The goalposts are constantly shifting.



The postmodern contribution to the human race is the understanding that the universe, as we know it, is not static.  In fact, if there is one thing that seems to be consistent it is the lack of consistency and thus, the return of the philosophical paradox of sorts.  Yet, this is not a true paradox because now, thorough the lens of the postmodern we can see the larger overall picture which is one of complexity and dynamic interconnected systems.  It is impossible for most people in their current way of seeing and grasping the world to truly get this in it’s entirety and when it happens it is often described as an “Ah-ha!” experience and even mystical in nature (whatever your level or definition for mysticism). 

The goalposts are constantly shifting.  This means, simply, that the laws we come to rely on today might not be true tomorrow.  If the universe does truly evolve and is dynamic, creative, and novelty generating then how can we assume that the laws of physics, for example, are static?  How is it that we can make this exception when all else is evolving in complexity?  This is what it means to exist on a level of understanding that rides the current of emergence in reality as we know it.  Postmodernism and it’s children, such as complexity theory and chaos theory teach us that we can’t take our assumptions and our current rules for granted for all times, all places, and all universes.  In fact, this is the central tenant, as I understand it, of the new physics since the birth of quantum mechanics.  Even in modern consciousness research there is an understanding that what we are dealing with are so many constantly changing variables that to take a “snap-shot” if you will through our scientific methods is, in the final instance, doomed to temporary truth status as surely things will change.  Socially speaking, if we do make the categorical error of taking our models too seriously we are in for a rude awakening.  So far, there hasn’t been a worldview that hasn’t been challenged and improved upon and I certainly don’t see it changing in the future.  So, it is from this that I can go ahead and make the assumption that there will never be any truly Grand Unified Theory or THE.  Only relatively speaking is this possible.  This, of course, is a very postmodern statement that is not without it’s own difficulties but I see no other alternative than to go down this path and to follow my contemporaries in the belief in an integration of worldviews and methods in an ever-evolving, continuously changing universe of realities and possibilities beyond anything we could ever imagine. 

So, as I see it, the future of science is one of integration, dynamism, and the recognition of the observer effect and the reality of ever shifting goalposts.   The pathological alternative is already in existence today and will likely continue for a significant number of people and that is one of scientism, or scientific dogmatism, which is, strictly speaking, not science at all.  Beyond this, it is a matter of hermeneutics and linguistic swordsmanship.  Nonetheless, this all seems to be the case but there are many traps along the way, the most obvious being taking it all (any model such as this one) too seriously.  We can be persistent in our pursuit for truth, knowledge, insight, and wisdom but we needn’t take it all so seriously that we lose sight of what I call the “dynamic absurdity” or the great play of Lila as the Hindus put it.
It is important to maintain a sense of play and beginner’s mind at every turn, no matter how experienced others might tell us we are.  Humility and awe is what keeps the true scientist, at least the best ones, in check for as the saying goes, truth is stranger than fiction.   

 
-sean
aug. 2005

This is the blog for my internet and scholarly research class at ITP

“I am beginning to wonder if anyone ever makes true friends in graduate school. Most everyone here seem super competitive - I tend to be more of a cooperative learner. I have this vague, nagging idealism that education should be a growing experience - not a series of sucker punches . . .”

Sorry folks.  My last blog entry (after several months of zero activity) is very strange indeed.  Basically, I am doing some preliminary literature searches through an internet and scholarly research class that I'm taking at the moment (at ITP), and I was assigned to post to my blog some relevant hits for my Doctoral Qualifying Paper (DQP). 

Toward an Integral Methodology
for Transpersonal Studies

AN INTEGRAL APPROACH

Ken Wilber and the Education Literature

Integral International Development Gathering – A Synthesis

Bruce Aldermann:  Integral Visioning

Organizational Development Network:  Links

Man, I have been sorely neglecting my presence on Zaadz.  Basically, when one starts a new doctoral program, you can pretty much be sure that it's quite taxing on a number of levels.  Gwen's visit was awesome and made me realize how I've been on "time-out" in regards to Zaadz.  I never was a prolific blogger anyway.  I guess I just felt the need to say something since my last post was back at the beginning of september! 

