Just saw this future history post in The Manifest E-Zine.

OMFG - this is some righteous sh*t.  Now that's what I'm talkin about!

Some of the pleasures -

N.E.S.T - New Earth Systematized Transformatron.

Not only a physical space incorporating self-sustaining edible gardens, hydrogen fuel cells, and a brownwater waste system, unlike most "communes" of its kind, it features an award-winning business model: it doubles as a reality TV show, where NEST's more charismatic members interact in real time using the latest in environmentally-friendly and personal growth-oriented products and services. Think Big BrotherFriends as sponsored by Horizon Organics and Dharma Crafts and you're halfway there. The 2009 Fall Season starts off with NEST co-founder Marcopolis Greenstem failing to clean the composting toilet due to excessive meditating in the middle of a terrorist attack, whereupon a general meeting called to discuss Greenstem devolves into a paintball fight with guns named after Great Sufis of the 20th century. Wicked.


Also this:

. The Japanese Ken Wilber
Move over "Einstein of Consciousness", in 2009 there will be a new hip knowledge machine on the scene, one Takenobu Igarashi, son of the great graphic designer of the same name, who will take Integral Methodological Pluralism to a whole new level with the help of genetic enhancements, ultra-fast internet access, and a severed brain which allows him to read and process two books at once (one for each eye). And no "theory and practice of everything" would be complete without pushing the frontiers of what is acceptable: what KW did to help bring Eastern mysticism into serious academic and scientific discussion, Igarashi will do for the studies of exobiology (aliens, dude, aliens) and parapolitics. And, as the Japanese are wont to do, he will take it to all new ridiculous extremes, so much so that his massive 3000-page magnum opus Holarchical Development of the Cluster God Spark-Lifter will be adapted to become the world's first #1 game show where Japanese families of four battle each other by break dancing through the well-stocked libraries of Pacific Rim Central University in search of the lost texts not incorporated by Igarashis's massive, 3-dimensional theory. And don't even ASK about the footnotes....

I don't see many good riff's on combinations of mysticism and cyberpunk anymore - not since The Invisibles, at least.

As much as I love Ken Wilber, sometimes you want a little less Apollo archetype and a little more Dionysus archetype, you know what I mean?

As a meta-commentary -

It's funny to view the tracks of my mind in this instance, and how much of it is programmed to - the rebellious mystic, the cool zen kids ethos.  I would bet that a lot of this ethos that I appreciate is some weird growing up combination of faux "rebel" movies, combined with video games and anime...

Blogiating - "the act of going on and on in a weblog post, commenting with prose great and small, with either triumphalism or misplaced arrogance, on a topic you really know nothing about..."  A spin off of bloviating

Or also, "opinions are like "*ssholes.  Everybody's got one". 

But I put mine up on a weblog...

As can be seen by other posts today, I'm in a bit of a "is this the right room for an argument?" mood. 

So, building on a post by Goethea, I'd like to relate my experiences attempting to argue against simple atheism, by really bright people.


Clearly, like Goethea, I'm not partial to either side.  Creationism is very shallow, and very political/stupid, while atheism, once you have had any type of spiritual experience, is similar.

There was a thread on Matthew Yglesias's blog, where I attempted to engage "liberal atheists", with the views I hold regarding spiritual evolution (I'm the JC poster in the comments).  I came at it from a somewhat softer position than what I believe because I wanted the dialogue.

Here's my first comment.

Here's a good response.

The basic gist of the response is to resort to Occam's Razor - i.e. if you are going to postulate beyong the evidence of our senses, you may as well postulate anything - an underlying intelligence, a great green glob, a giant purple unicorn, etc.

This is really the cruz of the issue, I think. 

Ken Wilber responds to this by, basically,  pointing to other modes of empirical research, as accepted by other disciplines outside of science -

"Surely there is a broader science that attempts to understand not just rocks and weasels but humans and minds? Well, in fact, we do acknowledge these types of broader sciences, sciences that are not rooted merely in the exterior, physical, sensorimotor world, but have something to do with interior states and qualitative research methodologies. We call these broader sciences the "human sciences"

From the research methodology of the human sciences, then, we can search the empirical literature of the practices of mystics, past and present, and like Piaget for early development, formulate the higher structures of the "mystical" brain. 

I think though, that this isn't necessarilly a convincing argument for the Occam's Razor atheist comeback, but only a partial one.   The point is still that these are only pointers to "structures of the brain". 

At this point the options then, seem to me, to be one of the following - accept that there are "structures in the brain" that give rise to mystical experiences, but that don't really mean anything to the world as is. 

The aethist then would point out that so many mystical experiences are "different", that one would need to believe in an infinity of gods. 

Or, you can accept that these experiences ARE indicative of  the underlying structure of the world, but mixed with personal and social patterns of interpretation. 

All the experiences of energy, spirit, heart, that I have, clearly put me in the second camp.

But politically, perspectivally, I'd really like for a more integrated liberal view to be LOUD and acceptable in media/political circles.  It's a travesty that the "chattering classes" see God talk as only available to the right.

