Enlightenment = Higher Cognitive Development? The Piagetian Ken Wilber
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ก.ค. 2024
- Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development has an important place in the system of Integral Philosopher Ken Wilber. Wilber’s theory of everything is based around the stages of human development that go from the four stages of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and ascend into the spiritual realms of nondualism that we find in the works of Plotinus and other great spiritual masters.
In this episode we explore Wilber’s argument that the higher levels of cognitive development are in fact postformal Piagetian stages of development.
_________________
Learning Resources:
• The Living Philosophy of Jung’s Psychology of Kundalini Yoga • Psychology of Muladhra...
• Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development: • Piaget’s Theory of Cog...
• Ken Wilber’s Sex Ecology Spirituality / 177151.sex_ecology_spi...
_________________
⭐ Support the channel (thank you!)
▶ Patreon: / thelivingphilosophy
▶ Ko-fi: ko-fi.com/thelivingphilosophy
________________
🎶 Music Used:
1. Anguish - Kevin MacLeod
2. Mesmerize - Kevin MacLeod
3. End of the Era - Kevin MacLeod
4. Juniper - Kevin MacLeod
Subscribe to Kevin MacLeod / kmmusic
_________________
⌛ Timestamps:
0:00 Introduction
1:53 Piaget’s Conservation Experiments
6:27 Is Wilber Right?
8:07 MHC & Cognitive Complexity
10:41 Conclusion
_________________
#Integral #thelivingphilosophy #Wilber #Piaget #KenWilber
Want to support the channel? Now you can!
💸 Patreon: patreon.com/thelivingphilosophy
☕️ ko-fi.com/thelivingphilosophy
⌛ Timestamps:
0:00 Introduction
1:36 Sensorimotor
4:24 Preoperational
6:29 Concrete Operational
8:55 Formal Operational
10:50 Conclusion
Too bad you don't speak or read Dutch - but maybe you DO !!!???
Dutch illusionist Victor Mids tries Jean Piaget's tests with different Dutch children of 5 years of age.
Really, really wonderful !
th-cam.com/video/qkfBXPAiZ_0/w-d-xo.html
I had read somewhere as a teen about how you could cut a piece of cake in half in front of a young child who asked for more and they would be happy, thinking now they’ve got two pieces. I was able to test it on my youngest sister successfully.
It’s very interesting, but also feels very manipulative to use against a child, so I never did it again.
My god that's crazy. That's exactly conservation though. Totally would have used that example if I'd known it!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Your examples were very good! I am glad I could add another :)
This is so true. I’ve expanded my awareness through meditation and when I fell out of practice. Even though I knew something’s for fact I was out of that state that allowed me to feel that reality. And so it was like a distant memory
It will be nice to listen from you about phenomenology after Husserl (in particular about how Heidegger, Sartr, Merleau-Ponty did criticize him*)!
I have been reading a lot around Heidegger as well as the later postmodernists (to whom phenomenology was still so important) as well
Александр so watch this space there should be more coming in that vein!
Excellent as always! Thank you!
Thanks Rosa!
Excellent; thanks.
You mentioned three episodes for Ken Wilber but I don't see links to those or the names of your links to videos at the end don't seem to be for these videos..
Yes also looking for pt. 3 is it one of the Thomas Kuhn videos? Btw this is life changing stuff!
Great video. Fits in with Jed McKenna’s human child vs. human adult framework as well.
An excellent critique of Wilbur’s post-piagetian ideas concerning higher levels of spirituality. James is correct in pointing us in the direction of Thomas Kuhn’s idea of shifting paradigms in understanding religious mysticism. For example, the great Sufi mystic, Ibn Arabi’s concept of “the unity of all being” has more to do with a particular paradigm in understanding the nature of reality than with higher stages of cognitive development. That being said, shifting paradigms can lead to higher stages of cognitive development.
Totally agree Sinister Minister. There's definitely something of a dance between them it's only that they are not the same developmental line
Very interesting
Thanks jimmylad!
very interesting, thanks!
Thanks Soltuts!
Interesting video! 👍 From your explanation, it seems to me that Michael Commons MHC model is stuck at the rational levels of cognition (see David Hawkins Map of Consciousness where spirituality starts at 500 and rational thinkers are in the 400's). For an empirically based model see the work by Susanne Cook-Greuter and her Ego Development Theory (EDT). Edit: Have you made any newer video about this topic since?
