William Desmond - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T06:36:19Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/william-desmond?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A58397&feed=yes&xn_auth=noJust for reference (as well a…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-10-01:5301756:Comment:586242014-10-01T17:43:55.887ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Just for reference (as well as for anyone who would like to read it), here is a copy of Desmond's essay, <a href="https://www1.villanova.edu/content/villanova/mission/theoinstitute/proceedings/_jcr_content/pagecontent/download_0/file.res/William%20Desmond,%20Being%20True%20to%20Mystery%3A%20On%20Saturated%20Phenomena%20and%20the%20Hyperboles%20of%20Being.pdf" target="_blank">Being True to Mystery</a>. I've quoted from it above. It has some good, relevant (for this forum) discussion of the…</p>
<p>Just for reference (as well as for anyone who would like to read it), here is a copy of Desmond's essay, <a href="https://www1.villanova.edu/content/villanova/mission/theoinstitute/proceedings/_jcr_content/pagecontent/download_0/file.res/William%20Desmond,%20Being%20True%20to%20Mystery%3A%20On%20Saturated%20Phenomena%20and%20the%20Hyperboles%20of%20Being.pdf" target="_blank">Being True to Mystery</a>. I've quoted from it above. It has some good, relevant (for this forum) discussion of the relation of metaphysics and postmetaphysics, among other things.</p> How IS might be most useful i…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-10-01:5301756:Comment:586162014-10-01T04:40:49.744ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>How IS might be most useful is along the lines you suggest above, more like Latour or Sallis. But as I've noted recently in the fold thread, there is an incipient intuition vaguely forming, still indistinct and inarticulate. There are a number of IS, only one of which is whole-part in containment. The latter is emphasized in hierarchical structure, a main ingredient in developmental theory and hence meta-theory.</p>
<p>Which reminds me of when Edwards said the the various lenses he's…</p>
<p>How IS might be most useful is along the lines you suggest above, more like Latour or Sallis. But as I've noted recently in the fold thread, there is an incipient intuition vaguely forming, still indistinct and inarticulate. There are a number of IS, only one of which is whole-part in containment. The latter is emphasized in hierarchical structure, a main ingredient in developmental theory and hence meta-theory.</p>
<p>Which reminds me of when Edwards said the the various lenses he's discovered seem to arise from morpological fault lines in the Kosmos, and where I noted image schema fit this bill. And his warning that making the hierarchical the key for all the others leads to altitude sickness. Especially when we consider that the basis of hierarchy is itself a combination of IS like whole-part and containment, and IS themselves arise in the middle of classical hierarchies.</p>
<p>As I said, the intuition is only vaguely taking shape, not articulate yet. But it does resonate with Desmond's words above. Recall I've discussed the connection of how meditation takes us back down to archaic state-stages and brain structures. That when we get below abstract thought and the narrative self we are in effect contacting IS is some way. This is the so-called transcendent in the midst in Desmond's terms, the double fold of how we go back down and forward up at the same time via meditative inquiry. He makes the connection of this with metaphor, the latter an extension of IS, sort of the mediator between IS and abstract thought. Again, another border crossing where khora resides at each boundary.</p>
<p>Anyway, it sounds like a lot of disjointed thoughts and images and it is. As I said, something is brewing but can't discern it yet. It will come, for Musique never leads me astray.</p> I hear you, Edward; we certai…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-30:5301756:Comment:584752014-09-30T20:39:05.050ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>I hear you, Edward; we certainly don't all need to do that, and we each in this hive, staying true to the call of our own gifts and concerns, can all do something towards the co-articulation of this new vision that calls us collectively. But even if you don't decide to take the mad path of meta-theory building yourself, I am hoping for some more suggestions from you on just how you see image schema being most useful (esp. relative to meta-theory, AQAL, grammar philosophy, MOA,…</p>
