Introductions and Welcomes - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T08:51:01Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/categories/introductions-and-welcomes/listForCategory?categoryId=5301756%3ACategory%3A9&xg_raw_resources=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noMoved to Facebook IPS forumtag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2022-11-18:5301756:Topic:1464042022-11-18T16:04:41.398ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>This forum is now an archive. If interested join the active Facebook IPS forum.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/470435939720069">https://www.facebook.com/groups/470435939720069</a></p>
<p>This forum is now an archive. If interested join the active Facebook IPS forum.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/470435939720069">https://www.facebook.com/groups/470435939720069</a></p> Jhana Meditator Guytag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2021-09-17:5301756:Topic:1448032021-09-17T14:05:02.770Zkelamunihttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>Hello everyone,</p>
<p>I have a question. Some time ago we were talking about... well I'm not sure what we were talking about... hey, gimme a break, I just turned 60 this year! haha... and, anyway, the discussion turned to meditators as judges of their own accomplishments, or some such thing... and anyway, I think it was Balder... hey dude, hope you're well... Balder mentioned someone who had more or less taken it upon himself to train himself in accomplishing the Buddhist jhanas.<br></br>Now,…</p>
<p>Hello everyone,</p>
<p>I have a question. Some time ago we were talking about... well I'm not sure what we were talking about... hey, gimme a break, I just turned 60 this year! haha... and, anyway, the discussion turned to meditators as judges of their own accomplishments, or some such thing... and anyway, I think it was Balder... hey dude, hope you're well... Balder mentioned someone who had more or less taken it upon himself to train himself in accomplishing the Buddhist jhanas.<br/>Now, does anyone remember the name of this guy? And has he written any books on his adventure?</p>
<p>I think this sort of thing is becoming of greater interest to mainstream scholars working on the history of Buddhist meditation as it relates to textual descriptions. Some of the impetus may be coming from the growing number of 'practitioner scholars' out there, but it is also coming from a genuine interest in what, if at all, some of these terms like jhana, samadhi, prajna, smriti, dhyana, śamatha, vipassana and so on refer to exactly or how what they refer to could have changed over time or between groups or movements.</p>
<p>Thanks!<br/>kela</p> Fitness - body, mind, spirittag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-06-24:5301756:Topic:658332016-06-24T17:14:34.088ZAmbo Sunohttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/AmboSuno
This 'body, mind, spirit' phrase is a common and classical refrain.<br />
<br />
Integral theories have gotten more precise and probably nuanced about fitness, as with, for example, the injunction for attention to gross, subtle, and causal bodies and realms.<br />
<br />
But for the common world of specialization, as with "warriors", sometimes in the west, training seems to be mainly about body fitness. Then, the mind is recognized in various ways. Spirit usually comes as a complement, a gesture towards wholeness, or…
This 'body, mind, spirit' phrase is a common and classical refrain.<br />
<br />
Integral theories have gotten more precise and probably nuanced about fitness, as with, for example, the injunction for attention to gross, subtle, and causal bodies and realms.<br />
<br />
But for the common world of specialization, as with "warriors", sometimes in the west, training seems to be mainly about body fitness. Then, the mind is recognized in various ways. Spirit usually comes as a complement, a gesture towards wholeness, or even just an after-thought.<br />
<br />
I give a few kudos for mentioning these different aspects. If a fitness training specialization gives some recognition to integral theories, I get curious. As complexity is mentioned, one of my favorite realities (for me, paired with simplicity), I can feel the beginnings of being a little impressed.<br />
<br />
The professional networking "social media" platform LinkedIN sent out a blurb that was keyed to Sean Esbjorn-Hargens. I usually quickly trash these and other social media announcements that show up on my handheld - since Sean is one of my faves, and the word complexity was included, one of my fave recognitions and principles, I opened the link to "Sealfit."<br />
<br />
First quoted is the lead-in. Second comes three paragraphs of the short article that includes "complexity gap" and "VUCA."<br />
<br />
If you go to the url, also click on "about", if you are curious as to more of what they do. It looks very intense - not for me at my 'age and stage (stage not meant as integral parlance).'<br />
<br />
A younger and younger-feeling person, however - gnargnar.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://sealfit.com/the-mark-divine-blog-leading-in-a-vuca-world/">http://sealfit.com/the-mark-divine-blog-leading-in-a-vuca-world/</a><br />
"According to my friend Sean Esbjörn-Hargens of MetaIntegral Associates, Inc, this is called “The Complexity Gap.” The complexity gap exists when the complexity of a situation exceeds a leader’s cognitive and emotional ability to process the information, exceeds their capacity to ..."<br />
<br />
"VUCA was coined in part to describe the modern battlefield in a post-cold war era but now looks very much like the world we all face day in and day out. The recent event in Orlando is a testament to that, an early warning shot in the migration of the so-called war on terror to our homeland. VUCA stands for “Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous,” which all characterize the evolving conditions around the world.<br />
<br />
As leaders we need to learn how to navigate and lead in a VUCA world, to become “VUCA leaders.” Continuing to rely on the same strategies and tactics that worked in the past will yield poor results, further increasing personal and organizational stress. According to my friend Sean Esbjörn-Hargens of MetaIntegral Associates, Inc, this is called “The Complexity Gap.”<br />
