Sophia speaks - Bruce Alderman - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T09:43:28Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/sophia-speaks-bruce-alderman?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A52068&feed=yes&xn_auth=noIn the strange and wondrous l…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-10-05:5301756:Comment:666022016-10-05T15:37:20.291ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>In the strange and wondrous land of hyperlinking I came upon <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/object-oriented-ontology?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A52227" target="_self">this</a> old post in another thread. I said:</p>
<p>Hmm, Museque says that perhaps there is a meditative praxis to be had invoking prepositions to activate primordial image schemas and thus induce nondual states. The prepositions then could bridge back up to egoic rationality and thus integrate…</p>
<p>In the strange and wondrous land of hyperlinking I came upon <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/object-oriented-ontology?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A52227" target="_self">this</a> old post in another thread. I said:</p>
<p>Hmm, Museque says that perhaps there is a meditative praxis to be had invoking prepositions to activate primordial image schemas and thus induce nondual states. The prepositions then could bridge back up to egoic rationality and thus integrate such states. This would be the methodology or practice part (how) in addition to the phenomenological (who) and neurological (what) aspects.</p> Hi - I really like a couple o…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-02-23:5301756:Comment:640022016-02-23T19:27:13.541ZAmbo Sunohttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/AmboSuno
<p>Hi - I really like a couple of things about these ideas. I of course like the reinforcement of the idea that there is a good match between attractor sites/landscapes/conditions with values (and in this case adverbs are pointing to values.) It reminds me that through common values, spheres of sharing and isomorphism are experienced - "we spaces" and we feelings arise in this milieu. Ergo, adverbs also contribute intimately and immediately to the lower two quadrants. Good to have it…</p>
<p>Hi - I really like a couple of things about these ideas. I of course like the reinforcement of the idea that there is a good match between attractor sites/landscapes/conditions with values (and in this case adverbs are pointing to values.) It reminds me that through common values, spheres of sharing and isomorphism are experienced - "we spaces" and we feelings arise in this milieu. Ergo, adverbs also contribute intimately and immediately to the lower two quadrants. Good to have it highlighted.</p>
<p>I associate dynamic systems and especially non-linear dynamic systems with the word "attractor" as well as the visual imagery of a landscape that has traditionally been used to elicit the moving complexity. I have loved this early rendering and others similar, placed below, which is in the context of biological development, in regard to making truth more approachable and, <strong>particularly, aesthetically</strong>. I love various forms of topographies - so flexflowy, kinetic, affectively stirring - aesthetically they are like eating flan or custard for me.</p>
<p>In a doctoral dissertation I included this diagram (I think I remember), and I tinkered with it in a couple of incarnations of a business card.</p>
<p>Change - from the point of view/kinetics of these eggs - hmm, what way will life go, what grooves will tendencies cruise, run, and topple down? A tiny seismic shift could alter the eggs' travel, and the shape of this fabric. As we know now, even time-space fabric can stretch and shrink, with subtleties almost unimaginable. Sometimes life feels like that. "Every whichway but loose." :)</p>
<p></p>
<p><a target="_self" href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2505377779?profile=original"><img width="721" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2505377779?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="721"/></a><br/> <br/> <cite>Balder said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/sophia-speaks-bruce-alderman?xg_source=activity&id=5301756%3ATopic%3A52145&page=8#5301756Comment63812"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>ADVERBIAL ATTRACTORS</p>
<p>In Evolution's Purpose, McIntosh -- following Frederick Turner, Allan Combs, and others -- suggests that values might be seen as akin to attractors in a chaotic system: produced by, or inseparable, from the system itself, but nevertheless also governing the system (and sometimes pulling it towards greater transformations). Such an attractor model of values (or virtues or 'spiritual beings,' in Turner's approach) offers a possible postmetaphysical take o<span class="text_exposed_show">n Platonic ideals, and echoes Whitehead and MacIntyre both in the insistence that values (or virtues) are internal to social activities and embodied beings.</span></p>
<p>Here -- echoing <a rel="nofollow" class="profileLink" href="https://www.facebook.com/pretendtomeditate">Layman</a> as well as McIntosh -- values might be seen as the qualitative, gravitationally attractive surplus of dynamic systems or processes: in other words, as abverbs. Not simply as 'accidental' (adjectival) qualities of a self-existing substance, but as the reciprocally formative effluence or radiance of events or processes.</p>
