Here

The link is here - I would embed it, but that feature is not turned on for this video.

Here is the Google Zeitgeist list, of top searches for 2006.

If you want to see the level of consciousness - the "altitude" of the internet-going public, well, now you can.

Encouragingly, the searches for 2006 seem to be pretty good. - Social networking

First off, there's Bebo - something I didn't even know about, another social networking site, looks like a cross between MySpace and YouTube.

MySpace is second - makes sense, considering their traffic is rivalling Yahoo's now.

World Cup - always a favorite.  Wiki and wikipedia are there.

Another video service, MetaCafe.

Rebelde is interesting - a Mexican TV series?

And then mininova - A bittorrent dream.

Now, on the other side - news - not so much.

First Google News search is Paris Hilton, then Orlando Bloom, and the last of the top ten is Celebrity Big Brother 2006.

No wonder TV news programs seem to become more reality TV every day - that is the type of news people are searching for!

Or maybe not...

Great and simple article on how to have your whole office, (in terms of data and apps) on the web, from one starting page interface.

3 Minutes of Ramesh Balsekar:

So says Time.

But in case you think this gives me a swelled head, this means you too.

Personally, I agree with a lot of the people who say this is a copout.  If they wanted to pick the new "User created media", Time should have gone with the YouTube guys.

Here is Jorge Luis, teaching Swami Dayanands Baghavad Gita Home Study Course.

So a different taste of Non-Duality here - an analytic approach to teaching - and therefore realizing - Advaita, by someone raised in a Hispanic culture, who shuttles back and forth between the U.S. and Mexico.  Not something you see everyday!

A very interesting post at Parzifal's Blog.

I think this has been linked to before, but what is interesting about this, is that this attempt to define what is spiritual intelligence, and what defines that, is backed up with research that has been compiled through various workshops.

The results utilize the framework of the quadrants, as well as the framework of competencies and assessments, and an attempt to separate out levels - or consolidate ALTITUDE.  Very consonant with Integral Spirituality.

I also simply like the SQ distinction as well.  As multiple intelligences go, why not an SQ?  And the assessments which measure it?

This should be easy, for all you integral cats out there.  Here is Hope, Emo Chick - let's describe her perspective, shall we?

okay, actually, I just wanted to link to this, cause it's funny....but I think there may be a point as well.  Here is a clear case of a two dimensional character - so in that sense, it should be EASY to "diagnose" the particular level of consciousness that this (fake) person is coming from.  But is it?  You SD people out there - in this easy two-dimensional case, what are the appropriate labels?

A long Adyashanti video, although personally, I don't vibrate much with him, at least so far.  No frissions, or recognitions, for me, through watching this.  Still, he speaks well, for what that is worth.  May only be me, as the conversation by itself seems pretty practical and grounded.  On a personality level, I like this Adyashanti fellow.  But my own experience and recognition lines more up with the conversation with the Elysha guy, despite his clearly more evident personal quirkiness, and New Age trappings.

Video below:

An update on Google Reader, and blog reading.  I find the new setup of Google Reader to be incredibly useful - while at the same time, I haven't abandoned My Yahoo.  Still, the ease of reading one line synopsis, tagging the articles, sending out, etc - very nice.  I find I can manage a lot more feeds, without getting bogged down.

I'm going to put a permanent link to the Integral Wiki blogger feed, and put it prominently on this site - if anyone sees a site on the Integral Wiki blogger list, that isn't coming through on the feed, make sure to let me know.

here is a link to a good video, on projections of arctic ice disappearance.  Only 2 minutes long.

Check out Zaadz, collecting posts BY Zaadsters, that then tag their post with Ken Wilber.

You will see a few familiar bloggers, but also some people you don't normally see.  But make sure to scroll down.

Joe Perez left a comment yesterday, on the Bootstrapping post, regarding this question of 2nd tier. (As well, he left some good suggestions about integral communities.)

P.S.: I think you're right that we do part ways on the value of labeling (actually using Levels and not keeping them tucked away in the closet never to be seen in public), though I do want to add that I don't use the "first-tier/second-tier" distinction in my recent writings, as I view all labels on a holistic mandala or band that reflects both absolute and relative values. If anything, my writing now distinguishes not between tiers but co-equal hemispheres, separated not at integral/teal, but postmodern/green AND ultraviolet/infrared. In short, if YOU see "us vs. them" or "defense mechanisms" as inherent in any sort of Levels distinctions, that's YOUR projection onto the heuristic, not an inherent feature. :)

I thought this was a particularly useful comment, that deserved response.

