Participatory Spirituality for the 21st Century
Per Ed's request, I'm posting a copy of the paper I just submitted for the upcoming IT Conference. I only had 3 days to work on it, so I ended up rushing on it and I'm not entirely satisfied with the end. I went in the general direction I wanted, but in the presentation I'll definitely try to clarify my proposal more and provide more concrete suggestions. If you've read some of my old blogs, you'll see (in the interest of time, since I had so little of it; and also in the spirit of Wilber!), I've used material from some of them to flesh it out ... but there is still a good bit of new material in it!
Technically, this paper is not supposed to be published anywhere. I don't think a forum really counts as "publication," but just in case, I'll leave it up only for a short time. You will find it attached below.
P.S. I have removed the attachment and replaced it with a link (above) to the pdf of the paper which is posted on the ITC website.
Kudos brother B!
Thank you, David!
And theurj, yes, I think that dynamic shows up in many subtle ways. I think Kela describes it well. Integral emphasizes the values of inclusion, or comprehensive inclusiveness, which I think can be differentiated from inclusivism, but given some of our recent conversations I'm thinking a different sort of metaphor altogether might be in order.
This morning, I came across a review of an interesting-looking (and apparently must-read) text for me:
Excerpt from review:
"In his most recent volume, Integral Pluralism: Beyond Culture Wars, Fred Dallmayr again demonstrates, as he has throughout his distinguished career, his passionate commitment to making ours a more just and peaceful world. His central concern in this work is that, with postmodernism's steady move toward pluralism and emphatic rejection of totalizing monisms of every sort, there is a danger of cosmic incoherence whereby "individual lives likewise become incoherent and unintelligible" (1) and rendered incapable of effective engagement in the world. Dallmayr warns us:
Pluralism harbors a danger that curiously approximates it again to the monistic temptation. Carried to the extreme of radical fragmentation or dispersal, pluralism -- despite its protestations -- shades over into an assembly of fixed and self-enclosed monadic units exhibiting the same quality as its counterpart (8-9).
Such fragmentation, he further suggests, is a major source for today's "culture wars."
As an antidote to radical, atomizing pluralism, and as a middle position between it and tyrannizing monism, Dallmayr offers "integral pluralism," which he finds well exemplified already by classical pragmatists such as John Dewey, but especially by William James in A Pluralistic Universe. Integral pluralism entails "mutual embroilment, interpenetration, and contestation … differential entwinement without fusion or segregation" (9). The universe is taken as incomplete, but its pieces maintain real, although sometimes antagonistic, relations to one another. Other, non-Western thinkers whom Dallmayr offers as exemplars of integral pluralism are the philosopher of religion, Raimon Panikkar, whom Dallmayr discusses throughout this volume (and with whom this reviewer was privileged to study), Mahatma Gandhi, who receives a full chapter (Chapter 7), and two other, recently deceased Indian thinkers, little known in the West, Daya Krishna and Ramchandra Gandhi (a grandson of Mahatma Gandhi), who are the central subjects of the concluding chapter (Chapter 8). This reviewer is very appreciative of being made aware of these last two thinkers, and Dallmayr's interesting account of them has prompted him to read them first-hand."