Criticism of Ken Wilber

[Cocolove]

I've seen a lot of what seem to be substantive criticisms of Ken Wilber. What do you guys think of these? Are these legitimate? Why does this happen? It seems to me he might just have some type of shadow, or perhaps the claims are unsubstantiated.

http://www.kheper.net/topics/Wilber/Cult_of_Ken_Wilber.html

https://markmanson.net/ken-wilber

[Leo Gura]

Seems like fair criticism.

What must be remembered is that self-bias, survival, self-deception, partialness, and incompleteness are unescapable aspects of the mind.

The desire to follow Ken Wilber blindly rather than thinking independently for yourself is the crucial mistake. Trying to join and follow groups too closely is the key mistake.

Why on Earth would anyone want to join some "integral institute" and follow the work of one man blindly?

Everything must be thought through for yourself.

[Raptorsin7]

@Leo Gura If the one man knew what he was talking about, it could make sense to follow him. It's not necessary but i don't think we can deny the fact that for some people blindly following a spiritual guru could be the best thing that ever happened to them.

[Leo Gura]

4 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

@Leo Gura If the one man knew what he was talking about, it could make sense to follow him. It's not necessary but i don't think we can deny the fact that for some people blindly following a spiritual guru could be the best thing that ever happened to them.

My point is precisely: No!

Blindly following even the best human being of all time will result in evil.

Goodness is not a function of content, but structure. Conformity is the structure of evil.

Blind following is what created mankind's greatest evils. The core problem is blindness. If you are blind, you will commit evil. Nothing can compensate for being blind. And no one can make you see but yourself.

[Raptorsin7]

Nope, i'm blindly following you and you can't stop me...

[jj40]

@Leo Gura How do you know that you are not following another person/people blindly in some capacity? How can you know that the thoughts you conjure up and the actions you take are independent from all the information you have taken in from other people and resources? 

[remember]

15 minutes ago, Raptorsin7 said:

Nope, i'm blindly following you and you can't stop me...

then i guess he already told you what you are. confess! ahm you already did... renounce!

[Leo Gura]

12 minutes ago, jj40 said:

@Leo Gura How do you know that you are not following another person/people blindly in some capacity? How can you know that the thoughts you conjure up and the actions you take are independent from all the information you have taken in from other people and resources? 

Of course you cannot ever be totally independent of your sources and influences, but that is not really a problem.

All that's important is that you don't follow others too closely and diversify your sources.

Keep a healthy distance from your teachers/gurus. Learn from them but follow your own path.

Don't go crawling up your teacher's butthole. Don't go live with them. Don't go work for them. Don't go sleep with them.

This is just such obvious stuff. Yet people blindly do it and then act shocked when they get hurt.

Yeah, if you let your guru stick his dick inside you, you will regret it. That was your fault really for letting things get that far.

Learn to maintain healthy boundaries.

[Forestluv]

@jj40 
Observe attachment/identification.

Every true thing is also false. Every meaningful thing is also meaningless. 

This awareness free because there is no owner and nothing to own. 

[Leo Gura]

Having read the criticisms in more depth, I want to underscore that many criticisms of Ken Wilber are foolish and that the bulk of his written work is as solid as can be.

Minor criticisms like his support for Andrew Cohen, Adi Da, and his over-emphasis of the Mean Green Meme and his political prescriptions are all knit-picks compared to the bulk of his written work, which is solid, and which has little to do with those things.

Don't get distracted by the politics surrounding the Integral Institute. Just focus on his written work, which is genius.

And as always, don't expect any teacher to be perfect in their embodiment or conduct.

The criticism's of Ken Wilber found on the following website, for example, are pure BS:

http://www.integralworld.net

[remember]

in the first article it was practically revealed ken wilber being unable to distance himself far enough from his own guru.... absolutism is always dangerous, there is no relation to any person where absolutism could be healthy. so it’s really difficult sometimes to make a difference between a teaching and a person - although responsibility in the absolute sense is nothing only one person can take. in the comparison to dictators, you can’t say the dictator is the only responsible person but you also can’t say that the people the dictator suppresses are the responsible ones or that his followers/supporters/executives/executors alone are.
the difference between a dictator and a guru - where is it when the teaching is followed blindly. the dynamics are the same dynamics, when it turns toxic. especially when thinking god speaks directly through the guru while the guru confuses himself to be god alone (god is unfailable is one of the biggest traps)
there was a post about sensitiv phases during awakening some time ago - you could say it’s the holy(had a typo: holly. that would also fit in some sense) phase, where trust into the universe is reclaimed, during this time people are open and vulnerable, and fall into traps - it’s the gurus responsibility if they do.

Edited November 25, 2019 by remember
that’s where god is a shapeshifter really becomes interesting

[infinitelove]

@Leo Gura what is your personal criticism of ken wilber spirtuality. He seems like the type of zen master who denies infinte love.

[Leo Gura]

39 minutes ago, infinitelove said:

@Leo Gura what is your personal criticism of ken wilber spirtuality. He seems like the type of zen master who denies infinte love.

