Changes

==INTRODUCTION==

==INTRODUCTION==

Twenty-two years ago I stumbled upon a life changing book.  It was “[http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/2219.htm Stages of Faith]” by James Fowler.  Fowler taught a form of developmental [[psychology]] to seminary students at [[Emory University]]’s [[Candler School of Theology]].  His vision was to train future pastors to recognize that any given congregation will include a variety of people with differing faith-structures.  The idea was to equip the church to accommodate as well as challenge each type of faith.  Fowler’s academic work is based on meticulously categorized interviews with hundreds of people, each describing his or her own spiritual journey, and answering specific survey questions.  The result is that Fowler identifies six distinct stages of faith that are universally applicable, as it turns out, to any faith tradition.   

Twenty-two years ago I stumbled upon a life changing book.  It was “[https://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/2219.htm Stages of Faith]” by James Fowler.  Fowler taught a form of developmental [[psychology]] to seminary students at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emory_University Emory University]’s [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candler_School_of_Theology Candler School of Theology].  His [[vision]] was to train future pastors to recognize that any given congregation will include a variety of people with differing [[faith]]-[[structure]]s.  The [[idea]] was to equip the church to accommodate as well as challenge each type of faith.  Fowler’s academic work is based on meticulously categorized interviews with hundreds of people, each describing his or her own spiritual journey, and answering specific survey questions.  The result is that Fowler identifies six distinct stages of faith that are universally applicable, as it turns out, to any faith [[tradition]].   

Here in America we prefer to choose our beliefs from a menu, but the fact that faith develops in stages is not something you can simply choose to believe or not.  It’s one of those things like gravity that is not optional.  Anyone actively engaged in his or her own spiritual growth will inevitably grow upward through at least some of the six stages in a very specific order that will never vary.  And while the direction and order of the faith-stages are inviolable, one may not necessarily ever grow beyond a particular level.  Take a snapshot at any given church and you will find representatives of every stage.  Even a sample of people at the same point in life, say, all 40 year-olds, will represent different stages.  It was stunning to read the book because I was reading my own biography in a sense.  It was unequivocally clear to me at the time that I was in Fowler’s fifth stage.  I had experienced a number of “dark nights of the soul” on the way to that stage and for the first time I fully understood the underlying process.   

Here in America we prefer to choose our [[belief]]s from a menu, but the fact that faith develops in stages is not something you can simply choose to believe or not.  It’s one of those things like [[gravity]] that is not optional.  Anyone actively engaged in his or her own [[spiritual]] growth will inevitably grow upward through at least some of the six stages in a very specific order that will never vary.  And while the direction and order of the faith-stages are inviolable, one may not necessarily ever grow beyond a particular level.  Take a snapshot at any given church and you will find representatives of every stage.  Even a sample of people at the same point in life, say, all 40 year-olds, will represent different stages.  It was stunning to read the book because I was reading my own biography in a sense.  It was unequivocally clear to me at the time that I was in Fowler’s fifth stage.  I had experienced a number of “dark nights of the soul” on the way to that stage and for the first time I fully understood the underlying process.   

Ten years later I discovered [[Ken Wilber]].  I had heard of Wilber long before that but finally decided to read some of his books.  Wilber is something the world hasn’t seen since the ancient Greeks—a full-time self-supporting philosopher who achieved a categorical breakthrough.  Like Fowler, Wilber sees life unfolding in stages but expands stage theory to a cosmic scale.  There is actually a direct connection between the two men as Wilber often cites Fowler in his own work.  Wilber covers a universe of topics in his opus but we will focus here on what he has to say about spiritual growth.  He goes well beyond Fowler in this line of thought.

Ten years later I discovered [[Ken Wilber]].  I had heard of Wilber long before that but finally decided to read some of his [[books]].  Wilber is something the world hasn’t seen since the ancient Greeks—a full-time self-supporting philosopher who achieved a categorical breakthrough.  Like Fowler, Wilber sees life unfolding in stages but expands stage theory to a [[cosmic]] scale.  There is actually a direct connection between the two men as Wilber often cites Fowler in his own work.  Wilber covers a universe of topics in his opus but we will [[focus]] here on what he has to say about spiritual growth.  He goes well beyond Fowler in this line of thought.

