b-scan
October 2008 
B-SCAN with Steve Pavlina (Part 3)
Posted on May 3rd, 2007
by 
~C4Chaos
~C4Chaos
B-SCAN is a series of interviews with bloggers who are “consciously” aware of the impact of blogging on self, culture, and nature, integrally informed or otherwise.
Here is the third and final part of the Pavlina interview. To read the first and second parts, click here.
I would like to thank Steve Pavlina for his time and patience on this interview. For more of his writings and podcasts, check out StevePavlina.com. If you want to ask him questions or engage him in a discussion, his forum is free and open to all.
B-SCAN with Steve Pavlina: Part 3: On Psychic Development, Passion and Purpose
*** For a mainstream personality on the internet you don't hesitate discussing controversial and esoteric topics like psychic development. How did you get started with that? Care to share your experiences?
I write about the Law of Attraction, psychic development, and many other topics because they’re all part of the human experience. If a particular idea can stimulate enriching growth experiences for my readers, I’m open to covering it in depth. If some people take issue with that, good for them – it means the ideas are challenging them.
In case you haven’t noticed, these topics are very much mainstream now. Psychics have their own TV shows, and The Secret is a huge hit. Granted they may be controversial, but you can hardly say they’re obscure or unpopular unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade.
One of the reasons my site gets so much traffic is that I’m willing to write about the topics that lots of people are curious about, but which many are hesitant, fearful, or unqualified to write about. Some people think I’m taking a huge risk in covering such topics or that I’ll damage my reputation somehow. But the whole concept of a reputation is pure egoic fantasy anyway – it’s what we imagine others are thinking about us, when in reality people are generally far more concerned about themselves.
Having lived with Erin for 13 years, I’ve had some pretty amazing experiences with respect to lucid dreaming, astral projection, psychic-intuitive impressions, and communication with non-physical entities. I don’t pretend to understand it all, nor does Erin, but with each passing year, more of the puzzle is revealed. It’s been an absolutely fascinating ride, and I wouldn’t trade it for anything.
Nevertheless, I can totally relate to people who think all psychic stuff is nonsense. That’s how I was for most of my life. Erin was one of the catalysts that unlocked the door. Anyone who hangs out with her for any length of time will be in for a wild adventure. During her teen years, overnight guests used to flee her house in terror in the middle of the night. Sometimes the mischievous entities that hung around her would take their fun a bit too far.
As my own experiences began to pile up, I eventually decided to embrace them instead of trying to deny them. As a first step I learned lucid dreaming, followed shortly by astral projection. Then I worked on developing my intuition and channeling abilities. Some of my articles are actually channeled from non-physical entities (an example can be found at http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2007/02/desire/).
If I hadn’t experienced all of this for myself, I’d be one of those people saying it’s all bunk. Perhaps the most difficult part of having such experiences is that it turns your worldview upside down. At a conference last year, I actually walked up to a couple I’d never met and channeled a lengthy message from their deceased uncle – I could see him standing beside them. His message included plenty of validation and brought them to tears. It’s one thing to witness something like that from a distance and try to analyze it. It’s quite another thing to be the one who actually sees the dead person and can hear his thoughts loud and clear. Can you imagine what such an experience does to a person? It’s no wonder people resist this sort of thing, especially when they’ve become attached to a fixed perspective that would crumble under its weight.
Erin’s psychic and mediumship skills are far more developed than my own, but I’m certainly no slouch. In fact, I often channel messages for her. I opted not to pursue the path of becoming a professional psychic, but I’ll gladly admit to receiving plenty of non-physical assistance in my work. (This is pretty good copy-past-and-rant bait, wouldn’t you agree?)
The integral model’s inability to intelligently address conscious psychic development without labeling it delusional is unfortunate. It’s good to bypass phony magical thinking, but witch hunting isn’t the answer. Psychic development is a skill to be developed like any other. Just because you lack competence in this area doesn’t mean it’s an invalid line of study. It also doesn’t mean it’s pre-rational to apply what actually works for you.
