Multiplex: What's New | Site Map | Community | News My Multiplex Account | Sign In 
in Search

Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

Last post 03-18-2008, 10:44 PM by ralphweidner. 18 replies.
Page 1 of 2 (19 items)   1 2 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  01-13-2008, 12:25 AM 36376

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Hi folks

    I'm clinical psychology student, writing a paper on multidisciplinary approach to consciousness studies. I was lucky enough to find an academic advisor with clearly teal/turquoise cognition and orange-to-green-to-teal values, who is one of my country's leading specialists in the field of neuropsychology. Moreover, he doesn't deny that the field of transpersonal psychology has something important to offer, which is quite terrific and unique for a member of basically an orange science.

    Speaking of myself, I would like to do anything that relates to integral psychology & integral consciousness research that recognizes the existence of transpersonal realms. I've been thinking a lot about what I was going to do in the mainstream of conventional (and sometimes preconventional) psychology... and basically it doesn't work out, for I find no inspiration in being a mechanical part of the mechanical orange universe.

    So in my creative rebellion I am going to write a paper on integral approach to consciousness studies (with some emphasis on what neuropsychology and clinical psychology has to offer), and this is why I am asking for your help. If I succeed, I might get an exciting opportunity to conceive a postconventional study, having an access to all the conventional tools, for this paper might transform into a long-term project. If not, well, then we'll just have some fun, which is great, too.

    I would like to include all the most important stuff, so it would be awesome if you folks
    1) could help me with references,
    2) shared your experience of applying AQAL to your psychology studies,
    3) shared your ideas on how to present an integral vision in a paper for an orange audience with a capacity to teal cognition,
    4) shared your ideas on how to touch all the bases for integral consciousness study and integral psychology.
    5) shared any of your ideas :)

    I know that you're all busy, especially the guys at the I-I, but I would very appreciate if you invest your time and knowledge into this topic. Since I have an access to original papers, books, and ideas of such scientists as Vygotsky and Luria (there's a growing interest especially in the former worldwide), this might become mutually beneficial for all of us.

    Deadline is in a couple of months, but I think this topic is eternal in some sense, so I would be very grateful to listen to your thoughts anytime. I've been thinking through this problem for a few months, using all the formop and vision-logic capacities I have (frankly, not much), and that's why I am here now.

    To cut a long story short, what do you think my paper that introduces a multidisciplinary and integral approach to consciousness studies should look like? What foundational yet integral stuff should it include? How to really spark some interest of my local orange science?

    Have fun!

    P.S. Here's what I would like to write in the introduction to my paper (at least I would definitely want to insert something like this...):
    Consciousness is what is available to the reader of this page right now, in the present moment, and yet to give an intelligible "sctrictly scientific" or "strictly hard scientific" definition of this entity, already present and already known to everybody, is dreadfully difficult (and impossible as it seems), if in our academic study of the problem of consciousness we ignore the simplest phenomenal fact: consciousness is everything that is subjectively avaliable -- here and now -- to every one of us: it is the space in which this body, these thoughts, these higher feelings manifest; and it is the place in which our subjective interpretations of objective and sociocultural realms arise. When the fact that these subjective realities are real is acknowledged, when the fact that they are very important to our theoretical constructions is acknowledged, then defining of what consciousness is turns out to be quite a simple task.
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  02-04-2008, 6:09 PM 38393 in reply to 36376

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Hi Friend,

    I’m, Jim. I just noticed your post - maybe I'm a little late in responding. Yours is an ambitious endeavor for a 2 month project, and I wish you well on it. I think for the Integral community to comment on this project you probably need to clarify more how your focus will differ from so many of  Ken’s  writings that address what you refer to as “a multidisciplinary and integral approach to consciousness studies.” What have you read of Ken’s works, and are you thoroughly familiar with his Third-Tier stages of the psyche, subtle, causal and Nondual stages? Have you read Integral Spirituality? Are you conversant with Integral Post-Metaphysics? Do you want to write a paper where you are using Ken as a reference, as one of many? Are you wishing to focus on an UR approach based on neurological evidence, or do you want to show the relationships between an UL consciousness/mystic experience, a LL global awareness consciousness and dialogue with various vmemes, and new social institutions that reflect that consciousness?

