[image source - click to enlarge]
With some time to think about it, I'm grateful for this episode with Ken Wilber and the test. Wilber's explanation didn't cut it for me, and I really had the impression that only those who would seldom question Wilber okayed the first post. Be that as it may, this experience helped me become even more individuated from Wilber's version of Integral, and I'm grateful for that.
I haven't discarded Wilber or his version of integral to the trash heap, but I am going to look more closely at some of the systems Wilber has assimilated (resistance is futile). I think SDi is much more than a values line, no matter what Wilber says. And I think that Beck needs to do some additional work to flesh it out and verify its statements. Then again, Cowan may have the better version -- I don't know yet.
I'm grateful that one of my favorite clients asked me what I'd be doing if I wasn't a trainer. I said I'd be teaching poetry. Didn't know that before she asked. That gives me some food for thought, for which I am grateful.
And I am grateful that Kira likely will be teaching a workshop this fall that she has been hoping would be approved.
What are you grateful for?
Technorati Tags: Ken Wilber, Integral Theory, SDi, Don Beck, Poetry
4 comments:
Wilber bugs the holy hell out of me in ways too numerous for me to get into (though I dig him anyway) so I hardly think I qualify as a "minion." My life will get on very well even if I never get the opportunity to sit at his feet and ask--"Gee, show us mahasamadhi one more time, Mr Wilber!" or "How did you get to be so cool anyway, Mr Wilber?" I daresay the others who approved of/weren't bothered by Wilber's first message weren't lapdog morons to the last either.
Kai in NYC
Kai,
I'm not saying that those in the blogosphere who grooved with his post were minions -- but I do suspect that there aren't too many people in the organization who would tell him he's full of shit.
Somebody from the marketing dept. should have been consulted, that's for sure. Especially since this was mostly a ploy to generate buzz for the new (subsciption required) integral multiplex.
Peace,
Bill
Harry,
I've been away from the blogosphere for a while and am just catching up with some reading today. This is one of those rare times when I find myself in marked disagreement with you. Wilber's post rocked, IMO. As when you ask, "only those who would seldom question Wilber okayed the first post," I'd ask you to look at what's the point in asking any questions at all? Could you be mistaking synergy of mode of being and outlook with mere "agreement" with a particular philosopher, and thereby misconstruing the entire discourse? I suspect so.
Guess I pass the test, huh? Honestly I think the key to passing the test is not giving a rat's ass about any "judgments" related to "performance." It was a fucking awesome and bold piece of writing.
All the best,
Joe
Hey Joe,
I've been all over the board on the Wilber fiasco. I tend to agree with Matthew Dallman on this one, for what it's worth. Wilber was using the classic techniques of a guru, and not the healthy kind. Since then he has been engaged in damage control (let's all just stop now, I forgive you [for thinking I was out of line], I can help you heal -- all classic mind-control BS).
Wilber has a lot of intellectual gifts to offer, but he is falling into traps he identified in his own work 20 years ago (see the newest post from Frank Visser).
How have you been? How are the projects coming along?
Peace,
Bill
Post a Comment