Integral Religious Studies - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-28T09:59:47Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/integral-religious-studies?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A42725&feed=yes&xn_auth=noThanks for the link.
I have a…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-08-20:5301756:Comment:429622012-08-20T01:35:17.275ZDavid Millerhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DavidMiller
<p>Thanks for the link.</p>
<p>I have a couple of responses. First, I notice that the article includes inerrancy in its treatment of pre-modern study of religion. I think this is anachronistic. Inerrancy did not arise until the period around the turn of the nineteenth century. It was part of the fundamentalistic response to what the fundamentalists called modernism. Fundamentalistic Christianity and its accompanying idea of inerrancy takes one modern notion of what constitutes truth --…</p>
<p>Thanks for the link.</p>
<p>I have a couple of responses. First, I notice that the article includes inerrancy in its treatment of pre-modern study of religion. I think this is anachronistic. Inerrancy did not arise until the period around the turn of the nineteenth century. It was part of the fundamentalistic response to what the fundamentalists called modernism. Fundamentalistic Christianity and its accompanying idea of inerrancy takes one modern notion of what constitutes truth -- empirical facts -- and superimposes that on text(s) that understand truth claims in the context of magic and myth. Inerrancy is a truncation of "transcend and include" in that it transcended a magical or mythical understanding of truth by accepting empiricism as one of the forms of a modern understanding of truth, but it failed to include magical and mythical truth. Instead it claims that the magical and mythical truths represented in the Bible are empirical truths. This denies the power of magic and myth and robs the fundamentalist of any of the richness that including them into a modern paradigm might give. Such a move is the obverse of stereotypical modernism, which fails also fails to include the earlier paradigms, but which does so by saying that only empirical truth is true and that, since biblical narratives that contain elements that cannot be empirically true, it contains nothing of value for the modern person. So I bring this up not as simply an historical quibble that inerrancy didn't exist in pre-modernity, but to put flesh on the article's insight that there are ways in which the move to transcend and include can get truncated. Is this a form of the level-line fallacy, or is this something else?</p>
<p>Second, I add a resounding, "Yes!" to the article's second conclusion. I'm not in the field of religious studies but in continental philosophy of religion and to some extend philosophical theology, but part of my dissertation is the adding of developmental theory to postmodern forms (hermeneutical forms) of phenomenology. I should say re-adding, since Gebser already incorporates development in his integral phenomenology. While Gebser is popular in the discipline of communications and integral studies, he has all but been forgotten in "mainstream" phenomenology. I'm not at all sure why that is.</p>
<p>I wonder whether it has anything to do with a move away from essentialized "stages" in religious studies the work of early, and therefore modernist, practitioners of phenomenological method. (I'll distinguish between the use of the phenomenological method in various disciplines, including religious studies, and philosophical phenomenology.)</p>
<p>I'm working from a postmetaphysical framework (hmm, does any "framework" already reintroduce metaphysics?) -- how about postmetaphysical posture? -- I certainly am not appropriating Gebser in any essentialized manner.<br/><br/>Okay, a couple of thoughts off the top of my head. I really enjoyed the article. Thanks again.</p>
<p></p>
<p><br/> <cite>Balder said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/integral-religious-studies?xg_source=activity&id=5301756%3ATopic%3A41031&page=4#5301756Comment43113"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>Dustin DiPerna's recent essay on Integral Religious Studies is available <a href="http://foundation.metaintegral.org/sites/default/files/DiPerna.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> Thanks Bruce,
Nice to have th…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-08-18:5301756:Comment:428522012-08-18T00:03:44.297ZDouglas R Wallackhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DouglasRWallack
<p>Thanks Bruce,</p>
<p>Nice to have the stand-alone version. I am quite a fan of Dustin ;-).</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>Doug</p>
<p>Thanks Bruce,</p>
<p>Nice to have the stand-alone version. I am quite a fan of Dustin ;-).</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>Doug</p> Dustin DiPerna's recent essay…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-08-17:5301756:Comment:431132012-08-17T23:52:35.824ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Dustin DiPerna's recent essay on Integral Religious Studies is available <a href="http://foundation.metaintegral.org/sites/default/files/DiPerna.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>Dustin DiPerna's recent essay on Integral Religious Studies is available <a href="http://foundation.metaintegral.org/sites/default/files/DiPerna.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>.</p> Ah -- my editing timed out be…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-07-19:5301756:Comment:425602012-07-19T22:17:10.780ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>Ah -- my editing timed out before I could address the issues of higher cultural artifacts (incl. ideas) wielded by lower stage personalities and subpersonalities, or the relevance of attempts at an integral ethical code. Maybe next time...</p>
