John,
Thank you for the information on Ken Wilbur and his
critique of Joseph Campbell's work.
Your article Understanding Quality helped me to put
these discussions on MOQ in a larger, clearer context.
Thanks! And I agree with most of what you said about
the path to wisdom and understanding. The idea that
"language is a static latch" is, for me, the idea that
words are merely "handles" to carry (communicate) a
subjective interpretation of objective reality to
another person. We convey our thoughts and feelings
with these handles, but can only hope they touch
something common in the other and thereby evoke
understanding at some level. In my opinion, however,
words tend to satisfy the intellect too quickly, making
us only "think" we understand. I have always felt that
real learning takes place in my body, not in my head.
And in my opinion, communication is essential to any
real progress towards a quality life on this blue-green
home of ours among the stars. Each of us can do the
"inside" work (our unfinished business) but ultimately
this is as much an individual, inside job as it is a
collective, outside job. We must find consensus at
higher levels than now exist.
As you suggested, the discussions on this list (and
others) would indicate that we have a long way to go.
It is my hope that some day there will be a "critical
mass" of quality thinking that creates global quality
living. Hopefully, most of the people involved in these
discussions are not doing it simply because it is fun
to play with words and verbal gymnastics, to win
arguments, to dominate conversations and all those
other low-quality motives. That does not appear to be
happening on this list, and that makes me feel
"good"...
My experience as a technical writer and instructor
taught me to appreciate the different ways in which
people learn. It also helped me realize that the most
effective way to get knowledge from my head and skills
from my hands to their heads and hands, was to stop
"teaching" and start creating situations in which they
could discover things for themselves. So my
understanding of "education" involves both reasoning
and experience, with emphasis on experience--the
ultimate integrator?
How people "learn" to make "quality" choices is another
discussion, I suppose. Not sure where that sort of
learning takes place. But my own life is pretty good
evidence that the pain and suffering that comes from
"bad" choices will, sooner or later, compel me to make
"good" choices. And not just for myself, but because I
have begun to realize that the other person is, in a
collective way, ME. Parents, teachers, friends and
other mentors can help us avoid some of the mistakes by
"telling" us not to do this and so forth, but
experience is the best teacher, because it gives you
the test first and the lesson after. If we can help
people avoid tests that kill them, I guess we've done
something "good"...
Please allow me to make one other observation about
science and its methods of getting at the "objective"
truth. My understanding is that a "scientist" is almost
always required to eliminate lots of "irrelevant"
variables to make the problem simple enough to solve,
analyze and construct a working theory about the
phenomena being studied. I assume that metaphysics is
similar, in that we must eliminate lots of variables to
get at the meaning behind our experiences, and to
communicate our interpretations of those experiences to
others. The method we use to determine which variables
are included and which are eliminated, will have a
direct effect on the "quality" of our conclusions. And
the quality of our life when we start making choices
based on those conclusions.
Your thoughts on these matters will be well received...
Billy Dean
Info@billydee.com
http://www.billydee.com
"It is the journey that enlightens--not the
destination..."
Kwai Chang Caine
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Beasley" <beasley@austarnet.com.au>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 11:43 PM
Subject: Re: MD Re: A Fifth Level
> Hullo Billy,
>
> I have not read Campbell so really can't answer your
specific question. I
> know that Wilber drew on Campbell, amongst others, in
developing his ideas.
> He is very complimentary of Campbell's work ("his
meticulous scholarship and
> detailed analyses never fail to inspire"), but also
critical of his ultimate
> position which he judges "untenable, and can be
demonstrated to be so using
> his own assumptions and his own conclusions." He
suggests that Campbell is
> an elevationist, who assumes that only myths, and not
reason, lead us to the
> genuinely mystical. Wilbers critique of Campbell runs
to several pages in
> Sex, Ecology, Spirituality, so I won't try to
condense it all here.
>
> Like you I would like to be involved in "some
growing, planetary,
> collective consciousness--one in which I can
participate". I suspect that is
> part of the lure of Quality that attracts us to
Pirsig, but if the debates
> here are any indication there is a long way to go
before the MOQ will
> transform into such a movement.
>
> If you are interested in dipping into Wilber I would
recommend 'A Brief
> History of Everything', which is of manageable length
and not too hard
> going.
>
> Regards,
>
> John B
>
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive -
http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the
instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:28 BST