<p>And here, 'values' would be just one instance of an 'attractor model' of adverbial modes (which might include Whitehead's eternal objects, among other things). This really isn't very different at all from what I already argued in Sophia Speaks, but the attractor model offers a familiar and workable way to conceive of the role of adverbs, philosophically, as inseparable from and co-constitutive of process (rather than, like adjectives, accidental to substance).</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> Thank you, anyway, Alia! And…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-02-23:5301756:Comment:642012016-02-23T15:18:00.335ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Thank you, anyway, Alia! And thank you, too, David, for the interesting and definitely relevant reflections from Wieman; I will check out the essay when I have more time later this week.</p>
<p>Thank you, anyway, Alia! And thank you, too, David, for the interesting and definitely relevant reflections from Wieman; I will check out the essay when I have more time later this week.</p> Phooey. Closed already. Well,…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-02-23:5301756:Comment:641012016-02-23T08:34:31.443ZRev. O.M. Bastethttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/xn/detail/u_1rciwzlli1nrh
<p>Phooey. Closed already. Well, bon chance indeed!</p>
<p></p>
<p>Phooey. Closed already. Well, bon chance indeed!</p>
<p></p> Very cool !! Works that way i…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-02-23:5301756:Comment:640012016-02-23T08:33:50.932ZRev. O.M. Bastethttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/xn/detail/u_1rciwzlli1nrh
<p>Very cool !! Works that way in business/organizational languaging also. There is Vision, Mission, Purpose, and the values are "the way we act while moving toward those." Definitely adverbial: compassionately, sustainably, respectfully, ........</p>
<p>Going over now to hit the Like button for you, Bruce!</p>
<p>Very cool !! Works that way in business/organizational languaging also. There is Vision, Mission, Purpose, and the values are "the way we act while moving toward those." Definitely adverbial: compassionately, sustainably, respectfully, ........</p>
<p>Going over now to hit the Like button for you, Bruce!</p> Of related interest, I think,…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-02-22:5301756:Comment:637162016-02-22T19:27:22.219ZDavidM58http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DavidM58
<p>Of related interest, I think, is Henry Nelson Wieman's 1936 paper "Values Primary Data for Religious Inquiry." </p>
<p></p>
<p>He also emphasizes the important role of values as a connection between meaningful activities, which, if I understand correctly, is very much the role of adverbs. </p>
<p>" Certainly every appreciable activity...will consist, of activities organized according to some system of interconnections. In the great enjoyments these connections reach very far and very deep…</p>
<p>Of related interest, I think, is Henry Nelson Wieman's 1936 paper "Values Primary Data for Religious Inquiry." </p>
<p></p>
<p>He also emphasizes the important role of values as a connection between meaningful activities, which, if I understand correctly, is very much the role of adverbs. </p>
<p>" Certainly every appreciable activity...will consist, of activities organized according to some system of interconnections. In the great enjoyments these connections reach very far and very deep ...</p>
<p>"All this points to the conclusion that value is not enjoyment, but it is that connection between activities which makes them enjoyable....And these connections can be extended indefinitely to render stable and progressive the order which we enjoy. Value, then, is that connection between appreciable activities which makes them mutually sustaining, mutually enhancing, mutually diversifying, and mutually meaningful."</p>
<p>"...We can now summarize...It is the principle of mutual support, mutual enhancement, mutual diversification, mutual meaning, and transformation of suffering into an experience which is positively appreciated. This fivefold principle is the principle of value."</p>
<p>Complete article attached. </p> ADVERBIAL ATTRACTORS
In Evolu…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-02-22:5301756:Comment:638122016-02-22T17:10:16.112ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>ADVERBIAL ATTRACTORS</p>
<p>In Evolution's Purpose, McIntosh -- following Frederick Turner, Allan Combs, and others -- suggests that values might be seen as akin to attractors in a chaotic system: produced by, or inseparable, from the system itself, but nevertheless also governing the system (and sometimes pulling it towards greater transformations). Such an attractor model of values (or virtues or 'spiritual beings,' in Turner's approach) offers a possible postmetaphysical take o…</p>
<p>ADVERBIAL ATTRACTORS</p>
