Here is the Issue. The abstract:

In the 12 years since you first launched the Integral Postmetaphysical Spirituality forum, we’ve covered quite a lot of territory – too damned much to summarize! But it’s safe to say, I think, that it has served as a kind of peer-to-peer colloquium for its core members to explore the nominal themes of the forum, and to follow and develop our own respective threads of interest. One of my abiding concerns over the years, and honestly the only one that still remains vital for me, has been the intersection of IPS with economics and political activism, as I discuss in my essay for this issue. But regarding your own work there, two of the fruits that stand out for me are your concepts of integral grammatology and generative (en)closures. I’m thinking it would be interesting for this issue to discuss the relationship of these concepts to integral postmetaphysical spirituality, in general, and maybe also to some of the themes that I highlight in my paper.

Views: 24

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Some comments from the FB thread on this paper:

John:  I am very much enjoying the article . I am up to P6, which has a long quote from a previous article, Bruce Alderman, which concludes with references to Ferrer , Keller etc.
I would have appreciated it with sections and headings, for easier reading, but I realise that that would be almost impossible with such a free flowing conversation. I ‘ll have more comments later. I am particularly interested at the moment in developing my ideas around “ Integral participative religious pluralism “. I am reading Ferrer’s book Participation and the Mystery.

I know that you would know this , Bruce, but others would not. On page 26, Ferrer says “ in a series of important essays, Alderman offered the most successful attempt yet to reconcile Wilberian and participatory perspectives on enaction and spiritual pluralism. “ I hope he gets to read this latest conversation article.

I think the conversational format is great with Layman Pascal and Edward Berge taking the conversation into deeper and unpredictable directions. I’ll look forward to finishing the article. Time for lunch and a walk.

Bruce:  John, thank you. I look forward to seeing how you develop your integral participatory religious pluralism. As you’ll see in this paper, I think generative enclosures are intimately related to participatory enactment: generative enclosures are one of the forms and means of expression, one of the functions, of participatory systems.

Bonnitta gave me “G(En)C” as an abbreviation for generative (en)closure. I’m keeping it.

Bonnie:  I think the notion o G(En)C might help us think of holons not so much as containers like nested russian dolls. In the video on embryology you see that what is inside is also outside, and what is outside is also inside, Klein-bottle or torus-like. The brain is the inside of the skin, and the skin is the outside of the brain (See video)

Me:  I have a similar notion to Bonnita, with overlapping holons that while they maintain autonomy, they are also interdependent in the shared spaces between (like my icon).

To perhaps add to the shorthand: EmerG(en)C? And/or aG(en)C for the singular plural?

The model of hierarchical complexity relies on the nested doll container schema metaphor. And it's taken as an ontological given when it's just one of many metaphors. Or one of many lenses, as Edwards puts it. Different metaphors, different inference structures. And no One to rule them all! I know, heresy. MGM. Let the inquisition begin!

John: As I was washing the dishes a bit earlier, with lots of foamy bubbles, I was reminded of the talk in this conversation about looking at the multiple rainbow bubbles of religions, from a higher vantage point. The washing - up may never be the same! I very much like the metaphors and imagery, which I didn’t understand until the article.
I don’t think I will start talking about bubbles and foam at the next Interreligious gathering though. They will think I am blowing bubbles at them and frothing at the mouth!
I was able to get the significance of generative (en)closures , more so than before.

I appreciated Layman Pascal’ s overview of the various levels of religion and Edward Berge’ s reminder of the importance of economic and social structures.

Thanks to all three of you for a conversation rich in generative ideas.

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.

© 2019   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service