Wilber may copyright his books but not his [[philosophy]].  He works in collaboration with many others.  He acknowledges that his role is that of a compiler of the work and thought of hundreds of others from Tibetan gurus, to German philosophers, to Harvard researchers.  Wilber's 10% contribution has been to provide the glue that pulls together the history of the twin human quests for truth and for meaning into a single unified vision; a “philosophy of everything.”  Yes, I know…we’ve all tried to do that!  But Wilber does seem to have made a major breakthrough in unifying diverse fields of thought.  The scope of his writing is vast and there is much we could say regarding his social and political thought, his philosophy of [[science]], and his taxonomy of the entire [[universe]], but my purpose here will be limited to presenting a brief but clear introduction to Wilber as spiritual guide.  I believe there are three key concepts involved:  '''quadrants, stages,'''  and '''states.'''

Wilber may copyright his books but not his [[philosophy]].  He works in collaboration with many others.  He acknowledges that his role is that of a compiler of the work and thought of hundreds of others from Tibetan gurus, to German philosophers, to Harvard researchers.  Wilber's 10% contribution has been to provide the glue that pulls together the [[history]] of the twin human quests for [[truth]] and for [[meaning]] into a single unified [[vision]]; a “philosophy of everything.”  Yes, I know…we’ve all tried to do that!  But Wilber does seem to have made a major breakthrough in unifying diverse fields of thought.  The scope of his writing is vast and there is much we could say regarding his social and political thought, his philosophy of [[science]], and his taxonomy of the entire [[universe]], but my purpose here will be limited to presenting a brief but clear introduction to Wilber as spiritual guide.  I believe there are three key concepts involved:  '''quadrants, stages,'''  and '''states.'''

==QUADRANTS==

==QUADRANTS==

From the beginning Wilber collected hundreds of bits of truth, wisdom, and theory from every imaginable source and struggled to make sense of it all.  Many of the concepts in his collection were mutually contradictory.  Then one day he was struck with a sudden flash of insight.  The result was a map of reality he calls “AQAL“ (all quadrants, all levels) which I will attempt to illustrate below.  Basically, the idea is that all existential reality lies in four coterminous dimensions even though we typically remain unconscious of those dimensions in the same way that a fish remains unaware of water.  For present purposes I will limit this discussion to the quadrants as they relate to human consciousness-events.  These are the quadrants:

From the beginning Wilber collected hundreds of bits of truth, [[wisdom]], and [[theory]] from every imaginable source and struggled to make sense of it all.  Many of the [[concepts]] in his collection were mutually contradictory.  Then one day he was struck with a sudden flash of [[insight]].  The result was a map of [[reality]] he calls “AQAL“ (all quadrants, all levels) which I will attempt to illustrate below.  Basically, the idea is that all existential reality lies in four coterminous dimensions even though we typically remain unconscious of those dimensions in the same way that a fish remains unaware of water.  For present purposes I will limit this discussion to the quadrants as they relate to human consciousness-events.  These are the quadrants:

[[Image:Quad_1.jpg|right|frame]]

[[Image:Quad_1.jpg|right|frame]]

I’m sure you get the idea now, but so what?  Well, the important thing to note for the moment is that no subjective state stands alone.  Every subjective state (UL) coexists within three other interdependent dimensions, two of which are quite ''objective''. This has tremendous implications for, say, Christian contemplative prayer or Buddhist meditation which are  typically regarded as involving only interior states of consciousness.  But every inner spiritual state includes an outer "state of body" (UR) as well as a set of guiding concepts (LL) that come largely from the influence of others (LR) including teachers, churches, priests, parents, books, friends, TV, and society at large.

I’m sure you get the idea now, but so what?  Well, the important thing to note for the [[moment]] is that no subjective state stands alone.  Every subjective state (UL) coexists within three other interdependent [[dimensions]], two of which are quite ''objective''. This has tremendous implications for, say, Christian contemplative prayer or Buddhist meditation which are  typically regarded as involving only interior states of [[consciousness]].  But every inner spiritual state includes an outer "state of body" (UR) as well as a set of guiding concepts (LL) that come largely from the influence of others (LR) including teachers, churches, priests, parents, books, friends, TV, and [[society]] at large.