I have not but someone flagged Hawkins's work to me so I'm curious to follow it up. Letting Go has been sitting on my shelf for some years so this is a spur to read a little more
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Awesome!
My understanding is that Wilber sees development unfolding through several major domains. One of them is levels of development, which in turn is composed of dozens of lines of development. One line is the cognitive line, covered by Piaget and Commons. Others include values (Graves), morals (Kohlberg, Gilligan), self (Cook-Greuter, Loevinger), and emotional-sexual, kinesthetic, etc. He specifies that a person never responds from only one level within a given line, but gives responses from at least two or three levels. I can operate from a worldcentric moral level 50% of the time, but I might relapse into ethnocentric 30% of the time, or elevate to cosmocentric 20% of the time. Saying that I have worldcentric morals is just to say it is my center of gravity. The same goes for any line. You average across all of these behavioral probability clouds and you get the average level of development. The other major domain is state-stages. The human-being also moves through states of consciousness, from gross to subtle to causal to nondual. Again I can spend most of my time in the gross state, but some in the causal. Still gross would be my center of gravity. This is what he calls our dual centers of gravity; states and stages. So a spiritual sage might exist at the state-stage of non-dual 100% of the time, but they might be operating from value level 3, moral level 2, emotional-sexual level 3, etc. In other words an average level of development that is low. This is one of the big improvements, which comes online in Wilber-3 or Wilber-4 I think, in his later works, namely the distinction between states and stages.
I love this reply Erik thank you so much for taking the time to write it. My acquaintance with Wilber is SES and Theory of Everything though theory of everything I read a good bit before and didn't study as deeply as SES so it seems I may have missed the update. This actually sounds a lot like what Hanzi Freinacht is saying (who is of course grounded deeply in Wilber anyway). Although actually now I'm thinking about it, in Theory of Everything he still puts the Subtle Causal etc above Turquoise on Spiral Dynamics and so that would be more the values line than its own thing so was Wilber 3 or 4 after Theory of Everything? Or am I remembering that wrong? Because it seemed that he had just moved it away from the Piagetian line of development onto the Gravesian one. But maybe he isolated it further?
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Yes, you are right actually. At first I thought the state/stage differentiation was in place in SES (Wilber-4) already, but it is actually not until Integral Spirituality (Wilber-5) that he starts to really flesh it out. I found this nifty essay by Allan Combs (with whom Wilber co-authored the Wilber-Combs lattice detailing precisely the many possible interpositions of states and stages), which lays out the different periods of Wilber's work (see link below). Might be of interest.
www.researchgate.net/publication/233580864_All-levels_all-quadrants_a_review_of_Ken_Wilber%27s_%27a_theory_of_everything%27
@@erikljungberg1056 Ooh this is gold thanks for sending this my way Erik this will be a handy map to have
Great talk.
Where can I find the next part of the video?
Really enjoyed this. Thanks for explaining in a clear understandable manner. Fascinating
Thanks Danny!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy welcome & no need. It’s great to find someone who can explain concepts in a way that makes sense. I’ve watched read a lot of philosophy content and so often it doesn’t make much sense as it’s done in the language style of the time so almost like a foreign language!
@@dlloydy5356 Haha I know what you mean. It seems that a lot of my writing process is trying to get around just that. I tend to agonise over whether something is clear and keep circling it. It can be a bit of a nuisance as far as writing goes but I think it makes for a clearer communication of the ideas rather than the dangerous self-deceit of hiding behind technical terms so I'm glad you say that as it makes it feel at least somewhat effective!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy well I’m certainly glad you do. I can imagine (or try to) it’s time consuming
@@dlloydy5356 Haha indeed. It's definitely getting easier as time goes on and I begin to manage the various parts of the process better but we're still a while out from having a well-oiled methodology
As Morpheus said: there's the difference between knowing the path, and walking it.
As someone who walks it by sheer accident, I'm glad to see this in my quest for returning back and making bridge
Haha that's awesome way to walk the line Scorpio!!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Unfortunately, it's not. You need to numb yourself to the fact that you cannot ever be truly happy until everyone is happy, but to go through the narrow door of Jesus or the mirror of Neo, you need to break all the bones of knowledge you have so you can re-learn, rearrange those bones and let them grow again.
