|
1
registreret Arne Thomsen
3390
gæster og
157
søgemaskiner online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Skribent: Anonym
Emne: Re: Den Evige Filosofi
|
Kære Arne,
Wikipedia giver en god forklaring, hentet fra Ken Wilbers arbejde:
Wilber believes that many claims about non-rational states make a mistake he calls the pre/trans fallacy. According to Wilber, the non-rational stages of consciousness (what Wilber calls "pre-rational" and "trans-rational" stages) can be easily confused with one another. On Wilber's view, One can reduce trans-rational spiritual realization to pre-rational regression, or one can elevate pre-rational states to the trans-rational domain.[28] For example, Wilber claims that Freud and Jung commit this fallacy. Freud considered mystical realization to be a regression to infantile oceanic states. Wilber alleges that Freud thus commits a fallacy of reduction. Wilber thinks that Jung commits the converse form of the same mistake by considering pre-rational myths to reflect divine realizations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber
Det vi ser her på debatten fra Ole og Simon er netop denne forvirring mellem det prerationelle og det transrationelle. De sætter en prerationel mærkat på den transrationelle erkendeevne, når de kalder transrationelle indsigter, der ikke er rationelt tænkte, for følelser og fantasier. De kender ikke til intuitionen i den forstand, som den nævnes her (jeg fremhæver):
Intuition anvendes i to betydninger, hvorimellem der ikke altid skelnes klart. Dels til at betegne en form for indblik uden forudgående planlægning eller fastlagt metode, dels betegnende en direkte, højere form for erkendelse, der implicerer en skjult sammenhæng i universet.
http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition
Simon og Ole forsøger - uden dog at have forstået de videnskabsteoretiske implikationer og dimensioner - at hævde positivismen. (Uden argumentation, med personfnidder - f.eks. får vi på klassisk manér tildelt "kælenavne", og sådan er der jo så mange måder at flygte fra sagligheden på).
Her følger nogle af Wilbers inspirerende ord, som jeg tror, at du kan genkende i dig selv ... jeg synes i hvert fald ikke, at det falder så fjernt fra det, du siger - som jeg opfatter det. (Jeg fremhæver).
Are the mystics and sages insane? Because they all tell variations on the same story, don't they? The story of awakening one morning and discovering you are one with the All, in a timeless and eternal and infinite fashion. Yes, maybe they are crazy, these divine fools. Maybe they are mumbling idiots in the face of the Abyss. Maybe they need a nice, understanding therapist. Yes, I'm sure that would help. But then, I wonder. Maybe the evolutionary sequence really is from matter to body to mind to soul to spirit, each transcending and including, each with a greater depth and greater consciousness and wider embrace. And in the highest reaches of evolution, maybe, just maybe, an individual's consciousness does indeed touch infinity—a total embrace of the entire Kosmos—a Kosmic consciousness that is Spirit awakened to its own true nature. It's at least plausible. And tell me: is that story, sung by mystics and sages the world over, any crazier than the scientific materialism story, which is that the entire sequence is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying absolutely nothing? Listen very carefully: just which of those two stories actually sounds totally insane?
— Ken Wilber, A Brief History of Everything, 42–3
Fred,
Thomas
|
|
|
|
