EDITOR'S COMMENT:

I received a letter yesterday from one of NHNE's long-time fans and supporters that expressed frustration at my growing enthusiasm for all things integral. 'Have you guys all just gone off the deep end?!,' he asked.

Good question.

What follows is Jim Torson's query, followed by my attempt to address his concerns -- and clean up any confusion I may have created in the minds (and hearts) of the rest of you...

--- David Sunfellow

------------

INTEGRAL STUFF
Friday, June 6, 2008

Jim Torson Writes:

Hi David,

OK... About this integral stuff...

I'm perplexed. And, I might say, frustrated.

The first time I had heard of Ken Wilber and integral stuff was way back in December 2001 when you sent out an NHNE post about the audio CDs "Speaking of Everything" interview with Wilber. You gushed that Wilber was "widely regarded as one of the most important spiritually-oriented philosophers alive today." So, I thought that this sounded like something I should look into and learn more about.

I purchase a copy of the CDs and started listening. I was definitely not impressed. In fact, I couldn't even listen to the whole thing. After awhile, I just tossed it aside and didn't finish listening to it. A month or so ago, I loaned the CDs to a friend, who listened to the whole thing. He also was not impressed. A few days ago I pulled out the CDs and forced myself to listen to it from start to finish. I'm still not impressed.

For one thing, Wilber seemed to be rather arrogant, which I really don't care much for. Also, the interviewer seemed to be falling all over himself telling Wilber how wonderful he is. If I remember correctly, you recently referred to Wilber as "the most important person on the planet." I really don't care much for hero worship. Considering your experiences with the A.R.E. group, I'm surprised to hear you making statements like that.

Anyway, from way back when I first tried to listen to the Wilber interview and recently when I listened to the whole thing, I just don't understand what the big deal is. The thought that came to mind was that it just seemed like philosophical masturbation. I could not convince myself that there was anything there that had any useful practical importance. I think I remember Wilber saying things like only 2% of the population are smart enough to understand this stuff and it takes twenty years of study and reading his 400-page book to understand it. Well, I suppose I'm just too dumb to get it. (I think I recall Wilber saying he intended to make people feel stupid. Swell.) On the other hand, it mostly seemed like stuff that was obvious to me. Maybe my development is so advanced that it all just seems like common sense to me. I suppose the chance of that being the case is negligible. It's much more likely that I'm just too dumb to get it -- hence the frustration. But it's not that I feel confused about it. It's that I just don't understand what the big deal is.

Awhile ago you posted a reference to a summary of the integral stuff that someone had written. Maybe I didn't find the right document, but it seemed to be saying that the big thing about Wilber's stuff is the importance or recognizing that each group or approach has some valid points. I just thought, "Duh! What's the big deal about that obvious insight? Tell me something I don't know already." As I said, maybe I just didn't find the right document.

A couple weeks ago you sent out a message "What is Integral? A Brief Introduction to Integral Theory and Practice." Well, it was so brief that it left me wondering (still) what the big deal is. It said, "...It seeks to identify all the different ways that human beings grow... and discern which practices create the healthiest, happiest, most well-rounded human beings... this revolutionary idea is taking root all over the world." Revolutionary? Huh? I figured that this statement that you sent out via email must just be a "teaser," so I signed up to be a "member" of Integral NHNE thinking that I would find a longer version of the introduction that had enough substance to actually explain something. But, apparently the thing you emailed out was all there is. Again, maybe I just didn't find the right document. By the way, I find the term "best practices" to be somewhat annoying, perhaps because of how it has been used in the computer field. Anyway, using that term three times in two sentences is way too many. One is probably too many.

Also, it seems that all too often, discussions of integral stuff use the term "integral" in what seems like every other sentence. Integral this, integral that, integral, integral, integral. It's as if using the term often enough will make everything wonderful. It gets to be very tedious -- and rather annoying.

One time you sent out a reference to something and included the warning that it would sound like gibberish to the uninitiated, i.e., people like me. Another time you referred to the integral stuff as being mind-numbingly complicated. Well, these are not the sorts of things that encourage someone to think this is something of practical value that is worth looking into.

You have sent out some discussions of Scientology that suggest that it might be considered some sort of a cult. When I think about the integral stuff -- most important person on the planet, gibberish to the uninitiated, mind-numbingly complicated, etc. -- I have to wonder if this is just as much a cult as scientology is. Have you guys all just gone off the deep end?

