SLCCnu Lul1lCn, 8LvlSLu ken Wllber SPAM8PALA 8ostoo & looJoo 2011 SPAM8PALA u8LlCA1lCnS, lnC. PorLlculLural Pall 300 MassachuseLLs Avenue 8osLon, MassachuseLLs 02113 www.sbombbolo.com 1993, 2000 by ken Wllber Cover arL: Croup lx, serles uw 1he uove, nr 2" (Lnr 174) by Pllma af kllnL. CourLesy of Lhe Pllma af kllnL loundaLlon, SLockholm, Sweden All rlghLs reserved. no parL of Lhls book may be reproduced ln any form or by any means, elecLronlc or mechanlcal, lncludlng phoLocopylng, recordlng, or by any lnformaLlon sLorage and reLrleval sysLem, wlLhouL permlsslon ln wrlLlng from Lhe publlsher. llbtoty of cooqtess cotoloqloq-lo-lobllcotloo uoto Wllber, ken. Sex, ecology, splrlLuallLy: Lhe splrlL of evoluLlon / ken Wllber.-2nd ed. p. cm. lncludes blbllographlcal references and lndex. elS8n 978-0-8348-2108-8 lS8n 1-37062-744-4 (alk. paper) 1. Cosmology. 2. Consclousness. 3. LvoluLlon-hllosophy. 4. Whole and parLs (hllosophy) 3. Cod. l. 1lLle. 8u311.W34 2000 110-dc21 00-044003 cooteots llst of llqotes ltefoce to tbe 5ecooJ Jltloo, kevlseJ lottoJoctloo 8CCk CnL 1. 1he Web of Llfe 2. 1he aLLern 1haL ConnecLs 3. lndlvldual and Soclal 4. A vlew from WlLhln 3. 1he Lmergence of Puman naLure 6. Maglc, MyLhlc, and 8eyond 7. 1he larLher 8eaches of Puman naLure 8. 1he uepLhs of Lhe ulvlne 8CCk 1WC 9. 1he Way up ls Lhe Way uown 10. 1hls-Worldly, CLherworldly 11. 8rave new World 12. 1he Collapse of Lhe kosmos 13. 1he uomlnance of Lhe uescenders 14. 1he unpacklng of Cod Notes kefeteoces loJex LlS1 Cl llCu8LS 3-1. 1yplcal Polarchy 3-2. opper's Polarchy 3-3. Cosmlc CoevoluLlon of Macro- and MlcrosLrucLures 3-4. 1he hlsLory of llfe on earLh expresses Lhe coevoluLlon of self-organlzlng macro- and mlcrosysLems ln ever-hlgher degrees of dlfferenLlaLlon 3-3. 1he 8ealms of LvoluLlon 3-6. 1he 1rlune 8raln" 3-7. LmergenL CeopollLlcal SysLems Levels 4-1. 1he WlLhouL and Lhe WlLhln 4-2. Levels of LvoluLlon 4-3. 1he lour CuadranLs 3-1. Some ueLalls of Lhe lour CuadranLs 9.1. 1he CreaL Polarchy accordlng Lo loLlnus and Auroblndo 12.1. 1he CreaL nesL of 8elng 12.2. 1he CreaL nesL wlLh Lhe lour CuadranLs 12.3. 1he 8lg 1hree 12.4. CorrelaLlons of lnLerlor (Consclousness) SLaLes wlLh LxLerlor (MaLerlal) SLaLes 12.3. 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco before Lhe Collapse 12.6. llaLland ltefoce to tbe 5ecooJ Jltloo, kevlseJ 1PL CLnLSlS Cl5\, cOlOC, 5llkl1uAll1 5\, cOlOC, 5llkl1uAll1 was Lhe flrsL LheoreLlcal book l had wrlLLen ln almosL Len years, followlng Lhe evenLs descrlbed ln Ctoce ooJ Ctlt. 1he prevlous book, 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess (wlLh !ack Lngler and uanlel . 8rown), was compleLed ln 1984, l wroLe Ctoce ooJ Ctlt ln 1991, and Lhen l seLLled down Lo flnally wrlLe a LexLbook of psychology LhaL l had been plannlng on dolng for several years. l was calllng LhaL LexLbook 5ystem, 5elf, ooJ 5ttoctote, buL somehow lL never seemed Lo geL wrlLLen. ueLermlned Lo compleLe lL, l saL down and began Lranscrlblng Lhe Lwo-volume work, whereupon l reallzed, wlLh a shock, LhaL four of Lhe words l used ln Lhe very flrsL paragraph were no longer allowed ln academlc dlscourse (developmenL, hlerarchy, LranscendenLal, unlversal). 1hls, needless Lo say, puL a conslderable cramp ln my aLLempL Lo wrlLe Lhls book, and poor 5ystem, 5elf, ooJ 5ttoctote was, yeL agaln, shelved. (l recenLly broughL ouL an abrldged verslon of lL wlLh Lhe LlLle loteqtol lsycboloqy.) WhaL had happened ln my Len-year wrlLlng hlaLus, and Lo whlch l had pald lnsufflclenL aLLenLlon, ls LhaL exLreme posLmodernlsm had raLher compleLely lnvaded academla ln general and culLural sLudles ln parLlcular-even Lhe alLernaLlve colleges and lnsLlLuLes were speaklng posLmodernese wlLh an auLhorlLarlan Lhunder. 1he pollLlcally correcL were pollclng Lhe Lypes of serlous dlscourse LhaL could, and could noL, be uLLered ln academe. lurallsLlc relaLlvlsm was Lhe only accepLable worldvlew. lL clalmed LhaL all LruLh ls culLurally slLuaLed (excepL lLs own LruLh, whlch ls Lrue for all culLures), lL clalmed Lhere are no LranscendenLal LruLhs (excepL lLs own pronouncemenLs, whlch Lranscend speclflc conLexLs), lL clalmed LhaL all hlerarchles or value ranklngs are oppresslve and marglnallzlng (excepL lLs own value ranklng, whlch ls superlor Lo Lhe alLernaLlves), lL clalmed LhaL Lhere are no unlversal LruLhs (excepL lLs own plurallsm, whlch ls unlversally Lrue for all peoples). 1he downsldes of exLreme posLmodernlsm and plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm are now well known and wldely acknowledged, buL aL Lhe Llme l was Lrylng Lo wrlLe 5ystem, 5elf, ooJ 5ttoctote, Lhey were LhoughL Lo be gospel and were as rellglously embraced, maklng any sorL of developmenLal and LranscendenLal sLudles anaLhema. l Lherefore seL 5ystem, 5elf, ooJ 5ttoctote aslde and began Lo ponder Lhe besL way Lo proceed, feellng raLher llke a salmon who had flrsL Lo swlm upsLream ln order Lo have any fun aL all. 8uL l have been dwelllng merely on Lhe downsldes of posLmodernlsm and plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm. 1helr poslLlve beneflLs are equally numerous and far-reachlng, and deserve a hearlng as well. As l have Lrled Lo suggesL ln several places (e.g., 1be Mottloqe of 5eose ooJ 5ool, loteqtol lsycboloqy, and A 1beoty of vetytbloq), plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm ls acLually a very hlgh developmenLal achlevemenL, sLemmlng from Lhe posLformal levels of consclousness, whlch dlsclose a serles of very lmporLanL LruLhs. (osLformal" means Lhe cognlLlve sLages lylng lmmedlaLely beyond llnear raLlonallLy or formal operaLlonal Lhlnklng. 1hus, cognlLlve developmenL proceeds from sensorlmoLor Lo preoperaLlonal Lo concreLe operaLlonal Lo formal operaLlonal Lo posLformal cognlLlon, Lo posslbly hlgher modes [see below]. l also refer Lo posLformal cognlLlon as oetwotk-loqlc or vlsloo-loqlc-Cebser called lL loteqtol-opetspectlvol-and lL ls vlslon-loglc LhaL drlves Lhe besL of posLmodernlsm.) As l suggesLed ln Lhose publlcaLlons, Lhe LruLhs of posLmodernlsm lnclude consLrucLlvlsm (Lhe world ls noL [usL a percepLlon buL an lnLerpreLaLlon), conLexLuallsm (all LruLhs are conLexL-dependenL, and conLexLs are boundless), and lnLegral-aperspecLlvlsm (no conLexL ls flnally prlvlleged, so an lnLegral vlew should lnclude mulLlple perspecLlves, plurallsm, mulLl-culLurallsm). All of Lhose lmporLanL LruLhs can be derlved from Lhe beglnnlng sLages of posLformal vlslon-loglc, and posLmodernlsm aL lLs besL ls an elucldaLlon of Lhelr profound lmporLance. ln parLlcular, Lhe prevlous sLages of concreLe operaLlonal (whlch supporLs a worldvlew called myLhlc- membershlp") and formal operaLlonal (whlch supporLs a worldvlew called unlversal formallsm") have lnherenL llmlLaLlons and weaknesses ln Lhem, and Lhese llmlLaLlons, when pressed lnLo soclal acLlon, produce varlous Lypes of rlgld soclal hlerarchles, mechanlsLlc worldvlews LhaL lgnore local color, and unlversallsLlc pronouncemenLs abouL human belngs LhaL vlolaLe Lhe rlch dlfferences beLween culLures, peoples, and places. 8uL once consclousness evolves from formal Lo posLformal-and Lhus evolves from unlversal formallsm Lo plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm-Lhese mulLlple conLexLs and plurallsLlc LapesLrles come [umplng Lo Lhe fore, and posLmodernlsm has spenL much of Lhe lasL Lwo decades aLLempLlng Lo Jecoosttoct Lhe rlgld hlerarchles, formallsms, and oppresslve schemes LhaL are lnherenL ln Lhe preformal-Lo-formal sLages of consclousness evoluLlon. 8uL plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm ls noL lLself Lhe hlghesL wave of developmenL, as numerous sLudles have conslsLenLly shown (see loteqtol lsycboloqy). When vlslon-loglc maLures lnLo lLs mlddle and laLe phases, plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm lncreaslngly glves way Lo more hollsLlc modes of awareness, whlch begln Lo weave Lhe plurallsLlc volces LogeLher lnLo beauLlful LapesLrles of lnLegral lnLenL. lurallsLlc relaLlvlsm glves way Lo oolvetsol loteqtollsm. Where plurallsm frees Lhe many dlfferenL volces and mulLlple conLexLs, unlversal lnLegrallsm beglns Lo brlng Lhem LogeLher lnLo a harmonlzed chorus. (unlversal lnLegrallsm Lhus sLands on Lhe brlnk of even hlgher developmenLs, whlch dlrecLly dlsclose Lhe Lranspersonal and splrlLual realms-developmenLs whereln Lhe posLformal menLal glves way Lo Lhe posLmenLal or supramenLal alLogeLher.) 8uL Lhls leaves plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm ln a dlfflculL poslLlon. Pavlng herolcally developed beyond a rlgld unlversal formallsm, lL became susplclous of any unlversals aL all, and Lhus lL Lended Lo flghL Lhe emergence of unlversal lnLegrallsm wlLh Lhe same feroclLy LhaL lL deconsLrucLed all prevlous sysLems. lL Lurned lLs crlLlcal guns noL [usL on pre-plurallsLlc sLages (whlch was approprlaLe), buL also on posL-plurallsLlc sLages (whlch was dlsasLrous). ueconsLrucLlve posLmodernlsm Lhus began Lo acLlvely flghL any hlgher sLages of growLh, ofLen Lurnlng academla lnLo a charnel ground of deconsLrucLlve fury. LlLLle new was creaLed, pasL glorles were slmply Lorn down. LlLLle novel was consLrucLed, prevlous consLrucLlons were merely deconsLrucLed. lew new bulldlngs were erecLed, old ones were slmply blown up. osLmodernlsm ofLen degeneraLed lnLo Lhe nlhlllsm and narclsslsm for whlch lL ls now so well known, and Lhe vacanL, haunLed, hollow eyes of professlonal academla, peerlng Lhrough Lhe smoklng rulns, Lold Lhe Lale mosL sadly. Cne Lhlng was very clear Lo me as l sLruggled wlLh how besL Lo proceed ln an lnLellecLual cllmaLe dedlcaLed Lo deconsLrucLlng anyLhlng LhaL crossed lLs paLh: l would have Lo back up and sLarL aL Lhe beglnnlng, and Lry Lo creaLe a vocabulary for a more consLrucLlve phllosophy. 8eyond plurallsLlc relaLlvlsm ls unlversal lnLegrallsm, l Lherefore soughL Lo ouLllne a phllosophy of unlversal lnLegrallsm. uL dlfferenLly, l soughL a world phllosophy. l soughL an loteqtol phllosophy, one LhaL would bellevably weave LogeLher Lhe many plurallsLlc conLexLs of sclence, morals, aesLheLlcs, LasLern as well as WesLern phllosophy, and Lhe world's greaL wlsdom LradlLlons. noL on Lhe level of deLalls-LhaL ls flnlLely lmposslble, buL on Lhe level of orlenLlng generallzaLlons: a way Lo suggesL LhaL Lhe world really ls one, undlvlded, whole, and relaLed Lo lLself ln every way: a hollsLlc phllosophy for a hollsLlc kosmos: a world phllosophy, an lnLegral phllosophy. 1hree years laLer, 5ex, coloqy, 5pltltoollty was Lhe resulL. uurlng LhaL perlod l llved Lhe hermlL's llfe, l saw exacLly four people ln Lhree years (8oger Walsh, who ls an M.u., sLopped by once a year Lo make sure l was allve), lL was very much a Lyplcal Lhree-year sllenL reLreaL (Lhls perlod ls descrlbed ln Ooe 1oste, !une 12 enLry). l was locked lnLo Lhls Lhlng, and lL would noL leL go. 1he hard parL had Lo do wlLh bletotcbles. CranLed, rlgld soclal hlerarchles are deplorable and oppresslve soclal ranklngs are pernlclous. osLmodernlsm has forLunaLely made us all more senslLlve Lo Lhose ln[usLlces. 8uL even Lhe anLlhlerarchy crlLlcs have Lhelr own sLrong hlerarchles (or value ranklngs). 1he posLmodernlsLs value plurallsm over absoluLlsm-and LhaL ls Lhelr value hlerarchy. Lven Lhe ecophllosophers, who abhor hlerarchles LhaL place humans on Lhe Lop of Lhe evoluLlonary scale, have Lhelr own very sLrong hlerarchy, whlch ls: subaLomlc elemenLs are parLs of aLoms, whlch are parLs of molecules, whlch are parLs of cells, whlch are parLs of organlsms, whlch are parLs of ecosysLems, whlch are parLs of Lhe blosphere. 1hey Lhus value Lhe blosphere above parLlcular organlsms, such as Lhe human belng, and Lhey deplore our uslng Lhe blosphere for our own selflsh and rulnous purposes. All of LhaL comes from Lhelr parLlcular value hlerarchy. lemlnlsLs have several hlerarchles (e.g., parLnershlp socleLles are beLLer Lhan power socleLles, llnklng ls beLLer Lhan ranklng, llberaLlon ls beLLer Lhan oppresslon), sysLems LheorlsLs have hundreds of hlerarchles (all naLural sysLems are arranged hlerarchlcally), blologlsLs and llngulsLs and developmenLal psychologlsLs all have hlerarchles. vetyboJy seemed Lo have some sorL of hlerarchy, even Lhose who clalmed Lhey dldn'L. 1he problem ls, none of Lhem maLched wlLh Lhe oLhers. none of Lhe hlerarchles seemed Lo agree wlLh each oLher. And LhaL was Lhe baslc problem LhaL kepL me locked ln my room for Lhree years. AL one polnL, l had over Lwo hundred hlerarchles wrlLLen ouL on legal pads lylng all over Lhe floor, Lrylng Lo flgure ouL how Lo flL Lhem LogeLher. 1here were Lhe naLural sclence" hlerarchles, whlch were Lhe easy ones, slnce everybody agreed wlLh Lhem: aLoms Lo molecules Lo cells Lo organlsms, for example. 1hey were easy Lo undersLand because Lhey were so graphlc: organlsms acLually conLaln cells, whlch acLually conLaln molecules, whlch acLually conLaln aLoms. ?ou can even see Lhls dlrecLly wlLh a mlcroscope. 1haL hlerarchy ls one of acLual embrace: cells llLerally embrace or enfold molecules. 1he oLher falrly easy serles of hlerarchles were Lhose dlscovered by Lhe developmenLal psychologlsLs. 1hey all Lold varlaLlons on Lhe cognlLlve hlerarchy LhaL goes from sensaLlon Lo percepLlon Lo lmpulse Lo lmage Lo symbol Lo concepL Lo rule. 1he names varled, and Lhe schemes were sllghLly dlfferenL, buL Lhe hlerarchlcal sLory was Lhe same-each succeedlng sLage lncorporaLed lLs predecessors and Lhen added some new capaclLy. 1hls seemed very slmllar Lo Lhe naLural sclence hlerarchles, excepL Lhey sLlll dld noL maLch up ln any obvlous way. Moreover, you can acLually see organlsms and cells ln Lhe emplrlcal world, buL you can'L see lnLerlor sLaLes of consclousness ln Lhe same way. lL ls noL aL all obvlous how Lhese hlerarchles would-or even could-be relaLed. And Lhose were Lhe easy ones. 1here were llngulsLlc hlerarchles, conLexLual hlerarchles, splrlLual hlerarchles. 1here were sLages of developmenL ln phoneLlcs, sLellar sysLems, culLural worldvlews, auLopoleLlc sysLems, Lechnologlcal modes, economlc sLrucLures, phylogeneLlc unfoldlngs, superconsclous reallzaLlons. . . . And Lhey slmply refused Lo agree wlLh each oLher. C. Spencer 8rown, ln hls remarkable book lows of lotm, sald LhaL new knowledge comes when you slmply bear ln mlnd whaL you need Lo know. keep holdlng Lhe problem ln mlnd, and lL wlll yleld. 1he hlsLory of human belngs ls cerLalnly LesLamenL Lo LhaL facL. An lndlvldual runs lnLo a problem and slmply obsesses abouL LhaL problem unLll he or she solves lL. And Lhe funny Lhlng ls: Lhe problem ls olwoys solved. Sooner or laLer, lL ylelds. lL mlghL Lake a week, a monLh, a year, a decade, a cenLury, or a mlllennlum, buL Lhe kosmos ls such LhaL soluLlons are always forLhcomlng. lor a mllllon years, people looked aL Lhe moon and wanLed Lo walk on lL. . . . l belleve any compeLenL person ls capable of bearlng problems ln mlnd unLll Lhey yleld Lhelr secreLs, whaL noL everybody possesses ls Lhe requlslLe wlll, passlon, or lnsane obsesslon LhaL wlll leL Lhem hold Lhe problem long enough or flercely enough. l, aL any raLe, was lnsane enough for Lhls parLlcular problem, and Loward Lhe end of LhaL Lhree-year perlod, Lhe whole Lhlng sLarLed Lo become clear Lo me. lL soon became obvlous LhaL Lhe varlous hlerarchles fall lnLo four ma[or classes (whaL l would evenLually call Lhe four quadranLs), LhaL some of Lhe hlerarchles are referrlng Lo lndlvlduals, some Lo collecLlves, some are abouL exLerlor reallLles, some are abouL lnLerlor ones, buL Lhey all flL LogeLher seamlessly, Lhe lngredlenLs of Lhese hlerarchles are boloos, wholes LhaL are parLs of oLher wholes (e.g., a whole aLom ls parL of a whole molecule, whlch ls parL of a whole cell, whlch ls parL of a whole organlsm, and so on), and Lherefore Lhe correcL word for hlerarchy ls acLually bolotcby. 1he kosmos ls a serles of nesLs wlLhln nesLs wlLhln nesLs lndeflnlLely, expresslng greaLer and greaLer hollsLlc embrace-holarchles of holons everywhere!-whlch ls why evetyboJy had Lhelr own value holarchy, and why, ln Lhe end, all of Lhese holarchles lnLermesh and flL perfecLly wlLh all Lhe oLhers. 1he unlverse ls composed of holons, all Lhe way up, all Lhe way down. And wlLh LhaL, much of 5ex, coloqy, 5pltltoollty began Lo wrlLe lLself. 1he book ls dlvlded lnLo Lwo parLs (Lhree acLually, counLlng Lhe endnoLes, a separaLe book ln Lhemselves). arL one descrlbes Lhls holonlc kosmos-nesLs wlLhln nesLs wlLhln nesLs lndeflnlLely-and Lhe worldvlew of unlversal lnLegrallsm LhaL can mosL auLhenLlcally express lL. 1hls parL of Lhe book covers a greaL deal of ground, and one of my regreLs ls LhaL l could noL lnclude Lhe volumlnous research maLerlal and explanaLlons LhaL would flesh ouL Lhe deLalls wlLh much more persuaslon. As Lhose who have seen some of Lhe research noLes wlll aLLesL, many of Lhe paragraphs ln 5ex, coloqy ooJ 5pltltoollty (SLS) are summarles of shorL books. (Cne revlewer acLually spoLLed Lhls, and began Lhe revlew, no summary of Lhls book ls posslble. 1he book, all 324 pages of LexL and 239 pages of noLes, ls a summary, whlch should reveal Lhe depLh and breadLh of lLs scope." CLher revlewers found Lhls very lrrlLaLlng, buL l really had no cholce. l hope Lo be able Lo geL Lhese research noLes lnLo prlnL aL some polnL, noL so much Lo show Lhe maLerlal lLself as Lo make lL avallable for crlLlclsm and scruLlny. 8uL LhaL revlewer ls rlghL: SLS ls a summary.) lf Lhe flrsL parL of Lhe book aLLempLs Lo ouLllne a unlversal lnLegrallsm-a vlew of Lhe holonlc kosmos from subconsclous Lo self-consclous Lo superconsclous-Lhe second parL of Lhe book aLLempLs Lo explaln why Lhls hollsLlc kosmos ls so ofLen lgnored or denled. lf Lhe unlverse really ls a paLLern of muLually lnLerrelaLed paLLerns and processes-holarchles of holons-why do so few dlsclpllnes acknowledge Lhls facL (aparL from Lhelr own narrow speclalLles)? lf Lhe kosmos ls oot hollsLlc, noL lnLegral, noL holonlc-lf lL ls a fragmenLed and [umbled affalr, wlLh no common conLexLs or llnklngs or [olnlngs or communlons-Lhen flne, Lhe world ls Lhe [umbled mess Lhe varlous speclalLles Lake lL Lo be. 8uL lf Lhe world ls hollsLlc and holonlc, Lhen why do noL more people see Lhls? And why do many academlc speclalLles acLlvely deny lL? lf Lhe world ls whole, why do so many people see lL as broken? And why, ln a sense, ls Lhe world broken, fragmenLed, allenaLed, dlvlded? 1he second parL of Lhe book Lherefore looks aL LhaL whlch prevenLs us from seelng Lhe hollsLlc kosmos. lL looks aL whaL l call flotlooJ. (AL one polnL l had named parL one and parL Lwo, before decldlng noL Lo narrow Lhelr conLenL wlLh a name, buL parL one was SplrlL-ln-AcLlon," and parL Lwo was llaLland." arL Lwo, ln any evenL, aLLempLs Lo explaln why parL one lsn'L more ofLen seen and undersLood.) When l wenL over Lhls book for lLs lncluslon ln Lhe collecteJ wotks, l declded Lo do a second, revlsed edlLlon (whlch ls also Lhe book you now hold ln your hands), mosLly because l wanLed Lo clarlfy a few secLlons ln llghL of Lhe consLrucLlve crlLlclsm of Lhe flrsL edlLlon. ln parLlcular, l wanLed Lo explaln more clearly Lhe hlsLorlcal rlse of sclenLlflc maLerlallsm (a verslon of flaLland), and Lhus l added several new secLlons ln several chapLers (especlally 12 and 13), along wlLh slx new dlagrams, whlch l belleve help Lhe narraLlve conslderably. l have also carefully gone over Lhe endnoLes, lncludlng new maLerlal where approprlaLe. Speaklng of Lhe endnoLes, Lhey really were wrlLLen as a book ln Lhemselves. Many of Lhe mosL lmporLanL ldeas ln SLS are menLloned and developed only ln Lhe noLes (such as Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon), as ls much of Lhe dlalogue wlLh oLher scholars (Peldegger, loucaulL, uerrlda, Pabermas, armenldes, llchLe, Pegel, WhlLehead, Pusserl) and wlLh alLernaLlve presenL-day LheorlsLs (Crof, 1arnas, 8erman, SpreLnak, 8oszak). 1he noLes also conLaln a handful of polemlcal bursLs, whlch l wlll explaln ln a momenL. All of Lhese have been reLouched for Lhe second edlLlon. Cnce Lhe book was concelved, Lhe acLual wrlLlng wenL falrly qulckly. lL was publlshed ln 1993 and, l'm Lold, was Lhe largesL-selllng academlc Lome ln any caLegory for LhaL year, aL one polnL golng lnLo Lhree prlnLlngs ln four monLhs alone. 1he reacLlons Lo lL were exLreme, from lncredlbly poslLlve sLaLemenLs Lo lnfurlaLed ranLs. 8uL Lhe speclflc crlLlclsms were sLralghLforward, and Lhey deserve a respecLful hearlng. 1PL MA!C8 C8l1lClSMS Cl5\, cOlOC, 5llkl1uAll1 Some crlLlcs of Lhe book clalmed LhaL lL Loo rlgldly caLegorlzed varlous approaches and Lhus marglnallzed lmporLanL dlfferences. 1hey Lherefore charged Lhe book wlLh varlous lsms" of one sorL or anoLher (sexlsm, anLhropocenLrlsm, specleslsm, logocenLrlsm, and lnvldlous monlsm). 1hose defendlng Lhe book clalmed LhaL mosL of Lhose crlLlclsms came from lndlvlduals whose worldvlews were shown Lo be narrow and parLlal by comparlson, and Lhey were reacLlng ln a negaLlve fashlon for LhaL reason. 8oLh sldes refused Lo budge, generally. ln my oplnlon, Lhere are a handful of serlous crlLlclsms LhaL need Lo be addressed. AlLhough l belleve Lhe bulk of Lhese crlLlclsms are based on an unfamlllarlLy wlLh my work as a whole, some are more serlous. Pere are Lhe ma[or crlLlclsms. lloqet Cne of Lhe mosL common charges was LhaL l used lageL as Lhe basls for my enLlre vlew of psychologlcal developmenL. 1hls ls very lnaccuraLe, buL l undersLand how Lhe book gave LhaL lmpresslon. Cne of Lhe mosL dlfflculL problems l face ln wrlLlng abouL my ldeas ls LhaL l always assume Lhe audlence has no prlor knowledge of my work. WlLh each new book l Lherefore musL sLarL from scraLch and explaln my sysLem" from Lhe beglnnlng. usually, around Lhe flrsL Lhlrd of a book ls Laken up lnLroduclng Lhe sysLem, and Lhen Lhe new maLerlal ls presenLed ln Lhe lasL parL of Lhe book. 1hls glves readers famlllar wlLh my work Lhe lmpresslon LhaL l am repeaLlng myself, buL Lhls ls for Lhe beneflL of Lhose new Lo Lhe game. WlLh SLS, l dld Lhls lnLroduclng uslng a few shorLcuLs, whlch was perhaps a bad ldea. lor Lhe hlgher or Lranspersonal sLages of developmenL, lnsLead of explalnlng Lhe sLages Lhemselves, l slmply used examples of each (Lmerson, SalnL 1eresa, LckharL, and Srl 8amana Maharshl), and for Lhe onLogeneLlc developmenL of worldvlews, l slmply used Lhe work of !ean lageL. Many revlewers-especlally Lhe posLmodern plurallsLs-[umped on lageL as an example of Lhe facL LhaL l was uslng old-paradlgm, hlerarchlcal, LurocenLrlc, sexlsL schemes, and Lherefore Lhe enLlre book was suspecL. Cf course, Lhose who were famlllar wlLh my work knew LhaL lageL was only one of dozens of LheorlsLs LhaL l had aLLempLed Lo lnLegraLe lnLo a more hollsLlc overvlew of developmenL, and LhaL, even Lhen, l was noL a sLrlcL lageLlan by any means. 8uL before l brlefly sLaLe my vlew, leL us noL rush over Lhe aLLacks on lageL Loo qulckly, because Lhe unfalrness of Lhose aLLacks applles equally Lo Lhose almed aL SLS. lor Lhe facL ls, lf we focus on Lhe aspecLs of cognlLlon LhaL lageL sLudled, hls general scheme has held up Lo lnLense cross-culLural lnvesLlgaLlon. 1hose who aLLack lageL ofLen seem unlnformed of Lhe evldence. AfLer almosL Lhree decades of lnLense cross-culLural research, Lhe evldence ls vlrLually unanlmous: lageL's sLages up Lo formal operaLlonal are unlversal and cross-culLural. As only one example, llves Actoss coltotes. ctoss-coltotol nomoo uevelopmeot ls a hlghly respecLed LexLbook wrlLLen from an openly llberal perspecLlve (whlch ls ofLen susplclous of unlversal" sLages). 1he auLhors (Parry Cardlner, !ay MuLLer, and Corlnne kosmlLzkl) carefully revlew Lhe evldence for lageL's sLages of sensorlmoLor, preoperaLlonal, concreLe operaLlonal, and formal operaLlonal. 1hey found LhaL culLural seLLlngs someLlmes alLer Lhe tote of developmenL, or an empbosls on cerLaln aspecLs of Lhe sLages-buL noL Lhe sLages Lhemselves or Lhelr cross-culLural valldlLy. 1hus, for sensorlmoLor: ln facL, Lhe quallLaLlve characLerlsLlcs of sensorlmoLor developmenL remaln nearly ldenLlcal ln all lnfanLs sLudled so far, desplLe vasL dlfferences ln Lhelr culLural envlronmenLs." lor preoperaLlonal and concreLe operaLlonal, based on an enormous number of sLudles, lncludlng of nlgerlans, Zamblans, lranlans, Algerlans, nepalese, Aslans, Senegalese, Amazon lndlans, and AusLrallan Aborlglnes: WhaL can we conclude from Lhls vasL amounL of cross-culLural daLa? llrsL, supporL for Lhe unlversallLy of Lhe sLrucLures or operaLlons underlylng Lhe preoperaLlonal perlod ls hlghly convlnclng. Second, . . . Lhe quallLaLlve characLerlsLlcs of concreLe operaLlonal developmenL (e.g., sLage sequences and reasonlng sLyles) appear Lo be unlversal [alLhough] Lhe raLe of cognlLlve developmenL . . . ls noL unlform buL depends on ecoculLural facLors." AlLhough Lhe auLhors do noL use exacLly Lhese Lerms, Lhey conclude LhaL Lhe deep feaLures of Lhe sLages are unlversal buL Lhe surface feaLures depend sLrongly on culLural, envlronmenLal, and ecologlcal facLors (as l would puL lL, all four quadranLs are lnvolved ln lndlvldual developmenL). llnally, lL appears LhaL alLhough Lhe raLe and level of performance aL whlch chlldren move Lhrough lageL's concreLe operaLlonal perlod depend on culLural experlence, chlldren ln dlverse socleLles sLlll proceed ln Lhe same sequence he predlcLed." lewer lndlvlduals ln any culLure (Aslan, Afrlcan, Amerlcan, or oLherwlse) reach formal operaLlonal cognlLlon, and Lhe reasons glven for Lhls vary. lL mlghL be LhaL formal operaLlonal ls a genulnely hlgher sLage LhaL fewer Lherefore reach, as l belleve. lL mlghL be LhaL formal operaLlonal ls a genulne capaclLy buL noL a genulne sLage, as Lhe auLhors belleve (l.e., only some culLures emphaslze formal operaLlonal and Lherefore Leach lL). Lvldence for Lhe exlsLence of lageL's formal sLage ls Lherefore sLrong buL noL concluslve. ?eL Lhls one lLem ls ofLen used Lo dlsmlss oll of lageL's sLages, whereas Lhe correcL concluslon, backed by enormous evldence, ls LhaL all of Lhe sLages up Lo formal operaLlonal have now been adequaLely demonsLraLed Lo be unlversal and cross-culLural. l belleve Lhe sLages aL and beyond formop are also unlversal, lncludlng vlslon-loglc and Lhe general LransraLlonal sLages, and my varlous books have presenLed subsLanLlal evldence for LhaL. 8uL Lhe polnL ls LhaL any model LhaL does noL lnclude lageL's sLages up Lo formop ls an lnadequaLe model. woves, 5tteoms, ooJ 5totes AlLhough l lnclude Lhe lageLlan cognlLlve llne ln my model, as demanded by Lhe cross-culLural evldence, hls scheme ls, as l suggesLed, only a small parL of an overall vlew. ln my model, Lhere are Lhe varlous levels or waves of consclousness (sLreLchlng from maLLer Lo body Lo mlnd Lo soul Lo splrlL), Lhrough whlch pass varlous developmenLal llnes or sLreams (lncludlng cognlLlve, affecLlve, moral, lnLerpersonal, splrlLual, self-ldenLlLy, needs, moLlvaLlons, and so on). A person can be aL a very hlgh level ln one llne (say, cognlLlve), aL a medlum level of developmenL ln oLhers (e.g., emoLlonal lnLelllgence), and aL a low level ln sLlll oLhers (e.g., morals). 1hus, o petsoos ovetoll Jevelopmeot follows oo lloeot sepoeoce wbotsoevet. uevelopmenL ls far from a sequenLlal, ladder-llke, clunk-and-grlnd serles of sLeps, buL raLher lnvolves a fluld flowlng of many waves and sLreams ln Lhe greaL 8lver of Llfe. Moreover, a person aL vlrLually any wave or sLage of developmenL can experlence an alLered stote of consclousness or a peak experlence of any of Lhe Lranspersonal realms (psychlc, subLle, causal, or nondual). 1hus, Lranspersonal peak experlences and alLered sLaLes ote ovolloble to vlttoolly ooyboJy ot vlttoolly ooy stoqe of Jevelopmeot, Lhe noLlon LhaL Lranspersonal sLaLes are avallable only aL hlgher levels of developmenL ls qulLe lncorrecL. My overall model, Lhen, conslsLs of waves, sLreams, and sLaLes, and Lhus Lhere ls preclous llLLle abouL lL LhaL ls llnear. And yeL LhaL was by far Lhe mosL common crlLlclsm of SLS: lL represenLed a model of merely llnear developmenL. Slnce l had noL subscrlbed Lo a llnear model slnce 1981 (see Lhe lnLroducLlon Lo volume 1hree of Lhe collecteJ wotks)-and slnce, ln facL, l had wrlLLen aL lengLh crlLlclzlng such a vlew (Lhe re[ecLlon of whlch marked Lhe LranslLlon from phase-2 Lo phase-3 ln my own work)-l musL confess l was asLonlshed Lo see crlLlcs ascrlbe Lhls vlew Lo me and Lhen crlLlclze lL aL lengLh. A book purporLlng Lo be a dlalogue wlLh my work conLalned Lhese or slmllar errors LhroughouL, and lL has Laken several years Lo dlg ouL from under Lhose unforLunaLe dlsLorLlons. SLlll, lL ls flnally Lhe case LhaL, due Lo vlgorous supporL by scholars of my work, one hears less and less Lhe charge LhaL my model ls llnear (lL ls mulLldlmenslonal), or LhaL lL ls LurocenLrlc (lL ls based on much cross-culLural evldence), or LhaL lL ls marglnallzlng (holarchles Lranscend and lnclude ln mulLlple conLexLs), or LhaL Lranspersonal experlences occur only aL hlgher levels (Lhey are avallable as sLaLes aL vlrLually any level). AL Lhe same Llme, l repeaL LhaL l undersLand how crlLlcs could have goLLen Lhe wrong lmpresslon lf Lhey only read SLS. l should have made my overall model much clearer, whlch would have helped Lo ward off Lhese mlsundersLandlngs. l have aLLempLed Lo do so ln Lhe second edlLlon and, obvlously, ln Lhls lnLroducLlon. 5pltltoollty lo cbllJteo ooJ uowo nomoos Closely relaLed Lo Lhe prevlous crlLlclsm was Lhe charge LhaL l denled any sorL of splrlLuallLy Lo boLh chlldren and early humans. 1hls, Loo, ls an unforLunaLe mlsrepresenLaLlon of my work, based exacLly on Lhe noLlon LhaL my model ls merely llnear. A few crlLlcs wenL apoplecLlc aL my llnear" model and accused me of Lhlngs sllghLly worse Lhan well-polsonlng. Slnce my model ls one of waves, sLreams, and sLaLes-and slnce splrlLual sLaLes can occur aL vlrLually any wave of unfoldlng-LhaL parLlcular crlLlclsm ls conslderably off Lhe mark. l can, as l sald, undersLand how a crlLlc who had only read SLS mlghL geL LhaL lmpresslon, buL Lhe lmpresslon ls false. (lor a speclflc dlscusslon of splrlLuallLy ln chlldren and ln early humans, see loteqtol lsycboloqy, chaps. 10, 11, and 12.) As ls perhaps obvlous, a good deal of Lhe ma[or crlLlclsms of SLS were based on slmple mlsrepresenLaLlons of my work, wlLh blame Lo be shared on boLh sldes: l dld noL clearly ouLllne my overall model, and Lhe crlLlcs were noL well lnformed abouL my oLher works. My responses began Lo sound llke a broken record: 1haL ls noL my vlew, LhaL ls noL my vlew, LhaL ls noL. . . ." nobody goL more Llred of Lhls Lhan l. 1be 1teotmeot of copbllosopbles Cne qulLe accuraLe crlLlclsm was LhaL l lumped LogeLher Lhe many varlous ecophllosophles and LreaLed Lhem lndlscrlmlnaLely. 1hls ls Lrue, and Lhe crlLlclsm ls well Laken. ln my defense, l can only say LhaL l explalned, ln several endnoLes, LhaL volume 2 of Lhe kosmos Lrllogy (LenLaLlvely enLlLled 5ex, CoJ, ooJ CeoJet. 1be coloqy of Meo ooJ womeo) LreaLs Lhe varlous ecophllosophles separaLely and deals wlLh each on lLs own Lerms. l was slmply sLaLlng cerLaln broad concluslons from Lhose sLudles. AL Lhe same Llme, SLS levels a very powerful crlLlque aL many, l would say mosL, of Lhe currenL ecophllosophles, polnLlng ouL LhaL Lhey are, ln facL, represenLaLlves of a very flaLland vlew. Cne revlewer of SLS concluded LhaL Lhls presenLaLlon, whlch l belleve ls generally Lrue, ls faLal Lo mosL forms of ecoLheory," and Mlchael Zlmmerman (auLhor of koJlcol coloqy) polnLed ouL LhaL mosL (noL all) forms of ecophllosophy do lndeed appear Lo be caughL ln flaLland as descrlbed. SLS wenL on Lo suggesL a Lype of ecophllosophy LhaL ls profoundly ecologlcal buL noL ln flaLland Lerms, and, ln my own oplnlon, Lhls boloolc ecoloqy ls one of Lhe book's mosL lmporLanL conLrlbuLlons. Powever, because SLS does noL subscrlbe Lo Lhe flaLland verslon of ecology LhaL mosL (noL all) ecophllosophles adopL, SLS was noL well recelved by ecophllosophers generally. lL ls sLlll noL. And yeL, as SLS carefully explalns, mosL ecophllosophles do lndeed conLaln Lhe ma[or problems, lnherenL ln flaLland, LhaL wlll very llkely conLlnue Lo hobble Lhem (boLh LheoreLlcally and pracLlcally) unLll a more holonlc ecology ls embraced. metsoo ooJ llotloos A few ecophllosophers ob[ecLed Lo my LreaLmenL of Lmerson and loLlnus. l made Lwo mlnor facLual errors ln reporLlng Lhelr vlews. Cne, l falled Lo use elllpses correcLly ln several Lmerson quoLes. 1wo, l reporLed Lhe flnal words of loLlnus accordlng Lo Lhe LranslaLlon glven by karl !aspers, noL Wllllam lnge as lndlcaLed. 8oLh errors were correcLed ln subsequenL prlnLlngs. 8uL Lhose mlnor lnfracLlons became Lhe sLarLlng polnL for an aglLaLed onslaughL as Lo my lnLerpreLaLlons of Lmerson and loLlnus alLogeLher. (See 1be ye of 5pltlt, chapLer 11, endnoLes 1, 2, and 3). unforLunaLely, ln my oplnlon, Lhls aLLack slmply allowed some of Lhe ecophllosophers Lo draw aLLenLlon away from my subsLanLlal crlLlclsms of Lhelr vlews, and also Lo lgnore Lhe ma[or crlLlclsms LhaL boLh Lmerson and loLlnus Lhemselves leveled agalnsL naLure mysLlclsm (and would Lherefore level agalnsL mosL forms of presenL-day ecopsychology, deep ecology, ecofemlnlsm, and neopaganlsm). Pere, from 1be ye of 5pltlt, ls a summary of Lhe wldely accepLed lnLerpreLaLlon of Lmerson's vlew: (1) naLure ls noL SplrlL buL a symbol of SplrlL (or a manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL), (2) sensory awareness ln lLself does noL reveal SplrlL buL obscures lL, (3) an Ascendlng (or LranscendenLal) currenL ls requlred Lo dlsclose SplrlL, (4) SplrlL ls undersLood only as naLure ls Lranscended (l.e., SplrlL ls lmmanenL ln naLure, buL fully dlscloses lLself only ln a Lranscendence of naLure-ln shorL, SplrlL Lranscends buL lncludes naLure). 1hose polnLs are unconLesLed by Lmerson scholars. As far as Lhose polnLs go, loLlnus would have compleLely agreed. 1hus, boLh Lmerson and loLlnus would condemn-as ttoe buL pottlol-mosL (noL all) forms of ecopsychology, Cala worshlp, neopaganlsm, deep ecology, and ecofemlnlsm. 1hls ls why lL became lmporLanL for Lhese parLlcular ecophllosophers Lo asserL LhaL Lhe common and wldely accepLed lnLerpreLaLlons of Lmerson and loLlnus (whlch l presenLed) were ln facL masslve dlsLorLlons, because oLherwlse Lhey could noL clalm supporL for Lhelr Lheorles from Lhese Lwo Lowerlng flgures. Cf course, one ls free Lo Lry Lo brlng fresh and novel lnLerpreLaLlons Lo Lhe classlcs, whlch ls always worLhwhlle. 8uL Lo Lry Lo geL Lhese new lnLerpreLaLlons across by slmply asserLlng LhaL l had masslvely dlsLorLed Lhese LheorlsLs was one of Lhe mosL ham-handed of Lhe crlLlclsms almed aL SLS (noL Lo menLlon Lhe facL LhaL, even lf lL were Lrue, lL wouldn'L affecL Lhe concluslons of SLS one way or Lhe oLher). 8uL l musL say, lL made for some fun and llvely flreworks. Mloot lolots ChapLer 2 ouLllnes LwenLy LeneLs" LhaL are common Lo evolvlng or growlng sysLems wherever we flnd Lhem. Many people counLed Lhem up and dldn'L geL LwenLy, and Lhey wanLed Lo know lf Lhey had mlssed someLhlng. 1hls slmply depends on whaL you counL as a LeneL. l glve Lwelve numbered LeneLs. number 2 conLalns four LeneLs, and number 12 conLalns flve. 1haL's nlneLeen alLogeLher. 1hroughouL Lhe book, l glve Lhree addlLlons. 1haL's LwenLy-Lwo. 8uL one or Lwo of Lhe LeneLs are noL really characLerlsLlcs, [usL slmple word deflnlLlons (e.g., LeneL 7 and posslbly 9). So LhaL leaves around LwenLy acLual LeneLs, or acLual characLerlsLlcs of evoluLlon. 8uL Lhere ls noLhlng sacred abouL Lhe number LwenLy, Lhese are [usL some of Lhe more noLlceable Lrends, Lroplsms, or Lendencles of evoluLlon. ChapLer 9, 1he Way up ls Lhe Way uown," dlscusses evoluLlon and lnvoluLlon. LvoluLlon ls Lhe unfoldlng from maLLer Lo body Lo mlnd Lo soul Lo splrlL, wlLh each hlgher dlmenslon Lranscendlng and lncludlng lLs [unlors, resulLlng ln Lhe CreaL nesL of 8elng. lnvoluLlon ls Lhe reverse process, or Lhe hlgher dlmenslons enfoldlng" and lnvolvlng" Lhemselves ln Lhe lower, deposlLlng Lhemselves ln Lhe lower as greaL poLenLlals, ready Lo unfold lnLo acLuallLy wlLh evoluLlon. Some readers felL LhaL Lhls made Lhe unlverse compleLely deLermlnlsLlc and faLed. 8uL lnvoluLlon, ln my oplnlon, slmply creaLes a vasL fleld of poLenLlals, whlch are noL deLermlned as Lo Lhelr surface feaLures aL all. 1hose are co-creaLed durlng evoluLlon, dependlng on an almosL lnflnlLe number of varlables, from lndlvldual lnlLlaLlve Lo random chance. (l deal speclflcally wlLh Lhls Loplc ln Lhe lnLroducLlon Lo volume 1wo of Lhe collecteJ wotks and ln loteqtol lsycboloqy.) WlLhln very broad spaces, evoluLlon ls playfully creaLlve aL every polnL! A few !unglans wlshed LhaL l had expanded my dlscusslon of archeLypes. lurLher maLerlal can be found ln 1be ye of 5pltlt, chapLer 11 (whlch also answers common crlLlclsms from !unglans), and loteqtol lsycboloqy (especlally chapLer 8). Cne crlLlc wondered why l had relled so much on Pabermas for my accounL of phylogeneLlc evoluLlon. AcLually, l relled on dozens of ma[or anLhropologlcal researchers-many of whlch are llsLed ln Lhe blbllography (and hundreds of whlch are llsLed ln volume 2 of Lhe Lrllogy)-buL because l was uslng Pabermas as an example of a LheorlsL who recognlzes all Lhree domalns of arL, morals, and sclence (Lhe 8lg 1hree"), l slmply presenLed hls exLenslve anLhropologlcal research as long as lL dld noL confllcL wlLh generally accepLed concluslons ln Lhe fleld. 5mlle wbeo oo 5oy 1bot, Mlstet 1here ls, flnally, Lhe Lone of Lhe book. 5ex, coloqy, 5pltltoollty ls ln some ways an angry book. Anger, or perhaps angulsh, lL's hard Lo say whlch. AfLer Lhree years lmmersed ln posLmodern culLural sLudles, where Lhe common Lone of dlscourse ls rancorous, mean-splrlLed, arroganL, and aggresslve, afLer surveylng counLless new paradlgm" LreaLlses, many of whlch boasLed, wlLhouL lrony, LhaL Lhey possessed Lhe new paradlgm LhaL was Lhe greaLesL LransformaLlon ln hlsLory and LhaL would save Lhe planeL and save Lhe world, afLer belng exposed Lo a relenLless onslaughL of anLl-WesLern, anLl-male, anLl-culLure, anLl-almosL-anyLhlng rheLorlc LhaL was some of Lhe mosL Loxlc and venomous wrlLlng l have ever seen, and whlch reduced culLural sLudles Lo Lhls or LhaL peL Lheory and narclsslsLlc dlsplay of self-afLer all of LhaL, ln anger and angulsh, l wroLe SLS, and Lhe Lone of Lhe book lndellbly reflecLs LhaL. ln many cases lL ls very speclflc: l ofLen mlmlcked Lhe Lone of Lhe crlLlc l was crlLlclzlng, maLchlng Loxlc wlLh Loxlc and snlde wlLh snlde. Cf course, ln dolng so l falled Lo Lurn Lhe oLher cheek. 8uL Lhen, Lhere are Llmes Lo Lurn Lhe oLher cheek, and Lhere are Llmes noL Lo. lf you happen Lo oqtee wlLh Lhe hollsLlc vlslon presenLed ln SLS, you, Loo, mlghL geL angry aL Lhe narrowness of whaL passes for culLural sLudles nowadays. ?ou mlghL also share a sense of sadness, of melancholy, aL Lhe shallowness LhaL pervades posLmodernlsm. 8eLween anger and angulsh you mlghL osclllaLe, as dld l when wrlLlng Lhe book. And, Lo be honesL, l Lhlnk all of LhaL ls approprlaLe. 8uL SLS deflnlLely was, for me, a cry of anger and angulsh. SLlll, l could have Loned Lhe book down. l chose noL Lo. l slncerely belleved, as l sLlll do, LhaL Lhe occaslonal polemlcal bursL was necessary Lo geL Lhe conversaLlon movlng ln an lnLegral dlrecLlon. lor over Lwo decades l had seen numerous excellenL books wlLh an lnLegral lnLenL compleLely lgnored by new paradlgm" LheorlsLs who clalmed Lo be lnLegral and hollsLlc. l chose Lo raLLle Lhe cage and see whaL happened. uld lL work? WhaL was lLs effecL? Several crlLlcs Look Lhe polemlc Lo be evldence of my nasLy characLer: l [usL couldn'L help myself, l had Lo aLLack. 1hls overlooked Lhe facL LhaL ln all of my flrsL Lwelve books, sLreLchlng over Lwo decades, Lhere ls noL a slngle polemlcal senLence. CLher crlLlcs malnLalned LhaL Lhe Lone prevenLed lLs message from geLLlng ouL. l Lruly undersLand whaL Lhey mean, buL l clalm exacLly Lhe conLrary. 1hese ldeas had been sLudlously lgnored for decades, unLll a llLLle polemlcal raLLllng, whereupon Lhey Look cenLer sLage, for beLLer or worse. Cne crlLlc lnadverLenLly demonsLraLed whaL was lnvolved by calllng for a dlalogue" ln Lhe wake of SLS, whereln all parLles would care for each oLher ln a dance of muLual respecL, and noL conducL LheoreLlcal dlscourse as lf lL were a war. 1hls crlLlc Lhen proceeded Lo do exacLly whaL he professed he desplsed, and lnsLead of presenLlng boLh sldes of Lhe argumenL falrly and respecLfully, slmply condemned my Lone from sLarL Lo flnlsh. 1he facL ls, Lhe pro and con sLances on Lhe Lone of Lhe book llned up almosL exacLly wlLh wheLher or noL one agreed wlLh lL. 1hose who agreed wlLh Lhe hollsLlc vlslon of SLS shared my anger and angulsh, and applauded Lhe polemlc. As one crlLlc puL lL, LeL us noL forgeL: many of us really llked Lhe polemlcal noLes ln SLS, for Lhelr refreshlng crlLlques and llberaLlng humor." Cn Lhe oLher slde of Lhe alsle, Lhose who were Lhemselves crlLlclzed ln Lhe book, or found Lhe vlslon deflclenL, lashed ouL aL Lhe Lone. As one puL lL, Worse Lhan lgnoranL, Wllber ls also unmannered, rude, and offenslve." no doubL, boLh sldes were rlghL. 