* 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.

* Aka AQALingus for those more sensitive snowflakes offended by kennilingus. They'll probably be offended by this more innocuous version too though.

Views: 3214

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hegeholonic, from this post. It combines hegemony with holonic to indicate how certain forms of mereological holonics can be rather hegemonic.

I was re-reading this post today and forgot to put that word in here: interrational. For me it's better than transrational.

Which I'd thought of this one: cliteracy. Very important work at the link.

Word of the day is apothegm: noun, 1. a short, pithy, instructive saying; a terse remark or aphorism. To be distinguished with apophlegm, which is something that used to be an apothegm but got stale with overuse, hardened into dogma and just obstructs breathing new life. E.g., transcend and include, everyone is partially right (but I am more right), integral _______ (fill in the blank), meta________ (fill in the blank), post-post _______ (fill in the blank), etc.

Word of the day is quidnunc: \KWID-nuhngk\
1. a person who is eager to know the latest news and gossip; a gossip or busybody.

In integral circles this is known as a quadnunc.

Facefuck, first referenced here. A contemporary disease of those who participate in Facebook, while otherwise being firmly ensconced in the emerging wave of Commons and/or Integral values.

At the FB IPS forum, in a discussion about beating up on Ken, Joseph noted Ken is acting as a Katechon. He describes it thusly: "That which restrains or impedes. In this context, Ken may be serving a conservative function- providing a certain continuity and reminding us of the fundamentals of the movement, but also functioning as an impediment to what is trying to emerge. This is also the difference between Lenin and Luxemburg. Lenin insisted that the change in the consciousness of the movement came from without (the party, the guru, the spiritual experts), while Luxemburg said that it developed organically within the movement itself."

Perhaps in this role he is the Kennichon?

Word of the day: atrabilious \a-truh-BIL-yuhs\
1. gloomy; morose; melancholy; morbid.
2. irritable; bad-tempered; splenetic.

Applied to those not disposed to kennilingus, aqalbilious.

A/Aperspectival. See this post. For those of us in kennilingus recovery. Aka Aperspectivals Anonymous.

I hope you can make a good philosophical critique of aperspectivism (other than that you are tired of it).  Or maybe this is more an emotional reaction?

What have I been doing in this forum for the last several years?

You've critiqued IT for its latent metaphysics of presence, but I wouldn't equate that with aperspectivism.

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.

© 2024   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service