I think integral enthusiasts should feel free to add a psychic development line to their Integral Life Practice. Don’t be put off by the negative bias of the integral community. Just because they’re weak in this area doesn’t mean you have to inherit that weakness.
Some specific practices I’d recommend include automatic writing, channeling, “tuning in” meditations where you attempt to contact other entities, intention-manifestation, and making written predictions about the future.
One practice I find especially rewarding is something I call temporal meditation. I meditate in a specific place at two different times, usually separated by about a week, and I try to send messages back and forth between one time period and the other. Once I tried it with a gap of a full year. I’ll have to write an article about that someday, since it’s an amazing tool to play with. You can also try to create a bridge between more than two meditation sessions, linking to your past and future selves at different points along the time continuum. This opens a channel whereby any one of your time-bound selves can send messages forward or backward through time, and at any point you can attempt to tap into those messages. Think of it like temporal voicemail. When I tune into the past, I listen for questions from my past selves and send them the best answers I can. When I tune into the future, I send my future selves questions and then listen for their answers. Interestingly enough, over the past several years, I’ve sent many positive messages of courage and faith to my 19-year self while he was in that jail cell. I must caution that if you get started with temporal meditation, you’ll never think of time the same way again.
It’s regrettable that integral enthusiasts deny themselves such enriching experiences because of their fear of being labeled as gullible. Look beyond the fear and social pressure of those who shout, “Thou art purple – Begone, wretched mage.” Sure, some people will reject you for experimenting with belief systems they dislike, but let them keep their opinions as their own, and explore the options for yourself. Learn to integrate new belief systems into your arsenal instead of rejecting them out of hand.
Much of the time I write on these sorts of topics, a few bloggers will assert it as concrete proof that I’m deluded, writing lengthy rants to explain precisely why I’m wrong and where I’ve gone off the deep end. In so doing they generously refer their visitors to my site to see for themselves. When many of those visitors arrive at my site, they’ll often read the article in question and form a rather different opinion, many becoming long-term subscribers to my blog. So I’ll gladly concede victory in the righteousness game, since my target is effectiveness.
*** What's next for Steve Pavlina? What other things do you want to accomplish?
I want to infect as many people as possible with the message of conscious growth. I believe that’s the singular best thing I can do for this planet as well as the best thing I can do for myself.
Unlike the integral approach, however, I do not assert that the ultimate in conscious development is the adoption of a fixed belief system. I think it’s more valuable to teach people to view reality through multiple lenses. So I plan to continue offering up a variety of perspectives, but I don’t encourage people to fix their gaze on only one.
This message is what’s important, and I’m willing to embrace whatever media serve it best. Blogging and podcasting have been very effective, but the next major step is to cultivate an offline communication channel. Most likely I’ll manage that by writing books and offering workshops and seminars. I’d especially like to travel the world and connect with more people face-to-face, instead of just bringing the world to my web server. Localizing my site’s content into other languages will be another major undertaking.
*** What's your ultimate goal in life?
This may sound strange, but I’d have to say that my ultimate goal is to be right where I am, being exactly who I am, doing exactly what I’m doing.
As stated on my web site, my purpose is:
to live consciously and courageously;
to enjoy, increase, and share peace, energy, passion, and abundance;
to resonate with love and compassion;
to awaken the great spirits within others;
and to fully embrace this present moment.
My ultimate goal is the realization of this purpose, but that realization is something that only occurs in the present. So this goal isn’t a position to be reached at some future time; it’s a state of consciousness to be experienced right now.
I think everyone’s ultimate purpose is to discover who we are and then to broadcast that beingness outward. This not only serves our own needs, but it also provides tremendous value to others. Sharing your very best with the world is a deeply rewarding and joyful experience. Helping people adopt the mindset of conscious growth is, I believe, the best thing I can do right now to serve the needs of this planet.