<p>In Evolution's Purpose, McIntosh -- following Frederick Turner, Allan Combs, and others -- suggests that values might be seen as akin to attractors in a chaotic system: produced by, or inseparable, from the system itself, but nevertheless also governing the system (and sometimes pulling it towards greater transformations). Such an attractor model of values (or virtues or 'spiritual beings,' in Turner's approach) offers a possible postmetaphysical take o<span class="text_exposed_show">n Platonic ideals, and echoes Whitehead and MacIntyre both in the insistence that values (or virtues) are internal to social activities and embodied beings.</span></p>
<p>Here -- echoing <a class="profileLink" href="https://www.facebook.com/pretendtomeditate">Layman</a> as well as McIntosh -- values might be seen as the qualitative, gravitationally attractive surplus of dynamic systems or processes: in other words, as abverbs. Not simply as 'accidental' (adjectival) qualities of a self-existing substance, but as the reciprocally formative effluence or radiance of events or processes.</p>
<p>And here, 'values' would be just one instance of an 'attractor model' of adverbial modes (which might include Whitehead's eternal objects, among other things). This really isn't very different at all from what I already argued in Sophia Speaks, but the attractor model offers a familiar and workable way to conceive of the role of adverbs, philosophically, as inseparable from and co-constitutive of process (rather than, like adjectives, accidental to substance).</p> Very good, Bruce! A fun way t…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-01-23:5301756:Comment:634032016-01-23T13:25:26.499ZAmbo Sunohttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/AmboSuno
<p>Very good, Bruce! A fun way to slice through the challenge. Some people from the past have heard and then suggested that <em>in the beginning there was the word</em>. You are suggesting celebration that one of our most human features, language, can recursively guide and inform our exploring edge, with quiet and with organizing construct, which seeks the taste and the knowledge of source and of ultimate concern. Cool.</p>
<p>I hope you snag the prize. The judging could be quite interesting,…</p>
<p>Very good, Bruce! A fun way to slice through the challenge. Some people from the past have heard and then suggested that <em>in the beginning there was the word</em>. You are suggesting celebration that one of our most human features, language, can recursively guide and inform our exploring edge, with quiet and with organizing construct, which seeks the taste and the knowledge of source and of ultimate concern. Cool.</p>
<p>I hope you snag the prize. The judging could be quite interesting, especially depending on the stated evaluation method and the people.</p>
<p>I think Layman should enter something too. If you hear or see of what he does, or what other people who catch your interest do, can you post them?</p>
<p>Yours is such an interesting approach and so consistent, so integral with one of your main curiosities. Bon chance.</p> Recently, I learned about an…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2016-01-22:5301756:Comment:633582016-01-22T15:24:39.330ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Recently, I learned about an online contest called "Challenge for a New Religion," which requests people to submit a 300-word proposal for a new religion (or a new formulation of an existing religion). Submissions with the most "likes" on Facebook will be evaluated by a panel of six judges and the winner may receive up to $5000 (and be interviewed on MSNBC). I decided to submit something based on my Sophia Speaks / Integral In-Dwelling work. Please "like" it (if you have FB access) so…</p>
<p>Recently, I learned about an online contest called "Challenge for a New Religion," which requests people to submit a 300-word proposal for a new religion (or a new formulation of an existing religion). Submissions with the most "likes" on Facebook will be evaluated by a panel of six judges and the winner may receive up to $5000 (and be interviewed on MSNBC). I decided to submit something based on my Sophia Speaks / Integral In-Dwelling work. Please "like" it (if you have FB access) so mine can be included in the final running!</p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/92ndstreetY/app/422118604517529?brandloc=DISABLE&app_data=view-vote,for-12472526,chk-56a2484bb95f2" target="_blank">A new religion of the Word</a></p> Ambo, thank you for sharing t…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-05-11:5301756:Comment:613012015-05-11T15:55:34.571ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Ambo, thank you for sharing the above article. I came across it separately the other day, and not knowing you'd shared it here, I posted it on the Facebook IPS forum. This is the conversation (primarily between me and Layman) that followed...</p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>Layman Pascal:</strong> Bah! Flummery! Nonsense!<br></br><br></br>Sure, I love the terms "kith" and "kin" as much as the next asshole but language does not evolve by moralistic suggestions. It evolves by changes in the realities that us…</p>