<br />
The complexity gap exists when the complexity of a situation exceeds a leader’s cognitive and emotional ability to process the information, exceeds their capacity to coordinate the many essential perspectives involved, and overwhelms their process of meaning making and thus short circuits their ability to act with power, presence, and agility. The gap appears to be accelerating because leaders continue to rely on “horizontal” learning as their primary developmental tool. Thus they have few arrows in their quiver, and the arrows they do have are old and not very pointy." Laughing at the Separation of Quadstag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-09-11:5301756:Topic:622262015-09-11T13:45:29.768ZDarrell R. Moneyhonhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DarrellRMoneyhon
<p>I know you may think it quite brazen of me to jump in and make a post after not participating so long here. "Who does this guy think he is?!"</p>
<p>And yes, socially, that would probably be an accurate assessment. But the aspberger's tendency in me pushes for philosophical clarification more than it does social appropriateness.</p>
<p>And if there was ever an egghead place of forgiveness of social innappropriateness, I should think it would be HERE! </p>
<p>Part of the reason I havn't been…</p>
<p>I know you may think it quite brazen of me to jump in and make a post after not participating so long here. "Who does this guy think he is?!"</p>
<p>And yes, socially, that would probably be an accurate assessment. But the aspberger's tendency in me pushes for philosophical clarification more than it does social appropriateness.</p>
<p>And if there was ever an egghead place of forgiveness of social innappropriateness, I should think it would be HERE! </p>
<p>Part of the reason I havn't been here for a while is that I have been trying to help keep the Integral Life site alive long enough for a revival of it. It is too good to die. If I can help it live, I will. The other part of my non-participation is my own book writing projects, which have kept me busy and have contributed to long breaks from this site and the Integral Life site as well. </p>
<p>Here is the philosophical clarification that came to me today. Not a terribly new insight, but quite a bit <strong>clearer</strong>. </p>
<p></p>
<p>from a comment at the Integral Life site: </p>
<p></p>
<div class="forum-post-title">Laughing ...</div>
<div class="forum-post-content"><p>... Notice how I laughed at the Integral "rule" not to conflate quads. As I have said SO many times, the separation of quads makes sense when we are thinking like matter, looking from the overall perspective of the realm of classical objects (which we have a habit of calling "reality"). But convergence of quads makes sense if we look through the lens of a quantum substratum of total reality. The "rules" change when we include ontological (actual) depth in the equation. Philosophically an Integralist might call this a metaphysical assumption, a "given," and rail against the use of this arbitrary structuring of operational realities. Or he or she would say that too much weight is being given to the UR and LR quads, since quantum physic's interpretations come from those quads. The Integralist may show his or her postmodern leanings by insisting we not allow science to bully our Beauty (which for the postmodernist is always in the eye of the beholder, but worthwhile anyway). Science and technology, after all, are part of "the man." Screw "the man!" </p>
<p>But I think the quantum physics part of "the man," must be honored, because it seems to serve the liberation of the UL awe-fully well. Obviously<strong> I fall in the "quantum consciousness" camp</strong>. To me, quantum consciousness includes but transcends Integral theory. </p>
<p>It also includes but transcends standard "Christianity." But it in no way de-values either Integralism or Christianity. At least not for me. I value both these other two schools of thought. And use them both quite liberally. </p>
<p>Just a bit of philosophical clarification. Mostly for my future self which might "forget" this lucid moment. </p>
<p>darrell</p>
</div>
<p>- See more at: <a href="https://www.integrallife.com/node/267711#comment-63106">https://www.integrallife.com/node/267711#comment-63106</a></p>
<p></p>
<p>Are there any "quantum consciousness" adherents here? Or is that "camp" antithetical to the predominate view here? I actually have studied VERY LITTLE the quantum consciousness perspective. Basically I have only read so far Arnold Mindell's lay-oriented book about it called Dreaming While Awake. But he is a representative of that school of thought. Assuming that he is a reasonably good representative, my depth-dynamic spirituality approach seems to best match that "camp." </p>
<p>Does anyone mind if I pitch a tent here?! </p>
<p>darrell</p> Integral Grammatology, Integral Politics, and the Deficient Mental-Rationaltag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-07-26:5301756:Topic:614922015-07-26T20:41:36.873ZDavidM58http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DavidM58
No Description
No Description Space, Time & the Christmas Wikitag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-06-30:5301756:Topic:572112014-06-30T17:24:56.775ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>Balder,</p>
<p>I have been investing a little time in establishing this <a href="http://doowikis.com/m/1RvIG4x5Fk" target="_blank">Christmas Wiki</a> to serve as both a community reference and model of my own understanding. I've been getting a lot of feedback and requests for definitions. I was just asked to add SPACE and TIME (which I did) but I thought you might want to take a peek from your TSK, tsk, perspective and see if you can life with my definitions.</p>
<p>Likewise <em>anyone in…</em></p>
<p>Balder,</p>
<p>I have been investing a little time in establishing this <a href="http://doowikis.com/m/1RvIG4x5Fk" target="_blank">Christmas Wiki</a> to serve as both a community reference and model of my own understanding. I've been getting a lot of feedback and requests for definitions. I was just asked to add SPACE and TIME (which I did) but I thought you might want to take a peek from your TSK, tsk, perspective and see if you can life with my definitions.</p>