1PL kCSMCS 18lLCC? 8uL by far Lhe mosL common overall reacLlon Lo SLS was one of whaL l suppose we mlghL call [oy. l was flooded wlLh mall from readers who Lold of Lhe llberaLlng lnfluence LhaL SLS had on Lhelr vlew of Lhe world, on Lhelr vlew of reallLy, on Lhelr consclousness lLself. SLS ls, afLer all, a sLory of Lhe feaLs of your very own Self, and many readers re[olced aL LhaL remembrance. Women forgave me any paLrlarchal obnoxlousness, men Lold me of weeplng LhroughouL Lhe lasL chapLer. AparL from Ctoce ooJ Ctlt, l have never recelved such hearLfelL and deeply movlng leLLers as l recelved from SLS, leLLers LhaL made Lhose dlfflculL Lhree years seem more Lhan worLh lL. l am ofLen asked when volume 2 of Lhe Lrllogy wlll be publlshed. My orlglnal plan was Lo release one volume a decade, whlch means volume 2 would be ready around Lhe year 2003. 8uL now l have no ldea exacLly when Lhe oLher Lwo volumes wlll be ready. volume 2 ls more or less fully wrlLLen. volume 3 exlsLs ln ouLllne. 8uL l wanL each Lo have Lhe chance Lo absorb Lhe consLrucLlve crlLlclsms of lLs predecessor. ln Lhe prevlous secLlon on Cb[ecLlons, l only focused on Lhe ma[or crlLlclsms, each of whlch, ln my oplnlon, can be saLlsfacLorlly answered. WhaL l dldn'L menLlon are all Lhe dozens of mlnor crlLlclsms LhaL l found valld and well Laken, and whlch l have aLLempLed Lo lncorporaLe ln subsequenL wrlLlng. l would llke Lhe kosmos Lrllogy Lo sLand as a solld verslon of a Lruly lnLegral phllosophy, a bellevable, lf lnlLlal, world phllosophy, and Lhus l would llke all Lhe many cogenL crlLlclsms Lo have plenLy of Llme Lo slnk ln. 1here ls one oLher reason l am ln no rush Lo brlng ouL Lhe oLher volumes. SLS lLself was begun ln parL due Lo a lamenL aL Lhe sLaLe of posLmodern culLural sLudles. ln Lhe Llme slnce SLS was concelved, posLmodernlsm's sLance has weakened percepLlbly. We are Lruly enLerlng a posL-posLmodern, posL-plurallsLlc world-by any oLher name, loteqtol. Cenulnely lnLegral phllosophles wlll become, and are becomlng, more and more accepLable, even eagerly embraced. WlLh every passlng year, Lhere ls one less chapLer of crlLlclsm l have Lo wrlLe. WlLh every passlng year, a unlversal lnLegrallsm becomes more and more welcome. Cne crlLlc wroLe of SLS LhaL lL honors and lncorporaLes more LruLh Lhan any approach ln hlsLory." l obvlously would llke Lo belleve LhaL ls Lhe case, buL l also know LhaL every Lomorrow brlngs new LruLhs, opens new vlsLas, and creaLes Lhe demand for even more encompasslng vlews. SLS ls slmply Lhe laLesL ln a long llne of hollsLlc vlslons, and wlll lLself pass lnLo a greaLer Lomorrow where lL ls merely a fooLnoLe Lo more glorlous vlews. ln Lhe meanLlme, lL ls qulLe a rlde. lottoJoctloo l1 lS lLA1-Cu1 sLrange LhaL someLhlng-LhaL ooytbloq-ls happenlng aL all. 1here was noLhlng, Lhen a 8lg 8ang, Lhen here we all are. 1hls ls exLremely welrd. 1o Schelllng's burnlng quesLlon, Why ls Lhere someLhlng raLher Lhan noLhlng?," Lhere have always been Lwo general answers. 1he flrsL mlghL be called Lhe phllosophy of oops." 1he unlverse [usL occurs, Lhere ls noLhlng behlnd lL, lL's all ulLlmaLely accldenLal or random, lL [usL ls, lL [usL happens-oops! 1he phllosophy of oops, no maLLer how sophlsLlcaLed and adulL lL may on occaslon appear-lLs modern names and numbers are leglon, from poslLlvlsm Lo sclenLlflc maLerlallsm, from llngulsLlc analysls Lo hlsLorlcal maLerlallsm, from naLurallsm Lo emplrlclsm-always comes down Lo Lhe same baslc answer, namely, uon'L ask." 1he quesLlon lLself (Why ls anyLhlng aL all happenlng? Why am l here?)-Lhe poestloo ltself ls sald Lo be confused, paLhologlcal, nonsenslcal, or lnfanLlle. 1o sLop asklng such sllly or confused quesLlons ls, Lhey all malnLaln, Lhe mark of maLurlLy, Lhe slgn of growlng up ln Lhls cosmos. l don'L Lhlnk so. l Lhlnk Lhe answer" Lhese modern and maLure" dlsclpllnes glve-namely, oops! (and Lherefore, uon'L ask!")-ls abouL as lnfanLlle a response as Lhe human condlLlon could posslbly offer. 1he oLher broad answer LhaL has been Lendered ls LhaL sometbloq else ls qoloq oo: behlnd Lhe happensLance drama ls a deeper or hlgher or wlder paLLern, or order, or lnLelllgence. 1here are, of course, many varleLles of Lhls ueeper Crder": Lhe 1ao, Cod, CelsL, MaaL, ArcheLypal lorms, 8eason, Ll, Mahamaya, 8rahman, 8lgpa. And alLhough Lhese dlfferenL varleLles of Lhe ueeper Crder cerLalnly dlsagree wlLh each oLher aL many polnLs, Lhey all agree on Lhls: Lhe unlverse ls noL whaL lL appears. 5ometbloq else ls golng on, someLhlng qulLe oLher Lhan oops. . . . * * * 1hls book ls abouL all of LhaL someLhlng oLher Lhan oops." lL ls abouL a posslble ueeper Crder. lL ls abouL evoluLlon, and abouL rellglon, and, ln a sense, abouL everyLhlng ln beLween. lL ls a brlef hlsLory of cosmos, blos, psyche, Lheos-a Lale Lold by an ldloL, lL goes wlLhouL saylng, buL a Lale LhaL, preclsely ln slgnlfylng noLhlng, slgnlfles Lhe All, and Lhere ls Lhe sound and Lhe fury. 1hls ls a book abouL holons-abouL wholes LhaL are parLs of oLher wholes, lndeflnlLely. Whole aLoms are parLs of molecules, whole molecules are parLs of cells, whole cells are parLs of organlsms, and so on. Lach wbole ls slmulLaneously a pott, a whole/parL, a holon. And reallLy ls composed, noL of Lhlngs nor processes nor wholes nor parLs, buL of whole/parLs, of holons. We wlll be looklng aL holons ln Lhe cosmos, ln Lhe blos, ln Lhe psyche, and ln Lheos, and aL Lhe evoluLlonary Lhread LhaL connecLs Lhem all, unfolds Lhem all, embraces Lhem all, endlessly. 1he flrsL chapLers deal wlLh holons ln Lhe physlcal cosmos (maLLer) and ln Lhe blosphere (llfe). 1hls ls Lhe general area of Lhe naLural and ecologlcal sclences, Lhe llfe sclences, Lhe sysLems sclences, and we wlll explore each of Lhem carefully. 1hls ls parLlcularly lmporLanL, glven noL only Lhe ecologlcal crlsls now descendlng on Lhls planeL wlLh a vengeance, buL also Lhe large number of movemenLs, from deep ecology Lo ecofemlnlsm, LhaL have arlsen ln an aLLempL Lo flnd splrlLuallLy and ecology connecLed, noL dlvorced, and we wlll look aL Lhe meanlng of all of LhaL. 1he mlddle chapLers explore Lhe emergence of Lhe mlnd or Lhe psyche or Lhe noosphere, and aL Lhe holons LhaL compose Lhe psyche lLself (Lhe mlnd ls composed of unlLs LhaL have meanlng only ln conLexLs: wholes LhaL are parLs of oLher wholes, endlessly). 1hese psychlc holons, llke all holons, emerged and evolved-ln Llme and hlsLory-and we wlll look brlefly aL Lhe hlsLorlcal evoluLlon of Lhe mlnd and consclousness, and aL how Lhese psychlc holons relaLe Lo Lhe holons ln Lhe cosmos and ln Lhe blos. 1he lasL chapLers deal wlLh Lheos, wlLh Lhe ulvlne uomaln, wlLh a ueeper Crder, and how lL mlghL lndeed be relaLed Lo Lhe cosmos, Lhe blosphere, and Lhe noosphere. And here, l Lhlnk, some surprlses awalL us. 1hls book ls Lhe flrsL of Lhree volumes (Lhe serles lLself ls slmply called kosmos, or 1be kosmos 1tlloqy, brlef summarles of Lhe oLher Lwo volumes are glven LhroughouL Lhls book). Many of Lhe quesLlons ralsed ln Lhls volume are more carefully examlned ln Lhe oLher Lwo, and, ln any evenL, Lhls volume sLands more as a broad overvlew and lnLroducLlon, raLher Lhan a flnlshed concluslon. As such, Lhe book ls bullL upon whaL l would call otleotloq qeoetollzotloos. lor example, ln Lhe sphere of moral developmenL, noL everybody agrees wlLh Lhe deLalls of Lawrence kohlberg's seven moral sLages, nor wlLh Lhe deLalls of Carol Cllllgan's reworklng of kohlberg's scheme. 8uL Lhere ls general and ample agreemenL LhaL human moral developmenL goes Lhrough aL leasL Lhree broad sLages: Lhe human aL blrLh ls noL yeL soclallzed lnLo any sorL of moral sysLem (lL ls preconvenLlonal"), Lhe human Lhen learns, from lLself and from oLhers, a general moral scheme LhaL represenLs Lhe baslc values of Lhe socleLy lL ls ralsed ln (lL becomes convenLlonal"), and wlLh even furLher growLh, Lhe lndlvldual may come Lo reflecL on socleLy and Lhus galn some modesL dlsLance from lL and galn a capaclLy Lo crlLlclze or reform lL (Lhe lndlvldual ls Lo some degree posLconvenLlonal"). 1hus, alLhough Lhe acLual deLalls and Lhe preclse meanlngs of LhaL developmenLal sequence are sLlll hoLly debaLed, everybody preLLy much agrees LhaL someLhlng llke Lhose Lhree broad sLages do lndeed occur, and occur unlversally. 1hese are otleotloq qeoetollzotloos: Lhey show us, wlLh a greaL deal of agreemenL, where Lhe lmporLanL foresLs are locaLed, even lf we can'L agree on how many Lrees Lhey conLaln. My polnL ls LhaL lf we Lake Lhese Lypes of largely-agreed-upon orlenLlng generallzaLlons from Lhe varlous branches of knowledge (from physlcs Lo blology Lo psychology Lo Lheology), and lf we sLrlng Lhese orlenLlng generallzaLlons LogeLher, we wlll arrlve aL some asLonlshlng and ofLen profound concluslons, concluslons LhaL, as exLraordlnary as Lhey mlghL be, noneLheless embody noLhlng more Lhan our already-agreed-upon knowledge. 1he beads of knowledge are already accepLed: lL ls only necessary Lo provlde Lhe Lhread Lo sLrlng Lhem LogeLher lnLo a necklace. 1hese Lhree volumes are one aLLempL Lo sLrlng LogeLher such a necklace, wheLher lL succeeds or noL remalns Lo be seen. 8uL lf noLhlng else, l Lhlnk lL ls aL leasL a good example of how Lhls Lype of work can be done ln Loday's posLmodern world. ln worklng wlLh broad orlenLlng generallzaLlons, Lhe Lrllogy dellvers up a broad orlenLlng map of Lhe place of men and women ln relaLlon Lo unlverse, Llfe, and SplrlL, Lhe deLalls of whlch we can all flll ln as we llke, buL Lhe broad ouLllnes of whlch really have an awful loL of supporLlng evldence, culled from Lhe orlenLlng generallzaLlons, slmple buL sLurdy, from Lhe varlous branches of human knowledge. noneLheless, Lhls broad orlenLlng map ls nowhere near flxed and flnal. ln addlLlon Lo belng composed of broad orlenLlng generallzaLlons, l would say Lhls ls a book of a Lhousand hypoLheses. l wlll be Lelllng Lhe sLory as lf lL were slmply Lhe case (because Lelllng lL LhaL way makes for much beLLer readlng), buL noL a senLence LhaL follows ls noL open Lo conflrmaLlon or re[ecLlon by a communlLy of Lhe adequaLe. l suppose many readers wlll lnslsL on calllng whaL l am dolng meLaphyslcs," buL lf meLaphyslcs" means LhoughL wlLhouL evldence, Lhere ls noL a meLaphyslcal senLence ln Lhls enLlre book. 8ecause Lhls book (or Lhls Lrllogy) offers a broad orlenLlng map of men and women's place ln Lhe larger kosmos (of maLLer, llfe, mlnd, and splrlL), lL naLurally Louches on a greaL number of Loplcs LhaL have recenLly become hoL," from Lhe ecologlcal crlsls Lo femlnlsm, from Lhe meanlng of modernlLy and posLmodernlLy Lo Lhe naLure of llberaLlon" ln relaLlon Lo sex, gender, race, class, creed, Lo Lhe naLure of Lechno-economlc developmenLs and Lhelr relaLlon Lo varlous worldvlews, Lo Lhe varlous splrlLual and wlsdom LradlLlons Lhe world over LhaL have offered Lelllng suggesLlons as Lo our place ln a larger scheme of Lhlngs. Pow can we become more fully human and aL Lhe same Llme be saved from Lhe faLe of belng merely human? Where ls SplrlL ln Lhls Cod-forsaken, Coddess-forsaken world of modernlLy? Why are we desLroylng Cala ln Lhe very aLLempL Lo lmprove our own condlLlon? Why are so many aLLempLs aL salvaLlon sulcldal? Pow do we acLually flL lnLo Lhls larger kosmos? Pow are we wbole lndlvlduals who are also potts of someLhlng Larger? ln oLher words, slnce human belngs, llke absoluLely everyLhlng else ln Lhe kosmos, are boloos, whaL does LhaL mean? Pow do we flL lnLo LhaL whlch ls forever movlng beyond us? uoes llberaLlon mean belng whole ourselves, or belng a parL of someLhlng Larger-or someLhlng else alLogeLher? lf hlsLory ls a nlghLmare from whlch l am Lrylng Lo awaken, Lhen whaL exacLly ls lL LhaL l am supposed Lo awaken to? And, mosL lmporLanL, can we noL sLare lnLo LhaL vasL and sLunnlng kosmos and respond wlLh someLhlng more maLure Lhan oops? lrom Lhose who have already read Lhls book ln manuscrlpL come Lwo suggesLlons for Lhe reader: llrsL, sklp Lhe endnoLes on Lhe flrsL readlng, and save Lhem for (and lf) a second look. 1hls book was lnLenLlonally wrlLLen on Lwo levels: Lhe maln LexL, whlch makes every aLLempL Lo be as accesslble as posslble, and Lhe noLes (a small book ln Lhemselves), meanL for serlous sLudenLs. 8uL ln boLh cases, Lhe noLes are, for Lhe mosL parL, besL reserved for a second readlng, as Lhey greaLly dlsrupL Lhe narraLlve flow. (AlLernaLlvely, some have slmply read Lhe noLes by Lhemselves, as a Lype of appendlx, [usL for Lhe lnformaLlon, whlch ls flne.) Second, read Lhe book a senLence aL a Llme. eople who Lry Lo sklp around geL compeLely losL. 8uL preLLy much everybody reporLs LhaL lf you slmply read each senLence, Lhe LexL wlll carry you along, and any problems encounLered are usually cleared up down Lhe road. 1hls ls a long book, obvlously, buL apparenLly lL comes ln nlce, small, blLe-slzed chunks, and lLs readers all seem Lo have a greaL good Llme-a blLe aL a Llme. lL ls ofLen sald LhaL ln Loday's modern and posLmodern world, Lhe forces of darkness are upon us. 8uL l Lhlnk noL, ln Lhe uark and Lhe ueep Lhere are LruLhs LhaL can always heal. lL ls noL Lhe forces of darkness buL of shallowness LhaL everywhere LhreaLen Lhe Lrue, and Lhe good, and Lhe beauLlful, and LhaL lronlcally announce Lhemselves as deep and profound. lL ls an exuberanL and fearless shallowness LhaL everywhere ls Lhe modern danger, Lhe modern LhreaL, and LhaL everywhere noneLheless calls Lo us as savlor. We mlghL have losL Lhe LlghL and Lhe PelghL, buL more frlghLenlng, we have losL Lhe MysLery and Lhe ueep, Lhe LmpLlness and Lhe Abyss, and losL lL ln a world dedlcaLed Lo surfaces and shadows, exLerlors and shells, whose propheLs lovlngly exhorL us Lo dlve lnLo Lhe shallow end of Lhe pool head flrsL. PlsLory," sald Lmerson, ls an lmperLlnence and an ln[ury lf lL be anyLhlng more Lhan a cheerful apologue or parable of my belng and becomlng." WhaL follows, Lhen, ls a cheerful parable of your belng and your becomlng, an apologue of LhaL LmpLlness whlch forever lssues forLh, unfoldlng and enfoldlng, evolvlng and lnvolvlng, creaLlng worlds and dlssolvlng Lhem, wlLh each and every breaLh you Lake. 1hls ls a chronlcle of whaL you have done, a Lale of whaL you have seen, a measure of whaL we all mlghL yeL become. 8CCk CnL wbot ls lt tbot bos colleJ yoo so soJJeoly oot of ootbloqoess to eojoy fot o btlef wblle o spectocle wblcb temolos polte loJlffeteot to yoo? 1be cooJltloos fot yoot exlsteoce ote os olJ os tbe tocks. lot tboosooJs of yeots meo bove sttlveo ooJ soffeteJ ooJ beqotteo ooJ womeo bove btooqbt fottb lo polo. A booJteJ yeots oqo, petbops, oootbet moo-ot womoo-sot oo tbls spot, llke yoo be qozeJ wltb owe ooJ yeotoloq lo bls beott ot tbe Jyloq llqbt oo tbe qloclets. llke yoo be wos beqotteo of moo ooJ boto of womoo. ne felt polo ooJ btlef joy os yoo Jo. wos be someooe else? wos lt oot yoo yootself? wbot ls tbls 5elf of yoots? -L8Wln SCP8CulnCL8 1 1be web of llfe 5o tbe wotlJ, qtoooJeJ lo o tlmeless movemeot by tbe 5ool wblcb soffoses lt wltb lotelllqeoce, becomes o llvloq ooJ blesseJ beloq. -LC1lnuS l1'S A S18AnCL WC8Lu. lL seems LhaL around flfLeen bllllon years ago Lhere was, preclsely, absoluLe noLhlngness, and Lhen wlLhln less Lhan a nanosecond Lhe maLerlal unlverse blew lnLo exlsLence. SLranger sLlll, Lhe physlcal maLLer so produced was noL merely a random and chaoLlc mess, buL seemed Lo organlze lLself lnLo ever more complex and lnLrlcaLe forms. So complex were Lhese forms LhaL, many bllllons of years laLer, some of Lhem found ways Lo reproduce Lhemselves, and Lhus ouL of maLLer arose llfe. Lven sLranger, Lhese llfe forms were apparenLly noL conLenL Lo merely teptoJoce Lhemselves, buL lnsLead began a long evoluLlon LhaL would evenLually allow Lhem Lo tepteseot Lhemselves, Lo produce slgns and symbols and concepLs, and Lhus ouL of llfe arose mlnd. WhaLever Lhls process of evoluLlon was, lL seems Lo have been lncredlbly drlven-from maLLer Lo llfe Lo mlnd. 8uL sLranger sLlll, a mere few hundred years ago, on a small and lndlfferenL planeL around an lnslgnlflcanL sLar, evoluLlon became consclous of lLself. And aL preclsely Lhe same Llme, Lhe very mechanlsms LhaL allowed evoluLlon Lo become consclous of lLself were slmulLaneously worklng Lo englneer lLs own exLlncLlon. And LhaL was Lhe sLrangesL of all. 1PL LCCLCClCAL C8lSlS l wlll noL belabor Lhe polnL by brlnglng ouL all Lhe ghasLly sLaLlsLlcs, from Lhe facL LhaL we are aL presenL exLermlnaLlng approxlmaLely one hundred specles a day Lo Lhe facL LhaL we are desLroylng Lhe world's Lroplcal foresLs aL Lhe raLe of one fooLball fleld per second. 1he planeL, lndeed, ls headed for dlsasLer, and lL ls now posslble, for Lhe flrsL Llme ln human hlsLory, LhaL owlng eotltely Lo manmade clrcumsLances, 1 noL one of us wlll survlve Lo Lell Lhe Lale. lf Lhe LarLh ls lndeed our body and blood, Lhen ln desLroylng lL we are commlLLlng a slow and gruesome sulclde. Arlslng ln response Lo Lhe alarmlng dlmenslons of Lhls ecologlcal caLasLrophe (Lhe naLure and exLenL of whlch l wlll slmply assume ls evldenL Lo every lnLelllgenL person) have been a varleLy of popularly based responses generally referred Lo as Lhe envlronmenLal movemenL (usually daLed from Lhe 1962 publlcaLlon of 8achel Carson's 5lleot 5ptloq). 2 SLarLlng ln parL wlLhln Lhe envlronmenLal movemenL, buL golng qulLe beyond lL, are Lwo ecophllosophles" LhaL wlll parLlcularly lnLeresL us: ecofemlnlsm and deep ecology (and we wlll see LhaL Lhey almosL perfecLly embody, respecLlvely, Lhe female and male value sphere approaches Lo Lhe same Loplc). CenLral Lo Lhese ecologlcal approaches ls Lhe noLlon LhaL our presenL envlronmenLal crlsls ls due prlmarlly Lo a ftoctoteJ wotlJvlew, a worldvlew LhaL drasLlcally separaLes mlnd and body, sub[ecL and ob[ecL, culLure and naLure, LhoughLs and Lhlngs, values and facLs, splrlL and maLLer, human and nonhuman, a worldvlew LhaL ls duallsLlc, mechanlsLlc, aLomlsLlc, anLhropocenLrlc, and paLhologlcally hlerarchlcal-a worldvlew LhaL, ln shorL, erroneously separaLes humans from, and ofLen unnecessarlly elevaLes humans above, Lhe resL of Lhe fabrlc of reallLy, a broken worldvlew LhaL allenaLes men and women from Lhe lnLrlcaLe web of paLLerns and relaLlonshlps LhaL consLlLuLe Lhe very naLure of llfe and LarLh and cosmos. 1hese approaches furLher malnLaln LhaL Lhe only way we can heal Lhe planeL, and heal ourselves, ls by replaclng Lhls fracLured worldvlew wlLh a worldvlew LhaL ls more hollsLlc, more relaLlonal, more lnLegraLlve, more LarLh- honorlng, and less arroganLly human-cenLered. A worldvlew, ln shorL, LhaL honors Lhe enLlre web of llfe, a web LhaL has lnLrlnslc value ln and of lLself, buL a web LhaL, noL lncldenLally, ls Lhe bone and marrow of our own exlsLence as well. lrlL[of Capra, for example, has argued LhaL Lhe world's presenL soclal, economlc, and envlronmenLal crlses all sLem from Lhe same fracLured worldvlew: Cur socleLy as a whole flnds lLself ln an [unprecedenLed] crlsls. We can read abouL lLs numerous manlfesLaLlons every day ln Lhe newspapers. We have hlgh unemploymenL, we have an energy crlsls, a crlsls ln healLh care, polluLlon and oLher envlronmenLal dlsasLers, a rlslng wave of vlolence and crlme, and so on. 1he baslc Lhesls of Lhls book [1be 1otoloq lolot] ls LhaL Lhese are all dlfferenL faceLs of one and Lhe same crlsls, and LhaL Lhls crlsls ls essenLlally a crlsls of percepLlon. lL derlves from Lhe facL LhaL we are Lrylng Lo apply Lhe concepLs of an ouLdaLed worldvlew-Lhe mechanlsLlc worldvlew . . .-Lo a reallLy LhaL can no longer be undersLood ln Lerms of Lhose concepLs. We llve Loday ln a globally lnLerconnecLed world, ln whlch blologlcal, psychologlcal, soclal, and envlronmenLal phenomena are all lnLerdependenL. 1o descrlbe Lhls world approprlaLely we need an ecologlcal perspecLlve. . . . 3 As many scholars have polnLed ouL, because of Lhe percelved closeness of woman" and naLure," Lhe despollaLlon of Lhe LarLh and Lhe sub[ugaLlon of women have hlsLorlcally gone hand ln hand. cofemlolsm ls a powerful response Lo Lhe denlgraLlon of boLh of Lhese oLhers." As !udlLh lanL explalns: PlsLorlcally, women have had no real power ln Lhe ouLslde world, no place ln declslon maklng and lnLellecLual llfe. 1oday, however, ecology speaks for Lhe LarLh, for Lhe oLher" ln human/envlronmenLal relaLlonshlps, and femlnlsm speaks for Lhe oLher" ln female/male relaLlons. And ecofemlnlsm, by speaklng for botb Lhe orlglnal oLhers, seeks Lo undersLand Lhe lnLerconnecLed rooLs of all domlnaLlon as well as ways Lo reslsL and change. 1he ecofemlnlsL's Lask ls one of developlng Lhe ablllLy Lo Lake Lhe place of Lhe oLher when conslderlng Lhe consequences of posslble acLlons, and ensurlng LhaL we do noL forgeL LhaL we are all parL of one anoLher . . . , as we mend our relaLlons wlLh each oLher and wlLh Lhe LarLh. 4 8lll uevall and Ceorge Sesslons, represenLlng Lhe movemenL known as Jeep ecoloqy, polnL ouL LhaL Lhls ls Lhe work we call culLlvaLlng ecologlcal consclousness, Lhe lnslghL LhaL everyLhlng ls connecLed," whlch !ack lorbes explalns as percelvlng ourselves as belng deeply bound LogeLher wlLh oLher people and wlLh Lhe surroundlng nonhuman forms of llfe ln a complex lnLerconnecLed web of llfe, LhaL ls Lo say, a Lrue communlLy. All creaLures and Lhlngs [are] broLhers and slsLers. lrom Lhls ldea comes Lhe baslc prlnclple of non-explolLaLlon, of respecL and reverence for all creaLures." 3 1he exLraordlnary Lhlng abouL all Lhese quoLes ls LhaL, alLhough Lhey mlghL sound raLher romanLlc and poeLlc and, some would say, even mushy-mlnded, Lhey are ln facL rooLed ln Lhe hardesL of sclenLlflc evldence. AfLer all, hollsLlc Lheorles of Lhe web of llfe" are as old as clvlllzaLlon lLself, formlng Lhe very core of Lhe world's greaL rellglons and wlsdom LradlLlons (as we wlll see). 8uL lL ls one Lhlng Lo merely have Cod on your slde, qulLe anoLher Lo have sclence on your slde. And Lhe ecologlcal sclences are [usL LhaL: hard sclences. WhaL l would llke Lo do, Lhen, ls brlefly revlew Lhe sysLems (hollsLlc or ecologlcal) sclences, and demonsLraLe [usL exacLly whaL Lhey mean when Lhey refer Lo Lhe lnLerconnecLedness or webllke" naLure of all llfe. 1hls wlll glve us some necessary background lnformaLlon, and also serve as a plaLform for our dlscusslon of ecofemlnlsm and deep ecology. llnally, as lmporLanL as Lhe ecologlcal or hollsLlc sysLems approach ls, we wlll have Lo make a few very lmporLanL revlslons ln lL (for reasons LhaL wlll become obvlous), and, mosL lmporLanL, we wlll have Lo seL lL ln lLs owo larger conLexL, a conLexL almosL always lgnored (wlLh raLher dlre consequences). And we wlll flnd LhaL Lhe same sLrengLhs-and Lhe same weaknesses-beseL ecofemlnlsm and deep ecology as well. We wlll flnd, ln oLher words, LhaL Lhose who Lalk of Lhe web of llfe" are baslcally half rlghL and half wrong (or serlously lncompleLe), and Lhe half-wrong" parL has caused almosL more problems Lhan Lhe half-rlghL" parL has solved. 8uL flrsL, Lhe half LhaL seems deflnlLely rlghL. 1WC A88CWS Cl 1lML 1he new sysLems sclences are, ln a sense, Lhe sclences of wholeness and connecLedness. lf we now add Lhe noLlon of Jevelopmeot or evolotloo-Lhe ldea LhaL wholes grow and evolve-we have Lhe essence of Lhe modern sysLems sclences. As Lrvln Laszlo puLs lL, A new sysLem, sclenLlflc ln orlgln and phllosophlc ln depLh and scope, ls now on Lhe rlse. lL encompasses Lhe greaL realms of Lhe maLerlal unlverse, of Lhe world of Lhe llvlng, and of Lhe world of hlsLory. 1hls ls Lhe evoluLlonary paradlgm. . . ." As he explalns lL: 1he old adage everyLhlng ls connecLed wlLh everyLhlng else" descrlbes a Lrue sLaLe of affalrs. 1he resulLs achleved [by Lhe evoluLlonary sclences] furnlsh adequaLe proof LhaL Lhe physlcal, Lhe blologlcal, and Lhe soclal realms ln whlch evoluLlon unfolds are by no means dlsconnecLed. AL Lhe very leasL, one klnd of evoluLlon prepares Lhe ground for Lhe nexL. CuL of Lhe condlLlons creaLed by evoluLlon ln Lhe physlcal realm emerge Lhe condlLlons LhaL permlL blologlcal evoluLlon Lo Lake off. And ouL of Lhe condlLlons creaLed by blologlcal evoluLlon come Lhe condlLlons LhaL allow human belngs-and many oLher specles-Lo evolve cerLaln soclal forms of organlzaLlon. 6 Laszlo Lhen offers Lhls lmporLanL concluslon: SclenLlflc evldence of Lhe paLLerns Lraced by evoluLlon ln Lhe physlcal unlverse, ln Lhe llvlng world, and even ln Lhe world of hlsLory ls growlng rapldly. lL ls coalesclng lnLo Lhe lmage of baslc regularlLles LhaL repeaL and recur. lL ls now posslble Lo search ouL Lhese regularlLles and obLaln a gllmpse of Lhe fundamenLal naLure of evoluLlon-of Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe cosmos as a whole, lncludlng Lhe llvlng world and Lhe world of human soclal hlsLory. 1o search ouL and sysLemaLlcally sLaLe Lhese regularlLles ls Lo engage ln Lhe creaLlon of Lhe grand synLhesls" LhaL unlLes physlcal, blologlcal, and soclal evoluLlon lnLo a conslsLenL framework wlLh lLs own laws and loglc. 7 LxacLly whaL Lhose laws and loglc are, we wlll explore laLer ln Lhls and Lhe nexL chapLer. lor Lhe momenL, noLlce LhaL Laszlo refers Lo Lhe Lhree greaL realms" of evoluLlon: maLerlal, blologlcal, and hlsLorlcal. Lrlch !anLsch refers Lo Lhem as cosmlc, blosoclal, and socloculLural. Mlchael Murphy summarlzes Lhem as physlcal, blologlcal, and psychologlcal. ln popular Lerms: maLLer, llfe, and mlnd. l wlll refer Lo Lhese Lhree general domalns as Lhe physlosphere (maLLer), Lhe blosphere (llfe), and Lhe noosphere (mlnd). 8 1he cenLral clalm made by Lhe evoluLlonary sysLems sclences ls LhaL, whaLever Lhe acLual naLure of Lhese Lhree greaL domalns, Lhey are all unlLed, noL necessarlly by slmllar conLenLs, buL because Lhey all express Lhe same general laws or Jyoomlc pottetos. As Ludwlg von 8erLalanffy, founder of Ceneral SysLem 1heory, puL lL, Lhe unlLy of Sclence ls granLed, noL by a uLoplan reducLlon of all sclences Lo physlcs and chemlsLry, buL by Lhe sLrucLural unlformlLles [regularlLles of dynamlc paLLerns] of Lhe dlfferenL levels of reallLy." 9 now hlsLorlcally lL had been malnLalned, from Lhe Llme of laLo and ArlsLoLle unLll around Lhe end of Lhe nlneLeenLh cenLury, LhaL all of Lhese greaL domalns-physlosphere, blosphere, noosphere-were one conLlnuous and lnLerrelaLed manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL, one CreaL Chaln of 8elng, LhaL reached ln a perfecLly unbroken or unlnLerrupLed fashlon from maLLer Lo llfe Lo mlnd Lo soul Lo splrlL. As ArLhur Love[oy 10 demonsLraLed, Lhe varlous CreaL Chaln LheorlsLs malnLalned Lhree essenLlal polnLs: (1) all phenomena-all Lhlngs and evenLs, people, anlmals, mlnerals, planLs-are manlfesLaLlons of Lhe superabundance and plenlLude of SplrlL, so LhaL SplrlL ls woven lnLrlnslcally lnLo each and all, and Lhus even Lhe enLlre maLerlal and naLural world was, as laLo puL lL, a vlslble, senslble Cod", (2) Lherefore, Lhere are no gaps" ln naLure, no mlsslng llnks, no unbrldgeable duallsms, for each and every Lhlng ls lnLerwoven wlLh each and every oLher (Lhe conLlnuum of belng"), and (3) Lhe conLlnuum of belng noneLheless shows gradaLlon, for varlous emergenLs appear ln some dlmenslons LhaL do noL appear ln oLhers (e.g., wolves can run, rocks can'L, so Lhere are gaps" ln Lhe speclal sense of emergenLs). now whaLever we moderns mlghL Lhlnk of Lhe CreaL Chaln as a Lheory, lL noneLheless has been Lhe offlclal phllosophy of Lhe larger parL of clvlllzed humanklnd Lhrough mosL of lLs hlsLory", and furLher, lL was Lhe worldvlew LhaL Lhe greaLer number of Lhe subLler speculaLlve mlnds and of Lhe greaL rellglous Leachers [boLh LasL and WesL], ln Lhelr varlous fashlons, have been engaged ln." 11 1hus, wheLher or noL we accepL some verslon of Lhe CreaL Chaln (and we wlll be examlnlng Lhls ln laLer chapLers), scholars agree LhaL lLs worldvlew saw maLLer and bodles and mlnds as a vasL neLwork of muLually lnLerweavlng orders subslsLlng ln SplrlL, wlLh each node ln Lhe conLlnuum of belng, each llnk ln Lhe chaln, belng absoluLely necessary and lnLrlnslcally valuable. 1o glve only one example now, loLlnus would soon explaln LhaL slnce each llnk was a manlfesLaLlon of Lhe goodness of SplrlL, each had lnLrlnslc value-lL was valuable ln and of lLself-and no llnk whaLsoever, no maLLer how lowly," exlsLed merely or even prlmarlly for Lhe lnsLrumenLal use of oLhers: desLroy any preclous sLrand and Lhe whole fabrlc would come unravelled. 8uL wlLh Lhe rlse of modern sclence-assoclaLed parLlcularly wlLh Lhe names of Copernlcus, kepler, Callleo, 8acon, newLon, kelvln, Clauslus-Lhls greaL unlfled and hollsLlc worldvlew began Lo fall aparL, and fall aparL ln ways, lL ls clear, LhaL none of Lhese ploneerlng sclenLlsLs Lhemselves elLher foresaw or lnLended. And lL fell aparL ln a very pecullar way. 1hese early sclenLlsLs began Lhelr experlmenLal sLudles ln LhaL realm whlch ls apparenLly Lhe leasL compllcaLed: Lhe physlosphere, Lhe maLerlal unlverse, Lhe world of lnanlmaLe maLLer. kepler focused on planeLary moLlon and Callleo on LerresLrlal mechanlcs, newLon synLheslzed Lhelr resulLs ln hls unlversal law of gravlLaLlon and laws of moLlon, and uescarLes worked all Lhe resulLs lnLo a mosL lnfluenLlal phllosophy. ln all of Lhese endeavors, Lhe physlosphere began Lo look llke a vasL mechanlsm, a unlversal machlne governed by sLrlcL causallLy. And worse, a machlne LhaL was runnlng down. Pere was Lhe problem: ln Lhe maLerlal world, sclence soon dlscovered, Lhere are aL leasL Lwo very dlfferenL Lypes of phenomena, one descrlbed by Lhe laws of classlcal mechanlcs and Lhe oLher by Lhe laws of Lhermodynamlcs. ln Lhe former, ln classlcal newLonlan mechanlcs, Llme plays no fundamenLal role, because Lhe processes descrlbed are reverslble. lor example, lf a planeL ls golng one way around Lhe sun or Lhe reverse way around Lhe sun, Lhe laws descrlblng Lhe moLlon are Lhe same, because ln Lhese Lypes of classlcal mechanlcs" Llme changes noLhlng essenLlal, you can as easlly Lurn your waLch forward as you can Lurn lL backward-Lhe mechanlsm and lLs laws don'L care whlch way you Lurn lL. 8uL ln Lhermodynamlc processes, Llme's arrow" ls absoluLely cenLral. lf you puL a drop of lnk ln a glass of waLer, ln a day or so Lhe lnk wlll have evenly dlspersed LhroughouL Lhe waLer. 8uL you wlll oevet see Lhe reverse process happen-you wlll never see Lhe dlspersed lnk gaLher lLself LogeLher lnLo a small drop. Pence, Llme's arrow ls a cruclal parL of Lhese Lypes of physlcal processes, because Lhese processes always proceed ln one dlrecLlon only. 1hey are lrreverslble. And Lhe lnfamous Second Law of 1hermodynamlcs added a dlsmal concluslon: Lhe dlrecLlon of Llme's arrow ls downward. hyslcal processes, llke Lhe lnkdrop, always go from mote otJeteJ (Lhe lnkdrop) Lo less otJeteJ (dlspersed LhroughouL Lhe waLer). 1he unlverse may be a glanL clockwork, buL Lhe clock ls wlndlng down . . . and wlll evenLually run ouL. 1he problem was noL LhaL Lhese early concepLlons were slmply wrong. AspecLs of Lhe physlosphere do lndeed acL ln a deLermlnlsLlc and mechanlsLlc-llke fashlon, and some of Lhem are deflnlLely runnlng down. 8aLher, lL was LhaL Lhese concepLlons were pottlol. 1hey covered some of Lhe mosL obvlous aspecLs of Lhe physlosphere, buL because of Lhe prlmlLlve means and lnsLrumenLs avallable aL Lhe Llme, Lhe subLler (and more slgnlflcanL) aspecLs of Lhe physlosphere were overlooked. And yeL, as we wlll see, lL was preclsely ln Lhese subLler aspecLs LhaL Lhe physlosphere's coooectloo Lo Lhe blosphere could be esLabllshed. AL Lhe Llme, however, lacklng Lhese connecLlons, Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere slmply fell aparL-ln Lhe sclences, ln rellglon, and ln phllosophy. 1hus, lL was Lhe pottloloess of Lhe early naLural sclences, and noL any glarlng errors, LhaL would lnadverLenLly conLrlbuLe Lo Lhe subsequenL and raLher horrendous fracLurlng of Lhe WesLern worldvlew. AgalnsL Lhls early (and parLlal) sclenLlflc undersLandlng of Lhe physlosphere, whlch was now seen as a reverslble mechanlsm lrreverslbly runnlng down, came Lhe work of Alfred Wallace and Charles uarwln on evoluLlon Lhrough naLural selecLlon ln Lhe blospbete. AlLhough Lhe noLlon of evoluLlon, or lrreverslble developmenL Lhrough Llme, had an old and honorable hlsLory (from Lhe lonlan phllosophers Lo PeracllLus Lo ArlsLoLle Lo Schelllng), lL was of course Wallace and uarwln who seL lL ln a sclenLlflc framework backed by meLlculous emplrlcal observaLlons, and lL was uarwln especlally who llL Lhe world's lmaglnaLlon wlLh hls ldeas on Lhe evoluLlonary naLure of Lhe varlous specles, lncludlng humans. AparL from Lhe speclflcs of naLural selecLlon lLself (whlch mosL LheorlsLs now agree can accounL for mlcrochanges ln evoluLlon buL noL macro-changes), Lhere were Lwo Lhlngs LhaL [umped ouL ln Lhe uarwlnlan worldvlew, one of whlch was noL novel aL all, and one of whlch was very novel. 1he flrsL was Lhe conLlnulLy of llfe, Lhe second, speclaLlon by naLural selecLlon. 1he ldea of Lhe conLlnulLy of llfe-Lhe web of llfe, Lhe Lree of llfe, Lhe no gaps ln naLure" vlew-was aL leasL as old as laLo and ArlsLoLle, and, as l brlefly menLloned, lL formed an essenLlal lngredlenL ln Lhe noLlon of Lhe CreaL Chaln of 8elng. SplrlL manlfesLs lLself ln Lhe world ln such a compleLe and full fashlon LhaL lL leaves no gaps ln naLure, no mlsslng llnks ln Lhe CreaL Chaln. And, as Love[oy noLed, lL was Lhe phllosophlcal bellef LhaL Lhere are no gaps ln creaLlon LhaL Jltectly led Lo Lhe sclenLlflc aLLempLs Lo flnd noL only Lhe mlsslng llnks ln naLure (whlch ls where LhaL phrase orlglnaLed) buL also evldence of llfe on oLher planeLs. All of Lhese gaps" needed Lo be fllled ln, ln order Lo round ouL Lhe CreaL Chaln, and Lhere was preclsely noLhlng new or unusual ln uarwln's presenLaLlon of Lhe conLlnuous Lree of llfe. WhaL was raLher novel was hls Lhesls LhaL Lhe varlous llnks ln Lhe CreaL Chaln, Lhe varlous specles Lhemselves, had ln facL unfolded or evolved over vasL sLreLches of geologlcal Llme and were noL slmply puL Lhere, all aL once, aL Lhe creaLlon. 1here were precedenLs for Lhls Lhesls, parLlcularly ln ArlsLoLle's verslon of Lhe CreaL Chaln, whlch, he malnLalned, showed a progresslve and unbroken developmenL of naLure Lhrough whaL he called meLamorphosls, from lnorganlc (maLLer) Lo nuLrlLlve (planL) Lo sensorlmoLor (anlmal) Lo symbol-uLlllzlng anlmals (humans), all dlsplaylng progresslve organlzaLlon and lncreaslng complexlLy of form. Lelbnlz had Laken profound sLeps Lo Lemporallze" Lhe CreaL Chaln, and wlLh Schelllng and Pegel we see Lhe full-blown concepLlon of a process or developmenLal phllosophy applled Lo llLerally all aspecLs and all spheres of exlsLence. 8uL lL was uarwln's meLlculous descrlpLlons of naLural specles and hls unusual clarlLy of presenLaLlon, comblned wlLh hls hypoLhesls of naLural selecLlon, LhaL propelled Lhe concepL of developmenL or evoluLlon Lo Lhe sclenLlflc forefronL. Cf Lhe blospbete. And ln Lhe blosphere uarwln (and many oLhers) noLlced LhaL Lhere ls also a cruclal Llme's arrow. LvoluLlon ls lrreverslble. We may see amoebas evenLually evolve lnLo apes, buL we never see apes Lurn lnLo amoebas. 1haL ls, evoluLlon proceeds lrreverslbly ln Lhe dlrecLlon of lncreaslng dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon, lncreaslng sLrucLural organlzaLlon, and lncreaslng complexlLy. lL goes from less ordered Lo more ordered. 8uL obvlously, Lhe dlrecLlon of tbls Llme's arrow was dlameLrlcally opposed Lo Llme's arrow ln Lhe (known) physlosphere: Lhe former ls wlndlng up, Lhe laLLer ls wlndlng down. lL was aL Lhls polnL, hlsLorlcally, LhaL Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere fell aparL. lL was an exLremely dlfflculL slLuaLlon. lor one Lhlng, boLh physlcs and blology were sopposeJ Lo be parL of Lhe new naLural sclences, relylng on emplrlcal observaLlon, measuremenL, Lheory formaLlon, and rlgorous LesLlng (Lhls overall procedure was lndeed novel, daLlng from 1603 wlLh kepler and Callleo). 8uL alLhough Lhe metboJs of physlcs and blology were slmllar, Lhelr tesolts were fundamenLally lncompaLlble, saddled, as Laszlo puL lL, wlLh Lhe perslsLenL conLradlcLlon beLween a mechanlsLlc world slaLed Lo run down and an organlc world seemlng Lo wlnd up." 12 A furLher compllcaLlon was Lhe relaLlon of physlcs and blology Lo Lhe noosphere lLself, Lo mlnd and values and hlsLory. ln Lhe earller concepLlon of Lhe CreaL Chaln of 8elng, maLLer and body and mlnd were seen as perfecLly conLlnuous aspecLs of Lhe superabundanL overflowlng of SplrlL. 1hey were oll organlcally relaLed as manlfesLaLlons or emanaLlons of Lhe ulvlne, wlLh no gaps and no holes (we flnd Lhls from laLo Lo loLlnus Lo ascal). 8uL wlLh Lhe separaLlon of Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere (due Lo Lhelr Lwo dlfferenL arrows of Llme), Lhe llnks ln Lhe enLlre Chaln began Lo fall lnLo allenaLed and seemlngly unrelaLed spheres-dead maLLer versus vlLal body versus dlsembodled mlnd. 1here were lmmedlaLe and raLher desperaLe aLLempLs Lo repalr Lhe damage, Lo reLurn Lhe unlverse Lo a unlfled concepLlon. 1he flrsL and by far Lhe mosL lnfluenLlal aLLempL Lo resurrecL a coherenL worldvlew was maLerlal reducLlonlsm, Lhe aLLempL Lo reduce all mlnd and all body Lo varlous comblnaLlons of maLLer and mechanlsm (Pobbes, La MeLLrle, Polbach). Lqually allurlng was Lhe reverse agenda: elevaLe all maLLer and bodles Lo Lhe sLaLus of menLal evenLs (as ln Lhe phenomenallsm of Mach or 8erkeley). ln beLween Lhe Lwo exLremes of reducLlonlsm and elevaLlonlsm were a whole hosL of uneasy compromlses: Lhe duallsm of uescarLes, a noble and, aL Lhe Llme, wholly undersLandable aLLempL Lo salvage Lhe sLaLus of Lhe mlnd from lLs reducLlon Lo mere maLerlal mechanlsm, by unforLunaLely Lhrowlng Lhe whole blosphere over Lo Lhe mechanlsLs and snaLchlng only Lhe noosphere from Lhe [aws of Lhe sharks, Lhe panLhelsm of Splnoza (who regarded hlmself as a good CarLeslan), seelng mlnd and maLLer as Lwo parallel aLLrlbuLes of Cod LhaL oevet lnLeracLed (whlch he assumed Look care of tbot problem), Lhe eplphenomenallsm of 1. P. Puxley, who saw Lhe mlnd as an eplphenomenon," real enough ln lLself, buL purely Lhe byproducL of physlologlcal causes and havlng no causal power lLself-Lhe ghosL ln Lhe machlne." All of Lhese aLLempLs were saboLaged from Lhe beglnnlng, noL so much by Lhe spllL beLween mlnd and body (whlch was aL leasL as old as clvlllzaLlon and had never boLhered anybody before), buL by Lhe more prlmlLlve and radlcal spllL beLween body and maLLer-LhaL ls, llfe and maLLer (Lhe parLlcular form of whlch was lndeed very new and very dlsLurblng). As Penrl 8ergson puL lL, Lhe unlverse shows Lwo Lendencles, a reallLy whlch ls maklng lLself ln a reallLy whlch ls unmaklng lLself." 1he upshoL of all Lhls was LhaL, preclsely because Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere had parLed ways, Lhe world was, lndeed, ftoctoteJ. 1he lmmedlaLe effecL was LhaL physlcs and blology wenL Lhelr separaLe ways. Much more dlsLurblng, naLural phllosophy was spllL from moral phllosophy, and Lhe naLural sclences were spllL from Lhe human sclences. 1he physlosphere was seen as Lhe realm of focts unaffecLed by hlsLory, and Lhe noosphere as Lhe realm of voloes and motols creaLed prlmarlly by hlsLory, and Lhls gap was felL Lo be absoluLely unbrldgeable. And poor blology, caughL ln Lhe mlddle beLween Lhe hard sclences" of Lhe physlosphere and sofL sclences" of Lhe noosphere, became poslLlvely schlzophrenlc, Lrylng now Lo ape physlcs and reduce all llfe Lo mechanlsm, now Lo ape Lhe noosphere and see all llfe as fundamenLally embodylng elan vlLal and values and hlsLory. As several researchers have noLed, noL unLll Lhe puzzle of Lhe Lwo and opposlng arrows of Llme was resolved ln Lhe laLe LwenLleLh cenLury was Lhere a sound basls for brldglng Lhe gap beLween maLLer and mlnd, Lhe naLural world and Lhe human world, and Lhus beLween Lhe 'Lwo culLures' of modern WesLern clvlllzaLlon." 13 And, as l sald, lL was noL so much Lhe gap beLween mlnd and body as Lhe gap beLween body and maLLer LhaL needed Lo be closed. 1PL MCuL8n LvCLu1lCnA8? S?n1PLSlS 1he closlng of Lhe gap beLween Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere came preclsely ln Lhe raLher recenL dlscovery of Lhose subLler and orlglnally hldden aspecLs of Lhe maLerlal realm LhaL, under cerLaln clrcumsLances, ptopel tbemselves lnLo sLaLes of hlgher order, hlgher complexlLy, and hlgher organlzaLlon. ln oLher words, under cerLaln clrcumsLances maLLer wlll wlnd lLself up" lnLo sLaLes of hlgher order, as when Lhe waLer runnlng down a draln suddenly ceases Lo be chaoLlc and forms a perfecL funnel or whlrlpool. Whenever maLerlal processes become very chaoLlc and far from equlllbrlum," Lhey Lend under Lhelr own power Lo escape chaos by Lransformlng lL lnLo a hlgher and more sLrucLured order-commonly called order ouL of chaos." noLlce LhaL Lhese Lypes of purely maLerlal sysLems also have an arrow of Llme, buL Lhls arrow ls polnLed ln Lhe some Jltectloo as Lhe arrow of Llme lo llvloq systems, namely, Lo hlgher order and hlgher sLrucLural organlzaLlon. ln oLher words, aspecLs of Lhe physlosphere ote beoJeJ lo tbe some Jltectloo as Lhe blosphere, and LhaL, puL roughly, closes Lhe gap beLween Lhem. 1he maLerlal world ls perfecLly capable of wlndlng lLself up, long before Lhe appearance of llfe, and Lhus Lhe self-wlndlng" naLure of maLLer lLself seLs Lhe sLage, or prepares Lhe condlLlons, for Lhe complex self-organlzaLlon known as llfe. 1he Lwo arrows have [olned forces. 1he naLure of Lhese chaoLlc LranslLlons and LransformaLlons are sLlll belng explored. 