Gaia: Integral Post-metaphysical Spirituality

Are We Serious About Effecting Cultural Transformation?

http://Moneynot.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:53:39 GMT

In the first thread I ever posted here, I asked if there were any experts, or thoughts about, a type-by-perspective interaction. Unfortunately, much of the initial post was so rambling that only a couple of brave or patient souls chose to muddle through it.
  I would still value any insights about type-by-perspective interactions, but my larger concern and interest is "How do we best go about shaping the world to make it better, in terms of maximixing human potential and human goodness/virtue?"
  My first thread contained a comment in which I proposed that gift assessment (and by that, I mean something like assessment of "natural apptitudes" and related "personality dispositions", sometimes called "types") would seem more important than perspectives, per se, when it comes to forming an optimal cooperative/collective.
   Once the "gifts" are found, the next step is to find a niche for each of those gifts. I believe that if we develop a system of knowing and using the gifts, much of the vertical enlightenment that Wilber mentions will more-or-less occur as a matter of course.
   If I am wrong, please chime in and help me challenge the assumption. It is not just a hypothetical exercise - not if we are serious about worthwhile cultural transformation.
   The vehicle that I propose would be the most effective in organizing and integrating the "gifts" would be a model community. If it works there, it can be replicated throughout the larger social system, or, in business terms, the model community can be used as a "benchmark".
  Below is my defense of the small-community-level approach to cultural transformation. What do you think? Concerning both the "gift" approach and the model community approach? Are these two ideas something we would need to impliment if, in fact, we are serious about effecting Cultural Transformation?

  Excerpt from Intro section of The Marketing of Virtue: Allsberg Rising:
   One objective characteristic of this book which might set it apart from other writings or discussions about the topic of culture-creating is the fact that The Marketing of Virtue:
Allsberg Rising devotes a great deal of attention toward blueprinting a fictional model community, at the level of a small town. This characteristic appears to give the book an
advantage over many of the broader, more general, discourses about cultural transformation. On the other hand, many other discussions have leaned the opposite direction, toward the (level of the) individual, with a "Let there be peace on earth, and let it
begin with me" line of thought.

As compared to these more general or more narrow approaches, the current offering seems like the bed in the Goldilocks fable, in that it feels "just right" for investigating the
most effective means of implementing the envisioned social changes; this, despite the fact that it is only a virtual community, a drawing-board version of a model community.

During my blogging participations online, I rarely encounter discussions geared toward making a scaled-down version of the world or of a nation, in the form of a model town. Yet, the hallmark of scientific investigation is to start small, with simulated realities called "experiments", and then see if the observations on that smaller, artificially-controlled, scale
can be generalized to larger and/or more naturally occurring circumstances. This is the reason I focussed on a model community. The book is intended to be a plan for a
sociocultural experiment.

Darrell

Re: Is there an atheist schism?

http://perfectcircle.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:28:02 GMT

Being a computer technologist for over twenty years, I appreciate your analogies of computer technology and life. But check where it may lead.
Your post here:
“After 6 or 7 or 8 … such experiences, one starts to get the feeling that perhaps this notion of “truth” aint what it's all about.”

This statement is good, it clarifies
For that’s the key. There is an old aphorism:
“Knowledge without guidance will lead to hell”
Everything [ even truth] has to be sought in a context for the fullest benifit to the organism

For example: Buddha sought truth in the context of suffering, or understanding life and death. It is that context that was his guide, without he would have been seeking pointless information and never had that base to anchor him.

Unfortunately modern science doesnt understand that.

Take Einstein for instance.
He trusted modern science and it burned him [ KNOWLEDGE WITHOUT GUIDANCE WILL LEAD TO HELL]
He contributed the discovery of relativity - and E=MC2 , with an open heart to contribute to science. But lo and behold, what did they do with it.
Nuclear weapons!
Einstein was sorry he ever wrote a letter to FDR advocating creating the atomic bomb.

We have knowledge and all the technology but not the guidance for it, therfore we have erected the means to our own end.
Or you might put it Ted, using your computer lanquage: we have a software glitch!
But the fire of the hardware doesnt care, it acts on its own intellegence, doesnt it.

Software = our perverted nature that leads to, somthing like a nuclear bomb. Or the reality that we have to create it to survive.

Hardware=our actions, or Karma, Weapons of mass destruction, etc....