<p>Likewise <em>anyone in this community</em> should feel free to message me or email me with suggestions for terms to be defined or modifications to existing definitions.</p>
<p></p> A Short History of Nihilsmtag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-03-18:5301756:Topic:545662014-03-18T19:56:26.124ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>I've just uploaded my draft of <strong>A Short History of Nihilism</strong> to <a href="http://laymanpascal.wordpress.com" target="_blank">The Midriffs</a> (my middle-length writings).</p>
<p>This blog will provide access to PDFs of my documents such as <em>The Rules of Metatheory, Only the Athenians Exist, Vulture Peak, The Edges of Perfection, etc</em>.</p>
<p>The next piece of writing I intend to make available there will be <em>OVERPLAY: Nietzsche's Jukebox</em>. If possible it will link…</p>
<p>I've just uploaded my draft of <strong>A Short History of Nihilism</strong> to <a href="http://laymanpascal.wordpress.com" target="_blank">The Midriffs</a> (my middle-length writings).</p>
<p>This blog will provide access to PDFs of my documents such as <em>The Rules of Metatheory, Only the Athenians Exist, Vulture Peak, The Edges of Perfection, etc</em>.</p>
<p>The next piece of writing I intend to make available there will be <em>OVERPLAY: Nietzsche's Jukebox</em>. If possible it will link to an abbreviated playlist of songs and splices which illustrate certain facets of the "Anti-Wagnerian musical spirit" that is associated with the Dionysian Cultural Revolution (of which Metatheorizing is a primary intellectual tentacle).</p> "Spiritual Energy": Exploring a Gray Area between the UR and UL Quandrantstag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-03-12:5301756:Topic:545482014-03-12T15:28:48.396ZDarrell R. Moneyhonhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DarrellRMoneyhon
<p>Just wanted to share a segment from my book in progress. Thought the topic would be good for thinking about interactions between Integral quadrants.</p>
<p></p>
<p>The below excerpt deals with the quad-conflating term of "spiritual energy." In addition to the potential problem of quad-conflation, if the word "energy" (in the phrase "spiritual energy") is used without sufficient qualification, it would indicate an indescriminate metaphysical assumption about spirituality instead of staying…</p>
<p>Just wanted to share a segment from my book in progress. Thought the topic would be good for thinking about interactions between Integral quadrants.</p>
<p></p>
<p>The below excerpt deals with the quad-conflating term of "spiritual energy." In addition to the potential problem of quad-conflation, if the word "energy" (in the phrase "spiritual energy") is used without sufficient qualification, it would indicate an indescriminate metaphysical assumption about spirituality instead of staying true to our shared value here of defining a set of operations or frame of reference about spirituality.</p>
<p></p>
<p>I believe that my concept (shared in the text below) of "thinking like energy" ends up qualifying as being an articulation of a frame of reference or set of mental operations.</p>
<p></p>
<p>At any rate the following segment seems to be a pretty interesting exploration of a gray area or two between two major Integral quadrants. This segment is an excerpt from a larger section where I explore various other "gray areas" as well.</p>
<p></p>
<p>While writing this section I was fascinated by the spaces between "objective" and "subjective" thought. My years and years of writing poetry on the one hand and philosophizing on the other hand seemed to lead me to a moment in time when I explore spaces of possible convergence of the two. That time is now, during the writing of <em>Your Third Nature</em>. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Here's the excerpt exploring the quad-crossover nature of the phrase/concept "spiritual energy." </p>
<p></p>
<p>from <em>Your Third Nature</em> (in progress): </p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Shifting perspective to the neutral eye of the storm is more a chance to learn about really real reality than it is an</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">excuse</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">to escape or anesthetize the suffering while using the defense mechanism of intellectualization (“These things happen.” or “One encounters such unfortunate events.” or “In the vast scheme of things it's not that bad.”). To paste the deeper, calmer, view onto the surface zones of the ever-unfolding flares without differentiating which depth location the perspective is coming from is not “deep” and is not integrative; it's screwing up one's depth continuity and crippling one's third nature. Like prescription drugs, the neutral view and mental state can be abused. Intellectualization is an abuse of this otherwise healthy prescription for third nature insight and growth.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Now, lets shift from this UL, psychological perspective back to a more systems-thought view of a deep, multi-layered, and unfolding reality. The systems view is quite intellectual, without being intellectualized―it is one based on “sincere thought” (Taoism term), instead of thought used to cover-up of emotions. It does not require that a person stay forever at a distance, looking from afar in a state of aboutness. Instead it allows a person to, sooner or later, use the aboutness in the service of withness. I-it can be put to the service of I-Thou. To think that a person must choose one quadrant or the other (UL or LR) as an answer or as a means of meeting human needs would be a false dichotomy. Both views can serve human development and wellbeing. Inputs and energies from various depth levels of the flare/self are needed in order to be a whole, fully-actualizing, person. Same applies to <i>groups</i> of people.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">All this to give us mental permission to shift from a deeper, more intimate, vantage point to a considerably less deep and closer-to-surface veiwpoint. It's okay to shift from the warmth and wisdom of a fireside chat to a more intellectual discussion similar to those occuring in scientific laboratories and college classrooms. Going “there” can (and <i>will</i>, if you let it) actually help “here.”