Sunday, December 17, 2006

Altitude and depth must be seen as of a piece

Altitude and depth must be seen as of a piece; inseparable; distinguishable but not reducible. This is easier said than done because for the most part the self identifies not with its depth but with its altitude (true more often for men than for women). Thus, criticisms that focus on altitude are taken as emotional bombs by agentic individuals because they are seen as diminishing, hurtful, not allowing "equality of stature," etc. Well, what so wrong with that? Diminshing the ego isn't a bad thing if the ego needs to be diminished! Diminishing the ego by refusing it (false) altitude is also building the Self by making space for it to acknowledge depth. The Self is not merely the self climbing the ladder of consciousness to God Consciousness. The Self is the union of the self's ascent (eros) and God's descent (agape) to meet the self. The Self is the meeting of self and God in an I-Thou/Self-Self relationship (Wilber calls this the "2" in the "123 of God"). We can symbolize eros by altitude and agape by depth (as I do with the Kronology symbols) but of course the expressions may reveal themselves to be mere flimsy cellophane over the unknowable.

It is a misreading of Wilber to say his theory is a top-of-pyramid-looking-down philosophy. Wilber allows equally for the ascending and descending currents. It is error to say that a nondual embrace is where "the rules of the game are established,"; rather, it's where KW offers as a generous gift of spirit his own vision of the rules, the game, and the nature of all rules and game. For what it's worth. Our best and most subtle aesthetics, kronologies, and integral theories must acknowledge that self and Self, eros and agape, altitude and depth are One and Not-One. On the Kronos mandala, Station 8 of a base-12 symbolic system is altitude turquoise and the depth of amber, with relative values of +8 and -8 respectively, summing to the beautiful number of 0. And as I see it this is nothing but an intuitive restatement of what KW's Integral Theory has said or implied all along, even as its emphasis on the processes of development has led some critics to miss the forest for the trees. Until posted by Joe Perez at 12/16/2006 Joe Perez Location: Seattle, Washington, US. Joe Perez is "a rip-roaring wonder of a writer." He has earned a B.A. with Honors in comparative religion and philosophy from Harvard University. He is the author of two books, Soulfully Gay and Rising Up. View my complete profile

No comments:

Post a Comment