First off, Joe is right - in his writings over at his blogspace, he doesn't really use first-tier/second-tier.  But it worthwhile also to explain a little more, why I think there is, in the 1st tier/2nd tier view, a lot of "unnecessary projection", and unnecessary accusations of projection - and this comes through, even for the best of us. 

This post at Zaadz, is a long one on this 1st Tier/2nd Tier distinction.

Now, like all pod threads or discussion forums, that discussion meanders.

The thread starts off:


Now I know this is a new thing and all, and I really do have compassion and patience for the process - but i wonder if zaadz has fallen prey to a kind of green/blue politeness combined with an orange/green enterprising positive thinking and is calling that “second tier”.

Notice here, the high level of abstraction that exists, in a comment like this - purportedly around real people and their virtual conversations - "kind of green/blue politeness", "orange/green enterprising positive thinking", "called second-tier".

For myself, that type of abstraction from what people are actual DOING or SAYING - well, it doesn't strike me as particularly useful, you know?  This is wandering about in concepts, rather than a lived experience.  It is applying MAPS to particular people, particular conversations.  As such, it isn't real.

Secondly - the confusion illustrated by "labeling" 2nd tier - will be coming from people who are mostly 1st tier to begin with.  Which means all the projections of a less mature consciousness, talking about an idealized version of what they think "2nd tier" is.

Thirdly - labeling such as this, runs particularly counter to wholeness work, as encourage by SHADOW work.  Again, 90% of the time that one is labelling a person 1st Tier, three fingers are pointed back at yourself, pointing at YOUR shadow!


Now, I believe the point that Joe is getting at is the following (and please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)  - that there are distinctions in maturity, in growth, as represented by individual behavior and individual perspectives.which are adequately captured by 1st Tier/2nd tier, or Spiral Dynamics language.
And the objection to "dropping" labels, is you take away a useful - and true - descriptive tool of the situation.

I don't disagree with this - if you read Gary Stamper, he discusses in his group work, how over time, he begins to be able to suss out WHEN a discussion is more "2nd Tier", and when a discussion, is captured by a lower level perspective-value.

And I'm sure Gary is on to something there.  One analogy that makes sense to me is "drive".  When a discussion started to be captured, by fear, or by a person's narcissism, or by too much concern for egalitarianism, then a conversation, behavior, has veered from taking into account ALL values and drives - concern for others, powers, status, harmony, etc - and being unreflectively dominated by ONE particular drive.

My view though, is that the analysis of an unreflective drive/values capturing a conversation/perspective, is dissectable.  This can be analyzed without reference to applying the MAP of colors, the MAP of 1st Tier/2nd Tier, to messy actual behavior.

Again, I just don't see the utility. 

Thoughts?


UPDATE:  Joe Perez responded at his pad - and a colorful response it is too!

I'm getting into some of the video clips of various Nondual teachers - the "non-dual wave" that grew in the 90's, and that has influenced me greatly - at any rate, below is another video - of a guy I don't know except through this video - and then some comments:



Of interest - outside the energetic reaction, the recognition, and "big eye" reaction that I experience through some of these non-dual guys - a couple of points made:

a. "Learning to identify as that which you truly are".  Important point - also emphasized by Dayananda.
b. False identity that reforms itself, natural, recognition doesn't come in a "great big bangness"

No comment on the visual choice of the Kitsch tiger though!

With Ken's latest misfortune (and godspeed, with all my prayers to Ken!), as well, as the documentation of the trials and tribulations of Integral Institute, it seems clear to me that, we are going to need to take it in hand ourselves to create various city centers ourselves - in as full transparency as we can.

Some background -

1.  First off, we had the news about Ken Wilber's health. 
2.  Then, we have had the detailing of the inner workings of I-I - the bumps and challenges of any new startup, as detailed by Steve Frazee.
3. Then there was this good post at Naked Reflections, regarding what the integral community would do, if something happened to Ken Wilber  (God willing, a long, long, time from now).
4. And then, this good post by Gary Stamper, regarding integral questions and developing integral community and intitutions.

So there is a lot happening, in the blog conversations, around integral community.  (In the virtual world, of course!)  (And, I would like to add, the best PERSONAL RESPONSE to be with these happenings, is to view them as challenges, and let the best way to respond to those challenges, percolate up inside of you.  Actions WILL suggest themselves to you.  As Hokai has said, "It's up to us".  Or, as the common expression goes, "Be the change you wish to see in the world".

