Comments - A Brief Note on Inclusivism - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T08:59:24Zhttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=5301756%3ABlogPost%3A5715&xn_auth=noBhakti shit? hahhahah
But h…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-03-21:5301756:Comment:90222011-03-21T17:33:12.916Zxibalbahttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/xibalba
<p>Bhakti shit? hahhahah</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But hasn´t the teaching under poetry form of the Bhagavad gita a central place in his heart practice or Ishta Bhakti Guru Yoga?</p>
<p>Da used to tell that too much zen practice zombie-fied people.</p>
<p>KW primarily a left brain oriented mammal, and probably fascinated by the charisma of Da must have fallen for that sort of argument.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Bhakti shit? hahhahah</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But hasn´t the teaching under poetry form of the Bhagavad gita a central place in his heart practice or Ishta Bhakti Guru Yoga?</p>
<p>Da used to tell that too much zen practice zombie-fied people.</p>
<p>KW primarily a left brain oriented mammal, and probably fascinated by the charisma of Da must have fallen for that sort of argument.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p> On the history of this term:…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-03-21:5301756:Comment:85562011-03-21T17:14:31.677Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>On the history of this term: At one time inclusivism was offered as a kind of "superior" dialectical alternative to exclusivism and pluralism. So the term did not always have a negative connotation associated with it, nor does it across the board today: their are still thoise who call themselves inclusivists.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Then, as Hegelianism came under suspicion, it began to acquire a negative connotation, as a kind of creeping exclusivism. We can see this in Hacker accounts of the…</p>
<p>On the history of this term: At one time inclusivism was offered as a kind of "superior" dialectical alternative to exclusivism and pluralism. So the term did not always have a negative connotation associated with it, nor does it across the board today: their are still thoise who call themselves inclusivists.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Then, as Hegelianism came under suspicion, it began to acquire a negative connotation, as a kind of creeping exclusivism. We can see this in Hacker accounts of the Indian tradition. Part of the problem here, perhaps, stems from whether we want to use the term as a descriptive term or a normative term. The problem though is that now that so much negativity has been attached to it, it is difficult to use the term descriptively without evoking its negative connotations.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Personally, I don't think saying, "inclusivism, bad; Integralism, good; helps matters much. Descriptively speaking, integralism is a form of inclusivism. And personally, I find Wilber's use of the term "meothodlogical pluralism" disingenuous and misleading. Any system that is hierarchical will be inclusivist descriptively speaking, IMO. The only distinction I'm hearing is this: "OUR brand of inclusivism, aka Integralism, is the <em>good</em> kind of inclusivism." Well OK, but then that's kinda like saying that one has a benevolent tyrant. Ethically, it may indeed be better than the alternative, but descriptively, it's still a form of tyranny.</p> So this post is a reminder to…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-03-21:5301756:Comment:93222011-03-21T16:51:47.836Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
So this post is a reminder to myself to get off my ass and write the extended essay. Indeed, all of these blog posts will be rewritten and systematized, with redundancies removed and the "tone" neutralized, and then posted at the perennialism site. They are in effect working notes.
