Now where Bryant might be akin to something like the MHC is in his endo-relational organizational structure. Recall in TDOO
his distinction between exo- and endo-relations, and its correlation
with intensional and extensional relations in a set (212).
Endo-relations reside in the structural organization of its elements,
the elements themselves not being autonomous entities. Hence the
elements of this set cannot be otherwise; they must be in a relatively
fixed pattern to maintain an entity's autonomy (214).
Bryant uses Bergon's diagram on memory to show how endo-relations are maintained (232).
It is similar to hierarchical nests but
not quite. ABCD shows the unfoldment of an entity over time. A'B'C'D'
show the memory of the entity, which feeds back into its unfoldment and
also allows for future anticipation. But what is unfolded and
remembered-anticipated is how an entity selectively organizes its
structural elements in relation to its environment. This can and does
change in response to these relations, but even when it changes it
maintains a relatively stable endo-relational structure to maintain
autonomy.
Where Bryant didn't go with this, and I do, is in relating this to the Wilber-Combs lattice. As I've laid out in different posts and threads, we might loosely correlate A'B'C'D' with our early development using MHC's stages
with Gebser's, from pre-operational/archaic (D') to primary/magic (C')
to concrete/mythic (B') to abstract-rational (A'). Formal rationality
begins at A, which can be then trained to retrieve through focus and
memory to integrate the previous levels throuch meditative or
contemplative methods.
But here is where it diverges with the
MHC and uses a twist or fold in the W-C lattice. I've claimed that the
MHC continues to get more complicated with it's postformal stages, not
fully remembering and then integrating the previous stages by not taking
into account how the meditative process works. When integrated via
meditation there is a fold or twist in both the W-C lattice and in
Bergon's diagram above. Hence we get something more akin to Levin's bodies
as the integrative process unfolds in reverse order, the prior magic
and mythic becoming the transpersonal and the prior archaic becoming the
ontological.
This relates to the W-C lattice in that
the higher stages are the meditative integration of earlier state-stages
in reverse order: gross-abstract, subtle-magic/mythic, causal-archaic.
These are the third tier in the lattice.
But whereas the lattice continues to differentiate states from stages
in postformal levels a la the MHC, the states and stages undergo a
transformation in the fulcrum of formal operations with
meditation. i.e., they are heretofore more fully integrated and that
differentiation is now replaced a la Gebserian IA awaring and the prior
analysis-synthesis (de-re) above.
Relating this back to Bryant's
endo-relational structure, the endo-relational elements are structurally
organized in a specific and nested way akin to transcend and include.
Wilber senses that there is a difference between enduring and
transitional structures akin to Bryant's endo- and exo-relations. Wilber
even uses Luhmann in ways similar to Bryant but not in this way, since
Wilber's enduring structures are cogntive like pre-formal to concrete to
rational. These would be more akin to Luhmann's independent and
autonomous exo-relations.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.