     

    Can you show how your analysis can transcend yet include the most relevant aspects of the consciousness movement of the last 40 years, and the transpersonal psychology work of the past 20 years? Are you yourself a practitioner of inner practice or meditation? A little more clarity like this might help.

     

    In response to your query, “How to really spark some interest of my local orange science?” I would suggest focusing on the transitional stages of Teal and Turquoise, between the Post Modern Green and the Third-Tier spiritual stages. This means a thorough review of vision logic. Once that is established as a bridge, you can try escorting your colleagues across it.

     

    Let us know how its going,

    Best,

    Jim



     

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  02-05-2008, 7:44 AM 38448 in reply to 38393

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Hey Jim,

    I really appreciate that you answered to my post. And no, you are not late at all! You're just right on time! In fact, when I was posting, I was pretty sure there's a great chance no one would answer to my post (that's easy to realize by observing the forum's dynamics) -- at least in a few months. And now you answered, and this is so cool.

    The project I'm working on actually extends beyond 2 months you mentioned, in 2 months probably I need to have some draft in mind (and then I would have another month to write it down), and as I said time limits don't really matter in this thread, because I already got some subtler vision of how my paper would look like, and from my experience I know that I can translate this subtler vision into a gross form (very, very gross) in about a week of hardcore writing. But in this case the topic is ambitious, indeed, and this subtle vision seems to be more of a causal one: I had (and still have) this subtlest feeling of the paper in this ocean of possibilities, and the main idea why I decided to take an opportunity and start a thread here is that I hope that some intersubjective communication exchange would simply clarify the vision I have.

    I don't expect to start a revolution in the field consciousness research with just a little paper of mine, so it's more about the artistic joy of working with these little cute citations and references and literature and stuff. :) Also, it's just fun to chat about integral consciousness studies in a forum full of future ken wilbers. Big Smile [:D] That's also why I presented such a broad topic in my first post, so everybody could enjoy sharing their ideas and stuff, if they would get any.

    Ok, now I'll try to answer your questions and clarify myself.

    Basically, I need to cogently present arguments for AQAL to be the best way to study consciousness today. But working only with theoretical methodology is just boring and no one would ever read this, including myself, so I hope to present these arguments by analyzing the state of art in the field through the scope of AQAL (and, hopefully, pragmatically proposing an idea for some cool mad-scientist research, which I would complete and get the Noble Prize in psychology. Just kidding. They don't give the Noble Prize to psychologists.).

    My starting thesis (which is quite easy to prove using today's literature) is that talking only about neurology and Right-Hand stuff basically doesn't make any sense in case of consciousness if we don't equally (AQALly) include Left-Hand realms as well, and then I'll go on with presenting an integral vision for this topic. The problem is that I never used AQAL for writing a paper in AQAL, so that's why I need your experience (I mean You in general and you in particular). As you see, nothing groundbreaking really, all hard-kenwilbered science (which is by itself a groundbreaking thing, and this is why I need first to present the framework and only then go on working with it).

    • What have you read of Ken’s works, and are you thoroughly familiar with his Third-Tier stages of the psyche, subtle, causal and Nondual stages? Have you read Integral Spirituality?

    I read Sex, Ecology, Spirituality, A Brief History of Everything, The Eye of Spirit, Integral Psychology, One Taste, No Boundary, and The Atman Project. And, yes, I read Integral Spirituality. Also I read several articles.

    As far as I know, Ken doesn't call these 3rd-tier structure-stages "psychic, subtle, causal and Nondual" anymore. The terms gross, subtle, causal, and Nondual now strictly refer to the major horizontal states-stages. And for the higher vertical structure-stages he uses Aurobindian terms: Illumined Mind/Para-Mind/Trans-global (Indigo) for what previously was called Psychic, Intuitive Mind/Meta-Mind (Violet) for what previously was called Subtle, Overmind for what previously was called Causal (Ultraviolet), and then there is Supermind (Clear Light).