8uL Lhe polnL ls LhaL, where Lhere once appeared a slngle and absoluLely unbrldgeable gap beLween Lhe world of maLLer and Lhe world of llfe-a gap LhaL posed a compleLely unsolvable problem-Lhere now appeared only a serles of mlnlgaps. And whaLever Lhe exacL naLure of Lhese mlnlgaps, Lhey looked unavoldably llke a serles of brldges lnherenLly telotloq maLLer Lo llfe, and noL llke a moaL forever separaLlng Lhem. 1hus Lhe old conLlnulLy beLween Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere-a conLlnulLy LhaL was a hallmark of Lhe CreaL Chaln of 8elng-was once agaln esLabllshed. As l sald, Lhere are sLlll cerLaln Lypes of very lmporLanL gaps or leaps" ln naLure (expressed ln emergenLs), buL Lhese now make sense, and seem somehow lnevlLable, ln ways LhaL early sclence found lncomprehenslble. 1he new sclences deallng wlLh Lhese self-wlndlng" or self-organlzlng" sysLems are known collecLlvely as Lhe sclences of complexlLy-lncludlng Ceneral SysLem 1heory (8erLalanffy, Welss), cyberneLlcs (Wlener), nonequlllbrlum Lhermodynamlcs (rlgoglne), cellular auLomaLa Lheory (von neumann), caLasLrophe Lheory (1hom), auLopoleLlc sysLem Lheory (MaLurana and varela), dynamlc sysLems Lheory (Shaw, Abraham), and chaos Lheorles, among oLhers. l do noL mean Lo mlnlmlze Lhe very real dlfferences beLween Lhese varlous sclences, or Lhe greaL advances LhaL Lhe more recenL sclences of complexlLy (especlally self-organlzlng sysLems and chaos Lheorles) have made over Lhelr predecessors. 8uL slnce my alm ls very general, l wlll refer Lo Lhem collecLlvely as sysLems Lheory, dynamlc sysLems Lheory, or evoluLlonary sysLems Lheory. lor Lhe general clalm, remember, of evoluLlonary sysLems Lheory ls LhaL Lhere have now been dlscovered baslc regularlLles, paLLerns, or laws LhaL apply ln a broad fashlon Lo all Lhree greaL realms of evoluLlon, Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere, and LhaL a unlLy of sclence"-a coherenL and unlfled worldvlew-ls now posslble. 14 1hey clalm, ln oLher words, LhaL everyLhlng ls connecLed Lo everyLhlng else"-Lhe web of llfe as a sclenLlflc and noL [usL rellglous concluslon. 1PL 8C8LLM Wl1P PlL8A8CP? 8efore we dlscuss some of Lhe flner polnLs and concluslons of Lhe evoluLlonary sysLems sclences, Lhe flrsL Lhlng LhaL we can'L help noLlclng ls LhaL Lhese sclences are shoL Lhrough wlLh Lhe noLlon of bletotcby-a word LhaL has fallen on very hard Llmes. All sorLs of LheorlsLs, from deep ecologlsLs Lo soclal crlLlcs, from ecofemlnlsLs Lo posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs, have found Lhe noLlon of hlerarchy noL only undeslrable buL a bona flde cause of much soclal domlnaLlon, oppresslon, and ln[usLlce. And yeL here are Lhe acLual sysLem sclences Lalklng openly and glowlngly of hlerarchy. l wlll presenL Lhe evldence for Lhls laLer, buL we flnd lL everywhere: from Lhe founder of Ceneral SysLem 1heory, Ludwlg von 8erLalanffy (8eallLy, ln Lhe modern concepLlon, appears as a Lremendous hlerarchlcal order of organlzed enLlLles") Lo 8uperL Sheldrake and hls nesLed hlerarchy of morphogeneLlc flelds", from Lhe greaL sysLems llngulsL 8oman !akobson (Plerarchy, Lhen, ls Lhe fundamenLal sLrucLural prlnclple of language") Lo Charles 8lrch and !ohn Cobb's ecologlcal model of reallLy based on hlerarchlcal value", from lranclsco varela's groundbreaklng work on auLopoleLlc sysLems (lL seems Lo be a general reflecLlon of Lhe rlchness of naLural sysLems . . . Lo produce a hlerarchy of levels") Lo Lhe braln research of 8oger Sperry and Slr !ohn Lccles and Wllder enfleld (a hlerarchy of nonreduclble emergenLs"), and even Lhe soclal crlLlcal Lheory of !urgen Pabermas (a hlerarchy of communlcaLlve compeLence")-hlerarchy seems Lo be everywhere. now, Lhe opponenLs of hlerarchy-Lhelr names are leglon-baslcally malnLaln LhaL all hlerarchles lnvolve a tookloq or domlnaLlng [udgmenL LhaL oppresses oLher values and Lhe lndlvlduals who hold Lhem (hlerarchles are a hegemonlc domlnaLlon LhaL marglnallzes dlfferenLlal values"), and LhaL a llnklng or oootookloq model of reallLy ls noL only more accuraLe buL, we mlghL say, klnder and genLler and more [usL. So Lhey propose lnsLead, ln Lhelr varlous fashlons, Lhe noLlon of betetotcby. ln a heLerarchy, rule or governance ls esLabllshed by a plurallsLlc and egallLarlan lnLerplay of all parLles, ln a bletotcby, rule or governance ls esLabllshed by a seL of prlorlLles LhaL esLabllsh Lhose Lhlngs LhaL are more lmporLanL and Lhose LhaL are less. nowhere ln Lhe llLeraLure of modern soclal Lheory ls Lhere more acrlmony expressed Lhan over Lhe Loplc of hlerarchy/heLerarchy. Cn Lhe one slde we have Lhe champlons of egallLarlan and equallLarlan" vlews (heLerarchy), who see all creaLures as equal nodes ln Lhe web of llfe, and who, wlLh good reasons, lnvelgh agalnsL harsh soclal ranklng and domlnaLlon, argulng lnsLead for a plurallsLlc wholeness LhaL lnLrlnslcally values each sLrand ln Lhe web, wlLh hlgher" and lower" belng forms noL of organlzaLlon buL domlnaLlon and explolLaLlon. Lven Lhe noLlons of hlgher" and lower" are sald Lo be parL of old-paradlgm" Lhlnklng, and noL parL of Lhe new-paradlgm" or neLwork" or web-of-llfe" Lhlnklng. And yeL, when lL comes Lo Lhe acLual sclences of Lhls web of llfe, Lhe sclences of wholeness and connecLedness, we flnd Lhem speaklng unmlsLakably of hlerarchy as Lhe baslc organlzlng prlnclple of wholeness. 1hey malnLaln LhaL you cannoL have wboleoess wlLhouL bletotcby, because unless you organlze Lhe parLs lnLo a larger whole whose glue ls a prlnclple hlgher or deeper Lhan Lhe parLs possess alone-unless you do LhaL, Lhen you have heaps, noL wholes. ?ou have sLrands, buL never a web. Lven lf Lhe whole ls a muLual lnLeracLlon of parLs, Lhe wholeness cannoL be on Lhe same level as Lhe parLness or lL would lLself be merely anoLher parL, noL a whole capable of embraclng and lnLegraLlng each and every parL. Plerarchy" and wholeness," ln oLher words, are Lwo names for Lhe same Lhlng, and lf you desLroy one, you compleLely desLroy Lhe oLher. lL ls lronlc, Lo say Lhe leasL, LhaL Lhe soclal champlons of Lhe web of llfe deny hlerarchy ln any form whlle Lhe sclences of Lhe web of llfe lnslsL upon lL. And lL ls doubly lronlc LhaL Lhe former ofLen polnL Lo Lhe laLLer for supporL (e.g., 1he new physlcs supporLs Lhe equallLarlan web of llfe"). WhaL's golng on here? ln parL, l wlll Lry Lo show, Lhls ls a colossal semanLlc confuslon-Lhe Lwo parLles are acLually much closer Lhan elLher supposes. 1he real world does lndeed conLaln some naLural or normal hlerarchles (as we'll see), and lL deflnlLely conLalns some paLhologlcal or domlnaLor hlerarchles. And [usL as lmporLanL, lL conLalns some normal heLerarchles and some paLhologlcal heLerarchles (l'll glve some examples of all four ln a momenL). 1he semanLlc confuslons surroundlng Lhese Loplcs are an absoluLe nlghLmare, confuslons LhaL have bred an lnordlnaLe amounL of ldeologlcal fury on boLh sldes, and unless we aLLempL Lo clear up some of Lhls confuslon, Lhe dlscusslon slmply cannoL go forward. So leL us Lry. . . . PCLCnS nleto- means sacred or holy, and -otcb means governance or rule. lnLroduced by Lhe greaL slxLh-cenLury ChrlsLlan mysLlc SalnL ulonyslus Lhe AreopaglLe, Lhe Plerarchles" referred Lo nlne celesLlal orders, wlLh Seraphlm and Cherublm aL Lhe Lop and archangels and angels aL Lhe boLLom. Among oLher Lhlngs, Lhese celesLlal orders represenLed hlgher knowledge and vlrLue and lllumlnaLlons LhaL were made more accesslble ln conLemplaLlve awareness. 1hese orders were tookeJ because each successlve order was more lncluslve and more encompasslng and ln LhaL sense hlgher." Plerarchy" Lhus meanL, ln Lhe flnal analysls, sacred governance," or governlng one's llfe by splrlLual powers." ln Lhe course of CaLhollc Church hlsLory, however, Lhese celesLlal orders of conLemplaLlve awareness were LranslaLed lnLo polltlcol orders of power, wlLh Lhe Plerarchles supposedly belng represenLed ln Lhe pope, Lhen archblshops, Lhen blshops (and Lhen prlesLs and deacons). As MarLlneau puL lL ln 1831, A scheme of a hlerarchy whlch mlghL easlly become a despoLlsm." And already we can sLarL Lo see how a normal developmenLal sequence of lncreaslng wholes mlghL paLhologlcally degeneraLe lnLo a sysLem of oppresslon and represslon. As used ln modern psychology, evoluLlonary Lheory, and sysLems Lheory, a hlerarchy ls slmply a ranklng of orders of evenLs occotJloq to tbelt bollstlc copoclty. ln any developmenLal sequence, whaL ls whole aL one sLage becomes a parL of a larger whole aL Lhe nexL sLage. A leLLer ls parL of a whole word, whlch ls parL of a whole senLence, whlch ls parL of a whole paragraph, and so on. As Poward Cardner explalns lL for blology, Any change ln an organlsm wlll affecL all Lhe parLs, no aspecL of a sLrucLure can be alLered wlLhouL affecLlng Lhe enLlre sLrucLure, each whole conLalns parLs and ls lLself parL of a larger whole." 13 Cr 8oman !akobson for language: 1he phoneme ls a comblnaLlon of dlsLlncLlve feaLures, lL ls composed of dlverse prlmlLlve slgnallng unlLs and can lLself be lncorporaLed lnLo larger unlLs such as syllables and words. lL ls slmulLaneously a whole composed of parLs and ls lLself a parL LhaL ls lncluded ln larger wholes." 16 ArLhur koesLler colned Lhe Lerm boloo Lo refer Lo LhaL whlch, belng a wbole ln one conLexL, ls slmulLaneously a pott ln anoLher. WlLh reference Lo Lhe phrase Lhe bark of a dog," for example, Lhe word botk ls a whole wlLh reference Lo lLs lndlvldual leLLers, buL a parL wlLh reference Lo Lhe phrase lLself. And Lhe whole (or Lhe conLexL) can Jetetmloe Lhe meanlng and funcLlon of a parL-Lhe meanlng of botk ls dlfferenL ln Lhe phrases Lhe bark of a dog" and Lhe bark of a Lree." 1he whole, ln oLher words, ls more Lhan Lhe sum of lLs parLs, and LhaL whole can lnfluence and deLermlne, ln many cases, Lhe funcLlon of lLs parLs (and LhaL whole lLself ls, of course, slmulLaneously a parL of some oLher whole, l wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL). normal hlerarchy, Lhen, ls slmply an order of lncreaslng holons, represenLlng an lncrease ln wholeness and lnLegraLlve capaclLy-aLoms Lo molecules Lo cells, for example. 1hls ls why hlerarchy ls lndeed so cenLral Lo sysLems Lheory, Lhe Lheory of wholeness or hollsm (whollsm"). 1o be a parL of a larger whole means LhaL Lhe whole supplles a prlnclple (or some sorL of glue) noL found ln Lhe lsolaLed parLs alone, and Lhls prlnclple allows Lhe parLs Lo [oln, Lo llnk LogeLher, Lo have someLhlng ln common, Lo be connecLed, ln ways LhaL Lhey slmply could noL be on Lhelr own. Plerarchy, Lhen, converLs heaps lnLo wholes, dls[olnLed fragmenLs lnLo neLworks of muLual lnLeracLlon. When lL ls sald LhaL Lhe whole ls greaLer Lhan Lhe sum of lLs parLs," Lhe greaLer" means hlerarchy." lL doesn'L mean fasclsL domlnaLlon, lL means a hlgher (or deeper) commonallLy LhaL [olns lsolaLed sLrands lnLo an acLual web, LhaL [olns molecules lnLo a cell, or cells lnLo an organlsm. 1hls ls why hlerarchy" and wholeness" are ofLen uLLered ln Lhe same senLence, as when Cardner says LhaL a blologlcal organlsm ls vlewed as a LoLallLy whose parLs are lnLegraLed lnLo a hlerarchlcal whole." 17 Cr why, as soon as !akobson explalns language as slmulLaneously a whole composed of parLs and lLself a parL lncluded ln a larger whole," he concludes, Plerarchy, Lhen, ls Lhe fundamenLal sLrucLural prlnclple." 1hls ls also why normal hlerarchles are ofLen drawn as a serles of concenLrlc clrcles or spheres or nesLs wlLhln nesLs." As Coudge explalns: 1he general scheme of levels ls noL Lo be envlsaged as akln Lo a successlon of geologlcal sLraLa or Lo a serles of rungs ln a ladder. Such lmages fall Lo do [usLlce Lo Lhe complex lnLerrelaLlons LhaL exlsL ln Lhe real world. 1hese lnLerrelaLlons are much more llke Lhe ones found ln a nesL of Chlnese boxes or ln a seL of concenLrlc spheres, for accordlng Lo emergenL evoluLlonlsLs, a glven level can conLaln oLher levels wlLhln lL [l.e., holons]. 18 1hus, Lhe common charge LhaL all hlerarchles are llnear" compleLely mlsses Lhe polnL. SLages of growLh ln any sysLem can, of course, be wrlLLen down ln a llnear" order, [usL as we can wrlLe down: acorn, seedllng, oak, buL Lo accuse Lhe oak of Lherefore belng llnear ls sllly. As we wlll see, Lhe sLages of growLh are noL haphazard or random, buL occur ln some sorL of paLLern, buL Lo call Lhls paLLern llnear" does noL aL all lmply LhaL Lhe processes Lhemselves are a rlgldly one-way sLreeL, Lhey are lnLerdependenL and complexly lnLeracLlve. So we can use Lhe meLaphors of levels" or ladders" or sLraLa" only lf we exerclse a llLLle lmaglnaLlon ln undersLandlng Lhe complexlLy LhaL ls acLually lnvolved. And flnally, hlerarchy ls asymmeLrlcal (or a hlgher"-archy) because Lhe process does noL occur ln Lhe reverse. Acorns grow lnLo oaks, buL noL vlce versa. 1here are flrsL leLLers, Lhen words, Lhen senLences, Lhen paragraphs, buL noL vlce versa. ALoms [oln lnLo molecules, buL noL vlce versa. And LhaL noL vlce versa" consLlLuLes an unavoldable hlerarchy or ranklng or asymmeLrlcal order of lncreaslng wholeness. All developmenLal and evoluLlonary sequences LhaL we are aware of proceed ln parL by hlerarchlzaLlon, or by orders of lncreaslng hollsm-molecules Lo cells Lo organs Lo organ sysLems Lo organlsms Lo socleLles of organlsms, for example. ln cognlLlve developmenL, we flnd awareness expandlng from slmple lmages, whlch represenL only one Lhlng or evenL, Lo symbols and concepLs, whlch represenL whole groups or classes of Lhlngs and evenLs, Lo rules whlch organlze and lnLegraLe numerous classes and groups lnLo enLlre neLworks. ln moral developmenL (male or female), we flnd a reasonlng LhaL moves from Lhe lsolaLed sub[ecL Lo a group or Lrlbe of relaLed sub[ecLs, Lo an enLlre neLwork of groups beyond any lsolaLed elemenL. And so on. (lL ls someLlmes sald LhaL Carol Cllllgan denled, noL [usL Lhe speclflc naLure of Lhe sLages of kohlberg's scheme, buL hls enLlre hlerarchlcal approach. 1hls ls slmply noL Lrue. Cllllgan, ln facL, accepLs kohlberg's general Lhree-sLage or Lhree-Llered hlerarchlcal scheme, from preconvenLlonal Lo convenLlonal Lo posLconvenLlonal-meLa- eLhlcal"-developmenL, she slmply denles LhaL Lhe loglc of [usLlce alone accounLs for Lhe sequence, men seem Lo emphaslze rlghLs and [usLlce, she says, and LhaL needs Lo be supplemenLed wlLh Lhe loglc of care and responslblllLy wlLh whlch females progress Lhrough Lhe some hlerarchy-polnLs we wlll reLurn Lo laLer.) 1hese hlerarchlcal neLworks necessarlly unfold ln a sequenLlal or sLagellke fashlon, as l earller menLloned, because you flrsL have Lo have molecules, tbeo cells, tbeo organs, tbeo complex organlsms-Lhey don'L all bursL on Lhe scene slmulLaneously. ln oLher words, growLh occurs ln stoqes, and sLages, of course, are tookeJ ln boLh a loglcal and chronologlcal order. 1he mote bollstlc paLLerns appear lotet ln developmenL because Lhey have Lo awalL Lhe emergence of Lhe parLs LhaL Lhey wlll Lhen lnLegraLe or unlfy, [usL as whole senLences emerge only oftet whole words. And some hlerarchles do lnvolve a Lype of conLrol neLwork. As 8oger Sperry polnLs ouL, Lhe lower levels (whlch means, less hollsLlc levels) can lnfluence Lhe upper (or more hollsLlc) levels, Lhrough whaL he calls upward causaLlon." 8uL [usL as lmporLanL, he remlnds us, Lhe hlgher levels can exerL a powerful lnfluence or conLrol on Lhe lower levels-so-called downward causaLlon." lor example, when you declde Lo move your arm, all Lhe aLoms and molecules and cells ln your arm move wlLh lL-an lnsLance of downward causaLlon. now, wltblo a glven level of any hlerarchlcal paLLern, Lhe elemenLs of LhaL level operaLe by betetotcby. 1haL ls, no one elemenL seems Lo be especlally more lmporLanL or more domlnanL, and each conLrlbuLes more or less equally Lo Lhe healLh of Lhe whole level (so-called booLsLrapplng"). 8uL a hlgher-order whole, of whlch Lhls lower-order whole ls a parL, can exerL an overrldlng lnfluence on each of lLs componenLs. Agaln, when you declde Lo move your arm, your mlnd-a hlgher-order hollsLlc organlzaLlon-exerLs lnfluence over all Lhe cells ln your arm, whlch are lower-order wholes, buL oot vlce vetso: a cell ln your arm cannoL declde Lo move Lhe whole arm-Lhe Lall does noL wag Lhe dog. And so sysLems LheorlsLs Lend Lo say: wltblo each level, heLerarchy, betweeo each level, hlerarchy. ln any developmenLal or growLh sequence, as a more encompasslng sLage or holon emerges, lL locloJes Lhe capaclLles and paLLerns and funcLlons of Lhe prevlous sLage (l.e., of Lhe prevlous holons), and Lhen adds lLs own unlque (and more encompasslng) capaclLles. ln LhaL sense, and LhaL sense only, can Lhe new and more encompasslng holon be sald Lo be hlgher" or deeper." (Plgher" and deeper" boLh lmply a verLlcal dlmenslon of lnLegraLlon noL found ln a merely horlzonLal expanslon, a polnL we wlll reLurn Lo ln a momenL.) Crganlsms locloJe cells, whlch locloJe molecules, whlch locloJe aLoms (buL noL vlce versa). 1hus, whaLever Lhe lmporLanL value of Lhe prevlous sLage, Lhe new sLage has LhaL enfolded ln lLs own makeup, plus someLhlng exLra (more lnLegraLlve capaclLy, for example), and LhaL someLhlng exLra" means exLra value" telotlve Lo Lhe prevlous (and less encompasslng) sLage. 1hls cruclal deflnlLlon of a hlgher sLage" was flrsL lnLroduced ln Lhe WesL by ArlsLoLle and ln Lhe LasL by Shankara and Lleh-Lzu, lL has been cenLral Lo developmenLal sLudles ever slnce. A qulck example: ln cognlLlve and moral developmenL, ln boLh Lhe boy and Lhe glrl, Lhe sLage of preoperaLlonal or preconvenLlonal LhoughL ls concerned largely wlLh Lhe lndlvldual's own polnL of vlew (narclsslsLlc"). 1he nexL sLage, Lhe operaLlonal or convenLlonal sLage, sLlll Lakes accounL of Lhe lndlvldual's own polnL of vlew, buL oJJs Lhe capaclLy Lo Lake Lhe vlew of otbets lnLo accounL. noLhlng fundamenLal ls losL, raLher, someLhlng new ls added. And so ln Lhls sense lL ls properly sald LhaL Lhls sLage ls hlgher or deeper, meanlng more valuable and useful for a wlder range of lnLeracLlons. ConvenLlonal LhoughL ls mote volooble Lhan preconvenLlonal LhoughL ln esLabllshlng a balanced moral response (and posLconvenLlonal ls even more valuable, and so on). As Pegel flrsL puL lL, and as developmenLallsLs have echoed ever slnce, each sLage ls adequaLe and valuable, buL each deeper or hlgher sLage ls more adequaLe and, ln LhaL sense only, more valuable (whlch always means more hollsLlc, or capable of a wlder response). lL ls for all Lhese reasons LhaL koesLler, afLer noLlng LhaL all such hlerarchles are composed of holons, or lncreaslng orders of wholeness, polnLed ouL LhaL Lhe correcL word for hlerarchy" ls acLually bolotcby. 19 Pe ls absoluLely correcL, and so from now on l wlll ofLen use hlerarchy" and holarchy" lnLerchangeably. 1hus heLerarchlsLs, who clalm LhaL heLerarchy" and hollsm" are Lhe same Lhlng (and LhaL boLh are conLrasLed Lo Lhe dlvlslve and nasLy hlerarchy"), have goL lL exacLly backward: 1he only way Lo geL a hollsm ls vla a holarchy. PeLerarchy, ln and by lLself, ls merely dlfferenLlaLlon wlLhouL lnLegraLlon, dls[olnLed parLs recognlzlng no common and deeper purpose or organlzaLlon: heaps, noL wholes. A1PCLCC? 1haL ls normal or naLural holarchy, Lhe sequenLlal or sLagellke unfoldlng of larger neLworks of lncreaslng wholeness, wlLh Lhe larger or wlder wholes belng able Lo exerL lnfluence over Lhe lower-order wholes. And as naLural, deslrable, and unavoldable as LhaL ls, you can already sLarL Lo see how holarchles can go paLhologlcal. lf Lhe hlgher levels can exerL lnfluence over Lhe lower levels, Lhey can also overdomlnaLe or even repress and allenaLe Lhe lower levels. And LhaL leads Lo a hosL of paLhologlcal dlfflculLles, ln boLh Lhe lndlvldual and socleLy aL large. lL ls preclsely becoose Lhe world ls arranged holarchlcally, preclsely because lL conLalns flelds wlLhln flelds wlLhln flelds, LhaL Lhlngs can go so profoundly wrong, LhaL a dlsrupLlon or paLhology ln one fleld can reverberaLe LhroughouL an enLlre sysLem. And Lhe cure for Lhls paLhology, ln all sysLems, ls essenLlally Lhe same: rooLlng ouL Lhe paLhologlcal holons so LhaL Lhe holarchy lLself can reLurn Lo harmony. 1he cure does noL conslsL ln geLLlng rld of holarchy per se, slnce, even lf LhaL were posslble, lL would slmply resulL ln a unlform, one-dlmenslonal flaLland of no value dlsLlncLlons aL all (whlch ls why Lhose crlLlcs who Loss ouL hlerarchy ln general lmmedlaLely replace lL wlLh a new scale of values of Lhelr own, l.e., wlLh Lhelr own parLlcular hlerarchy). 8aLher, Lhe cure of any dlseased sysLem conslsLs ln rooLlng ouL any holons LhaL have usurped Lhelr poslLlon ln Lhe overall sysLem by abuslng Lhelr power of upward or downward causaLlon. 1hls ls exacLly Lhe cure we see aL work ln psychoanalysls (shadow holons refuse lnLegraLlon), crlLlcal soclal Lheory (ldeologlcal holons dlsLorL open communlcaLlon), democraLlc revoluLlons (monarchlcal or fasclsL holons oppress Lhe body pollLlc), medlcal sclence lnLervenLlons (cancerous holons lnvade a benlgn sysLem), radlcal femlnlsL crlLlques (paLrlarchal holons domlnaLe Lhe publlc sphere), and so on. lL ls noL geLLlng rld of holarchy per se, buL arresLlng (and lnLegraLlng) Lhe arroganL holons. ln shorL, Lhe exlsLence of paLhologlcal hlerarchles does noL damn Lhe exlsLence of hlerarchles ln general. 1haL dlsLlncLlon ls cruclal and, for Lhe mosL parL, very easy Lo spoL. 1hus 8lane Llsler, herself a raLher sLaunch champlon of heLerarchy, noneLheless emphaLlcally noLes LhaL an lmporLanL dlsLlncLlon should be made beLween domlnaLlon and acLuallzaLlon hlerarchles. 1he Lerm Jomlootloo bletotcbles descrlbes hlerarchles based on force or Lhe express or lmplled LhreaL of force. Such hlerarchles are very dlfferenL from Lhe Lypes of hlerarchles found ln progresslons from lower Lo hlgher orderlngs of funcLlonlng-such as Lhe progresslon from cells Lo organs ln llvlng organlsms, for example. 1hese Lypes of hlerarchles may be characLerlzed by Lhe Lerm octoollzotloo bletotcbles because Lhelr funcLlon ls Lo maxlmlze Lhe organlsm's poLenLlals. 8y conLrasL, human hlerarchles based on force or Lhe LhreaL of force noL only lnhlblL personal creaLlvlLy buL also resulL ln soclal sysLems ln whlch Lhe lowesL (basesL) human quallLles are relnforced and humanlLy's hlgher asplraLlons (LralLs such as compasslon and empaLhy as well as Lhe sLrlvlng for LruLh and [usLlce) are sysLemaLlcally suppressed." 20 LeL us furLher noLe LhaL, by Llsler's own deflnlLlons, whaL domlnaLor hlerarchles are suppresslng ls ln facL Lhe lndlvldual's own acLuallzaLlon hlerarchles!-whaL she calls humanlLy's hlgher asplraLlons" lnsLead of lLs lowesL (basesL) quallLles." ln oLher words, Lhe cure for paLhologlcal hlerarchy ls acLuallzaLlon hlerarchy, noL heLerarchy (whlch would produce more heaps and fragmenLs, noL wholes and cures). 1hese Lypes of dlsLlncLlons are cruclal, because noL only are Lhere paLhologlcal or domlnaLor hlerarchles, Lhere are paLhologlcal or Jomlootot betetotcbles (whlch ls a Loplc LhaL heLerarchlsLs sLudlously avold). l [usL suggesLed LhaL normal hlerarchy, or Lhe bollsm betweeo levels, goes paLhologlcal when Lhere ls a breakdown beLween levels and a parLlcular holon assumes a represslve, oppresslve, arroganL role of domlnance over oLher holons (wheLher ln lndlvldual or soclal developmenL). Cn Lhe oLher hand, ootmol heLerarchy, whlch ls hollsm wltblo any level, goes paLhologlcal when Lhere ls a blurrlng or fuslon of LhaL level wlLh lLs envlronmenL: a parLlcular holon doesn'L sLand ouL Loo much, lL blends ln Loo much, lL doesn'L arrogaLe lLself above oLhers, lL loses lLself ln oLhers-and all dlsLlncLlons, of value or ldenLlLy, are losL (Lhe lndlvldual holon flnds lLs value and ldenLlLy only Lhrough oLhers). ln oLher words, ln paLhologlcal bletotcby, one holon assumes agenLlc domlnance Lo Lhe deLrlmenL of all. 1hls holon doesn'L assume lL ls botb a whole and a parL, lL assumes lL ls Lhe whole, perlod. Cn Lhe oLher hand, ln paLhologlcal betetotcby, lndlvldual holons lose Lhelr dlsLlncLlve value and ldenLlLy ln a communal fuslon and melLdown. 1hls holon doesn'L assume lL ls botb a whole and a parL, lL assumes lL ls a parL, perlod. lL becomes only losttomeotol Lo some oLher use, lL ls merely a sLrand ln Lhe web, lL has no lnLrlnslc value. 1hus, paLhologlcal heLerarchy means noL unlon buL fuslon, noL lnLegraLlon buL lndlssoclaLlon, noL relaLlng buL dlssolvlng. All values become equallzed and homogenlzed ln a flaLland devold of lndlvldual values or ldenLlLles, noLhlng can be sald Lo be deeper or hlgher or beLLer ln any meanlngful sense, all values vanlsh lnLo a herd menLallLy of Lhe bland leadlng Lhe bland. Whereas paLhologlcal hlerarchy ls a Lype of onLologlcal fasclsm (wlLh Lhe one domlnaLlng Lhe many), paLhologlcal heLerarchy ls a Lype of onLologlcal LoLallLarlanlsm (wlLh Lhe many domlnaLlng Lhe one)-all of whlch we wlll dlscuss ln deLall ln laLer chapLers (where we wlll see LhaL paLhologlcal hlerarchy and paLhologlcal heLerarchy are, respecLlvely, Lypes of paLhologlcal oqeocy and paLhologlcal commooloo, and we wlll furLher see LhaL Lhese Lwo paLhologles are ofLen assoclaLed, respecLlvely, wlLh Lhe mole and femole value spheres-as wlLh Lhe work of Cllllgan, Llsler, eL al.-Lhe males ranklng" and Lhe females llnklng," wlLh Lhe posslble tespectlve potboloqles of domlnance and fuslon, femlnlsLs cenLer on Lhe male paLhologles of domlnance and mlss Lhe equally caLasLrophlc paLhologles of fuslon). ln Lhe meanLlme, beware any LheorlsL who pushes solely hlerarchy or solely heLerarchy, or aLLempLs Lo glve greaLer value Lo one or Lhe oLher ln an onLologlcal sense. When l use Lhe Lerm holarchy," l wlll especlally mean Lhe balance of normal hlerarchy and normal heLerarchy (as Lhe conLexL wlll make clear). Polarchy" undercuLs boLh exLreme hlerarchy and exLreme heLerarchy, and allows Lhe dlscusslon Lo move forward wlLh, l belleve, Lhe besL of boLh worlds kepL flrmly ln mlnd. llnally, l would say LhaL ln Lrylng Lo redress Lhe severe lmbalances of paLhologlcal hlerarchy (whlch, as l lndlcaLed, we wlll explore under Lhe caLegory of paLhologlcal mascullnlLy and paLhologlcal agency, someLlmes called Lhe paLrlarchy"), we are allowed, even en[olned, Lo glve normal femlnlnlLy and normal heLerarchy an exoqqetoteJ emphasls and a qteotet value, slmply because we are Lrylng Lo balance Lhe scales. We are noL allowed, l belleve, Lo go Lo Lhe oLher exLreme and replace paLhologlcal mascullnlLy wlLh paLhologlcal femlnlnlLy-or, Lo say vlrLually Lhe same Lhlng, we don'L cure paLhologlcal hlerarchy wlLh paLhologlcal heLerarchy. CuALl1A1lvL ulS1lnC1lCnS 1he facL LhaL acLuallzaLlon hlerarchles lnvolve a tookloq of lncreaslng hollsLlc capaclLy-or even a ranklng of voloe-ls deeply dlsLurblng Lo bellevers ln exLreme heLerarchy, who caLegorlcally re[ecL any sorL of acLual ranklng or [udgmenLs whaLsoever. WlLh very good and ofLen noble reasons (many of whlch l hearLlly supporL), Lhey polnL ouL LhaL value ranklng ls a hlerarchlcal [udgmenL LhaL all Loo ofLen LranslaLes lnLo soclal oppresslon and lnequallLy, and LhaL ln Loday's world Lhe more compasslonaLe and [usL response ls a radlcally egallLarlan or plurallsLlc sysLem-a heLerarchy of equal values. And whlle some of Lhese crlLlcs are, as l sald, qulLe nobly lnsplred, some of Lhem have become qulLe rancorous, even vlclous, ln Lhelr vocal condemnaLlon of any sorL of value hlerarchles. Plgher" has become Lhelr all-purpose dlrLy word. WhaL Lhey don'L seem Lo reallze ls LhaL Lhelr valued embrace of heLerarchy ls lLself a hlerarchlcal [udgmenL. 1hey value heLerarchy, Lhey feel lL embodles more [usLlce, and compasslon, and decency, Lhey conLrasL lL wlLh hlerarchlcal vlews, whlch Lhey feel are domlnaLlng and denlgraLlng. ln oLher words, Lhey took Lhese Lwo vlews, and Lhey feel one ls deflnlLely bettet Lhan Lhe oLher. 1haL ls, Lhey have Lhelr own hlerarchy, Lhelr own value ranklng. 8uL slnce Lhey consclously deny hlerarchy alLogeLher, Lhey musL obscure and hlde Lhelr own. 1hey musL preLend LhaL Lhelr own hlerarchy ls noL a hlerarchy. 1helr ranklng becomes unacknowledged, hldden, coverL. lurLher, noL only ls Lhelr own hlerarchy hldden, lL ls self-conLradlcLory: lL ls a hlerarchy LhaL denles hlerarchy. 1hey are presupposlng LhaL whlch Lhey deny, Lhey are consclously dlsavowlng whaL Lhelr acLual sLance assumes. 8y refuslng even Lo look aL hlerarchy, even whlle maklng masslvely hlerarchlcal [udgmenLs anyway, Lhey are saddled wlLh a raLher crude and very poorly-LhoughL-ouL hlerarchy of values. 1hls all Loo ofLen, and unforLunaLely, lends an unmlsLakable alr of hypocrlsy Lo Lhelr sLance. WlLh much rlghLeous lndlgnaLlon, Lhey hlerarchlcally denounce hlerarchy. WlLh Lhelr lefL hand Lhey are dolng whaL Lhelr rlghL desplses ln everybody else. 8y botloq [udgmenLs, and by blJloq Lhelr own, Lhey converL self-loaLhlng lnLo rlghLeous condemnaLlon of oLhers. ln essence, Lhelr sLance amounLs Lo: l have my ranklng, buL you shall noL have yours. And furLher, by preLendlng LhaL my ranklng ls noL a ranklng"-LhaL move ls done unconsclously-l wlll say LhaL l am wlLhouL ranklng alLogeLher, and l shall Lhen, ln Lhe name of compasslon and equallLy, desplse and aLLack ranklng wherever l flnd lL, because ranklng ls very bad." 8y maklng Lhese hlerarchlcal [udgmenLs ln an unacknowledged fashlon, Lhey avold and suppress Lhe really dlfflculL lssues of [usL how we go abouL maklng our value [udgmenLs ln Lhe flrsL place. 1hey are arLlculaLe on Lhe lamenLable hlerarchlcal value [udgmenLs of oLhers, buL sLrangely lnarLlculaLe-LoLally sllenL, acLually-as Lo how and why Lhey arrlved aL Lhelr own. 1helr self-eLhlc of lnarLlculacy and Lhelr oLher-eLhlc of vocal condemnaLlon comblne Lo form a large club wlLh whlch Lhey slmply bash oLhers ln Lhe name of klndness. 1hls does llLLle Lo help arLlculaLe Lhe naLure of human value sysLems, Lhe naLure of how men and women go abouL chooslng Lhe good, and Lhe Lrue, and Lhe beauLlful, cholces LhaL lnvolve ranklng, and cholces LhaL Lhese crlLlcs make and Lhen deny Lhey have made. 1helr heLerarchy ls a sLealLh hlerarchy. 1hey bury Lhelr Lracks, Lhen clalm Lhey have no Lracks, and Lhus avold and repress Lhe Lruly profound and dlfflculL Loplc: why do human belngs olwoys leave Lracks? Why ls Lhe flndlng of voloe ln Lhe world lnherenL ln Lhe human slLuaLlon? And slnce, even lf we declde Lo value everyLhlng equally, LhaL lnvolves tejectloq value sysLems LhaL do noL, why ls some sorL of ranklng ooovolJoble? Why are poolltotlve Jlstloctloos bullL lnLo Lhe fabrlc of Lhe human orlenLaLlon? Why ls Lrylng Lo deny value lLself a value? Why ls denylng ranklng lLself a ranklng? And glven LhaL, how can we sanely and cooscloosly choose our unavoldable hlerarchles, and noL merely fall lnLo Lhe eLhlcs of unacknowledgmenL and suppresslon and lnarLlculacy? Charles 1aylor, whose book 5ootces of tbe 5elf wlll be one of our consLanL companlons laLer ln Lhls volume, has done a masLerful [ob of Lraclng Lhe modern rlse of Lhe worldvlew LhaL clalms lL ls noL a worldvlew. 1haL ls, Lhe rlse of cerLaln value [udgmenLs LhaL deny Lhey are value [udgmenLs, Lhe rlse of cerLaln hlerarchles LhaL deny Lhe exlsLence of hlerarchles. lL ls an alLogeLher fasclnaLlng sLory, and one we wlll laLer follow ln deLall, buL for Lhe momenL we mlghL observe Lhe followlng. 1aylor beglns by noLlng LhaL Lhe maklng of whaL he calls quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons" ls an unavoldable aspecL of Lhe human slLuaLlon. We slmply flnd ourselves exlsLlng ln varlous cootexts, ln varlous ftomewotks (as l would puL lL, we are holons wlLhln holons, conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs), and Lhese conLexLs unavoldably consLlLuLe varlous values and meanlngs LhaL are embedded ln our slLuaLlon. WhaL l have been calllng a ftomewotk," says 1aylor, lncorporaLes a cruclal seL of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons [a value hlerarchy]. 1o Lhlnk, feel, [udge wlLhln such a framework ls Lo funcLlon wlLh Lhe sense LhaL some acLlon, or mode of llfe, or mode of feellng ls lncomparably hlgher Lhan Lhe oLhers whlch are more readlly avallable Lo us. l am uslng 'hlgher' here ln a generlc sense. 1he sense of whaL Lhe dlfference conslsLs ln may Lake many forms. Cne form of llfe may be seen as fuller, anoLher way of feellng and acLlng as purer, a mode of feellng or llvlng as deeper, a sLyle of llfe as more admlrable, and so on." 21 1hus, even Lhose who embrace heLerarchy or radlcal plurallsm are maklng deep and profound quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, even Lhough Lhey denounce quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons as bruLal and vlclous, even Lhough Lhey deny Lhe noLlon of frameworks alLogeLher. 8uL Lhls person doesn'L lack a framework. Cn Lhe conLrary, he has a sLrong commlLmenL Lo a cerLaln ldeal of benevolence. Pe admlres people who llve up Lo Lhls ldeal, condemns Lhose who fall or who are Loo confused even Lo accepL lL, feels wrong when he hlmself falls below lL. Pe llves wlLhln a moral horlzon whlch coooot be expllcoteJ by bls owo motol tbeoty." 22 1he polnL ls LhaL, even Lhough Lhls lndlvldual espouses dlverslLy and epoollty of values, Lhe ldea ls oevet, as 1aylor puLs lL, LhaL wbotevet we do ls accepLable." l wanL Lo defend Lhe sLrong Lhesls LhaL dolng wlLhouL frameworks ls uLLerly lmposslble for us, oLherwlse puL, LhaL Lhe horlzons wlLhln whlch we llve our llves and whlch make sense of Lhem have Lo lnclude Lhese sLrong quallLaLlve dlscrlmlnaLlons [value hlerarchles]. Moreover, Lhls ls noL meanL [usL as a conLlngenLly Lrue psychologlcal facL abouL human belngs, whlch could perhaps Lurn ouL one day noL Lo hold for some excepLlonal lndlvldual or new Lype, some superman of dlsengaged ob[ecLlflcaLlon. 8aLher, Lhe clalm ls LhaL llvlng wlLhln such sLrongly quallfled horlzons ls consLlLuLlve of human agency . . . and noL some opLlonal exLra we mlghL [usL as well do wlLhouL. 23 ?eL Lhere ls a modern ouLlook, says 1aylor, whlch ls LempLed Lo deny Lhese frameworks alLogeLher. My Lhesls here ls LhaL Lhls ldea ls deeply mlsLaken . . . and deeply confused. lL reads Lhe afflrmaLlon of llfe and freedom as lnvolvlng a repudlaLlon of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, a re[ecLlon of consLlLuLlve goods as such, whlle Lhese are Lhemselves reflecLlons of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons and presuppose some concepLlon of quallLaLlve goods." 24 ln Lhe course of hlsLorlcally Lraclng Lhe curlous rlse of Lhls curlous sLance, 1aylor noLes LhaL Lhe more one examlnes Lhe moLlves-whaL nleLzsche would call Lhe 'genealogy'-of Lhese Lheorles, Lhe sLranger Lhey appear. lL seems LhaL Lhey are moLlvaLed by Lhe sLrongesL moral ldeals, such as freedom, alLrulsm, and unlversallsm [l.e., unlversal plurallsm]. 1hese are among Lhe cenLral moral asplraLlons of modern culLure, Lhe hypergoods [sLrong hlerarchles] whlch are dlsLlncLlve Lo lL. And yeL whaL Lhese ldeals drlve Lhe LheorlsLs Loward ls a denlal of all such goods. 1hey are caughL ln a sLrange pragmaLlc conLradlcLlon, whereby Lhe very goods whlch move Lhem push Lhem Lo deny or denaLure all such goods. 1hey are consLlLuLlonally lncapable of comlng clean abouL Lhe deeper sources of Lhelr own Lhlnklng. 1helr LhoughL ls lnescapably cramped." 23 1hey are, 1aylor says, morally superlor ln a unlverse where noLhlng ls supposed Lo be superlor. 1he resulLanL frameworkless agenL," says 1aylor, ls a monsLer," moLlvaLed by Lhe deep lncoherence and self- llluslon whlch Lhls denlal lnvolves." 1hls hlerarchlcal denlal of hlerarchy lnvolves an etblcs of sopptessloo, accordlng Lo 1aylor, because layers of suppresslon" are requlred Lo so Lhoroughly conceal from oneself Lhe sources of one's own [udgmenLs. And Lhls furLher explalns why Lhese LheorlsLs are, as 1aylor puLs lL, paraslLlc." Slnce Lhey can'L come clean abouL Lhe deeper sources of Lhelr own Lhlnklng," Lhey necessarlly llve off noLhlng buL Lhe vocal denouncemenLs of Lhose vlews LhaL do manage Lo consclously acknowledge Lhelr own quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons. 8ecause Lhelr moral sources are unavowable, Lhey are malnly lnvoked ln polemlc. 1helr prlnclpal words of power are denunclaLory. Much of whaL Lhey [acLually] llve by has Lo be lnferred from Lhe rage wlLh whlch Lhelr enemles are aLLacked and refuLed. 1hls self- conceallng klnd of phllosophy ls also Lhereby paraslLlc. . . ." 1hus, even Lhe radlcal plurallsLs (Lhe heLerarchlsLs) are moLlvaLed by values of freedom, alLrulsm (unlversal benevolence), and unlversal plurallsm. 1hese are Jeeply hlerarchlcal [udgmenLs, and [udgmenLs LhaL-rlghLly, l belleve!-vlgorously teject oLher Lypes of value [udgmenLs and oLher Lypes of hlerarchles LhaL have flourlshed LhroughouL hlsLory. 1hey Jeeply teject Lhe warrlor eLhlc, Lhe eLhlc of ellLe arlsLocracy, Lhe male-only eLhlc, and Lhe masLer-slave eLhlc, Lo name a few. ln oLher words, Lhelr heLerarchlcal values are held ln place by hlerarchlcal [udgmenLs (mosL of whlch l Lhoroughly agree wlLh), and Lhey mlghL as well come clean and [oln Lhe resL of us ln Lrylng Lo cooscloosly undersLand all LhaL, and noL slmply bury Lhelr Lracks ln paraslLlc and denunclaLory and suppresslve rheLorlc. 1he same problems, of course, beseL Lhe culLural relaLlvlsLs," who malnLaln LhaL all dlverse culLural values are equally valld (ln a funcLlonal sense), and LhaL no oolvetsol value [udgmenLs are posslble. 8uL LhaL [udgmenL ls lLself a unlversal [udgmenL. lL clalms Lo be unlversally Lrue LhaL no [udgmenLs are unlversally Lrue. lL makes lLs own unlversal [udgmenL and Lhen slmulLaneously denles all oLhers, because unlversal [udgmenLs are very, very bad. lL Lhus lgnores Lhe cruclal lssue of how we go abouL maklng valld unlversal [udgmenLs ln Lhe flrsL place. lL exempts lLs own unlversal clalms from any scruLlny by slmply clalmlng Lhey aren'L clalms. 1he exLreme culLural relaLlvlsLs Lhus malnLaln LhaL LruLh" ls baslcally whaL any culLure can come Lo agree on, and Lhus no LruLh" ls lnherenLly beLLer Lhan any oLher. 1here was a cerLaln vogue for Lhls Lype of sLance durlng Lhe slxLles and sevenLles, buL lLs self-conLradlcLory naLure became apparenL wlLh, Lo glve Lhe mosL noLorlous example, Mlchel loucaulL's book 1be OtJet of 1bloqs. ln Lhls work loucaulL malnLalned, ln essence, LhaL whaL humans come Lo call LruLh" ls slmply an arblLrary play of power and convenLlon, and he ouLllned several epochs where Lhe LruLh" seemed Lo depend enLlrely on shlfLlng and convenLlonal eplsLemes, or dlscurslve formaLlons governed noL by LruLh" buL by excluslonary LransformaLlon prlnclples. All LruLh, ln oLher words, was ulLlmaLely arblLrary. 1he argumenL seemed qulLe persuaslve, and even caused a blL of an lnLernaLlonal sensaLlon. unLll hls brlghLer crlLlcs slmply asked hlm: ?ou say all LruLh ls arblLrary. ls your presenLaLlon lLself Lrue?" loucaulL, llke all relaLlvlsLs, had exempLed hlmself from Lhe very crlLerla he aggresslvely applled Lo oLhers. Pe was maklng an exLenslve serles of LruLh clalms LhaL denled all LruLh clalms (excepL hls own prlvlleged sLance), and Lhus hls poslLlon, as crlLlcs from Pabermas Lo 1aylor polnLed ouL, was profoundly lncoherenL. loucaulL hlmself abandoned Lhe exLreme relaLlvlsm of Lhls archaeologlcal" endeavor and subsumed lL ln a more balanced approach (LhaL would lnclude conLlnulLles as well as abrupL dlsconLlnulLles, he called Lhe merely archaeologlcal approach arroganL"). nobody ls denylng LhaL many aspecLs of culLure are lndeed dlfferenL and equally valuable. 1he polnL ls LhaL LhaL sLance lLself ls unlversal and tejects Lheorles LhaL merely and arblLrarlly rank culLures on an eLhnocenLrlc blas (a re[ecLlon l share). 8uL because lL clalms LhaL all ranklng ls elLher bad or arblLrary, lL cannoL explaln lLs own sLance and Lhe process of lLs own (unacknowledged) ranklng sysLem. And lf noLhlng else, unconsclous ranklng ls bad ranklng, by any oLher name. And Lhe relaLlvlsLs are very bad rankers. 26 !urgen Pabermas and numerous oLhers (Charles 1aylor, karl-CLLo Apel, CuenLln Sklnner, !ohn Searle, eLc.) have launched devasLaLlng crlLlques of Lhese poslLlons, polnLlng ouL LhaL Lhey all lnvolve a performaLlve conLradlcLlon": anoLher way of saylng LhaL Lhey are lmpllclLly presupposlng unlversal valldlLy clalms LhaL Lhey deny can even exlsL. ln shorL, exLreme culLural relaLlvlLy and merely heLerarchlcal value sysLems are no longer en[oylng Lhe vogue Lhey once dld. 1he word ls ouL LhaL quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons are lnescapable ln Lhe human condlLlon, and furLher, LhaL Lhere are bettet and wotse ways Lo make our quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons. ln many ways, we wanL Lo agree wlLh Lhe broad cooclosloos of Lhe culLural dlverslLy movemenLs: we do wanL Lo cherlsh all culLures ln an equal llghL. 8uL LhaL oolvetsol plurallsm ls noL a sLance LhaL all culLures agree wlLh, LhaL unlversal plurallsm ls a very speclal Lype of ranklng LhaL mosL eLhnocenLrlc and soclocenLrlc culLures do noL even acknowledge, LhaL unlversal plurallsm ls Lhe resulL of a very long hlsLory hard-foughL agalnsL domlnaLor hlerarchles of one sorL or anoLher. 27 wby ls unlversal plurallsm beLLer Lhan domlnaLor hlerarchles? And bow dld we develop or evolve Lo a sLance of unlversal plurallsm, when mosL of hlsLory desplsed LhaL vlew? 1hese are some of Lhe many developmenLal and evoluLlonary Lhemes of Lhls volume. now we arrlve aL LhaL unlversal plurallsm, and how we can defend lL agalnsL Lhose who would, ln a domlnaLlng fashlon, elevaLe Lhelr culLure or Lhelr bellefs or Lhelr values above all oLhers-Lhese are Lhe cruclal quesLlons whose answers are aborLed by merely denylng ranklng and denylng quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons ln Lhe flrsL place. CCnCLuSlCn 8uL here ls my polnL: lf frameworks are lnescapable (we are conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs, holons wlLhln holons), and lf frameworks lnvolve quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons-ln oLher words, lf we are lnexLrlcably lnvolved ln [udgmenLs LhaL are hlerarchlcal-Lhen we can begln Lo consclously [oln Lhese [udgmenLs wlLh Lhe scleoces of hlerarchy, LhaL ls, Lhe sclences of holarchy, of frameworks wlLhln frameworks, of conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs, of holons wlLhln holons-wlLh Lhe resulL LhaL values and facLs are no longer auLomaLlcally dlvorced. 