"This paper explores the fruitfulness of Edgar Morin’s articulation of the principles of complex thinking for contemporary reflection on the nature of consciousness. Following some preliminary remarks on Teilhard de Chardin’s understanding of the connection between complexity and consciousness, I turn to Ken Wilber’s 'all quadrant, all level' assessment of the field of consciousness studies. While acknowledgingthe value of Wilber’s assessment, I argue that his hermeneutic principles of 'holarchical integration' (which he adapts from Koestler’s notion of the 'holon') and 'simultracking' fall short in accounting for the complex character of the relation between 'levels’ (e.g., brain and mind) and 'quadrants' (e.g., individual and culture). Such an accounting is possible, however, when informed by the notions of recursivity,dialogic, and holography--Morin’s three principles of complex thinking. I conclude with the suggestion that hese principles can be taken as expressions, in the cognitive mode, of the next main phase in the evolution of consciousness following the full deployment of formal operational thinking (Piaget), a phase variously described as post-formal, 'integral consciousness' (Gebser), and 'vision logic' (Wilber)."
Saturday, November 9, 2013
Sean Kelly on Morin
In keeping with recent posts on transformality also see this article by Sean Kelly, "From the complexity of consciousness to the consciousness of complexity." The abstract:
"This paper explores the fruitfulness of Edgar Morin’s articulation of the principles of complex thinking for contemporary reflection on the nature of consciousness. Following some preliminary remarks on Teilhard de Chardin’s understanding of the connection between complexity and consciousness, I turn to Ken Wilber’s 'all quadrant, all level' assessment of the field of consciousness studies. While acknowledgingthe value of Wilber’s assessment, I argue that his hermeneutic principles of 'holarchical integration' (which he adapts from Koestler’s notion of the 'holon') and 'simultracking' fall short in accounting for the complex character of the relation between 'levels’ (e.g., brain and mind) and 'quadrants' (e.g., individual and culture). Such an accounting is possible, however, when informed by the notions of recursivity,dialogic, and holography--Morin’s three principles of complex thinking. I conclude with the suggestion that hese principles can be taken as expressions, in the cognitive mode, of the next main phase in the evolution of consciousness following the full deployment of formal operational thinking (Piaget), a phase variously described as post-formal, 'integral consciousness' (Gebser), and 'vision logic' (Wilber)."
"This paper explores the fruitfulness of Edgar Morin’s articulation of the principles of complex thinking for contemporary reflection on the nature of consciousness. Following some preliminary remarks on Teilhard de Chardin’s understanding of the connection between complexity and consciousness, I turn to Ken Wilber’s 'all quadrant, all level' assessment of the field of consciousness studies. While acknowledgingthe value of Wilber’s assessment, I argue that his hermeneutic principles of 'holarchical integration' (which he adapts from Koestler’s notion of the 'holon') and 'simultracking' fall short in accounting for the complex character of the relation between 'levels’ (e.g., brain and mind) and 'quadrants' (e.g., individual and culture). Such an accounting is possible, however, when informed by the notions of recursivity,dialogic, and holography--Morin’s three principles of complex thinking. I conclude with the suggestion that hese principles can be taken as expressions, in the cognitive mode, of the next main phase in the evolution of consciousness following the full deployment of formal operational thinking (Piaget), a phase variously described as post-formal, 'integral consciousness' (Gebser), and 'vision logic' (Wilber)."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In the above article we see the recurrent themes of this thread. For example, the relationship of two poles in a dichotomy is dialogic rather than dialectic, i.e., they retain their autonomy yet are inseparable from the other yet are not subsumed in a higher synthesis. Which of course applies to the sort of mereology one employs, holographic (Morin) or holarchical (Wilber). Morin is much more aligned with the strange mereology of OOO. Kelly sees Wilber's variety as idealistic, a criticism I've expounded at length. And Kelly, like me, thinks that all this plays into how we interpret what an integral 'level' even means.
ReplyDelete