"Agape" in Integral Theory - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T11:30:14Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/agape-in-integral-theory?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A58814&feed=yes&xn_auth=nosure, i wasn't dissing disamb…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:591492014-11-14T05:09:06.007ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>sure, i wasn't dissing disambiguation. my assumption is that desmond, like us, is not speaking in terms of a superholon. therefore we are left with intra-holonic agape or extra-holonic agape. but we have to tease those apart. whatever you ferret out of desmond i will run against this and see if it fits. </p>
<p>sure, i wasn't dissing disambiguation. my assumption is that desmond, like us, is not speaking in terms of a superholon. therefore we are left with intra-holonic agape or extra-holonic agape. but we have to tease those apart. whatever you ferret out of desmond i will run against this and see if it fits. </p> I also am interested in bring…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:588922014-11-14T05:04:52.942ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>I also am interested in bringing these sets of concerns together, not just comparison; however, some initial comparative disambiguation is necessary, in my opinion, if we don't want to run roughshod over one interpretation by simply assuming the starting terms of the conversation based on another. In my understanding of Desmond thus far, he does accept something like a holonic notion -- he speaks of singular integrities (as open wholes) -- but he does not posit a superholon. I understand…</p>
<p>I also am interested in bringing these sets of concerns together, not just comparison; however, some initial comparative disambiguation is necessary, in my opinion, if we don't want to run roughshod over one interpretation by simply assuming the starting terms of the conversation based on another. In my understanding of Desmond thus far, he does accept something like a holonic notion -- he speaks of singular integrities (as open wholes) -- but he does not posit a superholon. I understand your point in your paper and think Desmond is doing something a little different, but I'll need time to flesh it out. I'll take this up when I respond to your paper.</p> I'm trying to bring all these…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:589632014-11-14T04:32:58.057ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>I'm trying to bring all these sets of concerns together rather than evaluate them comparatively. I think the phenomenology and the ontology should be viewed as complementary aspects of the definition of any of these terms. Although all terms are "incomplete" or "self-proximal" by nature, if we want to associate that with Agape with have a limited set of choices. Either we accept the holonic notion (which adequately covers most of the phenomenology) in addition to another more primal…</p>
<p>I'm trying to bring all these sets of concerns together rather than evaluate them comparatively. I think the phenomenology and the ontology should be viewed as complementary aspects of the definition of any of these terms. Although all terms are "incomplete" or "self-proximal" by nature, if we want to associate that with Agape with have a limited set of choices. Either we accept the holonic notion (which adequately covers most of the phenomenology) in addition to another more primal influence OR we posit a supraholonic notion which acts trans-holonically relative to all other holons. Since we do not want to do the latter, we must do the former. And the former requires teasing apart two things which are frequently entangled in different sets of definitions of agape-as-experience. But I'm no expert on his work. I'm just trying to organize what is possible relative to all the points which keep surfacing in postmetaphysical discussions on this topic.</p> One issue here that is a like…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:591482014-11-14T04:24:36.041ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>One issue here that is a likely philosophical / paradigmatic sticking or stumbling point is that Desmond primarily discusses eros and agape phenomenologically rather than metaphysically / ontologically, so the focus and purpose are different. He doesn't appear to be trying to enlist the terms in the 'cosmos-building' work that Wilber does.</p>
<p>Anyway, I think there are elements in your paper that make bridges towards Desmond's views, nevertheless, that haven't appeared as much in your…</p>
<p>One issue here that is a likely philosophical / paradigmatic sticking or stumbling point is that Desmond primarily discusses eros and agape phenomenologically rather than metaphysically / ontologically, so the focus and purpose are different. He doesn't appear to be trying to enlist the terms in the 'cosmos-building' work that Wilber does.</p>