*** What would you advise people who want to follow their passion?
Fear makes us believe we’re something less than the great spirits we truly are. It sends us spiraling into a life of unconsciousness. Oddly enough our greatest fear is the very spirit that resides within us. We fear death because it reminds us of our immortality. We fear embarrassment and humiliation because they expose the magnitude of our message. We fear failure because it reveals our ultimate success. We are like gods that have used our power to command, “Let me be powerless.” Human life is a process of understanding and embracing the truth that we are God, that we’ve always been God, and that we always will be God. The closer you come to realizing this, the more passion will course through your veins.
Identify your greatest fear. Then summon the courage to turn and face it, however long it takes.
In your search for ultimate truth, let effectiveness be your guide. Never become so fixed in your position that you close your mind to alternative ways of thinking. Keep exposing yourself to new perspectives. Integrate what works for you, and dump what doesn’t. Over time your decisions should gradually become more accurate, and your functional results should trend upwards.
Lastly, be wary of taking advice from overweight doctors, indebted accountants, or frustrated philosophers. ☺
Access: Public
Oh well. Steve clearly has absolutely no idea what integral is all about. And I have a suspicion he may not really know what psi is about either. I mean, come on. He met his wife and all of a sudden decided he wanted to teach himself to be a psychic, too? Pardon me if I'm skeptical.
Anyway, I do appreciate that he qualified his description of channeling in the blog entry he referenced with this:
“…just think of it as a conversation with a projection of your subconscious mind”
but the text that follows sounds more like the product of an active imagination than channeling. At best, I'd say it's something like Genpo Roshi's Big Mind process, except that the whole conversation seems geared to supporting his belief in the Law of Attraction.
And temporal meditation? How exactly does he know that that's working? Sending a message to a future self? That's called “memory”, Steve. And sending messages to his past selves? Well, whatever…
Anyway, research has shown that it's no longer a question of whether or not psi exists, but we obviously need to be careful about not making exaggerated claims that can just as easily be explained by less… well, exotic explanations.
Thanks again for the interview, C. Very… insightful. ;-)
Peace,
Grey
I appreciated the interview. Often on Zaadz, I feel a bit uncomfortable talking about my experiences due to the heavy integral presence and fear of being labeled “pre-rational.” It's nice to see someone encouraging me not to worry so much about the opinions of others.
(p.s. I'm not suggesting that all the integral theorists I've met are pompous jerks, just that the consideration is usually in the back of my mind)
*Crossposted from comments section in Part 2.
I resonate with Julian's comments above. I will add a point, though. It's great to see people share their own takes on the issue of newage junk, but as we move into the realm of mature critical thought, sheer pluralism of opinions and everyone's right to defere, defy and differ does bring us any closer to clarity. There remains the question of depth and integrity and truthfulness, even when statements are not formulated perfectly, and vice versa. It's a question of degree, but a crucial one.
It may not be so obvious, but Pavlina has no grasp of the integral approach, since he uses technical concepts in a way he finds useful to establish his own agenda. “Integrally informed” does not mean one has heard of integral theory or read several articles. (Just as an example, refering to the elements of integral theory as a “decomposition of human development” is outright ridiculous. Arguing for a relational vs. hierarchical model is quite beside the point. Claiming integral theory discards “psychic development” IS delusional. ) There are too many instances, and it's of inferior relevance to my main point. As he said himself, “As far as integral theory itself goes, I was largely disappointed with it.” No wonder.
My point: I cannot symphatize with anything Pavlina said in this interview, because he appears incapable of admitting the accuracy of many objections raised (by Julian and Stuart, among others). While many arguments may be left aside for additional inspection, several main arguments can only be recognized as valid and therefore require some sort of acknowledgement and correction of his recent statements, views etc. Keeping firm to one's own views does not make them real, right or true (so much of “subjective” reality). Pavlina's argument that many among “integral enthusiasts” (!) are investing a great deal of energy into being right or proving themselves right or whatever is silly and profoundly flawed: anyone passionate about thought and philosophy is deeply into finding the truth (actually at least two truths), and they better be. Such people, however, readily and happily admit their mistakes. There's nothing Pavlina finds himself incapable of commenting, even when it's quite clear he has no serious competence or even knowledge (e.g. meditation, shadow work , spiritual practice etc.). The degree of self-aggrandizement and psychic inflation sometimes becomes just a bit too much.