</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">One specific topic of discussion which shifts from “here” to “there,” is the popular notion of “spiritual energy.” While the word “spiritual” is rather “here” or subjective, the word “energy” is rather “there” or objective. A person shifts from thinking about a personal-like presence to thinking in terms of spiritual energy moving about. It is a view about the workings or dynamics of spirituality, rather than about the feeling tone and specific experiences of “spirituality.” The mental shift from thinking about the intimate relationship aspect of spirituality to thinking about the workings of spirituality is not unlike a parent kissing his or her children goodbye in the morning to head off to work. Sometimes we long to simply stay at home and be with our family. Saying goodbye is not always easy. And yet there is a reason that we do so, day after day.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Likewise, there seems to be a compelling reason why we consistently refer to inner (UL) spiritual experiences in terms of spiritual “energy.” The “working” view has the potential of adding value. Some would argue that this is the result of a mere semantics error<font face="Times New Roman, serif">―</font>that when it comes to spirituality the “energy” is really just a feeling sensation like a loved-one putting his or her hand on your shoulder. “Energy” is just a metaphor to describe the feeling of that comforting sensation.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">But if it is just a matter of the misuse of a word or concept, why is the misuse so dern prevalent? Why that particular metaphor over and over again? Could it be that there is in fact a quality shared by both the comfort of a hug and the flow of electrons through a wire? Is it possible that something similar to flowing electrons passes from one person to another during the spiritual act of showing affection and support?</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">It’s not like this use of the word “energy” is limited to flakey, overly dramatic, New Age talk. It pops up all across the spiritual philosophy spectrum—so prevalent that an underlying link between external forms of energy and inwardly felt psychic energy is suggested. </font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Like a Mobius strip, whose continuous loop twists from inside to out, energy seems to twist the observer from the outside-looking-at perspective of the right two quadrants to the inside-looking-out perspective of the upper left quadrant. This quad-crossing tendency is, I believe, due in part to the fact that energy seems to closely match qualities of the human mind. The mind intuitively sees itself reflected in the external forms of energy. It's like gazing into a pool of water. Yes, water is a pretty decent energy metaphor, and one that has been used a lot to describe spiritual energy.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Perhaps mind sees itself reflected in energy because the slippery stuff (energy) "out there" matches the slippery stuff in here, in my subjective mind realm; so much so, that the two, like a couple of lovers, just can't seem to leave each other alone! Those slippery little devils called thoughts seem right at home in an energy field or stream of energy. Mind and energy can't seem to stay in their respective "corners" of "the known." Like the story of Romeo and Juliet, the “family traditions”<font face="Times New Roman, serif">―</font>our established classification schemes<font face="Times New Roman, serif">―just</font> can't keep these lovers apart.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Here's one reason why the lovers sense so much compatibility in one another. Both energy and mind can be especially good portals to the unknown. Neither limits itself to the known. Using our flare analogy, both a low <span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">resistance</span>, high frequency, variety of energy and a fully functioning, open, mind would be <span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">likely</span> to move freely (or at least much more freely than matter) from the surface "knowns" at the top of the flare to the deep "unknowns" at, or near, the base of the flare.</font></font></p>
<p> </p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Sure, you can see from the upper right quadrant's perspective that a particular type of energy consists of particles such as molecules or electrons. This much is known about certain forms of energy. But the exact nature of the attracting or repelling forces which make those particles move is not really known. As soon as more tiny particles or discrete packets of energy are found (or inferred) deeper down inside the force, more questions arise about new forces that might be operating on those "particular" particles! </font></font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Scientists can observe how each new level of forces act. They may even eventually identify and measure those forces. But the "why" always seems to end up escaping us.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Here's what David Bohm and his co-author Basil J. Hiley, in their book <i>The Undivided Universe</i>, has to say about the elusive “why”:</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><em><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">What has been a constant in this overall historical development is a pattern in which at each stage,</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">certain</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">features are regarded as appearance, while others are regarded as of an</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">essence</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">which explains the appearance on a qualitatively</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">different</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">basis. But what is taken as essence at any stage, is seen to be appearance of a still more fundamental essence. Ultimately everything pays both the role of appearance and that of essence. If, as we are suggesting, this pattern never comes to an end, then ultimately all of our thought can be regarded as appearance, not to the senses, but to the mind.