Sunday, February 9, 2014

Pascal's indecent proposal for Wilber

See it in this IPS thread. I disagree with it and responded as follows:

I'm with Balder on this one. AQAL is lacking and needs to not only be compared with but integrated into (i.e. included and transcended) other integral and meta models. I'm with Edwards that there is no one meta-model that can handle it all and to presume such is part and parcel of a metaphysical paradigm, hegemonic and inclusivist to boot. Edwards has done extensive research into a host of other meta-models that take into consideration things utterly missing from AQAL, yet he finds the latter useful and includes it in the mix. Or to apply kennilingus to AQAL, it is (somewhat) true but (definitely) partial.

And to try to give 5 more points for Wilber to kennilinguinize is fruitless, imo. I've been at this a long time, from the very beginning of I-I, and the Lingam has faced a lot of criticisms and suggestions. I've seen how he handles both over the years and by his responses and he's mostly sticking to his (Wyatt Earpy) guns and not about to change his mind. Which is ok, but I'm no longer much interested in his views or his model, particularly. I still include some of it but there are far more interesting things emerging in this field and his role is no longer significant. To the contrary, it often gets in the way of new developments.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.