Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

So, thoughts on pluralistic relativism?

Posted January 31st, 2010 by Judie Heiss

OK so I finally picked up Sex, Ecology, Spirituality by Wilber... and already I am thinking I may have bitten off more integral theory then my four quadrants can simultaneously; have the intention to chew,  perform that act of chewing, and discuss said interior and exterior chewing with others.


Why, because I am already stuck and I am only on page x (yes, that right, Roman numeral 10, stuck in the freaking preface of SES, I can admit it!) So, instead of using the book as a foot stool, I am making use of my connections to this wonderful tool thoughtfully and lovingly created by Integral Life and Ken himself


While I can admit I am a newbie at Integral theory, but at least I know where to go to ask the questions


Relativism (the main tool of postmodernism) holds that one can never escape human subjectivity. But if you can use your mind to think that thought have you not just escape human subjectivity? I mean in other words, if you are aware of the fact of human subjectivity you can not be totally stuck in it. Right??

 

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

Hey Judie

Posted January 31st, 2010 by Posessor Faust

Well, I actually found SES remarkably easy to read compared to most philosophy, Wilber tends to embrace everything ever written as a special snow flake of spirit, even the things Wilber disagrees with he calls 'partially true'.

Now, relativism is a term that came out anthropology and later cultural studies. It came at a time when European colonies were being divested. Its actually more of a political question than a 'subjective' one. Europe had believed their traditions were inherently superior to those of the natives. With the advent of relativism this assumption was put into question. This was so far reaching that European philosophers put the notion of fundemental Truth into radical question. The traditional hierarchy of values were broken apart, what was on top fell to the bottom and vice versa.

Now, this was all well and good for a while, until certain problems started to develop. The question was "what's better? relativism or religious fundamentalism?" Take the current conflict between the West and the Middle East. Its their cultural tradition to genitally mutilate females, force them to cover themselves outside, stone them without proper trials in certain cases, not allow them to inherit money, etc. A popular writer recently asked an audience "by show of hands, who here feels they are morally superior to the Taliban," only a few hands went up. 

Relativism tends to blame the West for all the problems in the world, masochistically asking 'why don't the terrorists like us, what have we done wrong' instead of blaming Al-Qaeda itself for what Al-Qaeda has said it wants to do. That is wage war against the infidel and establish an Islamic Caliphate based on religious fundamentalism. 

That isn't to say there isn't a great deal of fundamentalism in the West, however there's a difference between Pat Robinson/Jerry Falwell types and the kind of post-relativism I and others put forward. 

Read SES, I haven't read it for years but I remember quite liking the prose style, lots of that spiritual stuff.