<p>I hear you, Edward; we certainly don't all need to do that, and we each in this hive, staying true to the call of our own gifts and concerns, can all do something towards the co-articulation of this new vision that calls us collectively. But even if you don't decide to take the mad path of meta-theory building yourself, I am hoping for some more suggestions from you on just how you see image schema being most useful (esp. relative to meta-theory, AQAL, grammar philosophy, MOA, etc).<br/><br/>Today, reading further in the <em>William Desmond Reader</em>, I came across the following passage that I think you might enjoy (especially for its relevance to your reflectios on paraphysics and metaphor).<br/><br/>"If metaphysical thinking, as I claim, takes place in the milieu of being, the question of transcendence has nothing to do with a leap out of being into the void, but with the deepest mindfulness of what is emergent in the middle itself. Again the double meaning of <em>meta</em> is relevant. '<em>Meta</em>' is being in the midst; '<em>meta</em>' is also reference to what is beyond, what is transcendent. Metaxological metaphysics must think the doubleness of this tension between being in the midst and being referred by self-transcendence to the transcendence of what is other, what is over and above.<br/><br/>I stress that vigilance to the signs of transcendence does not imply the reduction of transcendence to the between. There is a thinking about the beyond in the between itself. What gives the between surpasses the between, though we face towards it, in and through the between. Thus, what I called posthumous mind suggests a rebirth of thinking with respect to the meaning of being in its height and depth, in its spread over the middle, in our implication with being as a community of plurality. The rebirth of agapeic mind demands the articulate thinking of this community.<br/><br/>This is no easy matter. It means a rejection of the idealistic strategy whereby autonomous thought is tempted to impose its categories on appearing and hence only to see what it puts there itself. But the coherence of idealism is also its unraveling: for when thought only thinks itself, the emptiness is evident in its reduction of thought's other to the construction of a category. [A variant of the epistemic fallacy?] I think we need a complex realistic fidelity that does not dictate to being, but that puts itself honestly before it. This realistic fidelity makes us attentive to the between as the matrix of thought. We must not let the later conceptualizations cover over what comes to concrete nascence there.<br/><br/>In the middle we are on the way, to where we do not exactly know, from where we are unsure. Mindfulness comes in the middle, out of an enigmatic origin, in expectation of an uncertain end. Existential contingency cannot find its substitute in any purely objective system. Nor do we have an Archimedean point to survey the middle as a whole, or to overlook our wavering passage in it. We are amongst, and the density of being touches us; we are participants and intimate with being. As such we live from within what we try to think. But to think from within is hard; some reflective distance is needed; but absolute distance is impossible for us in the within of the middle. To remain true to our intimacy with being, and yet to gain reflective distance that does not distort, is a great struggle. We need an equilibrium beyond objectifying science and idiosyncratic individuality. We need a certain doubling of existential and systematic thinking.<br/><br/>Metaphysical thinking, thus conceived, cannot entirely escape a metaphorical dimension. This is especially evident with respect to the metaxological, and the reborn thinking of the second perplexity. Metaphor itself refers to the double of the meta. Metaphor is a carrier in the between; it ferries (pherein: to carry) us across a gap; or it is the carrier of transcendence; it is in the midst as meta, and yet an image of the meta as beyond, as transcendent. It is both determinate and indeterminate at once. It is neither one nor other, but both in a manner that transcends univocal unity, sheer equivocity, and indeed a dialectic that reduces difference to mediated identity. There is a rich sense of indeterminacy at play in metaphor that functions as articulating a pluralized mediation, and a certain opening of transcending. Metaphysical metaphor is the carrier of agapeic astonishment and perplexed mindfulness in the middle." (Desmond, WDR)</p> "1) I am waiting to see more…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-30:5301756:Comment:587082014-09-30T03:51:18.210ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>"1) I am waiting to see more specifically how you philosophically develop and apply image schema in a meta-theoretical context, since this has been an idea you've been cultivating for awhile."</p>
<p>That could be never, since my forte doesn't seem geared to meta-theory but rather the gaps within and between meta-theories. Like above, the different forms of metaphysics Desmond lays out, noting they all have their place. And yet the between contexualizes and counterbalances them, being itself…</p>
<p>"1) I am waiting to see more specifically how you philosophically develop and apply image schema in a meta-theoretical context, since this has been an idea you've been cultivating for awhile."</p>