    This is quite an important distinction, and I would like to include it into my paper, however I would like to find more good references for both states and some of the higher stages and their differentiation (more description of the higher stages and more information on UL-UR correlations, for instance (what exactly is meant by SF1, SF2?)). I hope this year the new edition of Transformations of Consciousness is going to be published, but until then, unfortunately, I won't be able to include references to it into my work. I find states vs structures differentiation very important and impossible to ignore, but I wish I had more sources that elaborate on that.

    • Are you conversant with Integral Post-Metaphysics?

    I'm familiar with the basics of Integral Post-Metaphysics, but of course I just haven't had any experience in applying it to writing a paper. I slowly start to use Integral math in my daily life (when I watch a movie or read a book, I see these different patterns very clearly sometimes), however that's still quite a challenge for me to figure out the ways to formulate this in relation to my paper. Frankly speaking, Wilber-5 is quite new for me.

    • Do you want to write a paper where you are using Ken as a reference, as one of many?

    Yes, in my current position and according to my vision I can rely on all contemporary sources and data I find reliable. And I can argue why I find them reliable, if I have to. I'm lucky enough to be able to have all this fun.

    • Are you wishing to focus on an UR approach based on neurological evidence, or do you want to show the relationships between an UL consciousness/mystic experience, a LL global awareness consciousness and dialogue with various vmemes, and new social institutions that reflect that consciousness?

    Neurological evidence is going to be a very big part of my paper (not only because of my wish to find out what neuropsychology can offer us here, but also because it is my natural inclination to mess with brains, neuronal, and stuff). I mean it is very, very important. But if I can't mess with phenomenology and meaning and the Beautiful as well, I'd better just quit what I am doing. So the main emphasis is on UL-UR relations, however of course I need to include and differentiate the sociocultural side as well. All quadrants means all quadrants. But in my future work there will probably be more emphasis on UL-UR stuff (we have a good base for states of consciousness research, not to mention all the UR stuff) with integrally informed approach to LL-LR (they all come together, don't they?). Or it might be some other sick twist of fortune, for in some sense the field is so unexplored that one can do whatever he or she imagines to do. Also, it is probably appropriate to include some possible immediate benefits of applying the model and the research in clinic.

    I know that's a lot, but we have some time to go through this. More than two months, definitely. Two years, maybe? Don't like going too narrow.

    • Can you show how your analysis can transcend yet include the most relevant aspects of the consciousness movement of the last 40 years, and the transpersonal psychology work of the past 20 years?

    Well, I ain't running for becoming a ken wilber: I want at least to include the most relevant aspects of the consciousness movement, because in the present state of affairs of today's neuropsychology (especially cognitive neuropsychology) it seems that consciousness doesn't exist. D'oh! And I'm not kidding.

    Transpersonal psychology, unfortunately, seems to be dead, too. There's more of transpersonal psychotherapy now. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) However I am more than ready to include all the most important discoveries of the transpersonal research -- I mean I fell in love with psychology because of it.

    • Are you yourself a practitioner of inner practice or meditation? A little more clarity like this might help.

    I practice formless meditation and some other stuff. I'm not an advanced meditator though. My main worldview inclination is towards Advaita.

    • In response to your query, “How to really spark some interest of my local orange science?” I would suggest focusing on the transitional stages of Teal and Turquoise, between the Post Modern Green and the Third-Tier spiritual stages. This means a thorough review of vision logic. Once that is established as a bridge, you can try escorting your colleagues across it.

    Yes! That's precisely what I have been thinking about in terms of establishing a bridge. That's a nice idea to start with. There's no way I could go on with my stuff without first exploring the vision-logic. What references would you suggest for this? What, according to you, such a thorough review of vision-logic must include?

    Again, thanks for answering!
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  02-06-2008, 12:15 AM 38498 in reply to 38448

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science


    some thoughts from an oldster:

    i could easily suggest more things for you to look at, but you don't have much time for this paper, so focus on presenting a clear synopsis of your understanding of what you've already read, thought about, experienced. you'll have plenty of time to go beyond this later on, and you'll need it.

