An Integral Assessment of President Joe Biden

Hi, just on a technical point, I recall Wilber saying that the Buddha was orange.

It’s the individuals who can be way ahead of their time.

Just like the few early turquoise people would be way ahead of their culture today.

As for whether things can be cyclical, I guess sometimes. When the Arab Spring happened, I looked up the world democacy index, as a hint, and it showed lots of regions where democracy would pop up for a bit, but then fade, and then reappear a bit etc. Which makes sense, like how the Magna Carta took basically 800 years to develop to modernity.

I can read ancient wisdom texts which seem ahead of even today, yet on longer time spans, we have obviously evolved over the last 200,000 years.

2 Likes

Welcome Thomas. As a relative newcomer I feel I need to welcome others and to feel comfortable in expressing my gratitude for having this platform.

I don’t know what it is with Ray but Ray seems to needto be Disliked. To call Charles an old dinosaur is so inappropriate and uncaring (As well as Untrue),. It makes me wonder why Ray continues to contribute to this forum. I like Ray, I think he’s made many good points. I don’t understand why he needs to be so Cantankerous.

Ray, there’s nobody on this platform who wants to hurt you. People are here to exchange ideas in a civil manner to help them stimulate an internal process of growth. We can liberate each other, but you seem to wanna demean other people. II don’t understand it?

Ken Wilber Has a very specific definition of his structure and stages and levels and lines and streams and heaps and holons, etc. It all fits together… If you find his Model odious why do you keep attacking those who find it helpful? Do you know the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

I will be the first one to tell you I’m not perfect so don’t tell me to look at myself. As long as I’m using this platform, I am going to respect the originators vision. In fact, if Ken took you on head to head, you would not have a place to hide. The same for me. The reason he has followers is because of his unique attributes he offers all of us and we could/shoulfd be grateful for what he has done at his own expense (Psychic as well as material) to attempt to make our lives that much better. If you’re not on the Ken Train find another train you feel comfortable with. That doesn’t mean you have to agree with everything he says, but you seem to have a pattern of finding fault at the most basic level by not accepting his definitions, for example, Karl Marx.

According to Wilber (and I dare speak for him) Karl Marx couldn’t be green because he was born in a time and place when cultural norms and values , Including the information available to him, prohibited him from having the ability to technologically link to a global community. Small point but a crucial point. That’s just off the top of my head, but that’s one example of where you continue to not understand what Wilber is trying present. Socrates, lived in an alien culture that I don’t think any of us would be comfortable with if we went back 2500 years ago. So mellow dude. I’ll back you I’ll be your friend, but I don’t understand what this need is to continue to attack people who respect Ken Wilber?

All the spellings and grammatical errors are my own Partially because I’m speaking into a iPhone 14 which is not the most sensitive translator in the world.

1 Like

Of course he isn’t literally an old Dinsaur. That’s absurd. It’s imagery. His method of criticizing is old and should be left far behind in a bygone age.

  • Again, poking at spelling in a discussion is something I haven’t seen since the 1990’s and even then it was only “that old guy” who did it. We’d have to go back to the 1960’s before it was mainstream in academia to comment on spelling.
  • “we needn’t quibble”. Funny the projection onto me of “troll”. More like I “was Trolled”

If you want me to tell you why I speak as I do, rather than making up stories about it in your head, I can tell you.
You see - you are doing essentially the same thing. Take one side and make up a story that suits you.
You make up that I find Ken’s Model “odius”. Ah, another “all or nothing” thought process. If I don’t think a model is 100% perfect and want to discuss a few things that I don’t find perfect or if I don’t take on the model 100% - for some reason in your mind I am suddenly “against us” and not “with us”.

If Ken and I met “head to head”. I prefer to think we’d probably both laugh hilariously and he’d enjoy someone asking difficult questions for once rather than worshipping him. If, on the other hand, you are correct and I “would not have a place to hide” two things come up. First - I’m not really interested in hiding anything. What an odd thing to put forward. Second - if you are suggesting that there would be a kind of “me against him” interaction where he would show me a thing or two because I disagree with him about a couple of things - wow that would reflect really poorly on him if that is how it turned out. So I myself prefer to think we would both observe the absurdity of how others are expecting us to feel and behave and just share a belly aching laugh at your expense.

Karl Marx - forest and trees and all that, eh wat! Not worth having a discussion if a forest exists or not because a tree is in the way of seeing it.