<p>Anyway, I think there are elements in your paper that make bridges towards Desmond's views, nevertheless, that haven't appeared as much in your forum comments, and I definitely want to engage them. You've framed the situation primarily in terms of differentiating from a mythic-God approach (and a mythic/mystical/sentimental use of agape), however, and that isn't what Desmond is up to (or what I have been trying to present or defend in my own inquiries here). But I'm new to his work so it takes some digesting, on my part, to sift through a good bulk of what he says and then relate that back to your proposal...</p> I am quite happy with the adj…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:588912014-11-14T04:01:57.386ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>I am quite happy with the adjacency elements of Desmond's metaxology. I just think he (and most people) are conflating two distinct patterns of love-influence-energy because they both push some of the same emotional, mystical and theological buttons. I don't care which one gets called Agape but there are two distinct functional profiles involved. One is perfectly consistent with dialectical framing and the other is not. But they are not competing for the definition of Agape. The…</p>
<p>I am quite happy with the adjacency elements of Desmond's metaxology. I just think he (and most people) are conflating two distinct patterns of love-influence-energy because they both push some of the same emotional, mystical and theological buttons. I don't care which one gets called Agape but there are two distinct functional profiles involved. One is perfectly consistent with dialectical framing and the other is not. But they are not competing for the definition of Agape. The represent two distinct patterns.</p> Yes, agape can be defined dia…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:590372014-11-14T03:43:17.520ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Yes, agape can be defined dialectically, but in my view, some of the important -- and, yes, central -- meaning of the term is lopped off or distorted when you do that.</p>
<p>I had thought you would appreciate Desmond's metaxology as an MOA-2 ally or cousin, but it seems you are keeping things confined -- at least in relation to eros and agape -- within a largely dialectical framing. </p>
<p>As for your paper, I still plan to respond to it. But unfortunately I don't have the amount of free…</p>
<p>Yes, agape can be defined dialectically, but in my view, some of the important -- and, yes, central -- meaning of the term is lopped off or distorted when you do that.</p>
<p>I had thought you would appreciate Desmond's metaxology as an MOA-2 ally or cousin, but it seems you are keeping things confined -- at least in relation to eros and agape -- within a largely dialectical framing. </p>
<p>As for your paper, I still plan to respond to it. But unfortunately I don't have the amount of free writing / thinking time available to me that you obviously have, so this kind of thing moves rather slowly for me. :-(</p> Ken-osis. Nice. As they say…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:589622014-11-14T02:00:41.098ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>Ken-osis. Nice. As they say in the deconstructed timeline season of Arrested Development: "<em>You have all the itis-es & a host of osis-es."</em></p>
<p>So I'm looking from the perspective summarized in my <a href="http://laymanpascal.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">The "Gap" in Universal Agape</a>. And that is that Agape is not only or specially a kenotic, self-emptying phenomenon. That is just a facet, one of the more common manifestations. Who transcends for the other? And what…</p>
<p>Ken-osis. Nice. As they say in the deconstructed timeline season of Arrested Development: "<em>You have all the itis-es & a host of osis-es."</em></p>
<p>So I'm looking from the perspective summarized in my <a href="http://laymanpascal.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">The "Gap" in Universal Agape</a>. And that is that Agape is not only or specially a kenotic, self-emptying phenomenon. That is just a facet, one of the more common manifestations. Who transcends for the other? And what is accomplished? And how is always done?</p>
<p>Normally the definition is given in mystic idealist terms with a heavy emphasis on subjectivity and contemplative ethics. But there is nothing which requires this to be the central area of definition. In fact it natural that Christian theologians would focus here but they are not special. </p>
<p>When a being is impulsed to release self-concern for the sake of another -- that other is already joined with it in a participatory and interpretive field of coherence which is secured through the act of mutual sacrifice exchanged between its contributing entities. The gesture of moving outward without hope or need for return is a description of the subjective perception by an entity of the urge to serve beyond itself among some field of other entities. </p>