Finally, “taking sides” may sound ugly to some, but not taking the side of meaning (not words) and purpose (not goals) and values (not “value”) often has unwanted consequences. After interviewing Pavlina, ~C4 may need to redefine what “consciously” aware in the description of B-SCAN stands for. To endorse Pavlina is to participate in serious confusion. Just my two cents.
Hokai
Its unfortunate that Pavlina thinks that the integral community denies psychic phenomena. I have never disputed that non-ordinary experiences can happen, and I have never attempted to tell people that they didn't experience what they experienced. By themselves, they don't constitute magical thinking, but how you understand them and the mental model you have of them can be. Many spiritual traditions are aware of them, but specifically instruct students to avoid getting caught up in them because they are a distraction from the true spiritual path. But for Pavlina, they are the true spiritual path. I'm sure this is very effective – but for what? Who is it that is trying to be effective? And to what end? These are all questions that would arise in a spiritual path.
Effectiveness seems to be Pavlina's trump card, and he pulls it out whenever he's in a corner to justify his monological 1st person perspective on everything. But that's exactly what we are saying is wrong with his take on VATech. There are things that matter beyond your own personal effectiveness. Pavlina's response is, “Well, I don't care about that because it makes me less effective.” In evaluating the truth of a particular worldview, there are more things at stake than just effectiveness.
He focuses on the personal development lens to the exclusion of other priorities and other viewpoints, but to take an integral perspective, we expect him to be able to view reality through multiple lenses simultaneously. And not only be capable of doing it, but to acknowledge that, in principle, any valid information from any valid lens is valued equally. Pavlina is very clearly about his belief that the subjective system is prior to (and does not co-arise with) the objective system, that the objective belief system is inferior because its supposedly a fear based system, there's some kind of social pressure to accept it, etc. He is tactful about it, and I don't think its offensive for him to say that, I just think he's not doing enough to include other viewpoints.
Finally, we all believe what we believe, and perhaps not many minds were changed, but to take a more-flexible-than-thou attitude is a defense mechanism, and its a bit hypocritical for Pavlina to take us to task for ranking people when he has no problem ranking himself on the basis that he doesn't rank people.
Its unfortunate that Pavlina thinks that the integral community denies psychic phenomena. I have never disputed that non-ordinary experiences can happen, and I have never attempted to tell people that they didn't experience what they experienced. By themselves, they don't constitute magical thinking, but how you understand them and the mental model you have of them can be.
MrTeacup, this has not been my experience of Integral Theory so far. Perhaps I have read the wrong things - care to direct me to an article or something that illustrates your point?
Many spiritual traditions are aware of them, but specifically instruct students to avoid getting caught up in them because they are a distraction from the true spiritual path. But for Pavlina, they are the true spiritual path.
I remember one story in which a monk excitedly called his teacher over and said that while meditating, he'd seen the Buddha in a glorious vision. The teacher smiled and said, “Go back to your meditation, and it will go away after awhile.” Until I experienced spiritual peace for myself, this story was incomprehensible.
KMG, see dialoges on Integral Naked with people like Dean Radin, Michael Murphy, and Michal Levin to name a few of the top of my head. Or if you're not an IN member (and have already already used your free 30-day trial), you can look these three people up on the internet for an integral perspective on psi.
