Please Log in to Vote.

19 out of 19 members found this useful.

Talk to Ken Wilber about Integral Spirituality!

Posted August 10th, 2010 by Corey deVos

The previous Conveyor Belt and ILP calls with Ken Wilber were amazing, thank you to everyone who submitted questions. Next week we will be talking with Ken about the first Appendix: From the Great Chain of Being to Postmodernism in 3 Easy Steps. Whether personal or theoretical, don't miss your chance to talk to Ken about your Integral Spirituality questions!

We are re-recording a few of the missing chapters from an Integral Spirituality Q&A we originally produced a few years ago, parts of which unfortunately got lost due to technical issues.  I intend to package these together as a 30+ hour "companion guide" to Ken's Integral Spirituality book, and I wanted to see if any of you would be interested in hopping on the phone with Ken for a question/answer session.

We will be recording this on Sunday, 9/5 at 11AM MST.

So, if you like, take a look at the Integral Spirituality book and let us know if you are interested in participating, and if you have any good questions for Ken that would fit into this chapter topic.

Submit all questions to me at cdevos@integrallife.com, with the subject line "Integral Spirituality Questions".  We will choose the most interesting questions, and if your question is approved, will get back to you with a phone number to call into one of these Sunday sessions.

I hope to hear from you!

Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

Appendix 1 Question

Posted August 11th, 2010 by Brent Simpson

In Appendix 1 you state that "...every mind has a body, or every state of consciousness has a corresponding signature state of matter-energy." What exactly is the distinction between the idea that "every mind has a body" and that "every state has a corresponding signature state of matter-energy"? Is there one? You have said that although all three-bodies are ever-present to the Self or Witness.  Accessing altered states of consciousness allows an individual-I to identify with the gross, subtle or causal self. And that identification process is expressed in the upper-right in gross, subtle or very subtle matter-energy. So does this mean, "every mind has a body" is dealing with ones average mode of consciousness and "every state has a signature state of matter-energy" is dealing only with novel kosmic patterns that get laid down when one is accessing altered states? What am I mixing up here?

--

Brent Simpson

 

Please Log in to Vote.

3 out of 3 members found this useful.

Question

Posted August 19th, 2010 by Stanley

Integral Life Practice:

Are we not yet ready to include community wide charitable selfless service as a core module of integral life practice? Would this not be a beautiful expression of the fruits of all the other modules?

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

I dispute it thus

Posted September 3rd, 2010 by Ev Miles

In appendix 1 you state that "matter doesn't just seem to lie about, on unemployment insurance, watching TV". But I have seen this happen and nowhere more so than in Boulder! Please explain your position.

--

Ev Miles :: Pixel Ink Design :: Online Business Cookbook ::

Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

SF1, SF2, SF3 - Huh?

Posted September 3rd, 2010 by Ev Miles

Maybe the 'matter on unemployment insurance' question is too hard. Here's an easier one-

In Appendix 1, you state - Increasing evolution brings increasing complexity of gross form - in the upper right. The most common example given is quarks to protons to atoms to molecules to cells to tissue to organs. And seems to bring us up-to-date with the human brain. You also state, increasing complexity of form in the upper right is correlated with increasing interior consciousness in the upper left, such as the fulcrums 1 through 10 or archaic, magic, mythic, rational, post modern, integral and onward and inward.

if you look at the famous four quadrant diagram, it works very nicely until we get to the mysterious SF1, SF2, SF3 in the Upper Right. The model seems to imply that "brains" have been increasing in complexity right along with sentient interior development.  Until we get to concrete operational, then it's the mysterious  SF1, SF2, SF3 in the upper right from that point on.

Then there are the energy bodies - Figure 1.7 on page 228. They seem to truck along hauling ass nicely until we get to causal and those pesky non-descript SF bastards show up again. How can there be increasingly subtle energy fields moving into causal (by going inwards no less) without any correlating increase in brain matter complexification. You cannot get the higher out of the lower, is the common explanation for involution.So why the halt in brain evolution?

Are these higher more inward realities beyond grey matter? I personally know that they are, because I do it all the time in Big Mind practice, so the brain can go there, but this SF stuff is bothering me.

I'm complexifused!

Questions:

Can anything more be said about these higher levels (SF1 SF2 SF3) in the upper right?
Can anything be said about why brain physiology has not changed since Archaic? Possibly 50,000+ years!
How do you get increasingly subtler energy experiences from the same brain complexification?

And if there is time, maybe you can explain why you feel that matter does not just sit around watching TV.

 

--

Ev Miles :: Pixel Ink Design :: Online Business Cookbook ::