<p>I have yet to see an argument which makes it necessary for this experience to grounded in or associated with a trans-dialectical escape from holonic closure. As I lay out in the paper on this topic, there is an attractive trans-holonic influence but it should not be conflated with agape. </p>
<p>So, roughly speaking, I am saying that Desmond is conflating Agape (which can be defined "dialectically") with the trans-dialectical, trans-holonic influence which appears as elements of both Eros and Agape. If he wants to use "agape" to mean the trans-holonic influence then he must sift out the characteristics which are fully explainable as the inclusionary/consolidating influence of holonic fields. Otherwise only a metaphysical God concept can permit both.</p>
<p>The Integral Glossary, of course, skews its definition to describe common ways that these forces show up for individual holons. There is nothing in that definition, however, which disagrees with what I have been saying. The only point I would contest is that Thanatos is NOT necessarily the pathological expression of Agape. However there are many instances in which that is true. </p>
<p>Generally speaking I contest the overly simplistic conflation of involution/evolution, agape/eros & masculine/feminine. As I cover in the appendix to the paper, there are good reasons for thinking that we should separate these pairs... and in some cases consider that they are not reciprocal pairs but only two examples of a set. However agency/communion has a much stronger conceptual relationship to eros/agape than do the other pairs.</p>
<p></p>
<p><br/> <br/></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/agape-in-integral-theory?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A58890&xg_source=msg_com_forum#5301756Comment58890"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><br/><p><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><br/> <span>In my view, these drives neither individually nor taken together capture the meaning of agape as Desmond uses it (a use which is consonant with many of the 'traditional' connotations of agape/kenosis).</span></span></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> Interesting about Lingam's no…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:591462014-11-14T00:53:57.956ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Interesting about Lingam's notion of agape, when dysfunctional it becomes Thanatos. It reminded me of the suicidal urge expressed through ultimate love of all Others, the sacrifice of Christ. And this discussion of <em><a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/black-swan" target="_self">Black Swan</a></em>.</p>
<p>Interesting about Lingam's notion of agape, when dysfunctional it becomes Thanatos. It reminded me of the suicidal urge expressed through ultimate love of all Others, the sacrifice of Christ. And this discussion of <em><a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/black-swan" target="_self">Black Swan</a></em>.</p> Hahaha, yeah, if you want to…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:591452014-11-14T00:50:33.656ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Hahaha, yeah, if you want to ruin that word!</p>
<p>Hahaha, yeah, if you want to ruin that word!</p> So we might say that kennilin…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-11-14:5301756:Comment:591442014-11-14T00:46:08.192ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>So we might say that kennilingus has <em>ken</em>osis, if by that we take the suffix <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/osis?s=t" target="_blank">osis</a> added to ken:</p>
<p><span><span class="oneClick-link">-osis: a</span> <span class="oneClick-link oneClick-available">suffix</span> <span class="oneClick-link oneClick-available">occurring</span> <span class="oneClick-link">in</span> <span class="oneClick-link">nouns</span> <span class="oneClick-link">that…</span></span></p>
<p>So we might say that kennilingus has <em>ken</em>osis, if by that we take the suffix <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/osis?s=t" target="_blank">osis</a> added to ken:</p>
<p><span><span class="oneClick-link">-osis: a</span> <span class="oneClick-link oneClick-available">suffix</span> <span class="oneClick-link oneClick-available">occurring</span> <span class="oneClick-link">in</span> <span class="oneClick-link">nouns</span> <span class="oneClick-link">that</span> <span class="oneClick-link">denote</span> <span class="oneClick-link">actions,</span> <span class="oneClick-link">conditions,</span> <span class="oneClick-link">or</span> <span class="oneClick-link">states</span>,</span> <span><span class="oneClick-link oneClick-available">especially</span> <span class="oneClick-link oneClick-available">disorders</span> <span class="oneClick-link">or</span> <span class="oneClick-link">abnormal</span> <span class="oneClick-link">states</span>.</span></p>