Most Helpful Customer Reviews
82 of 86 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Some major leaps in the AQAL model, December 7, 2006
In one of his previous books "Sex Ecology and Spirit", Ken Wilber introduced a wildly ambitious schema that (as one previous reviewer accurately calls it) attempts to butt-weld western psychology onto eastern spirituality. His All-Quadrant-All-Levels (AQAL) model is a dizzyingly complex schemata that tries to appease, well, pretty much every major thinker in the eastern and western canon.
Despite the ponderous weight of "Sex, Ecology and Spirit", there were major holes in his exposition, and "Integral Spirituality" was written, I suspect, to plug some of those holes. I believe that there are 2 major problems that Wilber addresses in "Integral Psychology". The first problem is that, although Wilber spent the bulk of "Sex, Ecology and Spirit" savagely critiquing the limits of a menagerie of postmodernist thinking, he did not incorporate the insights of postmodernism into his AQAL model. The second problem is that, in "Sex, Ecology and Spirit", even though he divides the world into four irreducible quadrants in his AQAL model (the individual interior, the individual exterior, the social interior, and the social exterior), he reads the history of the Enlightenment as the differentiation of only three spheres of values (aesthetics, morals and science). Clearly, one sphere of value missing.
Scholars of Wilber might find then, that the first 5 chapters of "Integral Spirituality" are a tedious re-tread of the AQAL model found in previous books. But this particular presentation of the AQAL model offers something fundamentally different. It embraces postmodern insights into its core, by providing a much more nuanced discussion of inter-subjectivity. That's why Wilber makes such a big deal, as another reviewer pointed out, of critiquing the "Myth of the Given" and the "Philosophy of Consciousness" in these chapters. These critiques encapsulate the basic insight of twentieth century postmodernism, and it is something that Wilber did not do in previous books.
One result is that Wilber argues that eastern traditions are blind to their cultural biases - biases that are fundamentally invisible to meditative introspection. These cultural biases can only be detected using hermeneutics/sociological techniques, the bread-and-butter of postmodernist thinkers. Wilber accuses every major meditative tradition of being naive (or monological) in their belief in the absolute reality of the cultural manifestations of their traditions. That is why many genuine teachers of Eastern traditions, might also be misogynists, sexual deviants and abusive figures of authority. This is a major clarification and culminates in a very satisfying chapter about the Shadow and the Self, or how western psychology might supplement meditative practices.
The other major problem tackled in "Integral Spirituality" resolves an anomaly in previous discussions of the european Enlightenment. In previous books, Wilber described the Enlightenment as the moment in western history when values first differentiated into the autonomous spheres of Art, Morality and Science. He calls this the differentiation of the Big Three. Wilber argues that the failure of the Enlightenment was a failure to integrate the Big Three. This has always been puzzling to me as Wilber makes such a big deal about the Four Quadrants in his AQAL model, whereas Wilber described the Enlightenment as the differentiation of only 3 spheres of values.
In "Integral Spirituality", Wilber resolves this anomaly between the Big Three and the Four Quadrants. He now finds that the Enlightenment failed because it failed to differentiate a Fourth sphere of values. He has tentatively identified this as the spiritual line of development, as described by James Fowler. This is admittedly vague, but represents a genuine change in Wilber's thinking. The failure of the Enlightenment is not the failure to integrate the Big Three, but the failure to differentiate into the Big Four, and that is what is preventing the next step in human evolution, the Integration that is yet to come. Based on this insight, Wilber offers some startling insights on the future role of institutionalized religions in the chapter "The Conveyor Belt". He argues that the world's religions must transform themselves to develop this fourth sphere of value, an enlightened differentiated form of spirituality.
Although Wilber doesn't pursue this, I'd like to offer a schema to map the Big Four onto his Four Quadrants. Art or Aesthetics is the values we use to describe our Individual Interior. Ethics are the rules and values, with which we relate to each other, forming the Social Interior. Science is the study of discrete physical things, essentially the Individual Exterior. And Spirituality or the Godhead, or the Ultimate, is how we relate to everything out there, and *that* is the Social Exterior.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
88 of 94 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
I expected more from Wilber at this stage, but still a good read., December 31, 2006
Integral Spirituality lays out a worldview that tries to encompass and take whatever is of value from as many worldviews as possible. It assumes that no particular position is completely wrong and looks for patterns of meaning across the world's wisdom traditions. Anyone familiar with Wilber will already know this, but for those new to him this point may be useful to mention.
There are many reviews that criticize this book for repeating material that is repeated in other books. I agree with these criticisms and I think there is a bit too much of a commercial focus on the website as well. I was expecting less repetition and more editorial discipline, but I still think the book justifies a 4 star rating based on its other merits. Hopefully, Ken will get away from doing this in future publications.
What I enjoyed specifically about this book was the material on Integral Methodological Pluralism (although this appears in other places) and the somewhat different focus on an Integral Post-Metaphysics. The material on the shadow and disowned self was also interesting and I'm also glad he included a chapter on an Integral Life Practice. Integral Life practices involve engaging every level of being such as body, emotion, mind, soul and spirit to bring about transformation of consciousness.