In Harry Potter, this "forgetting to be able to re-learn" is visualized by Dumbledore drinking from the potion of despair. He must keep going although the experience is crucifying, he asks for it to stop, yet the mission is to get to the bottom of it destroy the evil, a lie, ignorance that is keeping us blind.
So, the only way to cross it is if someone is willing to commit such a "suicide". Knowledge is truth we live by, it defines our path and our life. That's symbolism of Jesus: that book character represents knowledge by saying I am the truth the way and the life. And knowledge opens eyes by truth spitting in your eyes. Mostly people just spit back.
And that's the problem I'm facing, yet what is on the other side.... Being child again, learning again, seeing everything from new perspective... That's something I'd like all to experience. But universe is about balance, you can't have great joy without great suffering, otherwise you wouldn't appreciate it, anyway.
I've changed my perspective and with it everything changed. Now I see that everything is connected to everything else. Yet, I'm alone on the other side of the mirror.... Stuck
@@ScorpioHR Well that does sound tough. It brings to mind the distinction that Positive Psychology has made central in its conception of the good life: pleasure vs meaning. These are the two components of the good life. Someone like Viktor Frankl managing to affirm life in the midst of a concentration camp is a complete anomaly to a pleasurable contentment view of life. His life is full of meaning but obviously we tend to be happier when not in concentration camps and so the thing is balancing a life between pleasure and meaning and so it sounds like you are not doing the best on the pleasure front but that you have a life of meaning which is something no? Even if it's lonely and testing. I dunno if you've seen the most recent episode on the channel about the difference between catharsis and ekstasis but I feel it really would speak to this place you are in
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Yes, I have seen that clip.
Seven years ago, when I was awoken, I had Extasis, the one Archimedes had when he found the answer to the burning question when entering the bath tub, leaving it immediately, jumping out naked and running through the streets yelling: "Eureka! I found it". What I did was decode the message of the ancient writers, four riders of the apocalypse/change/revolution that wrote two Gospels: I found out what the message was about and what exactly is "the judgment day". I went through it and experienced the first miracle of Truth: the same one Archimedes experienced (mind you, "truth" is simply information that fits our experiences and knowledge, not necessarily "fact": one man's truth can be other man's lie, so it's more like epistemological "justified true belief"): he found the answer and answer is never a "lie" - that truth turned water into wine, it got him intoxicated that to the outside he seemed like lunatic running drunken through the streets.
That is the feeling of "heaven" we're all invited to experience. Of course, I've discovered so many things, so many stones turned, so many new perspectives, so many flips... But on the other hand, it was excruciating to others around me: the need of equilibrium is universal - you can gain hysterical happiness only by sucking happiness from people around you. So that didn't end well. I was put back to "sleep", dormant, for seven years and then I looked it back and wondered... Were I really "psychotic" as the doctors concluded. So I re-checked myself and still, I can't find flaws because comparing to what others say, it fits to my view, as a part of it, as a trunk is part on an elephant blind people don't see. So again, I tried to find a way to transfer the idea, knowing my mind and exactly how emotions work, I locked myself in (let me just say, this is always happening in the world of mind, on the internet, behind anonymity, real life is intact and there are no experiments there), behind a large shield, and tried to find a weak spot to start flipping others, for them to also see what I've seen... But since this is so fundamental part of our personality, flipping it would be flipping the entire "self", it truly is a suicide, which makes me a metaphorical murderer. Yet, without it, we will never restart the counter, we will never "get it over" and put it into drawer like we do with all questions answered. So now, this part is cathartic to me. I've made a full circle, from awakening at 32, to revisiting it now, few days before my 40th birthday. Realizing why 33, 7 and 40 are important numbers in that book. Completely understanding the authors and their book character representing the knowledge: truth (JTB), the way (heuristics) and the life (demented people are like new people in old body). And Father - is The Mind.
The place where we are just now, in your mind, me entering it through the peep hole, your eyes looking at these dots. And here I am, showing you my wounds for you to put fingers in it and feel my pain.
As you can see, nothing really magical, just poetical, allegorical, philosophical.... I see the pattern, Matrix, Holy Spirit, logic and reason behind everything.
@@TheLivingPhilosophy with my knowledge and your channel....
