Big-picture philosophies, are they coming back?

The illusion of morality that has been so prevalent throughout humanities' history is in essence the ego attempting to emulate its conception of enlightened, or virtuous, behavior. This state of contrived goodness produces what one might conveniently call the "shadow self" -- all of the disowned and repressed aspects of one's being that cannot be allowed to manifest because they've been labeled by the ego as "bad" or "evil". If you look back to say, the 1950's, for example, we find a society so enamoured by the prospect of domestic perfection and egos so chiseled and polished that it was practically a parody of itself. Since that time, we have been gradually shedding our rigid egoic roles, allowing consciousness to more fluidly transition between different states of being. This is culminating now with the predominance of relativism throughout modern culture, which is really only a backlash from our repressed, puritanical past. However, the pendulum accumulated a great deal of height in one direction and now its momentum must be allowed to dissipate. This is accomplished, in part at least, as the shadow self comes to the forefront of human consciousness.

Travis

 

There are many different diluted forms of universal truth. Every religion has them. Every religion also has the distilled essence that allowed it to come into being in the first place.

By some definition of the word "energy", perhaps. But it isn't the energy cultivated and/or reallocated by the practice of Pranayama.

Reading books might act as a catalyst for one's spiritual growth, but the realization itself is always spontaneous. Of course, to understand this phenomenon, one must first understand the paradox that exists between being and becoming.

Nor is your presumptive, narrow-minded attitude any surprise, given the massively embittered vibe I've been getting off of you since I first encountered you on these forums over a year ago. As far as your assertion that my statements about tribal sprituality are only my opinion, I would invite you to first spend some time with shamans (as its quite evident that you've only dabbled) prior to taking an authoritative stance on the issue. I myself have over 200 hours of personal experience with 7 different shamans over the course of 9 years. I'd say that that gives my "opinion" on the matter a little more credence than it does yours, wouldn't you?

Tribalistic shamanism has a laundry list of defects just as the "civilized" world does. Modern society has many "integral" qualities that tribal spirituality lacks (most notably the predominance of a cohesive self-identity), and of course, vice versa.

The mass consciousness has yet to establish a connection with universal consciousness, so the spontaneity of the type I was referring to earlier naturally wouldn't be evident. Of course, like most of your retorts, this has absolutely no bearing on the statements I made initially, which were made in reference to the upliftment of consciousness that can be observed in mainstream society.

Hope is the refuge of an ego that believes that salvation exists somewhere in an imagined future.

Let's not.

Travis

 

Dark times, no doubt though.
Especially for the easily-swayed.

 

I think it's also the case that a new synthesis is coming together. Living in the information age, it's becoming easier to have access to a LOT of information, and it's also becoming easier to collaborate and converge that into knowledge. Also, we might begin to see the emergents of a "planetary" culture, the more exposed we are to one another as the internet continues to wire itself into previous "offline" areas of the globe.

I'm just not sure if Wilber and his specific "integral" movement is bearing the weight of these changes, or just reflecting them in his own philosophies. Intuitively I feel the latter is true---maybe we are beginning to at least acknowledge there is a forest beyond the trees, but our previous ways of thinking we can box it are insufficient.