July 31, 2006
Michael Miovic [From the Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School; Psychosocial Oncology Program, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA]
- Arthur M. Young, inventor and author of The Reflexive Universe
- Edward Haskell, author of Full Circle: The Moral Force of Unified Science
- Richard Tarnas, author of The Passion of the Western Mind and Cosmos and Psyche
Jean Gebser, Swiss phenomenologist, was the author of The Ever-present Origin, which concieved of human history as stages of consciousness. Gebser saw in the momentous events of the 1930s and '40s a revolution in consciousness which he identified as the transition to the integral stage.
Haridas Chaudhuri, a Bengali philosopher, was a correspondant with Aurobindo and founded the California Institute of Integral Studies.
Michael Murphy, author of The Future of the Body, and George Leonard, are co-founders of the Esalen Institute and the Human Potential Movement, and co-authors of The Life We Are Given.
Ken Wilber is the most visible and popular integral theorist in the world today. Wilber's books include: Sex, Ecology, Spirituality, Integral Psychology, and Boomeritis. His major ideas include: AQAL, Integral ecology, Integral politics, and Vision-logic. Founder of the Integral Institute, Integral Naked, and Integral University.
Clare Graves, American psychology professor, was the creator of the Emergent Cyclical Levels of Existence Theory of human development, which inspired the book Spiral Dynamics by Don Beck and Chris Cowan.
Georg Feuerstein is the author of Wholeness or Transcendence: Ancient Lessons for the Emerging Global Civilization and Structures of Consciousness: The Genius of Jean Gebser, An Introduction and Critique, and founder of the Yoga Research and Education Center and Traditional Yoga Studies.
Allan Combs is the author of The Radiance of Being: Understanding the Grand Integral Vision, Living the Integral Life.
Robert Kegan and Susan Cook-Greuter are Harvard developmental psychologists who are considered integral theorists. They are members of the Integral Institute.
July 30, 2006
Vrinte's final position is shortly summed up when he writes, "It may be necessary that the integral views Sri Aurobindo once held have to be modified by his followers in the field of present-day knowledge. Ken Wilber's current integral views may likewise soon be seen as naive. That's why further revision of both integral approaches is necessary for future application to each seeker's unique life and circumstances." [p 544]
This is purely an intellectual view — limited to intellect only, having all the limitations of the narrow human understanding. All the philosophical or spiritual views of Sri Aurobindo, originated from higher levels of Realization, though they were expressed and conveyed intellectually, so that reason can comprehend, so that others can understand. Sri Aurobindo conveyed His message to us from 1914 to 1950 ; I am not speaking of His earlier writings. I do not find that present day knowledge, as in 2006, has been so advanced within fifty-six tears that it is beyond the supramental or even overmental grasp of Sri Aurobindo. He did not live or think limited to His time, within the narrow frame of consciousness of an ordinary man. His Vision was / is so wide and all-comprehensive that He would have known what advancement of knowledge will be there. Mainly, He belongs to the Future. He had seen even the most distant Future, and that is why He guides us to the Future, to the Supramental Future. I am not speaking about Ken Wilber. But to say that the views of Sri Aurobindo was naïve and there is a need for further revision is a statement of a narrow opportunism without any depth or understanding. Personal uniqueness of life and circumstances has nothing to do with a true integral progress towards Supramentalization. Rather those things and aspects of life have to change with the progress made or to be made. Barin 30-07-2006 From Barindranath Chaki The New Horizon - http://www.freewebs.com/barinchaki/ , http://barin.zaadz.com
July 29, 2006
July 28, 2006
I know from experience that the great successes of our scientific exploration of the universe can tempt us to dismiss anything other than scientific understanding as of secondary importance. But spirituality, and with it religious faith, is deeply ingrained in human culture, and many people rely on their religious convictions to make sense of life. Whatever one's personal views about religion, it is undeniable that scientific understanding alone does not encompass the range of the human intellectual experience.
Scientists who fail to appreciate this, and who attack religious beliefs for being unscientific, do their discipline a disservice, not least because such attacks are themselves unscientific. This is why, while I am sympathetic with many of the points he raises, I disagree with Richard Dawkins's unfettered attack on God. Not only is it inappropriate to try to convince people of the validity of scientific theories by first arguing that their deeply held beliefs are silly, it is also clear that the existence of God is a metaphysical question which is, for the most part, outside the domain of science.
Now more than ever it is important to understand the limits of science. The phrase often used to defend aspects of evolution has particular significance here: the absence of evidence is not evidence for absence. This is not to say that all theological interpretations are beyond scientific criticism. A fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible is in clear violation of physical evidence. Continue reading "Lawrence Krauss: Don't Pit Science Against Religion" » Jul 27, 2006 in Religion Permalink Comments (5) TrackBack (0) email@example.com
"The most vital issue of the age is whether the future progress of humanity is to be governed by the modern economic and materialistic mind of the West or by a nobler pragmatism guided, uplifted and enlightened by spiritual culture and knowledge." This book resolves this question by reconciling the truths behind the metaphysical and the modern with a synthesis of the idea of divine life on Earth.2) The Essential Aurobindo: Writings of Sri Aurobindo
Amassed from over two dozen volumes of Aurobindo's works, this book is essential to an understanding of one of the greatest minds of the 20th century, who combines "the alacrity of the West with the illuminations of the East." Edited with an introduction and an afterword by Dr. Robert McDermott, professor of philosophy and religion at the California Institute of Integral Studies, San Francisco.3) Savitri: A Legend & A Symbol
A major work, this is a long poem of over 23000 iambic pentameter lines based on the ancient Hindu legend of Savitri and Satyavan. Didactic yet inspiring, it depicts myriad aspects of his views and explanation of the ancient Vedic-Yogic path. A unique specimen of spiritual literature, it is, in his own words, "A nectar of honey in the combs of gold" encompassing all human experience in 700 pages.4) Synthesis of Yoga
A seminal exposition of the discipline of yoga, this book has a wide-angle view and all-embracing scope to help the seeker of spiritual realization. Here, Aurobindo reviews the three great yogic paths of Knowledge, Work and Love, and presents his own unique view of the philosophy of Yoga. It also includes his views of Hatha Yoga and Tantra.5) Powers Within
Meant for the general reader as well the spiritual seeker, this book discusses the nature of various inherent potentials of man - powers, which we already possess and use unconsciously, and powers lying dormant within, which we need to develop and nurture in order to reap spiritual benefits in life.6) Gems from Sri Aurobindo
This is a gleaning of Aurobindo's statements on subjects of interest from his vast body of works. Aphoristic in style, his sentences illumine the truths within. He packs each sentence with the depth and intensity of the inner meaning, and provides inspiration, themes for meditation and ideas for reflection on a wide array of topics.
- Freudian psychology is dismissive, and
- his coverage of subjects like, say, sociology, minimal,
the point is that, unlike Wilber, he is not interested in presenting an intellectual “theory of everything”.