</font></font></em></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">In fact, it seems that such mere-appearance elusiveness is part of the definition of the concept of the alleged essence called a “force.” The term is used to describe a result, but the exact <i>content</i> of the force seems, for the most part, unknown. It is often a hypothetical essence without known substance.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">To say a force is elusive is almost a tautology, like saying water is water, or mind is mind. Or maybe it's more like the near-tautology of "water is wet." A force is a force (and a horse is a horse, of course, of course!), and a force is, by definition, somewhat elusive. We might just as well call a force a ghost. We know what the ghost does. We know the ghost's effects on non-ghostly things. But we often don't have a handle on what the ghost <i>is.</i></font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">We do know that at the deeper levels of observation and analysis, energy is</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>very</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">slippery stuff. Furthermore, energy at</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>any</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">level seems to be a slippery slope to that slippery "stuff" down deep inside. Like a gateway drug that begins an addict's descent into heavier and heavier drug states, energy—even at its more superficial and "known" levels—is a gateway for descending into deeper and deeper states of not knowing.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">The more we get to know energy's characteristics and to think like those characteristics (mentally imitating energy's ways, which is the natural result of being with and taking in such a metaphor), the less it seems appropriate to conceptualize energy exclusively in the right quadrant's category of individual things observed from the outside. A trained dog version of energy (superficial level of understanding) may fit there, but not the <i>real</i> energy. A portion of the "truth" about energy may fit there, but not the "whole truth."</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">I suppose that could be said about anything. At the deepest levels of observation and analysis, nothing—no thing—passes the knowing test. That was the whole point of Bohm and Hiley's comment above. But energy seems particularly good at getting us to this point sooner. If wine is fine, but liquor is quicker, then matter (and “thinking</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>like</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">matter”) is the wine. Energy (and “thinking</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>like</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">energy”) is the liquor!</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;"><font size="3">The concept of a system is invariably and inescapably a <i>pattern</i> in our mind. Does the external system actually have a “pattern,” or is that just our minds' way of representing or understanding the system? Who really knows?</font></span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;"><font size="3">But we do know that a pattern has that same structural-like quality which the objective things in the UR quad appear to have whenever you investigate their parts in relation to one another. The pattern of a system is the mental representation of the relationships of separate or relatively separate objects within systems. If no such pattern were to appear in the mind as it looks at collections of things, then there would be no LR quad to speak of or to use as a way of knowing. The objects are dependent upon the mind's patterns, in the a priori manner that Kant went on and on about many years ago.</font></span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;"><font size="3">And yet the collection of objects themselves seem to exude this patterness. A system seems to operate according to a pattern. Its pattern is not merely or only “dreamed up.”</font></span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;"><font size="3">Hence patterns live in one of those gray areas between the objective and subjective domains.</font></span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', times;"><font size="3">But patterns, like thoughts, aren't stuck limbo. They move in and out of the gray area. It should be of no surprise, considering that these patterns seem to be a subtype of thoughts in general. A pattern <i>is</i> a thought. It appears to be a “right-brain” type of thought, since the right brain is known to specialize in whole patterns or “gestalts.”</font></span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Ken Wilber's integral quadrants and our “quantumized” version of them here create one of those systems-related patterns. The quads as a whole form a dynamic pattern which has the potential to move information about from one quad to another and which constitutes a</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>system</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">of organized ways of knowing and approaching reality. It's one thing to have an open and disorganized mind. Quite another to have an open but organized mind.</font></span></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In my previous field of clinical psychology, the</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">openness</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">to use any theory or approach which works was called “</font><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">eclecticism.</span></font><font face="Times New Roman, serif">” While</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">eclecticism</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">does not preclude an organized method of inclusion, neither does it require it. For the most part,</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">eclecticism</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">in psychotherapy has been intuitive and somewhat random or disorganized.