It is with much ado that I change the name of my blog to “integral postmetaphysical enaction” but will keep the same address. The term nonduality is too limited and too attached to certain metaphysical schools of philosophy and religion. Yes, I can recontextualize the term, make it mean whatever I want, but the weight of its historical association is more than my miniscule influence can overcome. On the other hand the term enaction is within the historical context of recent developments in cognitive science yet applicable to all methodologies across the spectrum. Plus it specifically denotes the kind of nonduality in which I'm interested through continuity, both within an individual and between an individual with others and the environment. In AQALese, the integrated and inseparable relations between the one and the many, the inside and the outside. And all within a postmetaphysical, developmental trajectory that dynamically enacts a worldspace, not discovers a universal, given world. It also demonstrates the relation of action and theory, for it is my hope to inspire action in those who read these theoretical ramblings.


By the way, I did an internet search on those terms in  parentheses and again it is currently the only link on the web, another first.


Here is a good working definition of enaction from Enaction School 2010:


“The term enactive is used to identify a way of thinking about, and a set of methodologies for conducting, cognitive science. This approach to describing, explaining and investigating the mind emphasises the valued, meaningful interaction between a living agent and its environment. It emphasises the continuity between the basic processes of living (e.g. metabolism) and cognition. It recognises the autonomy of living systems and the way in which meaning, thought and experience emerge within the dynamic, skilful activity of the agent - the enaction of meaning, thought and experience.


“Standing in contrast to much of mainstream thinking within Cognitive Science, the enactive approach challenges many of the basic assumptions of extant theory. The body (including but not limited to the brain) is considered to have an integral role in the processes of the mind. Cognitive processes are seen as the means by which an agent adapts their behavior so as to maintain their values (in the simplest case, biological values such as continued existence but in more complex cases, social and cultural values come into play). The nature of such processes is considered to be dynamic and adaptive, rather than a set of structures that are universal and modular in character.”

Views: 2820

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Petition to reinstate food stamp funds. The Democrats are again sucking corporate dick instead of helping the needy.

It's not often that one finds such articles in mainstream liberal media like Huff Post. Therein Slaughter brings in Carol Gilligan's work showing how men and women view power and relationship: men are more linear and ladder oriented; women more distributed and web oriented. However she notes that "both perspectives are equally valid and equally essential to human existence." Wilber also brought this up as a 'type' difference that is applicable to any particular level. But I'm not so sure that what is occurring socially is differences of type but more of an evolution of level.

Wilber via Spiral Dynamics had addressed this also, noting a move from the rational ego to pluralisitic relativism. Also it seems that levels alternative in type as well, back and forth between a more individual or social focus, and hence the move into the more social focus of a pluralistic, postmodern, web-like social structure. But the 'integral' level, entering 'second tier,' is supposed to transcend this alternating cycle, to balance the ladder-web, individual-social paradigms so that per Gilligan "both perspectives are equally valid and equally essential to human existence."

And yet in much of kennilingus we have this focus on ladders and never-ending development, running full tilt into 3rd tier now, not being satisfied with being the most evolved 2nd tierants on the planet. Whereas in many threads and posts I've explored what it means to achieve this 2nd-tier balance via depth integration, which transforms both the ladder and the web paradigms into something else again. It's not just equal and opposite at any level but mutual and interdependent at a new level that changes what it means to 'develop' on a ladder in the first place, as well as what it means to embrace everyone in a web.

To further elucidate the above, see "Swallow it down, that jagged little (nondual) pill."

Krugman and the Republican war on food stamps. This goes with the new thread on anti-capitalism and the psychology that goes with the capitalists.

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