<p>That could be never, since my forte doesn't seem geared to meta-theory but rather the gaps within and between meta-theories. Like above, the different forms of metaphysics Desmond lays out, noting they all have their place. And yet the between contexualizes and counterbalances them, being itself that gap in each of them as well as between them. I suppose that this gap, ecarte, rift, fold or khora is a philosophy per se. But again, I don't see myself as building a philosophy around the concept like those I've referenced, apparently not my bag. I'm just a dapper gapper rapper, not so much a flapper mapper.</p>
<p>I remember early on in my integral explorations, back when I did the first university integral course offered by somewhere in PA, a fellow discussion group participant noted that I was excellent at finding and fixing the cracks in AQAL and meta-theory generally. He too waited in anticipation for when I'd develop my own meta-theory. As you can see, that isn't likely. Nor is it necessary. Meta-theory takes a (p2p) village, with many working within their own areas of interest and expertise. It doesn't necessarily mean only putting together all that work into a coherent whole, itself only a part of this great work. There are dangers and pitfalls with focusing on just that, as readily and voluminously discussed in contemporary philosophy.</p>
<p>I.e., I ain't no Latour, Wilber, Sallis, Desmond, Derrida etc. I just do my bit part on this stage, perhaps an obscure footnote to Plato at best. It ain't much but it's something. That's a good one for my tombstone.</p> Hi, Edward, yes, I think Lako…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-30:5301756:Comment:587072014-09-30T00:59:41.203ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Hi, Edward, yes, I think Lakoff & Johnson (and you) make a good case for the image schematic basis of many primitive (and more advanced) language forms, including grammatical categories. Although I do discuss image schema in <em>Sophia Speaks</em>, and likely will in future works as well, I haven't pursued them extensively for several reasons: 1) I am waiting to see more specifically how you philosophically develop and apply image schema in a meta-theoretical context, since this has…</p>
<p>Hi, Edward, yes, I think Lakoff & Johnson (and you) make a good case for the image schematic basis of many primitive (and more advanced) language forms, including grammatical categories. Although I do discuss image schema in <em>Sophia Speaks</em>, and likely will in future works as well, I haven't pursued them extensively for several reasons: 1) I am waiting to see more specifically how you philosophically develop and apply image schema in a meta-theoretical context, since this has been an idea you've been cultivating for awhile; 2) the pre-verbal nature of image schema makes them a bit difficult to deal with, in an easy way, in the verbal media in which we 'do philosophy' (to talk about image schema, I must use nouns, prepositions, verbs, etc); and 3) we might make a distinction between image schema themselves and the <em>concept</em> of image schema (that makes a difference here). Actual image schema arguably have less flexibility and potential for graceful application than their verbal outgrowths; for instance, which image schema would you use for 'between' that would get more mileage than 'between' likely can? But the <em>concept</em> of image schema, as holistic pattern-sensibilities rooted in embodied experience and extended in metaphor (angels singing at/as the boundaries of body/bodies & mind), can yield a lot, particularly when / if you relate this to other concepts such as <em>khora</em>, the 'between,' MOA, prepositions, etc. We can distinguish <em>technically</em> between image schema and prepositions, as you suggest above, arguing that image schema are pre-verbal and serve as a 'between' that is not limited to linguistically prepositional philosophies, and I think that's fair, but this is actually how Latour uses the concept of preposition (not limiting it to prepositional-based or grammatically centered philosophies):</p>
<blockquote><p>The abbreviation <span class="modecross">[<a href="http://www.modesofexistence.org/ime/en/voc/PRE" target="_blank">PRE</a>]</span> denotes the preposition mode, which is necessary in the inquiry since it allows us to go back to the interpretive keys which allow us to prepare for what comes after: in the <span class="modecross">[<a href="http://www.modesofexistence.org/ime/en/voc/NET" target="_blank">NET</a>]</span> mode, which describes networks, it allows for the definition of the minimal metalanguage necessary for the deployment of modes.</p>
<p>The <span class="modecross">[<a href="http://www.modesofexistence.org/ime/en/voc/PRE" target="_blank">PRE</a>]</span> mode suspends the choice of interpretive key by means of a hesitation and returns to the mode's own specific hiatus: which is the correct key?</p>