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">In contrast, the quadrants-as-a-system is</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>organized</i></font><font face="Times New Roman, serif">. You might say that the Integral approach and the Quantum Quad approach is “organized</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">eclecticism.” It is more</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US"><i>systematic</i></span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">than undifferentiated eclecticism.</span></font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">A conceptual model or pattern pertaining to a system is just a fancy metaphor or analogy. We talked earlier about what happens when you spend</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>quality time</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">with a metaphor. In time your mind begins to take in and then</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>take on</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">the model/metaphor's qualities. You begin to think</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>like</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">the model/metaphor, in a mode reflecting the qualities of the referent-object being used as a metaphor. In a way, the contemplativeness extracts the referent-object's qualities. It's sort of like</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><span lang="en-US" xml:lang="en-US">squeezing</span></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">the juice from a lemon, except the “juice” is not as tangible.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Because of the intangibility of it, the extracting ends up being</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>abstracting</i></font><font face="Times New Roman, serif">. Just as the lemon juice can be moved beyond the lemon itself, your mental abstraction can be moved from its original location to new places. You are free to make conceptual lemonade from the original lemon-thought.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">But there must be something to carry the juice in. That's your mind. As vessel it is directly exposed to the qualities of the lemon as unleashed in the juice. The lemon poured its heart into that juice! Now the mind is exposed to the heart of the matter. In the process of abstracting and carrying the lemon's juice your mind gets a bit sticky and/or tart. It begins to think more</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>like</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">lemons.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Or perhaps it had to think like lemons before it could squeeze out the lemon juice in the first place. Either way, a thinking-like-lemons occurs.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">This contemplative process is, of course, a subjective, UL quantum quad, activity. No one else can see direct evidence of you thinking like the “lemon” or metaphor.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">However,</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>indirect</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">evidence may be seen in the form of a new quality to your thought/thinking. You may approach things differently than before you spent quality time with the metaphor.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Our mind metaphor or “lemon” here is energy and energy fields. The mind is seen as being an energy field and/or an energy process. This mind-as-energy view is highy compatible with the notion of an ever-unfolding flare/self. It becomes easier to see mind and self as energy which is flowing from in to out.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">But that's when we are thinking <i>about</i> mind<font face="Times New Roman, serif">―</font>about mind as being like energy flowing in the general form of a flare. What happens if the mind itself<font face="Times New Roman, serif">―</font>the very thing doing the thinking<font face="Times New Roman, serif">―</font>spends enough quality time <i>with</i> the mind metaphor of an energy-based flare that it can start to think <i>like</i> (instead of merely about) the energy and <i>like</i> an energetic flare? Instead of just “seeing” the image of mind-as-energy-in-the-form-of-an-ever-unfolding-flare, we feel it<font face="Times New Roman, serif">―</font><i>experience</i> it as it unfolds. Mind experiences itself in terms of the metaphor.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">At first glance the energy/flare metaphor appeared to be but a projection of the mind. But then the projector is informed, or rather, <i>transformed</i>, by its projection. This process seems to be an example of Kevin Kelly's “up creation,” in which the parts help create the whole.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">When the mind is transformed by its own projection it begins to act more like its true nature, no longer pretending to be composed of static parts called individual thoughts, images, percepts, or other object-like “parts.” The mind no longer pretends to be like a physical “body.” It doesn't just sit there like a bunch of rocks; it flows like a river and spreads out like an ocean.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">In turn, this flowing/spreading essence within, behind, and through the metaphor is realized as being <i>mind itself</i>. The projection is reclaimed.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">Now that the mind knows itself better, it begins to exhibit a more dynamic way of thinking. It is a different approach to how we see, interact with, and feel about reality. It allows for new sets of questions and, therefore, new sets of answers. It is a qualitatively different <i>mode</i> of thought than our previous mode of “thinking like matter.” Concepts such as “non-dual” or “unity consciousness” make much more sense in this thinking-like-energy mode. But the potential benefits go beyond merely understanding certain concepts.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3">There is a real, almost practical, advantage to “thinking like energy” (TLE). TLE can help us feel and be more “spiritual.” It can also make our thoughts more porous, more open to experiences and thoughts which were previously ignored or filtered out. Thus TLE helps with both spirituality and the search for truth in general.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">One way it helps me grow spiritually is in my capacity to fully</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>love</i></font><font face="Times New Roman, serif">. TLE allows the me over here to see how I overlap with the you over there. It allows us to be together in some unseen but sensed, felt, and intuitively</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>understood</i></font><font face="Times New Roman, serif">, unified field. The energy metaphor not only has wings which stir the imagination; it has down-to-earth</font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif"><i>legs</i></font> <font face="Times New Roman, serif">which help me form better relationships with others. Like the spirituality which it helps facilitate, TLE is as practical as it is fun and aesthetically pleasing.</font></font></p>
