I need a touch of clarification on the metaphysics of the worlds religious tradition that Wilber is leaving out. I assumed it meant dogma. But now I am thinking it may be in reference to things that can't possibly fit into the scientific laws of the universe. Such as the metaphysics of Christ being the 'miracles'. But I could be way off on both counts. Any help here?

He actually will go into more detail on this later in the book. It has to do with perspectives and what perspectives one is able to take. In other words, his point won't be to prove miracles of Christ or anyone else.

-TC

One other thing to keep in mind when discussing these "bodies" is that we will be talking in the next chapter is that there are two views to each quadrant: how it looks from the outside and how it looks from the inside. So, from the inside these bodies will look lime images and thoughts and sensory perception, but from the outside, in humans, it will look like our triune brain:



So our gross body is associated with the reptilian brain stem, the subtle body with the paleomammilian limbic system, and the causal body with the neocortex.

Another one of the concepts necessary to grasp is the association of the quadrants to 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person perspective. Recall our quadrants:



The upper left will give us our first person perspective, the lower left our second person perspective, and the entire right side as our 3rd person perspective.

These perspectives can also be thought of in terms such as:

1st: The Beautiful and art
2nd: The Good and morals
3rd: The True and science

Since they all interact as they co-evolve a first person perspective of concepts will have to be found in a community at least capable of magical second person associations. When we look objective in a 3rd person format, such people will have to have developed a complex neo-cortex in tribal network setting producing a horticultural to early agrarian society.

-TC

Did anyone find Carol Gilligan's research on moral development interesting? To recap she has four moral stages:

1. preconventional
2. conventional
3. postconventional
4. (integrated)

These correspond to:

1. ego-centirc (nobody tells me what to do)
2. ethno-centric (we must follow the rules)
3. world-centirc (rules in relation to context)
4. (integrated)

Gilligan calls these levels of moral care:

1. selfish
2. care
3. universal care
4. (integrated)

She notes that these stages are heirarchial, in other words, once one progresses to a higher stage, they do not retreat backwards. They may stay at one level for a while , but they never reverse.

She also notes the different ways in which men and women show care and compassion:

Men: based on terms of autonomy, justice and rights
Women: based on terms of relationship, care, and responsibility

Men: towards agency; follow rules; look
Women: towards communion; follow connections; touch

At the fourth stage, however, the individual is able to take on both masculine and feminine roles: integrated.

How would these stages compare with transfiguraton and Jung's individuation? Wouldn't they all be the same thing with just different terms? Isn't the end goal of all of them integration?

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

Well these would obviously be high on the Self stages:



I personally would probably place individuation in the upper second tier, transfiguration in third tier. It is interesting to note Wilber often uses Jung and Freud to illustrate the pre/trans fallacy. He notes Jungians had a tendancy to elevate even prerational events to transrational while Freud tended to devalue genuine transrational experiences to prerational. So Freud would be the master of Infrared to Amber while Jung had a handle on Green to Turquoise.

But that's just my guess. The goal of an integral practice is to supplement what you are already working with. Learn to identify areas you might ignore and bring them up to speed if need be. Its also important to note these levels are not rigid, they are overlapping like waves. Plus, when one adds in their multiple intelligences into the equation, there is always plenty of room to work on the Self.

Yes, integration should be the goal, but remember, one doesn't necessarily have to be able to push each line to integration.

-TC

I'm so glad this book is being covered here. It was given to me by someone very special as a christmas gift. Yay.

Age 29.5

Gender: male

Canadian/Northamerican

Religion/Philosophy: All or none. Student of. A kind of buddhist, studying the vedic, christianist, islamist, taoist, who is ultimately a pragmatist. Pragmatist, perhaps one day pseudo Catholic/ unorthodox Hindu.

Do you prefer fiction or non-fiction?: Some non-fiction

How many books per year do you average?: about 85, sometimes 25, sometimes several hundred. Many books i don't read completely, many i read several times, and notes in particular slow me down.


Have you read this author before?:
Yes, in: earnestly, criticaly, and really carefully, in books like: One Taste, A Sociable God, A brief History, Transformations of Consciousness, SES, on integral institute, and through the grapevines.

Have you finished the book yet; if not, where are you at?: about midway

Do you like the writing style?:
Yes and no. He is like a great mentor for me, and I want to criticize what i think are his mistakes. It is not easy to do that. Much of what he writes is very context dependant, and, er...ought to be said for one reason or another.

Is the subject matter difficult to comprehend?:
Yes and no. Sometimes the context is dependant on being aware of what exactly KW is on about, which means reading his writing word by word, with the notes.

Would you read more from this author?:
Yes, definitely. He is a very important person; one of the most important contemporary writers. Interfaith and the Integral Approach share a great deal of intellectual property and overlap.

We're going to press on to the first chapter, but if there is anything that people would like to go back over, don't hesitate to bring it up.

Chapter 1: Integral Methodological Pluralism

One of the biggest "breakthroughs" in the development of Wilber's Integral Theory was arranging a "map" of how various lines of data collection unfold. He could see various developmental sequences, but couldn't figure out how they all related to each other. Without this kind of relationship, he really had no "integral theory". After holing himself up in his home for a few years, he finally saw the connection and the AQAL chart was the result. It was the centerpiece of his "Stage IV" development and appeared in what is considered his Magnum Opus, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality (1995). "Stage V" is marked by a refinement to the AQAL map by adding the inside and outside "zones" of each quadrant. This gives us Integral Methodological Pluralism and his new "Integral Math".

Integral Methodological Pluralism: involves, among other things, at least 8 fundamental and apparently irreducible methodologies, injunctions, or paradigms for gaining reproducible knowledge (or verifiable repeatable experiences). It claims that approach that leaves out any of these 8 paradigms is a less than adequate approach according to available and reliable human knowledge at this time.

Holon: a whole/part, or a whole that is part of other wholes. Each item labeled in the quadrants can be considered a holon

8 primordial perspectives: If you can imagine a holon as a sphere in each quadrant, one can think of the look of that quadrant as from outside the sphere and from inside the sphere. So each quadrant has two views times the four quadrants gives us 8 perspectives. Each of the following chapters will go into detail on those views and perspectives.

Integral Perspectivism: the sum total of these 8 views

I didn't think it was a revised SD model but it is based on SD as well as several other developmental models. None of the western scientific models have anything close to the 3rd tier that Wilber describes. The only one's that I've seen that do are the ones based on eastern mysticism which is why I brought up metaphysics.


I agree that these states can become permanent structures or stages however I don't believe that these "state stages" belong on the same chart as the rest of the developmental stages in tier one and two.

These "3rd Tier" states and "state stages" can be accessed and developed by everyone. One doesn't need to develop to "Turquoise" in order to move into what Wilber describes as "3rd Tier". His 3rd Tier stages are available to all. That's why IMO "3rd Tier" belongs in a separate category by itself.

It's similar to measuring hair growth and a persons height. A person needs to grow to a height of 4ft before they can reach a height of 5ft. However one doesn't need to grow to a height of 4ft before their hair will begin to grow, both can grow at the same time because they are separate categories.