<p>It opens up the comparison of all modes of veridiction which it is responsible, after a fashion, for keeping open and for protecting against the hegemony that each mode attempts to exercise over all others.</p>
<p>It allows for an awareness of the multivocity of beings.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here, while there is a technical difference (in cognitive linguistics) between image schema and the grammatical forms which grow out of them, I believe Latour is using the concept of preposition in a way which is quite similar to your philosophical application of the concept of image schema.</p> I'm liking it too. Thanks Bru…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-30:5301756:Comment:586082014-09-30T00:20:29.310ZDavidM58http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DavidM58
<p>I'm liking it too. Thanks Bruce!</p>
<p>I'm liking it too. Thanks Bruce!</p> I am very much liking Mr. Des…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-29:5301756:Comment:583972014-09-29T22:48:38.297Zandrewhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/andrew
<p>I am very much liking Mr. Desmond! One of my fave sayings these days is that, "I am in-between days.'</p>
<p>I am very much liking Mr. Desmond! One of my fave sayings these days is that, "I am in-between days.'</p> Hi, yes, the phrase about "kh…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-29:5301756:Comment:583952014-09-29T21:19:16.983ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Hi, yes, the phrase about "khora-like affordances" is my own language; I deliberately put it that way to make a connection between Desmond's work and your own reflections.<br/><br/>I will comment more when I get home this evening.</p>
<p>Hi, yes, the phrase about "khora-like affordances" is my own language; I deliberately put it that way to make a connection between Desmond's work and your own reflections.<br/><br/>I will comment more when I get home this evening.</p> They are, in Desmond's terms,…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-29:5301756:Comment:582972014-09-29T20:54:26.662ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>They are, in Desmond's terms, the embodied and empirical basis of "the khora-like affordance for each" form of metaphysics above, as well as each part of speech. Recall my comparison of IS with khora <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/sophia-speaks-bruce-alderman?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A52210" target="_self">here.</a> And our comments a few posts above that on this topic.</p>
<p>They are, in Desmond's terms, the embodied and empirical basis of "the khora-like affordance for each" form of metaphysics above, as well as each part of speech. Recall my comparison of IS with khora <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/sophia-speaks-bruce-alderman?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A52210" target="_self">here.</a> And our comments a few posts above that on this topic.</p> Balder, have you given any fu…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-09-29:5301756:Comment:584592014-09-29T20:28:18.865ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Balder, have you given any further thought to my proposition that prepositions, and other parts of speech, are the linguistic extension of image schema? The latter, while pre-positioning language, do not just extend into linguistic prepositions but all parts of speech. And as I noted elsewhere, image schema as basic categories are in the middle of classical hierarchies so fulfill this 'in between' ontological nature. Which itself changes the nature of how we see hierarchy (and holarchy), a…</p>
<p>Balder, have you given any further thought to my proposition that prepositions, and other parts of speech, are the linguistic extension of image schema? The latter, while pre-positioning language, do not just extend into linguistic prepositions but all parts of speech. And as I noted elsewhere, image schema as basic categories are in the middle of classical hierarchies so fulfill this 'in between' ontological nature. Which itself changes the nature of how we see hierarchy (and holarchy), a key ingredient in many philosophies. We see it manifest in all these contemporary philosophies of the between, multiplicity, relationship, even in OOO, as well as the more metaphysical ones. Yet none of them have made this connection to how image schema and its linguistic extension in metaphor explain said philosophies and contextualize them cross-paradigmatically.</p>
<p>Aside from Lakoff and company, that is. And you with your onto-choreography. I know you used them in a recent paper, but this notion of the 'in between' is not really limited to linguistically prepositional philosophies but seems a rather overall cross-paradigmatic shift in contemporary philosophy. Granted each may emphasize a particular grammatical element, but the overall zeitgeist seems more image-schematic pre-positional.</p>