<p></p>
<p><font size="3">Darrell</font></p> A Bow to the Old Year, An Embrace of the Newtag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-12-31:5301756:Topic:536032013-12-31T18:11:52.023ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>What are your thoughts on the past year, and on the year ahead?<br></br><br></br>Personally, in retrospect, while there were several difficult challenges and losses, overall 2013 was not a bad year for me:<br></br><br></br>1. I wrote two academic papers.<br></br>2. Took several significant steps towards establishing the Foundation for Integral Religion and Spirituality and developing our first degree program.<br></br>3. Presented a paper at the Integral Theory Conference and won a Best Paper award.<br></br>4. Got a…</p>
<p>What are your thoughts on the past year, and on the year ahead?<br/><br/>Personally, in retrospect, while there were several difficult challenges and losses, overall 2013 was not a bad year for me:<br/><br/>1. I wrote two academic papers.<br/>2. Took several significant steps towards establishing the Foundation for Integral Religion and Spirituality and developing our first degree program.<br/>3. Presented a paper at the Integral Theory Conference and won a Best Paper award.<br/>4. Got a promotion at work.<br/>5. Was recruited for an exciting new teaching job, to begin in 2014.<br/>6. Released a new album of flute music.<br/>7. Received an unexpected complimentary trip to the UK with Dr. Steven Greer.<br/>8. Continued to host the IPS forum and to be enriched by conversations with the members there, and established a mirror site here on FB.<br/>9. After much paperwork and expense, succeeded in bringing my mother-in-law to the U.S.<br/>10. As of today, celebrated 16 years of marriage to my wonderful wife.<br/><br/>I'm thankful for the blessings of the past year, and look forward to 2014 as a year of further creativity, generativity, growth, service, and flourishing. In particular, I hope for the further kindling of the flame of vocation -- the development of new ways of perceiving, acting, and being in the world, in support of right action and right livelihood in the face of the many unique challenges and opportunities of our time.<br/><br/>Blessings and love to all my friends here!</p> Simplified "Second Tier" Quiztag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-10-20:5301756:Topic:525072013-10-20T18:34:18.912ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<blockquote><p>Hello Everybody,</p>
<p>I've been soliciting/compiling people's intuitions about the casual identification of the the "second tier personality". Many such simple selection tools must come into existence. Such a questionnaire must, in my opinion, meet the following criteria?</p>
<ul>
<li>Be short, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">easy</span>, quick to fill out, NOT based on open-ended answers, NOT requiring great depth or time in order to interpret results.…</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><p>Hello Everybody,</p>
<p>I've been soliciting/compiling people's intuitions about the casual identification of the the "second tier personality". Many such simple selection tools must come into existence. Such a questionnaire must, in my opinion, meet the following criteria?</p>
<ul>
<li>Be short, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">easy</span>, quick to fill out, NOT based on open-ended answers, NOT requiring great depth or time in order to interpret results.</li>
<li><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Does not need to be perfect</span>. Only needs to initiate a boundary beyond which the odds of finding "integralites" is considerably increased.</li>
<li><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Should not be based primarily on "Theory".</span> We are not looking for the "integrally-informed" person... nor are we trying to deploy any top-down personality analytics which correspond to the more developed academic models. Instead, we are working from the grassroots looking for the community to clarify its own sense of the instincts, capacities & response-patterns which characterize themselves.</li>
</ul>
<p>So this is just a draft. Many of the questions of clumsy. I would love to know these things from you:</p>
<p>(a) do you find yourself basically answering yes to all these?</p>
<p>(b) is there a better phrasing? tighter? some slightly adjusted emphasis?</p>
<p>(c) which are least important? Ideally, this should get down to 10 Simple Questions.</p>
</blockquote>
<p></p>
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: center;"><strong>CLUMSY DRAFT QUESTIONNAIRE</strong></p>
<p><span><span><br/></span></span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>This brief questionnaire is looking for a</span> <span>certain type</span> <span>of person. It is not perfect but it allows us to increase the odds of finding the sort of people we are looking to benefit.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Are there really types of people? Can a simple questionnaire work? If you are unsure about these things, then</span> <span>you</span> <span>might be just the type we are looking for!</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>Please answer as honestly as possible...</span></p>
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: center;"><span>Yes, No or Huh?</span></p>
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: center;"><span>(Huh? will be counted as YES if you have more Yes-es,</span></p>