Since I get this question a great deal and because I'm sure that there are plenty of folks out there who just want a good definition, I've provided a link to this description provided by my school, ITP.   Granted, it's one of the lengthier descriptions but I find it the most helpful.

The 2006 Association of Transpersonal Psychology/Institute of Transpersonal Psychology Conference being held at my school, ITP, in Palo Alto, is a truly exciting event for those in the field.  Here's the blurb found at the Institute and the Association's website:

The ATP-ITP 2006 Conference: 100 Years of Transpersonal Psychology will be held September 7-9, 2006 at the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology in Palo Alto, CA. 100 years ago, William James used the word transpersonal for the first time in reference to that which transcends the boundaries of the individual self. A century later, the Association for Transpersonal Psychology and the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology invite you to our annual professional conference, to teach, learn, and share the innovations and discoveries that have shaped the field since that day, and to chart the future for the next 100 years. Featured guest speakers include: Stanislav Grof, Jeanne Achterberg, Jim Fadiman, Francis Vaughan and more! Special events include: A Celebration of Women in Transpersonal Psychology on the eve of Sept. 7 and a Multimedia Event on the eve of Sept. 8. To register or for more information, go to www.atpweb.org or call (650) 424-8764.

On a recent sun-drenched weekend here in the Bay Area I had the unique honor of going to the annual gay pride parade in San Francisco, the second-largest gathering in the largest state economy in the largest national economy in the world.  Aside from the sunburn I now suffer I can quite pointedly say that I had a fantastic time.

Early in the morning me and my friend had found a nice shaded spot along the sidewalk where we could easily watch the parade march down Mission Street on it’s way to the Castro.  After standing there for a few minutes admiring the impressive display of pride and flamboyance a small boy of no more than 7 or 8 years walked in front of us waving the ubiquitous (in San Francisco) rainbow-hued flag in support of gay pride, trying to get a closer look at the ongoings.  The boy was followed by his mother who was urging him to get closer and to not be shy about it.

So, I am standing there thinking how unique this is to witness (after having seen how the rest of the country responds to such events) when the mother asked me and my friend if we lived here.  We admitted that we lived in the Mid-Peninsula which, I guess, counts.   She said, “Well, I’m not from here, I’m from New York and although we have parades and events like this in New York I can’t help but notice how wholesome it all is here.”  We readily agreed considering all of the families present at the parade and the children that I was seeing riding atop the shoulders of their parents.  However, at the moment she said “wholesome” (her emphasis) I couldn’t help but to notice the “Leather Float” slowly go by.

So, here is this woman and her very young and innocent-looking son enjoying the “wholesomeness” of the parade and, at the same time, men and women in ass-less chaps, half-naked with whips and chains are parading down the street.  In the center of this is a pickup truck with two men standing in the bed of the truck, one chained and bound with his rosy-red ass-cheeks getting whipped by his partner who also happens to be wearing strategically revealing cowhide goods.  Both of them are waving and smiling to the crowd as if nothing unusual is going on at all.

I smiled and thought to myself:  "Wholesome!"

     It is incredibly important for those who feel so inclined to study and create models for their existence lightly.  A model might work but there is a very human tendency to get “stuck” into relying too much on a particular model to the point where it becomes calcified.  I propose that a certain type of consciousness development must be reached before the natural tendency to hold one’s model’s lightly becomes second nature.  Right now it would seem that the majority of us have a difficult time doing this.

    Why is it that people throughout history have shown us that the human tendency is certainly towards close-mindedness, i.e., a certain inertia?  Yet there are those rare pioneers (you know who they are because they are the ones with knives in their backs) who have found a way to break the mould and challenge conventional dogma.  What is this queer need to become dependent and static with one’s worldview?  Habituation, surely. 

    It also seems that even the best of us can so easily fall into the trap of taking one’s models of reality too seriously.  To say anything is for most people to put faith in what one is saying.  If someone is talking about how they see things then it seems all too easy to actually believe in it to the point where another’s conception of reality can become, unconsciously and consciously, a threat. 