While this book does indeed contain a lot of recycled material, it is worth purchasing for the new material and some of the new ways that old ideas are presented. Going forward, however, I hope Ken Wilber works more closely with his editors, gets clear on the audience for a particular book and avoids unnecessary repetition and rambling.
Ken is certainly a very important philosopher with a useful point of view. As other reviewers have pointed out, I believe he has blindspots, but he is one voice among many. At times, his attitude can be irritating and arrogant, but I try not to let this get in the way of the underlying value in his message. I think he is worthy of considerable respect for what he has done in this area. I also appreciate how entertaining he can be much of the time, while simultaneously making important points.
In many of Wilber's works the repitition didn't bother me because it was a good review. I suspect this will be the case for new readers of Ken Wilber, but a problem for others more familiar with his work. Another good introductory book on Ken's writings is A BRIEF HISTORY OF EVERYTHING which is organized like an interview. This is a fairly easy read and lays out his most important ideas in a highly digestible and engaging format.
I also think it would be useful for Ken to run his ideas by more people that disagree with him. This book was a long time in coming out and other reviewers have legitimately pointed out that certain points of view such as Christianity were treated in what seems like an arbitrarily narrow manner. I believe this criticism applies to some other areas of thought as well and would have benefited from more scholarly review from third parties.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
55 of 59 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
full of great ideas, but a fully integral Wilber would use an editor, March 17, 2007
I had the pleasure of teaching this book to a small undergraduate seminar on the Sociology of Religion last quarter. The reaction was decidedly mixed, with some students finding the material to be exciting and mind-expanding, while others, though sympathetic to the ideas, were totally turned off by Wilber's egotism and bad writing. My #1 recommendation to Ken and the Integral Institute is to fully, integrally utilize the talents that are being gathered and produce works that are edited for maximum impact -- there is a world of sentient beings to save, and time is short!
Overall, Wilber's analysis is incredibly valuable, and if this is the first of his books you read, you will learn much. However, it is less clear that INTEGRAL SPIRITUALITY adds much to what he has already said. I still recommend THE MARRIAGE OF SENSE AND SOUL as the best introduction to his work.
I will limit my substantive comments to a few points of critique: 1) The topic promised by the subtitle is only covered in Chapter Nine, "The Conveyor Belt," and is not examined with the depth or with the respect that it deserves. 2) One of the most fascinating aspects of the book, for anyone who has been following Wilber's project over time, is that he has stopped bashing the "Mean Green Meme" (bad writing exemplified!) and incorporated postmodernism into his AQAL system. Now he's taken to bashing all spiritual authors and teachers who have NOT incorporated postmodernism! 3) As a sociologist and long-time political activist, it is by turns amusing and annoying to me how superficially Wilber treats his lower-left and lower-right collective quadrants (cultural and social). He appears to have only a rudimentary familiarity with the research in sociology and anthropology, and tends to subsume it all under the heading of postmodern philosophy, which is puzzling and incongruous. I continue to maintain that Wilber's Project is too inwardly focused, too psychological, and not fully integral because it fails to address the need for social change, as opposed to personal growth. 4) Conceptually, some of the best points made here have to do with the need to integrate the subjective with the objective (including intersubjective, objective and interobjective), but when Wilber doubles his four quadrants to eight zones, and speaks of a subjective and objective zone for each quadrant (page 39), and then puts down everyone who fails to do so, along with the accompanying 8 distinctive methodologies (page 37), he makes a serious error. There can be no "subjective interior" to any quadrant other than the upper left. 5) Wilber may think his assertion that "the problem of the proof of God's existence simply evaporates" (page 266) is proven with a wave of the postmodern wand, but he provides nothing to back up his sweeping claim, no way that a seeker can verify that a teacher actually represents a higher level of consciousness, or just talks a good line. Is s/he just the Wizard of Oz? He claims to have staked out post-metaphysical terrain, but he'll have to do better before an accepted ladder of higher post-conventional levels moves from the realm of metaphysics and becomes intersubjectively and objectively real.
One thing that is clear in reading INTEGRAL SPIRITUALITY is that Wilber is working through serious emotional problems. Just as he correctly points out that meditation alone will not resolve such problems, it is clear that writing alone will not resolve them either. Clearly there are some raging shadows/demons/disowned voices roaming through this text and this project. I encourage spiritual seekers to look to dharma teachers such as Thich Nhat Hanh who have clearly manifested the compassion of the boddhisattva. Brother Ken has much to offer in the conceptual realm, but he does not seem to be fully realized emotionally, and therefore is not a good role model. (In his own terms, he may experience higher states of consciousness, but will interpret them from a limited emotional vantage point.)
I send my loving regards to Ken and all the members of the global sangha -- may we move together to liberate all sentient beings, every day, with all our hearts and minds.
Namasthe.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