*Imagine all the views*
Hi! First and farmost, huge congrats on who You Are and how You have been shapping yourself through your actions in and about life. On this particular matter, my humble opinion is that there are two different paths, one ruled by age and neurophysiology that brings the natural structure that integrates these New Dimensions, and the other, ruled by experience, that "enforces" a Spiritual approach to what reality is presenting, despite your age, emotional and rational stage of development... Experinces like death, time, universe, meaning... I think of it Like the energy/message that you Want to represent when you say that someone Had to grow up fast... Facts of life play an importam role, I think...
I hope I didn't made a complete fool of myself and with all respect, thank you for charing your soul!
Thanks for the kind words Marco! And for the interesting input. There's something in Hanzi Freinacht's work that chimes with what you are talking about here: the mapping out of the four dimensions of an individual's stage of development: there's state depth complexity and code. State is your state of mind at any moment in time; it's very changeable - do you have a lot of experience with higher states or lower states. Depth on the other hand is the level of integration of these experiences so how much of these states you have converted into wisdom. Compare these with complexity (IQ/Piagetian level of development) and code (cultural level of development: modern/postmodern/metamodern). Hanzi gives the example of going to therapy and having more depth (having integrated more profound experiences) than his therapist. She was an older lady who probably hadn't experience the level of angst and crisis that he had faced and integrated. Bit of a long winded way of saying that you're definitely speaking some truth but there you have it!
There are so many stories and sutras that illustrate a "simple" person attaining enlightenment, i feel it's not necessary to comment further about why cognitive development isn't necessary for satori.
It likely is, though, for those who are ensconced in mind.
0:48 Ken does not claim that higher states are post formal Piagetian stages of development. Maybe in his early books but he started making the distinction between states and stages decades ago. Someone with an average cognitive development can experience all the spiritual states including nondual. This is a point he emphasized in many of his books.
Great episode man!!! did episode 3 get made cant seem to find it on youtube
Thanks Donald and unfortunately I never did make episode 3. It's funny I got so frustrated with Wilber for talking about Sex Ecology Spirituality as part of a trilogy and only ever wrote part 1 and then I went and did the same thing here 🙈
That's cool I was so excited about the last 2 episodes thought I would just make sure :) will go through all the other great context you have made here.
I am loving all of your wonderfully informative videos, but I think there is some misunderstanding of what Wilber is teaching about the higher stages being about spirituality, per se. Early on in Wilber's work, I think he refers to it as "Wilber 1" he used to stack the spiritual on top of the structure stages, but later removed it from this and placed them alongside any of the stages. That's his Wilber-Combs matrix, which explains how anyone at any stage of development, such as Amber traditionalism, may have a satori experience, which is subsequently translated though that stage's structure's.
I do not believe he believe the higher spiritual stages are any part of cognitive development. At least not anymore that is. He now draws off of the different lines of intelligences, such as spiritual intelligence, within the developmental models. However, spiritual state again is not a developmental thing, but are realizations that can occur at any stage from magic through integral. These are "states" as opposed to stages, and don't go through developmental stages.
Unlike developmental stages where you can't skip a stage moving higher, with state experiences you can go from zero to ten in peak experiences. They are temporary, not permanent like stages. But integration into them, where they are permanent modes of perception, would be on the line of spiritual intelligence development, and not the cognitive line.
I find this to be true in my experience.
The username checks out XD
Can you make a brief historical video regarding the rising of Islamic philosophy back in the days? and the brief stories of the likes of Ibn Rusyhd and Ibn Sina? along with its similarities and conflicts against western philosophical ideas..?
That would actually be fascinating I've always been a fan of Ibn Sina and have heard enough about Ibn Rushyd to be interested. Might be worth looking at thanks for the idea!
The problem with a cognitive map is it belies the changes that occur between stages...it becomes only a description. Changes in state and being emerge, and can be felt and tracked, therefore evidenced. Where would things like subtle energy practices, telepathy, non local phenomena etc be relevant on such models? What do these represent as markers...or do they get excluded by having not been proved by measurement tests?? These things emerge as traits, but are not the state alone. Epiphenomenon. But they are markers of the existence of the source of what has emerged. Wilber ignores all of this, not sure why. It's a theoretical book based approach. Look to the work of Stan Grof to see evidence of subtle emergent qualities in deeper penetration of psychic terrain. This is a representation of the limits of an approach, the researcher, the belief system etc. All entirely the domain of the question Wilber seeks to answer, but he's an interpreter, not an experiencer. This is the territory, it's naturally exclusive by way of hierarchical rite of passage, by way of direct knowledge of by experience to. Or you can report on it...but will only be accepted or otherwise along the same lines.
