Comments - Three Nows, the Future Infinitive, and Triple-Loop Awareness - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T00:34:06Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=5301756%3ABlogPost%3A56081&xn_auth=noVery good. This helps me bett…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-12-20:5301756:Comment:595272014-12-20T19:58:40.847ZDavidM58http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DavidM58
<p>Very good. This helps me better understand and relate to Gebser's concept of time - as theurj refers to.</p>
<p>In regards to the vital question, I think process-relational philosophy and what Whitehead called "causal efficacy" can also contribute here.</p>
<p>Starr and Torbert quoted above: "Triple-loop awareness occurs in any moment when there’s an attention distinct from the mental thinking, from the physical sensing, and from the objects of perception, infusing them all with an immediacy…</p>
<p>Very good. This helps me better understand and relate to Gebser's concept of time - as theurj refers to.</p>
<p>In regards to the vital question, I think process-relational philosophy and what Whitehead called "causal efficacy" can also contribute here.</p>
<p>Starr and Torbert quoted above: "Triple-loop awareness occurs in any moment when there’s an attention distinct from the mental thinking, from the physical sensing, and from the objects of perception, infusing them all with an immediacy that is at once passionate, dispassionate, and compassionate."</p>
<p>Nancy Frankenberry on Whitehead's Doctrine of Causal Efficacy:</p>
<p>"Prescinding from the more technical features of Whitehead's system, the main features of his philosophy of experience can be summarized in the broader, nonsystematic language he uses in developing a theory of nonsensuous perception or "perception in the mode of causal efficacy." According to this theory, the most basic mode of experience is not sense <em>per</em>ception but sense <em>re</em>ception, or the perception of process. Most modern schools of epistemology have confined their analysis of experience to sense-perception (what Whitehead calls "perception in the mode of presentational immediacy") as the only valid means of deriving and testing empirical knowledge. But underlying the sharp, precise, spatially located experience of contemporaneous sense perception, projected as presentationally immediate, is the receptive nonsensuous experience of causal efficacy with its dim and vague vector feeling-tones."</p>
<p>(Religion and Radical Empiricism, 1987, p. 160)</p>
<p></p>
<p>Frankenberry, p. 164:<br/>"Attention to the primacy of causal efficacy involves an important shift in value theory as over against those philosophies and theologies which designate mind or substance or matter as primary categories. The doctrine of causal efficacy also provides an elemental base in human experience for designating the most deeply creative transformations associated with religion. It is an insistence on the centrality of the body and the fact that consciousness, even when dominant in human experience, is in organic association with bodily, visceral, affective processes which either enhance conscious attention or frustrate and attenuate it. It points also to the fact that images, concepts, and theories alone do not enlighten or liberate, redeem or destroy. More profoundly, lives are created and re-created in terms of organic physical energies of nature which are most intimately experienced with the body. The creativity of all existence originates in the realm of concrete relationality, present in physical feelings, for this constitutes the stream of experience, the qualitative flux in which and out of which events have their reality. This is the level of common creaturehood, a level more pervasive than that of mere sensation or refined intellectuality. As we shall see next, for the Buddhist process view, too, what is most real is the flow of experiencing."</p>
<p></p> If interested we also have a…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-05-12:5301756:Comment:561442014-05-12T16:02:25.029ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>If interested we also have a thread on Torbert <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/bill-torbert" target="_self">here</a>. In particular, <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/bill-torbert?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A19702" target="_self">this</a> post and several following discusses triple time loops. In this post Gidley criticizes the Lingam for not including the 3rd time loop, what she calls <em>concretion</em> after Gebser. And on …</p>
<p>If interested we also have a thread on Torbert <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/bill-torbert" target="_self">here</a>. In particular, <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/bill-torbert?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A19702" target="_self">this</a> post and several following discusses triple time loops. In this post Gidley criticizes the Lingam for not including the 3rd time loop, what she calls <em>concretion</em> after Gebser. And on <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/bill-torbert?id=5301756%3ATopic%3A19301&page=3#comments" target="_self">p. 3</a> a discussion of how this missing piece plays into how the Lingam metaphysically formulates the Causal as distinct from the postmetaphysical <em>withdrawn</em> of Bryant or the <em>khora</em> of Derrida. And all of which determines how one formulates what an <em>integral</em> consciousness even means in the first place.</p> (Posting this old blog here f…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2014-05-12:5301756:Comment:561422014-05-12T14:44:34.624ZBalderhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>(Posting this old blog here for archiving purposes.)</p>
<p>(Posting this old blog here for archiving purposes.)</p>