Continuing from this post, and in response to some FB posts:
I
prefer Mark Edwards' notions on eros/agape and agency/communion. See
his "Through AQAL Eyes" series at integral world for his distinctions.
For him eros/agape is the ascending/descending currents in each line in
each quadrant. But the individual and social have their own holons, each
with 4 quadrants and 8 zones, each with both agency and communion
aspects on the interior and exterior. So he too makes the same
distinctions you mention David, but expands it in the above way.
In
terms of ascending and descending currents though (eros/agape), he sees
them as occurring simultaneously, where when any particular line in any
quadrant ascends or evolves it also descends or involves by the
integrations of the junior levels. Granted Wilber says this too, but he
also has the 'universal' involution/evolution holon of everything
theme,* where one happens first, then the other. It is the latter
metaphysical frame which tends to infect the more practical frame of
transcend and include, or eros/agape dynamic, for each level. Hence that
infection expresses in what several others are noticing, the Hegelian
dialectical notion of subsumption of the lower in the higher.
Wilber
addresses this in his differentiation for ground value and relative
value, the former showing we are all equal in the eyes of Spirit, but
the latter showing the difference in level value. But again, his
metaphysical Spiritual dimension (highest levels) tends toward the
subsumption of All in Spirit, which in various places he defines in the
traditional modes of his favored shentong Buddhist tradition. In
practice this doesn't always or even usually lead to practical
expressions of agape-loving the ground value of each holonic level. Or
at least it is tainted by a superiority complex with hints of disdain or
even disgust, e.g., the green meme.
*
Also see Edwards' criticism on the holon of everything (aka assholon),
how it reifies involution/evolution in this metaphysical way. This is a
common criticism of the popo postmetaphysicists. Or as I now call it,
paraphysics, a metaphysics of the between (or LP's adjacency).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.