You are probably thinking, oh no, no, no -- you have it all wrong -- it's not like that at all. Well, maybe you can tell me where I've gone wrong in thinking about this. Where can I find some information about integral stuff that will contain enough substance to convince me that there is indeed something here that has some real practical value? As you can probably guess, I would not find it satisfactory for you to tell me I need to study for twenty years and read a 400-page Wilber book before I can understand any of it.

Anyway, for what it may be worth... I thought you might be interested in the reaction of one person to this stuff.

------------

RE: INTEGRAL STUFF
Friday, June 6, 2008

David Sunfellow Responds:

Hi Jim. Here's my response to your integral letter.

I'll begin by saying that you caught me by surprise -- both with what you said, as well as with the strong emotional charge that underpinned it. Your growing frustration with "integral", Ken Wilber, and me blowing a fog horn about it comes through loud and clear. I do, however, appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns. If you have them, no doubt many other NHNE readers do too. So let me do my best to respond.

First of all, it's important to know that Ken Wilber is not the only one championing integral perspectives. There are a growing legion of people, past and present, who are rallying around this banner. You can find an abbreviated list of integral pioneers here.

While there are many other integral trailblazers, Wilber has done more to explain, flesh out, and popularize integral theory and practice than anyone else. Thus, he receives the lion's share of acknowledgement -- and criticism. Wilber also benefits from being alive during a time in human history when integral ideas are finally beginning to catch fire. And, yes, I agree with you that the guy is not perfect. He can be arrogant, dismissive, and uninformed. He doesn't know everything. He makes mistakes. But perfection (or lack thereof) must, I believe, be considered in light of a person's overall development and their contribution to improving the lot of humankind. And on these two counts I continue to think that Wilber is one of the most honest, sincere, and well-rounded human beings we've got, paving new ground in an area that can help solve many of humankind's most fundamental problems. In my view, it is difficult to overestimate his contribution, which continues to pick up steam and influence an exceptionally broad range of human activities. And the guy, to his credit, continues to grow. Unlike other visionaries who come up with systems that are largely set in stone, both Wilber and his philosophy continues to adapt, adjust, and incorporate new perspectives as his/our knowledge and life experience deepens.

While I applaud Wilber for his character, contributions, and ever-seeking spirit, I am not a blindfolded groupie. Not only do I have issues with some of Wilber's philosophical leanings, but I have worked aggressively in the integral group I've helped anchor in Sedona to be sure we maintain a healthy distance from both Wilber and his Institute. I have done this both because I want us to follow our own light, as best we can, and also sidestep some of the dysfunctions that have reportedly hampered Wilber and his group. On the other hand, I also think it is important to acknowledge good wherever it is found and, as far as possible, join with it. So I/we are attempting to connect with Wilber's work as much as possible, while, at the same time, keeping a sharp lookout for potential problems.

Enough about Wilber and his organization. What about integral? What is it? And why do I think it is so important? Here's how Wilber defines it:

"The word integral means comprehensive, inclusive, nonmarginalizing, embracing. Integral approaches to any field attempt to be exactly that -- to include as many perspectives, styles, and methodologies as possible within a coherent view of the topic. In a certain sense, integral approaches are 'meta-paradigms,' or ways to draw together an already existing number of separate paradigms into an interrelated network of approaches that are mutually enriching." --- Ken Wilber, "Foreword", in Frank Visser, "Ken Wilber: Thought As Passion"

"This means that the chief activity of integral cognition is not looking at all of the available theories -- whether premodern, modern, or postmodern -- and then asking, 'Which one of those is the most accurate or acceptable?,' but rather consists in asking, 'How can all of those be right?' The fact is, all of the various theories, practices, and established paradigms -- in the sciences, arts, and humanities -- are already being practiced: they are already arising in a Kosmos that clearly allows them to arise, and the question is not, which of those is the correct one, but what is the structure of the Kosmos such that it allows all of those to arise in the first place? What is the architecture of a universe that includes so many wonderful rooms?" --- Ken Wilber, "The Ways We Are in This Together: Intersubjectivity and Interobjectivity in the Holonic Kosmos" Excerpt C of draft of forthcoming book, Kosmic Karma and Creativity

To amplify, the thrust behind all things integral is to come up with a system that includes, embraces, and unifies all the different beliefs, systems, experiences, tendencies, states, stages, etc. that human beings, both individually and collectively, experience. Along with discovering a way to unify the vast, seemingly discordant array of human perspectives and experiences, there is also an attempt to discern why they exist, where they are taking us, and what we can do to cooperate with the evolutionary force that propels them. In other words, how can we cooperate with the forces of life / evolution that have created us and which appear to have a clear sense of directionality to them? Or, said another way, how we can become better, happier, more developed, well-rounded, fully-functioning human beings?

