Krimel's "point was that Wilber co-opts the whole body of Piagetian research

into his system ignoring the fact that Piaget's system point in a completely

different direction than Wilber's own."

dmb says:
I don't quite understand this objection. Surely, you can't be saying that 
Wilber is obliged to remainful to Piaget's intentions? You can't be saying 
that Wilber is not allowed to take incorporate ideas and information into 
his worldview. What other option do any of us have? If we were obliged to 
remain faithful to what's come before, the world of ideas would be frozen 
solid. You can't be saying that.

Wilber agrees with Piaget on some things and not on others. So what? Why is 
the problem? In what sense is that an "abuse" of ideas? I would think that 
sort of thing happens every day, even on weekends and holidays.

[Krimel]
It's a free country. Wilber can say whatever he wants. But are you saying
that completely inverting the nature, direction, theoretical approach and
philosophy of the man, then claiming him as an ally, is ok with you?

After all you asked about my impressions of Wilber's abuse of the people he
cites. Are you saying that what Wilber does with Piaget is not abusive? It's
not like he ever acknowledges the differences. The truth is his mostly cites
Gilligan but only after tying them together so as to imply that Gilligan is
Piaget's heir apparent.



moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to