Ken Wilber
Ken Wilber current suggested assesment |
|
| Tradition | Originally Transpersonal Psychology, but since established his own tradition, the Integral Movement, inspired by Developmental Psychology, Postmodernism, and Nonduality spirituality |
| Guru | Previously Adi Da, now more informerly a number of Buddhist figures |
| Category | Nondual |
| Inspiration | Intellectual synthesis; some Intermediate zone? |
| Important Students | Allan Combs, Stuart Davis, Mark Edwards, Sean Hargens, Brad Reynolds, Frank Visser was ad hominem attacked by Wilber because he hosts a peer-review criticism website, and is now  an important critic, many many others. |
| Criticism | See Critics section, also  A Spectrum of Critics. |
| Abuses | Really, nothing to mention; we are all imperfect (apart from Authentic Enlightened Beings) and Wilber is no different to you or me. He doesn't even consider himself a guru, but neither does he discourage talk among his students/devotees taht he is Enlightened. If one is to compare him to other spiritual teachers, it would be as follows: Sexual - None Financial - Mild ( I-I / IU as merchandising)Emotional - None Thought - Medium (Suppression of discusssion, 3 Cards Trick) Antagonism - Moderate Control info - Mild ( Integral Institute lack of openness)External - None Cultism - Mild or at very most Moderate - Organisation, update, My essay part 2d, Neuro-Linguistic manipulation)
|
| Assesment | Integral Paradigm theorist who seems to derive his amazing enthusiasm and power from daimonic charisma. Generous to those who praise him, antagonistic to those who criticise him |
Author's note: Perhaps because his opinions are very forthright and not infrequently controversial, and his attempt at a grand synthesis of all human knowledge is so ambitious, Ken Wilber has been a very difficult person to write about. In this critique I have tried to strike balance between a too-worshipful and a too-critical stance.
It has been said that Ken Wilber stands in the tradition of William James as psychologist of the spiritual and "far and away the most cogent and penetrating voice in the recent emergence of uniquely American wisdom." [ Tony Schwartz Foreword to Ken Wilber's A Brief History of Everything.]. His first book, The Spectrum of Consciousness, was written in 1973 when he was only twenty three, and published in 1977, after being rejected by twenty publishers. It became an immediate best-seller, and Wilber's output has been prodigious and constant since. Although considered one of the founders of Transpersonal Psychology, he has since disassociated himself from the movement.
Wilber is credited with developing a unified theory of consciousness, synthesising all of the world's great psychological, philosophical, and spiritual traditions, and using as a starting point a laudable eclecticism and the Perennial Philosophy's Great Chain of Being and progressing ever further and broader with each successive iteration of his thought. Says one supporter
"Wilber's approach appears to have provided a coherent vision that seamlessly weaves together truth-claims from such fields as physics and biology; the eco-sciences; chaos theory and the systems sciences; medicine, neurophysiology, biochemistry; art, poetry, and aesthetics in general; developmental psychology and a spectrum of psychotherapeutic endeavors, from Freud to Jung to Kegan; the great spiritual theorists from Plato and Plotinus in the West to Shankara and Nagarjuna in the East; the modernists from Descartes and Locke to Kant; the Idealists from Schelling to Hegel; the postmodernists from Foucault and Derrida to Taylor and Habermas; the major hermeneutic tradition, Dilthey to Heidegger to Gadamer; the social systems theorists from Comte and Marx to Parsons and Luhmann; the contemplative and mystical schools of the great meditative traditions, East and West, in the world's major religious traditions."