Solution = rectify the software, remove the glitches [ inner nature]

What else is there

The shadow of the Dalai Lama

http://theurj.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:00:17 GMT

From "The shadow of the Dalai Lama":

But then, out of the blue in 1996, dark clouds began to gather over the bright aura of the "living Buddha". Charges, accusations, suspicions and incriminations began to appear in the media. At first on the Internet, then in isolated press reports, and finally in television programs (see Panorama on ARD Heidelberg, Germany, November 20, 1997 and 10 vor 10 on SF1 Switzerland, January 5-8, 1998). At the same time as the Hollywood stars were erecting a media altar for their Tibetan god, the public attacks on the Dalai Lama were becoming more frequent. Even for a mundane politician the catalogue of accusations would have been embarrassing, but for a divine king they were horrendous. And on this occasion the attacks came not from the Chinese camp but from within his own ranks.

The list of accusations goes on and on. Here we present some of the charges raised against the Kundun since 1997 which we treat in more detail in this study: association with the Japanese "poison gas guru" Shoko Asahara (the "Asahara affair"); violent suppression of the free expression of religion within his own ranks (the "Shugden affair"); the splitting of the other Buddhist sects (the "Karmapa affair"); frequent sexual abuse of women by Tibetan lamas ("Sogyal Rinpoche and June Campbell affairs");intolerance towards homosexuals; involvement in a ritual murder (the events of February 4, 1997); links to National Socialism (the "Heinrich Harrer affair"); nepotism (the "Yabshi affair"); selling out his own country to the Chinese(renunciation of Tibetan sovereignty); political lies; rewriting history; and much more.

Re: Is there an atheist schism?

http://tlcoriginals.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:45:35 GMT

sounds like enactiv...ism...gol*

It seems to me that we create it. Not we in the sense of an ego we, but we in the sense of the self expression of all the humanity that has gone into producing the I that is me; and through that I is an active co-creator with all that is.

but i don't think it is the 'I'...the 'I' is just a focal point of awareness...

and maybe it should be called...IN-Act-LIVE-WEISM...

LOL...

Re: Is there an atheist schism?

http://tedhoward.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:41:10 GMT

Hi Zak,

Perhaps it is simply a language barrier, and perhaps we agree about almost everything.

The nuances of words from a different tradition.

It seems to me that there are many such "methodologies" that lead to the same experiential realm, and that once people experience that particular experiential realm, they want to communicate it to others.
In that sense, I can completely understand the sense of faith that is required.

It is exactly that sense of faith that a scientist has that there is a "natural" explanation for everything, even if we don't know it yet.

The faith is, in a sense, the same, and leads one to successive levels of paradox, where the only way to resolve the paradox is to break one of the "truths" that lead to that paradox - and enter a new realm of conception and being.

I have experiential knowledge of ways of being that, like the experiences of Buddha and Rumi cannot be directly communicated.

For me, I have studied many disciplines, many religions, and I can see powerful paradigms and powerful experiences in each of them; and I retain, as an underlying framework, a basic scientific approach, of designing experiment, testing, evaluating alternative hypotheses - and this approach (as distinct from any "truth"s it revealed) has transitioned with me at each level.

I can agree in a sense, that there are higher "vibrational energies", and we have a modern name for such things - we call it "software" (as distinct from hardware - ie something you can kick).

Modern computer software development is on average about 7 levels of abstraction removed from the hardware on which it is running, and it requires hardware. When I built my first computer I drilled the motherboard myself, and soldered in all the chips - all TTL logic. My only input device was a hexadecimal keypad. Computers have come a long way in the last 30 years. They have a long way to go to match the biological computers in our heads, and if current trends continue, that will happen within this century by even the most doubting critic. The optimists say within 15 years, I'm in the camp that says our holographic memory is much more complex than that, and for serial devices to match it will take most of this century. The other approach is, of course, to go holographic. Which could see them surpass us within 30 years.

Irrespective of that, yes, every entity must for itself climb the ladder, and at each new level, see the ladder that got it there for the fiction it is.

After 6 or 7 or 8 ... such experiences, one starts to get the feeling that perhaps this notion of "truth" aint what it's all about.

Perhaps there are just too many infinities.

Perhaps there are other things that a being might be.

Perhaps there is love, dance, bliss.

Perhaps in that, can exist a diversity unimaginable at any level, always beyond.

Perhaps a caring and active tolerance is always the appropriate response (from a simple survival and self interest perspective).

Perhaps our difference lies in the sense of "access" in your last sentence.

It seems to me that we create it. Not we in the sense of an ego we, but we in the sense of the self expression of all the humanity that has gone into producing the I that is me; and through that I is an active co-creator with all that is.

It is so very difficult to communicate with tools from a different realm - parable within parable - all in a word.

Re: Type by Perspective Interaction, Any Experts on That?

http://Moneynot.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:35:44 GMT

Mary, Those were beautifully concieved and written responses to my impressions about the status of the church and deep spirituality.

