From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Feb 23 2003 - 21:43:13 GMT
Sam and all philosophers:
Wilber wrote:
Known as the "perennial philosophy"--"perennial" precisely because it
shows up across cultures and across the ages with many similar
features--this world view has, indeed, formed the core not only of the
world's great wisdom traditions, from Christianity to Buddhism to Taoism,
but also of many of the greatest philosophers, scientists, and psychologists
of both East and West, North and South. So overwhelmingly widespread is the
perennial philosophy--the details of which I will explain in a moment--that
it is either the single greatest intellectual error ever to appear in
humankind's history--an error so colossally widespread as to literally
stagger the mind--or it is the single most accurate reflection of reality
yet to appear.
Sam said:
My fundamental problem relates to the idea of Perennial Philosophy (PP)
itself - I don't think it stands up to scrutiny; at least, not yet. ...
DMB quotes Wilber describing the PP as "the common core of the world's great
spiritual traditions". This is an explicitly essentialist approach. I want
to know IF there is a common core, and see some evidence for that.
DMB says:
Evidence? Wilber says its "overwhelmingly widespead", that it "shows up
across cultures and across the ages" and at the intellectual level pursuits
too. I think it is based on a mountain of evidence. I don't know if
recognition of this common core constitutes an "essentialist approach", i
just think its an observation made by those who have done different kinds of
cross-cultural analysis. Campbell demonstrates certain perennial themes in
his work on mythology too. This is only natural insofar as mythology is tied
up with the world's great spiritual traditions. Evidence? I think the
evidence is not seriously in dispute, it is only a matter of what
conclusions we draw from that evidence.
Sam said:
Some sort of common core has prima facie plausibility, simply because there
is a common human biological nature. Yet the acceptance of the MoQ states
that the social level - which constitutes the foundations of our humanity -
is separate from the biological. Thus there seems to me no obvious
contradiction in claiming that different spiritual traditions show a 'family
resemblance' but there is no core common to all.
DMB says:
Well, yes, the biological and social levels are distinctly different, but
recall that the main task of social level values is to control biology for a
higher purpose. Thus social level values, the great religions and
mythologies all have an intimate relationship with the body. Think of the
way marriage and morals keep a muzzle on our sex organs. This of the way
table manners and dietary laws put a leash on our stomachs. Think of those
one-handed theives. Naturally, we'd see some similarities in the various
cultures because each culture is essentially working out the same problems
with the same bodies. But I think there's much more to it than that. I think
the common core is a reflection of the mystical experience. Since a direct
encounter with DQ is the letting go of all static patterns, it transcends
all language and culture. This experience is then translated imperfectly
into the static forms of the person's society. The experience is outside of
time and space, but the expression of it can only be of a particular time
and place. There's a reason that my claims that social values grow out of
both DQ and handling the problems with a common physiology in a common world
may seem paradoxical..
Wilber:
Which brings us to the most notorious paradox in the perennial philosophy.
We have seen that the wisdom traditions subscribe to the notion that reality
manifests in levels or dimensions, with each higher dimension being more
inclusive and therefore "closer" to the absolute totality of Godhead or
Spirit. In this sense, Spirit is the summit of being, the highest rung on
the ladder of evolution. But it is also true that Spirit is the wood out of
which the entire ladder and all its rungs are made. Spirit is the suchness,
the isness, the essence of each and everything that exists.
Sam said:
This seems to be a particularly characteristic metaphysical conceit. It is
the 'conventional wisdom' on the subject (all religions are different roads
up the same mountain) but I think that owes much more to Enlightenment
ideologies than a proper acquaintance with the facts.
DMB says:
Conventional wisdom? Enlightenment ideologies? I don't know about that. It
seems to me that conventional wisdom and Enlightenment ideologies both
dismiss religion as superstition and ignorance. The perennial philosophy, on
the other hand, defies that sentiment and says that reality is spiritual.
The ground, the ladder, the rungs and the goal. Its mysticism.
Wilber:
The central claim of the perennial philosophy is that men and women can grow
and develop (or evolve) all the way up the hierarchy to Spirit itself,
therein to realize a "supreme identity" with Godhead--the ens perfectissimum
toward which all growth and evolution yearns.
DMB concludes:
Here's the thing. One of Pirsig's central critiques of SOM intellect is that
it went too far in separating itself from the church and turned a blind eye
to the social level values. The result has been a disaster. The MOQ seeks to
remedy this not only by including mysticism in his picture, but also by
showing that intellect is actually dependent upon these static forms for its
very existence. All our intellecutual constructs are culturally derived, he
says. Descartes can think only because French culture existed first. Rituals
may be the connecting link to the first intellectual values. The mythos over
logos idea. He says it a zillion ways. Social level values, with all its
religion, myth, ritual, language and all that holds society together, is
what allows us to do philosophy and science. This is where the perennial
philosophy comes in. If Pirsig is insisting that our intellectual
descriptions must be derived from the mythos, and if there is a common
vision expressed in every mythos, then it would be foolish in the extreme to
ignore this vision. The perennial philosophy can certainly be seen in the
MOQ's larger structure too. Its no accident, I suppose, that the MOQ has
levels of creation, We migrate through these levels toward higher realms,
the ground of being and the goal of our spiritual aspirations is a mystery,
there is an illusion of duality to overcome. I think its important to see
what the perennial philosophy really says for the light it sheds on
religion, but even more than that, I think its important to understand it
here because the MOQ is an intellectual description of the perennial
philosophy.
Thanks for your time,
DMB
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 21:42:46 GMT