What is the Meaning of "Integral"?An impressive claim. Wilber's critics may consider it a bit too impressive. But this is not to deny that Ken Wilber in some respects seems like a latter day Pico della Mirandola, unifying fields of knowledge that have for the most part been separate and isolated since the Renaissance at least (Pico was a Renaissance Neoplatonist who incorporated all fields of human knowledge into a single all-embracing philosophical-religious system). It is just a question of whether - giving the current exponential growth in human knowledge (in my mind a symptom of a coming technological singularity) such a synthesis is even possible, and if it is, how best to go about doing it? (and yes this is a subject that I myself am also concerned with)
In any case, despite his powerful intellect, huge sweep of knowledge, and tremendous sincerity, Wilber is not an original thinker in the style of, say, Plato, Hegel, Spinoza, Whitehead, or Sri Aurobindo, to name just a few. Nor I am sure would he claim to be (even if some of his followers do!). And like most monolithic systematisers - like me, he is a Hedgehog, but he is far more extreme than I am - he does tend to put things in boxes, in fact, he does this with far more enthusiasm than I ever would. Time and again, he takes widely divergent maps of consciousness and squeezes them into the same procrustean bed (for a good example of this, see the table of charts at the back of 
Integral Psychology). Perhaps because he reads so widely he does not have time to absorb in depth the intricacies and details of each scientific field, and each spiritual teaching. Because of this he tends to misunderstand teachers like Sri Aurobindo who go beyond the simple Zen and Advaita-based monism of his own belief-system
Wilber draws eclectically from a large number of modern Western and traditional Eastern philosophers and writers, almost all of whom he gives his own interpretation on. These include evolutionary philosophers such as Hegel, Schelling, Nicolai Hartmann, psychoanalytical theories of personality and developmental psychologists like Piaget, postmodernists like Habermas, for the West, and Indian, Tibetan, and Sino-Japanese non-dualist schools of mysticism and metaphysics (Advaita Vedanta (especially Ramana Maharsha), Madyamika (Nargajuna), Mahamudra in Tibetan Buddhism, and Ch'an/Zen) for the East (along with western guru Da Free John / Adidam, who teaches the same thing basically); and a few others like Plotinus, Sri Aurobindo (but not Teilhard?), perennial traditionalists like Fritjof Schuon and Huston Smith, along with flirtations with modern science, especially physics.
The great 20th century linguistic philosopher Wittgenstein's ideas are divided into two quite distinct phases, the Yonger or earlier Wittgenstein (Tractatus Logicus Philosophicus) and the the later Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations). Perhaps somewhat tongue in cheek, Ken has gone one better and divided the development of his ideas through four stages or phases [see e.g. The Eye of Spirit, 
One Taste Nov 16 entry, and Integral Psychology p.255, n.15], which he terms Wilber I, Wilber II, Wilber III, and Wilber IV (more recently a Wilber V has been added). In keeping with his all-embracing syncretism, he says that the subsequent phases do not negate earlier phases, but transcend-and-include earlier phases, incorporating them into a deeper and more integrated whole. The only phase he rejects outright is Wilber-I
Phase 1 (1977-1979). Wilber refers to this as his "romantic-Jungian" or "recaptured goodness" model. Inspired by the Jungian interpretation of psychodevelopment, it sees consciousness as a single spectrum, and spiritual growth as a return to an original non-dualistic condition, a position that he since radically rejects, For this reason, Ken tells his students to begin at Wilber-II.
Phase 2 (1980-1982). This is a more specifically evolutionary or developmental, "growth to goodness" model, with an elaborate series of stages of psychodevelopment that reminds me a lot of Freud's Psycho-developmental Stages, but extending these further to the mystical attainment. During this period Wilber adopts a (pop-)Tibetan Buddhist-inspired cycle of involution-evolution (based on the Bardo Thodel), and integrates Western psychology and Eastern mysticism as the two halves of the same process. Arvan Harvat provides a powerful critique of this paradigm, and its attempt to weld two completely disparate systems of thought, as well as Wilber's misreading of Mahayana Buddhism.
Phase 3 (1983-1987), added developmental lines, so that development is no longer understood as a homogenous process in which the self passes through the stages described in phase 2, but as a complex process consisting of a number of distinct lines of development (cognitive, emotional, social, spiritual, etc) proceeding in an independent manner, and that the self somehow has to maintain a delicate balance between these lines.
The period from 1987 represents a period of deep personal crisis for Wilber, as his wife develops cancer and he nurses his through her illness, treatment, and conscious death in 1989. This period is chronicled in the book 
Grace and Grit in 1991.
Phase 4 (1995-2001), in which he adds a socio-cultural dimension to his model of individual development, and develops the four quadrants model, called AQAL (All Quadrants All Levels). By now the whole thing was starting to look on the one hand like a sort of neo-Renaissance synthesis, and on the other like the immensely elaborate cosmologies of Blavatsky (with who's work and Ken's there are a number of parallels) and Steiner. This phase marks the beginning of Wilber's Modernism/Postmodernist phase, in which he develops a shrewd analysis of Western "Postmodern" state of mind. At this time he also acquired some harsh critics (in addition to devotee-like fans) when in Sex, Ecology, and Spirituality, considered by some as his greatest book, he came out as being against Ecological Spirituality. And although he has always been closely associated with and enthusiastic about Adi Da's teachings and revelation, the period from 1996 onwards marked his start of his criticism of the "World Teacher"'s activities and the movement itself.