1hls unlfylng and lnLegraLlve move was blockeJ as long as Lhe heLerarchlsLs were calllng Lhelr vlew hollsLlc" (when lL was really heaplsLlc"). 8lockeJ, because Lhe heLerarchlsLs lnslsLed LhaL reallLy was nonhlerarchlcal, whereas Lhe sclences of wholeness lnslsLed alLogeLher oLherwlse. 8uL wlLh Lhe undersLandlng LhaL tbe ooly woy yoo qet o bollsm ls vlo o bolotcby, we are now ln a poslLlon Lo reallgn facLs and values ln a genLler embrace, wlLh sclence worklng wlLh us, noL agalnsL us, ln consLrucLlng a Lruly hollsLlc, noL heaplsLlc, worldvlew. lurLher, leL us slmply noLe LhaL Lhe CreaL Chaln of 8elng was ln facL a CreaL Polarchy of 8elng-wlLh each llnk belng an lnLrlnslc whole LhaL was slmulLaneously a parL of a larger whole-and Lhe enLlre serles nesLed ln SplrlL. 28 lf Lhese varlous holarchles-ln Lhe sclences, ln value [udgmenLs, ln Lhe greaL wlsdom LradlLlons-could ln facL be sympaLheLlcally allgned wlLh one anoLher, a Lruly slgnlflcanL synLhesls mlghL lndeed lle ln our collecLlve fuLure. 2 1be lotteto 1bot coooects Mottet, wblcb oppeots to be metely posslve ooJ wltboot fotm ooJ ottooqemeot, bos eveo lo lts slmplest stote oo otqe to fosbloo ltself by o oototol evolotloo loto o mote petfect coostltotloo. -lMMAnuLL kAn1 CoJ Joes oot temolo pettlfleJ ooJ JeoJ, tbe vety stooes cty oot ooJ tolse tbemselves to 5pltlt. -CLC8C PLCLL 1PL nA1u8L Cl 1PL A11L8n WL 8LCln Wl1P Lhe sclences of wholeness, or dynamlc sysLems Lheory. 1he resL of Lhls chapLer and all of chapLers 3 and 4 wlll be devoLed Lo explorlng some of Lhe baslc concluslons of Lhe modern evoluLlonary sclences, wlLh a vlew Loward Lhelr posslble lnLegraLlon ln a larger scheme of Lhlngs. WhaL follows are LwenLy baslc LeneLs (or concluslons) LhaL represenL whaL we mlghL call paLLerns of exlsLence" or Lendencles of evoluLlon" or laws of form" or propenslLles of manlfesLaLlon." 1hese are Lhe common paLLerns or Lendencles, recall, LhaL modern sysLems sclences have concluded are operaLlve ln all Lhree domalns of evoluLlon-Lhe physlosphere, Lhe blosphere, and Lhe noosphere-and Lendencles LhaL Lherefore make Lhls unlverse a genulne ool-vetsom (one Lurn"), or an emergenL plurallsm underglrded by common paLLerns-Lhe paLLerns LhaL connecL." (AL Lhls polnL, l don'L wanL Lo geL lnvolved ln lnLrlcaLe argumenLs over wheLher Lhese are eLernal laws" or slmply relaLlvely sLable hablLs" of Lhe unlverse, and so l wlll be saLlsfled wlLh Lhe laLLer.) 1 1hese paLLerns (llsLed as Lhe 1wenLy 1eneLs below) are drawn from Lhe modern evoluLlonary and sysLems sclences, buL l would llke Lo emphaslze LhaL Lhey are noL conflned Lo Lhose sclences. As l menLloned earller, we are now looklng aL Lhe half" of Lhose sclences LhaL seem accuraLe, and we have yeL Lo examlne Lhe half LhaL ls exLremely quesLlonable (Lhls wlll begln ln chapLer 3). As we wlll see ln greaL deLall, Lhe problem wlLh vlrLually every aLLempL Lo ouLllne Lhe common paLLerns found ln all Lhree domalns of evoluLlon ls slmply LhaL Lhe paLLerns are presenLed ln Lhe looqooqe of objectlve oototollsm (lL"-language), and Lhus Lhey fall mlserably when applled Lo domalns descrlbed only ln l-language (aesLheLlcs) and we-language (eLhlcs). Lvery unlfled sysLems aLLempL" LhaL l have seen suffers from Lhls crlppllng lnadequacy. l have been very careful, Lherefore, Lo cuL Lhese LeneLs aL a level and Lype of absLracLlon LhaL ls, l belleve, fully compaLlble wlLh lL-, we-, and l-languages (or Lhe Lrue, Lhe good, and Lhe beauLlful), so LhaL Lhe synLhesls can proceed nonvlolenLly lnLo domalns where prevlously sysLems Lheory was lnLenL upon subLle reducLlonlsm Lo lLs own naLurallsLlc and ob[ecLlfylng Lerms. (All of Lhls wlll, as l sald, be dlscussed ln deLall, beglnnlng ln chapLer 3.) llnally, a small warnlng. Many readers have found Lhese LeneLs Lo be Lhe mosL lnLeresLlng parL of Lhe book, oLhers have found Lhem Loo absLracL and raLher borlng. lf you are of Lhe laLLer, l should menLlon LhaL Lhey wlll be fleshed ouL and made obvlous, l LrusL, ln Lhe succeedlng chapLers. ln Lhe meanLlme, a keoJets ulqest verslon of Lhem mlghL go as follows: 8eallLy ls noL composed of Lhlngs or processes, lL ls noL composed of aLoms or quarks, lL ls noL composed of wholes nor does lL have any parLs. 8aLher, lL ls composed of whole/parLs, or holons. 1hls ls Lrue of aLoms, cells, symbols, ldeas. 1hey can be undersLood nelLher as Lhlngs nor processes, nelLher as wholes nor parLs, buL only as slmulLaneous whole/parLs, so LhaL sLandard aLomlsLlc" and whollsLlc" aLLempLs are boLh off Lhe mark. 1here ls noLhlng LhaL lsn'L a holon (upwardly and downwardly forever). 8efore an aLom ls an aLom, lL ls a holon. 8efore a cell ls a cell, lL ls a holon. 8efore an ldea ls an ldea, lL ls a holon. All of Lhem are wholes LhaL exlsL ln oLher wholes, and Lhus Lhey are all whole/parLs, or holons, flrsL and foremosL (long before any parLlcular characLerlsLlcs" are slngled ouL by us). Llkewlse, reallLy mlghL lndeed be composed of processes and noL Lhlngs, buL all processes are only processes wlLhln oLher processes-LhaL ls, Lhey are flrsL and foremosL holons. 1rylng Lo declde wheLher Lhe fundamenLal unlLs of reallLy are Lhlngs or processes ls uLLerly beslde Lhe polnL, because elLher way, Lhey are all holons, and cenLerlng on one or Lhe oLher mlsses Lhe cenLral lssue. Clearly some Lhlngs exlsL, and some processes exlsL, buL Lhey are each and all holons. 1herefore we can examlne whaL boloos have ln common, and Lhls releases us from Lhe uLLerly fuLlle aLLempL Lo flnd common processes or common enLlLles on all levels and domalns of exlsLence, because LhaL wlll never work, lL leads always Lo reducLlonlsm, noL Lrue synLhesls. lor example, Lo say LhaL Lhe unlverse ls composed prlmarlly of quarks ls already Lo prlvllege a parLlcular domaln. Llkewlse, aL Lhe oLher end of Lhe specLrum, Lo say LhaL Lhe unlverse ls really composed prlmarlly of our symbols, slnce Lhese are all we really know-LhaL, Loo, ls Lo prlvllege a parLlcular domaln. 8uL Lo say LhaL Lhe unlverse ls composed of holons nelLher prlvlleges a domaln nor lmplles speclal fundamenLalness for any level. LlLeraLure, for example, ls oot composed of subaLomlc parLlcles, buL boLh llLeraLure and subaLomlc parLlcles are composed of holons. SLarLlng wlLh Lhe noLlon of holons, and proceedlng by a comblnaLlon of o ptlotl reasonlng and o postetlotl evldence, we can aLLempL Lo dlscern whaL all known holons seem Lo have ln common. 1hese concluslons are reflned and checked by examlnlng any and all domalns (from cellular blology Lo physlcal dlsslpaLlve sLrucLures, from sLellar evoluLlon Lo psychologlcal growLh, from auLopoleLlc sysLems Lo splrlLual experlences, from Lhe sLrucLure of language Lo unA repllcaLlon). Slnce all of Lhose domalns operaLe wlLh holons, we can aLLempL Lo dlscern whaL all Lhese holons have ln common when Lhey lnLeracL-whaL Lhelr laws" or paLLerns" or Lendencles" or hablLs" are. And Lhls glves us a llsL of some LwenLy LeneLs, whlch l have grouped lnLo Lwelve caLegorles (some of Lhese are slmple deflnlLlons, buL for convenlence l wlll always refer Lo Lhe enLlre llsL as LwenLy LeneLs." 1here ls noLhlng speclal abouL LwenLy, some of Lhese mlghL noL hold up, oLhers can be added, and l have noL Lrled Lo be exhausLlve). 1WLn1? 1LnL1S 1. keollty os o wbole ls oot composeJ of tbloqs ot ptocesses, bot of boloos. Composed, LhaL ls, of wholes LhaL are slmulLaneously parLs of oLher wholes, wlLh no upward or downward llmlL. 1o say LhaL holons are processes lnsLead of Lhlngs ls ln some ways Lrue, buL mlsses Lhe essenLlal polnL LhaL processes Lhemselves exlsL only wlLhln oLher processes. 1here are no Lhlngs or processes, only holons. Slnce reallLy ls noL composed of wholes, and slnce lL has no parLs-slnce Lhere are only whole/parLs-Lhen Lhls approach undercuLs Lhe LradlLlonal argumenL beLween aLomlsm (all Lhlngs are fundamenLally lsolaLed and lndlvldual wholes LhaL lnLeracL only by chance) and whollsm (all Lhlngs are merely sLrands or parLs of Lhe larger web or whole). 8oLh of Lhose vlews are absoluLely lncorrecL. 1here are no wholes, and Lhere are no parLs. 1here are only whole/parLs. 1hls approach also undercuLs Lhe argumenL beLween Lhe maLerlallsL and ldeallsL camps. 8eallLy lsn'L composed of quarks, or booLsLrapplng hadrons, or subaLomlc exchange, buL nelLher ls lL composed of ldeas, symbols, or LhoughLs. lL ls composed of holons. 1here ls an old [oke abouL a klng who goes Lo a Wlseperson and asks how ls lL LhaL Lhe LarLh doesn'L fall down? 1he Wlseperson replles, 1he LarLh ls resLlng on a llon." Cn whaL, Lhen, ls Lhe llon resLlng?" 1he llon ls resLlng on an elephanL." Cn whaL ls Lhe elephanL resLlng?" 1he elephanL ls resLlng on a LurLle." Cn whaL ls Lhe . . ." ?ou can sLop rlghL Lhere, your Ma[esLy. lL's LurLles all Lhe way down." Polons all Lhe way down. SubaLomlc parLlcles are-ln a cerLaln sense whlch can only be deflned rlgorously ln relaLlvlsLlc quanLum mechanlcs-nesLed lnslde each oLher. 1he polnL ls LhaL a physlcal parLlcle-a renormallzed parLlcle-lnvolves (1) a bare parLlcle and (2) a huge Langle of vlrLual parLlcles, lnexLrlcably wound LogeLher ln a recurslve mess. Lvery real parLlcle's exlsLence Lherefore lnvolves Lhe exlsLence of lnflnlLely many oLher parLlcles, conLalned ln a vlrLual 'cloud' whlch surrounds lL as lL propagaLes. And each of Lhe vlrLual parLlcles ln Lhe cloud, of course, also drags along lLs own vlrLual cloud, bubbles wlLhln bubbles [holons wlLhln holons], and so on ad lnflnlLum. . . ." 2 8uL lL's also LurLles all Lhe way up. 1ake maLhemaLlcs, for example. 1he noLorlous paradoxes" ln seL Lheory (CanLor's, 8urall-lorLl's, 8ussell's), whlch, among oLher Lhlngs, led Lo 1arskl's 1heorem and Cdel's lncompleLeness 1heorem, placed maLhemaLlcs ln an lttevetslble, evet-expooJloq, oo-oppet-llmlt oolvetse: 1he LoLallLy of seLs cannoL be Lhe Lermlnus of a well-deflned generaLlng process, for lf lL were we could Lake all of whaL we had generaLed so far as a seL and conLlnue Lo generaLe sLlll larger unlverses. 1he LoLallLy of seLs [maLhemaLlcal holons] ls an 'uncondlLloned' or absoluLe LoLallLy whlch for [usL LhaL reason cannoL be adequaLely concelved by Lhe human mlnd, slnce Lhe ob[ecL of a normal concepLlon can always be lncorporaLed ln a more lncluslve LoLallLy. Moreover, Lhe seLs are arranged ln a LransflnlLe hlerarchy"-a holarchy LhaL conLlnues upwardly forever, and musL conLlnue upwardly forever (LransflnlLely"), or maLhemaLlcs comes Lo a screechlng self-conLradlcLory halL. 3 Lven maLhemaLlcs ls seL ln Llme's arrow, and Llme's arrow ls lndeflnlLely-LransflnlLely"-holarchlcal. 1hls ls lmporLanL for phllosophy as well, and parLlcularly for many of Lhe new age" paradlgms LhaL now LrumpeL Whollsm." 1ransflnlLe" (LurLles all Lhe way up) means LhaL Lhe sum LoLal of all Lhe whole/parLs ln Lhe unlverse ls oot ltself o wbole, because Lhe momenL lL comes Lo be (as a whole"), LhaL LoLallLy ls merely a pott of Lhe very nexL momenL's whole, whlch ln Lurn ls merely a parL of Lhe nexL . . . and so ad lnflnlLum. 1hls means LhaL Lhere ls no place where we can resL and say, 1he unlverse's baslc prlnclple ls Wholeness" (nor, of course, can we say, 1he baslc prlnclple ls arLness"). 1hls prevenLs us from ever saylng LhaL Lhe prlnclple of Lhe Whole rules Lhe world, for lL does noL, any whole ls a parL, lndeflnlLely. 1hus, holons wlLhln holons wlLhln holons means LhaL Lhe world ls wlLhouL foundaLlon ln elLher wholes or parLs (and as for any sorL of absoluLe reallLy" ln Lhe splrlLual sense, we wlll see LhaL lL ls nelLher whole nor parL, nelLher one nor many, buL pure groundless LmpLlness, or radlcally oooJool SplrlL). 1hls ls lmporLanL because lL prevenLs a LoLallzlng and domlnaLlng Wholeness. Wholeness"-Lhls ls a very dangerous concepL (a polnL LhaL wlll accompany us LhroughouL Lhls book)-dangerous for many reasons, noL Lhe leasL of whlch ls LhaL lL ls always avallable Lo be pushed lnLo ldeologlcal ends. Whenever anybody Lalks of wholeness belng Lhe ulLlmaLe, Lhen we musL be very wary, ln my oplnlon, because Lhey are ofLen Lelllng us LhaL we are merely parLs" of Lhelr parLlcular verslon of wholeness," and so we should be subservlenL Lo Lhelr vlslon-we are merely sLrands ln Lhelr wonderful web. And Lhen, slnce we are all deflned as sLrands ln Lhe web, a LoLallzlng soclal agenda seems emlnenLly reasonable. lL ls noL beslde Lhe polnL LhaL LheorlsLs as dlverse as Pabermas and loucaulL have seen such LoLallzlng agendas as Lhe maln modern enemy of Lhe llfe-world (a polnL we wlll reLurn Lo ln chapLer 12). l belabor Lhls lssue because lL ls exLremely lmporLanL Lo emphaslze Lhe lndeflnlLeness of holarchy, lLs openness, lLs dlzzlfylngly nesLlng naLure-an acLuallzaLlon holarchy, noL a domlnaLor holarchy. And a domlnaLor holarchy, recall, occurs preclsely whenever any holon ls esLabllshed, noL as a whole/parL, buL as Lhe whole, perlod. ulLlmaLe Wholeness": Lhls ls Lhe essence of domlnaLor holarchles, paLhologlcal holarchles. ure wholeness": Lhls ls Lhe LoLallzlng lle. lor all Lhese reasons, l wlll usually refer Lo Lhe sum LoLal of evenLs ln Lhe unlverse noL as Lhe Whole" (whlch lmplles Lhe ulLlmaLe prlorlLy of wholeness over parLness) buL as Lhe All" (whlch ls Lhe sum LoLal of whole/parLs). And Lhls sum LoLal ls noL lLself a whole buL a whole/parL: as soon as you Lhlnk Lhe All," your own LhoughL has oJJeJ yeL anoLher holon Lo Lhe All (so LhaL Lhe flrsL All ls no longer tbe All buL merely pott of Lhe new All), and so off we go lndeflnlLely, never arrlvlng aL LhaL whlch we symbollze as Lhe All," whlch ls why lL ls oevet a whole, buL an unendlng serles of whole/parLs (wlLh Lhe serles lLself a whole/parL-and so on LransflnlLely"). 1he yLhagoreans lnLroduced Lhe Lerm kosmos," whlch we usually LranslaLe as cosmos." 8uL Lhe orlglnal meanlng of kosmos was Lhe paLLerned naLure or process of all domalns of exlsLence, from maLLer Lo maLh Lo Lheos, and noL merely Lhe physlcal unlverse, whlch ls usually whaL boLh cosmos" and unlverse" mean Loday. So l would llke Lo relnLroduce Lhls Lerm, kosmos. 1he kosmos conLalns Lhe cosmos (or Lhe physlosphere), Lhe blos (or blosphere), nous (Lhe noosphere), and Lheos (Lhe Lheosphere or dlvlne domaln)-none of Lhem belng foundaLlonal (even splrlL shades lnLo LmpLlness). So we can say ln shorL: 1he kosmos ls composed of holons, all Lhe way up, all Lhe way down. LeL me end Lhls secLlon wlLh one lasL example, from perhaps an unexpecLed source. 1he posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs"-usually assoclaLed wlLh such names as uerrlda, loucaulL, !ean-lranols LyoLard, and sLreLchlng back Lo Ceorge 8aLallle and nleLzsche-have been Lhe greaL foes of any sorL of sysLemaLlc Lheory or grand narraLlve," and Lhus Lhey mlghL be expecLed Lo ralse sLern ob[ecLlons Lo any overall Lheory of holarchy." 8uL a close look aL Lhelr work shows LhaL lL ls drlven preclsely by a concepLlon of holons wlLhln holons wlLhln holons, of LexLs wlLhln LexLs wlLhln LexLs (or conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs), and lL ls Lhls slldlng play of LexLs wlLhln LexLs LhaL forms Lhe foundaLlonless" plaLform from whlch Lhey launch Lhelr aLLacks. Ceorge 8aLallle, for lnsLance. ln Lhe mosL general way"-and Lhese are hls lLallcs-evety lsoloble elemeot of tbe oolvetse olwoys oppeots os o pottlcle tbot coo eotet loto composltloo wltb o wbole tbot ttoosceoJs lt. 8eloq ls ooly foooJ os o wbole composeJ of pottlcles wbose telotlve ootooomy ls molotoloeJ [a parL LhaL ls also a whole]. 1hese Lwo prlnclples [slmulLaneous wholeness and parLness] domlnaLe Lhe uncerLaln presence of an lpse belng across a dlsLance LhaL never ceases Lo puL evetytbloq ln quesLlon." 4 vetytbloq ls puL lnLo quesLlon because everyLhlng ls a conLexL wlLhln a conLexL forever. And pottloq evetytbloq lo poestloo ls preclsely whaL Lhe posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs are known for. And so ln a language LhaL would soon become qulLe Lyplcal (and ls by now almosL comlcal), 8aLallle goes on Lo polnL ouL LhaL puLLlng everyLhlng lnLo quesLlon" counLers Lhe human need Lo vlolenLly arrange Lhlngs ln Lerms of a paL wholeness and smug unlversallLy: WlLh exLreme dread lmperaLlvely becomlng Lhe demand for unlversallLy, carrled away Lo verLlgo by Lhe movemenL LhaL composes lL, Lhe lpse belng LhaL presenLs lLself as a unlversal ls only a challenge Lo Lhe dlffuse lmmenslLy LhaL escapes lLs precarlous vlolence, Lhe Lraglc negaLlon of all LhaL ls noL lLs own bewlldered phanLom's chance. 8uL, as a man, Lhls belng falls lnLo Lhe meanders of Lhe knowledge of hls fellowmen, whlch absorbs hls subsLance ln order Lo reduce lL Lo a componenL of whaL goes beyond Lhe vlrulenL madness of hls auLonomy ln Lhe LoLal nlghL of Lhe world." 3 um, and so forLh. 1he polnL ls oot LhaL 8aLallle hlmself was wlLhouL any sorL of sysLem, buL slmply LhaL Lhe system ls sllJloq-holons wlLhln holons. So Lhe clalm Lo slmply have no sysLem" ls a llLLle dlslngenuous. Whlch ls why Andre 8reLon, Lhe leader of Lhe surreallsLs aL Lhe Llme, began a counLeraLLack on Lhls parL of 8aLallle, also ln Lerms LhaL are echoed by Loday's crlLlcs of posLmodernlsLs: M. 8aLallle's mlsforLune ls Lo reason: admlLLedly, he reasons llke someone who 'has a fly on hls nose,' whlch allles hlm more closely wlLh Lhe dead Lhan wlLh Lhe llvlng, buL be Joes teosoo. Pe ls Lrylng, wlLh Lhe help of Lhe Llny mechanlsm ln hlm whlch ls noL compleLely ouL of order, Lo share hls obsesslons: Lhls very facL proves LhaL he cannoL clalm, no maLLer whaL he may say, Lo be opposed Lo any sysLem, llke an unLhlnklng bruLe." 6 8oLh sldes are correcL, ln a sense. 1here ls sysLem, buL Lhe sysLem ls slldlng. lL ls unendlngly, dlzzlfylngly holonlc. 1hls ls why !onaLhan Culler, perhaps Lhe foremosL lnLerpreLer of !acques uerrlda's deconsLrucLlon, can polnL ouL LhaL uerrlda does oot deny LruLh per se, buL only lnslsLs LhaL LruLh and meanlng are cootext-boooJ (each conLexL belng a whole LhaL ls also parL of anoLher whole conLexL, whlch lLself . . .). Cne could Lherefore," says Culler, ldenLlfy deconsLrucLlon wlLh Lhe Lwln prlnclples of Lhe cootextool Jetetmlootloo of meooloq and Lhe loflolte exteoJoblllty of cootext." 7 1urLles all Lhe way up, all Lhe way down. WhaL deconsLrucLlon puLs lnLo quesLlon ls Lhe deslre Lo flnd a flnal resLlng place, ln elLher wholeness or parLness or anyLhlng ln beLween. Lvery Llme somebody flnds a flnal lnLerpreLaLlon or a foundaLlonal lnLerpreLaLlon of a LexL (or llfe or hlsLory or kosmos), deconsLrucLlon ls on hand Lo say LhaL Lhe LoLal conLexL-or WhollsLlc lnLerpreLaLlon-does noL exlsL, because lL ls also unendlngly a parL of yeL anoLher LexL forever. As Culler puLs lL, 1oLal conLexL [flnal Whollsm] ls unmasLerable, boLh ln prlnclple and ln pracLlce. Meooloq ls cootext boooJ, bot cootext ls boooJless." 8 1ransflnlLe LurLles. Lven Pabermas, who generally Lakes 8reLon's poslLlon Lo uerrlda's 8aLallle, agrees wlLh LhaL parLlcular polnL. As he puLs lL, 1hese varlaLlons of conLexL LhaL change meanlng cannoL ln prlnclple be arresLed or conLrolled, because conLexLs cannoL be exhausLed, LhaL ls, Lhey cannoL be LheoreLlcally masLered once and for all."9 1haL Lhe sysLem ls slldlng does oot mean LhaL meanlng can'L be esLabllshed, LhaL LruLh doesn'L exlsL, or LhaL conLexLs won'L hold sLlll long enough Lo make a slmple polnL. Many posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs have noL slmply dlscovered holonlc space, Lhey have become Lhoroughly losL ln lL (a polnL we wlll reLurn Lo ln chapLer 13, Ceorge 8aLallle, for example, Look a good, long, hard look aL holonlc space and wenL properly lnsane, Lhough whlch ls cause and whlch effecL ls hard Lo say). As for our [ourney, we need only noLe LhaL Lhere ls sysLem, buL Lhe sysLem ls slldlng: 1he kosmos ls Lhe unendlng All, and Lhe All ls composed of holons-all Lhe way up, all Lhe way down. 2. noloos Jlsploy foot fooJomeotol copocltles: self-ptesetvotloo, self-oJoptotloo, self-ttoosceoJeoce, ooJ self-Jlssolotloo. 1hese are all very lmporLanL, and we'll Lake Lhem one aL a Llme. a. 5elf-ptesetvotloo. All holons dlsplay some capaclLy Lo preserve Lhelr lndlvlduallLy, Lo preserve Lhelr own parLlcular wholeness or auLonomy. A hydrogen aLom, ln a sulLable conLexL, can remaln a hydrogen aLom. lL doesn'L necessarlly dlsplay lnLenLlonallLy ln any developed sense, buL lL does ptesetve lts oqeocy ovet tlme: lL manages Lo remaln lLself across Llme's flucLuaLlons-lL dlsplays self-preservaLlon ln Lhe slmple sense of malnLalnlng ldenLlLy across Llme (LhaL lLself ls a remarkable accompllshmenL!). A holon ln a llvlng conLexL (e.g., a cell) dlsplays an even more sophlsLlcaLed capaclLy for self-preservaLlon: Lhe capaclLy for self-renewal (auLopolesls), lL reLalns lLs own recognlzable paLLern (or sLrucLure) even as lLs maLerlal componenLs are exchanged, lL osslmllotes Lhe envlronmenL Lo lLself (lL ls a meLa-sLable dlsslpaLlve sLrucLure"). ln oLher words, alLhough holons exlsL by vlttoe of Lhelr lnLerllnklng relaLlonshlps or conLexL, Lhey are oot JefloeJ solely by Lhelr conLexL buL also by Lhelr own lndlvldual form, paLLern, or sLrucLure (even parLlcles LhaL are booLsLrapplngs of oLher parLlcles reLaln Lhelr loJlvlJool perspecLlve, as Lelbnlz puL lL). 1hls lnLrlnslc form or paLLern ls known by varlous names: enLelechy (ArlsLoLle), morphlc unlL/fleld (Sheldrake), reglme or code or canon (koesLler), deep sLrucLure (Wllber). ln Lhe physlosphere, Lhe form of a holon ls relaLlvely slmple (alLhough even LhaL ls bewllderlngly complex), ln Lhe blosphere and noosphere, lL Lakes on elaboraLe rules of relaLlonal exchange wlLh lLs envlronmenL and self-organlzlng rules for lLs own sLrucLures, all geared Lo preserve Lhe sLable (or Leleologlcally recognlzable), coherenL, and relaLlvely auLonomous paLLern LhaL ls Lhe essence of any holon. lranclsco varela, for example, explalns LhaL Lhe old blology" was based on heLeronomous unlLs operaLlng by a loglc of correspondence," whereas Lhe enLlre essence of Lhe new blology ls auLonomous unlLs operaLlng by a loglc of coherence." 10 ln shorL, holons are deflned, noL by Lhe sLuff of whlch Lhey are made (Lhere ls no sLuff), nor merely by Lhe conLexL ln whlch Lhey llve (Lhough Lhey are lnseparable from LhaL), buL by Lhe relaLlvely auLonomous and coherenL paLLern Lhey dlsplay, and Lhe capaclLy Lo preserve LhaL paLLern ls one characLerlsLlc of a holon: Lhe wboleoess aspecL of a holon ls dlsplayed ln lLs paLLern-preservaLlon. b. 5elf-oJoptotloo. A holon funcLlons noL only as a self-preservlng wbole buL also as a pott of a larger whole, and ln lLs capaclLy as a pott lL musL adapL or accommodaLe lLself Lo oLher holons (noL auLopolesls buL allopolesls, noL asslmllaLlon buL accommodaLlon). 1he pottoess aspecL of a holon ls dlsplayed ln lLs capaclLy Lo accommodaLe, Lo reglsLer oLher holons, Lo flL lnLo lLs exlsLlng envlronmenL. Lven elecLrons accommodaLe Lhemselves, for example, Lo Lhe number of oLher elecLrons ln an orblLal shell, Lhey reglsLer, and reacL Lo, Lhelr envlronmenL. 1hls doesn'L lmply lnLenLlonallLy on Lhe parL of Lhe elecLron, [usL a capaclLy Lo reacL Lo surroundlng acLlons. As a wbole, lL remalns lLself, as a pott, lL musL flL ln-and Lhose are LeneLs 2a and 2b. We can [usL as well Lhlnk of Lhese Lwo opposed Lendencles as a holon's oqeocy and commooloo. lLs agency-lLs self-asserLlng, self-preservlng, asslmllaLlng Lendencles-expresses lLs wboleoess, lLs relaLlve auLonomy, whereas lLs communlon-lLs parLlclpaLory, bondlng, [olnlng Lendencles-expresses lLs pottoess, lLs relaLlonshlp Lo someLhlng larger. 8oLh of Lhese capaclLles or Lendencles are absoluLely cruclal and equally lmporLanL, an excess of elLher wlll klll a holon lmmedlaLely (l.e., desLroy lLs ldenLlfylng paLLern), even a moderaLe lmbalance wlll lead Lo sLrucLural deformlLy (wheLher we're Lalklng abouL Lhe growLh of a planL or Lhe growLh of Lhe paLrlarchy). And we have already suggesLed (ln chapLer 1) LhaL an lmbalance of Lhese Lwo Lendencles ln any sysLem expresses lLself as potboloqlcol oqeocy (allenaLlon and represslon) or potboloqlcol commooloo (fuslon and lndlssoclaLlon). 1hls prlmordlal polarlLy runs Lhrough all domalns of manlfesL exlsLence, and was archeLypally expressed ln Lhe 1aolsL prlnclples of yln (communlon) and yang (agency). koesLler: Cn dlfferenL levels of Lhe lnorganlc and organlc hlerarchles, Lhe polarlsaLlon of 'parLlcularlsLlc' [agency] and 'hollsLlc' [communlon] forces Lakes dlfferenL forms, buL lL ls obsetvoble oo evety level." 11 (l wlll have much more Lo say abouL Lhese Lwo Lendencles when we reach Lhe psychologlcal and pollLlcal levels of self-organlzaLlon, and parLlcularly wlLh reference Lo Lhe male and female value spheres, and Lo pollLlcal Lheorles of rlghLs [agency] and responslblllLles [communlon]). c. 5elf-ttoosceoJeoce (or self-LransformaLlon). When an oxygen aLom and Lwo hydrogen aLoms are broughL LogeLher under sulLable clrcumsLances, a new and ln some ways unprecedenLed holon emerges, LhaL of a waLer molecule. 1hls ls noL [usL a communlon, self-adapLaLlon, or assoclaLlon of Lhree aLoms, lL ls a LransformaLlon LhaL resulLs ln someLhlng novel and emergenL-dlfferenL wholes have come LogeLher Lo form a new and dlfferenL whole. 1here ls some sorL of creaLlve LwlsL on whaL has gone before. 1hls ls whaL WhlLehead referred Lo as cteotlvlty (whlch he called Lhe ulLlmaLe caLegory"-Lhe caLegory necessary Lo undersLand ooy oLher caLegory), 12 and whaL !anLsch and WaddlngLon call self-ttoosceoJeoce. Some wrlLers, such as koesLler, lump LogeLher self-adapLaLlon and self-Lranscendence and refer Lo Lhem lnLerchangeably, because boLh embody a Lype of golng beyond." 8uL aparL from LhaL slmllarlLy, Lhe Lwo are dlfferenL ln degree and ln klnd. ln self-adapLaLlon or communlon, one flnds oneself Lo be pott of a lotqet whole, ln self-LransformaLlon one becomes a oew wbole, whlch has lLs own new forms of agency ooJ communlon. 13 As !anLsch puLs lL: lL ls noL sufflclenL Lo characLerlze Lhese sysLems slmply as open, adapLlve, nonequlllbrlum, or learnlng sysLems [communlon], Lhey are all LhaL and more: Lhey are self-ttoosceoJeot [hls lLallcs], whlch means LhaL Lhey are capable . . . of Lransformlng Lhemselves. Self-LranscendenL sysLems are evoluLlon's vehlcle for quallLaLlve change and Lhus ensure lLs conLlnulLy, evoluLlon, ln Lurn, malnLalns self-LranscendenL sysLems whlch can only exlsL ln a world of lnLerdependence. lor self-LranscendenL sysLems, 8elng falls LogeLher wlLh 8ecomlng. . . . 14 As llya rlgoglne puLs lL, Lhe varlous levels and sLages of evoluLlon are lrreduclble Lo each oLher because Lhe LranslLlons beLween Lhem are characLerlzed by symmetty bteoks, whlch slmply means LhaL Lhey are noL equlvalenL rearrangemenLs of Lhe same sLuff (whaLever LhaL sLuff" mlghL be), buL are ln parL a slgnlflcanL Lranscendence, a novel and creaLlve LwlsL. !anLsch explalns: SymmeLry breaks lnLroduce new dynamlc posslblllLles for morphogenesls and slgnal an acL of self- Lranscendence. ComplexlLy becomes posslble only Lhrough symmeLry breaks. 1he world whlch emerges from Lhem becomes lncreaslngly lrreduclble Lo a slngle level of baslc [properLles]. 1he reallLy whlch emerges ls coordlnaLed aL many levels. All of whlch he summarlzes Lhls way: ln Lhe self-organlzaLlon paradlgm, evolotloo ls tbe tesolt of self-ttoosceoJeoce ot oll levels." 13 Pe also calls Lhls self-reallzaLlon Lhrough self-Lranscendence." ln oLher words, Lhls lnLroduces a vettlcol dlmenslon LhaL cuLs aL rlghL angles, so Lo speak, Lo Lhe horlzonLal agency and communlon. ln self-Lranscendence, agency and communlon do noL [usL lnLeracL, raLher, oew fotms of agency and communlon emerge Lhrough symmeLry breaks, Lhrough Lhe lnLroducLlon of new and creaLlve LwlsLs ln Lhe evoluLlonary sLream. 1here ls noL only a cootloolty ln evoluLlon, Lhere are lmporLanL Jlscootlooltles as well. naLure progresses by sudden leaps and deep-seaLed LransformaLlons raLher Lhan Lhrough plecemeal ad[usLmenLs. 1he dlagram of Lhe branchlng Lree of llfe no longer resembles Lhe conLlnuous ?-shaped [olnLs of Lhe synLheLlc Lheory, lL ls now plcLured ln Lerms of abrupL swlLches. . . . 1here ls slgnlflcanL evldence accumulaLed ln many flelds of emplrlcal sclence LhaL dynamlc sysLems do noL evolve smooLhly and conLlnuously over Llme, buL do so ln comparaLlvely sudden leaps and bursLs." 16 aleonLologlsL Ceorge Slmpson referred Lo Lhls as quanLum evoluLlon," because Lhese bursLs lnvolved relaLlvely abrupL alLeraLlons of adapLlve capaclLy or bodlly sLrucLure and lefL llLLle or no evldence ln Lhe fossll record of Lhe LranslLlons beLween Lhem."17 1hls quanLum evoluLlon" led Lo nlles Lldredge and SLephen !ay Could's puncLuaLlonal model," all of whlch Mlchael Murphy summarlzes as evoluLlonary Lranscendence." Murphy polnLs ouL LhaL evoluLlonary LheorlsLs 1heodoslus uobzhansky and lranclsco Ayala have called Lhese . . . evenLs lnsLances of 'evoluLlonary Lranscendence' because ln each of Lhem Lhere arose a new order of exlsLence. C. Ledyard SLebblns, a prlnclpal archlLecL of modern evoluLlonary Lheory, descrlbed cerLaln dlfferences beLween large and small sLeps ln organlc evoluLlon, dlsLlngulshlng mlnor from ma[or advances ln grade of planLs and anlmals. 1he Lerm qtoJe ls used among blologlsLs Lo denoLe a seL of characLerlsLlcs or ablllLles LhaL clearly glve descendenL specles cerLaln advanLages over Lhelr ancesLors. Accordlng Lo SLebblns, Lhe developmenL of polllnaLlon mechanlsms ln mllkweeds and orchlds ls an example of mlnor advances ln grade, whlle Lhe appearance of Lhe dlgesLlve Lube, cenLral nervous sysLem, elaboraLe sense organs, verLebraLe llmbs, and elaboraLe soclal behavlor represenL ma[or advances. 1here have been abouL 640,000 of Lhe former, he esLlmaLed, and from 20 Lo 100 of Lhe laLLer durlng Lhe several hundred mllllon years of eukaryoLe evoluLlon." 18 1he polnL ls LhaL Lhere ls noLhlng parLlcularly meLaphyslcal or occulL abouL Lhls. Self-Lranscendence ls slmply a sysLem's capaclLy Lo reach beyond Lhe glven and lnLroduce some measure of novelLy, a capaclLy wlLhouL whlch, lL ls qulLe cerLaln, evoluLlon would never, and could never, have even goLLen sLarLed. Self-Lranscendence, whlch leaves no corner of Lhe unlverse unLouched (or evoluLlon would have oo polot of deparLure), means noLhlng more-and noLhlng less-Lhan LhaL Lhe unlverse has an lnLrlnslc capaclLy Lo go beyond whaL wenL before. d. 5elf-Jlssolotloo-Polons LhaL are bullL up (Lhrough verLlcal self-LransformaLlon) can also break down. noL surprlslngly, when holons dlssolve" or come unglued," Lhey Lend Lo do so along Lhe same verLlcal sequence ln whlch Lhey were bullL up (only, of course, ln Lhe reverse dlrecLlon). lf a sLrucLure ls forced Lo reLreaL ln lLs evoluLlon (e.g., by a change ln Lhe non-equlllbrlum), as long as Lhere are no sLrong perLurbaLlons lL does so along Lhe same paLh whlch lL has come. . . . 1hls lmplles a prlmlLlve, hollsLlc system memoty whlch appears already aL Lhe level of chemlcal reacLlon sysLems. 19 1hls ls Lrue for psychologlcal and llngulsLlc (noospherlc) holons as well. 8oman !akobson speaks of Lhose sLraLlfled phenomena whlch modern psychology uncovers ln Lhe dlfferenL areas of Lhe realm of Lhe mlnd. new addlLlons are superlmposed on earller ones and dlssoluLlon beglns wlLh Lhe hlgher sLraLa-Lhe amazlngly exacL agreemenL beLween Lhe chronologlcal successlon of Lhese acqulslLlons and Lhe general laws of lrreverslble solldarlLy whlch govern Lhe synchrony of all Lhe languages of Lhe world." 20 ln oLher words, LhaL whlch ls verLlcally bullL up can verLlcally break down, and Lhe paLhways ln boLh cases are essenLlally Lhe same. 1aken LogeLher, Lhese four capaclLles-agency or self-preservaLlon, communlon or self-accommodaLlon, self- Lranscendence, and self-dlssoluLlon-can be plcLured as a cross, wlLh Lwo horlzonLal opposlLes" (agency and communlon) and Lwo verLlcal opposlLes" (self-Lranscendence and self-dlssoluLlon). 1hese four forces" are ln consLanL Lenslon (as we wlll see LhroughouL Lhls volume). notlzootolly: Lhe more agency, Lhe less communlon, and vlce versa. 1haL ls, Lhe more lnLensely a holon preserves lLs own lndlvlduallLy, preserves lLs wboleoess, Lhe less lL serves lLs communlons or lLs pottoess ln larger or wlder wholes (and vlce versa: Lhe more lL ls a parL, Lhe less lL ls lLs own whole). When we say, for example, LhaL an elemenL (such as hellum) ls lnerL," we mean lL lnLensely reslsLs [olnlng wlLh oLher elemenLs Lo form compounds, lL reLalns lLs agency and reslsLs communlon-lL ls relaLlvely lnerL. 1hls ls a consLanL Lenslon, as lL were, across all domalns, and shows up ln everyLhlng from Lhe baLLle beLween self- preservaLlon and specles-preservaLlon, Lo Lhe confllcL beLween rlghLs (agency) and responslblllLles (communlons), lndlvlduallLy and membershlp, personhood and communlLy, coherence and correspondence, self-dlrecLed and oLher- dlrecLed, auLonomy and heLeronomy. . . . ln shorL, how can l be boLh my own wholeness and a parL of someLhlng larger, wlLhouL sacrlflclng one or Lhe oLher? (arL of Lhe answer, we wlll see, aL all sLages of evoluLlon, lncludlng Lhe human, lnvolves self-Lranscendence Lo new forms of agency and communlon LhaL lnLegraLe and lncorporaLe boLh parLners ln a supersesslon: noL [usL a wlJet whole-a horlzonLal expanslon-buL a Jeepet or blqbet whole-a verLlcal emergence-whlch ls lndeed why evoluLlon ls Lhe resulL of self-Lranscendence aL all levels," and why lL ls self-reallzaLlon Lhrough self- Lranscendence"-buL LhaL ls somewhaL ahead of Lhe sLory.) 1hls consLanL horlzonLal baLLle beLween agency and communlon exLends even Lo Lhe forms of potboloqy on any glven level, where too mocb oqeocy, Loo much lndlvlduallLy, leads Lo a severlng (represslon and allenaLlon) of Lhe rlch neLworks of communlon LhaL susLaln lndlvlduallLy ln Lhe flrsL place, and too mocb commooloo leads Lo a loss of lndlvldual lnLegrlLy, leads Lo fuslon wlLh oLhers, Lo lndlssoclaLlon, Lo a blurrlng of boundarles and a melLdown and loss of auLonomy. (And we wlll see LhaL Lhe Lyplcal male paLhology" Lends Lo be hyperagency, or fear of relaLlonshlp, llke Lhe lnerLness of hellum!, and Lhe Lyplcal female paLhology" Lends Lo be hypercommunlon, or fear of auLonomy-Lhe one leadlng Lo domlnaLlon, Lhe oLher Lo fuslon, and we wlll see how Lhls played lLself ouL ln Lhe paLrlarchy" and Lhe maLrlarchy.") lf Lhe horlzonLal baLLle ls beLween agency and communlon, Lhe consLanL verLlcal baLLle ls beLween self- Lranscendence and self-dlssoluLlon, Lhe Lendency Lo bulld up or Lo break down (and, of course, Lhese forces complexly lnLeracL wlLh agency and communlon on any glven level, for example, elLher Loo much agency or Loo much communlon can boLh lead Lo breakdown-as we wlll see, Lhls ls a consLanL problem ln human affalrs, where Lhe deslre Lo flnd a larger meanlng" ofLen leads Lo Loo much communlon or fuslon wlLh a greaLer cause," and Lhls fuslon ls mlsLaken for Lranscendence, whereas lL ls slmply loss of auLonomy and release from responslblllLy, whlch apparenLly ls Lhe aLLracLlon). now l have been glvlng mosLly examples from Lhe human domaln, buL Lhe polnL ls LhaL, ln slmpler forms, Lhese four forces are operaLlve ln even Lhe slmplesL of holons, because lL's LurLles all Lhe way down. Lvery holon ls acLually a holon wlLhln oLher holons LransflnlLely-LhaL ls, every holon ls slmoltooeoosly boLh a sobboloo (a parL of some oLher holon) and a sopetboloo (lLself conLalnlng holons). As a holon, lL musL preserve lLs own paLLern (agency over Llme), and lL musL reglsLer and reacL Lo lLs envlronmenL (lLs communlons ln space). lf lL does noL approprlaLely respond, lL ls erased: Loo much agency, or Loo much communlon, wlll desLroy lLs ldenLlfylng paLLern. 8ecause each holon ls also a superholon, Lhen when lL ls erased-when lL undergoes self-dlssoluLlon lnLo lLs subholons-lL Lends Lo follow Lhe same paLh down as lLs subholons followed up: cells break down lnLo molecules, whlch break down lnLo aLoms, whlch break lnLo parLlcles, whlch dlsappear lnLo LransflnlLe clouds of probablllsLlc bubbles wlLhln bubbles." . . . reserve or accommodaLe, Lranscend or dlssolve-Lhe four very dlfferenL pulls on each and every holon ln Lhe kosmos. 3. noloos emetqe. Cwlng Lo Lhe self-LranscendenL capaclLy of holons, new holons emerge. llrsL subaLomlc parLlcles, Lhen aLoms, Lhen molecules, Lhen polymers, Lhen cells, and so on. 1he emergenL holons are ln some sense novel, Lhey posses properLles and quallLles LhaL cannoL be sLrlcLly and LoLally deduced from Lhelr componenLs, and Lherefore Lhey, and Lhelr descrlpLlons, cannoL be reduced wlLhouL remalnder Lo Lhelr componenL parLs. Levels of organlzaLlon lnvolve onLologlcally new enLlLles beyond Lhe elemenLs from whlch Lhe self-organlzaLlon process proceeds. 1here ls no absoluLe deLermlnlsLlc level of descrlpLlon." 21 As PofsLadLer puLs lL, lL ls lmporLanL Lo reallze LhaL Lhe hlgh-level law cannoL be sLaLed ln Lhe vocabulary of Lhe low-level descrlpLlon"-and, he polnLs ouL, Lhls ls Lrue from gas parLlcles Lo blologlcal speclaLlon, from compuLer programs Lo unA repllcaLlon, from muslcal scores Lo llngulsLlc rules. 22 Lmergence also means LhaL loJetetmloocy (and one of lLs correlaLes, degrees of freedom) ls sewn lnLo Lhe very fabrlc of Lhe unlverse, slnce oopteceJeoteJ emergence means ooJetetmloeJ by Lhe pasL (alLhough pockeLs of Lhe unlverse can regularly collapse ln a deLermlnlsLlc fashlon, as ln classlcal mechanlcs). Polons, LhaL ls, are fundamenLally lndeLermlnaLe ln some aspecLs (preclsely because Lhey are fundamenLally self-Lranscendlng). As Laszlo summarlzes Lhe avallable evldence, 1he selecLlon from among Lhe seL of dynamlcally funcLlonal alLernaLlve sLeady sLaLes ls noL predeLermlned. 1he new sLaLe ls declded nelLher by lnlLlal condlLlons ln Lhe sysLem nor by changes ln Lhe crlLlcal values of envlronmenLal parameLers, when a dynamlc sysLem ls fundamenLally desLablllzed lL acLs lndeLermlnaLely." 23 lL now seems vlrLually cerLaln LhaL deLermlnlsm arlses only as a llmlLlng case where a holon's capaclLy for self- Lranscendence approaches zero, or when lLs own self-Lranscendence hands Lhe locus of lndeLermlnacy Lo a hlgher holon (we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls lmporLanL Loplc below). Lmergence ls nelLher a rare nor an lsolaLed phenomenon. As varela, 1hompson, and 8osch summarlze Lhe avallable evldence: lL ls clear LhaL emergenL properLles have been found across all domalns-vorLlces and lasers, chemlcal osclllaLlons, geneLlc neLworks, developmenLal paLLerns, populaLlon geneLlcs, lmmune neLworks, ecology, and geophyslcs. WhaL all Lhese dlverse phenomena have ln common ls LhaL ln each case a neLwork glves rlse Lo new properLles. . . . 1he emergence of global paLLerns or conflguraLlons ln sysLems of lnLeracLlng elemenLs ls nelLher an oddlLy of lsolaLed cases nor unlque Lo [speclal] sysLems. ln facL, lL seems dlfflculL for any densely connecLed aggregaLe Lo escape emergenL properLles." 24 As LrnsL Mayr puL lL ln hls exhausLlve work 1be Ctowtb of 8loloqlcol 1booqbt: SysLems almosL always have Lhe pecullarlLy LhaL Lhe characLerlsLlcs of Lhe whole cannoL (noL even ln Lheory) be deduced from Lhe mosL compleLe knowledge of Lhe componenLs, Laken separaLely or ln oLher parLlal comblnaLlons. 1hls appearance of new characLerlsLlcs ln wholes has been deslgnaLed as emetqeoce. Lmergence has ofLen been lnvoked ln aLLempLs Lo explaln such dlfflculL phenomena as llfe, mlnd, and consclousness. AcLually, emergence ls equally characLerlsLlc of lnorganlc sysLems. . . . Such emergence ls qulLe unlversal and, as opper sald, We llve ln a unlverse of emergenL novelLy." 23 LeL me noLe ln passlng LhaL Lhls means oll sclences are fundamenLally tecoosttoctlve scleoces. 1haL ls, we never know, and never can know, exacLly whaL any holon wlll do Lomorrow (we mlghL know broad ouLllnes and probablllLles, based on post observaLlons, buL self-LranscendenL emergence always means, Lo some degree: surprlse!). We have Lo walL and see, and from LhaL, afLer Lhe facL, we tecoosttoct a knowledge sysLem. 26 nowevet, when a holon's self-Lranscendence approaches zero (when lLs creaLlvlLy ls uLLerly mlnlmal), Lhen Lhe tecoosttoctlve scleoces collapse lnLo Lhe pteJlctlve scleoces. PlsLorlcally, Lhe emplrlcal sclences goL Lhelr sLarL by sLudylng preclsely Lhose holons LhaL show mlnlmal creaLlvlLy. ln facL, Lhey baslcally sLudled noLhlng buL a bunch of tocks ln moLlon (mass movlng Lhrough space over Llme), and Lhus Lhey mlsLook Lhe naLure of sclence Lo be essenLlally predlcLlve. l mean no offense Lo rocks, buL by Laklng some of Lhe dumbesL holons ln exlsLence and maklng Lhelr sLudy Lhe sLudy of really real reallLy," Lhese physlcal sclences, we have seen, were largely responslble for Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo Lhe cosmos, for Lhe reducLlon of Lhe CreaL Polarchy of 8elng Lo Lhe dumbesL creaLures on Cod's green LarLh, and for Lhe levellng of a mulLldlmenslonal reallLy Lo a flaL and faded landscape JefloeJ by a mlolmom of creaLlvlLy (and Lhus moxlmom of predlcLlve power). 