It’s not that I “need” to be disliked. It’s that I really, honestly and truly don’t care if I am liked or disliked. You should try it sometime. It’s very liberating.

Regardless - you may have noticed my posts are more and more sparse. At times there have been interesting discussions in here but the more the cult “for us or against us / all or nothing” mentality sets in the fewer interesting discussions I see. If it’s just discussing exactly what Ken sai and nothing else - well … he wrote some books and I can read so all these discusions in here are superfluous. Discussions are only worth having if a new perspective is found. There was two ideas before a discussion and then after a good discussion another idea is birthed. If one side just refuses to see any second much less third idea, discussion seems pointless. Just like it’s a waste of time to open a discussion with a Jehovah’s Witness. They want to TELL, not discuss.

1 Like

I stopped reading after the first few sentences. You have problems interacting appropriately on this platform. This is a place for discussion and THOUGHTFUL comments so that we can help each other to grow. You have helped me in that I can still call you my friend but FIRST in this program there is growing up and cleaning up, the two I believe you need to work on before we could be friends and you can make constructive contributions. I have seen some of your posts and they had a lot of insight so you can do it. Now are you motivated to be helpful rather than rude? Say what you want about me, I am cool with it, but I will not be engaging.

1 Like

Well, then we don’t have anyhing to “discuss”
The rest is pointless.
Again - this is a forum of selected self- designated elites granting their favor or not.
In other words, a waste of time for all involved.

1 Like

I feel there’s way more that’s interesting in the discussion than there is divisive.

@raybennett — UFOs and possible answers to the Fermi Paradox — I like the Star Trek “non interference” Prime Directive (why ETs aren’t colonialists), as one explanation,

and as for FTL, I think AC Clarke did take light speed as perhaps unbreakable, but the universe is very old, and as humans we’re in this weird 200 year period where we’ve only just realised that maybe we could travel to other stars — but have no idea what might be possible in the next thousand or even billion years — maybe reincarnation is the interstellar travel. But meanwhile, yeah, any sighting story is too easy to have been made up. Footage from the U.S. Navy on the other hand… hm.

@thebeatificvision — I do like the coalescing around stories. I was once complaining to a counsellor that I’d arrived at the rational understanding that life had no meaning. Nothing, zilch, nada. I’d done the sums and suffering outweighed everything. It was my unbearable lightness of being moment. She suggested I buy a book called Up From Eden and take it on a beach. I never got the beach holiday but it worked nevertheless.

@Charles_Marxer — I have been struggling to understand the Palestinian perspective. There’s so many angles on it as well. The “history” analysis, for example, says the people who were there first were… the dinos 300 million years ago! And I wish one could make light of it, the horrific tragedy that it is.

Also, I’m conscious that whilst Spiral Dynamic offers a massive explanatory power, I am now its prisoner, in that I can’t not see things in terms of that model. It’s now become a structure dictating how I see things. However, just within those broad brushstrokes, it does at least get away from the “good” vs “bad” picture, as if the Western backed Israel was “good/bad” versus the other side “bad/good”.

I don’t think the good vs bad model helps. I guess there’s this thing about the fall of the Ottoman Empire leaving a power vacuum, and then various factions fighting it out.

At its “birth” Israel was attacked, they say. So who defended them? I guess all the pre-existing paramilitary groups. And where did they come from? Much of the Middle East seems to be the land of warlords and paramilitary groups. Plus a lot of people live in these lands, and as @thebeatificvision says, most ordinary people just want a good life — but we are also all under the spell of our political system. I used to think that the UK was a democracy, for example. With the pandemic, I’m not so sure.

Red wants to fight, paramilitaries want to fight — that’s their story, their meaning making — and being red and winning is only better than being red and losing — the victims — so in one sense, perhaps there are no victims in those lands, there are only losers…

but one thing which I’ve heard and which seems to ring true but is brutal — this notion that the powerful deliberately keep destabilising those lands, in order to keep everyone at red, and keep people fighting each other. And that probably applies to Israel also — they get a lot of “power” from the USA, but they also are the victims in the geopolitical game of being used to “help” keep everything destabilised. And that just seems evil.

But these power games are also played in a very subtle way. I’ve heard that Egypt could just turn off its oil supply to Israel tomorrow, but wouldn’t — there’s all manner of interconnected power and economic and political forces. Everyone wants to fight a bit but not too much. It’s ghastly.