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  02-09-2008, 12:41 PM 38776 in reply to 38498

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Hey Ralph,

    Thanks for your advice. It is wise, indeed, and I shall do exactly that.

    However I would appreciate if you shared your ideas here, for, although it is very important, still the goal of writing a paper is just a secondary gain of being able to have an inspiring conversation. I focus on the paper because it gives our polylogue the sense of concrete immediateness and objective purposefulness (although I will be happy to incorporate new ideas from this thread into my research). It is always good to plant new seeds of ideas long before you need their fruits; and who knows, maybe these ideas will be thought through by my transconscious self, while my conscious self is doing all the dirty work. Don't worry about my attention span :)
    • Post Points: 35
    • Report abuse
  •  02-10-2008, 11:04 AM 38878 in reply to 38776

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Friend bububu,

     

    OK, we are all “future Ken Wilbers,” you are not going to be Ken Wilber for this paper, but you are going to use Ken as a reference. I think I’ve got it.Wink [;)]

     

    Thanks for sharing your thinking process. You’ve probably better read than me, and I know nothing about neuropsychology. Be that as it may, I can give you my opinion. Any academic paper needs to be clear about its focus, purpose and aim, usually expressed in an abstract or short concept paper, before writing the final paper. Then of course the methodology is described and employed. Good AQAL summaries have been put in papers for awhile now, particularly by the Integral Sustainability people like Barrett Brown. And I’m sure in the AQAL Journal articles.

     

    As I mentioned, if it was me I would move, with as much logic as I could, from a psychological position to a vision logic position to wherever you want to go from there. In addition you want to establish that relationship between the LL and the UR, between what is tested evidence (UR) and what is credible testing methodology and interpretations (LL).My tendency is to set up the bridge to third-tier in general and gear the vocabulary for the audience – translate well. If you want to call all 4 stages the Causal/Nondual, or the Logos realm, or go into all the other names is your preference. Certainly, the original terms are very resonant still with a lot of people and a wide audience, including Advaita. I’m not sure I understand you, when you refer to them as “horizontal states-stages?”

     

    My key source for vision logic is Susan Cook-Greuter, as you probably know. Her descriptions of those stages are on her web site, and there are interviews at Integral Naked. Her key stages, or action logics, are The Strategist, Teal, the Magician, Turquoise, and then her final stage 6, the Unitive stage, Indigo. Also her book on Adult Development describes her testing methodology in a fair amount of technical detail which may be helpful for this kind of writing. You can get the full book title from her website and an interlibrary loan in a week or so. I find her to be a good model because she has a thesis, a testing methodology, and a credible synthesis.

     

    In the lofty reaches of higher mind (UR) reason, logic, thought and brain function transform. You would think that psychology and neuropsychology would be able to articulate the multi-perspective and cross paradigmatic nature of that. Rather, it becomes a reductionist experiment about brain function and chemicals. One would hope at these levels, anomalies will present themselves that make the researchers pause and query their assumptions like what happened with the quantum physicists. Thought is not separated from the physical or the spirit, from context, culture, or its pluralistic setting. An upper right perspective may be emphasized at a given kosmic address, for a time, with the other dimensions in subtext. Otherwise, it is just an experiment reducing everything to a lab-jar. There is no ecology to it, no recognition of a holistic living system. Maybe get your literature review to show this gap, or to support this holistic approach. In the sustainability literature language is shifting to include the UL and LL quadrants, developing metaphors, and inclusiveness, maybe something is happening like that in neuropsychology…

     

    For example, when reason, logic, and thought transform, what language is used to describe that. My UL language directs me toward words like wisdom, attuned logic, harmonic thought, etc. In addition, a cognitive giant like Krishnamurti articulates a realm of noh-thought at these lofty regions. How does that work?? When a query is not analyzed, but the answer is awaited, ‘known’ that it will arise out of the Logos. Evidence for this may have been researched, I don’t know. (maybe KW points it out in Integral Psychology). In any case you could describe in your work an example of something, like a runner who enters ‘the zone’, and has a peak experience. What is the neuropsychology of the brain? Why is it related to the physical activity? What are first person reports of the consciousness state a person is in when this happens, etc, etc.