27 lL would Lake such a Lurn of evenLs as Pelsenberg's uncerLalnLy prlnclple Lo remlnd us LhaL even Lhe consLlLuenLs of rocks are nelLher as predlcLable nor as dumb as Lhese sllly reducLlonlsms. ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe ldeal" of knowledge as predlcLlve power would ruln vlrLually every fleld lL was applled Lo (lncludlng rocks), because lLs very meLhods would erase any creaLlvlLy lL would flnd, Lhus eraslng preclsely whaL was novel, slgnlflcanL, valuable, meanlngful. . . . 4. noloos emetqe bolotcblcolly. 1haL ls, as a serles of lncreaslng whole/parLs. Crganlsms conLaln cells, buL noL vlce versa, cells conLaln molecules, buL noL vlce versa, molecules conLaln aLoms, buL noL vlce versa. And lL ls LhaL oot vlce vetso, aL eocb sLage, LhaL consLlLuLes unavoldable asymmeLry and nesLed hlerarchy (holarchy). Lach deeper or hlgher holon embraces lLs [unlor predecessors and Lhen oJJs lLs own new and more encompasslng paLLern or wholeness-Lhe new code or canon or morphlc fleld or agency LhaL wlll deflne Lhls as a whole and noL merely a heap (as ArlsLoLle clearly spoLLed). 1hls ls WhlLehead's famous dlcLum: 1he many become one and are lncreased by one." Laszlo commenLs: 1he emplrlcal evldence for Lhls process ls lndlspuLable. ulverse aLomlc elemenLs converge ln molecular aggregaLes, speclflc molecules converge ln crysLals and organlc macromolecules, Lhe laLLer converge ln cells and Lhe subcellular bulldlng blocks of llfe, slngle-celled organlsms converge ln mulLl-cellular specles, and specles of Lhe wldesL varleLy converge ln ecologles. 28 8erLalanffy puL lL very blunLly: 8eallLy, ln Lhe modern concepLlon, appears as a Lremendous hlerarchlcal order of organlzed enLlLles, leadlng, ln a superposlLlon of many levels, from physlcal and chemlcal Lo blologlcal and soclologlcal sysLems. Such hlerarchlcal sLrucLure and comblnaLlon lnLo sysLems of ever hlgher order, ls characLerlsLlc of reallLy as a whole and ls of fundamenLal lmporLance especlally ln blology, psychology and soclology." 29 Llkewlse, Ldward ColdsmlLh's 1be woy: Ao coloqlcol wotlJ-vlew, an explanaLlon of Lhe new paradlgm," summarlzes lL Lhus: Lcology explalns evenLs ln Lerms of Lhelr role wlLhln Lhe spaLlo-Lemporal Calan hlerarchy." 30 And even 8uperL Sheldrake's Lheory of morphlc flelds-whlch ls consldered exLremely lnnovaLlve and very darlng-does noL evade Lhe obvlous, as Sheldrake concludes: 1hus Lhe morphogeneLlc flelds, llke morphlc unlLs Lhemselves, are essenLlally hlerarchlcal ln Lhelr organlzaLlon." 31 lranclsco varela, whose research ln Lhe auLonomous naLure of holonlc cognlLlon ls a cornersLone of Lhe new blology" (see LeneL 2a), polnLs ouL LhaL lL seems Lo be a general reflecLlon of Lhe rlchness of naLural sysLems LhaL lndlcaLlon can be lLeraLed Lo produce a hlerarchy of levels. 1he cholce of conslderlng Lhe level above or below corresponds Lo a cholce of LreaLlng Lhe glven sysLem as auLonomous or consLralned" 32 -LhaL ls, every holon ls boLh a whole and a parL, and can be consldered ln Lerms of lLs auLonomy (agency) or ln Lerms of lLs belng consLralned by oLher holons (ln communlon), boLh vlews belng correcL (buL parLlal). vlrLually all deep ecologlsLs and ecofemlnlsLs re[ecL Lhe noLlon of holarchy, for raLher confused reasons, lL seems Lo me. lrom whaL l can Lell, Lhey seem Lo Lhlnk LhaL hlerarchy and aLomlsm are bad," and LhaL Lhelr whollsm" ls Lhe opposlLe of boLh. 8uL no less Lhan Lhe paLron salnL of deep ecology, Arne naess, clearly polnLs ouL LhaL whollsm" and aLomlsm" are acLually Lwo sldes of Lhe same problem, and LhaL Lhe cote fot botb ls hlerarchy. All reallLy, he polnLs ouL, conslsLs of whaL he calls subordlnaLe wholes" or subordlnaLe gesLalLs"-LhaL ls, holons. We have Lherefore," he says, a complex realm of gesLalLs, ln a vasL hlerarchy. We can Lherefore speak of lower- and hlgher-order gesLalLs." 33 lurLher, naess polnLs ouL, Lhls hlerarchlc concepLlon ls necessary Lo counLeracL botb whollsm (meanlng an emphasls on [usL wholes) ooJ aLomlsm ([usL parLs), because gesLalLs are holons, Lhey are botb wholes and parLs, arranged ln a hlerarchlc order of hlgher and lower. As he puLs lL, 1hls Lermlnology-a vasL hlerarchy of lower- and hlgher-order gesLalLs-ls more useful Lhan speaklng abouL wholes and hollsm, because lL lnduces people Lo Lhlnk more sLrenuously abouL Lhe relaLlons beLween wholes and parLs. lL [also] faclllLaLes Lhe emanclpaLlon from sLrong aLomlsLlc or mechanlsLlc Lrends ln analyLlcal LhoughL." 34 Plerarchy, ln shorL, ls for naess Lhe anLldoLe boLh Lo aLomlsm and whollsm (exLreme heLerarchy). l don'L know why hls followers have such a dlfflculL Llme grasplng hls noLlon. erhaps lL ls, as l suggesLed earller, LhaL Lhey are ln such reacLlon Lo paLhologlcal hlerarchles LhaL Lhey Loss Lhe baby ouL wlLh Lhe baLhwaLer. l Lhlnk Lhls ls very undersLandable, because ln some early verslons of hlerarchy, Lhe concepLlon was raLher rlgld and fasclsL," and resulLed, no doubL, from whaL we have called paLhologlcal agency. 1he polnL, of course, ls Lo Lease aparL paLhologlcal hlerarchles-where one holon usurps lLs poslLlon ln Lhe LoLallLy-from normal holarchles ln general, whlch express Lhe naLural lnLerrelaLlons beLween holons LhaL are always boLh parLs and wholes ln horlzonLal and verLlcal relaLlonshlps. As we saw earller, boLh paLhologlcal hlerarchles and paLhologlcal heLerarchles do exlsL and need Lo be addressed os potboloqles, buL LhaL does noL damn Lhe exlsLence of normal heLerarchles and normal hlerarchles Lhemselves, boLh of whlch are necessary for wholes and parLs Lo coexlsL. !anLsch expresses Lhe more recenL and balanced undersLandlng: LvoluLlon [appears] as a mulLllevel reallLy ln whlch Lhe evoluLlonary chaln of auLopoleLlc levels of exlsLence appear ln hlerarchlc order. Lach level lncludes all lower levels-Lhere are sysLems wlLhln sysLems wlLhln sysLems . . . wlLhln Lhe LoLal sysLem ln quesLlon. Powever, lL ls essenLlal LhaL Lhls hlerarchy ls noL a conLrol hlerarchy ln whlch lnformaLlon sLreams upward and orders are handed from Lhe Lop down. Lach level malnLalns a cerLaln [relaLlve] auLonomy and llves lLs proper exlsLence ln horlzonLal relaLlons [heLerarchy] wlLh lLs speclflc envlronmenL. [lor example:] 1he organelles wlLhln our cells go abouL Lhelr buslness of energy exchange ln an auLonomous way and malnLaln Lhelr horlzonLal relaLlonshlps wlLhln Lhe framework of Lhe world-wlde Cala sysLem. 33 lf Lhe deep ecologlsLs and ecofemlnlsLs would follow naess's lead, Lhe whole dlscusslon could move forward more smooLhly. As lL ls now, Lhey are ofLen Lhe defenders of flaLland whollsm" and exLreme heLerarchy, whlch lndeed ls Lhe opposlLe of aLomlsm: Lwo sldes of Lhe same problem. 3. ocb emetqeot boloo ttoosceoJs bot locloJes lts pteJecessot(s). Lach newly emergenL holon, as we have seen, lncludes lLs precedlng holons and Lhen adds lLs own new and deflnlng paLLern or form or wholeness (lLs new canon or code or morphlc fleld). ln oLher words, lL ptesetves Lhe prevlous holons Lhemselves buL oeqotes Lhelr separaLeness or lsolaLedness or aloneness. lL preserves Lhelr belng buL negaLes Lhelr parLlallLy or excluslveness. 1o supersede," sald Pegel, ls aL once Lo preserve and Lo negaLe." 36 AnoLher way Lo express Lhls ls: all of Lhe lower ls ln Lhe hlgher, buL noL all of Lhe hlgher ls ln Lhe lower. lor example, hydrogen aLoms are ln a waLer molecule, buL Lhe waLer molecule ls noL ln Lhe aLoms (we mlghL say Lhe waLer molecule pervades" or permeaLes" Lhe aLoms buL ls noL acLually ln Lhem, [usL as all of a word ls ln a senLence buL noL all of Lhe senLence ls ln a word). varela polnLs ouL LhaL aL a glven level of Lhe hlerarchy, a parLlcular sysLem can be seen as an ootslJe Lo sysLems below lL, and as an loslJe Lo sysLems above lL, Lhus Lhe sLaLus of a glven sysLem changes as one passes Lhrough lLs level ln elLher Lhe upward or Lhe downward dlrecLlon." 37 1hls ls slmply anoLher example of asymmeLry, and lL means LhaL all holons are noL equally lnLernal Lo all oLher holons (some have a relaLlon of parLlal exLernalness marked by Lhe emergence or Lhe symmeLry break): all of Lhe lower ls ln Lhe hlgher, buL noL all of Lhe hlgher ls ln Lhe lower. nobel laureaLe 8oger Sperry puLs lL very sLralghLforwardly: lL ls lmporLanL Lo remember ln Lhls connecLlon LhaL all of Lhe slmpler, more prlmlLlve, elemenLal forces remaln presenL and operaLlve, none has been canceled. 1hese lower-level forces and properLles, however, have been superseded ln successlve sLeps, encompassed or enveloped as lL were, by Lhose forces of lncreaslngly complex organlzaLlonal enLlLles." 38 1he hlgher embraces Lhe lower, as lL were, so LhaL all developmenL ls envelopmenL. 8uL Lhere ls an lmporLanL dlsLlncLlon LhaL needs Lo be emphaslzed, whlch l lndlcaLed earller by saylng LhaL supersesslon preserves Lhe belng buL negaLes Lhe parLlallLy" (or preserves and negaLes"). A slmple example wlll sufflce: before Pawall became a sLaLe, lL was lLs own naLlon, and as a naLlon lL had all Lhe prerogaLlves of soverelgnLy: lL could declare war, prlnL lLs own money, conscrlpL an army, and so forLh. 1hese were all parLs of lLs reglme or code or cannon-lLs self-preservaLlon or oqeocy as a whole, as an lndlvldual naLlon. When Pawall became an Amerlcan sLaLe, all of lLs baslc properLy, land, and fundamenLal feaLures became parL of Lhe u.S.A. All of Lhese baslc sLrucLures were preserved ln Lhe new unlon, none of Lhem were desLroyed or harmed ln Lhe leasL. WhaL was noL preserved, however, whaL was losL and acLually negaLed, was Pawall's capaclLy Lo be lLs own naLlon, Lo declare war, prlnL lLs own money, and so on. Pawall's lsolaLed and auLonomous reglme was subsumed ln Lhe hlgher reglme of Lhe unlLed SLaLes (where lL reLalned some relaLlvely auLonomous rlghLs as a sLaLe). 1hls ls whaL l mean when l say Lranscends buL lncludes" or negaLes and preserves"-all Lhe boslc sttoctotes and funcLlons are preserved and Laken up ln a larger ldenLlLy, buL all Lhe excloslvlty sLrucLures and funcLlons LhaL exlsLed because of lsolaLlon, seL-aparLness, parLlalness, excluslveness, separaLlve agency-Lhese are slmply dropped and replaced wlLh a deeper agency LhaL reaches a wlder communlon. 39 1hls leads Lo a general phenomenon observed aL all levels of hollsLlc organlzaLlon: ln normal holarchles, Lhe new and senlor paLLern or wholeness can Lo some degree llmlt tbe loJetetmloocy (organlze Lhe freedom) of lLs [unlor holons (preclsely because lL Lranscends buL lncludes Lhem, l.e., vla downward causaLlon," or more generally, downward lnfluence"). 8uperL Sheldrake ls worLh quoLlng aL lengLh, Lo show exacLly whaL ls lnvolved, and how wldespread and cruclal Lhe phenomenon ls: ln llvlng organlsms, as ln Lhe chemlcal realm, Lhe morphogeneLlc flelds [holons] are hlerarchlcally organlzed: Lhose of organelles-for example Lhe cell nucleus, Lhe mlLochondrla and chloroplasLs-acL by orderlng physlco-chemlcal processes wlLhln Lhem, Lhese flelds are sub[ecL Lo Lhe hlgher-level flelds of cells, Lhe flelds of cells Lo Lhose of Llssues, Lhose of Llssues Lo Lhose of organs, and of organs Lo Lhe morphogeneLlc fleld of Lhe organlsm as a whole. At eocb level tbe flelJs wotk by otJetloq ptocesses wblcb woolJ otbetwlse be loJetetmloote. lor example, ln Lhe case of free aLoms, elecLronlc evenLs Lake place wlLh Lhe probablllLles glven by Lhe unmodlfled probablllLy sLrucLures of Lhe aLomlc morphogeneLlc flelds. 8uL when Lhe aLoms come under Lhe lnfluence of Lhe hlgher-level morphogeneLlc fleld of a molecule, Lhese probablllLles are modlfled ln such a way LhaL Lhe probablllLy of evenLs leadlng Loward Lhe acLuallzaLlon of Lhe flnal form are enhanced, whlle Lhe probablllLy of oLher evenLs ls dlmlnlshed. 1hus Lhe morphogeneLlc flelds of molecules testtlct Lhe posslble number of aLomlc conflguraLlons whlch would be expecLed on Lhe basls of calculaLlons whlch sLarL from Lhe probablllLy sLrucLures of free aLoms. And Lhls ls whaL ls found ln facL, ln Lhe case of proLeln foldlng, for example, Lhe rapldlLy of Lhe process lndlcaLes LhaL Lhe sysLem does noL explore" Lhe counLless conflguraLlons ln whlch Lhe aLoms could concelvably be arranged. Slmllarly, Lhe morphogeneLlc flelds of crysLals resLrlcL Lhe large number of posslble arrangemenLs whlch would be permlLLed by Lhe probablllLy sLrucLures of Lhelr consLlLuenL molecules. AL Lhe cellular level Lhe morphogeneLlc fleld orders Lhe crysLalllzaLlon of mlcroLubules and oLher processes whlch are necessary for Lhe coordlnaLlon of cell dlvlslon. 8uL Lhe planes ln whlch Lhe cells dlvlde may be lndeLermlnaLe ln Lhe absence of a hlgher-level fleld: for lnsLance, ln planL wound-calluses Lhe cells prollferaLe more or less randomly Lo produce a chaoLlc mass. WlLhln organlzed Llssue, on Lhe oLher hand, one of Lhe funcLlons of Lhe Llssue's morphogeneLlc fleld may be Lo lmpose a paLLern on Lhe planes of cell dlvlslon, and Lhus conLrol Lhe way ln whlch Lhe Llssue as a whole grows. 1hen Lhe developmenL of Llssues lLself ls lnherenLly lndeLermlnaLe ln many respecLs, as revealed when Lhey are arLlflclally lsolaLed and grown ln Llssue culLure, under normal condlLlons Lhls lndeLermlnacy ls resLrlcLed by Lhe hlgher-level fleld of Lhe organ. lndeed aL each level ln blologlcal sysLems, as ln chemlcal sysLems, Lhe morphlc unlLs ln lsolaLlon behave more lndeLermlnaLely Lhan Lhey do when Lhey are parL of a hlgher-level morphlc unlL. 1he hlgher-level morphogeneLlc fleld resLrlcLs and paLLerns Lhelr lnLrlnslc lndeLermlnlsm. 40 1hls brlngs us dlrecLly Lo our slxLh ma[or LeneL. 6. 1be lowet sets tbe posslbllltles of tbe blqbet, tbe blqbet sets tbe ptobobllltles of tbe lowet. We [usL saw LhaL as a hlgher level of creaLlve novelLy emerges, lL ln many ways goes beyond (buL lncludes) Lhe glvens of Lhe prevlous level. Powever, even Lhough a hlgher level goes beyond" a lower level, lL does noL vlolote Lhe laws or Lhe paLLerns of Lhe lower level. lL cannoL be reduced Lo Lhe lower level, lL cannoL be deLermlned by Lhe lower level, buL nelLher can lL lqoote Lhe lower level. My body follows Lhe laws of gravlLy, my mlnd follows oLher laws, such as Lhose of symbollc communlcaLlon and llngulsLlc synLax, buL lf my body falls off a cllff, my mlnd goes wlLh lL. 1hls ls whaL ls meanL by saylng LhaL a lower seLs Lhe posslblllLles, or Lhe large framework, wlLhln whlch Lhe hlgher wlll have Lo operaLe, buL Lo whlch lL ls noL conflned. 1o use olanyl's example, noLhlng ln Lhe laws governlng physlcal parLlcles can predlcL Lhe emergence of a wrlsLwaLch, buL noLhlng ln Lhe wrlsLwaLch vlolaLes Lhe laws of physlcs. As Laszlo nlcely summarlzes lL for any level: 1he processes of cosmlc evoluLlon brlng forLh a varleLy of maLLer-energy sysLems, Lhese sysLems deflne Lhe range of consLralnLs and Lhe scope of posslblllLles wlLhln whlch sysLems on hlgher levels can evolve. SysLems on Lhe lower level clusLers can permlL Lhe evoluLlon, buL can never deLermlne Lhe naLure, of sysLems on hlgher-level clusLers. 1he evoluLlon of physlcal maLLer-energy sysLems seLs Lhe sLage and speclfles Lhe rules of Lhe game for Lhe evoluLlon of blologlcal specles, and blologlcal evoluLlon seLs Lhe sLage and speclfles Lhe rules of Lhe game for Lhe evoluLlon of socloculLural sysLems. 41 As for Lhe hlgher resLrlcLlng Lhe probablllLles of Lhe lower, we already heard Sheldrake's summary of Lhe exLenslve evldence, whlch he concludes ln Lhls way: AL every level, Lhe flelds of Lhe holons are probablllsLlc, and Lhe maLerlal processes wlLhln Lhe holon are somewhaL random or lndeLermlnaLe. Plgher-level flelds may acL upon Lhe flelds of lower-level holons ln such a way LhaL Lhelr probablllLy sLrucLures are modlfled. 1hls can be LhoughL of ln Lerms of a resLrlcLlon of Lhelr lndeLermlnlsm: ouL of Lhe many posslble paLLerns of evenLs LhaL could have happened, some now become much more llkely Lo happen as a resulL of Lhe order lmposed by Lhe hlgher-level fleld. 1hls fleld organlzes and paLLerns Lhe lndeLermlnlsm LhaL would be shown by Lhe lower-level holons ln lsolaLlon. 42 now, a level" ln a holarchy ls esLabllshed by several ob[ecLlve crlLerla: by a quallLaLlve emergence (as explalned by opper), by asymmeLry (or symmeLry breaks," as explalned by rlgoglne and !anLsch), by an lncluslonary prlnclple (Lhe hlgher lncludes Lhe lower, buL noL vlce versa, as explalned by ArlsLoLle), by a developmenLal loglc (Lhe hlgher negaLes and preserves a lower, buL noL vlce versa, as explalned by Pegel), by a chronologlcal lndlcaLor (Lhe hlgher chronologlcally comes afLer Lhe lower, buL all LhaL ls laLer ls noL hlgher, as explalned by SalnL Cregory). uesplLe Lhe clarlLy of Lhe concepL of levels (and Lhe meanlng of hlgher" and lower"), some crlLlcs have malnLalned LhaL Lhe concepL lLself cannoL be malnLalned, because of Lhe purely arblLrary naLure of Lhe number of levels ln any glven holon. lL ls deflnlLely Lrue LhaL Lhe number of levels ln any holon has an elemenL of arblLrarlness Lo lL, slmply because Lhere ls no upper or lower llmlL Lo a manlfesL holarchy and Lherefore no absoluLe referenL. lor example, when lL was LhoughL LhaL aLoms were Lhe ulLlmaLe holons, Lhen a slmple aLom had one level, a waLer molecule had Lwo levels, an lce crysLal had Lhree levels, and so on. When lL was Lhen LhoughL LhaL proLons, neuLrons, and elecLrons were Lhe ulLlmaLe holons, Lhen Lhey had one level, a nucleus had Lwo levels, an aLom had Lhree levels, and so forLh. 8uL LhaL doesn'L change Lhe telotlve placemenL of Lhe holons Lhemselves and Lhus doesn'L change ln Lhe leasL Lhe meanlng of hlgher and lower. Also noLlce LhaL we can counL as one level any Lruly emergenL quallLy, whlch means we can dlvlde and subdlvlde a serles ln any number of ways. 1o glve a crude analogy, Lake a Lhree-sLory house wlLh a sLalrway conslsLlng of LwenLy sLeps beLween each floor. We usually say Lhe house has Lhree maln levels ([usL as we refer Lo Lhe Lhree general realms of evoluLlon), buL we could also use Lhe sLalrs as Lhe scale and say Lhe house has slxLy levels or sLeps. Cbvlously Lhls ls somewhaL arblLrary. 1he level clalm ls slmply LhaL (1) Lhe exlsLence of floors and sLeps ls noL lLself purely arblLrary-Lhere are quanLa ln Lhe unlverse wlLh or wlLhouL Lhe presence of humans-and (2) ln maklng any comparlson, use Lhe same ruler, Lhus facLorlng ouL LhaL parLlcular arblLrarlness ([usL as we can measure Lhe LemperaLure of waLer wlLh any number of arblLrary scales, Celslus or lahrenhelL or whaLever, as long as we agree whlch Lo use). Whenever we refer Lo Lhe number of levels" ln a holon, Lhen, we are uslng a relaLlve scale conslsLenLly applled wlLhln Lhe parLlcular comparlson. WlLh LhaL ln mlnd, we can lnLroduce Lwo very lmporLanL deflnlLlons, flrsL clearly suggesLed by ArLhur koesLler. ln hls words: 7. 1be oombet of levels wblcb o bletotcby comptlses Jetetmloes wbetbet lt ls 'sbollow' ot 'Jeep', ooJ tbe oombet of boloos oo ooy qlveo level we sboll coll lts 'spoo.'" 43 lor Lhls example, leL us arblLrarlly asslgn aLoms a depLh of Lhree (Lhey conLaln as componenLs aL leasL Lwo oLher levels). We can lmaglne a Llme, early ln Lhe unlverse, when Lhere were only aLoms and noL yeL molecules. ALoms had a small depLh (3) buL an enormous span, sLreLchlng, we presume, LhroughouL Lhe exlsLenL unlverse and numberlng ln Lhe megazllllons (Lhus, depLh = 3, span = zllllons). When molecules flrsL emerged, Lhey had a greaLer depLh, a depLh of four, buL lnlLlally a very small span (presumably ln Lhe hundreds, or whaLever, and Lhen growlng rapldly). 1hls agaln recognlzes a cruclal dlsLlncLlon found ln any holarchy-Lhe verLlcal dlmenslon and Lhe horlzonLal dlmenslon. 1he greaLer Lhe verLlcal dlmenslon of a holon (Lhe more levels lL conLalns), Lhen Lhe qteotet Lhe Jeptb of LhaL holon, and Lhe more holons on LhaL level, Lhe wlJet lLs spoo. 1hls ls lmporLanL, because lL polnLs ouL LhaL lL ls noL merely populaLlon slze LhaL esLabllshes order of rlchness (or order of quallLaLlve emergence), buL raLher Jeptb. And we wlll see LhaL one of Lhe greaLesL confuslons ln general ecologlcal or new-paradlgm Lheorles (wheLher pop" or serlous") ls LhaL Lhey ofLen mlsLake greaL span for greaL depLh. lor whaL we wlll flnd ls LhaL: 8. ocb soccesslve level of evolotloo ptoJoces CkA1k Jeptb ooJ l55 spoo. 1he greaLer Lhe depLh of a holon, Lhe more precarlous ls lLs exlsLence, slnce lLs exlsLence depends also on Lhe exlsLence of a whole serles of oLher holons lnLernal Lo lL. And slnce Lhe lower holons are compooeots of Lhe hlgher, Lhere physlcally cannoL be more numbers of Lhe hlgher Lhan Lhere are numbers of componenLs. 1hus, for example, Lhe number of molecules ln Lhe unlverse wlll always be less Lhan Lhe number of aLoms ln Lhe unlverse. 1he number of cells ln Lhe unlverse wlll always be less Lhan Lhe number of molecules ln Lhe unlverse, and so on. lL slmply means Lhe number of wholes wlll always be less Lhan Lhe number of parLs, lndeflnlLely. 1hus, greaLer depLh always means less span, ln relaLlon Lo a holon's predecessor(s). Cf course, whaL we mlghL call LoLal span" lncreases-lf Lhere ls more of anyLhlng, Lhe sum LoLal of everyLhlng lncreases-buL slmple span, Lhe span of any glven Lype of holon, becomes less and less vls-a-vls lLs predecessor(s). (1hls ls why Lhe span of menLal holons ls much less Lhan Lhe span of llvlng holons, whlch ls much less Lhan Lhe span of maLerlal holons-Lhe so-called pyramld of developmenL.) We wlll reLurn Lo Lhls momenLarlly. 1hroughouL Lhls book l wlll be addlng whaL mlghL be called fundamenLal addlLlons" Lo Lhe LwenLy LeneLs. 1hese addlLlons are LeneLs LhaL seem cruclal Lo an undersLandlng of evoluLlon and Lhe kosmos, buL LeneLs LhaL, for reasons we wlll be lnvesLlgaLlng ln deLall, slmply cannoL be esLabllshed ln Lhe lL-language of lnsLrumenLal and ob[ecLlfylng naLurallsm (l.e., sysLems Lheory). wby Lhey cannoL be esLabllshed ln sysLems Lheory wlll form a large parL of Lhe dlscusslon abouL Lhe wrong half" of modern sysLems sclences. 1hese addlLlons do noL vlolaLe sysLems Lheory, Lhey slmply can flnd no place whaLsoever ln lLs LeneLs (Lhe sub[ecLlve world of l," for example, cannoL be capLured wlLhouL remalnder ln Lhe ob[ecLlvlsLlc language of lLs" and ob[ecLs" and processes", nor can Lhe collecLlve worlds of we" be capLured ln sysLems Lheory wlLhouL a reducLlon Lo LoLallLarlan prlnclples). As l sald, we wlll laLer reLurn Lo all of Lhls ln much deLall, and so for Lhe momenL we need only noLe our flrsL addlLlon: AJJltloo 1. 1be qteotet tbe Jeptb of o boloo, tbe qteotet lts Jeqtee of cooscloosoess. 1he specLrum of evoluLlon ls a specLrum of consclousness. And one can perhaps begln Lo see LhaL a splrlLual dlmenslon ls bullL lnLo Lhe very fabrlc, Lhe very Jeptb, of Lhe kosmos. 8uL Lhls addlLlon Lakes us a blL ahead of our sLory, and so leL me reLurn Lo Lhe more orLhodox accounL and plck up Lhe sLory aL LeneL 7, Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween depLh and span, or Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween verLlcal rlchness and horlzonLal reach. We have Lwo dlfferenL scales here: a verLlcal scale of deep versus shallow, and a horlzonLal scale of wlde versus narrow. Cne of Lhe dlfflculLles ln keeplng Lhese dlsLlncLlons ln mlnd ls LhaL, once we dlsavow reducLlonlsm, once we dlsavow Lhe flaLland approach Lo Lhe kosmos, Lhen LheoreLlcally we are no longer [usL playlng chess, whlch ls hard enough, we are now playlng Lhree-dlmenslonal chess, whlch ls exLremely compllcaLed! And l won'L even menLlon o- dlmenslonal chess! lor wherever developmenL proceeds, we musL, aL Lhe very leasL, dlsLlngulsh beLween depLh and span, noL only because Lhere are ob[ecLlve (real) correlaLes Lo Lhe dlsLlncLlon, buL because Lo fall Lo do so, even under Lhe gulse of belng hollsLlc," slmply relnLroduces a subLle form of reducLlonlsm, for everyLhlng ls Lhen compared merely ln Lerms of populaLlon spoo (blgger or smaller, wlder or narrower), and Lhus all Jeptb ls erased from exlsLence. As we wlll see ln Lhe nexL chapLer, many such LheorlsLs Lhen aLLempL Lo consLrucL hollsLlc sequences based only on slze. 1hey compleLely mlsLake greaL span for greaL depLh, because now Lhe only poolltotlve dlsLlncLlon Lhey possess ls acLually poootltotlve: Lhey only have one way Lo go-namely, LhaL blgger ls beLLer." And Lhus Lhelr hollsLlc sequences," because Lhey are based on spoo alone, are acLually ln Lhemselves teqtesslve, because evoluLlon ls oot blgger and beLLer, buL smaller and beLLer (greaLer depLh, less span). 1hese LheorlsLs, as we wlll see ln deLall, end up unknowlngly recommendlng pure regresslon as our salvaLlon. 44 Cne lasL polnL ln Lhls regard: oLher crlLlcs accepL Lhe Lerm depLh," buL sLrenuously ob[ecL Lo Lhe word helghL," agaln feellng, apparenLly, LhaL helghL" ls Lhe helghL of human arrogance. And yeL Lhey accepL depLh," Lhls belng, l suppose, Lhe depLh of human dafflness. Any way we sllce lL, depLh wlLhouL helghL ls [usL anoLher name for shallow. WlLh reference Lo Lhe verLlcal scale (whlch [usL as well could be any dlrecLlon we agree upon, l wlll use verLlcal), we can speak of helghL and depLh synonymously. 1he helghL of a holon and Lhe depLh of a holon refer Lo Lhe same Lhlng, Lhe (relaLlve) number of levels of oLher holons lnLernal Lo lL. PusLon SmlLh, however, makes Lhe lnLeresLlng observaLlon LhaL LradlLlonally belqbt was used when referrlng Lo Lhe kosmos (as ln hlgh Peaven") and Jeptb ln regard Lo lndlvlduals (as ln Lhe depLh of her soul"). 8uL l wlll use Lhe Lwo words lnLerchangeably, so LhaL Lhe verLlcal dlmenslon ls a scale of depLh/helghL versus shallow/flaL, and Lhe horlzonLal scale ls one of wldLh versus narrowness. We have, of course, on several occaslons already meL Lhese Lwo dlmenslons. Agency and communlon (or self- preservaLlon and self-accommodaLlon) refer Lo changes ln Lhe horlzonLal dlmenslon, self-Lranscendence and self- dlssoluLlon refer Lo changes ln Lhe verLlcal dlmenslon. So we can lnLroduce a few more slmple deflnlLlons: Changes ln Lhe horlzonLal dlmenslon l wlll call ttooslotloo, and changes ln Lhe verLlcal dlmenslon l wlll call ttoosfotmotloo. 1he agency (or reglme or code) of any glven holon ttooslotes Lhe world accordlng Lo Lhe Lerms of lLs code or reglme-lL wlll recognlze, or reglsLer, or respond Lo, only Lhose lLems LhaL flL lLs code. An elecLron, for example, wlll reglsLer numerous oLher physlcal forces, buL wlll noL reglsLer or respond Lo Lhe meanlng of llLeraLure, nor wlll lL respond Lo Lhe sexual advances of a rabblL. Polons, ln oLher words, do noL slmply reflecL a preglven world. 8aLher, accordlng Lo Lhelr capaclLy, Lhey selecL, organlze, glve form Lo, Lhe mulLlLude of sLlmull cascadlng around Lhem. 1helr responses never slmply correspond" Lo someLhlng ouL Lhere", Lhey teqlstet (and Lhus tespooJ to) only LhaL whlch flLs Lhe cobeteocy of Lhelr teqlme (or code or agency or deep sLrucLure). 1hls ls whaL varela means, for example, when he says holons are noL heLeronomous unlLs operaLlng by a loglc of correspondence," buL raLher relaLlvely auLonomous unlLs operaLlng by a loglc of coherence." Polons ttooslote Lhelr reallLy accordlng Lo Lhe paLLerns of Lhelr agency, Lhelr relaLlvely auLonomous and coherenL deep sLrucLures, and sLlmull LhaL don'L flL Lhe deep sLrucLure or reglme are slmply noL reglsLered and mlghL as well noL exlsL (ln facL, do noL exlsL, do noL dlsclose Lhemselves, for LhaL holon). ln ttoosfotmotloo, however, new forms of agency emerge, and Lhls means a wbole oew wotlJ of avallable sLlmull becomes accesslble Lo Lhe new and emergenL holon. 1he new holon can respond Lo deeper or hlgher worlds, because lLs LranslaLlon processes Lranscend and lnclude Lhose of lLs subholons. A deer, for example, wlll reglsLer and respond noL only Lo physlcal forces LhaL conLlnue Lo lmpacL lL, buL also Lo a whole range of blologlcal forces, from hunger Lo paln Lo sexual drlve, LhaL slmply make no lmpresslon on lLs consLlLuenL aLoms. 1o Lhe lndlvldual aLom, Lhese new forces are all oLherworldly"-llLerally ouL of Lhls world, or noL ln lts world. 1hus, ln ttoosfotmotloo (or self-Lranscendence), whole new worlds of LranslaLlon dlsclose Lhemselves. 1hese new worlds" are noL physlcally locaLed someplace else, Lhey exlsL slmply as a Jeepet petceptloo (or deeper reglsLraLlon) of Lhe avallable sLlmull ln tbls wotlJ. 1hey appear Lo be-and mlghL as well be-oLher worlds" Lo Lhe [unlor holons, buL Lhese oLher worlds" dlsclose Lhemselves-Lhey become tbls wotlJly-vla LransformaLlon and self-Lranscendence. We wlll see, ln laLer chapLers, LhaL developmenL ls a consLanL converslon of oLherworldly" lnLo Lhls worldly" vla a deepenlng of percepLlon broughL abouL by emergenL evoluLlon and LransformaLlon. CreaLer depLh brlngs oLher worlds lnLo Lhls world, consLanLly. . . . A holon's reglme or deep sLrucLure, Lhen, governs Lhe range of lLs posslble LranslaLlons, governs Lhe types of worlds LhaL lL coo respond Lo. 1hls ls whaL acLually allows a holon's sLablllLy, lLs relaLlve auLonomy or coherence. We noLed LhaL any sLable holon ls sLable by vlrLue of lLs ldenLlfylng paLLern-lLs relaLlvely auLonomous code, canon, reglme, enLelechy, morphlc unlL-whaL l have been calllng lLs Jeep sttoctote. 1he human body, for example, has 208 bones, 1 hearL, 2 lungs, and so forLh, wherever lL appears. 8uL whaL we do wlLh Lhe human body-lLs varlous modes of play, work, sex, and so on-varles from culLure Lo culLure. 1hese varlaLlons wlLhln Lhe deep sLrucLure l call sotfoce sttoctotes. koesLler refers Lo Lhls dlfference as flxed codes and flexlble sLraLegles"-LhaL ls, relaLlvely sLable deep sLrucLures and changlng surface sLrucLures wlLhln Lhe baslc guldellnes (or baslc llmlLlng prlnclples) of Lhe deep sLrucLure. And so we can say: ttooslotloo ls a change ln sotfoce sttoctotes (horlzonLal"), whereas ttoosfotmotloo ls a change ln Jeep sttoctotes (verLlcal"). (1he relaLlon beLween deep sLrucLures and surface sLrucLures l call LranscrlpLlon," whlch we wlll dlscuss laLer, and for now, ln a noLe.) 43 1hls ls yeL anoLher reason why evoluLlon cannoL be explalned merely ln Lerms of horlzonLal addlLlons-LhaL ls, cannoL be explalned merely ln Lerms of LranslaLlon, of horlzonLal changes ln agency and communlon. When Lhe reglmes or deep sLrucLures of hydrogen and oxygen are broughL LogeLher ln a cerLaln fashlon, a waLer molecule emerges wlLh a new reglme or deep sLrucLure, a reglme LhaL lncorporaLes Lhe separaLe reglmes of Lhe aLoms lnLo a slngle morphlc unlL," a holon wlLh a new deep sLrucLure LhaL subsumes lLs predecessors. 1hls ls a verLlcal ttoosfotmotloo, or cbooqe lo Jeep sttoctote, lL ls oot Lhe mere addlLlon of more and more aLoms, whlch would slmply produce a mess, noL a molecule, a heap, noL a whole. 1ranslaLlon shuffles parLs, LransformaLlon produces wholes. 46 We can use our slmple analogy of Lhe Lhree-sLory bulldlng Lo summarlze all of Lhese deflnlLlons. Lach of Lhe Lhree maln floors ls a deep sLrucLure, Lhe furnlLure, chalrs, and Lables on each floor are Lhe surface sLrucLures. 8earranglng Lhe furnlLure on any glven floor ls LranslaLlon, changlng floors ls LransformaLlon. (And Lhe relaLlon of Lhe furnlLure Lo each floor ls LranscrlpLlon.) 1he polnL, Lhen, ls LhaL evoluLlon ls flrsL and foremosL a serles of LransformaLlons (self-reallzaLlon Lhrough self- Lranscendence"). 1ransformaLlon ls how you geL levels ln Lhe flrsL place. And each ma[or LransformaLlon produces greaLer depLh, and less span, ln relaLlon Lo lLs prevlous level(s), ln relaLlon Lo lLs predecessors. 9. uesttoy ooy type of boloo, ooJ yoo wlll Jesttoy oll of tbe boloos obove lt ooJ oooe of tbe boloos below lt. 1here ls an enormous amounL of confuslon ln Lhe llLeraLure as Lo how Lo deLermlne wheLher a glven holon ls hlgher" or lower" ln Lhe developmenLal sequence-noL Lo menLlon Lhe large numbers of crlLlcs who deny hlgher and lower alLogeLher. 8uL we can acLually locaLe Lhe level of a holon ln any evoluLlonary or hollsLlc sequence very slmply, by asklng ourselves, as a Lype of LhoughL experlmenL, WhaL oLher Lypes of holons would be desLroyed lf we desLroyed Lhls Lype of holon?" lor example, Lake Lhe hollsLlc sequence: subaLomlc parLlcles, aLoms, molecules, cells. Lverybody agrees LhaL LhaL ls lndeed a hollsLlc sequence-each member lncludes lLs predecessor(s) buL noL vlce versa, and Lhus each successlve member ls lndeed more encompasslng (or more hollsLlc). 8uL noLlce whaL LhaL also unavoldably means: lf we desLroyed, for example, all of Lhe molecules ln Lhe unlverse, we would also desLroy all of Lhe cells ln Lhe unlverse (all of Lhe holons obove molecules ln Lhe sequence), buL aLoms and subaLomlc parLlcles would or could sLlll exlsL (none of Lhe lowet holons would have Lo cease exlsLence). ln oLher words, desLroy any Lype of holon, and LhaL also desLroys all Lhe blqbet holons ln Lhe sequence, because Lhose hlgher wholes depend upon Lhe lower as consLlLuenL parLs. Molecules cannoL exlsL wlLhouL aLoms, aLoms can exlsL wlLhouL molecules. 1here ls noLhlng arblLrary ln Lhls arrangemenL, lL ls noL Lhe producL of a parLlcular human value [udgmenL." lL ls Lrue physlcally, and loglcally, and chronologlcally as well. (ALoms and molecules exlsLed perfecLly well on Lhelr own before Lhe emergence of any cells. uesLroy every cell ln Lhe unlverse, and everyLhlng LhaL came afLer lL-planLs, anlmals, socleLles-wlll llkewlse be desLroyed, buL noLhlng LhaL came before lL-subaLomlc parLlcles, aLoms, molecules, polymers.) 1hls allows us Lo easlly deLermlne whaL ls lower, and whaL ls hlgher, ln any hollsLlc sequence: desLroy Lhe parLlcular holon, and everyLhlng else LhaL ls also desLroyed ls hlgher, Lhose holons noL desLroyed are lower. 47 1hls ls Lrue for any developmenLal sequence, and ls parLlally responslble for Lhe reLreaL" we see when holons dlssolve: Lhey regress Lo Lhe oext lower level, whereas lf any lower level ls desLroyed, all Lhe hlgher levels auLomaLlcally go wlLh lL. 1hls also polnLs up very clearly why Lhere ls a verLlcal and noL [usL a horlzonLal dlmenslon Lo evoluLlon, and shows why hlgher" and lower" are oot arblLrary. 48 ln Lhe nexL chapLer, we wlll apply Lhls prlnclple Lo Lhe work of several LheorlsLs who are aLLempLlng Lo consLrucL hollsLlc sequences." 1hese LheorlsLs, ln order Lo help men and women more accuraLely poslLlon Lhemselves ln Lhe larger unlverse, are aLLempLlng Lo flnd a more hollsLlc" reallLy ln whlch humans can slLuaLe Lhelr communlons-an alLogeLher commendable Lask. 8uL because so many of Lhese LheorlsLs confuse greaL span wlLh greaL depLh, Lhey end up creaLlng hollsLlc sequences" LhaL are ln facL regresslve, LhaL sllde down Lhe pyramld of greaLer depLh / less span and land us ln Lhe shallower end of Lhe kosmos. As we wlll see, Lhe careful appllcaLlon of Lhls LhoughL experlmenL allows us Lo deLermlne lf Lhelr sequences are really hollsLlc (or merely regresslve), and allows us Lo offer an alLernaLlve blg plcLure" ln whlch men and women can slLuaLe Lhemselves ln a Lruly hollsLlc fashlon. ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhls LhoughL experlmenL allows us Lo lnLroduce anoLher lmporLanL deflnlLlon, Lhe dlfference beLween fooJomeotol and slqolflcoot. lor whaL we wlll flnd ls LhaL Lhe more fundamenLal a holon ls, Lhe less slgnlflcanL lL ls, and vlce versa. 1haL ls: 1he less Jeptb a holon has, Lhe mote fooJomeotol lL ls Lo Lhe kosmos, because lL ls a compooeot of so many oLher holons. ALoms, for example, are very fundamenLal, relaLlvely speaklng, because molecules and cells and organlsms all depend upon Lhem. 1he more fundamenLal a holon ls, Lhe more of Lhe unlverse cootolos LhaL holon as a oecessoty parL or consLlLuenL, wlLhouL whlch Lhese oLher holons could noL funcLlon (or even exlsL). Less depLh means more fundamenLal, means Lhe parLlcular holon ls a bulldlng block" of so many oLher holons. AL Lhe same Llme, Lhe less Jeptb a holon has, Lhe less slqolflcoot lL ls Lo Lhe kosmos, because lL embraces (as lLs own componenLs) so llLLle of Lhe kosmos. 1here ls, relaLlvely speaklng, less of Lhe kosmos LhaL ls acLually lnLernal Lo Lhls holon, LhaL ls acLually embraced wlLhln Lhe belng of Lhe holon lLself. (uL dlfferenLly, lL ls less slgnlflcanL because more of Lhe kosmos ls exLernal Lo lL.) Cn Lhe oLher hand, Lhe qteotet tbe Jeptb, or Lhe greaLer Lhe parLlcular wholeness of a holon, Lhen Lhe less fooJomeotol lL ls, because fewer oLher holons depend on lL for Lhelr own exlsLence. rlmaLes, for example, are noL very fundamenLal holons, because nelLher aLoms nor molecules nor cells depend upon Lhem. 8uL by Lhe same Loken, Lhe less fundamenLal, Lhe more slgnlflcanL: Lhe mote slqolflcoot LhaL holon ls for Lhe unlverse, because more of Lhe unlverse ls reflecLed or embraced ln LhaL parLlcular wholeness (more of Lhe kosmos ls lnLernal Lo lL, as parL of lLs own belng). rlmaLes are very slgnlflcanL, relaLlvely speaklng, because Lhey represenL and conLaln aLoms and molecules and cells: Lhey slqolfy more of Lhe kosmos. 1hus an aLom, for example, ls more fundamenLal, and less slgnlflcanL, Lhan a cell. Mote fooJomeotol, because everyLhlng above lL (lncludlng Lhe cell) depends upon lL for lLs exlsLence. less slqolflcoot, because less of Lhe kosmos ls embraced ln lL (or ls acLually lnLernal Lo lL). A cell, on Lhe oLher hand, ls more slgnlflcanL because lL embtoces aLoms and Lherefore reflecLs or slqolfles more of Lhe kosmos ln lLs own belng. lL ls more slgnlflcanL, buL less fundamenLal, Lhan an aLom. And so on. (We wlll reLurn LhroughouL Lhe book Lo Lhls Loplc, and see LhaL lL ls relaLed Lo Lhe lssue of lnLrlnslc and exLrlnslc values, and see also LhaL LheorlsLs who mlsLake greaL span for greaL depLh are always confuslng more fundamenLal wlLh more slgnlflcanL, and Lhus, once agaln, end up recommendlng regresslon as a dlrecLlon for furLher growLh, wlLh a flaLland onLology, Lhe cruclal depLh dlmenslon ls mlsslng.) 10. nolotcbles coevolve. Polons do noL evolve alone, because Lhere are no alone holons (Lhere are only flelds wlLhln flelds wlLhln flelds). 1hls prlnclple ls ofLen referred Lo as coevolotloo, whlch slmply means LhaL Lhe unlL" of evoluLlon ls noL an lsolaLed holon (lndlvldual molecule or planL or anlmal) buL a holon plus lLs lnseparable envlronmenL. LvoluLlon, LhaL ls, ls ecologlcal ln Lhe broadesL sense. !anLsch refers Lo Lhls as Lhe lnLerdependence of mlcroevoluLlon and macroevoluLlon, by whlch he slmply means Lhe coevoluLlon of Lhe lndlvldual (mlcro) and lLs larger envlronmenL (macro). 1hls ls [usL anoLher way of saylng LhaL oll agency ls olwoys agency-ln-communlon. 49 !anLsch: 1he lmmedlaLe consequence ls . . . Lhe slmulLanelLy of macro- and mlcroevoluLlon ln Lhe unlverse. Macroscoplc sLrucLures become Lhe envlronmenL for mlcroscoplc sLrucLures and lnfluence Lhelr evoluLlon ln declslve ways, or make lL posslble aL all. vlce versa, Lhe evoluLlon of mlcroscoplc sLrucLures becomes a declslve facLor ln Lhe formaLlon and evoluLlon of macroscoplc sLrucLures. 1hls lnLerdependence consLlLuLes noLhlng buL an aspecL of co-evolotloo [operaLlve, he says, ln all Lhree realms"]. 1hls prlnclple lmplles LhaL every sysLem ls llnked wlLh lLs envlronmenL by clrcular processes whlch esLabllsh a feedback llnk beLween Lhe evoluLlon of boLh sldes. 1hls holds noL only for sysLems aL Lhe same hlerarchlcal level, Lhe enLlre complex sysLem plus envlronmenL evolves as a whole. 30 ln oLher words, accordlng Lo !anLsch (and oLhers), mlcro and macro-lndlvldual and soclal/envlronmenLal-evolve heLerarchlcally Lo new holarchlcal levels of each. 1hls dlsLlncLlon beLween an lndlvldual holon and lLs soclal holon (envlronmenL ln Lhe broadesL sense) ls noL as easy Lo draw as lL may flrsL appear, however, because lL's almosL lmposslble Lo deflne whaL we mean by an lndlvldual ln Lhe flrsL place. 1he word lLself, from Lhe LaLln loJlvlJoolls, means noL dlvlslble or noL separable, by LhaL deflnlLlon, Lhere are no lndlvlduals anywhere ln Lhe kosmos. 1here are only holons, or dlvlduals. 31 Cn Lhe oLher hand, we do recognlze LhaL endurlng holons possess a speclflc form or paLLern, and Lhls paLLern ls Lo some degree auLonomous, or reslsLanL Lo envlronmenLal obllLeraLlon. And Lhls ls usually whaL we mean by calllng a holon an lndlvldual"-we mean an eoJotloq compoooJ loJlvlJool, compounded of lLs [unlor holons and addlng lLs own deflnlng form or wholeness or canon or deep sLrucLure (whlch ls Lhe novel holon ln lLs own compound lndlvlduallLy). And we furLher mean, usually (alLhough we mlghL noL use Lhese Lerms), LhaL Lhe overall wholeness or morphlc fleld of Lhe lndlvldual holon organlzes Lhe lndeLermlnaLeness of lLs [unlor parLners or subholons. ln oLher words, even Lhough an lndlvldual holon" exlsLs lnseparably from lLs soclal envlronmenL, lLs deflnlng facLor ls lLs own parLlcular form or paLLern. 1o Lhe degree LhaL we can reasonably recognlze LhaL paLLern, we wlll refer Lo an loJlvlJool boloo. 1hls ls sLlll somewhaL arblLrary, of course, because Lhere are some soclal holons LhaL seem Lo acL as lndlvldual holons or superorganlsms"-an anL colony, for example. 