'''The Premodern Paradigm'''

'''The Premodern Paradigm'''

Wilber describes at some length how the four quadrants evolved through the history of culture.  Back in premodern, or prerational times, all four quadrants were undifferentiated.  In other words, there was a magical sort of thinking that one's inner state (UL) directly influenced outer events (UR).  For example, there is the belief that sticking pins in a doll will cause someone else to feel pain.  Or one may pray for rain and when rain finally comes (maybe weeks later) one then claims that the prayer was responsible.  Alchemists believed that lead could become gold so they kept experimenting, expecting gold eventually to appear.  Premodern thinking did not end in modern times—it persists everywhere.  To give a familiar example, one may "believe in the Bible" and based on that belief, attempt to change or manipulate one's circumstances by quoting from the Bible.   

Wilber describes at some length how the four quadrants evolved through the history of [[culture]].  Back in pre-modern, or pre-rational times, all four quadrants were undifferentiated.  In other [[words]], there was a [[magic]]al sort of [[thinking]] that one's [[inner life|inner state]] (UL) directly influenced outer events (UR).  For example, there is the belief that sticking pins in a doll will cause someone else to feel pain.  Or one may pray for rain and when rain finally comes (maybe weeks later) one then claims that the prayer was responsible.  Alchemists believed that lead could become gold so they kept experimenting, expecting gold eventually to appear.  Pre-modern thinking did not end in modern times—it persists everywhere.  To give a familiar example, one may "believe in the [[Bible]]" and based on that [[belief]], attempt to change or manipulate one's circumstances by quoting from the Bible.   

'''The Modern Paradigm'''

'''The Modern Paradigm'''

The Enlightenment and the scientific revolution led to modern times with a powerful new way of understanding the right hand side of reality.  This new understanding was basically that objective (RH) reality simply obeys laws of nature and is completely independent of what we may believe.  A good example is modern medical practice.  When you are sick the doctor is not concerned with your inner consciousness but rather with the mechanics and chemistry of your body (UR).  He or she likely does not even want to talk to you other than possibly to ask where it hurts.  Typically you will be given a pill which is a chemical designed to alter your body chemistry.  This is a radical right-hand approach to reality which assumes that the LH side is immaterial to the cause and cure of your symptoms.  A right-hand approach to religion can be seen in studies where researchers have gone to prayer meetings and connected electrodes to participants’ brains (UR).  They discovered that certain brain waves (UR) activate during prayer (UL) and that endorphins (UR) are released in the brain (UR), thus creating the feeling of having a religious experience (UL). They conclude therefore that nothing is happening except chemistry (UR).  So the modern paradigm involves promoting the right hand side to the status of being verifiably real, while the left hand side is merely delusional in terms of knowing any real truth.   

[[The Enlightenment]] and the scientific revolution led to modern times with a powerful new way of understanding the right hand side of reality.  This new understanding was basically that objective (RH) reality simply obeys laws of [[nature]] and is completely independent of what we may believe.  A good example is modern medical [[practice]].  When you are sick the doctor is not concerned with your inner [[consciousness]] but rather with the mechanics and [[chemistry]] of your body (UR).  He or she likely does not even want to talk to you other than possibly to ask where it hurts.  Typically you will be given a pill which is a chemical designed to alter your body [[chemistry]].  This is a [[radical]] right-hand approach to reality which assumes that the LH side is immaterial to the cause and cure of your symptoms.  A right-hand approach to [[religion]] can be seen in studies where researchers have gone to prayer meetings and connected electrodes to participants’ brains (UR).  They discovered that certain brain waves (UR) activate during prayer (UL) and that endorphins (UR) are released in the brain (UR), thus creating the feeling of having a religious [[experience]] (UL). They conclude therefore that nothing is happening except chemistry (UR).  So the modern paradigm involves promoting the right hand side to the status of being verifiably real, while the left hand side is often merely delusional.   