<p>Ambo, thank you for sharing the above article. I came across it separately the other day, and not knowing you'd shared it here, I posted it on the Facebook IPS forum. This is the conversation (primarily between me and Layman) that followed...</p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>Layman Pascal:</strong> Bah! Flummery! Nonsense!<br/><br/>Sure, I love the terms "kith" and "kin" as much as the next asshole but language does not evolve by moralistic suggestions. It evolves by changes in the realities that us make express ourselves in this term or that term.<br/><br/>Here's another terrible thing! "It" is not necessarily problematic. The acolytes of "thou" are always bitching as though thing-ness was derogatory and dangerous. Perhaps they merely have to open their hearts to the fullness of "it".<br/><br/>Plus "thou" and "we" already solve 85% of the problems this joker is cringing about.<br/><br/>And another thing: It is not true that English does not treat human beings as "it". We do. We shift pronouns for each other all the time. I refer to a good friend as "that jackass". It. It is a gesture of trust that runs deeper than the mere positive/negative, inclusive/exclusive ripples on the surface of social communication. He & She are, virtually, "it" pronouns for people under all conditions.<br/><br/>Grammar provides an excellent tool for integrative analysis of inter-cultural reality but it sways into superstition when it accepts the premise that the conventionally perceived "charge" of popular social terminology magically creates the realities we inhabit.<br/><br/>When the geological oversight group failed to prevent the BP Oil Spill the US government leaped into action -- changing the name of the committee! Rebranding is considered to be a solution. But the switch from problematic to non-problematic terminology leaves the issues untouched. It may even conceal them more deeply.<br/><br/>Worrying about our pronoun usage "absolves us of moral responsibility" for changing the personal and collective realities that express themselves as grammatical choices.<br/>Fuck language.</p>
<p></p>
<p>~*~</p>
<p><br/><strong>Bruce Alderman:</strong> You like to make these wildly dismissive rants in response to my posts more than to others', I've noticed; I'll take that as a sign of endearment.<br/><br/>I also found the suggestion of "ki" a little silly, though I don't really know wny. "Ki" isn't any sillier than "he," I suppose.<br/><br/>As a regular "moral admonisher," instructing people on what we must do to enact a wisdom civilization, I'm not sure why you are allergic to another person's moral admonitions... In any case, language use *can* change through moral admonishment -- look at our changing use of the masculine pronoun, or the use of titles (the use of "Ms.", for better or worse, was inaugurated through several moral admonitions back in 1901). And now the LGBT community is attempting to encourage the use of alternative pronouns. But is changing a language enough? No, obviously not -- and like you say, it can also cosmetically mask the issue(s).<br/><br/>Is "it" necessarily a problematic pronoun? Not at all. But may it sometimes be, especially when it is primarily an unconscious vehicle for the perpetuation of deep cultural presuppositions? Yes, maybe so. We sometimes refer to people as "its" ("that jackass") but that's not really *treating* them as an it. Demeaning it-language can be used in a context of trust and good humor, but that "it" is different from the "it" used to refer to things that were never afforded intimacy or love or respect in the first place.<br/><br/>That's what I see this person really calling for in this essay - not imagining she is really about to change the English language through her tiny little article, but to call attention (as others have) to prevailing cultural attitudes (which we enact mostly unconsciously through language). Changing language doesn't magically change reality (New Age claims aside) but it can flavor perception, and it can be used as a tool in conjunction with broader cultural discussions and reflections.</p>
<p></p>
<p>~*~</p>
<p><br/><strong>Layman Pascal:</strong> I think the obvious reason why "ki" is a bit silly is that it is proposed hypothetically, outside the evolutionary mechanisms of language, and thereby lacks the normative influence of embedding.<br/><br/>Now I am not allergic to moral admonishment. I'm quite in favor of it. However I am challenging both this piece and a general contemporary attitude which links moral admonishment, phraseology change, social attitudes and the well-being of civilization. This chain of links strikes me as being as feeble in practice as it is popular in discourse.<br/><br/>Even if we lighten to her proposal and accept it merely as a "call to awareness" we must question (a) whether such calls to awareness are demonstrated to be helpful or whether they constitute part of the ideological apparatus of the current social system (b) whether this form of "awareness" is worthy of that name. The mere posture of turning to reflect upon language usage may be a helpful form of mind expansion for college kids but there are serious doubts whether it represents a responsible critical attitude toward social functioning. It is disturbing narcissistic (for the culture, not the essayist). Perhaps it even represents pathological evidence. Like the fake eye which deceives a predator might we not assume that apparent distortion in our conventional language usage stand out readily to critics so that they can be attacked WITHOUT modifying business as usual?<br/><br/>You note that the word "it" is unproblematic but that it may be problematic to treat people as depersonalized things. I see two things about this.<br/><br/>Firstly that makes a distinction between healthy and non-healthy it-ification that is missing from the article.<br/><br/>Secondly, this very thing is my point. The activity, not the word usage, is problematic. By referencing "that jackass" I hope to indicate precisely the fact that the difficulty reside in a domain outside of casual pronoun usage. None of the terminology needs be changed to improve the situation of humanity and nature -- while, conversely, there is a decided risk that we will change terminology without changing the situation.<br/><br/>Plus: It is fun to say "Flummery!" Other than Nero Wolfe I never hear it used...</p>