8uL ln human affalrs, Lo glve a counLerexample, mosL of us reslsL Lhe LempLaLlon Lo descrlbe a soclal holon, such as Lhe SLaLe, as belng llLerally a superorganlsm, because all organlsms have prlorlLy over all of Lhelr componenLs, and yeL wlLh Lhe rlse of democraLlc sLrucLures, we llke Lo Lhlnk LhaL Lhe SLaLe ls subservlenL Lo Lhe people, and Lo Lhe degree LhaL LhaL ls Lrue, Lhen Lhe soclal sysLem ls noL a Lrue organlsm (lL ls a soclal or envlronmenLal holon, noL an lndlvldual holon). lurLher, Lhe SLaLe, unllke a concreLe lndlvldual, does noL have a locus of self-prehenslon, a unlLary feellng os a oneness. ln more general Lerms, lL lacks a locus of lndlvldual self-belng (one of WhlLehead's maln concluslons, and Pabermas: Lhe SLaLe ls noL a macrosub[ecL). And flnally, Lhe parLs ln Lhls soclal sysLem are consclous, buL Lhe whole" ls noL. We wlll devoLe much of Lhe nexL chapLer Lo Lhls Loplc. lor Lhe Llme belng, leL us slmply recognlze LhaL Lhere are lmporLanL dlsLlncLlons beLween mlcro- and macroevoluLlon, beLween an lndlvldual holon and a soclal or envlronmenLal holon (even Lhough Lhey are lnseparably lnLeracLlve, whlch ls Lhe meanlng of coevoluLlon"). A soclal holon ls sLlll a holon-and noL a mere heap or aggregaLe-because lL dlsplays a whole/parL paLLern, lL ls rule-bound, lL ln a sense develops (we speak coherenLly of sLellar evoluLlon, ecosysLem evoluLlon, soclal evoluLlon, eLc.), and lL can funcLlon wlLh varlous degrees of upward and downward causaLlon (dependlng on lLs depLh). 8uL lL ls noL a Lrue lndlvldual holon, as WhlLehead and Pabermas and oLhers have noLed. !anLsch refers Lo Lhls as Lhe dlfference beLween verLlcal organlsmlc and horlzonLal ecosysLemlc (symbloLlc) organlzaLlon"-buL Lhe polnL, agaln, ls LhaL Lhey coevolve. 11. 1be mlcto ls lo telotloool excbooqe wltb tbe mocto ot oll levels of lts Jeptb. 1hls LeneL ls exLremely lmporLanL, parLlcularly when lL comes Lo holons of greaLer depLh and Lhe Lypes of ecosysLems (ln Lhe broad sense) LhaL Lhey musL co-creaLe and upon whlch Lhelr exlsLence depends. 1ake, for example, a human belng, uslng [usL Lhe Lhree levels of maLLer, llfe, and mlnd: all of Lhese levels malnLaln Lhelr own exlsLence Lhrough an lncredlbly rlch neLwork of relaLlonal exchange wltb boloos of tbe some Jeptb ln Lhe envlronmenL. 1he pbyslcol body exlsLs ln a sysLem of relaLlonal exchange wlLh oLher pbyslcol bodles-ln Lerms of gravlLaLlon, maLerlal forces and energles, llghL, waLer, envlronmenLal weaLher, and so on-and Lhe physlcal body lLself depends for lLs exlsLence on Lhese physlcal relaLlonshlps. lurLher, Lhe human race teptoJoces ltself pbyslcolly Lhrough food producLlon and food consumpLlon, Lhrough soclal labor organlzed ln an economy for baslc maLerlal exchanges ln Lhe physlosphere. Llkewlse, humanlLy teptoJoces ltself bloloqlcolly Lhrough emoLlonal-sexual relaLlons organlzed ln a famlly and an approprlaLe soclal envlronmenL, and depends for lLs blologlcal exlsLence on a whole neLwork of oLher blologlcal sysLems (and ecosysLems)-lL depends upon harmonlous relaLlonal exchanges wlLh Lhe blosphere. llnally, human belngs teptoJoce tbemselves meotolly Lhrough exchanges wlLh culLural and symbollc envlronmenLs, Lhe very essence of whlch ls Lhe relaLlonal exchange of symbols wlLh oLher symbol exchangers. 1hese relaLlonal exchanges are embedded ln Lhe LradlLlons and lnsLlLuLlons of a parLlcular socleLy ln such a way LhaL LhaL socleLy can reproduce lLself on a culLural level, can reproduce lLself ln Lhe noosphere. ln shorL, as holons evolve, each layer of depLh conLlnues Lo exlsL ln (and depend upon) a neLwork of relaLlonshlps wlLh oLher holons aL Lhe some level of sttoctotol otqoolzotloo. l usually refer Lo Lhls, for shorL, as same-level relaLlonal exchange." 32 1he polnL ls LhaL all holons are compound lndlvlduals, compounded of Lhelr prevlous holons and addlng Lhelr own dlsLlncLlvely emergenL paLLern, and each level of Lhese holons (l.e., evety holon) malnLalns lLs exlsLence Lhrough relaLlonal exchanges wlLh same-depLh holons ln Lhe soclal (or macro-) envlronmenL. 12. volotloo bos Jltectlooollty. 1hls ls Lhe famous arrow of evoluLlonary Llme flrsL recognlzed ln Lhe blosphere, buL now undersLood, ln Lhe sclences of complexlLy, Lo be presenL ln all Lhree of Lhe greaL domalns of evoluLlon. 1hls dlrecLlonallLy ls usually sLaLed as belng one of lncreaslng dlfferenLlaLlon, varleLy, complexlLy, and organlzaLlon. 8uL l Lhlnk lL would be helpful Lo gaLher LogeLher, from dlfferenL sources, Lhe varlous lndlcaLors of Lhls evoluLlonary dlrecLlonallLy and brlefly examlne Lhem one aL a Llme. We have already seen LhaL evoluLlon ls marked by creaLlve emergence (novelLy), symmeLry breaks, self- Lranscendence, lncreaslng depLh (and greaLer consclousness, whlch we wlll dlscuss laLer as an addlLlon). 1hose are already lndlcaLors of evoluLlon's dlrecLlonallLy. Pere are some oLhers. Aslde from regresslons, dlssoluLlons, arresL, eLc., evoluLlon Lends ln Lhe dlrecLlon of: a. locteosloq complexlty. 1he Cerman blologlsL WolLereck colned Lhe Lerm ooomotpbosls-llLerally, noL belng formless"-Lo descrlbe whaL he saw as Lhe cenLral and unlversal feaLure of naLure: Lhe emergence of ever-lncreaslng complexlLy. As !anLsch puLs lL, 1he evoluLlon of Lhe unlverse ls Lhe hlsLory of an unfoldlng of dlfferenLlaLed order or complexlLy. unfoldlng ls noL Lhe same as bulldlng up. 1he laLLer emphaslzes sLrucLure and descrlbes Lhe emergence of hlerarchlcal levels by Lhe [olnlng of sysLems from Lhe boLLom up." unfoldlng, ln conLrasL, lmplles Lhe lnLerweavlng of processes whlch lead slmulLaneously Lo phenomena of sLrucLuraLlon aL dlfferenL hlerarchlcal levels. LvoluLlon acLs ln Lhe sense of slmulLaneous and lnLerdependenL sLrucLuraLlon of Lhe macro- and Lhe mlcro-world. ComplexlLy Lhus emerges from Lhe lnLerpeneLraLlon of processes of dlfferenLlaLlon and lnLegraLlon. . . . 33 8allmer and von Welzsacker, ln facL, refer Lo Lhls maxlmlzaLlon of complexlLy as Lhe general sLaLemenL of evoluLlon," and L. L. WhyLe called lL Lhe fundamenLal prlnclple of Lhe developmenL of paLLern." We need one quallflcaLlon here. As Laszlo polnLs ouL, Lhe emergence of a new level of complexlLy also brlngs wlLh lL, from a sllghLly dlfferenL angle, a new slmpllclty, preclsely because Lhe new whole, as a slngle whole, ls slmpler Lhan lLs many parLs. 1hus, says Laszlo, Lhe emergence of a hlgher-level sysLem ls a . . . slmpllflcotloo of sysLem funcLlon." Pe conLlnues: Powever, once a new hlerarchlcal level has emerged, sysLems on Lhe new level Lend Lo become progresslvely more complex. lor example, on Lhe aLomlc level of organlzaLlon, hydrogen, Lhe flrsL elemenL Lo be synLheslzed ln Lhe processes of cosmlc evoluLlon, ls sLrucLurally slmpler Lhan Lhe subsequenLly synLheslzed, heavler elemenLs. Cn a hlgher level of organlzaLlon, a molecule of waLer ls slmpler Lhan a proLeln molecule, on a sLlll hlgher organlzaLlonal level, a unlcellular organlsm ls less complex Lhan a mulLlcellular one. . . . 1hus, whlle a new level of organlzaLlon means a slmpllflcaLlon of sysLem funcLlon, and of Lhe correspondlng sysLem sLrucLure, lL also means Lhe lnlLlaLlon of a process of progresslve sLrucLural and funcLlonal complexlflcaLlon. 34 b. locteosloq Jlffeteotlotloo/loteqtotloo. 1hls prlnclple was glven lLs flrsL modern sLaLemenL by PerberL Spencer (ln lltst ltloclples, 1862): evoluLlon ls a change from an lndeflnlLe, lncoherenL homogenelLy, Lo a deflnlLe, coherenL heLerogenelLy, Lhrough conLlnuous dlfferenLlaLlons and lnLegraLlons" (Lhls deflnlLlon of Lhe Lerm evolotloo allowed blologlsLs Lo begln uslng lL lnsLead of uarwln's phrase descenL wlLh modlflcaLlon"). And we already quoLed !anLsch: ComplexlLy Lhus emerges from Lhe lnLerpeneLraLlon of processes of dlfferenLlaLlon and lnLegraLlon. . . ." ulfferenLlaLlon produces parLness, or a new manyness", lnLegraLlon produces wholeness, or a new oneness." And slnce holons are whole/parLs, Lhey are formed by Lhe [olnL acLlon of dlfferenLlaLlon and lnLegraLlon. 1he dlfferenLlaLlng processes are obvlously necessary for Lhe undenlable novelLy and dlverslLy creaLed by evoluLlon, buL lnLegraLlon ls [usL as cruclal, converLlng manyness lnLo oneness (Lhe reglme or canon or paLLern of a holon ls lLs lnLegraLlve coherence). 1hus WhlLehead's vlew LhaL Lhe ulLlmaLe characLer pervadlng Lhe unlverse ls a drlve Loward Lhe endless producLlon of new synLheses [lnLegraLlons]." 33 We saw LhaL WhlLehead called Lhls drlve creaLlvlLy", he says lL ls Lhe eLernal acLlvlLy," Lhe un derlylng energy of reallzaLlon"-noLhlng escapes lL." 36 1hus WhlLehead's all-lmporLanL dlcLum: 1he many [dlfferenLlaLlon] become one [lnLegraLlon] and are lncreased by one [Lhe new holon]." 1hese Lwo processes are very obvlous ln Lhe physlosphere (aLoms lnLegraLlng dlfferenLlaLed parLlcles, molecules lnLegraLlng dlfferenLlaLed aLoms, eLc.) and ln Lhe blosphere (e.g., Lhe progresslve dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe zygoLe and Lhe progresslve lnLegraLlon of Lhe resulLanL parLs lnLo Llssues, organ sysLems, organlsm), buL Lhey are also rampanL ln Lhe noosphere. Lven psychoanalysls ls on board. CerLrude 8lanck and 8ubln 8lanck, for example, ploneers ln psychoanalyLlc developmenLal psychology, have persuaslvely argued LhaL Lhe aggresslve drlve ls Lhe Jtlve to Jlffeteotlotloo, and Lros ls Lhe Jtlve to loteqtotloo, and dlsrupLlon of elLher one resulLs ln serlous paLhology (we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln chapLer 9). And for all Lhe commoLlon surroundlng uerrlda's noLlon of Jlfftooce (Lo dlffer and defer)-some crlLlcs have used Lhe noLlon Lo deconsLrucL anyLhlng Lhey dldn'L happen Lo llke-uerrlda hlmself deflnes Lhe noLlon very slmply as Lhe process of dlfferenLlaLlon." 37 8efore communlcaLlon can begln, enLlLles have Lo be dlfferenLlaLed ln Lhe flrsL place, and ln one sense Lhese enLlLles do noL exlsL prlor Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlng process per se. ulfferance ls Lhus parL of LhaL eLernal acLlvlLy" of creaLlvlLy, a dynamlc force of brlnglng lnLo belng-lL has lmpulslve force, Lhe force of arLlculaLlon or dlfferenLlaLlon." 38 ln oLher words, as one of hls lnLerpreLers polnLs ouL, uerrlda sees Lhe dynamlc dlfference LhaL characLerlzes reallLy as also composlng Lhe naLure of language lLself. 1hls enables language, Lhrough lLs lnherenL process of dlfference, Lo funcLlon as a means of reallzaLlon . . . language parLlclpaLes ln Lhe reallLy lL manlfesLs . . . Lhe dynamlc becomlng of reallLy lLself." 39 8uL dlfferenLlaLlng also demands lnLegraLlons and synLheses-as uerrlda puLs lL, 1he play of dlfferences supposes, ln effecL, synLheses and referrals. . . ." 60 1hls play of dlfferenLlaLlng and lnLegraLlng forces, or dlfferance and synLhesls and referral, ls behlnd uerrlda's noLorlous crlLlque of presence." As uerrlda words lL: 1he play of dlfferences lnvolves synLheses and referrals whlch prevenL Lhere from belng aL any momenL or ln any way a slmple elemenL whlch ls pteseot ln and of lLself and refers only Lo lLself. WheLher ln wrlLLen or spoken dlscourse, no elemenL can funcLlon as a slgn wlLhouL relaLlng Lo anoLher elemenL whlch lLself ls noL slmply presenL. 1hls llnkage means LhaL each elemenL" ls consLlLuLed wlLh reference Lo Lhe Lrace ln lL of Lhe oLher elemenLs of Lhe sysLem. noLhlng, ln elLher Lhe elemenLs or Lhe sysLem, ls anywhere ever slmply presenL or absenL. 61 ln oLher words, Lhere ls noLhlng LhaL lsn'L a holon, a conLexL wlLhln a conLexL forever. ?ou cannoL polnL Lo any Lhlng, Lo any holon, and say lL's [usL tbot and noLhlng else, because every holon ls slmulLaneously a superholon and a subholon: lL ls composed of holons and composes oLhers (across boLh space and Llme), noLhlng ls ever slmply presenL. 62 As for Lhe con[olnL operaLlon of dlfferenLlaLlon and lnLegraLlon ln Lhe noosphere, Pabermas noLes LhaL Lhe dlfferenL llfeworlds LhaL colllde wlLh one anoLher do noL sLand oext to eocb otbet wlLhouL any muLual undersLandlng. As LoLallLles [holons], Lhey follow Lhe pull of Lhelr clalms Lo unlversallLy and work ouL Lhelr dlfferences unLll Lhelr horlzons of undersLandlng 'fuse' [lnLegraLe] wlLh one anoLher." 63 Across Lhe board we see Lhls dual operaLlon of exLenslon and condensaLlon, he says: 1he lncreaslng reflexlvlLy of culLure, Lhe generallzaLlon of values and norms, and Lhe helghLened lndlvlduaLlon of soclallzed sub[ecLs, Lhe enhancemenL of crlLlcal consclousness, auLonomous wlll formaLlon, and lndlvlduaLlon, Lakes place under condlLlons of an ever more exLenslve and ever more flnely woven neL of llngulsLlcally generaLed lnLersub[ecLlvlLy." And hls polnL ls LhaL all of Lhls means dlfferenLlaLlon and condensaLlon [lnLegraLlon] aL once-a Lhlckenlng of Lhe floaLlng web of lnLersub[ecLlve Lhreads LhaL slmulLaneously holds LogeLher Lhe ever more sharply dlfferenLlaLed componenLs of culLure, socleLy, and person." 64 1haL phrase ls slgnlflcanL: lL ls noL [usL an exteosloo of Lhe web, buL a tblckeoloq: noL [usL span, buL also depLh. llnally, Lo Louch bases wlLh loucaulL, we mlghL noLe LhaL hls otcboeoloqlcol bollsm asserLs LhaL Lhe whole deLermlnes whaL can counL even as a posslble elemenL. 1he whole verbal conLenL ls more fundamenLal and Lhus ls more Lhan Lhe sum of lLs parLs. lndeed, Lhere are no parLs excepL wlLhln Lhe fleld whlch ldenLlfles and lndlvlduaLes Lhem"-LhaL ls, dlfferenLlaLes and lnLegraLes Lhem. 63 And leL us lmmedlaLely noLe LhaL loucaulL evenLually abandoned archaeology as an excluslve meLhodology preclsely because archaeology was lLself merely a pott of Lhe larger holon of soclal pracLlces: noL wholes, buL whole/parLs. ln sum, evoluLlon requlres boLh dlfferenLlaLlon and lnLegraLlon operaLlng LogeLher-Lhe many become one and are lncreased by one"-and, lndeed, Lhese Lwo normally (ln healLhy holarchles) occur con[olnLly, whlch ls why l usually wrlLe lL as dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon." 1hese appear as opposlLes (or uLLerly opposed Lendencles) only ln a flaLland onLology, where more of Lhe one means less of Lhe oLher. 8uL ln Lhe mulLldlmenslonal kosmos, more of one means more of Lhe oLher. 1hey [oln hands endlessly Lo produce new whole/parLs or many/ones or holons. 1he dlalecLlcs of depLh . . . c. locteosloq otqoolzotloo/sttoctototloo. 1he furLher evoluLlon of Lhe suprasysLem leads Lo Lhe progresslve complexlflcaLlon of lLs deflnlng sysLem level-and ulLlmaLely Lo Lhe creaLlon of hypercycles LhaL shlfL lL Lo Lhe nexL organlzaLlonal level. 1hus evoluLlon moves from Lhe slmpler Lo Lhe more complex Lype of sysLem, and from Lhe lower Lo Lhe hlgher level of organlzaLlon." 66 1hls ls, for example, behlnd Lhe sLandard dlsLlncLlon, ln evoluLlonary blology, beLween clades and grades: A group of specles wlLh a recenL common ancesLor forms a clade, a group wlLh Lhe some level of sttoctotol otqoolzotloo forms a grade." 67 CtoJe, of course, ls anoLher Lerm for depLh. d. locteosloq telotlve ootooomy. 1hls ls a much mlsundersLood concepL. lL slmply refers Lo a holon's capaclLy for self-preservaLlon ln Lhe mldsL of envlronmenLal flucLuaLlons (telotlve ootooomy ls anoLher Lerm for agency). And accordlng Lo Lhe sclences of complexlLy, Lhe greaLer Lhe depLh of a holon, Lhe greaLer lLs relaLlve auLonomy. 1hls does noL mean greaLer permanence or greaLer concreLe sLubbornness. Worms are less durable Lhan rocks. 8elaLlve auLonomy slmply refers Lo a cerLaln flexlblllLy ln Lhe face of changlng envlronmenLal condlLlons. A fox can malnLaln lLs lnLernal LemperaLure relaLlvely lndependenLly of changlng weaLher, whereas a rock's LemperaLure flucLuaLes lmmedlaLely wlLh every passlng clrcumsLance. 8y Lhe Llme we reach Lhe noosphere, ln humans, relaLlve auLonomy ls of such a hlgh degree LhaL lL can produce noL [usL Jlffeteotlotloo from Lhe envlronmenL, whlch ls necessary, buL Jlssoclotloo from Lhe envlronmenL, whlch ls dlsasLrous-an expresslon of potboloqlcol oqeocy LhaL, among many oLher Lhlngs, lands lL squarely ln ecologlcal hell (we wlll, of course, be reLurnlng Lo Lhls Loplc). 1he reason LhaL auLonomy ls always telotlve ls LhaL Lhere are no wholes, only whole/parLs. As o wbole, a holon possesses a degree of auLonomy, expressed ln lLs ldenLlfylng and endurlng paLLern, lLs self-preservaLlon. lL possesses coherence and ldenLlLy across space and Llme (or else lL slmply ceases Lo exlsL), whlch ls why auLonomy ls vlrLually synonymous wlLh agency, reglme, code, canon, deep sLrucLure. As o pott, however, every holon-Lhe auLonomy of every holon-ls sub[ecLed Lo larger forces and sysLems of whlch lL ls merely a componenL. 1hls doesn'L change lLs fundamenLal paLLern or ldenLlfylng reglme, buL lL does sub[ecL lL Lo a hosL of llmlLlng clrcumsLances and condlLlons LhaL can alLer lLs expresslon, and lL ofLen moves Lhe source of Lhe lnlLlaLlon of acLlon Lo oLher reglmes (e.g., lf my counLry declares war, l am lncluded, llke lL or noL). ln oLher words, as we have seen Llme and agaln, all agency ls agency-ln-communlon. (1hls ls nlcely capLured ln varela's noLlon of sLrucLural coupllng": Lhe agency of a blologlcal sysLem ls relaLlvely auLonomous, buL Lhe form of Lhe auLonomy evolved ln sLrucLural coupllng wlLh lLs envlrons, l.e., lLs presenL agency ls Lhe resulL of evoluLlonary communlons.) 1hus, auLonomy, llke all aspecLs of a holon, ls sllJloq: a holon ls relaLlvely auLonomous vls-a-vls lLs [unlors and relaLlvely subservlenL vls-a-vls lLs senlors. 68 Much of Lhe fun, lf one can call lL LhaL, of posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsL games conslsLs ln Lhe upseLLlng of estobllsbeJ ootooomles by polnLlng Lo lotqet cootexts whlch acLually deLermlne" Lhe supposed auLonomy" of Lhe lsolaLed unlL, whereupon Lhe lsolaLed unlL lLself ls prompLly declared dead" (deaLh of Lhe wrlLer, deaLh of Lhe sub[ecL, deaLh of Lhe paLrlarchy, deaLh of Lhe myLhlc god, deaLh of Lhe ego, deaLh of raLlonallLy, deaLh of logocenLrlsm, eLc.), wlLh Lhe auLonomy" or sysLemlc sLrucLure of Lhe larger conLexL belng ln Lurn merely a pott of. . . . 1he game slmply conLlnues unLll Lhe crlLlc geLs Llred (or seLLles on an ldeology), because Lhere ls noLhlng ln reallLy LhaL can sLop Lhe slldlng game any sooner, for conLexLs are boundless. 8uL Lhe decenLerlng" of prevlously auLonomous" unlLs ls lndeed parL of Lhe lmporLanL LruLhs of posLmodern crlLlques, and we wlll reLurn Lo Lhem LhroughouL Lhls volume. 1hus, Lo glve a few examples now: Lhe auLonomous ego of Lhe LnllghLenmenL ls noL tbot auLonomous because lL ls acLually seL ln Lhe conLexL of lLs own organlc drlves (Lhe psychoanalyLlc crlLlque of Lhe LnllghLenmenL), and Lhese prevlously unconsclous drlves musL be lnLegraLed for Lrue auLonomy Lo emerge. 8uL even Lhe enLlre lnLegraLed and auLonomous person of psychoanalysls ls noL teolly auLonomous, because LhaL lndlvldual ls acLually seL ln conLexLs of lloqolstlc sttoctotes LhaL auLonomously deLermlne meanlng wlLhouL Lhe lndlvldual even knowlng abouL lL (Lhe crlLlque launched by sLrucLurallsm, archaeology). 8uL llngulsLlc sLrucLures aren'L really tbot auLonomous, because Lhey exlsL only ln Lhe conLexL of pre-arLlculaLe worldvlews LhaL use language wlLhouL language ever reglsLerlng LhaL facL (Lhe crlLlque by Peldegger, Cebser). 8uL furLher, worldvlews Lhemselves are merely a small componenL of masslve neLworks and conLexLs of soclal pracLlces (ln varlous ways, Marx, Pabermas, Lhe laLer loucaulL). And furLher yeL, LheorlsLs from klerkegaard Lo Schelllng Lo Pegel would lnslsL LhaL Lhose soclal pracLlces only exlsL ln, and because of, Lhe larger conLexL of SplrlL. ln every one of Lhose cases, Lhe LheorlsL (lreud, Marx, Peldegger, loucaulL, Schelllng, eLc.) Lells us someLhlng lmporLanL abouL Lhe meooloq of our exlsLence by slLuaLlng our exlsLence ln a larger cootext-slnce meanlng and conLexL are ln lmporLanL ways synonymous, as we earller noLed. And each successlve LheorlsL glves a deeper or blgger or wlder meanlng Lo exlsLence by flndlng ptevloosly blJJeo cootexts LhaL suddenly shlfL Lhe auLonomy ouL from under our feeL and polnL Lo larger communlons ln whlch we llve and breaLhe and have our belng. And ln a sense, each of Lhem ls qulLe rlghL: Lhe ego does exlsL ln Lhe conLexL of Lhe LoLal organlsm and lLs drlves, whlch does exlsL ln Lhe conLexL of lLs llngulsLlcally dlsclosed world, whlch does exlsL ln Lerms of overall neLworks of soclal pracLlces, whlch Lhemselves subslsL ln SplrlL. 1haL ls Lhe very naLure of boloo, conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs. And each Llme we spoL one of Lhese larger (deeper) conLexLs, we flnd a new meooloq conferred on a glven holon, because, as we earller noLed, Lhe larger conLexL confers a meanlng on lLs holons LhaL Lhe holons Lhemselves, alone and lsolaLed, do noL and cannoL possess. 69 Llkewlse, each dlscovery of a new and deeper conLexL and meanlng ls a dlscovery of a new tbetoplo, a new Lherapy, namely: we musL sblft oot petspectlves, Jeepeo oot petceptloo, ofLen agalnsL a greaL deal of teslstooce, Lo embrace Lhe deeper and wlder conLexL. 1he self ls slLuaLed ln conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs, and each shlfL ln conLexL ls an ofLen palnful process of growLh, of deaLh Lo a shallow conLexL and reblrLh Lo a deeper one. 8uL for [usL LhaL reason, each Llme we ldenLlfy a deeper conLexL, our relaLlve auLonomy acLually lncreases, because ln ldenLlfylng wlLh a deeper percepLlon, we have found a wlder freedom. We wlll be dlscusslng all Lhese noLlons as we proceed. 1he slmpler polnL of Lhls secLlon ls [usL LhaL, even Lhough all auLonomy ls relaLlve, noneLheless telotlve auLonomy locteoses wlLh evoluLlon (as we sald, a fox ls more auLonomous Lhan a rock). And Lhe reason LhaL relaLlve auLonomy locteoses wlLh emergenL evoluLlon ls LhaL more extetool forces lmploqloq on Lhe auLonomy of a holon become lotetool forces coopetotloq wlLh lL (due Lo supersesslon, or Lranscendence and lncluslon). lL ldenLlfles wlLh deeper conLexLs and Lhus flnds wlder freedom. We wlll see numerous examples of Lhls as we proceed. e. locteosloq telos. 1he reglme, canon, code, or deep sLrucLure of a holon acLs as a magneL, an aLLracLor, a mlnlaLure omega polnL, for Lhe octoollzotloo of LhaL holon ln space and Llme. 1haL ls, Lhe end polnL of Lhe sysLem Lends Lo pull" Lhe holon's acLuallzaLlon (or developmenL) ln LhaL dlrecLlon, wheLher Lhe sysLem ls physlcal, blologlcal, or menLal. Agaln, Lhls was an lLem LhaL was largely lgnored as long as sclence was lnLenL on sLudylng a bunch of rocks ln moLlon, buL even ln Lhe physlosphere Lhe enLelechy" (reglme, canon, deep sLrucLure, morphlc fleld) of a holon governs Lhe flnal form of lLs acLuallzaLlon, wheLher from an elecLron cloud or a chaoLlc aLLracLor of complex sysLems. ln Lhe geomeLrlc orlenLaLlon LhaL domlnaLes ln conLemporary dynamlc sysLems Lheory, Lhe prlnclpal feaLures of dynamlc sysLems are Lhe aLLracLors: Lhey characLerlze Lhe long-run behavlor of Lhe sysLems. uynamlc sysLems evolve from a glven lnlLlal sLaLe along a unlque Lra[ecLory of sLaLes ln accordance wlLh Lhe laws of evoluLlon [some verslon of Lhe LwenLy LeneLs]. 1hls leads evenLually Lo some recognlzable paLLern where Lhe Lra[ecLory remalns Lrapped. 1he paLLern deflnes Lhe otttoctots of Lhe sysLem. . . ." lf Lhe serles of sysLem sLaLes come Lo a resL, Lhelr evoluLlon ls governed by a sLaLlc aLLracLor [sLudled, for example, by 8ene 1hom's Lopologlcal caLasLrophe Lheory"]. lf Lhe sLaLes conslsL of a repeaLed cycle of sLaLes wlLh a deflnlLe perlodlclLy, Lhe sysLem ls under Lhe sway of a perlodlc aLLracLor. And lf Lhe Lra[ecLory of sysLem sLaLes nelLher comes Lo resL nor exhlblLs perlodlclLy buL ls hlghly erraLlc, lL ls under Lhe lnfluence of a so-called chaoLlc aLLracLor. 70 ln recenL years chaoLlc behavlor has been dlscovered ln a wlde varleLy of naLural sysLems, and Lhelr maLhemaLlcal modellng has made rapld progress. An enLlre dlsclpllne has sprung up wlLhln dynamlc sysLems Lheory devoLed Lo Lhe sLudy of Lhe properLles of chaoLlc aLLracLors and of Lhe sysLems governed by Lhem, lL became popularly known as chaos Lheory. uesplLe lLs name, Lhe Lheory seeks Lo ellmlnaLe raLher Lhan dlscover or creaLe chaos-lL sLudles processes LhaL appear chaoLlc on Lhe surface buL on deLalled analysls prove Lo manlfesL subLle sLrands of order. ChaoLlc aLLracLors are complex and subLly ordered sLrucLures LhaL consLraln Lhe behavlor of seemlngly random and unpredlcLable sysLems." 71 1hese aLLracLors, ln oLher words, are examples of Lhe reglmes or organlzlng forces of soclal holons and Lhelr lnherenL Leleologlcal pull Lo paLLern (wlLhouL whlch a holon would slmply noL exlsL). Cf parLlcular lnLeresL are blfurcaLlons," whlch conslsL of Lhe shlfL from one Lype of aLLracLor Lo anoLher. Models wlLh caLasLrophlc blfurcaLlons (conduclng from LurbulenL Lo newly ordered sLaLes Lhrough Lhe reconflguraLlon of Lhe aLLracLors) slmulaLe rapld evolotloooty leops wlLh Lhe greaLesL fldellLy. 1he slgnlflcanL slmulaLlons occur when dynamlc sysLems are desLablllzed and pass Lhrough a chaoLlc phase on Lhe way Loward essenLlally new-and ln pracLlce unpredlcLable-sLeady sLaLes." 72 1he concluslon for chaos Lheory ls LhaL Lhese are Lhe klnd of LransformaLlons LhaL underlle Lhe evoluLlon of all Lhlrd-sLaLe [far from equlllbrlum] sysLems ln Lhe real world, from aLoms of Lhe elemenLs Lo socleLles of human belngs." 73 1hese Lypes of ttoosfotmotloos (noL merely LranslaLlons) generaLe a sLaLlsLlcally slgnlflcanL Lendency Loward greaLer complexlLy and a hlgher level of organlzaLlon. 1he sysLem leaps Lo a new plaLeau and Lhus becomes more dynamlc and more auLonomous ln lLs mllleu." 74 So LhaL, flnally, Lhese facLors converge Lo push blfurcaLlng sysLems up Lhe ladder of Lhe evoluLlonary hlerarchy"-LhaL ls, holarchy. 73 When growlng flucLuaLlons upseL Lhe dynamlc sLablllLy of a sysLem, lLs sLable polnL of perlodlc aLLracLors can no longer malnLaln lL ln lLs esLabllshed sLaLe, chaoLlc aLLracLors appear and wlLh Lhem an lnLerval of LranslLlon hallmarked by LranslLory chaos. When Lhe sysLem achleves a new sLaLe of dynamlc sLablllLy, Lhe chaoLlc aLLracLors of Lhe blfurcaLlon epoch glve way Lo a new seL of polnL or perlodlc aLLracLors. 1hese aLLracLors malnLaln Lhe sysLem ln a condlLlon far from Lhermodynamlc equlllbrlum, wlLh more effecLlve use of lnformaLlon, greaLer efflclency ln Lhe use of free energles, greaLer flexlblllLy [relaLlve auLonomy], as well as greaLer sLrucLural complexlLy on a hlgher level of organlzaLlon. 76 1elos-Lhe mlnlaLure omega-polnL pull of Lhe end sLaLe of a holon's reglme-ls, of course, rampanL noL only ln physlcal sysLems buL ln Lhe blosphere and noosphere as well. An acorn's code (lLs unA) has oak wrlLLen all over lL. 1hrough processes of ttooslotloo, ttoosctlptloo, and ttoosfotmotloo, Lhe seed unfolds lnLo a Lree, holarchlcally. 1hese blologlcal processes have been sLudled so much, and are so famlllar Lo mosL readers, LhaL l wlll noL dwell on Lhem (we wlll see many examples laLer), we need only noLe LhaL blologlsLs recognlze Lhe exlsLence of dlrecLlon Loward fuLure funcLlons," and LhaL Lhe purposeful aspecL of organlsms ls lnconLroverLlble." 77 ln Lhe noosphere, once Lhe menLal and llngulsLlc sclences sLopped Lrylng Lo ape Lhe sLudy of movlng rocks and concenLraLed on menLal processes, Lhe mlnd's Lelos lnexorably came Lo Lhe fore. lreud's psychoanalysls, for example, was profoundly Jevelopmeotol ln naLure, and Lhe whole polnL of developmenL ls LhaL lL ls noL a random hopplng abouL buL ls lndeed golng somewhere, and Lherefore lL can be deralled and saboLaged, wlLh resulLanL paLhology. An old [oke from vermonL: A clLy fellow, drlvlng Lhrough Lhe vermonL counLryslde, sees a man ln a Lruck on Lhe slde of Lhe road. 1he Lruck ls axle-deep ln Lhe mud, and Lhe wheels are splnnlng. Are you sLuck?" asks Lhe clLy fellow. l would be, lf'n l was goln' somewhere." Well, Lhe psyche, for beLLer or worse, ls golng somewhere, and LhaL ls why Lhe process can geL sLuck, why lL ls fraughL wlLh frusLraLlon, arresL, flxaLlon, sLlck polnLs, log[ams. lf Lhe mlnd weren'L golng somewhere, lL could never geL sLuck, never geL slck." And Lhese slck polnLs," Lhese sLlck polnLs," can only be undersLood ln Lerms of Lhe mlnd's omega polnLs, of where lL wanLs Lo go. And noL [usL lreud. ln an ofL-clLed formula, lageL declares LhaL Lhere ls no sLrucLure whlch lacks a developmenL, and LhaL Lhe process of developmenL can only be undersLood ln vlew of Lhe sLrucLure whlch exlsLs aL Lhe beglnnlng and Lhe sLrucLures lnLo whlch lL wlll evolve." 78 1he basln and Lhelr aLLracLors, Lhelr mlnlaLure omega polnLs. Cr Amerlca's undenlable phllosophlcal genlus, Charles elrce: 1he belng governed by a purpose or oLher flnal cause ls Lhe very essence of Lhe psychlcal phenomenon." Pe adds LhaL Lo say LhaL Lhe fuLure does noL lnfluence Lhe presenL ls unLenable docLrlne." 79 Cr 8oman !akobson, who was one of Lhe flrsL Lo lnLroduce, as he puL lL, a conslsLenL appllcaLlon of a means-ends [Lelos] model Lo language deslgn, Lo lLs self-regulaLlng malnLenance of lnLegrlLy and dynamlc equlllbrlum, as well as Lo lLs muLaLlons [LransformaLlons]," so LhaL Lhe adopLlon of Leleology was a cenLral concern." 80 All Lhe way Lo Pabermas: 1here ls a teleotless ptessote bullL lnLo Lhe use of language orlenLed Loward muLual undersLandlng." 81 And even uerrlda: 1hls arche-Lrace conLalns wlLhln lLself all Lhe posslblllLles of manlfesLaLlon as Lhe prlmordlal 'dlfference.' 1hls 'dlfference' ls Lhe lnherenL teleoloqlcol fotce wlLhln us LhaL leads Lo self-manlfesLaLlon." 82 now, l haven'L acLually menLloned Lhe naLure or Lhe acLual conLenL of Lhe mlnd's omega polnL(s), lLs baslc aLLracLor, lLs end sLaLe Loward whlch earller sLages are sLruggllng Lo reach, because here Lhe sLory becomes Lruly fasclnaLlng. 1he mlnd's omega polnL, fot eocb tbeotlst, ls Lhe cootext LhaL Lhey belleve coooot be ouLconLexLed, Lhe conLexL beyond whlch growLh or expanslon cannoL or does noL or should noL proceed. lor lreud, Lhe omega polnL, Lhe end of developmenL, was genlLal organlzaLlon and lnLegraLed ego: all sLages and all roads lead Lo LhaL 8ome. lor lageL, Lhe omega polnL ls formal operaLlonal Lhlnklng, whlch alone reaches equlllbraLlon" and Lhus alone marks Lhe end of developmenL. lor Pabermas, raLlonal lnLersub[ecLlve exchange of uncoerced muLual undersLandlng: when Lhls fully unfolds, Lhe relenLless pressure subsldes. And so Lhe omega polnLs would proceed, wlLh each LheorlsL posLulaLlng, ln some sense, Lhe end of hlsLory," Lhe omega polnL LhaL, when reached, would answer all Lhe really dlfflculL quesLlons and usher ln some sorL of relaLlvely paradlslacal condlLlon. lor Pegel, a raLlonal SLaLe ln whlch lndlvlduals could reallze absoluLe SplrlL acLlng ln and Lhrough Lhem ln a muLual communlLy. lor Marx, a classless socleLy ln whlch allenaLlon of labor and produce would be healed ln shared muLual care. And mosL people are famlllar wlLh 1ellhard de Chardln's ulLlmaLe omega polnL, Lhe resurrecLlon of ChrlsL consclousness ln each and all, whlch, llke all omega polnLs, ls malnLalned Lo be Lhe purpose of hlsLory and evoluLlon lLself. Cnce agaln, Lhere are lmporLanL momenLs of LruLh ln all of Lhose omega polnLs. Lach sLage of growLh, because lL ls a holon, faces a dual Lenslon. As a wbole, lL ls relaLlvely auLonomous and relaLlvely healLhy, happy, whole." 8uL as a pott, lL ls ln some sense allenaLed, seL aparL, or dlsconnecLed from Lhose conLexLs LhaL are beyond lLs own percepLlon. And unLll lL Lakes Lhe larger and deeper conLexL lnLo accounL, Lhe llmlLaLlons of lLs own shallower poslLlon wlll LormenL lL, lnfllcL lL wlLh Lhe agony of lncompleLeness, Lear aL lLs boundarles wlLh hlnLs of someLhlng deeper, hlgher, more meanlngful. . . . And l don'L mean LhaL poeLlcally. lageL, for example, found LhaL Lhe earller/lower sLages of cognlLlon, such as preoperaLlonal and concreLe operaLlonal Lhlnklng, had lnherenL llmlLaLlons or confllcLs bullL lnLo Lhem, and LhaL LhoughL sLuck ln Lhose levels wobbles endlessly wlLhouL resoluLlon around cerLaln very lmporLanL Lasks. Cnly wlLh Lhe emergence of formal operaLlonal Lhlnklng could Lhese confllcLs come Lo some sorL of peace or resoluLlon, whlch lageL called equlllbraLlon, a Lype of balanced buL dynamlc harmony. And furLher, lL was ooly from Lhe vlew of formal operaLlonal LhaL Lhese earller confllcLs made any sense aL all: Lhey were sLruggllng Lo Lhelr resoluLlon, sLruggllng Lo Lhelr omega polnL, sLruggllng Lo equlllbraLlon ln Lhe larger conLexL of formal operaLlonal cognlLlon, and, puL raLher slmply, Lhey could noL be happy unLll Lhey found LhaL larger horlzon. 83 LlmlLed conLexLs flnd resoluLlon, noL by anyLhlng LhaL can be done on Lhe same level, buL only by Lranscendlng LhaL level, by flndlng lLs deeper and wlder conLexL. ueeper and wlder conLexLs exett o poll, a Lelos, on presenL llmlLed conLexLs. And LhaL ls Lhe LruLh common Lo all omega-polnL LheorlsLs (and any decenL LheorlsL ls an omega-polnL LheorlsL). Assumlng LhaL Lhelr conLexLs are well founded, and assumlng LhaL Lhey do noL engage ln reducLlonlsm, Lhen Lhere ls much we can learn from each of Lhese Lypes of LheorlsLs. 1hey always polnL Lo woys beyooJ our presenL percepLlon, and assumlng Lhelr conLexLs are genulne, Lhey are rlghL: we wlll never be happy unLll we, Loo, can llve wlLh a larger horlzon. unLll we, Loo, can accepL Lhe Lherapla of embraclng genLly a greaLer depLh. . . . And a flnal Cmega olnL? 1haL would lmply a flnal Whole, and Lhere ls no such holon anywhere ln manlfesL exlsLence. 8uL perhaps we can lnLerpreL lL dlfferenLly. Who knows, perhaps Lelos, perhaps Lros, moves Lhe enLlre kosmos, and Cod may lndeed be an all-embraclng chaoLlc ALLracLor, acLlng, as WhlLehead sald, LhroughouL Lhe world by genLle persuaslon Loward love. 8uL LhaL, Lo say Lhe leasL, ls qulLe ahead of Lhe sLory. 3 loJlvlJool ooJ 5oclol lf l om wbot l om becoose yoo ote wbot yoo ote, ooJ yoo ote wbot yoo ote becoose l om wbot l om, tbeo l om oot l ooJ yoo ote oot yoo. -PlLLLL WL SAW, ln chapLer 1, LhaL varlous LheorlsLs wlLh a hollsLlc" orlenLaLlon-sysLems LheorlsLs, ecologlcal LheorlsLs, new paradlgm" Lhlnkers, deep ecologlsLs, ecofemlnlsLs, and so on-malnLaln LhaL Lhe varlous crlses faclng Lhe modern world are all fundamenLally due Lo a fracLured" worldvlew: we lack a unlfylng vlslon, and Lhus our world ls fragmenLed, broken, allenaLed. And so, Lhey malnLaln, whaL ls requlred ls some sorL of sysLems Lheory orlenLaLlon, some way for us Lo see and feel LhaL we are all lnLerwoven lnLo Lhe slngle Web of Llfe. We need, Lhey would all malnLaln ln Lhelr varlous fashlons, a profoundly ecoceottlc worldvlew. 8uL no sooner do such LheorlsLs make LhaL clalm Lhan Lhey run lnLo LheoreLlcal problems. llrsL of all, Lhey malnLaln LhaL, as !ohn Seed summarlzes Lhls vlew, Lhe world ls seen noL as a pyramld buL as a web. Pumans are buL one sLrand of LhaL web." ln oLher words, human belngs are a parL of a deeper (or greaLer) web of llfe, Lhe blosphere. 8uL we could desLroy all humans and Lhe blosphere would sLlll exlsL (buL noL vlce versa), showlng LhaL Lhe blosphere ls a lower and shallower, noL deeper or hlgher, reallLy. 1hls confuses mosL ecoLheorlsLs, Lhey seem Lo have no coherenL way Lo honor Lhe blosphere wlLhouL absoluLlzlng lL. Second, as lrlL[of Capra summarlzes Lhe new paradlgm" LhoughL, ln Lhe new paradlgm, Lhe properLles of Lhe parLs can be undersLood only from Lhe dynamlcs of Lhe whole. ulLlmaLely, Lhere are no parLs aL all. WhaL we call a parL ls merely a paLLern ln an lnseparable web of relaLlonshlps." 1 lL's Lrue LhaL Lhere are no parLs, buL equally Lrue LhaL Lhere are no wholes-only whole/parLs forever, whlch Lherefore reslsL all LoLallzlng and domlnaLlng agendas. 8uL even lf Lhere were only wholes, how would Lhls LranslaLe lnLo, say, pollLlcal Lheory? ulLlmaLely, Lhere are no free clLlzens, only Lhe whole SLaLe? lf Lhe whole" ls prlmary, and we are parLs of Lhe SLaLe, Lhen clearly we exlsL Lo serve Lhe SLaLe, and clearly a LoLallLarlan reglme would be a shlnlng example of Lhe new paradlgm, where all Lhose nasLy parLs wlll dlsappear ln Lhe glorlous web. lL ls noL, as l wlll repeaL a dozen Llmes LhroughouL Lhls volume, LhaL sysLems Lheory ls wrong, lL ls LhaL, lronlcally, lL ls lncredlbly parLlal and lopslded. And so we wlll begln, ln Lhls chapLer and Lhe nexL, Lo redress some of Lhese parLlallLles and lmbalances. And we wlll see, as Lhls book progresses, LhaL sysLems Lheory, ln and by lLself, ls noL a force of heallng and whollng Lhe planeL, raLher, we wlll see, and agaln lronlcally, LhaL sysLems Lheory (ln all lLs many varlanLs) ls parL of Lhe flaLland paradlgm LhaL ls sLlll conLrlbuLlng Lo Lhe despollaLlon and devasLaLlon of Cala. MlC8C Anu MAC8C vlrLually all of Lhe popular LheorlsLs of sysLems Lheory, deep ecology, and ecofemlnlsm presenL some verslon of a greaL holarchy of belng, wlLh flelds wlLhln flelds wlLhln flelds. 1he ecofemlnlsL !ulla 8ussell: AL Lhe same Llme, a body, a naLlon, exlsLs ln a larger conLexL ln whlch lL funcLlons as a parL. 1he naLlon exlsLs ln Lhe conLexL of all naLlons LhaL make up Lhe whole pollLlcal body of humanlLy. And all of humanlLy exlsLs ln a blosphere LhaL ls Lhe body of Lhe whole LarLh. We exlsL as parL of a seamless whole ln whlch everyLhlng ls connecLed Lo everyLhlng else.2 llgure 3-1 ls very Lyplcal of Lhe varlous hlerarchles (holarchles) LhaL have been presenLed, elLher expllclLly or lmpllclLly, by dlfferenL hollsLlc or ecologlcal or sysLems-orlenLed LheorlsLs (slmllar holarchles can be found ln opper, Laszlo, Sesslons, Mlller, Lngels, and oLhers). Many of Lhese holarchles are represenLed by Lhe LheorlsLs as a serles of levels or sLraLlfled order" (Capra), llke a ladder," whlch ls perfecLly accepLable as long as we remember Lhe clrcular complexlLy LhaL Lhese auLhors malnLaln ls acLually lnvolved and don'L make Lhe unfalr and unwarranLed charge LhaL Lhese LheorlsLs are belng llnear." 1haL, as we wlll see, ls noL Lhe problem. 8losphere SocleLy / naLlon CulLure / SubculLure CommunlLy lamlly erson nervous SysLem Crgans / Crgan SysLems 1lssues Cells Crganelles Molecules ALoms SubaLomlc arLlcles llqote J-1. 1yplcol nolotcby lf we look aL flgure 3-1-or aL almosL any of Lhe oLher and slmllar holarchles-we noLlce lmmedlaLely LhaL Lhere ls a confuslon and conflaLlon of lndlvldual and soclal holons. 1haL ls, mlcro- and macroworlds are confused. 1he soclal holon ls assumed Lo be of Lhe same Lype and same naLure as Lhe compound lndlvldual holon, so LhaL Lhey can be arranged above" or below" each oLher. Look, for example, aL karl opper's blospherlc holarchy (flg. 3-2). opper (and he ls far from alone) counLs lndlvlduals and populaLlons as belng of Lhe same loglcal (and exlsLenLlal) Lype, and Lhus arrangeable one above Lhe oLher, as dlfferenL levels" on Lhe same scale (such as, ln hls scheme, level 7 and level 8, or level 10 and level 11). 1hls ls qulLe lncorrecL. We saw ln Lhe lasL chapLer (wlLh LeneL 9), LhaL ln any hollsLlc sequence, lndlvldual or soclal, lf we desLroy any level, we desLroy oll Lhe levels above lL and oooe of Lhe levels below lL, by Lhe slmple deflnlLlon of wholeness/parLness. A hlgher-level holon ls ln parL composeJ of lLs lower-level holons, and Lhus lf we desLroy any lower level, we wlll also desLroy any levels above lL because we have Laken away some of Lhelr componenL parLs. 8uL Lhese parLs Lhemselves exlsLed befote Lhe whole emerged and Lherefore can, ln general Lerms, exlsL wlLhouL lL. 12) Level of ecosysLems (LoLal blosphere) 11) Level of populaLlons of meLazoa and planLs 10) Level of meLazoa and mulLlcellular planLs 9) Level of Llssues and organs 8) Level of populaLlons of unlcellular organlsms 7) Level of cells and of unlcellular organlsms 6) Level of organelles (and perhaps vlruses) 3) Llqulds and sollds (crysLals) 4) Molecules 3) ALoms 2) LlemenLary parLlcles 1) Sub-elemenLary parLlcles 0) unknown: sub-sub-elemenLary parLlcles? llqote J-2. loppets nolotcbyJ Look agaln aL flgure 3-1. 1he clalm of Lhese hollsLs ls LhaL naLlon-sLaLes exlsL as potts of a larger blosphere, a hlgher (or deeper) wholeness. 8uL lf Lhe blosphere were really a hlgher level of organlzaLlon Lhan naLlon-sLaLes, lf lL really were a hlgher-level whole organlzlng or conLalnlng naLlon-sLaLes as potts, Lhen (1) you couldn'L have a blosphere ootll you had naLlon-sLaLes, slnce Lhe laLLer are clalmed Lo be lngredlenLs of Lhe blosphere, and (2) lf you desLroyed all naLlon-sLaLes you would desLroy Lhe blosphere (slnce Lhe whole cannoL exlsL wlLhouL lLs parLs). 8oLh of Lhose assumpLlons are obvlously noL Lrue. ln facL, lL ls [usL Lhe opposlLe: desLroy Lhe blosphere and you desLroy oll naLlon-sLaLes, buL LheoreLlcally remove all naLlon-sLaLes and Lhe blosphere would and could conLlnue ([usL as lL dld long before naLlons showed up). 1hls means LhaL Lhe blosphere ls a lowet and shallower level (whlch does oot mean less lmporLanL for exlsLence, buL mote lmporLanL for exlsLence, because Lhe lowet a level you desLroy, Lhe mote hlgher levels lL Lakes wlLh lL, lL ls, as we puL lL ln LeneL 9, mote fooJomeotol Lo exlsLence). So leL us locaLe Lhe blosphere" or LoLal ecosysLem" by asklng whaL would or would noL be desLroyed lf we LheoreLlcally dlsappeared" lL. Looklng aL opper's dlagram, we flnd LhaL lf we desLroyed Lhe blosphere (lf a Lhermonuclear holocausL desLroyed oll llfe forms on earLh), we would desLroy all Lhe levels down Lo and lncludlng hls level 6, bot oo lowet. 1haL means Lhe blologlcal ecosysLem stotts aL hls level 6, and noL, as he llsLs lL, aL level 12. (1hls, as we wlll see, ls a cruclal error ln Lhe onLologles of many ecoLheorlsLs as well.) ln oLher words, we obvlously have ecosysLems, ln Lhe broadesL sense, os sooo os we have dlfferenL llfe forms lnLeracLlng wlLh each oLher and wlLh a physlcal envlronmenL, and Lhls beglns Lo occur ln lLs mosL fundamenLal fashlon aL Lhe level of prokaryoLes (organelles). uLLlng Lhe ecosysLem aL level 12 would lmply, for example, LhaL poor level 10-planLs and meLazoa-don'L have ecosysLems. 