What is Integral?

18 Guests, 0 Users

My wife and I were happy for twenty years. Then we met. - Rodney Dangerfield

Advanced search

Dilber MulticolorMarley TPSMF Default Theme -

[jimtzu]

what is your (anyones) definition of Integral?  is it a movement? a way of life?  it certainly keeps changing.  we'd all agree that it's not limited to Wilber's trademarked AQAL perspective. it seems to have started with Aurobindo's use of the word and has grown and morphed into a whole new philosophy and paradigm.  the posting over at Open Integral blog http://www.openintegral.net/blog/?p=174 has it the "movement" splitting into at least two streams, but i'm sure there are many more. the word Integral, with a capital I, is overused, to me, much like spirituality and enlightenment. so much so that it loses all meaning after a while.

just some questions.....

[Michael]

Hi Jim,

As you can see I took your post out of the Norman Einstein thread, and started a new topic with it.  Because I think it is a very interesting question you pose, and worthy of its own discussion.

I?ve been asking myself this same question on and off for the last few years, and continue to do so.  Here are my thoughts:

I suppose the primary elements that define integral for me would be balance and proportion.  An integral worldview would be one that encourages appreciation of wholeness of course, which to my mind means appreciation for all aspects of life.

Some aspects that I think characterize imbalances, or at best, primary focuses of some streams within ?the integral movement? are:

Theory vs Practice
Metaphysics vs Post-Metaphysics
Mind vs Heart
Individual vs Collective
Interior vs Exterior

I am grateful to KW for his AQAL system, which uses theory to pull together, and codify relationships between such diverse elements as the above, but I am also grateful to many people who don?t give a rat?s ass about KW who already live in such a way as to embody wholeness.  So for me, integral is about a way of living, or better yet, a way of BEING.  It doesn?t have to hinge on theory (or God forbid; its degenerate offspring ideology, which is what you tend to see cropping up among Wilberites, offshoots, critics and followers).  You might be tempted to say then, that it might rather hinge on practice, but I think that might miss the point too.  Rather, I think it hinges on BALANCE; of all elements of living and being.  Which is achieved through embodying/living/testing relationship and values.

[Daniel]

Yes Michael, I am glad you did this. I was brewing up answers with more questions. It's high time we get get to the top of this, as several branches of the tree are emerging forth in new distinct directions.

Dan

[Liz]

I like this, Michael

Theory vs Practice
Metaphysics vs Post-Metaphysics
Mind vs Heart
Individual vs Collective
Interior vs Exterior

However, it sems a bit adversarial, like it has always to be one or the other.

Isn't it about putting theory into prectice? Walking the talk?
metaphysics-pass
MInd and heart aren't exclusive either, it should be possible to think and feel, use aquired learning and untuition at the same time.
Interior and exterior shouldn't be in competition if we are at least trying to live congruently.

For me it would seem like it is a question of trying to embrace the big picture, without losing any of the little bits. That should, in the end, lead to a life more fully lived..........perhaps becoming is more relevant than being.

Just a thought or two

Liz

[henry]

thanks everyone. michaelD has indeed created a balanced site. this old fool gets a little weary hearing that madonna invented yoga ...henry

[Jana]

INTEGRATION, EVOLUTION AND I-I
All Charles Haanel quotes are from pages: 120-123 The Master Key Arcana

?The perfect ideal can only be that of being capable of reciprocating all the qualities of the Originating Mind. Consequently man, in his inmost nature, is the product of the Divine Mind imaging forth an image of itself on the plane of the relative as the complementary to its own sphere of the absolute. If we therefore go to the in most principle in ourselves?we shall find that we have reached a principle in ourselves which stands ?in loco dei? towards all our vehicles and also towards our environment.?

True integration being The Natural State.

?The Spiritual World, as it appears at this moment is outside Natural Law. Theology continues to be considered, as it has always been, a thing apart. It remains still a stupendous and splendid construction, but on lines altogether its own.?

?As the highest of the sciences, Theology in the order of evolution should be the last to fall into rank. It is reserved for it to perfect the final harmony.?

Charles Haanel says scientific inquiry cannot relate to the unprecedented, Great Exception, portions of spiritual experience cut off by an insurmountable barrier from the domain of scientific inquiry. He says religion has yet to be brought within the sphere of Natural Law?Law is the revelation of time?The discovery of Law is simply the discovery of Science.

?And if the analogies of Natural Law can be extended to the Spiritual World, that whole region at once falls within the domain of science and secures a basis as well as an illumination in the constitution and course of Nature.?

?The forms of the Sciences had to be perfected before the form of the Spiritual. The inorganic has to be worked out before the organic?the Natural before the Spiritual.?

?If there is any foundation for theology, if the phenomena of the Spiritual World are real, in the nature of things they ought to come into the sphere of Law. Such is at once the demand of Science upon Religion and the prophecy that it shall be fulfilled.?

As an example of how Science and Spirituality will come increasingly together we can see that our current understanding of spiritual-energy  of the body that is influenced by the East, is a mythic analogy of subjective interior gnosis of what is. However in about 50 years we will have a mature scientific model of the spiritual energy system, which will expand our skill, understanding and growth exponentially. Thus Theology will reach its maturity when all the sciences in their highest moral and intellectual forms are included intimately and nottwo with spiritual perception, sensibility and behavior.

As yet religion and science stand apart and each is made lesser because of it. As they grow together however, each will mature the other into a singular grokking of the true nature of Reality and Being. Only at this point can we say a genuinely ?rational and spiritual? human exists?that is an integral being.

To the extent that I-I uses past forms of religious manipulation and extortion, it is harming this grand synthesis. To the extent that I-I embraces a rational and transrational theology and the spiritualization of the sciences?it is to this extent that I-I will contribute to a lasting renaissance of the higher human?ie: promote evolution.