<p>Ah -- my editing timed out before I could address the issues of higher cultural artifacts (incl. ideas) wielded by lower stage personalities and subpersonalities, or the relevance of attempts at an integral ethical code. Maybe next time...</p> I certainly read the linked p…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-07-19:5301756:Comment:424612012-07-19T21:56:34.380ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>I certainly read the linked post before responding but chose to allow it to be largely summarized as the extended implications of the provided quote in order to both save time and respond to the prior single-ing out of this snippet. It does seem to hover near the center of many different kinds of problematics which I have heard raised around this topic. </p>
<p>I certainly read the linked post before responding but chose to allow it to be largely summarized as the extended implications of the provided quote in order to both save time and respond to the prior single-ing out of this snippet. It does seem to hover near the center of many different kinds of problematics which I have heard raised around this topic. </p> This Edwards quote seems to..…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-07-19:5301756:Comment:427252012-07-19T21:24:29.774ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><em>This Edwards quote seems to...take the form of an over-hasty response</em>.</p>
<p>I suggest it is you that are being overly hasty with Edwards due to one sentence. Perhaps you should explore not only the referenced post but some of his other quite intricate, complex views on integrality? There is plenty to find in the forum.</p>
<p>Perhaps a refresher to this oldy but goody <a href="http://www.integralworld.net/berge2.html" target="_blank">'04 article</a> might be of assistance in the…</p>
<p><em>This Edwards quote seems to...take the form of an over-hasty response</em>.</p>
<p>I suggest it is you that are being overly hasty with Edwards due to one sentence. Perhaps you should explore not only the referenced post but some of his other quite intricate, complex views on integrality? There is plenty to find in the forum.</p>
<p>Perhaps a refresher to this oldy but goody <a href="http://www.integralworld.net/berge2.html" target="_blank">'04 article</a> might be of assistance in the overall project?</p> That's funny! But that's not…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-07-19:5301756:Comment:424602012-07-19T20:55:49.149ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p><em>That's funny! But that's not what I meant. :-) I'm only speaking on my behalf (not knowing a number of the other board members yet), but for this cat, I will want to help craft guidelines I deeply believe in, support, and would be willing and happy to follow if I were a minister, without concluding that whatever way is worked out is the only viable way to "do Integral ministry," and without attempting to preclude the emergence or development of those other…</em></p>
<p><em>That's funny! But that's not what I meant. :-) I'm only speaking on my behalf (not knowing a number of the other board members yet), but for this cat, I will want to help craft guidelines I deeply believe in, support, and would be willing and happy to follow if I were a minister, without concluding that whatever way is worked out is the only viable way to "do Integral ministry," and without attempting to preclude the emergence or development of those other ways.</em></p>
<p></p>
<p>I'm not sure it would be funny if it was exactly what you meant. But I'm glad to hear you're speaking on your own behalf and will be attempting to do a good job according to your own criteria.</p>
<p></p>
<p><em>An Integral association with [cohen] isn't "all bad," in my opinion -- I do like some of his ideas, and it's clear he also values and strives to enact Integral thought (to some extent) -- but my concern hinges around two things: 1) the reports about his past behaviors with students (though, admittedly, there have not been any recent reports that I'm aware of), and 2) the particular metaphysical mix he endorses (a classic metaphysics of the One, impersonality and impersonal collectivity, absolutization of evolution) is a potentially dangerous one, socially and psychologically, in my opinion. </em></p>
<p></p>
<p>It seems to me like</p>
<p>(a) an evolutionary systems must supplement critique and ethical demands with an extraordinary degree of tolerance since we are so aware of our limits in understanding, the complexity of perspectives involved, and the fact that every development stands at the end of many, many less developed engagements</p>
<p>(b) that a natural affinity exists between all approaches who wish to grapple with the questions of post-post-modernism, evolutionary non-dualism, planetary transformation, etc. </p>