Phase 5 (2001-present), in which he retains everything of the Phase 4 AQAL, but becomes increasingly postmodernist (rejection of metaphysics and absolute answers), shifting his focus from the metaphysical to a more Buddhistic "emptiness" (shunyata) teaching. He also adopts a more pragmatic attitude of teacher in the world (via multimedia), and works with the Spiral Dynamics model of human evolution. However, all the complexities of the original AQAL model are retained, as well as a few new elements like Rupert Sheldrake's "formative causation".
Throughout 1999, Shambhala Publishers released Wilber's multi-volume collected works. This is the first time an author has had their collected works published during their lifetime. Considering Wilber's prodigious output, this is one series of collected works that will have to be constantly revised and amended for some time to come!
In 2000 Wilber founded the Integral Institute, a think-tank for studying issues of science and society in an integral way. The term "Integral" refers to the Grand Synthesis approach of his more recent (Phase IV and onwards) philosophy. Wilber has since been involved in the development of an Integral psychology and Integral politics. This marks his movement away from a theorising-only approach, into the practical world as well; the difficult realm of "ahriman" as Rudolph Steiner would say, which one must master if one is to have any effect or make any serious change in the world.
One thing I like about Wilber is that he doesn't seem to take himself too seriously. The following two quotations from the wikipedia page are worth repeating here, lest the reader think that with all his incessant theorising he is trying to create an absolute system of thought. These quotations are also good in that they reveal the way Wilber goes about explaining things.
"In other words, all of my books are lies. They are simply maps of a territory, shadows of a reality, gray symbols dragging their bellies across the dead page, suffocated signs full of muffled sound and faded glory, signifying absolutely nothing. And it is the nothing, the Mystery, the Emptiness alone that needs to be realized: not known but felt, not thought but breathed, not an object but an atmosphere, not a lesson but a life."
Frank Visser's Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion, 2001Incidentally, this very Adi-Da-like statement reflects Wilber's adherence to the True Truths position of acosmic monism. He is telling his more enthusiastic disciples (and his critics as well for that matter) not to take him too literally, because ultimately only the Absolute is real
"I have one major rule: everybody is right. More specifically, everybody - including me - has some important pieces of the truth, and all of those pieces need to be honored, cherished, and included in a more gracious, spacious, and compassionate embrace."
Ultimately Wilber is a relativist. Everyone has something true to say. I can understand where he is coming from, and sympathise with it, but I find this position simplistic.
In researching this critique on Ken Wilber, I was most interested to read this small hagiographic document 
Where's Wilber At? The Further Evolution of Ken Wilber's Integral Vision During the Dawn of the New Millennium, by Brad Reynolds. In spite of the author's over-enthusiastic style and language, I did get a genuine feel of Wilber as someone who has made a breakthrough to a higher state of spiritual attainment (this marking the latest (Phase V) stage of his development) [Afterword 17 Dec 06 - I now consider this assesment false, I was just tapping into an Intermediate Zone daimon). However, Michel Bauwens' negative experiences with Wilber seem to indicate no such thing, since surely what spiritual attainment comes down to is how one has become a better person, everything else regarding claims of worshipfulness is egotistic cultism and pop-guruism? In any case, Reynolds suggests that most critics of Wilber are criticising his early work, and that he has already taken their concerns on board, addressed their concerns and modified his views accordingly. Perhaps some of Ken's future writings may address the important issues Arvan and I have raised here.
And in fact, one of his students has replied to one of them, or so it seems from the very informative entry on him in 
Wikipedia. I quote:
Some (namely, the Croatian esoteric philosopher Arvan Harvat) have noted that attempting to integrate a thoroughly non-dual approach like Zen with an evolutionary view is ultimately impossible: if your model includes all possibility, how can it change? Wilber's response is that his theory is actually a 'rational reconstruction of a trans-rational state of consciousness'. In effect, Wilber concedes the ultimate futility - from a rational perspective - of his quest. His writings point beyond the rational to the mystical.
The point however is that it doesn't have to be futile to at least attempt such an integration. But it is necessary to move beyond a strictly Advaitin and Mahayanist perspective if this is to be done. Not to reject it, not by any means, but simply to include it as part of a wider perspective.
Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion Frank Visser, provides a comprehensive overview of the development of Wilber's thought. This book has received a bad press as it is claimed that it "doesn't cover Wilber-5". The second edition will, but only when Wilber-5 has crystallised sufficiently - which is a bit difficult for a book that appeared in 2001 in Dutch.