That humanity evolves in a spiritual direction is not mere theory but has been proven by the examples of the great Adepts and practitioners in the higher forms of all the religions. See Adi Da Samraj’s explication of the seven stages of life.
Great video! Have you already thought about setting up a discord?
Thanks Lenie! I have thought about the Discord and I remember you saying it to me a few months back but there's a few reasons I haven't yet 1. I'm a little nervous about it because I haven't used discord enough to have know what it's like to have one set up. I have nerves around critical mass to make it engaging or maybe I have a misconception of Discord from my limited experience. So that mental minefield of my ignorance is the first reason. 2. I've been thinking that I'll be doing a proper launch of my patreon soon and that I'd maybe include that with the lowest tier but I wasn't dead set on it because of the reasons in 1. And 3. procrastination stemming from reasons 1. and 2. Do you think it would be a good idea? As you can tell I could do with some guidance on the question!
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Hey thanks for answering and thinking about it! 1. I get your concern, though Discord is very easy to use and manage, it is basically setting up different chatrooms where people can interact and my experience is that many people that join the server are the ones that take the initiative to make it interesting by starting discussions, requesting channels, even planning in voice chat discussions and debate topics. I think it will add a lot to your channel as well because many times Discord servers are places to share ideas, sources, books, videos, questions, etc. 2. A discord only for patreons can be a good idea sometimes but I would only suggest it for TH-camrs that provide a special service as well, for example TH-camrs that also provide personal coaching where the people that are getting coached can also form a community, share experiences and help eachother. Otherwise you run the risk of having a Discord server with only a few non-active members. 3. It might be a good idea to join another TH-camrs discord to see what its like to what its like and create a private one for yourself with maybe a few friends to see how it works and getting more used to it
@@leniepenie3419 I think this is what I needed to hear lenie I really appreciate your taking the time to walk me through the. I'm going to make one. I'll sort a couple of other things first and then get on it but it does seem like a solid idea
Very good. Keep going. It is as you say analogous. You’re on the right track with software. Aldous Huxley argues that the, how does he say it, knowledge is in the mode of the knower? Perhaps you could articulate that possibility or perspective?
Fascinating. Could you elaborate more on what he meant by knowledge being the mode of the knower? Sounds like a great insight
@@TheLivingPhilosophy The Perennial Philosophy bottom of pg 59 makes one reference…” knowledge is a function of being; but the thing known is independent of the mode and nature of the knower.” I will look for other references that he makes.
It relates to the ideas presented in the Zen “Oxherding Pictures”. The mode of the knower has changed.
He goes on (pg 85) “In other words, the highest form of the love of God is an immediate spiritual intuition, by which “knower, known, and knowledge are made one.”
Kierkegaard “leapt” into this. It is not acquired, it is remembered, when everything else is relinquished.
@@OneConsciousnessWithAaron Ah okay I'll be able to find that then. I guess from the expanded context then that's like saying that the tao that can be spoken is not the real tao or even more radically I guess it's saying that the semiotic sign is separate to the referent i.e. experience necessarily warps what is experienced. I'll have to check it out and read around those pages because it seems to be very relevant to what I'm exploring at the moment thanks for pointing a moon out for me
Fascinating. This left me far less convinced that volume concept of quantity - or quantity as such - is in any way "concrete" or obvious. The most concrete meaning of volume is sound, and very high and loud is not necessarilly better, it can hurt like a fire alarm going off because pizza has little black on the edges. I did feel like regressing back to the obviousness that taller is more... with all the talk about "higher", ie. taller spiritual levels than a toddler. But I like to doubt also the obviousness that a taller dude is by necessity always more spiritual... than a beginners mind. Or a midget sized leprechaun.
Haha indeed. We have to combat the predisposition that leads us to equate tallness with higher perspective XD
This is a really good exploration. My understanding is that, at least in recent years, Wilber has been saying that spiritual experience is to some degree outside of cultural and individual development. For example, he says many of the great masters might have been culturally and individually adapted more to an ethnocentric or pre modern society. But then its confusing because he has these lines of development where he says one might be spiritually more developed, yet individually and culturally less so , or visa versa.