     

    Attention to only one quadrant is a limited knowing of consciousness. Can you show this in your paper?? Can you strive for an ecology of the mind?

     

    J

     

     

     

     

     

     

    • Post Points: 35
    • Report abuse
  •  02-11-2008, 1:57 AM 38940 in reply to 38776

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science


    hi bu,

    i look forward to future conversations. this is really an awesome task you've set for yourself. i'm not even aware of anyone who's yet been able to write about what ken wilber's doing better than he has himself. so you're bound to fail to some extent, but you'll be the better off for it: you'll know yourself better.

    as socrates remarked, when he learned from a friend that the oracle of delphi had judged him to be the wisest man in the world: i thought surely she must be wrong because i'm truly ignorant about all that matters most--until it occurred to me that therein lies my wisdom.

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  02-16-2008, 9:37 AM 39434 in reply to 38878

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Hey guys, thanks for your posts! All your comments are being very, very useful already. Unfortunately, I've got some urgent stuff going on now, so I will be able to thoughtfully reply only in a week or two. I'll try to make it this week, but if not, I'll write my thoughts next week. I'll share my ideas and maybe information on some interesting literature in case someone else will become interested in this topic. Wanna make something creative. I really love this thread, you know! So I'm terribly sorry for the delay.
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  03-02-2008, 9:04 AM 40666 in reply to 38878

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Ok, I'm back.

    Jim,

    I have been reading (actually scanning) through some contemporary literature on academic philosophy of consciousness, as I wanted to be sure I didn't miss anything there. And I was astonished to find just how useless all these works are. I think David Chalmers is one of the brightest guys there, but even he has to be so limited by that Anglo-Saxon formop logic bullshit philosophy that most of the time sounds more like a talk show (how can people write hundreds of pages of arguments on a level of formop without a single reference to evidence from other levels and domains?). And now I start to fully acknowledge the simple fact that without vision-logic and higher cognitive capacities and integrative thinking everything's just shockingly dull. They keep and keep and keep discussing these a priori arguments... I've even wondered if there's any use of academic philosophy of consciousness at all (at least for my purpose).

    As for the higher structures, I absolutely agree with you that Susanne Cook-Greuter's work is crucial when speaking about vision-logic and some higher structures. Cook-Greuter is so cool!

    Now, horizontal states-stages. When I refer to states-stages I hope that I mean exactly what Ken means: states of consciousness (zone #1: states-stages) that (during meditation) unfold horizontally through several stages (gross to subtle to causal to nondual). There are also zone #2 structures of consciousness (vertical structure-stages) (i.e., in the cognitive line of development it's earlier structures to conop to formop to vision-logic to some higher structures). So, for instance, someone's center of gravity can be at the green altitude and he or she can experience a subtle state of consciousness at any time at this altitude. Ken speaks about it in his Integral Spirituality and other works.

    Again, I appreciate the full set of ideas you've given in your comments. There's so much to ponder, and your style is very elegant. I shall come back to your posts and meditate once in a while. ;)
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  03-02-2008, 9:14 AM 40667 in reply to 38940

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Ralph, that's a beautiful message about Socrates and Ken Wilber. The Light of consciousness is something that unites us and them, until we realize there's no "them," and there's no "us." There's just infinite play of liberation. And that's all that matters most, I think.
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  03-02-2008, 6:33 PM 40699 in reply to 40667

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science


    well said! it sounds like you're moving along with your project.

    i know what you mean in your message to jim: the literature out there can be very disappointing, once one has tapped into ken wilber. i'm beginning to take it more in stride, and just trying to better assess what kosmic address they're coming from, e.g. the orange form-op you seem to be encountering lately.