What is a decent counter-argument to the Occam's Razor logic of the smart liberal, decent athiest?

Okay, now does the statement, from this post, seem right to you?

here's a mind fuck for us: clinical research has shown that at the age of 21, you basically stop developing. that is to say your center of gravity, your World-view, the lens through which you experience and interpret all experiences- that solidifies and development stops. until you're about to die, you don't develop anymore, UNLESS you have a meditation practice. that's worth repeating: unless a person has a daily contemplative practice, clinical research shows THEY WILL NOT DEVELOP THROUGH STAGES after about the age of 21. that means if you're an arrested adolescent at the age of 21, and you don't have a practice, then you (and all your friends and family) can look forward to a long life enjoying your remedial needs. this ain't a religious thing, it ain't a buddhist thing, this is simple, emperical data from clinical research: if you don't meditate, you don't fucking DEVELOP after the age of 21.


Now, it seems like there is some perspective needed here.  What personal qualities can develop?  What qualities can't develop?  There are FAR too many assumptions in this paragraph.

For myself, I'm infinitely less stupid than I was in my 20's.  (I'm still infinitely stupid, but a lesser order of infinities, as it were...)

Now I'm not necessarily the best case, because I do meditate, however - if we continue with the TRANSLATION-INNOVATION metaphor, as applied to the individual, then this post might make sense, but I'd still like to see the cites.

But if we are dealing with "individual translation"  in the world - dealing with people better, LEARNING to move forward in various ways - both personally, professionally, etc - the possibilities of learning, growing, being, on this level, are very high. 

I think blanket statements like that could possibily contribute to an abandonment of growth, that actually CAN happen, on a translation level - even if this doesn't engage higher levels of consciousness.  

"Well, shoot - science shows that I stay the same unless I meditate - guess there's no point going to that AA meeting and dealing with my alcohol... - also, guess I'm not going to learn any more IT skills... "


That's a bit of an unfair example, it could be argued that's a strawman - but most of what we deal with in this world IS translation, so clarity is needed.  A lot of learning happens by simply SHOWING UP and being present, paying attention to what is being presented.

I also would think this type of blanket statement would strike at the heart of the notion of adult learning as well.  (Robert Kagan, what would you say?)

Okay, so maybe I'm not completely refuting Stuart Davis's post - if the innovation vs. translation distinction is kept in mind - but it is important to point out the adult learning that continues to happen,in several wonderful and multi-varied ways,  for those who put themselves in the situation to learn (those who show up).

UPDATE:  I didn't make it clear, but this paragraph was one small part of a much larger post - and really, I'm only criticizing this one single part.  But the title would be so much more ho-hum if the title was "A small part of Stuart Davis's post needs to be more clear." 

It just doesn't have the same ring.

Building on the Time Happiness post by coolmel,  there is another Time article that is interesting/has set me off - Meet the Twixters.

In a way, this is an updated sociological take that is similar to a GenX sociological take, about 12 years ago, that was published by Time - and umpteen other magazines, of course, but I remember the Time article, because if there is anything that I am, it's a (reformed?) member of  the slacker GenX generation.  (Hear me roar?)  Since matured, at least a bit.

But the article points up a lot of the economic issues that are endemic to "maturing" in the current world context. 

Basically, the "We" and the "Its" social segment of the world, in the U.S. at least, has shifted.  Lots more bright intelligent, socially aware people who delay/can't/won't "mature" on the IT's and We" segment.  I have been floored by the number of times I have met - for example - an employee of Border's, or a Starbuck's Coffee employee, etc, whom was bright, literate, possessor of a Master's, spiritual, etc.  (And, by the way, there wasn't a happiness in this particular field of employment, and especially the financial compensation - it's just what had happened.)

And now, there are numbers to back this up.  While causation is difficult - which factors are social, for example? - it is definitely the case that economically, it is getting harder and harder for new entrants into the work world. 

I don't believe there is a lot out there from the integral perspective, addressing this (although I will be eager to be proved wrong). Now there's a lot of job blogs out there - yet a lot of them tend to be of the rah-rah variety, or selling themselves.  For example, I've been looking for job blogs to link to - Monster blogs are decent, as are a couple of others, but nothing yet that is updated regularly, and comes from a slightly higher perspective. (And if I have to hear about "Networking events" again, I'll swear off entirely...)

Add to this, that there is a shift to creative and meaningful work, rather than a job - as typified by Tami Simon, and many many others, it makes this conversation more perplexing, from the sociological perspective.

One of the grating experiences I remember from being a poor struggling (but of a decent intelligence) 20 something year old (and not too far removed from this now) is the explosion of things to experiment with - expos, groups, etc - but the lack of funds to do so. 

In my (bloviating/blogiating) opinion, this disconnect runs through so much of the AQAL, integral, "new age", some (but not all) of the self-help movements. 

The economic, financial, and professional fundamentals, both personal and system-wide, need to be addressed more head-on in our movement networks.

UPDATE:  As I get home, I get a link to The Manifest E-Zine, and specifically a link to this article.  Pretty much encapsulates what I'm talking about - and like the editor, I'm a part of the problem, not a part of the solution.