This has caused me to begin to ruminate - what would a community of integral salons - really, Integral Community Centers - what type of character would they have?

I see it the following way:

An Integral Community Center, in an "ideal world" (not that this world exists) is basically a combination of the following three institutions:

A church
A wellness center
A university

"A church", because people gather together for practice, bonding, prayer, meditation, etc.   This also engages the spirit of giving, so important to the sense of selflessness.

A wellness center, I think is obvious - So much of integral is being "whole" - both physical, emotional, psychological, interpersonal health.  And all the assessments associated.

A University - this is the study and research part of Integral. Many think that I-I should have been this type of research institute, without expanding into "doing it all", but I understand the impulse.  People also wish to "practice", right?  (That's my goal at least!)

So, there are two ways to do this - build on existing church/wellness center/university's, or bum-rush local community spaces to provide a context to exercise these components.

In a sense, there are a few successful models for this - one is, I would think, something like Naropa University (you Naropiate/Naropeans correct me if I am wrong).  Here you already have a dedicated areas for spiritual practice (hopefully) a wellness center, including a gym, and the resources for research are present by being, well, a university!

I think this is similar for various theological colleges as well, catholic, episcopalian and the like.  Maybe Chris can speak up on this.

I've mentioned this before - but the ideal situation, at least for me, is to have an Integral Community Center (ICC) that acts in a very similar style to the Jewish Community Center (JCC). 

Who agrees with using the JCC as a model, as the ideal mode of integral-in-the-community? 

Now, that idealized vision founders on the rocks of a couple of hard truths -

a. Integral, at this point, is interesting in and of itself, to only a small subset of people.
b. The practices, beliefs, creeds, credos, principals, of integral-in-community, have yet to be established.  And in the real world, these must be established.  (See here for UU's history, and read here about UU's Principles and Purposes).  As an example, there is still a fairly large disagreement about "first-tier" versus 2nd tier.

Contra to Gary and Joe Perez, I still have significant issues with making this separation between "1st tier" and "2nd tier".  The main difficulty being that labeling of a person - or even a point of view - "1st tier", can be true, but also can be a signficant defense mechanism for a person/organization, and is one of the insidious ways that a "groupthink" can become rigid, thus created the "us versus them", "evil versus good", "2nd tier (good) versus 1st tier (bad)".  

I'm not sure the gain is worth the danger.

So, practically, what does that mean for action paths?

a.  Use an existing church, university, center, and develop a "sub-community". 
b.  Bootstrap through homes.

BEFORE that is even done though, there MUST be a social container.  And this must start from foundation principles/practices.  Otherwise, what you get is, vagueness and friendly people, gathering around for meandering conversations.

The foundational practices, at this point, is the "Module" concept.  Are there also "foundational" lesson plans?

 I'm sure some of the more experienced groups have some insight in this regard.

This post has been long - but any feedback would be appreciated.
 

Some good thoughts.

NOTE:  In case you were unaware, Gary has created the largest grassroots integral community (of course, you knew that, right?)

Saw this - being "old school" as I am, I have clear memories of loving MTV - back when MTV DID play music videos.  So I always like lists like this, where I can check out newer videos - and in this case, this is easy, because all the videos are embedded on the same page, courtesy of YouTube.

Especially since I can only identify some of the 50, it also helps to expand my knowledge of the current music scene.

An interesting report from Pongsathorn on meeting Dzogchen teachers.

Read it here.

Just saw this, been busy - but it is a full and comprehensive update, so if you haven't read it, go now.

Saw Peter post this at Zaadz:

“The report, from the World Institute for Development Economics Research at the UN University, says that the poorer half of the world’s population own barely 1% of global wealth.”

Then I saw this report on World Bank efforts to reduce poverty the last ten years:

Despite an intensified campaign against poverty, World Bank programs have failed to lift incomes in many poor countries over the past decade, leaving tens of millions of people suffering stagnating and even declining living standards, according to a report released Thursday by the bank's autonomous assessment arm.

Clearly, these two articles are related.   There has been a vast effort, on the part of the economic elites, to "grow the wealth" over the last several years.  But doing this, without paying attention to who benefits, simply makes sure the haves get more - in the article:

"For a sustained reduction in poverty over a period of time, it really pays to worry about both growth and distribution," said Vinod Thomas, director-general of the Independent Evaluation Group. "It has been a mistaken notion that you can grow first and worry about the distribution later."

There are also many social issues, that have to worked out internally, before economic use can be of aid.  You have to "pick your spots", so to speak, and take an integral, holistic, and pragmatic approach - paying attention not only to the economic picture, but the levels of consciousness and power distrubution, clan rivalries, etc - in a country.

The news from Nomali, is that Ken is in ICU, and has been unconscious, and has been for nearly a day.

More information in these places -

This thread on Zaadz.

This thread on Integral Multiplex.

Update:  I haven't seen something "official" on this, which is surprising.  I've been looking - will keep you posted.

I saw this from C4Chaos -

Very cool functionality at Zaadz.  You can choose the song, and using "open" functionality, this uses another application - Project Playlist

Although, I have to say, some of C4's music selections are seriously sappy!!     Life By the Drop though - that is cool.

(But hey, anyone who sees my IPod would say the same. We all have those sappy songs that "get" us). 

Still, a small poke at C4 - why isn't Changes on there?  That would be perfect for this playlist!

I think we all know the old joke about "Shit happens".  I would provide a link, but the folks over at the Zaadz Pod for Integral Institute (just a group interested in I-I, no relationship TO I-I, that I know of), have, in their creative whimsy, come up with some new versions of this 20 year old one-liner.


Take a look, I'm sure you'll have a smile or two!

More over at Vince's blog.

I see from Integral Options some good links today (well, good links every day, but today, I am actually acknowledging his link, something I do not do enough of, when he points me to good information.)

A couple of intriguing posts regarding the Alan Wallace book Contemplative Science.

Lion has a good post here, and apparently, Buddhist Geeks will have an audio session soon.

I and others have been grousing about an "open source spirituality", one resting on practice and assessments, rather than simply charismatic teachers and their claims.  This looks to be a very promising way to bring this about!

Another book to read...

In the previous post, I was investigating ethics - and I came across the Wikipedia article on Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development.

What struck me, as regarding Wilber theory, was the following Further Stages entry:

In his empirical studies of persons across their life-span, Kohlberg came to notice that some people evidently had undergone moral stage regression. He was faced with the option of either conceding that moral regression could occur, or revise his theory. Kohlberg chose the latter, postulating the existence of sub-stages wherein the emerging stage has not yet been adequately integrated into the personality.^[8] In particular Kohlberg noted of a stage 4½ or 4+, which is a transition from stage four to stage five, sharing characteristics of both.^[8] In this stage the individual has become disaffected with the arbitrary nature of law and order reasoning. Culpability is frequently turned from being defined by society to having society itself be culpable. This stage is often mistaken for the moral relativism of stage two as the individual considers society's conflicting interests with their own choices relatively and morally wrong.^[8] Kohlberg noted that this was often seen in students entering college.<sup>[8][11]

The question I have is this - if "regression" can happen, what does this do to Wilber's understanding that "you can't go backward" in terms of development?" 

Kohlberg seems to see this as "sub-stages", before "full" integration into the next stage.  I suppose that fits with the Wilber claim, but it also leaves one adrift in analyzing any PARTICULAR person - which again, seem to me to show that using stages to analyze an individual person is a non-starter.

Also, if you look at the bottom of this article, the See Also section, notice that there is a list of other theorists of development - cognitive, faith, ego, and psychosocial. 

This, for me, throws into clear relief how much "integral" theory is in alignment with, and dependent on, developmental theories.  So should integral theory be considered, in the main, a meta-developmental theory?</sup>

This story has been going around, so you have probably already read something about it.  But since I have been documenting these aspects of the U.S. administration, I am continuing.

Together with other documents filed late Friday, the images represent the latest and most aggressive sally by defense lawyers who declared this fall that charges against Mr. Padilla should be dismissed for “outrageous government conduct,” saying that he was mistreated and tortured during his years as an enemy combatant.

Now lawyers for Mr. Padilla, 36, suggest that he is unfit to stand trial. They argue that he has been so damaged by his interrogations and prolonged isolation that he suffers post-traumatic stress disorder and is unable to assist in his own defense. His interrogations, they say, included hooding, stress positions, assaults, threats of imminent execution and the administration of “truth serums.”

The biggest point about Padilla, of course, is that he has been held for 3 1/2 years, without any charges filed against him. 

On a personal level, it's hard to have any sympathy for Padilla.  He cheerleads the actions of 9/11, from what I understand.  Just from that perspective alone, his perspective is monstrous. 

Nevertheless, the fact is, there have been no charges filed against him.  How long, can someone be kept indefinitely isolated, imprisoned, without some form of trial.  The only reason he is in the trial system now, is because this was forced by the Supreme Court, tipping its preferences in an earlier case, which caused the Justice department to file just before the Supreme Court was to hear the Padilla case.

Glenn Greenwald's article is worth reading here.

With a couple of the other cases I have commented on here, it needs to be reinforced that, from any ethical system, whether utilitarian, christian, etc - that the lawlessness and dehumanizing treatment of even justly imprisoned prisoners, has a corrosive effect when utilized by the main state powers.

A new Integral Blog here - I make it a habit to refer to new aspiring blogs, for you never know the depth of the blog or person, so it is always wise to check 'em out.

Like Open Integral, or Integral Options, sometimes I find that they far surpass in contribution anything that I can do.

Also, he has gone ahead and added himself to the list of Integral Blogs. 

I keep a feed of entries of Integral Bloggers, you can see this feed on the right side of this blog.  

This weekend, the effects of Typhoon Durian is assumed to have killed 1000 people in the Phillipines.

These type of tragedies, are simply pointless, given that smart infrastructure can mitigate the damage and death that comes from these type of natural disasters.

Take a look at this list of severe European windstorms.  Notice, as time progresses, the lesser number of deaths.  This is mainly due to stronger infrastructure, buildings, tolerance testing in architecture, canals for decent runoff, etc.

I simply cannot comprehend the type of value system that spends 3 billion on a destroyer, as well as other military boondoggles, when the opportunity exists to sow UNIVERSAL good will, by utilizing these funds for helping nations out with good infrastructure.

Perhaps that is naive - but I do believe that this creates both:

a. Goodwill
b. Economic partners that are more interested in productive commerce, than being a "bad" neighbor.

NOTE:  This of course doesn't mean that ALL the effects of natural disasters can be mitigated.  But some can. 

Of course, we see this same type of blindness with global warming - and the exact same poorer countries will suffer the worst effects.

I had a chance to see the Fountain recently.

It was truly a marvelous experience. Basically, for me, I get throw into recognition of the "always everpresent", which happens sometimes, when there are very good "pointing out" instructions, and the shift happens.

And this film did this for me. 

But the additional realization of this film -(who knows that it is a true realization, but I will share it anyway) is the essential human-ness that we are - that I am, that she is, that you are, that we are - remains.  The laws, feelings, issues, that happen for the bodymind, cco-exist right beside, interpentrating, the recognition of one Consciousness.

The movie, in a large human sense, is a tragedy.  In three different times, in three different worlds, (also a progression through the Bardos here), Man is Striving.  For love, on the quest, to save Her, to save Himself, to save the world. 

Fighting against death.  Fighting for redemption.  And just as it appears he can - it ends.  He fails to save his love.  He fails in his quest.  He fails in immortality.

But IN this failure, the transformation of life happens.  In this surrender, the light of consciousnesss (hinted at in all the myths, dreams, symbols), finally appears completely.

And then the realization is that this light is - and was - always present. 

So for me, at the end, "I" live my dream, and interpenetrating this, is the recognition of the Truth.

And I say YES to both.  Yes, yes, yes, a thousand times yes!



In terms of "logical storytelling", I would say that this film is mediocre.  I reference B.S. and integral criticism in my last post. 

This movie gives an example of how "logical criticism" - analyzing plot, character development, etc - would truly say that this is a mediocre film.

It is only in the recognition of the "deeper message", that the truth of this movie comes shining through.

I saw this article about Calling Bullshit, over at the Watchdog blog - it is an article mainly about the vapidness of our current press, especially as it comes to being stenographers for the White House, rather than skeptical inquirers.

I will fess up - I am built in a skeptical way - if I perceive something that strikes me as B.S., not truthful, I immediately am psychically galvanized.  "What is going on?"  "Why did they say that?", or even better "WTF?"

This particular voice - this identity - is a particularly strong identity in the awareness field comprising myself.

Now, I do have SOME space from this voice.  Especially when you sit in meditation, and as the chattering mind runs down, runs out of places to hide, I get treated to a spectacle of the "bullshit detector mind", inside of me, and seeing in a sense, just how shallow that particular voice can be.