Cheers,
Grey
i actually like your personality steve. (not that you care) fun interview.
ahhh channeling, entities, dead people. ok.
i look forward to you or erin claiming Randi's $1M prize for being able to reliably prove any single shred of psychic ability. (Read about deepak chopra's response to Va Tech here….)
i also look forward to you writing a piece about the next VA Tech type tragedy the day before it happens….. until then i remain relatively unconvinced.
you are also mischaracterizing integral in relationship to this issue.
personally i find that most integrally-informed people i have talked to - including wilber, are actuallly much more open to paranomral/psychic stuff than i thinnk is warranted…..(oh and c4 - i have stated several criticisms of wilber on the I-I pod in numerous places.)
though i spent the first 10 years or so actively seeking some proof of all manner of paranonormal and metaphysical stuff with a sincere attitude (and i wnet at it hardcore during that period), i have yet to meet someone claiming psychic powers in my 20 years working in and around the new age worldview who was not either suffering from a PTSD kinda disocciative disorder, mildly psychotic delusions, mild bipolar disorder or just willful delusional narcissism, selective memory and wishful thinking… a disappointing but ultimately grounding realization for me.
that is not to say that they are not sometimes accurate - but we need to ask ourselves what this means and if the ocassional accuracy of certain intuitions warrants belief in unproven things like entities, ghosts, the spirit world life after death etc….
it is a classic bait-and-switch technique of charlatans to confuse people into thinking that certain phenomena = proof of their metaphysica assertions…
i would highly recommend donald kalsched's absolutely extraordinary book: the inner world of trauma, archetypal defenses of the personal spirit to anyone interested in a beautiful mythic/jungian archetypal/object relations understanding of how splits in the psyche caused by trauma manifest in distorted transpersonal experiences that are not integrated in a healthy way… this may be the single most brilliant book i have ever read. here's an excerpt from an interview with him..
the funny thing is i don't know anyone who has been on any serious path of self-inquiry - be it vipassana meditation, psychotherapy, mind-body work etc for more than 3 or 4 years that considers themselves psychic or prone to regular paranormal occurences - they seem to go away, be understood symbolically or become completely uninteresting in most people engaged in real healing and doing serious personal growth of the kind i am describing..
that said, and in all fairness - i do know people who i respect (who have also done serious process/practice-oriented work for years) that swear by their astrologers and psychics - i just think (somewhat privately) that they are caught up in the need to know things from some source beyond our (already sacred and miraculous) capacities out of a need to try and control what cannot be controlled.
also interestingly none of these process/practice oriented folks are themselves claiming psychic powers - and none of their psychic and astrologers have done the kind of awareness work i am describing…. interesting.
there is of course also the spiritual problem (that's been around since the at least the 60's, if not before in M. Blavatsy's theosophical movement) of confusing so-called psychic abilities with advanced stage of consciousness, a mistake that has been proven dangerous time and again from sai baba to muktananda to adi da samraj to sylvia brown and on and on…
anyway steve - here's the $1 M question (second only to stepping up and claiming Randi's prize): if you believe in the Law of Attraction - why have you attracted all of this controversy and criticism of your metyaphysical message? could it be the cosmos trying to fine tune your divinely inspired, entity-channelled message? or perhaps shwoing you where you have overlooked a few entire stages of integrative psyche-spirit-cognitive development?? gosh i hope so - please don't end up like this guy!
peace out y'all….
:O)
as for nailing it in clear lucidity - check out balder's latest beautiful post.
KMG, here's Wilber's Toward A Comprehensive Theory of Subtle Energies. Reading this again, I'm realizing that its possible to read this and have no idea what Wilber is talking about. But at least its a solid example that Integral theory treats psychic phenomena seriously and attempts to include it within the model, and unlike a great many others, it does it without either insulting or misusing scientific inquiry.
This article predates the Wilber-5 model, which I think is a bit more distant from psi research models than earlier Wilber models, and I think the AQAL model offers several critiques – constructive critiques but critiques nonetheless – of psi research as a whole. I think there is a temptation to use the results of psi research to 'prove' certain cultural myths and biases, that because the contents of psychic experiences apparently confirm those myths, therefore our culture's myths are true and another culture's myths are false. To me, this is a pre-rational conclusion. The problem is that its very likely that if we did a cross-cultural study of the contents of psychic experiences, they would all contradict each other.