Let's use the Bible again as another example of how the right hand approach can be applied to faith.  German scholars came along in the late 19th century and said "the Bible is an historical artifact that can be examined with the same critical scrutiny as a rock, a viral disease, or Shakespeare's Hamlet."  They ignored what faith had to say about the Bible and studied it purely on its own terms.  It subsequently proved to be an ordinary classifiable human document and a product of its times.  Scholars could only conclude that if God did have any influence over the Bible it was indirect at best.  So the Germans, for the first time, began to examine only the right-hand side of faith (the Bible in this case) and found that it was completely independent of the left-hand side (inner belief) and could thus be treated as a separate object of study.  As a result, some Christians ("conservatives") merely denounced this scholarship, and others ("liberals") agreed with the critics but then compartmentalized faith itself in the LH side where it would be immune from further RH critical scrutiny.   

Let's use the Bible again as another example of how the right hand approach can be applied to faith.  German scholars came along in the late 19th century and said "the Bible is an historical [[artifact]] that can be examined with the same critical scrutiny as a rock, a viral disease, or Shakespeare's Hamlet."  They ignored what faith had to say about the Bible and studied it purely on its own terms.  It subsequently proved to be an ordinary classifiable human document and a product of its times.  Scholars could only conclude that if God did have any influence over the Bible it was indirect at best.  So the Germans, for the first time, began to examine only the right-hand side of faith (the Bible in this case) and found that it was completely independent of the left-hand side (inner belief) and could thus be treated as a separate object of study.  As a result, some Christians ("conservatives") merely denounced this scholarship, and others ("liberals") agreed with the critics but then compartmentalized faith itself in the LH side where it would be immune from further RH critical scrutiny.   

Wilber strongly asserts that when modernism differentiated the subjective (LH) side from the objective (RH) side, that was a very positive thing for the most part. It gave us almost miraculous mastery of our world, including medical knowledge, electricity, automobiles, and other amazing benefits, and freed us from myth and the magical thinking of alchemy, voodoo, etc.  But it came with a price tag:  it demoted the states of inner consciousness to a place of relative unimportance.   

Wilber strongly asserts that when modernism differentiated the subjective (LH) side from the objective (RH) side, that was a very positive thing for the most part. It gave us almost miraculous mastery of our world, including medical knowledge, electricity, automobiles, and other amazing benefits, and freed us from myth and the magical thinking of alchemy, voodoo, etc.  But it came with a price tag:  it demoted the states of inner consciousness to a place of relative unimportance.   

'''CRITICAL WILBER CONCEPT:'''  Here’s one way to consider reintegration between RH and LH:  in the previous example of monitoring subjects’ brains with electrodes during prayer, Wilber would say there is reality happening in every quadrant.  He holds that mind is real, and therefore some sort of genuine growth, change, or expansion of consciousness is happening in the context of prayer.  At the same time he also asserts that the body is real and so endorphins are indeed more active during prayer, and are possibly even the sole cause of our devout feelings of inner peace.  It’s simply built into reality that everything is a two sided coin (actually a four-sided coin!) and therefore it doesn’t really matter if scientists find dopamine or even pink elephants in the brain; neither constitutes evidence that consciousness isn’t real* or isn’t growing in the context of prayer.  Dopamine, serotonin, or other brain chemicals do not negate spiritual growth.  However, if we remain unaware (or in denial) of the reality of both RH & LH sides of our experience,  then we are forced to choose in a false dualism.  One choice is to hold the infantile prerational and prescientific view that our prayer caused our inner religious experience (sometimes leveraged into a proof that God exists).  The other choice is to accept the modern critical (RH) view that we live in a colorless, flat, and demystified world in which we are just a collection of neuron-charged chemicals that generate an illusion of free will (sometimes leveraged into a proof that God does not exist).  Wilber, by contrast, would maintain that Spirit is the ground of all being, and that includes brain chemicals as well as consciousness.  We could say that the inner experience and the corresponding body processes taken together constitute a “spirit-event.”