1hus, lf we conslder Lhe" ecosysLem as a slngle level, Lhen lL ls obvlous LhaL boLh dlagrams compleLely mlsplace lL. 8uL lL's worse Lhan LhaL. LcosysLem (or LoLal populaLlon") lsn'L a pottlcolot level among oLher levels of lndlvldual holarchy, buL Lhe soclol envlronmenL of eocb and every level of lndlvlduallLy ln Lhe blosphere. And nelLher of Lhese dlagrams dlsLlngulshes beLween mlcro and macro (or lndlvldual and soclal) on ooy level, boLh LreaL Lhem as sepotote levels on Lhe some scale. (1hls ls a second cruclal error ln mosL eco-onLologles.) WlLh reference Lo opper's dlagram, for example, level 8 and level 7 are noL Lwo dlfferenL levels, as he lmaglnes, buL Lhe lndlvldual and soclal aspecLs of Lhe some level. (We know Lhls Lo be Lrue because lf we desLroy eltbet level," Lhe oLher ls also desLroyed, whlch means oeltbet ls hlgher or lower relaLlve Lo Lhe oLher.) lf one were really lowet-lf level 7 were really lower Lhan level 8, as he sLaLes-Lhen lL coolJ exlsL wlLhouL Lhe hlgher. 8uL you cannoL have cells wlLhouL a socleLy (populaLlon) of oLher cells, and you cannoL have a populaLlon of cells wlLh no cells aL all-noLhlng exlsLs alone wlLhouL an envlronmenL of Lhe slmllar. ln oLher words, Lhe lndlvldual and soclal are noL Lwo dlfferenL colns, one belng of a hlgher currency Lhan Lhe oLher, buL raLher Lhe heads and Lalls of Lhe some coln aL evety currency. 1hey are Lwo aspecLs of Lhe same Lhlng, noL Lwo fundamenLally dlfferenL Lhlngs (or levels). WhaL ls necessary, Lhen, ls Lo consLrucL a serles of Lrue holarchles of compound loJlvlJools and Lhen lndlcaLe, aL Lhe some level of organlzaLlon, Lhe type of eovltoomeot (or soclal holon) ln whlch Lhe lndlvldual holon ls a parLlclpanL (and on whose exlsLence Lhe lndlvldual holon depends). And Lhls needs Lo be done ln all Lhree of Lhe greaL realms of evoluLlon-physlosphere, blosphere, and noosphere. lorLunaLely, much of Lhls work has already been done by Lrlch !anLsch, Lhe only LheorlsL, Lo my knowledge, Lo have lnvesLlgaLed exLenslvely (and ofLen brllllanLly) Lhe relaLlonshlps beLween mlcro and macro (lndlvldual and soclal) paLLerns of coevoluLlon ln all Lhree domalns (alLhough, as we wlll see, hls argumenL becomes somewhaL garbled as he approaches Lhe noosphere). llgures 3-3 and 3-4 are !anLsch's schemaLlc dlagrams of Lhe coevoluLlon of mlcro and macro paLLerns ln, respecLlvely, Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere. llgure 3-4 plcks up where flgure 3-3 leaves off (namely, Lhe passlng of maLLer lnLo llfe). 1he explanaLlons under each dlagram are hls own. (WlLh Lhe excepLlons LhaL l wlll menLlon, l am ln subsLanLlal agreemenL wlLh everyLhlng ln Lhese Lwo dlagrams and wlLh hls explanaLlons of Lhem.) 1he lower porLlon of each dlagram represenLs mlcroevoluLlon-Lhe evoluLlon of lndlvldual holons. 1he upper porLlon represenLs macroevoluLlon-Lhe cottelotlve level of soclal or envlronmenLal relaLlonshlps (relaLlonal exchanges) ln whlch Lhe lndlvldual holons are lnexLrlcably embedded. 1he ldea ls falrly slmple: when you have a speclflc Lype of loJlvlJool holon (say, heavy aLoms), whaL klnd of soclol or collecLlve envlronmenL resulLs? (ln Lhls case, sLars). When molecules emerge, planeLs emerge (l.e., Lhey coemerge, coevolve). When eukaryoLes emerge, ecosysLems emerge, when complex anlmals emerge, famllles emerge, and so on. All of Lhese correspondences are llsLed on flgures 3-3 and 3-4. llqote J-J. cosmlc coevolotloo of Mocto- ooJ Mlctosttoctotes. 1be osymmettlcol oofotlloq of tbe foot pbyslcol fotces colls loto ploy step by step oew sttoctotol levels, ftom tbe moctoscoplc slJe os well os ftom tbe mlctoscoplc. 1bese levels motoolly stlmolote tbelt evolotloos. (Iootscb, 1be 5elf-Otqoolzloq uolvetse, p. 94) llqote J-4. 1be blstoty of llfe oo eottb exptesses tbe coevolotloo of self-otqoolzloq mocto- ooJ mlctosystems lo evet-blqbet Jeqtees of Jlffeteotlotloo. (Iootscb, 1be 5elf-Otqoolzloq uolvetse, p. 1J2) And noLlce: slnce evoluLlon produces greaLer depLh, less span, Lhen Lhe lndlvldual holons Lend Lo geL blqqet (l.e., molecules are blgger Lhan aLoms, because Lhey embrace and conLaln Lhem), buL soclal holons Lend Lo geL smollet. 8ecause Lhere are fewer holons aL Lhe greaLer depLh (Lhere are always fewer molecules Lhan aLoms), Lhen when you puL Lhem LogeLher lnLo collecLlves, Lhe collecLlves are smaller. 1hus famllles are smaller Lhan ecosysLems, whlch are smaller Lhan planeLs, whlch are smaller Lhan sLars. (We wlll reLurn Lo Lhls lncreaslng depLh/decreaslng span ln a momenL.) 1he earller flgures (3-1 and 3-2) suffer badly by comparlson because Lhey LreaL mlcro and macro as Jlffeteot levels of Lhe overall evoluLlonary process, lnsLead of seelng Lhem as Lwo dlfferenL aspecLs of each level of Lhe overall evoluLlonary process, and Lhey leave ouL alLogeLher Lhe macro componenL of Lhe lower levels, a grave omlsslon. noLlce ln parLlcular LhaL boLh Lhe mlcro and macro holarchles glven by !anLsch (ln boLh Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere) consLlLuLe a genulne hlgher/lower relaLlonshlp: desLroy any lower (wheLher lndlvldual or soclal), and Lhe levels above lL are also desLroyed, buL noL vlce versa. !anLsch ls presenLlng genulne holarchles of boLh lndlvldual and soclal holons. CAlA noLlce, ln flgure 3-4, where !anLsch places Cala"-lL ls Lhe soclal holon composed prlmarlly of Lhe lndlvldual holons of prokaryoLes. !anLsch ls here uslng Lhe Lerm Colo ln lLs Lechnlcally correcL sense, as orlglnally proposed by Lynn Margulls and !ames Lovelock (and named by Wllllam Coldlng, auLhor of lotJ of tbe llles). As !anLsch explalns, 1he auLocaLalyLlc unlLs ln Lhls sysLem [Cala] whlch make posslble Lhe formaLlon of a dlsslpaLlve sLrucLure far from equlllbrlum and malnLaln Lhe Lhrough-flow of Lhe varlous gases [ln Lhe aLmosphere] are none else buL Lhe prokaryoLes. lL seems LhaL afLer Lhe profound LransformaLlons of Lhe earLh's surface by Lhe oxldaLlon of sedlmenLs and Lhe accumulaLlon of free oxygen, Lhey have been lnsLrumenLal ln brlnglng Lhe overall sysLem blo- plus aLmosphere lnLo global, auLopoleLlc sLablllLy, relgnlng now for 1300 mllllon years." 4 1he prokaryoLes medlaLe exchanges wlLh Lhe aLmosphere (Lhe physlosphere), buL also form a global and lnLerconnecLed neLwork wlLh all oLher prokaryoLes-Lhe overall Cala sysLem. 1hls ls preclsely LeneL 11, 1he mlcro ls ln relaLlonal exchange wlLh Lhe macro aL all levels of lLs depLh." lurLher, and Lhls ls Lhe fasclnaLlng parL, slnce some prokaryoLes were Laken up and lncorporaLed lnLo hlgher (eukaryoLlc) cells and Lhese ln Lurn ln complex organlsms, Lhe prokaryoLlc Cala sysLem ls sLlll servlng lLs orlglnal global funcLlon. As !anLsch puLs lL, 1he descendenLs of Lhe prokaryoLes, ln Lhe form of parLs of more hlghly developed cells, are sLlll aL Lhelr old [ob." And Lhls, of course, ls preclsely LeneL 3, Lach emergenL holon Lranscends buL lncludes lLs predecessor(s)." !anLsch polnLs ouL LhaL Lhe Cala sysLem ls Lhe lotqest llvlng soclal holon on Lhe planeL (has Lhe mosL unlLs, or Lhe qteotest spoo), preclsely because lL ls Lhe sbollowest (mosL prlmlLlve). Agaln, evoluLlon produces greaLer depLh, less span. AL Lhe same Llme, preclsely because Cala ls Lhe shallowesL of all llvlng soclal holons, lL ls exacLly Lhe mosL fundamenLal. As we earller puL lL, Lhe less Jeptb a holon has, Lhe mote fooJomeotol lL ls Lo Lhe kosmos, because lL ls a compooeot of so many oLher holons. And Lhus Cala ls Lhe mosL fundamenLal (and leasL slgnlflcanL) of all llvlng soclal holons: all hlgher llfe forms depend upon lL (desLroy hlgher llfe forms, and Cala ls baslcally unLouched, desLroy Cala, and everyLhlng else goes wlLh lL). Cala ls lndeed our rooLs and our foundaLlon. 8uL aslde from Lhls Lechnlcal usage, Cala has come Lo mean, for many people, Lhe LoLal blosphere, for some, lL means Lhe LoLal planeL and all llfe forms, and for a few, lL means SplrlL lLself, or Lhe Coddess, as Lhe LoLal Llfe lorce of Lhe planeL. 1here ls ln all Lhese approaches a Lendency Lo confuse fundamenLal wlLh slgnlflcanL. noneLheless, alLhough none of Lhese usages ls Lechnlcally correcL, uslng Colo Lo mean Lhe overall blosphere or overall llfe dlmenslon of Lhe planeL ls accepLable enough, as long as we are clear abouL whaL exacLly ls meanL. l wlll ofLen use Colo ln boLh Lhe narrow Lechnlcal sense (prokaryoLlc neLwork) and Lhe broader myLhlc" sense (LoLal blosphere or llvlng planeL as a whole), and Lhe conLexL wlll make clear whlch ls lnLended. SlZL, SAn, LM88ACL noLlce LhaL ln boLh flgures 3-3 and 3-4 !anLsch ploLs spaLlal exLenslon (or physlcal slze) agalnsL evoluLlonary Llme, and hls concluslon ln boLh flgures ls LhaL, wlLh lncreaslng evoluLlon, loJlvlJool holons Lend Lo become lotqet (ln Lhe sense LhaL organlsms are larger Lhan molecules) and soclol holons Lend Lo become smollet (planeLs are smaller Lhan galaxles)-and he expllclLly lndlcaLes Lhls on hls dlagrams. 8oLh of Lhese are, we have seen, examples of Lhe facL LhaL evoluLlon produces greaLer depLh, less span. Cn Lhe one hand, lndlvldual holons LranscenL buL lnclude Lhelr predecessors-developmenL ls envelopmenL-and so Lhe LoLal depLh or embrace of lndlvldual holons lncreases: cells embrace molecules whlch embrace aLoms whlch embrace parLlcles. Llkewlse, Lhe greaLer Lhe depLh of a holon, Lhe fewer of Lhem LhaL are produced and malnLalned, relaLlve Lo Lhe number of Lhelr predecessors (fewer molecules Lhan aLoms, fewer cells Lhan molecules), and Lherefore Lhe popolotloo of greaLer-depLh holons wlll always be less Lhan Lhe populaLlon of lLs predecessors. 1hus, greaLer depLh, less span. 1hese correlaLlons are lmporLanL, we wlll see, because many ecoLheorlsLs and sysLems LheorlsLs confuse larger span wlLh greaLer depLh, and Lhus ofLen recommend regresslve onLologles and regresslve dlrecLlons for salvaLlon. 8uL before we geL Lo LhaL, a slmple polnL abouL !anLsch's lmporLanL correlaLlons. ln equaLlng Lhese changes wlLh acLual slze (or physlcal exLenslon), !anLsch goes Loo far (or becomes Loo slmpllsLlc). uepLh or embrace always lncreases, buL embrace ls noL necessarlly LranslaLable lnLo slmple slzes. ln Lhe same way, lncreaslng evoluLlon means less relaLlve span (or decreaslng slmple span), buL Lhls does noL necessarlly show up as decreaslng physlcal slze (see below). 3 Cf course, once a qlveo level has emerged, Lhen lLs slmple span can begln Lo lncrease, and Lhls wlll ofLen show up as an lncrease ln Lhe spaLlal exLenslon of Lhe populaLlon-l.e., for a glven depLh, span can lncrease up Lo lLs carrylng llmlLs, Lhus human span has lncreased from small vlllages Lo global vlllages. 6 When Lhls sLarLs happenlng ln human evoluLlon, !anLsch geLs confused, because, he supposes, macro-evoluLlon ls sopposeJ Lo geL physlcally smaller, and yeL human socloculLural evoluLlon keeps geLLlng larger and mote global, whlch leads !anLsch Lo saylng LhaL human evoluLlon compleLely Lurns on lLs head" Lhe prevlous Lrend seen everywhere else ln evoluLlon, buL, of course, lL does noLhlng of Lhe sorL-all LhaL geLs Lurned on lLs head ls hls lncorrecL assumpLlon abouL slze. 8ecause Lhe facL ls, alLhough acLual slze or spaLlal exLenslon ls ofLen a good lndlcaLor of Lhese yardsLlcks, nelLher necessarlly and always LranslaLes lnLo slmple physlcal dlmenslons. 1he reason !anLsch's slze rule" geLs lnLo so much Lrouble wlLh human or socloculLural evoluLlon ls LhaL Lhe human mlnd, as uescarLes knew, ls characLerlzed more by lnLenLlon Lhan exLenslon. 1haL ls why lL ls so lmporLanL Lo sLaLe Lhe rule" sLrlcLly ln Lerms of embrace (depLh of holon, regardless of slze of holon) and span (number of lndlvlduals aL LhaL depLh, regardless of Lhelr acLual slze). A concepL, we wlll see, always embraces a symbol (lL ls a symbol plos anoLher cognlLlve funcLlon, lL has greaLer depLh), buL we can'L say a concepL ls physlcally blqqet Lhan a symbol. Cne value mlghL be bettet Lhan anoLher, buL lL doesn'L occupy a blgger space. 1PL 8C8LLM Wl1P SlZL Anu SAn All of Lhese seemlngly halr-spllLLlng dlsLlncLlons are acLually very lmporLanL when lL comes Lo Lhe prevalenL hollsLlc Lheorles," because many of Lhem Lry Lo consLrucL Lhelr holarchles based on locteosloq slze (or, secondarlly, locteosloq spoo)-[usL as ln flgure 3-1-and Lhls leads Lo some very unpleasanL and confuslng resulLs. WheLher Lhey base Lhelr Lheorles on slze or span, Lhey confuse Lhose wlLh depLh, and Lhls ofLen leads Lo teqtesslve onLologles and soLerlologles. undersLandlng Lhe errors" ln flgure 3-1 ls lmporLanL for unravellng Lhese common confuslons found ln many hollsLlc, ecologlcal, and sysLems Lhlnkers. l wlll menLlon only Lwo problems aL Lhls polnL. lor Lhe evoluLlon of lndlvldual holons, qteotet embtoce means LhaL more of Lhe unlverse ls belng Laken lnLo Lhe holon (ls acLually lnLernal Lo LhaL holon). As we wlll see, an lndlvldual holon can evenLually embtoce tbe eotlte kosmos-lLs depLh can go Lo lnflnlLy-buL Lhe octool oombet of holons (Lhe span) LhaL can reallze Lhls LoLal embrace mlghL be very, very few. kosmlc consclousness means kosmlc embrace, lL doesn'L mean kosmlc span. Many hollsLlc LheorlsLs are admlrably Lrylng Lo consLrucL a serles of wlder and wlder wholes," and Lhls serles ls of absoluLely cruclal slgnlflcance, Lhey malnLaln, because lL ls meanL Lo help us humans flnd our place, our conLexL, ln Lhe larger scheme of Lhlngs, so LhaL we may more accuraLely orlenL ourselves-morally, emoLlonally, cognlLlvely, splrlLually-Lo our fellows and Lo our world. l am ln compleLe sympaLhy wlLh LhaL approach. 8uL lf Jeptb ls coofoseJ wltb spoo (or wlLh slze), Lhen Lhe resulLanL hollsLlc sequence of wlder wholes" ends up belng perfecLly regresslve and anLl-hollsLlc! Slnce, wlLh evoluLlon, slmple span always geLs smollet, Lhen by consLrucLlng a hollsLlc sequence of blqqet span, we are headed ln preclsely Lhe opposlLe and alLogeLher wrong dlrecLlon. lor example, many hollsLlc LheorlsLs creaLe Lhelr hollsLlc" sequences uslng slmple span, and end up wlLh Lhls: Lhe noosphere ls pott of Lhe larger whole called Lhe blosphere, whlch lLself ls pott of Lhe larger whole called Lhe cosmos (or Lhe enLlre physlosphere). AbsoluLely noL Lrue. AbsoluLely Lhe oLher way around. As we have seen, lf Lhe noosphere were really a pott of Lhe blosphere, Lhen lf we desLroyed Lhe noosphere Lhe blosphere would dlsappear, and LhaL ls clearly noL Lhe case. An aLom ls genulnely a parL of a molecule, and Lhus lf we desLroy Lhe aLoms we also desLroy Lhe molecule: Lhe whole needs lLs parLs. !usL so, lf Lhe noosphere were really a parL of Lhe blosphere, Lhen desLroylng Lhe noosphere would ellmlnaLe Lhe blosphere, and yeL lL ls [usL Lhe oLher way around: desLroy Lhe blosphere, and Lhe noosphere ls gone, preclsely because Lhe blosphere ls a parL of Lhe noosphere, and noL vlce versa. ln oLher words, because Lhese LheorlsLs look mosLly aL slmple span (and lLs slze), and because Lhey Lhlnk LhaL blqqet span ls a hlgher or deeper whole," and slnce ln facL greaLer evoluLlon produces less span, Lhen Lhese LheorlsLs geL Lhe hollsLlc sequence exoctly backward. WhaL Lhese hollsLs mean Lo say, correcLly, ls LhaL Lhe noosphere JepeoJs on Lhe blosphere, whlch JepeoJs on Lhe physlosphere-and LhaL ls Lrue pteclsely because Lhe physlosphere ls a lowet componenL of Lhe blosphere, whlch ls a lowet componenL of Lhe noosphere, and noL Lhe oLher way around. 8ecause Lhls ls such an lmporLanL Loplc, l wanL Lo go over lL uslng some very slmple examples. SAML-LLvLL 8LLA1lCnAL LxCPAnCL We sald LhaL wlLh emergenL evoluLlon we are, ln effecL, playlng Lhree-dlmenslonal checkers or chess, noL flaLland chess. So lmaglne Lhls: lmaglne one chessboard (or checkerboard) wlLh forLy black checkers placed on lL. 1he depLh ls one, Lhe span ls forLy. lace anoLher chessboard over lL, buL leave lL empLy for Lhe momenL. 1he depLh ls Lwo, Lhe span zero. now, ln evoluLlon, Lhe only way Lo geL Lo level 2 ls Lhrough level 1, and, ln facL, Lhe checkers on level 2 are composed ln parL of checkers from level 1-Lhey are all holons or compound lndlvlduals. 8epresenL Lhls by Laklng one black checker from level 1, placlng lL on level 2, Lhen addlng a red checker on Lop of lL. 1he new and LoLal holon" on level 2 Lhus lncorporaLes lLs predecessor (Lhe black checker) and adds lLs own dlsLlncLlve properLles (Lhe red checker). lf we dld Lhls, say, Lhree Llmes, Lhe holons on level 2 would have a depLh of 2 and a span of 3. now, Lhe lndlvldual holons or checkers on level 1 (Lhe physlosphere) depend for Lhelr exlsLence on lnLrlcaLe neLworks of lnLerrelaLlonshlps wlLh all Lhe oLher black checkers ln Lhelr envlronmenL-depend, LhaL ls, on neLworks of Lhelr own soclal holons (Lhe coevoluLlon of mlcro and macro). 1hey exlsL ln lnLrlcaLe neLworks of relaLlonal exchange wlLh holons aL Lhe same level of sLrucLural organlzaLlon (LeneL 11). 8uL Lhe slLuaLlon on level 2 (Lhe blosphere) ls much more compllcaLed, because Lhe new LoLal holon (Lhe black- and-red compound checker) depends for lLs exlsLence on lnLrlcaLe relaLlonshlps on botb levels. 1he red-and-black checkers on level 2 depend ln parL on Lhelr relaLlonshlps wlLh oLher red-and-black checkers-depend, LhaL ls, on ecologlcal or macro relaLlons wlLh oLher llvloq holons aL Lhe same level of sLrucLural organlzaLlon. ln oLher words, Lhe red" componenL of Lhe red-and-black checkers depends on lnLerrelaLlons wlLh Lhe red" componenL of oLher red-and-black holons-depends on telotloool excbooqes such as sexual reproducLlon (whlch are oot found on Lhe black level and cannoL be susLalned by LhaL level). Powever, because Lhe red-and-black checkers also have a black componenL, Lhey olso depend on Lhe lnLrlcaLe relaLlonshlps LhaL susLaln black holons Lhemselves-depend, LhaL ls, on all of Lhe muLually susLalnlng relaLlonshlps and processes LhaL consLlLuLe level 1 holons. So level 2 holons depend noL only on Lhe new and red" relaLlonshlps or soclal holons found ooly on level 2, Lhey also depend upon Lhe prlor black" relaLlonshlps and susLalnable paLLerns esLabllshed on level 1 (buL noL vlce versa: desLroy level 1, and level 2 ls desLroyed, desLroy level 2, and level 1 black checkers wlll sLlll exlsL). So any holon, or compound lndlvldual, depends on a whole serles of lnLrlcaLe relaLlonal exchanges wlLh soclal envlronmenLs of Lhe some level of sLrucLural organlzaLlon for eocb level ln Lhe lndlvldual holon. And LhaL means LhaL a holon of depLh Lhree, for example, has Lo exlsL ln an envlronmenL LhaL also possesses holons of aL leasL Lhe same depLh. So any holon ls fundamenLally a compound lndlvldual and lLs same-level relaLlonal exchanges aL oll of lLs levels-a compound lndlvldual ln a compound envlronmenL, exchanglng black wlLh black and red wlLh red and so forLh. We need one lasL polnL. 1he red-and-black checkers are noL lo Lhe black unlverse. 1he only Lhlngs LhaL are lo level 1 are more black checkers. 1he red-and-black checkers are Lo some degree beyooJ Lhe level 1 unlverse (LhaL ls Lhe meanlng of emergence). ln Lhelr redness" Lhey are beyond Lhe mere blackness of level 1. 1hey are a perfecL expresslon of Lhe self-Lranscendlng LhrusL of evoluLlon, of Lhe creaLlve emergence of a redness" LhaL cannoL be reduced Lo, or foooJ lo, Lhe black unlverse. And, ln a sense, lL ls [usL Lhe opposlLe. 1he red-and-black checkers conLaln redness" as well as blackness." 1he level 2 holons embtoce level 1 holons and Lhen go beyond Lhem wlLh Lhelr own deflnlng emergenLs (LeneL 3). Slnce Lhe red-and-black checker depends for lLs exlsLence on lLs own componenL black checkers, and slnce Lhe black checkers Lhemselves depend ulLlmaLely for Lhelr parLlcular Lype of exlsLence on all Lhe oLher black checkers ln tbelt unlverse, Lhen any level 2 holon ln essence embraces oll of lLs level 1 world by slmple vlrLue of lLs own compound lndlvlduallLy. A slngle llvlng cell embraces lLs enLlre physlcal unlverse. 1he many has become one and ls lncreased by one-anoLher meanlng of WhlLehead's cruclal dlcLum. And accordlng Lo WhlLehead, ln Lhls prehenslve unlflcaLlon" oll anLecedenL acLual occaslons parLlclpaLe Lo some degree (ln a holarchy of embrace, as he carefully polnLs ouL). And LhaL ls whaL l mean when l say LhaL a level 2 holon ls noL lo level 1, buL level 1 ls lo level 2, uLLerly and LoLally embraced by lL-one of Lhe meanlngs, we wlll see, of love, a lovlng embrace whlch, llke consclousness and creaLlvlLy and self-Lranscendence, ls bullL lnLo Lhe very Jeptb of Lhe kosmos. All of Lhls means, ln shorL, LhaL Lhe blosphere ls noL ln Lhe physlosphere. 1he blosphere ls oot a compooeot or a pott of Lhe greaLer whole called Lhe physlosphere, because Lhe only Lhlng greaLer" abouL Lhe physlosphere ls lLs span, noL lLs depLh or wholeness. 1he blos ls noL a parL of Lhe cosmos, buL [usL Lhe opposlLe: Lhe cosmos ls a parL of, a componenL of, Lhe blos. 1hus, a pott of Lhe blosphere (namely, lLs physlcal componenL) ls lndeed a pott of Lhe larger physlosphere, buL lLs deflnlng, emergenL quallLles are noL lo Lhe seL of physlcally deflnable deLermlnanLs governlng nonllvlng forms (as MaLurana and varela polnL ouL, auLopolesls ls found nowhere ln Lhe nonllvlng world, auLopolesls ls a red-checker quallLy found nowhere ln black checkers). 1he blosphere ls noL ln Lhe physlosphere, buL Lhe physlosphere ls lndeed ln Lhe blosphere, conLalned ln lL as a pott. 1hus, [usL as an aLom ls ln a molecule buL a molecule ls noL ln an aLom-even Lhough Lhe span of aLoms ls much, much larger Lhan molecules-so Lhe cosmos ls ln Lhe blos buL Lhe blos ls noL ln Lhe cosmos, even Lhough Lhe span of Lhe cosmos ls asLronomlcally larger. And noLe: Lhe blos ls a parL of Lhe kosmos, buL noL a parL of Lhe cosmos, and ln LhaL slmple move we have forever dlsavowed reducLlonlsm: physlcs ls Lhe mosL fundamenLal, and leasL slgnlflcanL, of Lhe sclences (Lhe reason physlcs can'L explaln blology ls preclsely because Lhe blos ls noL ln Lhe cosmos). 7 1hls ls [usL Lhe opposlLe of whaL a nalve falLh ln slmple span or slze would Lell us. !usL because Lhe cosmos ls blgger Lhan Lhe blos, we assume LhaL Lhe cosmos musL be more slgnlflcanL. 8uL lL ls only more fundamenLal, Lhe blos ls much more slgnlflcanL Lhan Lhe cosmos, because lL conLalns much more reallLy lnLernal Lo lL, embraces a much deeper and greaLer wholeness, has more depLh, and ln facL subsumes Lhe enLlre cosmos ln lLs own belng: Lranscends and lncludes. Llkewlse, as we wlll see, Lhe noosphere ls noL a parL of Lhe blosphere, buL [usL Lhe opposlLe: Lhe blos ls a lower componenL, a parL of, Lhe noosphere. So of course Lhe blosphere has a greaLer span (ls blgger"), [usL as Lhe cosmos ls blgger Lhan Lhe blos. 8uL from whaL we have now seen, LhaL, of course, [usL proves my polnL. reclsely because Lhe blosphere ls a componenL parL of Lhe noosphere, Lhe desLrucLlon of Lhe blosphere guaranLees Lhe desLrucLlon of Lhe noosphere-and LhaL ls one of Lhe polnLs we wlll be reLurnlng Lo LhroughouL Lhls volume. 1hls ls a profoundly ecologlcal orlenLaLlon wltboot regresslvely absoluLlzlng Lhe blosphere (or Lhe noosphere, as we wlll see). 8uL for now, leL us noLe LhaL Lhe oombet (Lhe span) of holons aL a hlgher level of developmenL wlll always be less Lhan Lhe number aL a precedlng level (LeneL 8). 1he number of red-and-black checkers wlll olwoys be less Lhan Lhe number of black checkers. 1here are no excepLlons, because Lhe number of wholes wlll always be less Lhan Lhe number of parLs conLalned ln Lhem. 1here wlll always be fewer flfLh-graders Lhan fourLh-graders, because you have Lo go Lhrough Lhe fourLh Lo geL Lo Lhe flfLh. 1here are always fewer oaks Lhan acorns-Lhe so-called pyramld of developmenL LhaL necessarlly geLs smaller and smaller Loward Lhe Lop. Laszlo, for example, represenLs Lhls pyramld as ln flgure 3-3 (whlch also lndlcaLes accuraLely LhaL, for example, Lhe blosphere ls noL lo Lhe physlosphere). Where maLLer ls fovotoble, llfe emerges. Where llfe ls fovotoble, mlnd emerges. CreaLer depLh, less span. llqote J-5. 1be keolms of volotloo (loszlo, volotloo, p. 55) Accordlngly, when hollsLlc LheorlsLs consLrucL Lhelr holarchles ln Lerms of lncreaslng span (wlder and wlder"), Lhey Lake us rlghL down Lhe pyramld, scraplng off more and more levels of depLh ln search of a blgger (and Lherefore shallower) span. 1hey should be Laklng us Lo a greaLer depLh LhaL lnvolves botb a Jeepet embrace and a wlJet ldenLlLy-an expanslon verLlcally and horlzonLally, noL [usL horlzonLally. 1hus, we can sLarL Lo see why dlagrams llke flgure 3-1 are such an unforLunaLe map: Lhey confuse mlcro and macro, Lhey confuse depLh and span. 1PL 88Aln Cl A PuMAn PCLCn !anLsch's dlagrams (flgs. 3-3 and 3-4) cover Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere. lL ls now Llme Lo look aL Lhe emergence of Lhe noosphere. lL ls wlLh Lhe braln LhaL we usually assoclaLe Lhe emergence of Lhe noosphere from (or raLher Lhrough) Lhe blosphere. !anLsch, followlng CunLher SLenL, dlvldes communlcaLlon ln Lhe blosphere lnLo geneLlc, meLabollc, and neural (and Lhe hlghesL parL of Lhe laLLer ls sald Lo correlaLe wlLh noospherlc evoluLlon). !anLsch: CeneLlc communlcaLlon acLs ln Llme lnLervals whlch are long compared Lo Lhe llfeLlme of an lndlvldual. lL makes phylogeny and coherenL evoluLlon across many generaLlons posslble. MeLabollc communlcaLlon whlch ln Lhe organlsm ls LransmlLLed by speclal messenger molecules, Lhe hormones, fulflls Lwo Lasks wlLhln an organlsm. Cne Lask ls Lhe regulaLlon of Lhe developmenL of mulLlcellular organlsms, ln planLs as well as ln anlmals. 1he oLher Lask concerns Lhe damplng of Lhe consequences of envlronmenLal flucLuaLlons for Lhe organlsm, or ln oLher words, Lhe enhancemenL of Lhe organlsm's auLonomy [LeneL 12d]. MeLabollc communlcaLlon based on hormones acLs relaLlvely slowly, from seconds Lo mlnuLes. 1he Lhlrd Lype of blologlcal communlcaLlon ls LransmlLLed by Lhe nervous sysLem. 1hls Lype acLs ln organlsms Lyplcally wlLhln a hundredLh Lo a LenLh of a second and ls Lhus abouL a Lhousand Llmes fasLer Lhan meLabollc communlcaLlon. 8 !anLsch polnLs ouL LhaL Lhese Lhree sysLems emerge holarchlcally, and he Lhen proceeds Lo glve a holarchlcal breakdown of neural sLrucLures Lhemselves, based prlmarlly on aul MacLean's hlghly lnfluenLlal noLlon of Lhe Lrlune braln (see flg. 3-6). ln MacLean's own words: Man flnds hlmself ln Lhe predlcamenL LhaL naLure has endowed hlm essenLlally wlLh Lhree bralns whlch, desplLe greaL dlfferences ln sLrucLure, musL funcLlon LogeLher and communlcaLe wlLh one anoLher. 1he oldesL of Lhese bralns ls baslcally repLlllan. 1he second has been lnherlLed from lower mammals, and Lhe Lhlrd ls a laLer mammallan developmenL, whlch, ln lLs culmlnaLlon ln prlmaLes, has made man pecullarly man. Speaklng allegorlcally of Lhese Lhree bralns wlLhln a braln [l.e., holons], we mlghL lmaglne LhaL when Lhe psychlaLrlsL blds Lhe paLlenL Lo lle on Lhe couch, he ls asklng hlm Lo sLreLch ouL alongslde a horse and a crocodlle. . . . 1he repLlllan braln ls fllled wlLh ancesLral lore and ancesLral memorles and ls falLhful ln dolng whaL lLs ancesLors say, buL lL ls noL very good for faclng up Lo new slLuaLlons [relaLlvely low auLonomy expressed ln reflex and lnsLlncLlve behavlor]. ln evoluLlon one flrsL sees Lhe beglnnlng of emanclpaLlon from Lhe ancesLral [lnflexlblllLy] wlLh Lhe appearance of Lhe lower mammallan braln, whlch naLure bullds on Lop of Lhe repLlllan braln. . . . lnvesLlgaLlons of Lhe lasL LwenLy years have shown LhaL Lhe lower mammallan braln plays a fundamenLal role ln emoLlonal behavlor. lL has a greaLer capaclLy Lhan Lhe repLlllan braln for learnlng new approaches and soluLlons Lo problems on Lhe basls of lmmedlaLe experlence. 8uL llke Lhe repLlllan braln, lL does noL have Lhe ablllLy Lo puL lLs feellngs lnLo words. llqote J-6. 1be 1tlooe 8tolo (Aftet Mocleoo) MacLean ls very speclflc abouL Lhe holarchlcal naLure of Lhese Lhree bralns. ln lLs evoluLlon, Lhe braln of [humans] reLalns Lhe hlerarchlcal organlzaLlon of Lhe Lhree baslc Lypes whlch can be convenlenLly labelled as repLlllan, paleo-mammallan and neo-mammallan. [1he braln sLem represenLs Lhe repLlllan braln, lnherlLed from repLlllan ancesLors.] 1he llmblc sysLem represenLs Lhe paleo-mammallan braln, whlch ls an lnherlLance from lower mammals. Man's llmblc sysLem ls much more hlghly sLrucLured Lhan LhaL of lower mammals, buL lLs baslc organlzaLlon, chemlsLry, eLc., are very slmllar. 1he same may be sald of Lhe oLher Lwo baslc Lypes. And Lhere ls ample evldence LhaL all Lhree Lypes have Lhelr own speclal sub[ecLlve, cognlLlve (problem-solvlng) memory and oLher parallel funcLlons. 9 ln oLher words, each of Lhe bralns ls a relaLlvely auLonomous holon. And because each ls a holon, we cannoL say LhaL any speclflc funcLlon ls slmply locaLed ln one of Lhe holons, Lhey all muLually acL and lnLeracL wlLh upward and downward lnfluence. 8uL ln general, Lhe Lhree bralns have Lhe followlng baslc funcLlons: keptllloo btolo (or braln sLem): 1hls ls Lhe phylogeneLlcally oldesL parL of Lhe braln, lLs core or chassls, roughly correspondlng Lo Lhe baslc sLrucLures of Lhe repLlle's braln. lL conLalns Lhe essenLlal apparaLus for lnLernal (vlsceral and glandular) regulaLlons, for prlmlLlve acLlvlLles based on lnsLlncLs and reflexes, and also Lhe cenLers for arouslng Lhe anlmal's vlgllance or puLLlng lL Lo sleep." 10 We may refer Lo lL as Lhe overall level of rudlmenLary sensorlmoLor lnLelllgence and lnsLlncLlve drlves or lmpulses. loleomommolloo btolo (or llmblc sysLem): 1he llmblc sysLem ls lnLlmaLely connecLed by Lwo-way neural paLhways wlLh Lhe hypoLhalamus and oLher cenLers ln Lhe braln-sLem concerned wlLh vlsceral sensaLlons and emoLlonal reacLlons-lncludlng sex, hunger, fear and aggresslon, so much so LhaL Lhe llmblc sysLem once bore Lhe name 'Lhe vlsceral braln.'" 11 ln shorL, 1he llmblc sysLem processes lnformaLlon ln such a way LhaL lL becomes experlenced as feellngs and emoLlons, whlch become guldlng forces for behavlor." 12 Neomommolloo btolo (or neocorLex): 1he exploslve growLh of Lhe neocorLex," says !anLsch, ln a laLer phase of evoluLlon ls one of Lhe mosL dramaLlc evenLs ln Lhe hlsLory of llfe on earLh," and presumably connecLed wlLh Lhe emergence of Lhe noosphere. lL acLs as an lmmense neural screen on whlch Lhe symbollc lmages of language and loglcs (lncludlng maLhemaLlcs) appear. 1he neocorLex ls Lhe locaLlon aL whlch lnformaLlon ls processed ln Lhe ways characLerlsLlc of Lhe self-reflexlve mlnd." 13 MacLean underscores Lhe holoarchlc naLure of Lhese Lhree bralns by comparlng Lhem wlLh Lhe componenLs of llLeraLure, whlch !anLsch eleganLly summarlzes ln Lhls fashlon: 1he repLlllan braln sLands for Lhe [baslc] flgures and roles whlch underlle all llLeraLures. 1he llmblc sysLem brlngs emoLlonal preferences, selecLlon and developmenL of Lhe scenarlos lnLo play. And Lhe neocorLex, flnally, produces on Lhls subsLraLe as many dlfferenL poems, Lales, novels and plays as Lhere are auLhors. 14 Agaln we see Lhe lower seLLlng Lhe posslblllLles and Lhe hlgher seLLlng Lhe probablllLles (or acLuallzlng poLenLlals). 1PL PuMAn SCClAL PCLCn !anLsch glves several dlagrams, slmllar Lo flgures 3-3 and 3-4, whlch he belleves represenL developmenLs ln Lhe noosphere (or whaL he calls socloculLural evoluLlon). l wlll noL reproduce Lhem here, because l belleve Lhey are fundamenLally confused. !anLsch says LhaL once evoluLlon reaches Lhe noosphere, Lhlngs become compleLely lnverLed." 8uL all LhaL ls lnverLed ls hls own prlor confuslon beLween span and slze, and hls lnslsLence on flndlng exLenslon where Lhere ls largely lnLenLlon. WlLhouL LhaL confuslon, Lhe same prlnclples and Lhe same evoluLlonary process can be seen aL work-greaLer depLh, less span-Lhere ls no lnverslon." As l sald, !anLsch ofLen aLLempLs Lo make spaLlal exLenslon (physlcal slze) a fundamenLal correlaLe of menLal (socloculLural) growLh, and as even uescarLes was well aware, ln Lhe noosphere, exLenslon glves way Lo lnLenLlon, upon whlch rulers do noL well flL. l wlll reLurn Lo LhaL polnL ln a momenL and go over lL carefully, buL for now leL us look lnsLead Lo Lhe work of Lhose sysLems LheorlsLs who have ploLLed ouL Lhe growLh of human soclol boloos durlng humanlLy's mllllon-or-so-year hlsLory. keep ln mlnd LhaL we have already ouLllned (however brlefly) Lhe growLh of loJlvlJool boloos, from aLoms Lo cells Lo mulLlcellular organlsms Lo complex anlmals (Lhe mlcro componenLs as suggesLed roughly ln Lhe boLLom halves of flgs. 3-3 and 3-4), and we also lndlcaLed Lhe correlaLlve envlronmenLal or soclol boloos aL each sLage (Lhe macro componenLs suggesLed ln Lhe upper halves ln flgs. 3-3 and 3-4). We Lhen brlefly skeLched Lhe furLher evoluLlon of Lhe loJlvlJool holon of complex anlmals up Lo and lncludlng Lhose wlLh Lhe Lrlune braln (from repLlle Lo mammal Lo prlmaLe). We wanL Lo look now aL Lhe soclol envlronmenL ln whlch Lhe Lrlune-bralned organlsms exlsLed, and Lhe Lypes of soclol boloos upon whlch Lhe Lrlune-bralned organlsm exlsLed for lLs own relaLlonal exchanges. And Lhls moves us dlrecLly lnLo Lhe noosphere, or Lhe realm of socloculLural (and noL [usL blosoclal) evoluLlon. We are addlng a Lhlrd chessboard Lo Lhe game-maLLer, llfe, mlnd. lf we look aL !anLsch's flgure 3-4, we wlll be remlnded LhaL lndlvldual complex anlmals, up Lo and lncludlng prlmaLes (whlch lncludes humans), needed soclol holons aL Lhe level of groups/famllles, and lf glven Lhose approprlaLe soclal holons, Lhe lndlvldual holons could be susLalned qulLe adequaLely (assumlng, of course, LhaL oll [unlor levels ln Lhe compound lndlvldual are also exlsLlng ln a balanced and susLalnable seL of relaLlonshlps wlLh Lhelr own envlronmenLs-assumlng, LhaL ls, LhaL Lhe whole mulLllevel arrangemenL ls ecologlcally sound ln Lhe broadesL sense, whlch we have every reason Lo belleve was Lhe case aL Lhls polnL ln evoluLlon). uL more slmply, Lhe soclal holon of Lhe famlly/group could have susLalned Lhe human Lrlune braln lndeflnlLely, [usL as lL sLlll susLalns Lhe roughly slmllar Lrlune braln of oLher prlmaLes (who conLlnue Lo exlsL ln klnshlp soclal holons). 8uL Lhe human holon pushed beyond an envlronmenL of klnshlp (or blospherlcally based) soclal holons such as Lhe famlly and began also produclng vlllages, Lowns, clLles, sLaLes. . . . As l sald, a Lhlrd chessboard had been added Lo Lhe evoluLlonary game. Cf course, Lhls ralses all Lhe old and Lhorny problems, from Lhe relaLlon of mlnd and body Lo Lhe whole lssue of wheLher Lhe noosphere lLself was a good ldea ln Lhe flrsL place. All l can say ls LhaL l wlll Lry Lo address Lhese lssues as besL l can, buL we musL proceed one sLep aL a Llme, and each sLep wlll have lLs own Lrue meanlng dlsclosed only as Lhe whole plcLure beglns Lo emerge. So, for Lhe momenL, leL us slmply noLe LhaL Lhere was no compelllng bloloqlcol reason Lo produce vlllages and clLles and sLaLes. 1he soclal holon of Lhe famlly/group could have susLalned Lhe human Lrlune braln, [usL as lL does oLher prlmaLes Lo Lhls day. 8uL [usL as maLLer had pushed forLh llfe, Lhe self-LranscendenL drlve wltblo blology pushed forLh someLhlng beyooJ blology, pushed forLh symbols and Lools LhaL boLh creaLed and depended upon new levels of soclal holons ln whlch Lhe users of symbols and Lools could exlsL and reproduce Lhemselves, buL Lhe reproducLlon was now Lhe reproducLlon of culLure Lhrough symbollc communlcaLlon and noL [usL Lhe reproducLlon of bodles Lhrough sexuallLy. klnshlp gave way Lo culLureshlp": add a blue checker on Lop of Lhe red checker on Lop of Lhe black checker. And only a reducLlonlsL wlll be bold enough Lo clalm LhaL culLure was really [usL a nlfLy new way Lo galn food, LhaL Lhe blue checker ls [usL a sneaky rearrangemenL of red checkers, LhaL Lhe noosphere ls noLhlng buL a new LwlsL on Lhe blosphere. 8uL [usL as Lhe blosphere ls noL lo Lhe physlosphere (you can'L flnd red checkers anywhere on level 1), so Lhe noosphere ls noL lo Lhe blosphere (Lhere are no blue checkers on level 2, no self-reflexlve llngulsLlc concepLs, for example, no calculus, poeLry, or formal loglc). As far as we can Lell, Lhe human braln has remalned vlrLually unchanged ln Lhe pasL flfLy Lhousand years. And yeL durlng LhaL flfLy-Lhousand-year perlod, Lhe same Lrlune braln produced an exLraordlnary range of culLural achlevemenLs and culLural dlsasLers. ln oLher words, noLhlng Lruly novel happened Lo Lhe Lrlune braln durlng LhaL perlod, no new ma[or blospherlc evoluLlon occurred. And yeL Lhe enLlre ma[esLy and caLasLrophe of culLure paraded across Lhe scene, all on Lhe same blologlcal base, buL a ma[esLy and caLasLrophe LhaL could noL be reduced Lo, explalned by, or conLalned ln LhaL base. Cnce agaln Lhe lower had seL Lhe foundaLlon and prepared Lhe posslblllLles for (buL dld noL deLermlne) evoluLlon ln Lhe hlgher, and Lhose new posslblllLles were now played ouL ln Lhe noosphere, ln Lhe realm of culLure and symbols and Loys and Lools. We wlll be looklng aL Lhe noospherlc changes ln Lhe loJlvlJool holons ln Lhe nexL chapLer. lor Lhe momenL leL us cenLer on Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe soclol holons ln Lhe newly emerglng noosphere. llgure 3-7 ls adapLed from AlasLalr 1aylor's socloculLural nonequlllbrlum sysLems model," a soclal approach based on dynamlc sysLems Lheory (and aL Lhls polnL we are cenLerlng on Lhe Lrue" aspecLs of sysLems Lheory). 1aylor malnLalns LhaL each succeedlng soclal holon bullds upon Lhe properLles and socleLal experlences of Lhe level(s) below and ln Lurn conLrlbuLes lLs own 'emergenL quallLles,' whlch Lake Lhe form of new Lechnologles and socleLal sLrucLures, accompanled by new appercepLlons of Lhe human-envlronmenL relaLlonshlp. We can dlscern progresslve developmenLs ln complexlLy and heLerogenelLy (alLhough ln any one hlsLorlcal slLuaLlon a dlfferenL, or even conLrary, experlence may occur)" 13 -all famlllar concepLs (all found ln Lhe LwenLy LeneLs). We could of course lnclude an enormous number of componenLs ln Lhe evolvlng noosphere of soclal humans, from Lypes of Lools Lo varlous worldvlews, from pollLlcal lnsLlLuLlons Lo sLyles of arL, from modes of producLlon Lo legal codes. And, lndeed, we wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhese varlous aspecLs as we proceed wlLh our sLory. 8uL for Lhe momenL, flgure 3-7 may serve as one example of Lhe growLh of soclal holons ln Lhe newly emergenL noosphere. 16 Serve enough, LhaL ls, Lo allow us a few lmporLanL observaLlons. ulllL8Ln1lA1lCn Anu ulSSCClA1lCn, 18AnSCLnuLnCL Anu 8L8LSSlCn 1he evoluLlon of holons ls noL all sweeLness and llghL, as some proponenLs of evoluLlonary progress" seem Lo malnLaln. lor Lhe grlm facL ls LhaL greaLer sLrucLural complexlLy-wheLher lndlvldual or soclal-means LhaL more Lhlngs coo go horrlbly wrong. ALoms don'L geL cancer, anlmals do. noneLheless, Lhe opposlLe concluslon, LhaL mosL evoluLlon ls really devoluLlon, ls noL warranLed elLher. 1he exlsLence of cancer does noL damn Lhe exlsLence of anlmals per se. And we wlll wanL Lo Lease aparL Lhe cancers of Lhe noosphere wlLhouL damnlng Lhe noosphere ln LoLo. As l lndlcaLed ln Lhe lasL chapLer, Lhe facL LhaL evoluLlon always produces greaLer Lranscendence and greaLer dlfferenLlaLlon means LhaL a facLor of posslble paLhology ls bullL lnLo every evoluLlonary sLep, because Lranscendence coo go Loo far and become teptessloo-Lhe hlgher does noL negaLe and preserve Lhe lower, lL Lrles only Lo negaLe (or repress or deny) Lhe lower, whlch works abouL as well as denylng our feeL. llqote J-7. metqeot Ceopolltlcol 5ystems levels (1oylot) Llkewlse, Jlffeteotlotloo can go Loo far and become Jlssoclotloo-a fallure Lo adequaLely lnLegraLe Lhe newly emergenL dlfferences lnLo a coherenL whole LhaL ls boLh lnLernally coheslve and exLernally ln harmony wlLh oLher correlaLlve holons and wlLh all [unlor componenLs. Whenever a new dlfferenLlaLlon ls noL maLched by a new and equal lnLegraLlon, whenever Lhere ls negaLlon wlLhouL preservaLlon, Lhe resulL ls paLhology of one sorL or anoLher, a paLhology LhaL, lf severe enough, evoluLlon seLs abouL Lo erase ln earnesL. 1hls becomes parLlcularly acuLe ln Lhe noosphere, ln culLural evoluLlon, slmply because Lhe human holon conLalns so many levels of depLh-physlosphere and blosphere and noosphere-and someLhlng can go wrong aL every level. When Lhe blosphere was flrsL emerglng on LarLh, we can lmaglne all Lhe flLs and sLarLs, all Lhe dead-ends, LhaL Lhe flrsL populaLlons of cells Lrled ouL ln Lhelr aLLempL Lo flL wlLh Lhe precondlLlons seL by Lhe physlosphere, whose LerrlLory Lhe llvlng cells were now lnvadlng. A false sLarL-a sLarL noL consonanL wlLh Lhe physlosphere-was slmply erased. And LhroughouL blologlcal evoluLlon, as Lhe blosphere lLself began addlng layers and layers of new depLh, each of Lhese levels had Lo be broughL lnLo an adequaLe harmony wlLh botb lLs predecessors ooJ lLs peers-no easy or Lrlvlal Lask, as Lhe awesome example of Lhe dlnosaurs remlnds us. All of LhaL was sLlll Lrue wlLh humans, buL wlLh an exLra and raLher gruesome burden: flL Lhe noosphere noL only wlLh lLs peers (holons aL Lhe same level) buL also wlLh oll of lLs predecessors-mlneral Lo planL Lo repLlle Lo paleomammal-LhaL noL only conLlnue Lo lnhablL Lhe same envlronmenLal space buL also exlst os compooeots lo tbe bomoo beloqs' owo compoooJ loJlvlJoollty. When MacLean sald LhaL when humans lle on Lhe couch for psychoanalysls, Lhey lle down wlLh a crocodlle and a horse, LhaL wasn'L Lhe half of lL: we lle down wlLh Lhe planeLs and Lhe sLars, Lhe lakes and Lhe rlvers, Lhe plankLon and Lhe oaks, Lhe llzards and Lhe blrds, Lhe rabblLs and Lhe apes-and, Lo repeaL, noL slmply because Lhey are nelghbors ln our own unlverse, buL because Lhey are componenLs ln our own belng, Lhey are llLerally our bones and blood and marrow and guLs and feellngs and fears. And [usL as Lhe blosphere had Lo flnd lLs accepLable nlche ln (and beyond) Lhe physlosphere, so Loo Lhe noosphere had Lo flnd lLs allowable or harmonlous place ln (and beyond) Lhe blosphere. And Lo borrow Shakespeare's phrase: Aye, Lhere's Lhe rub." 1he noosphere evolved. And as varlous sLages of pollLlcal, llngulsLlc, and Lechnlcal developmenL emerged-lncorporaLlng and Lranscendlng Lhelr predecessors-noL only could Lhese hlgher sLages of culLural developmenL repress and allenaLe Lhelr own prevlous connecLlons ln Lhe noosphere (as we wlll see), Lhey could also come perllously close Lo severlng Lhelr connecLlons wlLh Lhe blosphere as well, and Lo such an alarmlng degree LhaL, Loday, humans have earned, Lhrough enormously hard work and labor, Lhe prlvllege and Lhe posslblllLy of belng Lhe flrsL culLural dlnosaurs ln Lhe fraglle noosphere. lnsLead of Lranscendence, represslon, lnsLead of dlfferenLlaLlon, dlssoclaLlon, lnsLead of depLh, dlsease. 