In part 4 of the excerpt, several authors are mentioned favorably, so they might be decent starting points, but because the AQAL model both supports and critiques these authors, its quite hard to evaluate them completely without a really complete understanding of Integral theory.
Thank you! I'll check out the links and perhaps things will become more clear.
OK Julian, I see what you're saying and totally agree with the idea that psi shouldn't be seen as some sort of goal to be achieved on the path to spiritual development or a sign that one is spiritually evolved, but I think you may be a little too dismissive of the studies into the phenomenon.
Granted, none of the studies I've read about have really proven truly extraordinary psychic abilities, but they have demonstrated that something “supranormal” is going on that is worth looking into in order to better understand what exactly it is. I also agree that likely 99% of those who claim to have psychic abilities probably don't, but given how little we really know about human potential, I wouldn't totally rule out the possibility that some of those people really can do what they say they do… at least some of the time.
Anyway, like you, I'm typically skeptical of most people's claims of psychic abilities, but don't take that as a reason to ignore valid scientific studies into psi phenomenon. Like you've said, critical thinking is the key here, but critical thinking doesn't mean discarding psi as totally bogus as far as I can tell. It could prove to be very important research into human potential.
Later dude!
Grey
i am totally open to hearing about good studies and have heard that there are a few that tentatively suggest some growing edge capacity that we can't yet account for scientifically - how cool!
as you say though i don't think that this will correlate with 99% of what goes around in new age circles…
yep, it's true that psychic phenomena (or psi) has its place in the integral model. this has not been denied in AQAL. however, its true that is has been downplayed. that's why there's no psychic development module on the and ILP kit :)
i remember reading an interview with Wilber wherein he said (and i'm rephrasing here) that the reason he's not talking too much about psi is that this topic is very problematic and hard to prove scientifically. it's already hard enough to get AQAL to be accepted in mainstream academia (note: Wilber is still not recognized by mainstream academia as a “philosopher” due to his being identified as New Age and his biased towards UL or spirituality. and his style of communication is not helping his image any better.), and once you bring psi into the mix, then it would be doubly harder to get taken seriously by the academic and scientific community.
case in point: here's what Wilber wrote on his classic Integral Theory of Consciousness essay:
“I believe that the existence of some types of psychic phenomena is quite likely, and various meta-analyses of legitimate psychic research have concluded that something real is afoot. I have discussed this in the book Eye to Eye and won't repeat my observations here. I would simply like to emphasize that, once it is realized that the sensorimotor worldspace is merely one of at least ten worldspaces, we are released from the insanity of trying to account for all phenomena on the basis of empirical occasions alone. At the same time, precisely because the sensorimotor worldspace is the anchor of the worldview of scientific materialism, as soon as some sort of proof of non-sensorimotor occasions (such as psi) is found, it can be excitedly blown all out of proportion. Psi events indeed cannot be unequivocally located in the sensorimotor worldspace, but then neither can logic, mathematics, poetry, history, meaning, value, or morals, and so what? None of the intentional and Left Hand dimensions of consciousness follow the physical rules of simple location, and we don't need psi events to tell us that. Thus, an integral theory of consciousness would take seriously at least the possibility of psi phenomena, without blowing their possible existence all out of proportion; they are, at best, a very small slice of a very big pie.”
you'll notice that Wilber used the academic phrase “quite likely.” ah well. people in academia (and scientists) talk like that when they don't want to get pinned down :)
as for metaphysics and theosophy, here's a an essay from Frank Visser analyzing Wilber's philosophy as compared with Theosophy. see Wilber and Metaphysics. you may not agree with Frank Visser (and yep, Wilber doesn't like Frank's take on it) but remember that Frank is a scholar of Wilber's work. so my guess is that he knows what he's talking about (compared to most of us). the guy translated Wilber's books fer Chrissakes! :)
but anyway, i feel like one of the thousands of angels dancing at the tip of this needle.
