Explore
Gaia Soulmates
down  About This Group
The Integral Pod

The Integral Pod (formerly I-I+Zaadz, or IIZ) is a discussion group (a.k.a. “pod”) for enthusiasts of the work of Ken Wilber and other proponents of integral thought. Our aim here is to provide a “We-space” for broad discussion of second-tier living, loving and learning. Please read our vision and guidelines – the ...(more)
down  About This Room
This is the place to discuss all things integral, at all levels, but with an emphasis on challenging ourselves and each other through the insights that Integral Theory can provide. [AQAL focus: upper-left (UL), individual/interior, inner transformation]
down  Room Activity
Irmeli : Aletheia
Irmeli posted a reply to the conversation "Pathological Guru/Disciple Relationships?" ()
1Vector3 : "Relentless Wisdom"
1Vector3 posted a reply to the conversation "Pathological Guru/Disciple Relationships?" ()
Mascha : drop
Mascha posted a reply to the conversation "Pathological Guru/Disciple Relationships?" ()
1Vector3 : "Relentless Wisdom"
1Vector3 posted a reply to the conversation "Pathological Guru/Disciple Relationships?" ()
Mascha : drop
Mascha posted a reply to the conversation "Pathological Guru/Disciple Relationships?" ()
1Vector3 : "Relentless Wisdom"
1Vector3 posted a reply to the conversation "Pathological Guru/Disciple Relationships?" ()
down  Group Grapevine
Grey : Integral Ideator (I-I)
Grey Link! Cool! :D (9 months ago)
Grey : Integral Ideator (I-I)
Grey Just testing URLs in the grapevine. This link will take you to Pelle's blog: http://is.gd/ixdm (I want to see if this gets converted to a link or if you have to copy and paste it.) (9 months ago)
Grey : Integral Ideator (I-I)
Grey Oof! Just saw this now, Siona.... Yeah, flutters I think it was... no, "flaps", but I don't like it much. "Flutter" was the name to replace "Grapevine". Anyway, I just used "tweets" here because it's more readily recognizable. :) (9 months ago)
 Advertising keeps Gaia free! Interested in sponsoring us?
Resultset_previousprevious thread | next threadResultset_next
threaded | unthreaded | newest first


  Nicole : wakingdreamer

Democratic/Republic L/R E/I

Nicole said Jun 19, 2007, 3:21 PM:

 

Hi Peter,

You replied:

Ken's view on politics is much more refined than that. The second part of the audio has just been released, and you can read some details about that here.

If anybody wants to discuss that further, please open a new thread, since it's off-topic.

Thanks for the link, and for the very correct moderator direction to open a new thread, which I've done here.

Though I read the material in the link carefully, I didn't see anything that showed more depth in terms of either of my problems with the original statement - i.e. Left and Right are quite simply and (in my opinion) erroneously assigned to Democrats and Republicans, and Left=external and Right=internal.

In fact, it goes on to say that

… as Ken explains, the second, hidden, civil war is raging smack dab in the middle of the Democratic Party. Quite simply, the new postmodern Left and the old modern Left…

(again presupposing the existence of any true Left within the Democratic Party)

I'd like to leave this issue of where the Democratic Party lies to the side, though, and consider the (to me) more serious problem of summing up the Left as attributing ”the fundamental cause of human suffering to external causes”.

In his introduction to a talk in 2006 on the War on Terror Noam Chomsky presents three basic principles  necessary to deal constructively with terrorism. One of them is that “Elementary moral principles matter, even if they have consequences that we would prefer not to face.”   This principle, as he shows, has far-reaching implications when ignored, whether we are talking about the Nuremberg trials, or North American assistance and complicity in atrocities  throughout the world, or Iraq, and the list goes on.

So, could it be a commitment to internal causes of suffering at their most basic that  people on the Left work towards alleviating suffering seemingly due to “external” causes?

  MrTeacup : Celestial Accounts Receivable Dept.

Re: Democratic/Republic L/R E/I

MrTeacup said Jun 19, 2007, 5:57 PM:

 

So, could it be a commitment to internal causes of suffering at their most basic that  people on the Left work towards alleviating suffering seemingly due to “external” causes?

Yes, but this doesn't refute the internal/external dimension. The important question is what determines human happiness? Happiness is obviously an internal quality, how do people get it? I don't think this should be interpreted to mean that the left never makes arguments from internal causes – for example, that greed is the cause of environmental problems. But how do we solve greed? The left is virtually silent on this question. Similarly, the right sometimes argues from external causes – for example, that the media caused social decay. But if you dig a bit and asked what causes greed, or what caused the media, they revert to their internal/external explanations. Society socializes us to be greedy. The media consists of secularists who abandoned God.

Foreign policy is a bit more tricky, but the anti-war left strongly opposes the idea that war is justified because the enemy is innately evil. The fact that Chomsky emphasizes morality is actually an evolution for him, and for the left overall. Remember 2004 and the obsession with “values”? 

  kessels : soul-journer

Re: Democratic/Republic L/R E/I

kessels said Jun 21, 2007, 8:00 AM:

 

Hi Nicole,

I don't follow US politics closely, so I can't comment on details about the Democrat and Republican parties. I have a few general remarks that I hope can shine a light on this, and I'd like to hear your opinion.

Ken uses the terms Left and Right as meaning relative to the center of the political spectrum, so in that respect I think we can say that the Democrats are on the left of the center of the US. Many would indeed consider the Democrats right-wing in other countries, but these countries have a different political spectrum.

By what you're saying, I get the impression that you translate internal as 'domestic', and external as 'outside of the US', which is not how Ken uses the terms. Please correct me if I misinterpreted you. Have a look at  Chapter 14 of The Many Faces of Terrorism for a more detailed explanation, see pages 12 and 13.

Peter