<p><br/><br/>~*~</p>
<p><br/><strong>David Masten:</strong> *grinds axe*</p>
<p></p>
<p>~*~</p>
<p><br/><strong>Bruce Alderman:</strong> We've had similar discussions before, where you've expressed similar misgivings about conlangs such as Esperanto, Lojban, etc. There have been several recent academic studies published, again positively considering the impact of language upon feeling, thought, and perception, so the general Whorfian hypothesis hasn't been wholly discredited. I agree that it is impractical, and not necessary, to create wholly new languages, but I don't see any particular problems with, or have misgivings about, general language experimentation as part of a broader project of cultural innovation and transformation. So, I wonder at your apparent language conservatism in this area -- siding against Bohm's rheomode, or the change of pronouns (whether by American Indian essayists or, I imagine, LGBT activists), etc -- while simultaneously creating your own dictionary full of novel terminology (not only re-interpreting familiar terms according to your understanding of our present level and needs, but introducing wholly new ones). Is your active language reflection, experimentation, and reinterpretation or change also little more than a college kid's meager (and fruitless) attempt to impact social functioning? Is your Christmas Wiki an unwitting vehicle for the pathological narcissism of our culture?<br/><br/>As for whether "it" should really be replaced with something else when we make reference to non-human entities, I don't see us presented with as stark a set of choices. I don't really think we need a new word. We could just as easily use "he" or "she" to refer to animals or other creatures (as we often do with animals familiar to us). Or we could deepen "it" (and our appreciation of "it"'s nuances), as you suggest. But I don't think there's any fault, or naivete, with naming the link between our unconscious and habitual use of "it" for much of the earth's beings and our relationship to them as "resources" and "objects" of instrumental use. The problem is not primarily "caused" by our pronoun usage, and shouldn't be naively or magically reduced to a question of linguistic determinism, but it isn't wholly separate from our language use either. Language use is part of a constellation of factors.<br/><br/></p>
<p>~*~</p>
<p><br/><strong>Layman Pascal:</strong> We agree that it (sic) is unnecessary to replace the pronoun "it" to produce a deepening and balance in human relations with other sentient creatures and biospheric ecosystems. We also concur that the common experience of the pronoun "it" can be rendered fuller and richer. It is not necessarily pejorative or dehumanizing.<br/><br/>Beyond that I am taking (half or even two-thirds seriously) a stand against certain naive ideological assumptions involved in the Age of the Linguistic Turn. This is not a challenge to that level of linguistic complexity but only to certain readily felt but seldom questioned links between meta-linguistics and social ethics.<br/><br/>Nearly everyone feels that we must be sensitive to contexts in our word usage AND that political correctness contains something rotten -- a throwback to the court speech of conformist orthodoxies. This same divergence of health extends to many forms of language tinkering. When you wonder about how my own radical languaging tendencies jive with my apparent linguistic conservatism, the answer is here: some types of this activity are progressive & some are regressive.<br/><br/>The Christmas Wiki is a encyclopedia of jargon and new concepts. It is not an ethical attempt to modify society via language-modification. Such attempts are not meaningless but they are, in my estimation, fairly insignificant in their efficacy and easily turned backwards in their outcomes. Yes, we have studies to show that our wording primes our brains in certain directions. Everything we think and see does likewise. And yet something in people, some people, some times, feels like the words are the very "levers" which run the machine.<br/><br/>And, on top of these very serious considerations, I add my notion of mythocolloquialism. That is to say we lose a great deal of the potential potency of our terminology every time we switch terms -- rather than building the new meaning back into the existing semantic segment of our field. We are not allow the flavors to develop. We are overstirring. And, as noted in posts above, we run a very grave risk of minimizing our action about social problems by starting out with "awareness raising" and "terminology tinkering". As far as I can tell these are minor activities which, like transfats, often inhibit our access real reforms.</p>