~C
P.S. thanks to Julian, for the tip on the Deepak Chopra video. i think Pavlina and Chopra are saying the same thing. as far as “being” is concerned.
bet my 2 cents worth that one day we can scientifically prove what we are calling today “psychic” phenomenon and it's not going to be called “psychic” as in some “external source” as it is generalized by new age. There's something about savant's abilities to remember and store information as well as the ability of processing probabilities very quickly (maybe also do cause and effect associations/relations) that leads me to believe that some people's brain capacities are unique and as fast as a computer's hardware and if not faster that they can “predict” certain events that will be happening.
But, I remain skeptical of people “claiming” and “glorifying” these “psychic” abilities and claiming as “true”. I think it's a hit and miss and definately hard to know if it is a hit and miss since their predicitions hasn't happened yet.
So, better to be skeptical than believing without any validity or cause.
C4,
Thank you for taking so much energy and effort in posting a wonderful and thorough interview with Steve. I really enjoyed it from the perspective of someone who hasn't been really acquainted with his writings at all.
I have my doubts about both Wilber and Pavlina and still trying to really understand Integral Theory with regular philosophy.
It's true, Wilber's stuff will never be taught at a regular University. He's not in the Philosophy Club since he doesn't have a PHD and hasn't attended the Sorbonne.
I guess I'm curious as to why Wilber hasn't sat down with Academic Philosophers about Integral Theory, yet. I mean shouldn't I-I support Philosophers discussing Philosophy with other Philosophers.
I guess having been in “Philosophy” forums, especially with mainly analytical philosophers, everything is combed with a very fine tooth comb.
I like to see Wilber do an interview with Robert Adams, C. Curtis Anderson,
or any other living well known contemporary Philosophers.
and put integral theory up for discussion with these philosophers and watch them have discussions about the logic of integral theory. Now to me that would be more exciting than Pavlina vs. Wilber.
“I like to see Wilber do an interview with Robert Adams, C. Curtis Anderson,
or any other living well known contemporary Philosophers.
and put integral theory up for discussion with these philosophers and watch them have discussions about the logic of integral theory. Now to me that would be more exciting than Pavlina vs. Wilber.”
exactly! :) i don't think Wilber is interested to gain academic footing for himself in the philosophy department. gah, who knows what he thinks. but it would be a more exciting debate though.
~C
Again I enjoyed the interview. Though Steves understanding of AQAL -and again there is no single integral label ath this moment! -is bad.
Lets see how I-I. SD, Sdi ..and other protointegral and evolutionary approaches communicate truth between themselves. Not to mention adamia. LOL…..Serious philophers and scientists in Europe. are even refusing to read Kens work. Have directly spoken with many for over 20 years now.
Whats about Kens interview with Otto Scharmer? Mapping the Integral U? There was no real discussion about the “Integral”Of course Ken pointed to the missing stages in “Presencing”.
Lots of tons of communication regarding understanding of AQAL AND SdI..even between their founders. See the story -in.progress betwen Chis Cowan and Don Beck.
I am awaiting a world map of integral and evolutionary initiatives and agents. Sometimes people like Steve provide as much momentum for grwoth any elaborated approach. This may seem crazy.
Zaadz itself demonstrates the full complexity and spectrum of colors. And right now nobody of the SDi Core Group is pariticipating here to a great extent. Steve may be limited in his cognitive understanding. He enriches. Supplemental advice can be given to EVERYONE. As Ken demonstrates in “Integral Spirituality” where he sharply even ciritizes approach of Ervin Lazlo who claims Theory of everything for his own work. And Deepak Chopra, Almaas, Murphy, Sheldrake and 13 others.for example Thich Nath Than..:):)
I am honoring Steve for his good work. May others demonstrate the good of their own genius and keep inspecting their own demons too…
Albert