Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Philosophical impact

See this article on the 50 most influential living philosophers. We discussed a number of them in the Ning IPS forum as being 'integral,' e.g. Nancy, Habermas, Badiou, Butler, Chalmers, Clark, Harman, Morton, Priest, Singer. Yet none of them are explicit metatheorists, at least in the language used by kennilingus or Meta-Integral. And there are none of the latter on the list. Recalling ITC '15, which is having a greater impact?

We used to belive in science

But that was in ancient antiquity here in the US. Borowitz explains below:

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report)—Historians studying archival photographs from four decades ago have come to the conclusion that the U.S. must have believed in science at some point.

According to the historian Davis Logsdon, who has been sifting through mounds of photographic evidence at the University of Minnesota, the nation apparently once held the view that investing in science and even math could yield accomplishments that would be a source of national pride.

Fox News sexual harassment lawsuit

See this story, headlined "Fox operates like sex-fueled, Playboy mansion-like cult." No surprise that it's a regression to a time when America was great a la Mad Men, hence the need to take their country 'back.'

Searching for the centaur

Following up on the recent posts on metatheory, Wilber has stated that a key way to achieve the integral level is to use AQAL as the integral operating system. That just by so doing it inculcates integral development. As but one example, see this ad for the superhuman operating system, as it is now called.

"But the Superhuman Operating System isn’t simply a map of our early development or a means to better understand yourself, or your spouse, or your boss (although it helps with those things tremendously). The Integral map shows us where we are going, where our emerging potentials are, what they look like, and how we can consciously and intentionally develop them. It shows us not only how to realize our unique greatness but how to actualize it, catalyzing the psychological and spiritual evolution, of ourselves and our planet."

And what I'm saying is that one doesn't need that operating system, or for that matter to use any metatheory, to realize an integral or metasystematic level. As one example, see this Ning IPS thread on Dierkes '15 ITC paper. E.g.:

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Colbert catches up on Trump

He was off for two weeks so he catches up on what Trump has been up to.

Another danger of metatheory

From Esbjorn-Hargens in Metatheory for the Twenty-First Century (Routledge, 2015):

"[...] From time to time I arrived at the provocative idea that integral theory might not be as integral as it thinks or aspires to be. I came to feel that there is a real danger in assuming integral theory has included most of the enduring truths from many domains simply because it arguably has a framework and set of distinctions that could do so. [...] So I began to realize that within integral theory there might be some important pieces of reality not yet integrated, maybe we as integral metatheorists were putting some square metatheoretical pegs in round application holes, and some things just do not always fit neatly into the four quadrants" (102-03).

The danger of metatheory

From Mark Edwards' book Organizational Transformation for Sustainability: An Integral Metatheory (Routledge, 2010):

"There is a danger, however, that when the conservative side of metatheory stops being flexible and creative, the situating of theories
and lenses becomes a process of typing and categorization. The AQAL framework may be particularly prone to this problem because of the prescriptive manner in which it is used. The fundamental task of metatheorizing is not to be able to categorize theories within some preexisting, overarching framework but to ensure that the unique contributions of middle-range theories are accommodated with the metatheory" (208).

Monday, August 22, 2016

Trump now monogamous with Fox

See this story. Now he'll only appear on Fox from now on. Going on other networks he has to answer all sorts of  tough questions. Fox of course will just pitch softballs and suck up to him. I can't wait for his debates with Clinton; she is going to skewer him.

Trump and his followers

This pretty much sums it up.