Special Interest Knowing, the Problem of Perspective Inertia

 This discussion will attempt to progress from a simple observation of a certain degree of competition between what Arthur Diekman called the "Action Mode" and the "Receptive Mode" to the idea that there are specific blind spots caused by particular perspectives. The latter would be a form of solopsism, the idea that we might be somewhat limited to our own little boxes of perception. How do I ever know my taste of strawberries is the same as how they taste to you? That sort of thing.

  The postmodernists add a twist to the solopsism when they noted that cultural conditioning can create a kind of group-shared perception of the strawberries. One subculture might talk on and on about their sweetness, or maintain that strawberries are gifts from God, etc. Another subculture might see them as temptations of the flesh, and may think the Devil created them to lure us into a life of sin. Our "taste" might be strongly affected by this (inter) subjective cultural bias. Some of the solopsistic boxes are more like shared "rooms", but areas which limit awareness, nonetheless.

   Either way - solopsism in it the strict sense, or the postmodern version of it (including what Ken Wilber, in his book, Integral Spirituality, calls postmodern's "taboo" against Traditional faiths' intersubjectivity) - the enacting aspect of a perspective seems to numb or limit awareness of other perspectives, at least to some extent. An integral process would seem to have to acknowledge this phenomenon, in order to take the next step and transcend the problem of bias caused by (what might be called) the inertia of perspectives.

  The inevitable inertia, and the resulting "blind spot" would have to be mitigated by applying a bit of intertia from perspectives outside of the a particular perspective's "box". While a lowering of resistance of mind (looking from the energy core of "self"- from what Eckart Tolle calls "Being") might go a long ways toward loosening the grip on the thoughts and enactments of a particular perspective, in the real world of regular thinking (with the mind, instead of with the spirit, or Being), the mitigating process of skillfully applying the opposing inertias of other perspectives seems useful if we are to ever achieve a cultural version of integral seeing and doing and being.

   Hence, the utility of the Integral Map. The Map seems to be an interface tool that bridges spirit-viewing (which I tend to see as a kind of whole-mind activity which involves the skill of "thinking like energy", as opposed to thinking like matter) to "mind" (Tolle), that regular thinking which gives a relative priority to the part-mind activity we call "thought". David Bohm's idea of "proprioceptive thought" might be another way of indicating (what I call) whole-mind activity. Using Bohm's termonology, Wilber's Integral Map would be an interface, or bridge, between "thought"(the stuff of "thought-as-a-system") and "proprioceptive thought". The terminology might change, but the idea is the same. In the domain of regular beta-activity thought, we may need a crutch to help us open up the closed-mindedness which our preferred perspectives tend to cause. The Integral Map is that crutch. 

Let me return to my little mind experiment that showed me how action tends to lower awareness (and what Diekman calls the "receptive mode"). To me, this personal mind experiment (I think Wilber would classify the experiment as using the methodology of "structuralism")  provides evidence that there is a general competition between action and receptiveness, or awareness. This is not to say one totally prevents the other, but that perhaps there is a negative correlation between the degree of action (along with a higher resistance format of mental energy?) and the degree or extent of receptiveness or awareness.

  Below is an excerpt from my book, The Marketing of Virtue: Allsberg Rising, which suggests such a negative correlation. However, the experiment also suggests some sort of willed over-ride of the awareness-dulling effect of action. By focusing on awareness or whole-mind activity, I seemed to mitigate the general de-sensitizing effect of a simple physical act - walking. Here is the excerpt:

Applied Awareness via Meditation and Mind Experiments: a contribution of the Second Vehicle of Virtue  

    Another way to learn to apply awareness appeared to be the use of meditation exercises which challenge the participant to maintain awareness and sensitivity while introducing various levels of activity and distraction. The use of meditation to develop applied awareness entails the integration of the first two vehicles of virtue, awareness and mind skills. Ultimately, awareness depends on mind skills, or (as Todd said in his essay, The Master Tool) mind control. 

    Todd had used trees as objects of meditation. He could sense their creative energy. But one day he noticed how his awareness, or energy connection, dimmed as he walked toward a tree. It was as though action, even the simple action of walking, normally competes with awareness. 

    Todd tried a mind experiment. First, he did his meditation ritual. Then he focused on sensing natural energy from a tree. For the final part of the experiment, he concentrated on maintaining the energy connection with the tree at the same time he walked toward it. The outcome was successful. He could maintain sensitive awareness while walking. Todd, who is a runner, also began to pray during his runs. This integration of still mind and physical activity seemed to work well. Another fusion of running and stillness involved his use of imagery of “resting into the pace”. He could sense that he was resting inside his pace, as though riding in a car. The pace moved him along while he was, in his mind, sitting still.  

    Recently, Todd maintained a deep meditative state while engaged in the activity of eating his lunch. The ritual of praying before eating may be an old fashioned way of bringing a meditative, reverent, mental state to the table. Monasteries are famous for promoting a reverent attitude while working. The monk tending the garden prayerfully provides the food for the monk eating prayerfully. 

    The skill of integrating stillness with action may be pivotal, so far as applied awareness is concerned. As discussed earlier, Aurthur Diekman postulates that humans have two general modes of mind that cut across many different neurological and physical responses in the human body, nervous system, and brain. According to Diekman, these two general “organizational systems” are the “action mode” and the “receptive mode”. If this theory is correct, then even Todd’s earlier observation of how he switched from hard thinking to awareness would be explained as his having shifted from the “action mode” to the “receptive mode”. Awareness would involve giving the receptive mode greater priority - a version of “looking (being still, open, and non-active) before you leap”. 

    Todd knew that mastering these applied meditation exercises is a piece of cake compared to applying meditative awareness to hectic or fearful daily situations which blindside us, especially if those events happen to trigger the reliving of psychological trauma or lifelong patterns of defensive reactions. Still, such exercises do practice the basic pattern of applied awareness. Todd thought that once the applied awareness skill is developed in the easier, more controlled, meditation exercises, mastery of increasingly challenging “tests” in real life situations could follow. 

  (end excerpt)

So, if the observed awareness-dulling effect of walking tends to normally occur, it seems reasonable to think that specific "walks" down the corridors of a paticular perspectives, may also have an awareness-dulling effect, but one that is more specific. The walk down the hallways and streets of the perspective may not at all dull awareness within that "walk", but might partially, or even totally, blind us to the experiences involved in other walks down the corridors of other perspectives. The inertia of the perspective's enacting/injunctive tendency (both Wilber - in Integral Spirituality-  and Steven Covey - during Covey's discussion of centers in his habit "begin with the end in mind", from his book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People -  correctly maintain that seeing is actually a kind of doing or enacting - that the perspective you take tends to take you certain "places") creates specific blind spots. This updated, and softer, version of solopsism is reflected in a song of mine that I shared on FolkAlley.com. The song's chorus starts off "You only see what you know, you only know what you see ...    Click here if you want to hear the song: naked on the shore

  The specific inertias of perspectives may need both a map and a meditative practice if we are to avoid hitting bottom due to lack of integration in our lives (and in our collective, societal, life). No need to end up naked on the shore if we can find better ways to integrate and to expand awareness across all 4 quads and across Ken's 8 hybrid perspectives and corresponding methodologies. 

  We hear about special interest politics a lot. We try to find ways to somehow transcend special interest politics. Perhaps we also need to use the above "tools"(map and meditation) to try to transcend "special interest knowing". 

     Darrell