Hi Platt, John B, all.
Platt - I agreed with pretty much everything you said in your post of Nov
25; however, I think there may be some confusion over what counts as a
'transformative practice'. I do sympathise with John on this, but because
it's been spelt out in a Wilber context, there may be a little
misunderstanding over what it is (and the misunderstanding may be in me
rather than anyone else). So if I spell out what I think is involved, there
may be less disagreement - or, if it's still there, hopefully it will be
clearer.
What I take the talk about the need for a practice to be is to do with
training in ways of seeing. Are you familiar with the image that can be seen
as either an old woman or a young lady? It's been shown (and I'll track down
the references when I can remember where they are!) that you can shape which
image people actually see in that by 'training' them with similar pictures
beforehand. And that it then can require an awful lot of discussion before
you 'see' the alternative. My understanding of a 'transformative practice'
is not in principle different from that sort of training - in other words,
although (with a nod to the Emperor's new clothes) a beginner's eye is often
superior to a trained eye, there are some things which simply cannot be seen
without the requisite prior training.
Now if we accept the superiority of the aesthetic over the intellectual, and
of Quality over both, then it doesn't seem to be against the spirit of the
MoQ to say that you need some form of practical training (call it an
inculcation in social quality patterns) in order to be able to see with high
Quality (ie closer to the cutting edge). Another way of talking about this
would be to say that the holy person sees reality the most clearly (and an
aspect of this quest is actually what drives the high-Quality aspects of
formal scientific method). This comes back to what I said about the
philosophy of love - that the major spiritual traditions are (amongst other
things) ways of training people in different ways of seeing. And, in MoQ
terms, that is a fundamentally moral activity - hence the language of John
when he said:
>
In Wilber's view, the recovery of an ethical life involves transformations
of consciousness. One has to grow or develop, to change one's perceptions,
because the deeper and wider and more encompassing motivations are not just
lying around to be seen by the senses or their extensions. A truly ethical
life demands transformation, and that requires a praxis, a transformative
practice.
>
which I agree with.
One final example: one of my favourite paintings is Picasso's "Weeping
Woman". I don't think I would have been able to appreciate that before
gaining a little emotional maturity myself (I flatter myself that I have a
little (-: )
Does that make it clearer (even if the disagreement is still there)?
Lastly, you asked:
> Finally, finally. A question for both Sam and John. You know the famous
> (Platonic I believe) formulation of Truth, Goodness and Beauty. Do you
> agree that those three "absolutes" are now subservient to Quality
> which, with the coming of MOQ, is now the metaphysical top dog? Or
> is it better to simply place Goodness at the top with Truth and Beauty
> underneath? No big deal--just curious.
I am at present unclear in my own mind as to where Goodness and Quality are
distinguishable, and in either case I would tend to find the word 'God'
readily substitutable for either of them. I don't think any of the Platonic
trinity are 'absolute', so yes, in present day terms, they are subservient
to Quality/God. (And before Wim or anyone else comes in on this, I don't
think Quality/God can be exhaustively identified with any one religious
tradition. But of course that's a whole other thread...)
Oh yes, one other thing. I love your quote from ZAMM about "One can then
examine intellectual realities the same way he examines paintings in an art
gallery", I'd forgotten that passage (it's been a while since I read it -
time to go back again I think). That's the way I think Wittgenstein
understood metaphysics (as akin to poetry aswell), but it is also how I
understand the discipline of systematic theology (eg Aquinas) which, if I
ever went back into academic seclusion, would be my field.
Sam
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 - 16:01:39 BST