Philosophy as a System of Functioning

Hi, this thread was started as a compliment to RL truthseeker-artist's thread entitled Philosophy as a System of Knowledge. I have pondered before about whether Wilber's map is from the point of view of a gift set one might call a “thinker” (Jung has a “psychological type” by that name). Thinkers “view”, and they would make maps according to various viewpoints. They would take “knowledge” seriously, as being a major - or the major - mover and shaker of the world. 
  But what if the gift set of say a “do-er” made a map? Would that map be of viewpoints/perspectives and of “knowledge”? Or would it be of “orientations”, “directions”, “functional strategies”? etc.? I believe the “integral” map would vary according to which gift-set was constructing it. Each natural gift is predisposed to make, or transform, the world in a certain manner. It would be a shame to try to transform the world only according to a bias of viewpoints or “knowledge”. What about skills or arts or “ways of relating” or “ways of manifesting”? These all could be the basis for different maps, according to the frequencies of different gifts. 
   In the computer program Access, you set what is called a “primary key”. Until the so-called “Integral Map” re-sets the primary key according to each major “gift”, then the map will remain non-integrative, because it is locked into the one key of veiwpoints/knowledge - the exclusive domain of the “thinker” type. 
  I propose an Integral Mega-Map in which the current quads are accompanied by 3 other Integral Maps each driven by a different major “Type”. Jung's Types correspond well enough with my own sensed types of Thinkers (Jung's “thinkers”) , Dreamers (Jung's “intuiters”) , Doers (Jung's “sensers”) , and Relaters (Jung's “feelers”). 
   Below is not one of those maps, in that it doesn't attempt to map out functions in terms of 4 (or more) quadrants, but it seems to be discursive beginning of a do-er's “map” or strategy/frame for using the mind.

This is an excerpt from a book in progress called Christians Thinking Like Energy : 

