Comment

Comment by Jitendra Darling on February 23, 2012 at 3:00am

I sympathize to a degree with your sentiments, Pawel.  Speaking of wholeness, for me, assumes integration...or it isn't really wholeness.  Wholeness is something that leaves the written page and occurs in real time experience, as a full sensory unfoldment.

I find these asynchronous online conversations useful for exchanging viewpoints and ideas.  However, I often find them tedious as conversations, as they tip very easily into a predominantly mental realm.  Spirit, mind, heart and body are simply 1's & 0's actuated on my screen until they register subjectively in the non-consensus reality of my own consciousness. 

I've personally never had a particularly satisfactory experience writing about these things.  Writing is, at best, an invitation to the party.

If you'd like a richer conversation of the topics at hand, join an Occupy Heart call if you can.

Comment by David Eggleton on February 23, 2012 at 12:42am

Pawel,

At some risk, I'll say I suppose it is something like confirmation bias.  I associate integral with Ken Wibur and his lexicon that I haven't really explored.  So when I'm writing a sentence, I choose the words of similar meaning that are less likely to draw a response I cannot decipher with confidence.  Integrity is a word I use now and then, usually not in place of wholeness, by which I refer to balance and integration of body, mind, heart, spirit.

Comment by Ben Roberts on February 22, 2012 at 6:15pm

These are words that native speakers struggle with as well, Pawel.  For me, the challenge is to avoid having them turn to jargon or cliche.  Reminds me of this piece I read earlier today, in which the author (in reference to the notions of "civility" and "incremental change") proclaimed: 

 clichés are zombies; they are dead to the novelty of the living moment, and they eat the brains of inspiration. They are worse than lazy thinking--they are putrefied thought. Worse, clichés will not die, because they are already dead. Burn them with fire…reduce them to ashes…let the ash mulch the soil where future inspiration will grow.

I hear that you are frustrated with the quality and impact (or lack thereof) of the conversations here at OC thus far.  Perhaps you would like to start a discussion yourself, where the intentions are more aligned with that which calls to you directly?

Comment by Pawel Klewin on February 22, 2012 at 4:50pm

I notice astonishing disproportion (in all café discussions) between the frequent use of the concepts of “whole” and “wholeness” and avoidance of “integral” and  ”integration” or "integrity".

E.g. ‘Integral Activism’ (group) and 'Integral informed perspective NEEDED!' (discussion), which drifted away from the title subject and died.

Your answer fits the precept. I feel deep inability (or even impotence) to continue the discussion because of that.  All the more since you address disintegrations as first problem of western civilization (your previous post).

Being not sure of my English as second language I verified the meanings in Wikipedia:

The word "integrity" stems from the Latin adjective integer (whole, complete). In this context, integrity is the inner sense of "wholeness" deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character. As such, one may judge that others "have integrity" to the extent that they act according to the values, beliefs and principles they claim to hold.

Can you help me? Has it something to do with "confirmation bias"?

Comment by David Eggleton on February 21, 2012 at 7:13pm

"On what grounds your motivation to discuss with me is founded?"

Pawel,

We must keep going because all this matters a lot and our ways of expression (yours in a second language, thank you) force us to explain and clarify, if not give a new account from a perspective to which the other has recently pushed us.

Case in point:  I did not write about "conscious reasoning (logic) as link between faith and reason."  I wrote about consciousness in selection and in leaping.  I believe both are choices and don't believe a leap of faith is an unconscious act (saying nothing about its rationality).  I believe one is conscious of preparing to leap and of leaping (though, of course, one might faint in mid-air!).

So we continue.

Re your other question:  I believe whole people are/will be more agile and open-minded than fragmented people.  I asked myself how unchanged people can welcome and accept change and guessed that many cannot.  If they could, they would have by now, no?

Comment by Pawel Klewin on February 21, 2012 at 4:33pm

Roughly 400 years of Western over-reliance on measurement and analysis (reductionism) produced disintegrations, rearrangements and disorders, from personal to planetary, that deeply concern many.

My reasoned selection leads me towards integration as the solution for disorders caused by disintegration. Your idea of integration of the "person" is clear to me. I cannot however understand how we can leap to (faith in) integration, missing the understanding of the disintegration process (cause and mechanism). In particular: what exactly has happened 400 years ago and led to disintegration? Wasn't the leap of western civilization the natural and inevitable consequence of the Middle Ages?

Another question is the relation between the internal integrity (wholeness) of a person and the wholeness/truth of the planet, the universe.

I ask the questions in search for grounds for conscious reasoning (logic) as link between faith and reason.

My 4 years experience (including the initially promising discussion with DB) has led me to the conclusion that they cannot be linked - we will never agree. On what grounds your motivation to discuss with me is founded?

Comment by David Eggleton on February 20, 2012 at 2:02pm

From where I am, the nature of the tunnel is described thus:

Roughly 400 years of Western over-reliance on measurement and analysis (reductionism) produced disintegrations, rearrangements and disorders, from personal to planetary, that deeply concern many.  Beginning with fossil fuel use (alienation from human scale) and increasing with mass production/marketing (alienation from whole-person engagement with materials and processes) that reaches almost everywhere, more and more humans have lost connection and facility with the living life support system, the most reliable source of everything necessary.

Some of that repeats what you've read elsewhere, but it's a very new construction.

As people emerge from that, whether as a reasoned selection or as a leap of faith (conscious is the link), they'll have the option of resuming connection with wholeness/truth.

Comment by Pawel Klewin on February 20, 2012 at 5:39am

http://occupyheartworld.wordpress.com/: 

Seek Wisdom from Nature. Live in Truth.

David Eggleton:

For the time being, the truth of wholeness can serve well as light at the end of the tunnel.

My questions:

Is it the nature at the end of tunnel? What is the nature of the tunnel?

Comment by David Eggleton on February 19, 2012 at 11:45pm

http://occupyheartworld.wordpress.com/

Comment by Lindsay Newland Bowker on December 20, 2011 at 12:59pm

Doreen,

 

Thank you..I signed as an individual and am pasting to my Facebook.  I have been reseraching and writing abouty the truth of  the Egyptiann revolution and America's evil role in the whole thing, including propping up Mubarak and trying to keep the muslim majority out of government a my blog. (lindsaynewlandbowker@posterous.com)   Ther have been one or two arricles in major media here in the States but most don't see to get it and none are focusing on the U.S. role..or mentioning that our puppet governemnt in Egypt has been costing us $13 billion a year ( the price tag annually for maintining Egypt's compliance with the Camp David Accord and also U.S. strategic access.  It is time this is all spoken in public and unerstood by all Americans.

 

I am just thrilled to have such a distinguished and large group to add my own name to as an individual.

 

thankyou..and may I say many blessings . 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page