<p dir="ltr" style="text-align: center;"><span>or NO if you have more No’s.)</span></p>
<p><span><span><br/></span></span></p>
<ol>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>At some earlier point in your life, do you feel that you were more relativistic, “nihilistic”, exaggeratedly open-minded or unreasonably tolerant than you are now?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you consider yourself to be both pro-worldly & pro-transcendental? (That means you strongly feel the importance of action-in-the-world and something like a robust “inner” or “spiritual” practice...)</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you feel naturally very interested in the pattern of developmental stages -- whether in the process of individual maturation or else in human history generally?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Have you noticed in yourself that you very quickly and very often move from your initial reaction (to people or situations) to an unexpected empathy with the opposite position... and then a fleeting sense that these positions are linked or explained by a common significance?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you often try to deal with yourself, other people and life situations by being</span> <span>very present</span><span>? Does it seem to you that your consciousness, receptivity or sense-of-being can be a significant contribution?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you wish that more of your interactions with people should produce lucid flow, insights, exchange of high values, a feeling of inner “opening” and a sense of emergent novelty? Are you ever concerned that your own naivete, lack of focus or avoidance of genuine intimacy inhibits this productive</span> <span>We-space</span><span>?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you feel, for some reason, that you might have a lot personally in common with sensible, humanistic saints and great Wisdom-Teachers from every culture and tradition?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you basically agree with most</span> <span>Conservative, Mainstream & Progressive</span> <span>values -- but not necessarily with the people espousing those values?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you ever feel a strong interest in</span> <span>Grand Unifying ideas</span> <span>which attempt to integrate, coordinate and synthesize the enormous diversity of different theories, interpretations and human values?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you feel -- whether rightly or wrongly -- that you are inwardly in touch with either (a) a deeper sense of shared human experience or (b) an</span> <span>ultimate transpersonal being</span> <span>which is available through many diverse interpretations and lenses?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you discover that your own mind frequently takes perspectives about its own perspective -- and that this distance, depth or self-awareness helps maintain a kind of a spacious inner balance which allows you to feel less reactive in the face of things which are stressful, complicated or highly charged with personal and moral significance?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you observe people expressing themselves as parts of large populations of predictable worldviews... and do you wish that a new or deeper understanding would help resolve these repetitive tensions into a more integrated and harmoniously enriched dynamic complementarity?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Are you instinctively interested in the</span> <span>developmental potential of sore spots</span><span>, negatives, frictions, resistances, etc.?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you find yourself slightly “turned off” by people whose statements DO NOT simultaneously respect subjective, objective and interpersonal experience?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Are you (or would you like to be) an ally of a New Culture -- one which is fulfills the glimpses that people encounter in their diverse “</span><span>peak experience</span><span>s”?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Does your thinking regularly end up favoring</span> <span>complementary</span><span>, simultaneous, parallel or synchronized truths? Do you frequently find yourself needing to make a somewhat paradoxical double-affirmation ... “both/and”!</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Do you feel the great variety of different human experiences and belief systems needs to be organized by some kind of unfolding creative inner-and-outer process or “evolution” -- and that you have some kind of responsibility to be a better and more conscious participant in this process?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Are you interested in the usefulness of “</span><span>subtle</span><span>” energies, visions, entities, miracles, etc. but reluctant to make any exaggerated or hasty belief-statements about them?</span></p>
</li>
<li dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr"><span>Are you subtly put off by people who seem to share your own style, preferences and values when they seem overly identified with those forms?</span></p>
</li>
</ol>
<p><span><span><br/></span></span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span>If you answered yes or scored highly on most of these questions there is a strong possibility that you belong the “type” we are looking for -- a type whose personality and preferences are variously called</span> <span><em>integral, second tier, transpersonal, centauric, new existentialism, post-post-modernism, evolutionary spirituality, enlightened dualism, panentheism, tantric buddhism, High Sufism, transrational humanism, the Work, post-metaphysical spirituality, the “friends of the Way”</em>, etc.</span></p>
<p>Individuals with such sympathies and tendencies have existed sporadically throughout human history and have seldom been linked together or formed community for mutual benefit. We would like to change all that.</p>
<p>This change begins with people pondering the possibility that they might belong to a type. Then devising methods to concentrate more of this type in certain areas and arranging to benefit, empower, increase and deepen these people.</p>
<p><span id="docs-internal-guid--e7dbdd9-d71a-7457-310a-0f15bef7094b"></span></p>