My sense is that there are many issues about Wilbers attempt to objectify or quantify spiritual experience, because it doesn't fit into the subject/object paradigm, much less an Hegelian developmental model.
One thing I've struggled with about Wilber is that, inspired by Lovejoy's book The Great Chain of Being, Wilber has participated in blurring the true significance of the primacy of Being, in favor of a kind of utopian spirituality based on historicism.
I wasn't aware of the update with Wilber but then again I'm only reading his older books so that tracks. This sense that spiritual experience is outside of cultural and individual development makes a lot more sense I have to say. I find that thing about the older masters being ethnocentric to be very interesting that certainly discards what he was proposing in Sex Ecology Spirituality then where this seen as a conop phase of development. It also rules out the idea of all the spiritual being up in Turquoise or beyond on the spiral since they would have grown beyond that. I think he's right to abandon that position but it still leaves the question of what exactly spiritual development is. I guess the lines approach does make sense and that's what Hanzi Freinacht argues in his reworking of Wilber in the Listening Society (there spiritual development is a higher DEPTH and/or STATE but not necessarily better CODE or COMPLEXITY so it seems Wilber is on the same path then)
@@TheLivingPhilosophy yes, I think you're right. As you mentioned, Michael Collins seems to be more on solid ground regarding this developmental model.
I must now look into Michael Commons and Hanzi Freinacht. You've given me more homework Haha
@@TheLivingPhilosophy do you know Pierre Grimes of the Noetic Society? He did a great lecture on Lovejoy's great chain of being, showing how it makes wrong assumptions about Plato..it was a good insight for me.
th-cam.com/video/NNMWl9cky84/w-d-xo.html
@@michaelmcclure3383 They actually overlap. Hanzi studied with Michael Commons (not Collins maybe it's the Irish accent. I did a double take when I saw the name because of course Michael Collins being a very notable Irishman). Hanzi's book The Listening Society is well worth the read - the style can be a bit irksome but it was helped for me when I found out that it's a pseudonym (it's a whole metamodernist thing that the author was doing which is kind of interesting but it made the style grate when I didn't know about it)
@@TheLivingPhilosophy ah, thanks for the correction Haha.
It's a really interesting conversation this exploration of being and becoming. In Vedanta they see it as two sides of the one reality.. or two orders of the one reality. The Satya world of ever present Being Consciousness Bliss and the Mithya world of apparent change, polarity and complexity
.
I think that spiritual perception and intellect are separate things. People think that high intellect increases potential for spiritual insight but I think that this is because the great spiritual masters also happened to be highly intelligent as well which is why they were able to impress enough followers to create a movement. There might be many people with modest intellects who are also spiritually advanced but are not intelligent or articulate enough to create a spiritual program for others to follow.
That's a fascinating thought Peter kind of like a survivor bias but for a sort of spiritual marketing success
Studies on wisdom vs intelligence shows a 0.3 crossover.
You can be less intelligent and wise as well as highly intelligent and unwise (0.7)
John Vervake goes into this in his awakening from the meaning crisis series (around lecture 40ish from memory)
@@notmyrealpseudonym6702 Ah fascinating well I have that to look forward to! I think I'm in the teens of the series so a bit off still. I have a niggling question in my mind (which may have come from his discussion with Zak Stein though I could be wrong) about the definition of wisdom being troublesome because different groups will define it in different ways depending on what they esteem since wisdom is an inherent value judgement
@@TheLivingPhilosophy he does address that and yes any definition that covers the normative values of a big enough population (the world) will render it useless as it will have to be vague enough to contain all possibilities whereas any definition between two or more categorical populations will always have differences in one that the other population(s) won't have. However I suspect it is a pursuit where the process of consideration is of value despite the inherently different outcomes and impossibility of a standardized definition. You navigate by the stars so as to end up on new land, realizing you were never meant to end up on the stars. A form of self induced proximal development (to use a vygotsky-ian term). JVs talks with Gregg Henriques are also worth a systematic listen (untangling the world knot).
Anyhow Kia kaha (venture forth/be courageous) and much aroha (agape) from the antipodes and thank you for your ongoing effort.