The problem is - this voice is very very useful, to me, and very, very valuable.  That ability to distinguish truth from falsehood, to make determinations about people, positive and negative, to be truthful and blunt with oneself - it really is quite a good survival mechanism in the world.  Even in the job situation, to see a path through to a clean product.

As such, this voice can be very hard to disidentify with, as my self-identity - to the degree that I a identified with anything, has a big degree of identification with this voice.

Now, here's my sweeping statement - BLOGGERS especially, INCLUDING integral bloggers, have that voice in spades - it's not just me!! 

And I think there is some proof to this fact, given all the integral bloggers activity regarding Ken's Wyatt Earp post.  (yes, this means YOU reading this!)  Especially since a lot of integral thinking has to do with SYNTHESIS, as analysis.  When you engage in synthesis anlysis, you engage the limitations of one train of thought - focusing on the contradictions (and b.s.) of that particular train of thought for - hopefully - a higher view.

And the thing is, there are problems with this voice - there is bullshit in the bullshit detector, if you don't mind my language.  A few spring to mind -

a. Not all B.S. is equal.  To give an example, from the political world - what type of b.s. is more damaging - lying about a sexual encounter in the White House, or lying to the american public to get people into a war?  (I'm not providing answers to this, just laying out the scenario.) 
b. You can "fool" the b.s. meter, by appealing to the frame (this is a lie/self-contradiction) by setting up fake b.s. - we see this a lot in the current political market via smearing of opponents, dishonestly, or trumping up the charges, or blowing out of proportion an inconsistency in behavoir as a HUGE character issue.
c. The b.s. meter can be misapplied - for example, in one sense, b.s. and ethics are related.

Example:  Someone isn't "in integrity" between their stated beliefs and their actions - but recognized that , is not the same as saying that person is unethical.  So a sense of  "moral outrage", which is found when someone else transgresses against a moral value of another (moral turpitude!) - is often conflated with a straight out b.s. meter.  Thus people will accuse each other of this or that, or people will say "you are coming from an amber place - improve your colors - get your a$$ into violet!".

Or some such.

So, what does this have to do with integral, or with spirituality?

Well, I'm just exploring ideas right now (and by the way, saying "I'm just exploring, while true, is a good defense against the b.s. meter, because you aren't, you know, saying something authoritatively!), but here goes.

I'd like to see what an "integral b.s. meter" would look like.  Or, without the integral language, how a b.s. meter "should" work, from a higher consciousness place.  As I can't see us integral bloggers getting less attached to our b.s. calling (although it would probably be a good personal growth experiment, if I, for say three months, said nothing that was "critical", or pointing out the limitations of a particular point of view or action.  But given my job, that is nearly impossible.)

a.  Focusing on "the facts maam".  My main issue with the Wilber  Earpy posts, was the obvious misrepresentation of another's views.  While there were others who had some moral problems with the language, or the harshness, that didn't seem to come from a higher perspective, if you deem those as "subjective", then the obviousness of the misrepresentation of Frank Visser's actual post, was still problematic.

b.  Developing a "ranking scale" of b.s.  I think this would take awhile, but - it might be worth doing.  Does one episode of anger, suddenly discount 10 years of being a saint otherwise?  Can that type of judgment be made.  This is also important, in the spiritual community, as - should spiritual leaders have human foibles?  Should they always be exemplars of human behavior?  Are they allowed to laugh at bad jokes? Can they fart in public?     (I figure three bad episodes do disqualify a particular teacher.  Maybe even two - sorta like the "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".)   Does repeated horrible integral analysis that misrepresents both facts, and then also lies by omission, discredit that analysis?  I could say this about a couple of integral bloggers out there - and back it up, based on MANY different instances of their writing - but I don't, for three reasons. 

1. In the spirit of comity (brotherly love!)
2. because hey, my perspective is limited, and
3. There are few enough of us, that it doesn't make sense to argue about angels on the head of a pin, right?

Lastly, when we engage our b.s. detector, it is important, from a spiritual perspective to remember "You are not that".   And - for me at least - distinguishing between that "outraged reaction" or "that's B.S!" and the fundament of awareness that is my true nature - that is important as well.   If my energy is in the b.s. detector, rather than enlightened awareness, then that is a problem. 

So, I ask the question - how would an "enlightened" or "integral" b.s. detector work?  I would REALLY appreciate some thoughtful responses to this post.

Thanks!

Tricks and tips to learn faster and longer, at Online Education Database.

I always need to remember the breakfast one, myself...