After much extended consideration I changed the name of my blog from Integral Postmetaphysical Enaction to the above. (Former blog postings in this thread.) It will still be at the same link. I've decided to change the name largely due to no longer having much interest in integral theory. Still some, but not enough to justify it in the name. I'm still interested in postmetaphysics, but who the hell has heard of that outside a select few eggheads? I am much more interested in motivating myself and others into participating with progressive ideals and enacting those policies in all domains. Keeping the old blog name was more than a bit off putting for that broader agenda. I'll keep the old name as a subtitle for now for those familiar with and searching for it. But my intent is to get more people involved in the hope of actually changing things for the better instead of engaging in interesting but mostly armchair speculations.

I retained the word enaction for a few reasons. It relates to specific philosophical models of embodied cognition (and/or realism) in which I'm still interested and will continue to write about. It is a progressive evolution over previous models highlighting our participation with co-creating our realities. Note the prefix co, indicating that though we participate the Real grounds and delimits that participation. But that's still egghead. Mostly because the word means creating law, which to me is the most effective way for us to implement our values in society. Hence a lot of my focus is on motivating us to participate in changing or creating laws aligned with progressive ideals.

The blog will still be the same except that the name will more accurately reflect what I've been doing here for the past several months. I hope the current audience will continue to read. And I hope the new name will attract new readers who are motivated to join me in participating in progressive ideals and enacting laws and structures to express that agenda.

Views: 1552

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Here is a link on the state of education today:

It seems the many institutions are being taken over by administrators while the meat and potatoes of that system; teachers, are being made redundant. In other words, the corporate messiah's structure has taken over what was once a fairly socialized system. Now this had to happen why? Because Chase, Morgan Stanley, Citibank, etc. HAD to find a way to make more money. Where education was once a given to a better life; the only giving today is its one way ticket to debt slavery. 

In Alberta the petroleum corporations want to take over the ed. system. Geez, i wonder why they would want that.

Hedges provides the answer in that link: "It funnels them into a caste system of drones and systems managers. It transforms a democratic state into a feudal system of corporate masters and serfs." We are at war, and that ain't no metaphor.

I like this name as well.  I think "integral" is still a good word, even if you've lost interest in Wilber's take on it, and I'm not sure you need to cede the word to him, but this other name does highlight the stronger political / activist note that has dominated your writings recently.

It's largely due to the audience I'm trying to reach. Recall Bryant's criticism of Zizek here, which I turned around on Bryant. And which I think applies to the integral movement as a whole. The way it's framed and disseminated, its onto-graphic gravity, who are they reaching? It seems aimed at the ivory tower, which has little effect in the political sphere. Sure there's a populist movement, but quite honestly that is seen as a religious cult to most outside it. For the most part it stays in its own bubble. I commend those in the movement who are engaging in activism, but again, framing it in AQAL is off putting and doesn't connect. I'm trying to take cues from Lakoff and even the conservative Luntz and using frames that are more effective and get the job done. The job, in this case, is influencing voting and activism behavior.

Framing, by the way, is embodied (and real) communicative infrastructure in onto-graphic terms, affecting us below the ideological and symbolic. This is often missed by not only the liberal but by the integralite, both of whom assume if we just state facts and/or give them a new ideology (or model) that is enough. Not even close. Even Maher, the ultimate liberal, is finally catching on (with his usual humorous twist).

But remember this post discussing the intended audience for this forum. I'm not criticizing IPS in this regard, since I too love to engage with these intellectual discussions. I'm just saying for my blog I'm trying to reach a broader audience, and to get them politically involved.

A message from Representative Grayson, a bold progressive enactivist.

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