Embracing Reality: The Integral Vision of Ken Wilber : A Historical Survey and Chapter-By-Chapter Review of Wilber's Major Works by Brad Reynolds - a Wilber primer and overall summary. In view of Wilber's rejection of Frank Visser's Thought as Passion (too Theosophical? Or not inclusive of Wilber's latest ideas?), Embracing Reality claims to be the only comprehensive coverage of Wilber's ideas, but this is debatable. Both Visser and Reynolds cover exactly the same ground, the only difference being that Brad has relabelled part of Wilber-4 as Wilber-5 (actually, for him, Wilber-5 starts with Integral Psychology, which seems very much Wilber-4). Where's Wilber At seems to be an extract from this book (or if not, it's still by the same author). So if you don't like the latter's style, best not to get the book. Perhaps some objectivity is needed?
 |
Links - Ken Wilber | |
Ken Wilber On-line - his home page, sponsored by Shambhala publishers. Lists Wilber's books and has some on-line essays. There was an on-line discussion group / message board but I can't find this from the main page.
Integral Naked - funky spin-off from Integral Institute
Integral University - another bold project.
Integral World - Exploring Theories of Everything - site dedicated to Ken Wilber
The Manifest - e-zine about, and for, the integral movement.
Ken Wilber - Wikipedia
Ken Wilber - by Alex Burns - December 16, 2000 - good summary and huge list of links
Ken Wilber - bio etc
An introduction to the work of Ken Wilber - by Michel Bauwens 1998 - sympathetic review of several books and of Wilber's philosophy. Like so many others, Michel was later to become highly dissillusioned with Wilber
A Light in the Wilberness by Brian Van der Horst - written in 1997, this is a sympathetic overview of Wilber's teachings upto and including phase IV
Ken Wilber: Understanding and Applying His Work - by Daryl S. Paulson
table of ten levels - with sublevels
another table - with Disorders & Treatments
Core concepts in the work of Ken Wilber - pretty good overview
The five phases - a concise summary of the five phases of the development of Wilber's ideas
Overview of Ken Wilber's Theory of Integral Psychology by Don Salmon, PhD - a good overview of the first four phases (written before Wilber announced Phase V)
For Ken Wilber - an artist's spiritual friend - Alex Grey - a short page dedicated to Ken Wilber, with a visionary portrait
The Euro-report: around the world with Ken Wilber - by Brian Van der Horst - a detailed sympathetic review of the the influence of AQAL and Wilber's ideas in general in Europe.
Critics on Ken Wilber - list of papers critical of Wilber
A Spectrum of Critics - Critics of Wilber arranged from "strong positive" (strongly pro-Wilber) to "strong negative" (strongly anti-Wilber)
Critiques of Wilber by Geoffrey Falk and others, also 
Geoffrey Falk's Blog. Falk speaks his mind and hence is much despised by Wilber's followers. I too originally thought he was a bit too extreme, but Wilber's recent behaviour made me reassess my opinion of him, and I now think (disagreements over spirituality, esotericism, and Sri Aurobindo and the Mother aside) that Geoff's comments are (and always were) spot on.
Wilber Watch - Frank Visser's blog, a forum for both supporters and critics to discuss and critique all things Wilberian
A Suggestion for Reading
the Criticisms of My Work - on Frank Visser's "Integral World" Site - Wilber's reply to his critics
Ken Wilber's Critique of Deep Ecology and Nature Religion: A Response - Gus diZerega
David Lane's critiques/essays/reviews of Wilber
A tangle of lines and levels: a critique of Wilber's integral psychology - by John Heron. (see also Heron and Wilber)
de Quincey and Wilber (and others)
The Promise of Integralism - A Critical Appreciation of Ken Wilber's Integral Psychology essay by Christian de Quincey
Intersubjective Musings: A Response to Christian de Quincey's "The Promise of Integralism" - Sean Hargens' reply to Christian de Quincey
Do Critics Misrepresent My Position? - A Test Case from a Recent Academic Journal - Ken Wilber's reply
Response to Ken Wilber - Robert McDermott's reply to Wilber.
Response to McDermott - Ken Wilber's reply to McDermott
Critics Do. Critics Don't. - A Response to Ken Wilber de Quincey's counter-reply to Wilber
A Way out for Wilberians - criticism by John Heron
Ken Wilber's response to John Heron - reply by Ken Wilber
Way out further - retort by John Heron
Unlike the deQuincy-Wilber brawl, this one ended well.
See also other essays - some critical, some supportive, in The Reading Room
Ken Wilber's AQAL Map and Beyond - website by Rolf Sattler, includes the online book of the same name. The first part of this book discusses some of the most fundamental limitations of Wilber’s map, and in the second part presents a dynamic mandala that overcomes them.
Integral (Holistic) Mathematics - A sort of spin-off theory from Wilber's integral philosophy (heterodox rather than orthodox)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |