Participatory Spirituality for the 21st Century
Hi, Dial, welcome again to the forum -- and thank you for taking the time also to write an introductory post.
Regarding Kelly, he has crossed my radar occasionally -- I've visited his Technium blog a few times in the past and have read some things by or about him on Integral Life -- but I haven't yet been hooked by his message. I think the general approach of looking at developing technology in systemic terms makes sense, but it seems to me that its 'entanglement' with living human systems, as our artifactual output, may lend it qualities it would lack in the absence of humans. For instance, imagine if some biota-targeting death ray swept the planet, wiping out all humans in a flash without touching any of our machines. Would the "technium" keep evolving? Not at this point in its 'development,' in my view. Machines would sit inertly and move rapidly towards entropic decay. In the future, we may develop technological systems with enough life-like qualities, enough autonomy, that they could conceivably continue developing. But it doesn't seem to me that we're there yet.
Regarding post-Enlightenment spirit, I'm not entirely clear what your question is. I'd like to hear more, to get a better idea where you're coming from. For instance, are you familiar with McIntosh's writings on the good, true, and beautiful in the context of 'Integral spirituality'? If so, are you thinking along those lines, or differently?
Balder, sorry for not answering your questions here directly. I got rather consumed by the Machines question (still am, somewhat), and will return to them. Now, I have a couple of other questions asked that puzzle me about the term 'Integral Post Metaphysics'. I will return to your questions. I have read some McIntosh by the way and enjoyed it, though, possibly, a little too organic and wholesome for my sense of how the world really proceeds. Anyhow, I will return.