A review of Jeff Meyerhoff´s "Bald Ambition".
Ken Wilber is a controversial spiritual teacher whose
message is known as Integral Theory. It seems to be one of many off-shoots of
the New Age movement. The cosmic evolutionism of the Theosophists always lurk
in the background in cases like these. Wilber have created a rather complex
synthesis encompassing different spiritual traditions, psychology and science.
A good introduction to his ideas is the book "A brief history of
everything". The followers of Integral Theory have attempted to apply
Wilber's perspectives to a wide variety of fields, from management training and
art to ecology and Christianity.
Of course, not everyone is impressed.
Jeff Meyerhoff has decided to cut Wilber down to size, exposing the man's grand ambitions at a philosophical meta-synthesis as just another "perspective" among many others. According to Meyerhoff, Wilber has a persistent tendency to portray fringe scientific theories as if they were the consensus, misinterpret both Western and Eastern thinkers to make them fit his own Integral Theory, and be somewhat megalomaniacal on a purely personal level. Meyerhoff takes apart Wilber's curious metaphysics (what on earth *are* holons, anyway?) rather effectively. He also scores some points on other issues. And yes, he's a bit rude (Wilber is bald-headed).
It's perfectly possible that Meyerhoff is right on the various issues under debate, taken one by one. (My working knowledge of Habermas and W.R. Inge's interpretation of Plotinus is somewhat rusty, I'm afraid.) My problem is the author's postmodernist or postmodernistic tendency to attack "theories of everything" per se. What's Meyerhoff's alternative to Integral Theory? He doesn't seem to have any! Of course, Jeff would simply say: "Well, sonny, that's the point".
I for one doubt it. Pandit Wilber may be off tangent, but personally I'm gonna wait for the next Theorist of Everything to show off his "bald" ambition...
The truth is out there, agent Meyerhoff.
Of course, not everyone is impressed.
Jeff Meyerhoff has decided to cut Wilber down to size, exposing the man's grand ambitions at a philosophical meta-synthesis as just another "perspective" among many others. According to Meyerhoff, Wilber has a persistent tendency to portray fringe scientific theories as if they were the consensus, misinterpret both Western and Eastern thinkers to make them fit his own Integral Theory, and be somewhat megalomaniacal on a purely personal level. Meyerhoff takes apart Wilber's curious metaphysics (what on earth *are* holons, anyway?) rather effectively. He also scores some points on other issues. And yes, he's a bit rude (Wilber is bald-headed).
It's perfectly possible that Meyerhoff is right on the various issues under debate, taken one by one. (My working knowledge of Habermas and W.R. Inge's interpretation of Plotinus is somewhat rusty, I'm afraid.) My problem is the author's postmodernist or postmodernistic tendency to attack "theories of everything" per se. What's Meyerhoff's alternative to Integral Theory? He doesn't seem to have any! Of course, Jeff would simply say: "Well, sonny, that's the point".
I for one doubt it. Pandit Wilber may be off tangent, but personally I'm gonna wait for the next Theorist of Everything to show off his "bald" ambition...
The truth is out there, agent Meyerhoff.
No comments:
Post a Comment