Ken Wilber — “an enlightened nazi”

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Haumea2018 said:

Back to his statement -- typical of ivory tower thinkers, he can't present a single real-life example of an "enlightened nazi" -- instead it's merely a possibility derived from his theories.  Theory first, reality second.  I would venture to guess that he would have trouble finding such an example, because he doesn't fully understand all the real-life implications -- the psychological development especially -- of the Nondual state.

I see two opposing perspectives here: 1. there are apparently examples of enlightened mystics with backwards beliefs all thoughout history, and 2. the non-dual realization does obviously lead to a change in a person's overall values (I heard of one guy who turned from republican to democrat basically overnight). I would say that both of these observations can be reconciled by recognizing the relativity in each case.

"Backwards beliefs" is of course more prevalent in an ancient cultural backdrop, so you should expect the change of values in one time in history to be comparatively less "progressive" than a later time in history. The change is finite and gradual: you don't become a complete saint, atleast not overnight.

So if we were to take a completely theoretical perspective, then there is no problem with an "enlightened nazi". However, the odds of that in today's world are obviously very slim. Nevertheless, I don't see how Wilber is really falling short here. Did Wilber ever claim there are actual enlightened nazis? A "theoretical possibility" is exactly that because there doesn't have to be any real-life examples.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Carl-Richard

[Brandon Nankivell]

1 hour ago, Lyubov said:

any way to access the full article ?

scihub?

[Haumea2018]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

I see two opposing perspectives here: 1. there are apparently examples of enlightened mystics with backwards beliefs all thoughout history

If you lived in ancient times, or even 100 years ago, you couldn't have backwards beliefs unless they were backward relative to that time and place.  We can't measure all of history using the yardstick of the values of educated, mostly white, mostly middle- and upper-middle class Westerners living in 2020.  That's the entire point of my whole spiel: we're talking about basic "fitting-in" shit of the modern milieu, so there isn't much there to impress anyone as far as really going out on a limb and being advanced.  We take material advantages for granted that they couldn't even imagine, and one can't suggest that those material advantages haven't shaped our attitudes.  So there couldn't be a more unfair comparison imo.

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Did Wilber ever claim there are actual enlightened nazis? A "theoretical possibility" is exactly that because there doesn't have to be any real-life examples.

But that stems from my criticism of his approach - I simply don't buy the "two separate tracks" theory of stages vs. structures.  So if I reject the theory, I reject the possibilities of that theory.  Here's why I don't buy it: one is ivory tower, the other is the baseline of one's entire being, one's consciousness independent of theories and concepts.  One is mental, the other is embodied.  The mental one has feet of clay.  It's an issue that Wilber never bothers to get out of the ivory tower and check whether his theories have validity.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Haumea2018

[Someone here]

8 hours ago, Yali said:

According to Ken Wilber, an “enlightened nazi” is not a contradiction in terms. How is this possible?

The nazi is God Because God is everything. 

Anytime. 

[Eph75]

As mentioned enlightenment happens on the consciousness and spiritual developmental lines while the spiral is reflecting the value systems appearing through cognitive development, the how we think, the complexity of the sense we make out of what we are able to perceive and the quality of actions that are available to us. 

Enlightenment happens unrelated to spiral stages, and as Wilber also states, happens more in the mystic state as rationality later introduced in development dismisses much of that which calls for an open-mindedness in order to reach such enlightenment states, and also why spirituality has in large been shunned in later developmental stages and the Western world, and religion along with it. 

We often see a misconception that enlightenment is Turquoise simply because spirituality and consciousness is "rebooted" through the "mirroring" of first tier stages in the second tier stages. Turquoise bringing back the mystical, magical from the Purple stage, back through deeper cognition,  a different flavor if you will, more relevant, and more "grown up". The typical historical enlightened beings we think of were not on a cognitive level that of Turquoise, but we do see those mystical and magical parallels. 

Waking up can happen anywhere. Growing up is something entirely different. 

An enlightened being is still subjected to the cognitive limitation and value system of the place and time they find themselves in. Love experienced, that love would be relative framing created or allowed by the stage. Not the same as Turquoise perception of love. "Absolute love" can be early stage inclusive but relative to nature and animals, or even later stage relative ethnocentrically, or later stage inclusive relative worldcentrically. 

The enlightened being might not express himself but the underlying perception of the relative world won't come from the future. They won't be coming from post-states and beyond, they will be different enlightenment  versions for each state. They are more detaching from the circumstances where cognitive abilities are called for in the relative world. Turning to non-duality negates that cognitive "need" through disidentification with the relative world. 

So hypothetically, yes there could be an "enlightened nazi" but that nazi would probably not interfere with the relative going-on and hence not be percieved as holding nazi values. Has there been one? Yeah, that's it right? You wouldn't really know, just like you wouldn't know who were pro-nazi, never expressed it, and later denounced nazism after the fact.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Eph75

[Haumea2018]

One could argue that cognitive development isn't really even "development", but socially and materially conditioned evolution of attitudes: social conditioning/technology.  In other words, it's superficial.

