This sounds similar to the Lingam in this post. To reiterate:
"The net result, at supermind, is that all of the basic rungs or basic structures—and all of the major states—are still in existence, and now fully integrated [….] and is grounded in ever‑present pure Presence […] and all that remains is the freely arising, self-manifesting, self-liberating structures and states of consciousness, which plug the individual into all of the realms (worldviews, domains, states, conditions, and levels) of the entire Kosmos. The Awakened individual’s Kosmic Address includes the Kosmic Address of every phenomenon in the universe."
The difference is, as stated in that post, that of the metaphysics of presence in kennilingus, or the 'know it All'-ness, i.e., an assholonic perspective.
As also stated earlier in this thread, meditative discipline indeed confers expertise in disidentifying with any particular view. But only to a point, since meditative traditions typically frame 'nondual' states within a metaphysics of presence projected ontologically to the ontic itself. Hence we see the Lingam carry this banner from his own traditional training. My arguments are that so-called second tier requires not only state training to experience nonduality but an integral-aperspectival or postmetaphysical acknowledgement of no super Assholon experience and Reality. And that is only the beginning, not the end.
From this post in the Torbert thread (http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/bill-torbert?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A19312):
ReplyDeleteAlso from above one can see that while the higher action-logics in a sense transcend and include the lower ones the latter are not completely subsumed, because there is yet another aspect, this attentional focus,* that keeps up triple-looping around even the highest (as yet), transformational level so that one can consciously choose what level(s), and to what degree(s) and or mixtures, one might enact from among them depending on the unique particulars of a given circumstance.** This sounds much more akin to Gebser's integral-apersectival as I pointed out in the real/false reason thread.
* The intentional attention (which can be distinguished from the other three territories, can experience all three simultaneously...
** The singular event, in Caputo/Derrida terms. See this for example.