<p>(c) that an inclusive approach must, more than any other, strongly affirm that affiliation, exposure, etc. is not endorsement. this is tied to a lot of issues -- one wonders, for example, what a society would be like if all energy put in censorship was put into teaching critical resilience and responsibility in the face of disturbing and seductive stimuli. at a more grandiose level this becomes the issue of placing energy into policing the affiliations between various integralites and pseudo-integralites vs. affirming the need to direct that energy toward a less troubled critical-affirmative stance which intelligently expects a great deal of ambiguity, partialness and disagreement among integral affiliates. </p>
<p>PR concerns are, of course, another matter.</p>
<p>As is the really necessary question here, as elsewhere -- how to establish a proto-Way, a general teaching which prepares people to properly evaluate and make use of all different kinds of teaching scenarios rather than becoming a self-exploited or other-exploited unhappy subject. </p>
<p></p>
<p><em>"The defence of the ancient models of student-teacher relationship, particularly where development is focused on the stage-based lens, seems to me to be a sign of regression rather than evolution."</em></p>
<p></p>
<p>This Edwards quote seems to sum up a lot of concerns which, for me, take the form of an over-hasty response which does not anticipate the great variety of organic and subtle-energetic processes which might be involved. The need to learn where ancient models actually resemble our guesses about them, whether they work, where they don't work, where they contain unnecessary or counter-productive assumptions embedded in power, culture, etc. and where they merely reflect the diverse of the bio-energetic human "machinery" of the different streams of human spiritual life may be inhibited by superficially disturbed ethico-individualistic feelings which want to pre-interpret these ancient models are almost inherently regressive.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/integral-religious-studies?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A42639&xg_source=activity#5301756Comment42639"><div class="xg_user_generated"><p><br/><br/></p>
</div>
</blockquote> Also recall Mark Edwards on t…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-07-19:5301756:Comment:426412012-07-19T18:58:54.307ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Also recall Mark Edwards on the topic in <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/institute-for-integral-studies?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A1733" target="_self">this post</a>. Concluding sentence:</p>
<p>"The defence of the ancient models of student-teacher relationship, particularly where development is focused on the stage-based lens, seems to me to be a sign of regression rather than evolution."</p>
<p>Also recall Mark Edwards on the topic in <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/institute-for-integral-studies?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A1733" target="_self">this post</a>. Concluding sentence:</p>
<p>"The defence of the ancient models of student-teacher relationship, particularly where development is focused on the stage-based lens, seems to me to be a sign of regression rather than evolution."</p> Good to hear that I will hear…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-07-19:5301756:Comment:426392012-07-19T16:16:32.018ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p><em><strong>Good to hear that I will hear about the conclusion-generating cat council whose conclusions the cats have pre-concluded that they probably won't treat as personally conclusive. Yay!</strong></em></p>
<p><br></br>That's funny! But that's not what I meant. :-) I'm only speaking on my behalf (not knowing a number of the other board members yet), but for this cat, I will want to help craft guidelines I deeply believe in, support, and would be willing and happy to follow if I were a…</p>
<p><em><strong>Good to hear that I will hear about the conclusion-generating cat council whose conclusions the cats have pre-concluded that they probably won't treat as personally conclusive. Yay!</strong></em></p>
<p><br/>That's funny! But that's not what I meant. :-) I'm only speaking on my behalf (not knowing a number of the other board members yet), but for this cat, I will want to help craft guidelines I deeply believe in, support, and would be willing and happy to follow if I were a minister, without concluding that whatever way is worked out is the only viable way to "do Integral ministry," and without attempting to preclude the emergence or development of those other ways.</p>
<p><br/><em><strong>Where do you situate the danger [of the association with Cohen] here?</strong></em></p>
<p><br/>An Integral association with him isn't "all bad," in my opinion -- I do like some of his ideas, and it's clear he also values and strives to enact Integral thought (to some extent) -- but my concern hinges around two things: 1) the reports about his past behaviors with students (though, admittedly, there have not been any recent reports that I'm aware of), and 2) the particular metaphysical mix he endorses (a classic metaphysics of the One, impersonality and impersonal collectivity, absolutization of evolution) is a potentially dangerous one, socially and psychologically, in my opinion. Zach Stein did a pretty good analysis of these dynamics in Cohen's community in an issue of JITP (see below). We've discussed some of these issues in various threads, and Joseph, a member here, has offered <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/evolution-as-metaphysics-and" target="_self">a good critique of the fetishization of evolution</a>.</p>
<p><br/>Here's an excerpt from Stein's JITP article:</p>