This comment you made seemed to support my claim about economics as a contributing factor to spiritual superficiality:
   "In terms of economics, if I'm understanding you correctly – IMO a “sales” approach won't really work for deeper levels of spirituality, at least not in the long run. The shallower versions of “amber” spirituality tend to offer guaranteed, instant salvation, but deeper levels of spirituality eventually bring people to dark nights / crises of faith, the stripping away of certain illusions, etc., – deep and beautiful and humbling, but not necessarily comfortable, not easily “saleable.” Folks step onto that path through attraction or interior invitation, not proselytization."

Unless those willing to jump into mystery and dark nights of the soul have awfully deep pockets, like wealthy folks able to pay lots of money for Lamborgini cars or for customized busses (like the music stars have) or yaughts, etc. then I don't see much incentive for churches in general to go deeper. The money is in the quick salvation. If the church is to participate successfully in the market (in which it is competing, like it or not, even though the "payments" for spiritual services are made in free will offerings rather than set prices) then it will "grow" out more than deeply in.
   The one exception perhaps being a marketplace positioning that anticipates the long run (as in Wilber's and Keating's The Future of Christianity) benifits of an advanced product - the one that will bring us to a place that will be most valued on down the group-evolution "road". This long-range investment approach would really work later on, once the culture catches up.
   It may even work OK now, by appealing to the newly emerging social group called the Cultural Creatives. They read more, and have a bit more money than the Traditionals.
   But for this to sell enough to support a restructuring of the church as a whole, we would, I think, have to attract large numbers of Traditionals over to the CCs, by, perhaps using what I call "STOCK" - Secular Translations Of Christian Knowledge. Except it would work more like Christian Translations of Secular Spiritual Knowledge (Spiritual truths of the Cultural Creatives - true Moderns don't seem as invested in spirituality as a major focus).
   If the Traditionals can see, sense, and can be reassured, that the new spiritual insights closely match many of the core principles of "old time religion" (but not so amber), then the traditional church could really work like the conveyor belt that Wilber thinks it can be.
   I have relatives who attend a fairly conservative church, and who showed me a theological video by a young man named "Bell", Ralph Bell?, who was talking about God as energy or God as process. It seemed quite deep to me, and I was surprised that the conservative group (or at least some of its members, my relatives) accepted it. This is encouraging as regards the progression toward depth that you and I and many others long for and would like to promote in the church.
   My hunch is that for critical mass to occur in terms of real restructuring for this new form of (beyond amber) spirituality, the church, or significant factions thereof, will have to devote itself to "culturally creating" in ways similar to the model community that I wrote about in my book, The Marketing of Virtue: Allsberg Rising. The Church will have to Transcend and Include the world, rather than settling for its (the church's) current "fixation" that resulted from the church's swallowing the lie, or misunderstanding, of the Line/Level Fallacy that Wilber articulates in his book Integral Spirituality.
   See the following two links for a feel of my book which advocates a model community approach to de-fixating and to amping up the conveyor belt. The links are the intro section and first chapter: Introduction , Chapter 1

Thanks, Darrell

Re: great french wines

http://tlcoriginals.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:14:15 GMT

ub bella...gol*

Re: Transpersonal Psychology

http://theurj.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:14:10 GMT

Balder, did you ever finish reading the above article in JTP? If so, please provide your summary, thanks.

Re: Is there an atheist schism?

http://tedhoward.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:04:00 GMT

Hi Vali

Another Yes And
Yes possibility space is a fiction in a sense, the sense that it hasn't happened yet. And it is what we have to work with.

As I conceive it, it is a space of all the possible "what if"s that could become real.
Any single human mind can only conceive of a very tiny part of this infinite "space".
What many people do not acknowledge is that there is another infinite realm of the imaginable and not doable in reality.

We can work out theories and practices to distinguish which "space" any particular conjecture belongs to, and the ultimate test is reality itself.

So I think I agree with you, and there is a sense in which nothing really big happens unless someone envisages a goal and is certain that some path exists to reach it, then sets about choosing an appropriate path, supported by appropriate people and technologies.

In a sense there are probably an infinite number of possible paths to anything in the "doable", and in another sense, there will be a limited class that fit within the available budgets of time,energy and resources.

