Leo is NOT Construct Aware

[Unsavory5291]

7 hours ago, AION said:

People wouldn't be asking these kind of questions if people just read Ken Wilber instead of trying to reinvent the wheel. One of the biggest problem of spiritual people nowadays is that they are trying to reinvent the wheel and feel genius. I'm not above this mental/spiritual masturbation.

I do not understand how you can read any IRL context on Ken Wilber, read his book "A brief history of everything" and not think he is just a dreamy narcissist.

The closest I've seen to something that just doesn't just reiteratively add descriptors is the qualitative analysis of language of Susanne R. Cook-Greuter (which she talks about in "Posutautonomous Ego Development: A Study of Its Nature and Measurement")

Edited 3 hours ago by Unsavory5291
Typo

[Unsavory5291]

On the topic of the post: Using the language of ego-developmental frameworks, It is very much not ego-aware to postulate about someone's "true" level of ego development, especially someone you don't know and haven't talked to.

Reaching one-ness through cognitive relativism is nothing but a short-cut to avoid emotional pain. It has nothing to do with Oneness. Oneness is about choosing to take in your pain, and the pain of others. The symbol of Christ here is appropriate.

I do find it odd that some of Leo's political opinions are unusually strong, at least in the forum, but that might as well just be my naivety. I've noticed that quite a few intelligent people are very afraid of the consequences of "buffoon leaders" (Sam Harris or the political commentator Destiny come to mind), while I consider them for now as necessary disruptions in how the world has been operating.

[Hojo]

@AION Ken Wilbert isn't an argument. State what he says in your own words it might make it an argument.

You cant argue against something by stating a man's name its not an argument or a rebuttal.

Edited 3 hours ago by Hojo