<blockquote><p><br/>The role of the guru (i.e., Cohen) is to facilitate this transformation of the individual, from a partial and unique ego to a radically impersonal expression of cosmic evolution. Because the ultimate goal of the teaching is to create a dynamic community of individuals, all of whom are awakened to the same evolutionary impulse, the Classic wholistic authority of the teacher can be justified. The teacher is ostensibly already an expression of the Authentic Self, which means he is already in touch with the impersonal evolutionary impulse that the student strives to realize. Thus, the teacher is taken as justified in enlisting the conformity of the student across a wide array of particulars affecting their life-trajectory. In the terms of the Classic structure, the teacher is already that One without a second (the Authentic Self) and the student strives to be That. So the goal of the teachings and the scope of teacherly authority are aligned in that they focus on overcoming individuality for the sake of what is universal.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Both Cohen and Gafni have teachings that display Integral metaphysical and epistemological aspects. While they stem from specific traditions, they make translineage justificatory moves, pulling from a wide array of traditional, non-traditional, and scientific sources. Both are prodigious interlocutors and communicators, which gives their views a multi-perspectival interpretive bent and intersubjective validity. And both have catalyzed diverse and dynamic student bodies that engage in post-traditional forms of spiritual practice and contemplative enactment. However, as noted above, the teacherly practices they deploy and aim to justify (and thus the texture of the authority dynamics in their communities) are almost diametrically opposed.</p>
<p><br/>Putting an emphasis on impersonal evolutionary processes allows Cohen to justify classic guru relationships, the subordination of the individual to the cosmic process, and the homogenization of personality characteristics and modes of ethical engagement. In the context of the post-industrial West, the liability here is that these forms of student-teacher relationship are incongruent with broader cultural values, representing a step backward behind the advances made in the wake of the Western Enlightenment. One of the great dignities accompanying the emergence of Modern forms of authority are ethical views that stress the inviolability of the individual, views that aim to insure persons are treated as ends in themselves, and never merely as means to an end. Classic forms of authority are built around the idea that persons lack this kind of intrinsic value; instead, persons are understood as instances of a generic metaphysical type, to be valued in terms of their position in the Great Chain of Being, the dominant social hierarchy, or as facets of broader cosmic processes. So while Cohen’s teachings represent a kind of sophisticated Integral view, they are nevertheless amenable to justifying authority dynamics that are out of step with some of the most important ethical innovations achieved by the West. Put bluntly: the greatest human rights violations in history have all followed in the wake of ideologies that subordinated the individual to broader processes and thus characterized persons as means to an end. (Stein, <em>On Teachers and Teachings</em>, 2011, JITP v.6 n.1).</p>
</blockquote> Yeah, concur, etc. You seem…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2012-07-19:5301756:Comment:426382012-07-19T14:17:12.705ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>Yeah, concur, etc. You seem the very sort of chap to help work out what "good enough" integral apologetics and intra-distinguishing might require. At the very least one of Integral's great weapons -- hinted at rather than exhausted by Saint Ken -- is it ability to flexibly, adequately absorb all complaints. Although the terms of this adequacy are always up for grabs the skills gained in the attempt are part of what do and will characterize the living body of the integral community at all…</p>
<p>Yeah, concur, etc. You seem the very sort of chap to help work out what "good enough" integral apologetics and intra-distinguishing might require. At the very least one of Integral's great weapons -- hinted at rather than exhausted by Saint Ken -- is it ability to flexibly, adequately absorb all complaints. Although the terms of this adequacy are always up for grabs the skills gained in the attempt are part of what do and will characterize the living body of the integral community at all levels. Our collective spiritual self-confidence is adumbrated by every accommodation. We are very hegel's-end-of-history in this sense. </p>
<p>So I'm all on board with that. Now, I personally -- whatever my own feelings about Cohen -- have never sensed his alliance as a threat to integral credibility and power although I see that such ripples of concern periodically move through the community. Where do you situate the danger here?</p>
<p>Good to hear that I will hear about the conclusion-generating cat council whose conclusions the cats have pre-concluded that they probably won't treat as personally conclusive. Yay!</p>
<p></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/integral-religious-studies?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A42453&xg_source=activity#5301756Comment42453"><div class="xg_user_generated"><p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>