In fact, I would argue there isn't a single "Turquoise" person alive on earth at the moment if we are to take the implications of it seriously.  We simply don't have the technology to include the circle of "care" to "all of life." If one follows that to its logical conclusion, that means we need Star Trek replicators for genuine Turquoise: both animal and vegetable life are "off-limits" for consumption.

So at best we have very few genuinely Yellow types and no Turquoise.

[tsuki]

The closest to enlightened nazi would be my favorite Martin Heidegger

[Haumea2018]

5 minutes ago, tsuki said:

The closest to enlightened nazi would be my favorite Martin Heidegger

That probably is the closest, although I don't think it's likely he was what one would consider fully enlightened if at all.  Maybe partially, since his theories are pretty rooted in thinkers who were at least partly enlightened.  But then lots of partially enlightened people are far away from having a major integrative shift psychologically.

[Leo Gura]

A) You have to remember that most Nazi's are not putting babies heads on pikes or burning Jews in ovens. Your typical 1930's Nazi was basically like today's Neoliberal corpo professional class. The pop-cultural image of Nazis as these evil murderers is not true to how Nazis actually were. Your typical 1930's Nazi was like your grandma who would bake you cookies.

Need I remind you guys that Ramaji and Ananda were/are Trump supporters? There's your enlightened Nazis of the 21st century

All that Nazi really means is nationalism/stage Blue. And you can certainly be enlightened at stage Blue. Most of Japanese Zen masters are like that.

B) The binary label of "enlightened" in this case is very problematic because again it removes the many degrees and facets of consciousness which are possible and are highly important. When you use the word "enlightened" in such a binary and simplistic manner it leads to all sorts of absurdities. The bottom line is that being "enlightened" doesn't mean as much as you think it means. It's a very low bar to clear. The mistake here is that people hear that someone is "enlightened" and then they automatically assume that this equates to perfection and sainthood. Not. At. All.

Imagine if we called all boxers "boxers" without any further distinctions in the quality of their boxing. So a kid at your local gym is a "boxer" and Mike Tyson is a "boxer". So they are equal. That's how absurd this "enlightened" label is.

Or imagine if we called everyone who went to school as "educated". So your kid who finished 5th grade is "educated" and Albert Einstein is also "educated".

[zeroISinfinity]

Full Actual Understanding and knowing of "nothing" is to be considered "Enlightened". 

Leo is one of such people for example. 

Without it you can't discern "who is actually where". 

Edited December 29, 2020 by zeroISinfinity

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, zeroISinfinity said:

Full Actual Understanding and knowing of "nothing" is to be considered "Enlightened". 

Leo is one of such people for example. 

I've never claimed to be enlightened.

[zeroISinfinity]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

I've never claimed to be enlightened.

I mean you know what God/Reality is lets not pretend. 

[Rilles]

4 minutes ago, zeroISinfinity said:

Full Actual Understanding and knowing of "nothing" is to be considered "Enlightened". 

Leo is one of such people for example. 

Thats a nice story.

[zeroISinfinity]

2 minutes ago, Rilles said:

Thats a nice story.

Truth is Truth you know. So lets support people who understand it. 

[tsuki]

If we want to develop a standard by which we consider people to be enlightened, I think that a good one would be to look at their nicknames. It's obvious that nicknames starting with "t" and ending with "i" express highest enlightenment.

[Gesundheit]

Who said that Nazis are evil monsters? Who wrote modern history?

Perhaps a more evil monster.

[Ya know]

@Leo Gura Talk shit!! What about that confidence after your 5meo bender

[Lyubov]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

A) You have to remember that most Nazi's are not putting babies heads on pikes or burning Jews in ovens. Your typical 1930's Nazi was basically like today's Neoliberal corpo professional class. The pop-cultural image of Nazis as these evil murderers is not true to how Nazis actually were. Your typical 1930's Nazi was like your grandma who would bake you cookies.

uh... this is not true. your typical nazi was enlisted in the ss killing jews, fighting on one of the fronts, or doing some sort of managerial/office/research work to support the party for the benefit of the "aryan race." to be a nazi was to be a member of the party. we aren't talking about your un enlisted german citizens under nazi germany rule. nazi's were little like today's neoliberal corpo professional class. sure they had a mundane side to them that isn't often portrayed but that is one aspect of devilry, it is carried out by mundane typical humans. 

Edited December 29, 2020 by Lyubov

[Vrubel]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

All that Nazi really means is nationalism/stage Blue.

@Leo GuraMan, I could not disagree more with this statement. It's highly problematic precisely because the Nazi phenomena was not just a stage-blue nationalism. It was an absolute extreme of its most toxic form. You gave the example of a kid-boxer and Mohammed Ali both being considered boxers and went on saying that this labeling is misleading. Now, you are doing absolutely the same thing with stage blue nationalism. Nazi Germany is nowhere near the same class as for example stage blue societies like The Philippines, India or even fascist Italy.
I don't care how spiritual or progressive you are, 'Nazi' is a highly slanderous and libelous term. Pretty much the most damning you can put on a person. Criticize Trump or American conservatives all you want but calling them Nazis will turn off a large portion of reasonable people who would otherwise agree. 

Edited December 29, 2020 by Vrubel

[tsuki]

Ffs, this discussion is obscene. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law?wprov=sfla1