'''CRITICAL WILBER CONCEPT:'''  Here’s one way to consider reintegration between RH and LH:  in the previous example of monitoring subjects’ brains with electrodes during prayer, Wilber would say there is reality happening in every quadrant.  He holds that mind is real, and therefore some sort of genuine growth, change, or expansion of consciousness is happening in the context of prayer.  At the same time he also asserts that the body is real and so endorphins are indeed more active during prayer, and are possibly even the sole cause of our devout feelings of inner peace.  It’s simply built into reality that everything is a two sided coin (actually a four-sided coin!) and therefore it doesn’t really matter if scientists find dopamine or even pink elephants in the brain; neither constitutes evidence that consciousness isn’t real* or isn’t growing in the context of prayer.  Dopamine, serotonin, or other brain chemicals do not negate spiritual growth.  However, if we remain unaware (or in denial) of the reality of both RH & LH sides of our experience,  then we are forced to choose in a false dualism.  One choice is to hold the infantile prerational and prescientific view that our prayer caused our inner religious experience (sometimes leveraged into a proof that God exists).  The other choice is to accept the modern critical (RH) view that we live in a colorless, flat, and demystified world in which we are just a collection of neuron-charged chemicals that generate an illusion of free will (sometimes leveraged into a proof that God does not exist).  Wilber, by contrast, would maintain that Spirit is the ground of all being, and that includes brain chemicals as well as consciousness.  We could say that the inner experience and the corresponding body processes taken together constitute a “spirit-event.”

*[You may ask, what critic would suggest consciousness is not real?  I refer you to Edward Wilson, a Harvard biologist who argues that everything can be explained in terms of its smallest components.  Wilson says consciousness is simply the particle physics that ultimately underlie the molecules, cells, and neurons of the brain.  Consciousness is essentially a quantum field following natural laws, therefore it has no free will, it just generates the illusion of one.  Wilson claims we don’t know enough yet to explain the physics, but soon we will.  This begs the question…..who is this “we” that will soon understand how the illusion of consciousness is generated?  A quantum field that learns how to comprehend itself….isn’t that called….self-transcendence?!  It‘s hard to see how that‘s not the same thing as “real” consciousness.  We‘re obviously in the realm of semantics here].

*[You may ask, what critic would suggest consciousness is not real?  I refer you to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._O._Wilson Edward Wilson], a Harvard biologist who argues that everything can be explained in terms of its smallest components.  Wilson says consciousness is simply the particle physics that ultimately underlie the molecules, cells, and neurons of the brain.  Consciousness is essentially a quantum field following natural laws, therefore it has no free will, it just generates the illusion of one.  Wilson claims we don’t know enough yet to explain the physics, but soon we will.  This begs the question…..who is this “we” that will soon understand how the illusion of consciousness is generated?  A quantum field that learns how to comprehend itself….isn’t that called….self-transcendence?!  It‘s hard to see how that‘s not the same thing as “real” consciousness.  We‘re obviously in the realm of semantics here. Click [https://nordan.daynal.org/wiki/index.php?title=The_Origins_Of_Religion_in_Universal_Consciousness this link] for more on consciousness and physics].

Wilber’s tendency to place cultures, ideas, and consciousness stages in a hierarchy of importance and value is rooted not so much in pure elitism as in his strong connection to German Idealism as represented by philosophers such as Hegel, and especially Schelling, who hold that evolution is driving history toward a cosmic goal .  This idealism sees history as an upward evolutionary spiral in which '''Spirit''', as the underpinning of nature, is animating all of '''Being''' toward the goal of complete '''Self-Consciousness'''.  Assuming the correctness of the metaphysics of idealism, it logically follows that the further along in history we are the more advanced we are in consciousness growth, collectively speaking, and thus we have greater potential overall for spiritual enlightenment than those from past centuries.  If this philosophy constitutes “elitism” then Wilber is guilty as charged.

Wilber’s tendency to place cultures, ideas, and consciousness stages in a hierarchy of importance and value is rooted not so much in pure elitism as in his strong connection to German Idealism as represented by philosophers such as Hegel, and especially Schelling, who hold that evolution is driving history toward a cosmic goal .  This idealism sees history as an upward evolutionary spiral in which '''Spirit''', as the underpinning of nature, is animating all of '''Being''' toward the goal of complete '''Self-Consciousness'''.  Assuming the correctness of the metaphysics of idealism, it logically follows that the further along in history we are the more advanced we are in consciousness growth, collectively speaking, and thus we have greater potential overall for spiritual enlightenment than those from past centuries.  If this philosophy constitutes “elitism” then Wilber is guilty as charged.

----

# Integral Spirituality, by Ken Wilber  ISBN 978-1590303467 Shambhala Publications, 2006.

[[Category: Religion]]

[[Category: Religion]]