Re: great french wines

http://poesia.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:42:55 GMT

What Star doesn´t like our french peasants 1000 years old dialects?
hahhahahahha

Re: great french wines

http://tlcoriginals.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:32:53 GMT

good god almighty...time for an AA meeting 4real...gol*

Re: great french wines

http://poesia.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:26:00 GMT

Aie aie aie ouille ouille
Thnx monsieur Blader
We frogs are always perverting everything:

A la carte tonight
Canapé d´huitres Levinas
Souci de soi foucaldien servi avec pommes vapeur difference
Habitus grillé aioli
Profiterolles milles plateaux
Château-Lacan stade du Miroir 1954

C´est la vie!
hahhahha

Re: great french wines

http://poesia.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:27:24 GMT

Cré vin guieu d´bonsouaire.
ce ti pa ben une misérr d´entendr des gens parlé d´ la sorte, O bonne mère.
de dieu, tl´en verrai ben alle se fair foutr chel diable, ce bougrr de sagouin
reprendrai ben un pti perroque ben vert, Riton.
et on peu plu fumé z´aujordui
dan le temps...... ô bonn mère
z´aurai ben bezoin d´une bonn p´tit guerr tou ces jônes

Re: great french wines

http://brucealderman.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:12:50 GMT

Oops! X, maybe there's a language barrier here? I was making a joke, not trying to actually moderate. In calling Perle what you did, I thought you were being nice and going easy on him!

Re: great french wines

http://poesia.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:06:36 GMT

Jesus, now we are gettting very close to a psychological Gulag world here. I will use satin glove next time if I am to express any sort of discontentment.
Quelle planète, ô Seigneur

Re: Is there an atheist schism?

http://perfectcircle.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:34:24 GMT

In reality, all is matter. Even spirit [very refined energy] is matter. That’s not the question.All infinite/Finite is only a merging of ones world [the farthest point of density in that world] to the gateway or wormhole to another world, where the density of matter in more refined vibrationally speaking.
Infinite is the place where there is no end to states of consciousness, that relate to a point of reference.

That finite and infinite is what is relevant to human’s experience, the only finite and infinite that really matters to us.

Re: Is there an atheist schism?

http://perfectcircle.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:22:33 GMT

Ted
Interesting, all you mentioned above this is not in conflict with what I enumerated in my post.

Just a post-modern lanquage, and mine at times has mystical flavored lanquage to it.
　
Consideer this though:
　
All post- modern archetypes , there are many here; make the mistake of not understanding that they yourselves are borrowing wisdom from others [ to varying degrees depending on the individual] that have gone before you. Granted you may acknowledge intellectually and heart wise your debt to others, but generally that’s as far as it goes.

Yet a religious or mystical system merely acknowledges teachers like a Rumi, Ibn Arabi, Pathagoras, Gurlejj, even a guy like Wilber in a sense, as the focal point for there own rise to real knowledge, where they [ the above mentioned] have arrived at something and therefore can hand it down to sincere seekers in a mystical sense.

　
Yet people Like Rumi, Buddha, and many others,
whom you do admire, claim they have arrived at a system of self understanding and methodology that leads to higher awareness. But they do ask that one accepts their outer garment of in Rumis case, Islamic mysticism, as in Buddhas, early Buddhism, as the external kernel of something that has inside it a deeper and more lasting reality behind it.　
The aphorism; "The phenomenal is a bridge to the real" is the key to what I am saying.
　
To merge phenomenal activity into sacred action with a inner yearning to higher knowledge under the guidance, individual or collective, of one who has gone before is as legitimate as any scientific methodology.
For those who have no belief in higher awareness, or that humans can access it, then they just won’t have the faith to carry out the actions to succeed, or they just wont do it.
Bottom line, it is a question of faith. Not religious faith, but faith in the sense that there is higher awareness, and humans can access it within time and place.
Remember in this pursuit, there is success and failure, and success is very rare.

Re: great french wines

http://brucealderman.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:20:28 GMT

Sorry to be late, Gaddy. I just woke up.

Let's see... X calling Perle an arrogant dickhead.

I'd call that pulling punches.

Official assessment: no further action needed.

Re: great french wines

http://Gadfly.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:49:01 GMT

Hey he called Richard Perle an arrogant dickhead !!!! Bo hoo bo hoo meanie meanie meanie very bad man very bad man.

My feelings are hurt alert ! Where's the moderators jumping into action ?

Gaddy :-)

Re: Is there an atheist schism?

http://Ti-Shu.gaia.com — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:49:27 GMT

Darrel,
I love the way you focus on the verb (thinking like "energy"), instead of the noun (thinking like "matter") and that wonderfully "blasphemous" poem made me laugh :-D ! At the end of the day the bumble bee didn't ask for permition to fly before there was a consistent theory explaining how it is possible. Reality is what it is, another way of saying that is "I am what I am" (from the Bible) or "what survives, survives" (theory of evolution). We can't change what "is", only our understanding of it and what we "do" with it.