Couple with this the fact that this is the first time in human history when we have possessed the ability to actually study all the different facets of human culture and experience (thanks, largely to the Internet), and we have something, in my mind anyway, as revolutionary as controlling fire.

Why should we care?

On the most basic level -- the level of our personal lives -- the more we are able to understand and apply integral perspectives in our personal lives, the better, more well-rounded, happy, and whole human beings we become. We learn how to get along better with other human beings -- especially those who think differently than we do; how to deal with unhealed shadow issues that boil beneath the surface of all humans; how to take better care of our bodies, minds, emotions, spirits; how to make all the different aspects of our lives flow more harmoniously; how to connect with deeper aspects of ourselves and others. And the list goes on.

Based on what you shared it appears that I have failed miserably at giving you (and perhaps the rest of NHNE) a clear idea of what integral is, why I think it is so important, and how to practically use it in our day-to-day lives. Being able to condense these ideas into digestible forms is a primary challenge for people, like me, who have been attempting to help average people get their heads around integral theory and practice. And let me add that I consider myself one of these average people -- someone who has trouble understanding much of what Wilber (and other high-powered intellectuals) delight in philosophizing about.

That said, I will take another stab at it.

Assuming you still want to understand what this is about (and aren't so frustrated you don't want to hear any more about it), I would suggest reading this book:

INTEGRAL VISION
By Ken Wilber

This is Wilber's best attempt at making integral theory available to the average guy and gal.

Next up, would probably be:

A BRIEF HISTORY OF EVERYTHING
By Ken Wilber

To give you a bird's eye view of the integral perspectives in action, I would encourage you to take a look at "Breathing Together: An AQAL Guide To Significant Relationships" (pdf). This piece demonstrates how integral perspectives can be applied to the most challenging of all human endeavors, significant other relationships.

You may also want to take a look at "The Integral Life Practice Starter Kit", which provides a step-by-step overview of integral life practices.

Here is a quick list of basic overview materials. Some of this material make sense to a person who is just getting into integral, while some won't. The bottom line is that while most people can catch "the drift" of integral theory and practice by reading simple summaries, I don't think a person can really "get it" until they dive in and made an honest effort to learn and understand the main concepts. In my experience, joining with like minded people in this endeavor is the main way we can accelerate our understanding. We can dramatically reduce our learning time by learning from others who are more knowledgeable than we are in areas that they feel a kinship and passion.

What Is Integral?

The Integral Relationship Preamble

AQAL Glossary (pdf)

AQAL Map

The Four Quadrants

Altitude

Integral Life Practice Matrix (pdf)

Formless Mountain

iP2Pi Resource Page

............

The Current Writings Of Ken Wilber

Archive Of Ken Wilber Writings

............

Finally, I am including links to a discussion between Michael Murphy, George Leonard, and Ken Wilber. This three-part conversation provides a nice overview of what has been driving the integral movement.

And I'll end with that. I hope you find this helpful and apologize for not doing a better job explaining my preoccupation with this important topic.

Your brother,
David

..........

INTEGRAL TRANSFORMATIVE PRACTICE
Michael Murphy, George Leonard, Ken Wilber From 2004

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

From The Integral Naked Website

The most influential modern pioneers in Integral Transformative Practice, together for the first time, in a wide-ranging, vibrant, history-making conversation covering all aspects of ITP.

The discussion begins with background information and the historical roots of Integral Transformative Practice. The essential idea of ITP is that the more human capacities one exercises simultaneously, the more rapid is human transformation. Think of it as spiritual cross-training: the exercise of body, mind, soul, and spirit in self, culture, and nature.

Mike points out that every age has had its integral pioneers. George points out that every age has also had its anti-integral impulses -- whether it was the monotheistic religions' repression of the body by the mind, or today's sensory glorification where the mind is repressed by an overemphasis on the body ("Lose your mind and come to your senses"). Opposed to both forms of repression is the integral approach, which honors equally both the body and the mind in an integral embrace.

Because new truths constantly emerge, the integral endeavor has to be re-invented afresh with each new era. In today's world, the integral embrace must include the very idea of evolution and development itself. It appears that in the modern era, evolution became conscious of itself, and thus a new form of enlightenment -- evolutionary enlightenment -- also became available.

Integral Transformative Practice appears to be the most effective and most powerful method of human growth, development, and conscious evolution yet devised, as empirical evidence is starting to convincingly demonstrate.