    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  03-14-2008, 2:07 PM 41777 in reply to 40699

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    Ralph, yes, you're very right, assessing what kosmic address the articles come from is a very useful tool. It helps to spot the range of view points that are not included in a bibliography one collects. Perhaps, it is a good thing to create for oneself a bibliography that uses the notion of the kosmic address; and therefore one can find out whether he missed a zone or a level or a state (which is very important: most works in philosophy or neuroscience of consciousness are written from the point of view of the waking state of consciousness; but what would neuroscience of consciousness of subtle and causal state look like?).

    Also, it is very interesting to think about these orange formop theories. What do they refer to? Take, for instance, that freaking zombie argument in philosophy of consciousness -- it seems to be largely an orange formop talking. But what does it talk about?  Most likely, of course, it refers to its specific worldspace, being that of formop logic. Does it refer solely to what's happening inside a formop mind (UL) of the philosopher using mostly 3rd-person language [3p(formop, gross) x 1p(formop, gross), do I represent this scheme correctly?]?  It seems to me that such kind of philosophical thinking is limited by its very own level, and it never transcends it. I mean it just pretends to justify itself trying to talk itself out. It's like looking at E. Munchs Skrik from the point of view of its screaming character...  Is there any way out there for those philosophies, huh? ;) Or maybe I just don't get something very special about zombies and stuff? Well maybe I'm just incompetent in these matters (I would readily admit it), for there are thousands of scholars thinking the way I find perfectly boring, and these scholars are read by other scholars who write new papers that are read by... Self-sustainable apathic orange meme?..

    P.S. Perhaps, everybody here has seen Ken's "Descartes: Reviving the West's Greatest Modern Vedantist" (it's been @ youtube for a while). So my question would be: is there any literature/websites that provide more information on comparison between Cartesian point of view and that of Vedanta? That is, is there anything one can quote?
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  03-15-2008, 9:16 PM 41862 in reply to 41777

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    hi bububu,

    that ken wilber video was great! i think i may have seen it before but forgotten about it--either that or i saw more in it this time than i did before. i hear there is a much more extensive exploration of this sort of thing in a work called 'overview' that hasn't yet been made public Wink [;)] it's good you brought descartes up because he wasn't doing 1p x 3p(formop, gross), rather 1p x 1p(formop, causal), for short.

    the former, of course, is typical of science, and has been called 'the view from nowhere', because their self-understanding is simply 3p(gross). i can see, though, how some could misconstrue descartes in this manner.

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  03-17-2008, 2:17 PM 41963 in reply to 41862

    • bububu is not online. Last active: 03-10-2008, 5:36 AM bububu
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-26-2007
    • Posts 16
    • Points 230

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    I think, this causal formulation will be essentially fundamental to the science of consciousness in the future. If we agree (following Wilber, Habermas, and others) that there are different validity claims in different quadrants and if we go away from a classical reductionistic approach (which, we ought to admit, might have been useful in some circumstances), the basic undeniable data (not assumption, but data!) for consciousness studies, the data that cannot be reduced to anything else, would be "aware therefore exist." Who's aware of what, that is relative, awareness itself (and, following into the nondual, existence per se) is absolute. Perhaps, eventually this notion of turiya (and then liberated turiyatita) is going to be realized as a fundamental ground for any science, any genuinly integral science of any quadrant and level. In the post-postmodern era this idea will be explicitly acknowledged, I hope.

    Now, then we can use all the power of our deduction in trying to figure out in what extent consciousness is caused by brain (if we are to follow epiphenomenalism as a working hypothesis) or brain is caused by consciousness (if we are to follow some kind of idealism as a working hypothesis), if we wish to. However, the basic point of reference, the Ground Zero of that science for us (human beings) would be the basic fact of pure formless awareness with the realization that -- no matter how used are we to one theory or other -- these working hypotheses are only our relative mental constructions, while awareness is absolute.

    At least that's what I think.

    I've been thinking for some time now about Wilber's dual Center of Gravity concept. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Wilber usually says that states of consciousness is a horizontal affair. However, from the notion of subpersonalities we know that the self under some circumstances can move downwards and experience the "what it's like" state of a previous structure (the famous example is coming to parents' home for Thanksgiving). This is called a regression. And there can be not only a pathological regression, but a healthy one as well.