So this post is a reminder to myself to get off my ass and write the extended essay. Indeed, all of these blog posts will be rewritten and systematized, with redundancies removed and the "tone" neutralized, and then posted at the perennialism site. They are in effect working notes. @theurg. Thanks yet again for…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-03-21:5301756:Comment:93202011-03-21T16:41:21.472Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>@theurg. Thanks yet again for pointing out an old Lightmind post. I'm not sure where or the degree to which it has been incorporated into my blog comments here, but I'll have a look. At one time long ago I had written an artcile lenghth disussion of both "causal" and "subtle" in Wilber and the tradition that was possib;y the most "serious" piece I had written for NEO at the old forum, but it is now lost to the void, though bits and pieces of it have been incorporated into ny blog…</p>
<p>@theurg. Thanks yet again for pointing out an old Lightmind post. I'm not sure where or the degree to which it has been incorporated into my blog comments here, but I'll have a look. At one time long ago I had written an artcile lenghth disussion of both "causal" and "subtle" in Wilber and the tradition that was possib;y the most "serious" piece I had written for NEO at the old forum, but it is now lost to the void, though bits and pieces of it have been incorporated into ny blog here.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>@xibalba. Da's bhakti style shit is horrible IMO. I stopped reading him after he stopped being descriptive in his accounts. One can only wonder what was going through Ken's head when he wrote that endorsement.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>@Balder. Hey. No, this little blurb was probably removed from my Vivekananda page where it was too long to fit into the fluidity of the prose and could not be put into a footnote. So no, it's not a response to your post. Actually, yet once again, I wrote a longish semi-academic account on inclusivism at Lightmind at one time that included extended accounts of both Advaita and Jainism. It has been lost to the mists of time, but again elements have appeared here and there; most notably there was a short discussion in the "Are Brahman and Emptiness the Same" article, but I may have removed that also.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The intent is to one day not only reconstitute the old essya but to write an extensive history of inclusivism and relating it to its metaphysics of identity and its tendency to hav gods absorb other gods (as in the amagamation of the various Krishna myths and their absorption into Vaishnavaism).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>cheers.</p> You might check out this oldL…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-03-20:5301756:Comment:93092011-03-20T18:37:25.902ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
You might check out this old<a href="http://www.lightgate.net/boards/viewtopic.php?t=6424" target="_blank">Lightmind forum discussion</a> in which kela participated, commenting about what Wilber gets from Da.
You might check out this old<a href="http://www.lightgate.net/boards/viewtopic.php?t=6424" target="_blank">Lightmind forum discussion</a> in which kela participated, commenting about what Wilber gets from Da. Kela
What´s your opinion of D…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-03-20:5301756:Comment:93042011-03-20T15:20:03.665Zxibalbahttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/xibalba
<p>Kela</p>
<p>What´s your opinion of Da´s "Dawn horse testament"?</p>
<p>And how do you look at this KW´s statement:…</p>
<span class="Apple" style="word-spacing: 0px; font: medium 'Times New Roman'; text-transform: none; color: #000000; text-indent: 0px; white-space: normal; letter-spacing: normal; border-collapse: separate; orphans: 2; widows: 2;"><span class="Apple" style="text-align: center;"><a id="top" name="top" style="text-decoration: none;"><br />
</a></span></span>
<p>Kela</p>
<p>What´s your opinion of Da´s "Dawn horse testament"?</p>
<p>And how do you look at this KW´s statement:</p>
<span style="word-spacing: 0px; font: medium 'Times New Roman'; text-transform: none; color: #000000; text-indent: 0px; white-space: normal; letter-spacing: normal; border-collapse: separate; orphans: 2; widows: 2;" class="Apple"><span style="text-align: center;" class="Apple"><a name="top" style="text-decoration: none;" id="top"><br />
</a></span></span><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr><td width="100%" align="left" valign="top"><p>"This is one of the very greatest spiritual treatises, comparable in scope and depth to any of the truly classic religious texts. I still believe that, and I challenge anybody to argue that specific assessment".</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<p> </p>
I enjoyed this blog, Kela. …tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2011-03-18:5301756:Comment:90052011-03-18T22:28:35.368ZBalderhttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p> </p>
<p><br></br>I enjoyed this blog, Kela. Was it possibly inspired -- the theme, not the content -- by my writings awhile back on Integral Theory and inclusivism? In my ITC paper, I argued that I didn't think Wilber's latest phase of Integral should necessarily be classified as inclusivist (contrary to your conclusion), and that it could provide a good model for an enactive, postmetaphysical pluralism, but I have to admit I was really trying to surreptitiously 'redirect' Integral in these…</p>
<p> </p>
<p><br/>I enjoyed this blog, Kela. Was it possibly inspired -- the theme, not the content -- by my writings awhile back on Integral Theory and inclusivism? In my ITC paper, I argued that I didn't think Wilber's latest phase of Integral should necessarily be classified as inclusivist (contrary to your conclusion), and that it could provide a good model for an enactive, postmetaphysical pluralism, but I have to admit I was really trying to surreptitiously 'redirect' Integral in these ways (to be more consistent, in my view, with Wilber's IMP and his desire to 'go postmetaphysical') than simply representing Integral in its current state. I do think, overall, most Integral rhetoric does fall into the 'inclusivist' camp.</p>