Participatory Spirituality for the 21st Century
“I will retell Wilber’s ontology…in order to demonstrate the political significance…which coincide with the particular social regime (or in Wilber’s terms, the “telos”) it expresses, integrated global capital (Guattari, 2000). My purpose is not to explicate the flaws in Wilber’s logic or demonstrate his misreadings of particular texts; such exegesis has been taken up elsewhere; it is instead to suggest ways in which Wilber’s holarchy flickers or mechanically reproduces in the field of metaphysics and spiritual aspiration the social and political structures of late capital, which are not integral at all. Further, because Wilber’s holonography reproduces the present political order and forecloses any legitimized means of transforming its problematic terms of exchange, the unevenness of its development (as I will show), one may plausibly claim that it is not a transformative model but a conservative one in the last analysis, where conservatism is understood as an attempt to maintain the status quo for its own sake” (23-4).
Steven, I too have neither the time nor interest to engage with integral-lites directly, given their response to you is typical of the pre-packaged pablum one gets. There is an actual religious halo suffusing them, a "turquoise" hue to their lenses through which all is viewed in its proper box, your view being of obvious lesser frequency. I have this same aversion to most, but not all, Christians that believe that the only way to heaven is through our lord jesus h. christ. I understand both views, can even tolerate them, but I really have little to communicate with such folks other than some plesantries about the weather and maybe directions to the bathroom.