I have no serious criticisms of him. He knows his shit.

He doesn't deny love. He talks quite a bit about Eros (his term of Love), and he says that the driving force behind all evolution is love. Which is correct in my view, although even that doesn't go far enough to underscore the importance of Love in all of Creation.

He might not be as explicit about Infinite Love as I am, equating Love & Truth. But that's probably because he has not accessed some of the deepest insights I have accessed via psychedelics.

I think his understanding of reality would be deeper if he went deeply into psychedelics. But oh well. It's good enough. You can only ask so much of a guy. He has done several life-times-worth of amazing work.

Ken is one of the greatest Western philosophers and intellectuals who has ever lived. We are lucky to be alive alongside him. It's sad that his health as deteriorated so quickly.

[mandyjw]

1 hour ago, remember said:

there was a post about sensitiv phases during awakening some time ago - you could say it’s the holy(had a typo: holly. that would also fit in some sense) phase, where trust into the universe is reclaimed, during this time people are open and vulnerable, and fall into traps - it’s the gurus responsibility if they do.

This should be discussed a lot more I think. There are certain traps that come with being close to a guru and different dangers with the maverick approach. Sometimes you even end up attracting a trap you were hoping to avoid by choosing the approach you were less afraid of. 

[electroBeam]

12 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Blindly following even the best human being of all time will result in evil.

Actually in the yogic system it was common for people to pick a guru and follow him intensely. 

Not following him intensely was seen as superficial, much like how fucking every chick without settling down and having a relationship with 1 person is superficial.

If you don't follow a particular institute, guru, etc closely, you will never understand their depth and this will most likely result in either you not getting the best out of them or you not understanding them and then misinterpreting them because you were too flippant with your following of them.

Yep we've all seen the down sides of following a particular institute too closely, but you seem to be completely oblivious to the equally down side of doing the opposite: not following them closely. The maverick approach is not superior to the 'following closely' approach, its got just as many traps. A fine balance between thinking for yourself and relying on others is necessary for an optimal strategy. 

Havent you noticed that the people who don't go deep into your work and dont follow you closely enough end up dismissing and demonizing you? Like rational wiki? What would happen if rational wiki ended up actually taking your work seriously and followed you closely? Haven't you noticed that the reason why Shaun had an ego back lash was because he didn't go the entire way with your work? He went half way?

 

"Why on Earth would anyone want to join some "integral institute" and follow the work of one man blindly?" 

You know if you don't follow some one very deeply, you turn into Shauns, you go half way and get fucked for it. Thats why joining some integral institute is valuable. You want to get really deep with it. 

Edited November 25, 2019 by electroBeam

[Leo Gura]

18 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

Actually in the yogic system it was common for people to pick a guru and follow him intensely. 

And this is dangerous because the student must assume the guru is valid and truthful, which the student is not qualified to know. So he's taking a huge gamble.

It's like getting married to a random girl before you've even slept with her. Then later you find out she's a total pyscho.

18 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

You know if you don't follow some one very deeply, you turn into Shauns, you go half way and get fucked for it. Thats why joining some integral institute is valuable. You want to get really deep with it.

But the danger is you will become a sheep who walks off a cliff along with the herd.

This work is full of dangers. Which is why so few people truly master it.

You can go deeply by yourself. You don't need to crawl up someone's ass to go deep. RationalWiki doesn't need to blindly follow me. All they need to do is sit down and do the practices by themselves. It would also be a mistake for RationalWiki to only listen to my teachings. They should cross-reference my teachings with those of a 100 other gurus, yogis, mystics, philosophers, psychonauts, etc. to find the common ground.

Working through this material carefully by yourself is the key. Nothing can be taken for granted, believed, or assumed.

[electroBeam]

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

They should cross-reference my teachings with those of a 100 other gurus, yogis, mystics, philosophers, psychonauts, etc. to find the common ground.

Yeah but you will get fucked if you half ass the teachings of any one of those gurus. Just briefly/shallowly practising what a guru teaches is 10x safer than going half way with their teachings and landing in a no mans zone. Even though briefly studying them isn't good. 

you might be able to study 100s of gurus, but the average person with the average job isn't going to be able to. I would guess max 5 if they want to do it properly.

 

ps: fuck I took 8 woodrose seeds and they are actually working, I'm shocked. Omg I'm such an idiot I didnt think they were going to work, I'm freaking out. First time doing psychedelics. Sorry I know i shouldnt be writing this. 

Edited November 25, 2019 by electroBeam

[TamaraD]

13 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

@Leo Gura If the one man knew what he was talking about, it could make sense to follow him. It's not necessary but i don't think we can deny the fact that for some people blindly following a spiritual guru could be the best thing that ever happened to them.

Eh I would always be careful with that.

 

[Leo Gura]

33 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

but the average person with the average job isn't going to be able to.

The average person has zero chance of awakening up. So it's a moot point.

When you try to make awakening mainstream, it turns into crap like Catholicism or Mormonism.

[electroBeam]

23 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

When you try to make awakening mainstream, it turns into crap like Catholicism or Mormonism.

Yep agreed