    In my mind, one of the best arguments for this is what many have come to call Scientism.  You might think fundamentalist religious beliefs would be the more logical place to start but I think Scientism can be just as destructive and harmful, if not more so, since most scientists in the world, though the minority by far, are in the top eschelons of power in terms of their ability to influence and affect the world now and in the future.  Scientism is a dogmatic fundamentalist belief, but , obviously, not a religious one.  It is one that claims the fundamental and dominant truth of science even at the cost of not knowing anything about any one particular field of science.  The fact of the matter is that no scientist, lest, no human, can know everything there is to know in the world, especially in the world of science.  This is, need I remind you, why postmodernism came into existence and why we now have these fragmented, specializations:  there is just too much to know.  To get by at all, the idea is that we, collectively, work together under the rubric of theory and science but separately for the sake of truth (here, beauty is optional).

    Nonetheless, it is quite obvious what happens when someone grasps their version of things too tightly:  they stop growing.  Then, one day, it takes a serious whack on the head to break their concentration, unfortunately, this is rarely a pleasant affair.  Dynamical Systems Theory is by far, one of the best examples to my mind of how this works.  In DST when a system ceases to move it ceases to be dynamic, essentially, it dies.  However, when a system is alive and dynamic it is in a constant state of flux and change.  In this case there is a phenomenon that happens that scientists call “emergence.”  This is where an entirely new creation comes into being.  Very much like when something in our world of sticks and stones is created such as a painting, a song, or even a child.  It is something entirely new and novel.  This is the healthiest state for a any system to be in.  A complex system (continuing with the analogy), such as ourselves can be thought of as being essentially the same in this regard.  Indeed, everything about our lives suggests that the one thing that we can truly count on is change.  If we embrace change and live creative lives riding the waves of novelty there is no telling what we can accomplish and how full and rich our lives are.  The key word here is "embracing."  However, if we fail to embrace this and choose to live a life rigid with belief, closed to novelty, we run the risk of a premature death.  I mean this both metaphorically and literally. 

    When we consciously create models for ourselves by which to live by it is important to be open to the necessity that it will inevitably change.  The only way to do this is to truly develop a sense of humility.  Think of it as more of a gently guiding process rather than complete control or all affairs within one's experience.   Living is an art and like any art it takes care, patience, persistence, and vision.  It also takes being willing to risk everything you think you know.

    Curiously, as much as our culture in the West prizes logic and reasoning, the norm is anything but reasonable from my perspective.  That is, one person’s reason might be another’s insanity.  Most of the people I meet are not reasonable.  They base their lives on beliefs, many of which they have taken for granted from other people.  This is nothing unusual and modern psychology has shown us this.  Most of us create our reality based upon the common society’s vision of reality at large and sort of just try and work with that to the best of our ability because, after all, for the vast majority of people in the world, life is no walk in the park. 

I digress.

    I really do not want to paint an negative picture here.  On the contrary, my aim is to merely remind those of us who have the wherewithal to ponder such issues that no matter how sophisticated or learned we might think we are, we must always tread lightly with our beliefs.  This is where a good dose of humility and openness comes in.  Having the courage to state the facts, as you know it, and nothing more can be quite difficult.   Again, to hold your model's lightly, to hold the ideas and beliefs you use to live your life, lightly, takes a higher order of mindfulness and conscious recognition of the transitory nature of physical existence.  

The Flaming Lips have been together as a band for a long time.  23 years to be exact.  They are like a fine wine or a bottle of Scotch that gets better with age.  I can say this about very few musicians and artists.  One of the only other contemporary bands that comes to mind that have achieved this fate is Radiohead.  However, I am a bit of a late-comer to the Lips.  My introduction was their recent Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots.  Now, this album still blows me away and is in my top ten for sure.  That's why when their new release At War with the Mystics came out last month I knew I would not be disappointed.  Oh, how true my intuition was.  

At War with the Mystics is, quite simply, amazing.  I hear so much influence here from the greatest moments of 70's epic rock.  Every rift and melody you ever loved about early David Bowie and T-Rex (and even a little Moody Blues), is there.  This combined with a very fresh, modern sound from bands like The Beta Band, Yo La Tengo, Built to Spill, The Postal Service, and My Morning Jacket creates one of the best albums, from an actual band, I have heard in a very long time.  It is epic rock with a grand tale to weave.  And we thought great artwork, sci-fi storyboard, and classic formulas done in new, creative ways, was dead.  Well the Lips have once again proved the pessimists wrong.  This album rocks.