* FYI, theurjism is the term for my unique neologisms.

You may have noticed that I use a few terms that are not in the dictionary, that I've made up to get across a meaning that is also not in the dictionary. So let me clarify at least two of them for the moment. “Kennilingus” is one such term. It is a take on the word “cunnilingus” with which you are already familiar. The “kenni” part refers to Ken Wilber, so it's a sort of play on one who licks Wilber. This of course is metaphorical, not meaning one who actually gives head to him, although that most certainly could be included, especially since his “suck my dick” comment to critics, which comment it seems acolytes take literally. It's more like those who unflinchingly accept his work verbatim without much, if any, criticism. We all know the type, who when speaking of “integral” will use the exact same language as Wilber, not only in content but often in the same style with the same prejudices. I also use it to refer to the source from when the language comes, to Wilber's own dogma. To make it more akin to fellatio I have another variation for the object of worship in kennilingus, Ken Wilber as Kennilingam. (See this for a definition of lingam, which includes penis but goes into its religious meanings as well, a fit symbol of the AQAL religion.)


To distinguish the alternative integral movement from kennilingus I use the term “intergraal.” “Inter” comes more from the interrelations of the elements of AQAL instead of their rigid distinctions. Granted the elements should be separated out to gain invaluable analysis and clarity. Nor should they be reduced to each other in some form a overarching, dominant and relativistic mush of equality. But neither should they be so distinct as to not see how they relate, for it is in the relationships that any sense of a whole emerges from which the parts participate. And said whole is not THE whole, just a particular whole relative to a particular focus in a particular context. And this doesn't have to be reduced to another form of relativism, since it can also accommodate qualitative distinction and make value judgments so to which wholes are better in which circumstances. Also said parts do not have to be entirely subsumed in any given whole, since they retain their own agency and participate in other wholes in other contexts.


The “graal” of intergraal is the Old French spelling of the term “grail.” We often associate grails with the Holy Grail, the cup that caught the blood of Christ on the cross, and which nectar is purported to induce in one communion with the divine. Hence from such cups in religious masses where wine is transubstantiated into the blood of Christ we are washed of our sins by partaking in this ritualistic cannibalism. But again metaphorically it symbolizes more that communion with the big Other. We can demythologize that other from some metaphysical divinity to a more humane other, to focusing more on humanity in the here and now in this world and in this context, in our present embodiment and interactivity with our environment and other human beings. It is a transforming and perhaps even transubstantiating conversion from our isolated agency to a balance with our human communion through the emerging next wave of development in P2P networks. Hence intergraal is in distinction from the typically more agentic, individualistic, authoritarian, capitalistic and intellectualized kennilingus.

Views: 2332

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I agree with a) and b) in the first paragraph. And with proto-material as that dense, hot plasma of photons, electrons and protons. Hydrogen is the first element to come out of that soup. So one could say either or both are saectum saectorum in that sense. I prefer though hydrogen as symbol, being the First Element with atomic number One. And as savior of our planet in the form of solar energy in PV, as well as storage of such generated PV energy and fuel cell vehicles.

Okay, terrific.  I've increased the prominence of "hydrogen" in the entry.

As to your other uses in the definition, like waking down, are you planning to incorporate some of the ideas about the fold in your definition of splice? I.e., that it's about both waking up and down via such a fold?

Yeah, I just started a definition of "splice" which does mention the Fold in general terms.  There is a lot of good thinking still to be done about the relationship between ascending/descending functions in terms of the implicit bi-directionality of same-differential operators such as the Splice and its conceptual analogs.

I'd also suggest adding as examples Panikkar's notion of the saeculum, which led me to my ruminations, as well as Balder's notion of matarealism, both in this thread.

So I've referenced Panikkar in a new subsection on the sacralization of the secular and added an entry on Matarealism cross-linked to sacred materialism. 

Multipli City. And more here.

In line with the last post, I propose paraphysics for the kind of metaphysics that goes postmetaphysical. Especially since 'meta' is in the latter, thereby causing all sorts of redundancy by adding 'post' to qualify it. And then having to add another 'post' for post-postmodernism etc. Paraphysics handles all that without all the posts and the metas.

I said the following in a FB post:

"Hermes is my pa/matron (andryogenous) saint. This IPS post discusses how postmetaphysical hermeneutics (a Hermes endeavor) gets at what I've been discussing. Also note this is fully articulated in the polydox theologians, so 'religion' is going popo too. Ha, maybe I'll start using pama for popo."

Pama meaning the postmetaphysical andryogenous connection between patron-matron (male-female, subject-object etc.) exemplified by Hermes.

The above is in this FB thread.

Some more ammo for why paraphysics is apt. It is indicative how one handles paradox, which itself literally means beyond belief. Also paraphysics is the new paradigm of cross-paradigms, how it relates the plurality of paradigms in the betwixt and the between. See Desmond as the latest example.

Reply to Discussion


What paths lie ahead for religion and spirituality in the 21st Century? How might the insights of modernity and post-modernity impact and inform humanity's ancient wisdom traditions? How are we to enact, together, new spiritual visions – independently, or within our respective traditions – that can respond adequately to the challenges of our times?

This group is for anyone interested in exploring these questions and tracing out the horizons of an integral post-metaphysical spirituality.

Notice to Visitors

At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members.  We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join.  In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.

© 2017   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service