I mentioned the idea of usefulness as a value-point for this book. I love to think. I wouldn't be writing if I didn't. But over time, even I got tired of thinking just to be thinking. Another part of me - some practical and caring part that I feel is connected somehow to God - led me to prioritize my thinking. Usefulness became a whole philosophy in and of itself. It is a philosophy about philosophy (See, I told you I love to think!). I call it “Functional Philosophy”.    We are not here to develop egg-head ideas or count the number of angels on the head of a pin. There is a purpose to our thoughts. You are investing your time in reading those thoughts. I invested some time in coming up with them, and then in writing them down. Functional Philosophy places an emphasis on the purpose of those thoughts.     In a sense, Functional Philosophy is the working man's (or woman's) philosophy. It insures that the speculative thought relates to our quality of existence while we work to make a better life. You might also say that Functional Philosophy is “quality-oriented”, rather than oriented toward constructing a vast network of internally consistent logic which has little or no relevance to real human beings, nor to really being human.  Here's a brief description of “FP”.   The purpose of philosophy, according to Functional Philosophy, is to healthfully orient an individual or group of people. The idea of thinking like energy is functional because it influences the mind to think in a deferent way which seems to offer advantages. The mind begins to think more with verbs, and takes on other worthwhile qualities of energy as well.    I call this particular sort of influence upon the mind orientation by identification. If you think repeatedly about something, especially if you are interested in it, you tend to eventually identify with it. Once you identify with it, you tend take on its qualities. The qualities of the thing you think about could (and often do) even change the way you think.    Functional Philosophy prompts you to ask, “Do the objects of my philosophical thought offer me characteristics that I can add  to my way of thinking and to my way of being? Orientation by identification is similar to taking a characteristic from a deceased loved-one and incorporating it into your life. Emulation of a good personality characteristic is a fitting memorial to the loved-one. Emulation of a good thinking characteristic is a fitting tribute to life itself.           Since this book is about thinking like energy, let's use energy as an example. Energy seems to have a trans-object quality, meaning it cuts across individual things. That is one of the ways which the phenomena of “energy” presents itself. If I set my mind to thinking like energy, will this trans-object quality rub off on me in a positive way? Will it help me have more empathy? Will it help me improve the overall quality of my life? Others' lives?    A familiar image of energy is fire. A fire can burn from one thing to another, such as from one log to the next. Isn't that similar to how people can share their lives? Even after they are dead, they can share their lives, or “energy”, in the form of a legacy.    What advantages does this fire-spread offer me as a human being? It seems it teaches me something about my capacity for love and for good works. I am not merely a matter-like object. I am like energy. Seeing myself as being energy-based, rather than matter-based, “works” for me.    In fact, although we are using the energy of fire as an example, we already have biblical advice along those very lines. The Bible tells us to identify more with spirit and less with flesh. Spirit is analogous to fire, in that it, like fire, has many of the same energy characteristics. Spirit has its own fire-spread. We will look further into the parallels between spirit and energy later on. The point here is that the belief that I am energy-based, or spirit-based, helps save me from a low quality existence.    Well, not quite yet. Sometimes, salvation is slow in coming. I still have to live according to the model and then see if my belief was correct. Once I access the new way of thinking - by believing in the efficacy of thinking like energy - I still have to apply my belief that I am spiritual or energy-based. Perhaps I could respond to an insult by imagining that I am a field of energy which is spread out like diffuse light, having low resistance, and then allowing the negative energy to land softly or to pass right on through. What does that insulting comment have to do with my “ground of being”? After trying this “thinking like energy” (TLE) technique, I could assess its effectiveness by asking myself,  “Did those energy inspired thoughts help me maintain composure, inner peace? Did this and/or other applications of TLE add anything favorable to my well being?”    If the answer is yes, then I may opt to assimilate the beliefs and specific applications/techniques into my overall life. Now I have to integrate the new thoughts, skills, and habits, into my everyday existence. After carefully weaving the beliefs and practices into my life, was it improved? Did the philosophy of seeing myself as being like energy work over the long haul? If so, that philosophy was, for all intents and purposes, “true”.     If a person or group of people are going to take the time to philosophize, why not make it functional, purposeful? Why waste precious time and energy thinking anything less?     Having said that, it is important to allow for plenty of side trips. Philosophical thoughts, or even productive problem solving, cannot sustain functionality unless there is some research and development-like imaginative exploration. In problem solving, such side trips have been called “alternative taking” (from the psychological research called “interpersonal cognitive problem solving” by Platt, Spivak, and Sure). Come to find out, those who lack the habit of thinking of more than one way to approach a problem situation, are more likely to be poor problem-solvers. Imagine that!     Functional Philosophy is still philosophy. As such, it preserves the imaginative process of exploring possibilities. Otherwise, it could hardly be called philosophy.    Think of free flow philosophical thoughts and alternative taking as happening at the top of a decision making funnel. The funnel is wide at that point, and allows for a lot of ideas to swirl around and to come up with new patterns or hybrids. The funnel gets gradually narrower the further down you go. Decisive thoughts occur best at the bottom of the funnel. Open, explorative, thoughts occur best at the top. For the funnel to work best, the flow must go smoothly and gradually through all parts or stages of the funnel. Human tendency seems to be to rush to the bottom of the funnel. This tendency seems correlated with our habit of thinking like matter. Even our language hints to that. The decision-rusher often worries because they are attending to so many urgent “matters”. So many things matter to them that they end up carrying a “heavy load” (mass). More on this later.    On the other hand, some folks tend to stay at the top too long, perhaps to avoid the responsibilities or consequences at the bottom. If a person is God-designed as a dreamer, he or she will naturally have more thoughts at the top of the funnel. That is as it should be, according to his or her gift. But if fear leads him or her to stay at the top too long, perhaps misusing the gift of dreaming or of intellectualizing (in the case of a “thinker”), then dreaming and thinking ends up looking like a waste of time. The gifts of dreaming/intuiting and thinking end up getting a bad rap.    Also, the funnel-rushing decision-pressers tend to take over. Over time, the dreamers, thinkers, and relaters (and whatever other gift-orientations gravitate toward the upper zones of the funnel) build up resentment. Polarization occurs. Socially, in the marketplace or sharing-space of ideas, the thoughts no longer flow smoothly throughout the thought funnel. When this happens, no one wins. Many natural gifts are lost. And many good ideas are lost.     Functional philosophy seeks to retain the qualities of the top of the thought funnel (after all, much of the characteristics of energy are there!), but without inhibiting movement to the middle of the funnel where functionality and priorities and values can begin to give direction to the thinking process. The advantage of this more balanced approach is that it may help both the individual and the group to think better - to more fully utilize the resources of the system, whether it be the individual's system or the collective's system.     FP says: “Swirl, but let the swirls find their ways to stream-like currents which are going somewhere. On the other hand, don't rush thoughts into the narrow part of the funnel. Slow down and ease up enough to allow the philosophical thoughts to flow into a form that adds value to everyday existence.”    Interestingly, the art and habit of thinking like energy, as expressed in the above idea of preserving the flowing quality of thought, significantly contributes to the use of Functional Philosophy. At the same time, FP significantly contributes to the art and habit of thinking like energy (TLE). These two concepts or processes form a reciprocal relationship which makes for a good marriage. Stated differently, FP and TLE work well together to help healthfully regulate the thinking process. The end result of this effective regulation is not merely the production of beautiful or valid thoughts, but the production of wise decisions and a more fulfilling life.  

Darrell