Participatory Spirituality for the 21st Century
We can use this thread for discussion of anything related to the upcoming conference. Alas I will not attend due to living far, far away and have other priorities for my limited finances. The abstracts and bios for presentations can be found at this link. Our forum host Balder (aka Bruce Alderman) will be presenting:
Sophia Speaks: An Integral Grammar of Philosophy
The four pronouns at the center of the Integral model have yielded impressive explanatory and integrative power. However, while they are useful for classifying disciplines according to their primary epistemological orientations, they are not sufficient to account for or disclose the ontological views which inform our perspectives. After situating Integral Theory in a longer lineage of “pronoun philosophies,” I introduce an expanded set of grammatical lenses to complement Integral’s four person-perspectives. These lenses, based on six common parts of speech, can serve both metaphysical and meta-metaphysical ends, helping to identify the ontological views that inform our person perspectives, and providing an integrative architecture for correlating and interfacing various metaphysical systems and integrative meta-theories.
Another one of interest to me is this one by Gary Hampson and Mark Edwards:
Awaken: An Analysis of the Transformative Lyrics and Music of the Progressive Rock Group, Yes (Re-regarding and regaining the flower and fruit of Yes as neo-baroque future dreamers creating the spiral aim)
This presentation offers a “fusion of insight” arising from the often-spiritual, often-densely “baroque” lyrics and music of the progressive rock group Yes. Various lenses are employed to help empower the hitherto neglected connections between this “wondrous” art form and integrative studies. These include the authors’ first-person perspectives regarding their experiences with Yes music. The analysis addresses various spiritual traditions, The Beloved, and Audrey Kitagawa, spiritual mentor of the (most-times) lead singer/lyricist, Jon Anderson. Themes include: ecstasy, empowerment, Enlightenment, the evolution of consciousness, injunctions, Love, the Moment, nonduality, Sun as archetype, and world challenges. “Songs cast a light on us” (Awaken, Yes).
I hope you will bring these ideas to the panel Balder, since I won't be there? Maybe even the states thread itself?
Yes, I will. I don't know exactly what the questions will be, or how this will be formatted, but I will try to bring in information from some of our discussions here (re: states, postmeta recontextualization of stages, etc), and will try to speak to and from my own experience of these things.
I posted this excerpt on Facebook today, so I will share it here as well. From the introduction to my ITC 2013 paper / presentation:
"In an article advocating for a more verbal, process-oriented reading of Integral Theory, for instance, Bonnitta Roy (2006) has noted that the first-, second-, and third-person lenses at the center of the Integral model are insufficient, in themselves, to disclose the deeper metaphysical view in and through which first-, second-, or third-person research is pursued and articulated. In particular, these lenses alone cannot account for the different territories enacted by structural or process-oriented metaphysics. In contrasting her preferred 'pure process' view with the commonly nounal character of substance metaphysics and structuralist orientations, she emphasizes the need to shift to a more verb-centered language. We will return to her specific arguments about this later in the chapter, when we are reviewing various verb-oriented metaphysics; for now, I would like only to note that we already have, here, the suggestion of at least three possible grammatical-philosophical approaches: a pronoun-centered perspectival epistemology, a noun-centered metaphysics of things or structures, and a verb-centered metaphysics of processes or events. But, while Roy (2006) emphasizes that the structural and process views are deeper than the perspectival lenses that comprise the quadrants, and thus are not explicitly disclosed by them, I will argue that all are also related in that each employs and organizes itself around a particular grammatical category or metaphor.
In this chapter, then, I would like to review a number of the major philosophical approaches or metaphysical systems that have developed around each of six basic grammatical categories: pronouns, nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, and prepositions1. As I have already suggested above, these approaches range from various perspectival epistemologies, to substance, process, or relational metaphysics, among others. When considering these systems alongside one another, we may be led, in integral fashion, to perceive each as true but partial: as necessarily limited in scope, but still delivering important and irreducible truths. In this way, I hope to demonstrate the merit of expanding the Integral model beyond its pronoun focus, to enact a broader integrative approach employing multiple grammatical lenses. But as I will discuss below, each grammatical-philosophical system in itself can also be a site for integral theorizing: just as the pronouns can be used as a base to construct a broadly integrative model, so can nouns, verbs, or other grammatical elements. As we will see, both object-oriented (nounal) and process-oriented (verbal) philosophical systems, for instance, have already realized their own integral formulations. Thus, the six grammatical lenses or philosophemes I will introduce here can be understood from two perspectives at once: collectively, as true-but-partial elements of any comprehensive philosophical system; and individually, as unique, generative centers around which a number of philosophical models and emergent integrative meta-theories have been organized.
With these distinctions in mind, I will introduce two new terms to frame and guide our explorations: onto-choreography and heno-ontology. I will save fuller discussion of the former term until the end of the paper, when I will review the ground we have covered and will reflect on various integrative meta-theories that have been proposed, but in brief: by onto-choreography, I mean the integrative task of weighting and coordinating the grammatical elements or philosophemes into various metaphysical systems. How do these ontological elements dance together in the different philosophical models we will consider here? This question is related also to the second term I have coined, heno-ontology, by which I mean a meta-philosophical approach which allows for metaphysical pluralism, both across stages of development and even at the same level of development. As in henotheism, where multiple gods are recognized, but only one might be worshipped at a given time as supreme, depending on the circumstance or the proclivities of the devotee, I intend here to evoke an ambiguous field of multiple possible ontologies and integrative lenses, a chthonic matrix with a shifting absolute (which, in each ‘form’ that it manifests, may be seen to enfold in its own way certain of the qualities of the other ‘deities’). This is not an argument for the full equality of each choice of metaphysical or ontological center, however, or of the integrative models they may support. Each has its weaknesses as well as strengths, and I will review a number of them in the discussion to come. But rather than arguing for the ultimate superiority of one metaphysical or integrative model over all others, I prefer to adopt a meta-metaphysical, heno-ontological approach: a robust, speculative, experimental form of philosophical engagement which does not shy away from, but rather embraces and enacts, metaphysical pluralism."
Since the conference will no doubt take place before publication of the book I'm assuming it's ok to present this pre-publication?
I'm not sure! I'm hoping this brief excerpt is okay...
I don't mean your intro here. I mean presenting it at the conference, which will be before the book comes out.
Oh, yes. Sean has given me permission for that.
Since they sell books at the conference (at the conference book store), I am wondering if they will try to get a first run published by then... I haven't been told that, but that would be nice!
That's a lovely, captivating image, Bruce. (Would make a great book cover as well! Hint, hint. :) I am sorry to be missing the ITC this year -- along with the panel and your Sophia Speaks presentation, I would have loved to see John O'Neill's talk on mysticism, Terri O'Fallen's talk on individual and collective awakening, and Elliott Ingersoll on integral skepticism.
I notice that there is now a video-live-streaming package offered. Perhaps after the conference, there will be a way to purchase videoed presentations after-the-fact.
Break a meta-metaphysical leg, Bruce! And have a great time at the conference!
Thank you for your feedback, theurj and Mary. And, yes, I would like to attend several of those presentations as well. I am expecting there will be recordings of most presentations, like before, but with the webcast, maybe they can make videos available later, too... That would be fantastic.
And all for the low low price of $99 no doubt.