@@notmyrealpseudonym6702 Ah yes it must have just been in the meaning crisis series itself that he addressed it. I must say you've gotten me excited to continue delving in I've been very slow dipping in and out of it at different times but it sounds like it gets very deep by the end so well worth sticking with it.
I shall also be checking out the talks with Gregg Henriques. Also I agree about wisdom as being a very helpful aid when orienting. It's vague and inchoate but while this makes it difficult to study it does mean that it has a deeper than verbal rootstock and so there is an archetypal dynamism that has the power to motivate action and we can't ask for much more than that in a north star.
Thank you for the informative chat and the well wishes. I'm sure you can expect some JV to be showing up here at some point!
So interesting, but I did see the idea of using a scientific testing and development idea extrapolated so it must include and prove the spiritual, but with no proof that spiritual exists other than there are people practicing it, and that one can not understand it because you are not spiritual.
Yeah it's a tricky field of landmines. Even if you had no belief in anything spiritual it would be a fascinating landscape to navigate from an epistemological point of view. Why are people making these claims? Is there any similarity? Could they be sharing the same quality of experience? Does that mean it has any connection to reality or perhaps they've warped their neurochemistry? There's a lot of fun questions to explore around the topic but definitely a lot of rigour is required
It's very modern and weird idea that math is not spiritual and magickal. For better or worse, as a farmakon of writing.
@@TheLivingPhilosophy Thanks for the reply, I do like the idea that we should explore why people have these claims of spirituality, if for no other reason than to see why the human psych is drawn to them in so many societies. is it just ego, that there must be more than just this. Blind studies would be one way, I suppose, but that is taking a proven method from science to a field that is by its definition not science. Perhaps that is why every "Prayer" study fails to produce verifiable results.
BTW I really do like the series, it gets one thinking.
@@russha5891 Glad you enjoying the series Russ! And I think that these fields don't have to be entirely exclusive. I think that if there's something genuine being experienced then there has to be a way to do testing around it of some sort. I have some ideas for this based on some of Wilber's suggestions that I'll be exploring in the third episode in a few weeks but I think there's at least a possibility of it. Obviously there are aspects like faith that are inherently closed to science but I think the claim of spiritual states and experiences should be testable to some degree
I don't think you have a good understanding of Wilber's theories. Wilber does not claim that post formal stages and spiritual states, at least he has not said anything like that since about 2 decades ago. His model literally includes these post formal stages you mentioned at 9:36 and he argues that spiritual states and stages of development are 2 separate developments. Wilber calls cognitive development "growing up" and spiritual states "waking up". You can be at any stage of development and have a profound spiritual state. I suggest that you read Wilber's books that were published 2005.
hi. I live in Korea and I am a Ken Wilber reader. It's all good, and I understand what you're saying, but you speak too fast^^
Ah thabk you. That's good feedback. I'm glad you understood it but also happy to hear your thoughts on the speed
Tao is pronounced Dao.
I know I keep forgetting. It's embarrassing that I can't change this but just have to live with it 🙈😆
Wilber sets off too many alarm bells for me
Which part? I know there was some dodgy stuff standing up for gurus and his personality is a bit haughty but the guy has some shit hot insights
You can't get to genuine higher spirituality without higher levels of MHC, otherwise the whole thing collapses into nonsense.
I'm not so sure about this. And when you say the higher levels you mean to the formal levels or to the systematic levels or even the paradigmatic levels? It's an interesting thought but i think we'd have to hash out what we mean by genuine vs disingenuous higher spirituality and between higher and lower levels of the MHC. A topic very worthy of exploration but I feel that data would be needed to really finalise anything either way.
Since when is Ken Wilbur to be taken seriously as a thinker? He is a New Age positivist who will run to that belief system quicker than a dog will chase a squirrel. His analogy here is typical slight-of-hand for him. Plato got to the point more efficiently with his cave analogy, but even that is mere abstract musings. The belief that this world is illusion is responsible for so much irresponsibility toward it. Hard to go into a full critique on a comment board…
Haha he's certainly partial to the New Age cocktail. That being said though there is such a rich plethora of insights distinctions and a breadth of material in him that I do find delightful and stimulating and I admire the audacity of his project even if I'm not so keen on that New Age edge that is seeping in so often.