[jimtzu]

Integral thinking has been around for a long time, but it's been known by many different names throughout the years...  anyone who has attempted to take a big picture worldview has been there.
Oneness... wholeness... seeing and trying to live all sides of this circle of  life.  i think what has changed in these times is the ability to bring together Eastern and Western approaches in a somewhat cohesive (sometimes messy) way of life that encompasses the totality of the human experience up to NOW.   an Integral thinker doesn't think in either or's, but sees that the polarity actually makes up the whole.  for someone naturally in the flow there is just life in all it's beauty, pain and indifference, accepted and embraced.  for those that havn't reached that state of being, at least not consistantly,  there is a tendency to rely on theories, maps and mental contructs, to be able to find the balance, the center, the courage to just let go and live with eyes  wide open, living mindfully and aware in the world as a whole.

it is ironic that in dealing with the Whole, man parses it up in bite size pieces and tries to put it back together again, thinking he has a handle on reality.  splitting it up into finer and finer bits until it is hardly recognizable.  and so it goes.....

just some thoughts...

[Nickeson]

from variously above

Here are my thoughts

Just a thought or two

just some thoughts...

just some excellent thoughts or two or three... good people

This from Wikipedia:
     ?According to the Integral Transformative Practice website, 'integral' means 'dealing with the body, mind, heart, and soul.'"

So we can deduce from that sentence that the Boy Scout and Girl Scout Manuals are works of Integral philosophy. I am sure used ones are available on ebay and will go for less than the kits, the seminars, the monthly subscription fees..

I have also been mulling over that Open Integral post for the last several days.  Back in January I promised that my second installment of Well Log: Integral would be out in a week or so. No such luck, because I?ve been trying to get a grip on the integral phenom, in addition to the Integral? part of it, and the process is like learning how to catch fish with my hands. The fact that it is so indeterminate and elusive to definition and analysis takes it, I believe, out of the ?movement? category. Movements are supposed to be writ large and clear. I think the Int. ? Inst. folks would like to think of their product as a cultural movement but they have a long way to go

The other day I scrounged through the online thesauruses for synonyms for ?movement? and discovered none that would describe the fragmented phenomenon that can be found under the category heading ?integral,? which might become a one-word oxymoron before it becomes a movement.

I am beginning to think that ?integral? was essentially one of those compelling words like ?compelling? (for instance) that everyone liked to think described their art, their science, their lifestyle, their very existence, their every thought, and all the objects of their slavish devotions?in short anything that could be made buzzword compliant. At first it had an archetypal cache that for a true believer derived from the omniscient creative and organizing impulse of the universal designer, and for others it was more like the ability of the some portion of the brain to organize sensory data into coherent patterns. But as you said in your original post, Jim, as time wears on so does the word until a once viable adjective has been buggered into a trivial noun that can name everything and nothing at all in the same three syllables.

Maybe we need a new name for the beautiful, perpetual blooming of incarnate completion that we hold in such high regard. Lets call it Marianthi.
Steven

[marianthi]

Steven, you shameless scoundrel,

You got me speechless yet again.  Just you wait!

 

Marianthi.

[Liz]

I knew what that was going to say before I got to your name.

marianthi, how could you help but love that man? :-)

Liz

[marianthi]

S i g h....

 

M.

[Daniel]

As you can see I took your post out of the Norman Einstein thread, and started a new topic with it.  Because I think it is a very interesting question you pose, and worthy of its own discussion.

This is a cross over post as well. I am off to Boston for a job interview and so I must be brief. I will begin with this quote from a Starbucks coffee cup (Venti with a shot) in regards to Ken Wilber and the whole Integral mess:

"Many people lack a spiritual belief system and fill that void with obsessions about celebrities. The celebrities are raised to the rank of gods, and these earthly gods will always fail the expectations the masses have set for them. The cycle runs thusly: adoration turns to obsession, obsession turns to disappointment, and from disappointment it is just a short emotional jump to contempt."

- Donna Phillips Freelance Writer

[henry]

very best wishes in boston daniel. your celebrity post cuts to the chase. the mistake my generation made was replacing the bad viet nam/watergate daddy with the scoundrel guru daddy. we will find a balance and possibly include women  ...henry

[Jana]

Transcending implies "including" and perfecting.
Renouncing implies negating and avoiding.

"The question arises though; what is the proper mix of the various aspects? How do we know when our relationships are good enough, for instance? Any one of those aspects could consume a person's entire energy stores if they focused too much on that particular aspect. How much is focus is enough? How do we know when it's all working and we're well balanced? When it feels good? When we glow?"

For that you need the special Ken Wilber Psychometric Meter which measures the cortisol and other stress hormones in the blood. You also need weekly MRI's to make sure that you are not losing braincells in the battle of life.

You also need to have a I-I certified pain specialist counselor that will determine your pain threshold, and monitor which areas of your life that are causing you physical, emotional, mental and spiritual pain.

You also need weekly visits to your relationship coach to ensure your relationships are all hunky dory. And if not you may need to go in for remedial or emergency relationship health treatments.

If your Life Mandala is off skew you will be given the skew coordinates and a comprehensive program to get your Life Mandala back into correct cosmic alignment.

If you persist on remaining disharmonious and off-skew you will be sent to the Harmony Lodge for whatever time period needed to get you back into cosmic alignment.

Those that are criminally misaligned and are causing gross disharmony, stress, dis-ease and suffering to others (such as the current political administration) will be sent to Serenity Prison for an indefinite period, until they mend their ways.

[marshall]

Part of the balancing is the inclusion of the feminine, Henry...

Thanks for the giggles, Jana. It helped me realize though, that I no longer think transcending includes including. Transcending often seems to include ignoring or something like it, which is subtly different than rejection and avoidance.