    But Wilber, if I understand this part of his stance correctly, says that one cannot experience the "what it's like" state of a potential structure (you cannot state-experience a more advanced structure that is not evolved in you). However and as far as I know, Wilber never talks about the notion of a zone of proximal development (Vygotsky), which is "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers" (see Wikipedia). That is, a child seems to be able to experience a state of a higher structure in the proper sociocultural environment, even though this structure is not thorougly developed. And now I wonder, does a person only excercise an already fully developed higher structure  (which his Center of Gravity just didn't happen to reach), or it can be the case of actually experiencing a potentially available (through morphic resonance maybe?) but not thorougly developed structure?

    Of course, I understand that by saying that one cannot state-experience a higher structure Wilber perhaps simplifies the complex notion to a more understandable idea, but still I would like to explicitly discuss this aspect.

    What I am trying to say is that a state of consciousness doesn't seem to be strictly a horizontal affair. My self, if it is not very integrated or stabilized, may flow downwards and upwards, temporarily regress or progress through the structures, and perhaps really experience a higher structure. E.g. not just a subtle or a causal state of consciousness, but an Over-Mind. Of course, after coming back to a usual structure I may reinterpret (or forget, repress) this experience according to the frame of reference of my current Center of Gravity. But at the moment of experiencing a discrete state of consciousness of an Over-Mind structure I did have an Over-Mind insight into things (I did experience integral consciousness, integral values, integral aesthetics, etc.). But when I go to a dreaming state of consciousness (subtle), the experience seems to be different: I am not experiencing, say, an indigo, I am just having a dream (or am I not?). What do you think?
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  03-17-2008, 9:47 PM 41975 in reply to 41963

    Re: Integral Consciousness Studies and an orange science

    addendum: i was mistakenly thinking of overmind as supermind when i wrote this Embarrassed [:$]

    bububu:
    "aware therefore exist."
    isn't this a causal perspective? wouldn't a nondual perspective say, instead, that awareness and existence, epistemology and ontology, are not two, not one?

    i'm wondering if you're not going through the motions in this message of writing your paper on wilber. just a guess, because you seem to be wanting to make the firm assertions and conclusions that are expected in a paper, but you realize you're not yet there where you can actually do this, and that's much better than not realizing this!

    it's good to keep in mind that aqal is not about coming to final answers. it's simply a framework for laying out what we presently, actually know--spreading it out so it doesn't get conflated. states and structures, for example, are distinguished for good reason. it's true, of course, that they are related in some way, but there's so much confusion on how, isn't it better just to leave that out for now, for the most part?

    my own understanding is that overmind is something very, very few have attained: not more than can be counted on my digits--sri aurobindo, of course; ken wilber; mike murphy? genpo roshi? don't they both acknowledge that wilber sees farther than they do?

    of course, we could say that, by definition, overmind is what aurobindo achieved, so that as others go beyond him, they are, in effect, going beyond overmind. but then we get into this nasty paradox that someone who knows how to ride a motorcycle has somehow gone beyond gautama buddha!!

    my own sense is that overmind is best defined as the highest level of consciousness presently attainable--by definition, something very, very few experience, and even then, perhaps only occasionally. it must take exceptional training and who knows what else Surprise [:O]

    going on, i'm sure that wilber has, so to speak, transcended and included vygotsky (cf. the IN discussions with mark edwards), and his notion of a zone of proximal development. in 'integral psychology', for instance, he distinguishes between the proximal self and the distal self.

    it's also important to distinguish between levels and lines. my own sense here is that lines and quadrants figure prominently, along with levels, in shaping our c.o.g. (center of gravity), but in ways we still don't understand very well.

    do you see why i'm so anxious to get my hands on 'overview'?

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
Page 1 of 2 (19 items)   1 2 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML
 © Integral Institute, 2006. all rights reserved - powered by enlight™ email this page del.icio.us | terms of service | privacy policy | suggestion box | help