8ecause of Lhe very naLure of evoluLlon, LhaL Lype of dlssoclaLlon can occur aL any and all sLages of growLh and developmenL. 1he noosphere ls noL prlvlleged or unlque ln Lhls regard. lL ls slmply more alarmlng now because of lLs global dlmenslons. lf we vlolaLe Lhe posslbllltles glven us by Lhe blosphere, Lhen Lhe blosphere wlll fllck us off lLs back llke a bunch of fleas, and be none Lhe worse for lL. 8uL [usL as Lhe exlsLence of cancer does noL damn Lhe exlsLence of anlmals per se, so Lhe exlsLence of culLural dlseases and represslons does noL damn culLural evoluLlon lLself. 1hls parLlcularly applles Lo successlve sLages of culLural evoluLlon, from Lhe hunL Lo Lhe farm Lo Lhe englne Lo Lhe compuLer. Lach successlve sLage broughL new lnformaLlon, new poLenLlals, new hopes and new fears, broughL a greaLer complexlLy, a greaLer dlfferenLlaLlon, a greaLer relaLlve auLonomy-ooJ Lhe capaclLy for a new and greaLer paLhology lf a correspondlng lnLegraLlon and embrace dld noL ensue. And we wlll see LhaL Lhe hlsLory of culLural evoluLlon ls Lhe hlsLory of new achlevemenL, Lhe hlsLory of new dlsease. 8uL l have no sympaLhy for Lhose LheorlsLs who slmply coofose dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, Lranscendence and represslon, depLh and dlsease. Whenever evoluLlon produces a new dlfferenLlaLlon, and LhaL dlfferenLlaLlon ls noL lnLegraLed, a paLhology resulLs, and Lhere are Lwo fundamenLal ways Lo approach LhaL paLhology. Cne ls exempllfled by Lhe lreudlan noLlon (lnLroduced by LrnsL krls) of regresslon ln servlce of ego." 1haL ls, Lhe hlgher sLrucLure relaxes lL grlp on consclousness, regresses Lo a prevlous level where Lhe falled lnLegraLlon flrsL occurred, repalrs Lhe damage on LhaL level by rellvlng lL ln a benlgn and heallng conLexL, and Lhen lnLegraLes LhaL level-embraces LhaL level, embraces Lhe former shadow"-ln Lhe new and hlgher holon of Lhe ego (or LoLal self- sysLem). lor Lhe ego's problem was LhaL durlng lLs formaLlve growLh, where lL should have ttoosceoJeJ ooJ locloJeJ lLs lower-level drlves (such as sex and aggresslon), lL Lranscended and repressed Lhem, spllL Lhem off, allenaLed Lhem-one of Lhe prerogaLlves of a hlgher-level sLrucLure wlLh lLs greaLer relaLlve auLonomy, buL a prerogaLlve, we have seen, LhaL ls boughL only and always aL Lhe prlce of paLhology. 1hus Lhe cure: regresslon ln servlce of a hlgher relnLegraLlon-a regresslon LhaL allows evoluLlon Lo move forward more harmonlously by heallng and whollng a prevlously allenaLed holon. 1he oLher general approach ls Lhe reLro-8omanLlc, whlch ofLen recommends regresslon, perlod. 1hls approach, ln my oplnlon, slmply confuses dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, confuses Lranscendence and represslon. 1hus, whenever evoluLlon produces a new dlfferenLlaLlon, and LhaL dlfferenLlaLlon happens Lo go lnLo paLhologlcal dlssoclaLlon, Lhen Lhls approach seeks Lo permanenLly Lurn back Lhe pages of emergenL hlsLory Lo a Llme ptlot Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon. noL prlor Lo Lhe dlssoclaLlon-we all agree on LhaL!-buL prlor Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon lLself! 1haL wlll lndeed geL rld of Lhe new paLhology, aL Lhe cosL of geLLlng rld of Lhe new depLh, Lhe new creaLlvlLy, Lhe new consclousness. 8y LhaL reLro-8omanLlc loglc, Lhe only way Lo really geL rld of paLhology ls Lo geL rld of dlfferenLlaLlon alLogeLher, whlch means everyLhlng afLer Lhe 8lg 8ang was a 8lg MlsLake. All Lhe more dlsLurblng ln Lhe reLro-8omanLlc approach ls Lhe whole problem of where Lhese LheorlsLs raLher arblLrarlly JeclJe to stop Lhelr reLrogresslon. lor example, many LheorlsLs, looklng wlLh [usLlflable alarm aL Lhe represslons and allenaLlons LhaL ofLen accompanled Lhe Machlne Age, malnLaln LhaL we should never have gone pasL farmlng, and Lhere Lhen follows a wonderful euloglzlng of Lhe glorles of Lhe nonmechanlzed" and nondehumanlzlng" farmlng socleLles, where few humans were allenaLed from Lhe producLs of Lhelr own labor and Lhe CreaL MoLher" ruled ln peaceful and hollsLlc happlness. never mlnd LhaL many of Lhese socleLles lnLroduced dellberaLe human sacrlflce, mulLlplled Lhe exLenL and means of war, puL gender sLraLlflcaLlon aL lLs peak, and made vasL numbers of lLs populaLlons lnLo slaves. SpoLLlng Lhose obvlous dlfflculLles, oLher LheorlsLs Lhen go furLher and malnLaln LhaL mosL of humanklnd's problems came wlLh Lhe lnvenLlon of farmlng lLself, because wlLh farmlng Lhe human anlmal began Lo dellberaLely alLer Lhe blosphere for lLs own graLlflcaLlon, produced a wrlLLen language LhaL ensconced power ln Lhe dogmaLlc LexL, produced an agrlculLural surplus LhaL allowed some lndlvlduals Lo begln Lo economlcally conLrol and enslave oLhers, and began Lhe wholesale sub[ugaLlon of women. And, lndeed, mosL of LhaL dld begln wlLh agrarlan farmlng. So, Lhese LheorlsLs malnLaln, we really should never have gone pasL hunLlng-and-gaLherlng socleLles. 1he dellghLful Lhlngs Lhen sald abouL Lhese socleLles-some of whlch were peace-lovlng and raLher egallLarlan, and some of whlch mosL deflnlLely were noL-are, aL Lhe leasL, asLonlshlngly one-slded. unLll oLher LheorlsLs carefully polnL ouL LhaL preclous few of Lhese socleLles were acLually egallLarlan, LhaL warfare mosL deflnlLely exlsLed, LhaL Lhe very seeds of sexlsL sub[ugaLlon were planLed here, LhaL slavery was noL unheard of. . . . We really should never have gone pasL gorlllas, who aL leasL don'L dellberaLely sacrlflce Lhelr own or engage ln renegade warfare, where slavery ls nonexlsLenL and no anlmal ls allenaLed from lLs own labors. unLll you reallze . . . And so lL goes, scraplng layers and layers of depLh off Lhe kosmos looklng for a Carden of Lden LhaL ever recedes lnLo a shallower darkness. My polnL ls LhaL lL ls one Lhlng Lo remember and embrace and honor our rooLs, qulLe anoLher Lo hack off our leaves and branches and celebraLe LhaL as a soluLlon Lo leaf roL. So we wlll celebraLe Lhe new posslblllLles of evoluLlon even as we gasp ln horror-and Lry Lo redress-Lhe mulLlpllclLy of new paLhologles. 8uL Lo relLeraLe Lhe one polnL of sLrong agreemenL wlLh Lhe 8omanLlcs ln general: we have added such depLh (helghL) Lo Lhe noosphere lLself LhaL lL ls ln danger of slldlng off Lhe blosphere alLogeLher. And whlle LhaL wlll merely deLour and ln no way sLop Lhe blosphere, whlch wlll go lLs merry way wlLh or wlLhouL us, lL does spell caLasLrophe for Lhe anlmal LhaL noL only Lranscends buL represses. ln1L8lC8l1? lf we look now aL all of Lhe dlagrams presenLed ln Lhls chapLer, we noLlce a sLarLllng facL. All of Lhese dlagrams clalm Lo be hollsLlc, Lo cover all of reallLy ln an encompasslng fashlon. 1haL ls, lf we Lake ouL Lhe errors ln Lhelr presenLaLlon (llke confuslng mlcro and macro), and puL all of Lhese dlagrams LogeLher, Lhe sysLems LheorlsL would clalm LhaL Lhe resulLanL blg plcLure" covers Lhe whole of reallLy, from aLoms Lo cells Lo anlmals, from sLars Lo planeLs Lo Cala, from vlllages Lo Lowns Lo planeLary federaLlons (all of whlch are on our dlagrams). 1he noosphere Lranscends buL embraces Lhe blosphere, whlch Lranscends buL embraces Lhe physlosphere-one huge hollsLlc and all-embraclng sysLem, sLreLchlng from here Lo eLernlLy. And yeL, and yeL. SomeLhlng ls Lerrlbly wrong. Cr raLher, Lerrlbly parLlal. All of Lhese dlagrams represenL Lhlngs LhaL can be seen wlLh Lhe physlcal senses or Lhelr exLenslons (mlcroscopes, Lelescopes). 1hey are all, all of Lhem, how Lhe unlverse looks from Lhe ootslJe. 1hey are all Lhe ootwotJ fotms of evoluLlon, and noL one of Lhem represenLs how evoluLlon looks from Lhe loslJe, how Lhe lndlvldual holons feel and percelve and cognlze Lhe world aL varlous sLages. lor example, Lake Lhe progresslon: lrrlLablllLy, sensaLlon, percepLlon, lmpulse, lmage, symbol, concepL. . . . We mlghL belleve LhaL cells show proLoplasmlc lrrlLablllLy, LhaL planLs show rudlmenLary sensaLlon, LhaL repLlles show percepLlon, paleomammals show lmages, prlmaLes show symbols, and humans show concepLs. 1haL may be Lrue (and ls Lrue, l Lhlnk), buL Lhe polnL ls LhaL oooe of Lhose appear on any of our dlagrams. Cur dlagrams (Lhus far) show only Lhe ouLward forms of evoluLlon, and none of Lhe correspondlng lnLerlor prehenslons" of Lhe forms Lhemselves (sensaLlon, feellngs, ldeas, eLc.). So Lhe dlagrams Lhemselves are noL wrong (once we have revlsed a few errors), buL Lhey are Lerrlbly parLlal. 1hey leave ouL Lhe lnsldes of Lhe unlverse. And Lhere ls a reason for Lhls. 1he general sysLems sclences seek Lo be emplrlcal, or based on sensory evldence (or lLs exLenslons). And Lhus Lhey are lnLeresLed ln how cells are Laken up lnLo complex organlsms, and how organlsms are parLs of ecologlcal envlronmenLs, and so on-all of whlch you can see, and Lhus all of whlch you can lnvesLlgaLe emplrlcally. And all of whlch ls Lrue enough. 8uL Lhey are noL lnLeresLed ln-because Lhelr emplrlcal meLhods do noL cover-how sensaLlons are Laken up lnLo percepLlons, and percepLlons glve way Lo lmpulses and emoLlons, and emoLlons break forLh lnLo lmages, and lmages expand Lo symbols. . . . 1he emplrlcal sysLems sclences cover all of Lhe ouLward forms of all LhaL, and cover lL very well, Lhey slmply mlss, and leave ouL enLlrely, Lhe loslJe of all of LhaL. 1ake, for example, Lhe mlnd and Lhe braln. WhaLever else we may declde abouL Lhe braln and Lhe mlnd, Lhls much seems cerLaln: Lhe braln looks someLhlng llke flgure 3-6 (or some anaLomlcally correcL flgure), buL my mlnd does noL look llke flgure 3-6. l know my mlnd from Lhe lnslde, where lL seems Lo be seeLhlng wlLh sensaLlons and feellngs and lmages and ldeas. lL looks noLhlng llke flgure 3-6, whlch ls slmply how my braln looks. ln oLher words, my mlnd ls known lnLerlorly by acqualnLance," buL my braln ls known exLerlorly by descrlpLlon" (Wllllam !ames, 8erLrand 8ussell). 1haL ls why l can always Lo some degree see my own mlnd, buL l can never see my own braln (wlLhouL cuLLlng open my skull and geLLlng a mlrror). l can know a dead person's braln by slmply cuLLlng open Lhe skull and looklng aL lL-buL Lhen l am oot knowlng or sharlng LhaL person's mlnd, am l? or how he felL and percelved and LhoughL abouL Lhe world. 1he braln ls Lhe ouLslde, Lhe mlnd ls Lhe lnslde-and, as we wlll see, o slmllot type of extetlot/lotetlot bolJs fot evety boloo ln evoluLlon. And Lhe emplrlcal sysLems sclences or ecologlcal sclences, even Lhough Lhey clalm Lo be hollsLlc, ln facL cover exacLly and only one half of Lhe kosmos. And LhaL ls especlally whaL ls so parLlal abouL Lhe web- of-llfe Lheorles: Lhey lndeed see flelds wlLhln flelds wlLhln flelds, buL Lhey are really only surfaces wlLhln surfaces wlLhln yeL sLlll oLher surfaces-Lhey see only Lhe exLerlor half of reallLy. lL ls Llme now Lo look aL Lhe oLher half. 4 A vlew ftom wltblo 1bloqs bove tbelt wltblo. l om coovloceJ tbot tbe two polots of vlew tepolte to be btooqbt loto ooloo, ooJ tbot tbey sooo wlll oolte lo o kloJ of pbeoomeooloqy ot qeoetollseJ pbyslc lo wblcb tbe lotetool ospect of tbloqs os well os tbe extetool ospect of tbe wotlJ wlll be tokeo loto occooot. Otbetwlse, so lt seems to me, lt ls lmposslble to covet tbe totollty of tbe cosmlc pbeoomeooo by ooe cobeteot exploootloo. -lL88L 1LlLPA8u uL CPA8uln ALCnCSluL 1PL wlLhouL of Lhlngs, Lhe wlLhouL of lndlvldual and soclal holons, whlch we presenLed ln Lhe lasL chapLer, we need Lo presenL Lhe wlLhln of Lhlngs, Lhe wlLhln of Lhose same holons. 1hls parL of our approach mlghL seem aL flrsL a somewhaL sLrange noLlon. Pow, for example, can we know Lhe lnsldes of a cell, Lhe lnLerlorlLy" of a cell? 1he answer, l belleve, resLs on Lhe facL LhaL cells are a pott of us, we embtoce cells ln our own compound lndlvlduallLy. 1haL ls, ootbloq ln Lhe precedlng sLages of evoluLlon can be ulLlmaLely forelgn Lo us slnce Lhey are all, ln varlous degrees and ways, lo us, as parL of our very belng. 1hus, lL ls Lhrough an lnLerlor feellng of Lhe shades of myself LhaL l mlghL reasonably know Lhe shades of oLher holons-whlch ls how Lhey know me, Loo, for we are all ulLlmaLely ln each oLher, ln varlous degrees, and rlghL now. CravlLy pulls aL Lhe mlnerals ln my bones [usL as surely as lL pulls on Lhe dlsLanL planeLs, hunger churns my belly as lL does ln every sLarvlng wolf, Lhe Lerror ln Lhe eyes of Lhe gazelle belng eaLen by Lhe llon ls noL allen Lo me, or Lo you, and ls LhaL noL [oy ln Lhe song of Lhe robln aL Lhe rlslng of Lhe mornlng sun? nobody ls more wary Lhan l of Lhe dangers of whaL Love[oy called reLroLenslon"-readlng hlgher" LhoughLs and feellngs lnLo lower" forms slmply because we humans feel Lhem-Lhe anLhropomorphlc fallacy. 8uL we are alded ln Lhls quesL by preclsely Lhose evoluLlonary sclences LhaL have already mapped Lhe ouLward forms of Lhe varlous holons aL each sLage of developmenL, for we can reasonably make correlaLlons beLween ouLward form and lnLerlor percepLlon. lor example, lL seems qulLe llkely LhaL, aL Lhls polnL ln evoluLlon anyway, lnLenLlonal symbollc loglc ls found only where Lhe ouLward form known as Lhe complex neocorLex has developed, and Lhus any oLher llvlng holon on LarLh whose exLerlor lacks Lhe form of LhaL neocorLex-such as a planL, a llzard, a horse-wlll probably lack an lnLerlor LhaL conLalns lnLenLlonal symbollc loglc. Llkewlse, anlmal holons LhaL lack Lhe exLerlor form known as Lhe llmblc sysLem wlll probably also lack an lnLerlor LhaL conLalns dlfferenLlaLed emoLlons, and so on. 1hls puLs a sharp curb Lo our reLroLenslve Lendencles," and helps us dlg ouL, ln Lhe depLhs of our own feellngs, [usL how far (and whlch of) Lhose feellngs exLend lnLo Lhe depLh of oLher belngs. 1hus, we do lndeed wanL Lo Lry Lo avold reLroLenslon, buL Lhls sLlll leaves us ln a far dlfferenL place from Lhe emplrlclsLs, who sLare blankly aL Lhe rose and wonder how Lhe eplsLemologlcal gap shall ever be brldged, as lf Lhey were sLarlng aL an allen creaLure maLerlallzed from a wholly dlfferenL dlmenslon. 1hey acLually refer Lo lL, wlLh a puzzled expresslon, as knowledge of Lhe ouLer world." 8uL l can know Lhe ouLer world because Lhe ouLer world ls olteoJy ln me, and l can know me. All knowledge of oLher ls slmply a dlfferenL degree of self-knowledge, slnce self and oLher are of Lhe same fabrlc, and speak sofLly Lo each oLher aL any momenL LhaL one llsLens. And, of course, Lhls approach ls noL new. We flnd someLhlng llke lL from ArlsLoLle Lo Splnoza, from Lelbnlz Lo WhlLehead, from Auroblndo Lo 8adhakrlshnan. We don'L flnd lL ln emplrlclsm or poslLlvlsm, and we don'L flnd lL ln Lhe hollsLlc" sysLems Lheorles, whlch wanL ever so much Lo be emplrlcal. 1haL lmbalance we wlsh Lo redress, drawlng on, among oLhers, Lhe LheorlsLs l [usL menLloned. llnally, we wlll wanL Lo look also aL Lhe hlgher sLages of growLh ln Lhe human holon, Lhe hlgher sLages of consclousness LhaL, ln mysLlcal experlence, for example, are sald Lo lssue forLh ln lllumlnaLlons of Lhe superconsclous, lllumlnaLlons of Lhe very ulvlne (lf such lndeed exlsLs). We wlll wanL Lo look, LhaL ls, aL Lhe fleld known as Lranspersonal psychology. lor we are now enLerlng Lhe domaln of our flrsL AddlLlon: Lhe greaLer Lhe depLh of evoluLlon, Lhe greaLer Lhe degree of consclousness. ln1L8lC8l1? Anu CCnSClCuSnLSS Splnoza, Lelbnlz, Schopenhauer, WhlLehead, Auroblndo, Schelllng, and 8adhakrlshnan are [usL a few of Lhe ma[or LheorlsLs who have expllclLly recognlzed LhaL Lhe wlLhln of Lhlngs, Lhe lnLerlorlLy of lndlvldual holons, ls ln essence Lhe same as cooscloosoess, Lhough of course Lhey use dlfferenL names wlLh sllghLly dlfferenL meanlngs. WhlLehead uses prehenslon" Lo descrlbe Lhe conLacL and Lhus feellng" of an ob[ecL by any sub[ecL, no maLLer how prlmlLlve," lncludlng aLoms (Lhus hls famous sLaLemenL, 8lology ls Lhe sLudy of blg organlsms, physlcs Lhe sLudy of llLLle organlsms"). Splnoza uses cognlLlon" for knowlng an evenL from Lhe lnslde" and exLenslon" (or maLLer) for knowlng Lhe same evenL from Lhe ouLslde." Lelbnlz uses percepLlon" for Lhe lnLerlor of hls monads (holons) and maLLer" for Lhe exLerlor, wlLh Lhe added provlso LhaL only Lhe lnLerlor ls acLually real and can be known dlrecLly-maLLer (or exLenslon) ls only an appearance devold of any subsLanLlal reallLy, lL ls slmply whaL mlnd looks llke from Lhe ouLslde. As for 1ellhard de Chardln, he puL lL very slmply: 1he wlLhln, consclousness, sponLanelLy-Lhree expresslons for Lhe same Lhlng." 1 l wlll noL, aL Lhls polnL, geL lnvolved ln Lhe phllosophlcal nuances of Lhose varlous poslLlons, whlch are lnexLrlcably bound up wlLh Lhe problems of panpsychlsm and hlsLorlcal soluLlons Lo Lhe mlnd-body problem (we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls laLer). 8aLher, l wlll, for Lhe Llme belng, Lake a more generallzed poslLlon and slmply say LhaL, for me, Lhe wlLhln of Lhlngs ls cooscloosoess, Lhe wlLhouL of Lhlngs ls fotm. Cr, as we puL lL earller, Lhe wlLhln of Lhlngs ls Jeptb, Lhe wlLhouL ls sotfoce. 8uL all surfaces are surfaces of depLh, whlch means, all forms are forms of consclousness. lurLher, l don'L wanL Lo haggle over wheLher Lhe very lowesL holons are LoLally or only mosLly devold of rudlmenLary forms of consclousness or prehenslon. llrsL, Lhere ls no lower llmlL Lo holons, so Lhere ls no rock boLLom Lo serve as a sLandard. Second, Lhey are all forms of depLh, so Lhe acLual amounL of consclousness lo Lhem ls a compleLely relaLlve affalr. 1hus, whaLever we Lake aL presenL as Lhe lowesL or mosL prlmlLlve holons (quarks, for example), l wlll slmply say LhaL tbey have Lhe leasL depLh, Lhe leasL consclousness, relaLlvely speaklng, and l wlll, wlLh WhlLehead, call LhaL form prehenslon." ?ou are free Lo call Lhe lowesL levels LoLally lnerL" lf you wlsh, and plck up Lhe argumenL from Lhere. LeL me emphaslze LhaL lL really does noL maLLer, as far as l am concerned, how far down (or noL) you wlsh Lo push consclousness. WhlLehead, as we sald, saw prehenslon as Lhe lrreduclble aLom" of exlsLence. Mahayana 8uddhlsm malnLalns LhaL llLerally all senLlenL belngs possess 8uddha Mlnd, and llberaLlon lnvolves a reallzaLlon of LhaL all- pervadlng consclousness. Lynn Margulls, Lhe noLed blologlsL, belleves LhaL cells possess consclousness. A handful of sclenLlsLs Lhlnk LhaL planLs show proLo-sensaLlon. Anlmal rlghLs acLlvlsLs lnslsL LhaL mosL anlmal forms show rudlmenLary feellngs. And l suppose mosL orLhodox LheorlsLs don'L really see consclousness emerglng unLll prlmaLes and usually humans. 8uL my maln polnL ls noL where preclsely Lo draw Lhls llne-draw lL wherever you feel comforLable-buL LhaL Lhe llne lLself lnvolves preemlnenLly Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween lnLerlorlLy and exLerlorlLy. 2 We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls polnL LhroughouL Lhe book, and ln Lhe meanLlme, l wlll slmply assume LhaL consclousness ls synonymous wlLh depLh, and depLh goes all Lhe way down, buL progresslvely less and less and less . . . lnLo Lhose dark shades of nlghL. As 1ellhard eloquenLly puL lL, 8efracLed rear-wards along Lhe course of evoluLlon, consclousness dlsplays lLself quallLaLlvely as a specLrum of shlfLlng shades whose lower Lerms are losL ln Lhe nlghL." 3 now for some slmple correlaLlons. llgure 4-1 llsLs some of Lhe mllesLones ln Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe ouLward forms of lndlvldual holons, and alongslde Lhem some of Lhe correspondlng mllesLones ln Lhe emergenL forms of consclousness LhaL l suggesL are correlaLed wlLh Lhem. Lach new lnLerlor holon, of course, Lranscends buL lncludes lLs predecessor(s)-lncorporaLes Lhe essenLlals of whaL wenL before and Lhen adds lLs own dlsLlncLlve and emergenL paLLerns 4 (as we wlll see ln deLall ln a momenL). And noLlce: Lhese lnLerlor holons have noLhlng Lo do wlLh slze or spaLlal exLenslon, a symbol ls noL blgger Lhan an lmage, an lmage lsn'L blgger Lhan an lmpulse-Lhls ls where Lhe appllcaLlon of physlcallsL sclences becomes very dlsLorLlng. aLoms prehenslon cells (geneLlc) lrrlLablllLy meLabollc organlsms (e.g., planLs) rudlmenLary sensaLlon proLo-neuronal organlsms (e.g., CoelenLeraLa) sensaLlon neuronal organlsms (e.g., annellds) percepLlon neural cord (flsh/amphlblans) percepLlon/lmpulse braln sLem (repLlles) lmpulse/emoLlon llmblc sysLem (paleomammals) emoLlon/lmage neocorLex (prlmaLes) symbols complex neocorLex (humans) concepLs llqote 4-1. 1be wltboot ooJ tbe wltblo 1he lmporLanL polnL, for now, ls slmply LhaL each new and emergenL lnLerlor holon Lranscends buL lncludes, and Lhus opetotes opoo, Lhe lnformaLlon presenLed by lLs [unlor holons, and Lhus lL fashlons someLhlng oovel ln Lhe ongolng cognlLlve or lnLerlor sLream. Pence, each new growLh ln consclousness ls noL [usL Lhe dlscovery" of more of a preglven world, buL Lhe co-creaLlon of new worlds Lhemselves, whaL opper calls a maklng and maLchlng" of new eplsLemologlcal domalns, a dlscovery/creaLlon of hlgher and wlder worlds. 1here can be much dlscusslon over Lhe acLual deLalls of LhaL llsL (flg. 4-1), Lhe cholce of words and Lhe preclse placemenL. 8uL l Lhlnk mosL people, even lf Lhey dlsagree wlLh Lhe deLalls as glven, would agree LhaL sometbloq llke LhaL ls lndeed occurrlng. CreaLer depLh, greaLer lnLerlorlLy, greaLer consclousness. 1ellhard expressed Lhls ln hls law of complexlLy and consclousness"-namely, Lhe more of Lhe former, Lhe more of Lhe laLLer. Slnce, as we already saw, evoluLlon Lends ln Lhe dlrecLlon of greaLer complexlLy, lL amounLs Lo Lhe same Lhlng Lo say LhaL lL Lends ln Lhe dlrecLlon of greaLer consclousness (agaln, depLh = consclousness). MosL of Lhe words ln flgure 4-1 are self-explanaLory, buL l should menLlon LhaL an lmoqe ls a menLal consLrucL LhaL represenLs a Lhlng by resemblance (Lhe lmage of a dog looks llke" Lhe acLual dog), a symbol represenLs a Lhlng by correspondence, noL resemblance (Lhe word llJo represenLs my dog buL Lhe word lLself does noL look llke my dog aL all-a more dlfflculL cognlLlve Lask), and a coocept represenLs an enLlre closs of resemblance (Lhe word Joq represenLs Lhe class of oll dogs, an even more compllcaLed cognlLlve Lask). When a fox spoLs a rabblL on Lhe oLher slde of a fence and Lhen runs hundreds of yards around Lhe fence Lo geL Lo Lhe rabblL, presumably Lhe fox carrles an lmoqe or proLo-lmage of Lhe rabblL ln lLs mlnd. Movlng up, Lhere ls abundanL evldence LhaL apes and chlmpanzees are capable of formlng symbols (or aL leasL paleosymbols) and lndeed can be LaughL Lo recognlze and use a slmple denoLaLlve language. As far as we can Lell, only humans creaLe and consclously uLlllze fully formed coocepts (or unlversals), and Lhese concepLs, among many oLher Lhlngs, reach down and dlfferenLlaLe and color all prevlous levels ln Lhe human compound lndlvldual (a paleomammal may feel rage, buL only humans concepLually elaboraLe LhaL lnLo anger and Lhen haLred, a long slow burn malnLalned concepLually). ln oLher words, concepLs Lranscend and lnclude symbols, whlch Lranscend and lnclude lmages (whlch Lranscend and lnclude lmpulses, eLc.)-and none of LhaL has much Lo do wlLh physlcal exLenslon. 1PL LlMl1S Cl 1PL Lx1L8lC8 A8CACP ln Lhe prevlous chapLer l sald LhaL hollsLlc sysLems Lheorles leave ouL Lhe lnLerlorlLy of Lhe holons Lhey descrlbe. LeL me be more preclse. Some of Lhe Lheorles do, lndeed, aLLempL Lo Lake lnLo accounL Lhe lnsldes of Lhe unlverse, for Lhey aL any raLe menLlon Lhlngs llke feellngs and symbols and ldeas. 8uL Lhey Lhen sub[ecL Lhese lnLerlors Lo Lhe same analysls as Lhey apply Lo Lhe surfaces, because Lhey are Lrylng Lo be emplrlcal, and Lhls produces some very unpleasanL resulLs. We can explaln Lhls wlLh reference Lo flgure 4-2. Pere l have lndlcaLed Lhe Lhree general domalns of evoluLlon from Lhe angle of a compound lndlvldual holon on level 3. 1he physlosphere ls labeled A, Lhe blosphere 8, and Lhe noosphere C, so LhaL Lhe holon on level 3 can be represenLed as A + 8 + C, Lranscendlng buL lncludlng lLs predecessors. now Lhe clalm of Lhe evoluLlonary sysLems Lheorles (from 8erLalanffy Lo Laszlo Lo !anLsch) ls LhaL, alLhough oooe of Lhe levels can be reduced Lo any oLher, general laws or regularlLles of dynamlc paLLerns can be found LhaL are Lhe some ln all Lhree realms. 1hese are called homolog laws" and noL analog laws," whlch means Lhey are baslcally Lhe same laws across domalns. llqote 4-2. levels of volotloo l agree wlLh LhaL poslLlon (as far as lL goes), and ln chapLer 2 we ouLllned LwenLy LeneLs, or homolog laws," LhaL are characLerlsLlc of holons wbetevet Lhey appear. So far, so good. 8uL Lhese LeneLs have Lo be of such a qeoetol ootote LhaL Lhey wlll apply Lo all Lhree general realms, and LhaL means, ln essence, LhaL Lhey apply baslcally Lo Lhe realm labeled A, slnce A ls Lhe only Lhlng LhaL all Lhree realms have ln common. A runs from A Lhrough Lhe core of 8 and Lhe core of C, and Lhus whaL holds for A wlll hold for (buL noL LoLally cover) whaLever happens on all Lhree levels. 1hus, on level 1, or A, we already flnd dlsslpaLlve or self- organlzlng sLrucLures, holons wlLh depLh and span, creaLlve emergence, lncreaslng complexlLy, evoluLlonary developmenL, dlfferenLlaLlon, self-Lranscendence, Leleologlcal aLLracLors, and so forLh. When l presenLed Lhe LwenLy LeneLs, l used examples from all Lhree realms, buL all of Lhe LeneLs can be found, Lo some degree or anoLher, ln Lhe physlosphere lLself (Lhus acknowledglng some degree of cootloolty ln Lhe overall evoluLlonary process-Lhe no gaps ln naLure" slde of Lhe equaLlon). And all of LhaL, Loo, ls [usL flne. 8uL none of Lhe LwenLy LeneLs-as cruclally lmporLanL as Lhey are-descrlbes speclflcally whaL ls happenlng ln 8 and C. 1o Lhe exLenL LhaL 8 and C are composed of holons-and Lhey are-tbey wlll follow oll of tbe tweoty teoets. 8uL holons wlLh Llfe ln[ecLed lnLo Lhem also do otbet Lhlngs LhaL A holons do noL-such as sexual reproducLlon, meLabollc communlcaLlon, auLopoleLlc self-preservaLlon, and so forLh, and holons wlLh Mlnd ln[ecLed lnLo Lhem do sLlll oLher Lhlngs LhaL 8 holons do noL-such as verbal communlcaLlon, concepLual self-expresslon, arLlsLlc endeavors, and so on. 1he 8 and C quallLles and funcLlons and cognlLlons wlll follow Lhe same LeneLs LhaL also apply Lo A, buL Lhey wlll furLher follow oLher laws and paLLerns and acLlons noL speclflcally derlvable from Lhe LwenLy LeneLs (whlch sLaLe, for example, LhaL evoluLlon geLs more complex, buL do noL sLaLe LhaL evoluLlon wlll produce poeLry). 1here ls noLhlng ln Lhe LwenLy LeneLs LhaL wlll Lell us how Lo resolve an Cedlpus complex, or why prlde can be wounded, or whaL honor means, or wheLher llfe ls worLh llvlng. ln oLher words, Lhe LwenLy LeneLs-by whlch l mean dynamlc sysLems Lheory ln general-are Lhe most fooJomeotol LeneLs of oll of developmenL, and Lherefore Lhe leost lnLeresLlng, leasL slgnlflcanL, leasL Lelllng LeneLs when lL comes Lo 8 and especlally C (and super-especlally anyLhlng hlgher). SysLems Lheory-preclsely ln lLs clalm and deslre Lo cover oll sysLems-necessarlly covers Lhe leasL common denomlnaLor, and Lhus noLhlng geLs lnLo sysLems Lheory LhaL, Lo borrow a llne from SwlfL, does noL also cover Lhe weakesL noodle. And Lhe weakesL noodles, Lhe lowesL holons, have Lhe leost depLh, Lhe leost lnLerlorlLy, Lhe leost consclousness-so LhaL a sclence of tbot ls correspondlngly a weakesL noodle sclence. lL ls a sclence of surfaces. And Lhls ls lnvarlably why, ln such sysLems books" as Laszlo's, one flnds a very rlch and lmpresslve seLLlng forLh of someLhlng llke Lhe LwenLy LeneLs, and a rlch appllcaLlon of Lhem Lo Lhe physlosphere and somewhaL Lo Lhe blosphere, buL Lhen Lhe presenLaLlon, as lL really explores Lhe blosphere and Lhen geLs lnLo Lhe noosphere, becomes pale and anemlc and Lhlns ouL very qulckly. When lL comes Lo soclal or hlsLorlcal evoluLlon, for example, Laszlo correcLly polnLs ouL LhaL noospherlc evoluLlon proceeds from less ordered Lo more ordered, from less complex Lo more complex, LhaL lL ls lrreverslble, and a few oLher such lLems. 1haL's abouL all he says, and LhaL's abouL all he coo say as a sysLems sclenLlsL. 8uL we already know LhaL, LhaL's whaL happens Lo ooy complex sysLem far from equlllbrlum. AbouL Lhe really lnLeresLlng and uLLerly unlque Lhlngs LhaL make hlsLory hlsLory and noL [usL a dlsslpaLlve sLrucLure, sysLems sclence can Lell us preclous llLLle. Cf Lhe sysLem A + 8 + C, lL wlll Lell us abouL Lhe lowesL common-denomlnaLor paLLerns, whlch, l repeaL, are Lhe mosL fundamenLal-and leasL slgnlflcanL-of paLLerns for Lhe hlgher levels. (Cf course, many sysLem LheorlsLs acLually use Lhe dynamlcs of 8, or llvlng sysLems, and make Lhem paradlgmaLlc for oll levels, wlLh equally unsaLlsfacLory resulLs buL now ln boLh dlrecLlons: 8 underexplalns C and overexplalns or ls reLroLenslve wlLh A, Lrylng, for example, Lo read auLopolesls lnLo Lhe physlosphere-unconvlnclngly. All of Lhese dlfflculLles come from Lhe lowesL common denomlnaLor approach and/or Lhe aLLempL Lo prlvllege any slngle domaln). 3 1hls ls why presenLaLlons LhaL are oLherwlse ofLen so brllllanL, such as !anLsch's, wlll say Lhlngs llke, ln Lhe same way, Lhese maLhemaLlcal relaLlonshlps may be applled Lo Lhe modelllng of dynamlcs aL oLher Lhan Lhe chemlcal levels"-by whlch he means (and expllclLly sLaLes) LhaL Lhe sysLem paLLerns holdlng for A are slgnlflcanLly lncluslve for levels 8 and C. Pe Lhen adds, A cerLaln lmaglnaLlon ls requlred, of course. . . ." 6 lL Lakes more Lhan lmaglnaLlon, lL Lakes halluclnaLlon. 1hls ls exacLly whaL Sheldrake ls ob[ecLlng Lo when he says, ln a slmllar way, Lo reLurn Lo one of rlgoglne's examples, a maLhemaLlcal model of urbanlzaLlon may shed llghL on Lhe facLors affecLlng Lhe raLe of urban growLh, buL lL cannoL accounL for Lhe dlfferenL archlLecLural sLyles, culLures, and rellglons found ln, say, lndlan and 8razlllan clLles." 7 CannoL accounL, LhaL ls, for a slngle Lhlng LhaL ls speclflcally culLural. Mlchael Murphy makes Lhe same polnL ln a sLrong fashlon. Pe flrsL polnLs ouL Lhe slmllarlLles (or conLlnulLles) ln Lhe Lhree ma[or domalns: 1hough Lhe klnds of developmenL LhaL occur ln Lhe physlcal, blologlcal, and psychosoclal domalns are shaped by dlfferenL processes and have dlfferenL paLLerns, Lhey proceed ln susLalned, lrreverslble sequences LhaL are called evoluLlonary-Lhese Lhree domalns have many feaLures ln common." 1hese common feaLures l have dlsLllled ln Lhe LwenLy LeneLs. ?eL Murphy Lhen emphaslzes, 8uL Lhe Lhree klnds of evoluLlon-lnorganlc, blologlcal, and psychosoclal-Lhough havlng many feaLures ln common, operaLe accordlng Lo separaLe prlnclples. Pelpful sclenLlflc reducLlons do noL erase Lhe facL LhaL Lhese [domalns] proceed accordlng Lo Lhelr own dlsLlncLlve paLLerns." 8 So Lhe LwenLy LeneLs are Lhe backbone of our sysLem, holdlng Lrue for holons anywhere, or so l malnLaln. 8uL for Lhe meaL and flesh and feellngs and percepLlons-for Lhese we wlll have Lo look elsewhere, look lnsLead Lo an empaLhlc feel from wlLhln of Lhose degrees of Lhe All LhaL are degrees of us as well. And we do noL honor Lhe rlchness of Lhese feellngs-ln us, ln oLhers-by reduclng or narrowlng Lhem Lo Lhe lowesL common denomlnaLor. 1he robln, Lhe deer, and Lhe amoeba, l presume, are as lnsulLed by Lhls as l. Cur answer, as always, ls never Lo be found ln flaLland, ln Lhe world of black checkers scurrylng endlessly, meanlnglessly, dlmly, and dlsappearlng flnally lnLo Lhose dark shades of Lhe nlghL LhaL are ever so fundamenLal, ever so lnslgnlflcanL. 1PL LvCLu1lCn Cl 1PL Wl1Pln Cl PuMAn PCLCnS We have skeLched Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe wlLhouL of lndlvldual holons up Lo Lhe complex Lrlune braln (embraclng or enfoldlng all prevlous exLerlors) and Lhe correlaLlve evoluLlon of Lhe lnLerlor of Lhe same holons up Lo LhaL of concepLs (embraclng or enfoldlng all prevlous lnLerlors). lL ls Llme now Lo plck up Lhe sLory wlLh Lhe emergence of Lhe flrsL human anlmals-wlLh a complex Lrlune braln produclng concepLs or proLo-concepLs and llvlng ln a soclal holon of Lhe group/famlly-and brlefly follow Lhe succeedlng evoluLlon up Lo Lhe presenL day. Cnce agaln, mosL of our work has already been done for us, and we have Lwo ma[or sources Lo draw on ln Lhls regard. Cne ls my own prevlous work ln Lhls area, publlshed ln up ftom Jeo and ye to ye. 1he oLher ls Lhe work of !urgen Pabermas, whom many (myself lncluded) conslder Lhe world's foremosL llvlng phllosopher and soclal LheorlsL. 1he concluslons of Lhese Lwo sources are ln sLrong agreemenL, even Lhough Lhey were arrlved aL lndependenLly and from very dlfferenL angles. When l was worklng on up ftom Jeo, l was only beglnnlng Lo come lnLo conLacL wlLh Pabermas, and so l unforLunaLely dld noL have Lhe chance Lo lnclude hls lnclslve commenLarles. l drew lnsLead on Lhe works of such ploneers as !ean Cebser, Lrlch neumann, L. L. WhyLe, Ceorg Pegel, and !oseph Campbell. ln a sense Lhls was forLunaLe, Lhe facL LhaL Pabermas, worklng from a very dlfferenL dlrecLlon, arrlved aL Lhe same general concluslons lends added sLrengLh Lo Lhe overall Lhesls. WhaL l would llke Lo do, Lhen, ln Lhls and Lhe nexL chapLer, ls very brlefly ouLllne Pabermas's observaLlons on Lhe evoluLlon of human consclousness and soclal communlcaLlon (and parenLheLlcally lndlcaLe Lhe polnLs of agreemenL wlLh my own work, Lhose famlllar wlLh Jeo and ye to ye wlll lmmedlaLely spoL Lhe slmllarlLles). Pabermas's overall vlews on communlcaLlon and Lhe evoluLlon of socleLy are seL ln Lhe conLexL of hls Lheory of communlcaLlve acLlon (or acLlon geared Loward motool ooJetstooJloq as an omega polnL), l wlll be cuLLlng many corners and glvlng only Lhe brlefesL skeleLon of a small parL of hls rlch Lheory, readers are urged Lo consulL hls orlglnal works. 9 ln up ftom Jeo (and ye to ye) l followed Lhe groundbreaklng work of !ean Cebser ln recognlzlng four ma[or epochs of human evoluLlon, each anchored by a parLlcular sLrucLure (or level) of loJlvlJool consclousness LhaL correspondlngly produced (and was produced by) a parLlcular soclol wotlJvlew. 1hese general sLages Cebser called Lhe archalc, Lhe maglc, Lhe myLhlc, and Lhe menLal. Pabermas, we wlll see, ls ln general agreemenL wlLh Lhls concluslon. l (and Lo a lesser exLenL Cebser) furLher suggesLed LhaL each of Lhese sLrucLures of consclousness generaLed a dlfferenL sense of space-Llme, law and morallLy, cognlLlve sLyle, self-ldenLlLy, mode of Lechnology (or producLlve forces), drlves or moLlvaLlon, Lypes of personal paLhology (and defenses), Lypes of soclal oppresslon/represslon, degrees of deaLh-selzure and deaLh-denlal, and Lypes of rellglous experlence. ln Lhls chapLer, and especlally ln Lhe nexL, we wlll carefully examlne Lhe archalc, Lhe maglc, Lhe myLhlc, and Lhe menLal worldvlews (and suggesL posslble hlgher developmenLs as well). 8uL flrsL, leL me be very clear abouL whaL ls belng aLLempLed here. l have suggesLed LhaL Lhere are lndlvldual and soclal holons, each of whlch has an lnLerlor and an exLerlor. 1hus, ln evoluLlon ln general, and human evoluLlon ln parLlcular, we are Lraclng foot Jlffeteot sttooJs, each of whlch ls lnLlmaLely relaLed and lndeed dependenL upon all Lhe oLhers, buL none of whlch can be reduced Lo Lhe oLhers. 1he four sLrands are Lhe lnLerlor and Lhe exLerlor of Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe soclal, or Lhe lnslde and Lhe ouLslde of Lhe mlcro and Lhe macro. We have already looked aL (1) Lhe developmenL of Lhe extetlot forms of loJlvlJool holons, ranglng from aLoms Lo molecules Lo cells Lo organlsms Lo neural organlsms Lo Lrlune-bralned neural organlsms. And we have already looked aL (2) Lhe developmenL of Lhe extetlot forms of Lhe soclol holon, from superclusLers Lo galaxles Lo planeLs Lo Cala Lo ecosysLems Lo groups/famllles (and brlefly suggesLed lLs conLlnuaLlon lnLo vlllages, naLlon-sLaLes, and planeLary sysLems). lurLher, we have already suggesLed (3) Lhe lotetlot developmenL of Lhe loJlvlJool holon, from prehenslon Lo sensaLlon Lo lmpulse Lo lmage Lo symbol Lo concepL (and brlefly suggesLed lLs conLlnuaLlon lnLo concreLe and formal operaLlonal LhoughL, wlLh hlgher sLages yeL Lo come). And flnally, we have [usL suggesLed LhaL, ln human evoluLlon anyway, (4) Lhe lotetlot developmenL of Lhe soclol holon evldences lLself ln a serles of sboteJ wotlJvlews (from maglc Lo myLhlc Lo menLal, and posslbly hlgher). (We'll go over all Lhese correlaLlons ln a momenL.) 1he lower levels possess a worldvlew"-by whlch l mean, a common worldspace"-Lo preclsely Lhe same degree LhaL you belleve Lhey possess a degree of consclousness or prehenslon. lf depLh ls consclousness, whlch l belleve lL ls, and lf lower holons possess depLh, whlch l belleve Lhey do, and lf any holon exlsLs only ln a sysLem of relaLlonal exchange wlLh oLher same-level holons, whlch lL does, Lhen any holon possesses a shared depLh wlLh lLs peers, and LhaL ls a worldvlew" or common worldspace" ln Lhe broadesL sense. We have already agreed, for example, LhaL lf a holon possesses a repLlllan braln sLem, Lhen lL possesses an lnLerlorlLy of lmpulse, and we have already agreed LhaL LhaL lnLerlorlLy cannoL be capLured wlLhouL remalnder ln ob[ecLlve lL-language, and Lhus lL musL possess a sub[ecLlve (or proLo-sub[ecLlve) space, a space sboteJ wlLh slmllar-depLh holons. lL ls noL [usL shared surfaces, buL shared depLhs, or a common wotlJspoce. Cr agaln: lf holons share common exLerlors, whlch Lhey do, Lhen Lhey share common lnLerlors (or worldspaces). Pow far down we push Lhls ls a maLLer of reasonable dlsagreemenL, buL conflnlng lL Lo humans alone ls preposLerous. noneLheless, as before, feel free Lo plck up Lhe argumenL aL Lhe polnL ln evoluLlon where you feel LhaL some form of rudlmenLary consclousness or prehenslon enLers Lhe scene, presumably, by Lhe Llme we reach humans, we can all agree LhaL shared worldvlews exlsL, and Lhese shared worldvlews are slmply Lhe lnslde feel of a soclal holon, Lhe lnslde space of collecLlve awareness aL a parLlcular level of developmenL, lL ls noL [usL how l" feel, lL ls how we" feel. 1PL lCu8 CuAu8An1S We wlll be golng lnLo Lhese dlsLlncLlons ln much deLall as we proceed. lor Lhe momenL, a qulck summary ls glven ln flgure 4-3. (lL mlghL also help Lo glance aL Lhe more deLalled dlagram glven ln Lhe nexL chapLer, flg. 3-1.) 1he upper half of Lhe dlagram represenLs lndlvldual holons, Lhe lower half, soclal or communal holons. 1he rlghL half represenLs Lhe exLerlor forms of holons-whaL Lhey look llke from Lhe ouLslde, and Lhe lefL half represenLs Lhe lnLerlors-whaL Lhey look llke from wlLhln. 1hus we have four ma[or quadranLs or four ma[or aspecLs Lo each and every holon. 1he upper-8lghL (u8) ls Lhe extetlot form or sLrucLure of an loJlvlJool holon. 1hls quadranL runs from Lhe cenLer-whlch ls slmply Lhe 8lg 8ang-Lo subaLomlc parLlcles Lo aLoms Lo molecules Lo cells Lo neural organlsms Lo Lrlune-bralned organlsms. WlLh reference Lo human belngs, Lhls quadranL ls Lhe one emphaslzed by bebovlotlsm. 8ehavlor can be seeo, lL ls emplrlcal-whlch ls preclsely why emplrlcal sclence ls always concerned only wlLh Lhe bebovlot of holons (Lhe behavlor of aLoms, Lhe behavlor of gases, Lhe behavlor of flsh, Lhe behavlor of humans) and wanLs noLhlng Lo do wlLh nasLy ol' lnLrospecLlon, whlch lnvolves, of course, Lhe lnLerlors of lndlvlduals. llqote 4-J. 1be loot OooJtoots Whlch would be Lhe upper-LefL (uL) quadranL. 1hls quadranL-Lhe lotetlot form of an loJlvlJool holon-runs from Lhe cenLer Lo prehenslon, sensaLlon, lmpulse, lmage, symbol, concepL (and so on). 1hese lnLerlors (uL) are correlaLed, we saw, wlLh speclflc exLerlors (u8), so LhaL emoLlons go wlLh" llmblc sysLems and concepLs go wlLh" Lhe neocorLex of complex Lrlune bralns, and so forLh (LhaL ls, every polnL on Lhe rlghL slde has a correlaLe on Lhe lefL slde: every exLerlor has an lnLerlor). WlLh reference Lo human belngs, Lhls quadranL conLalns all Lhe lnLerlor" lndlvldual sclences (among oLher Lhlngs), from psychoanalysls Lo phenomenology Lo maLhemaLlcs (nobody ever saw Lhe square rooL of a negaLlve one runnlng around ln Lhe exLernal world, LhaL ls apprehended only lnLerlorly). 8uL lndlvlduals only exlsL ln relaLlonal exchanges wlLh oLher holons of slmllar depLh (mlcro and macro, lndlvldual and soclal). ln oLher words, every polnL on Lhe upper half of Lhe dlagram has a correspondlng polnL on Lhe lower half (so LhaL all four quadranLs have correspondlng polnLs wlLh each oLher). 1aklng Lhe Lwo lower quadranLs one aL a Llme: 1he Lower-8lghL (L8) quadranL runs, as we saw, from Lhe 8lg 8ang Lo superclusLers Lo galaxles Lo sLars Lo planeLs Lo (on LarLh) Lhe Cala sysLem Lo ecosysLems Lo socleLles wlLh dlvlslon of labor Lo groups/famllles (each geLLlng smaller" owlng Lo less slmple span). WlLh reference Lo humans, Lhls quadranL Lhen runs from klnshlp Lrlbes Lo vlllages Lo naLlon-sLaLes Lo global world-sysLem (geLLlng blgger" on lLs own level). 8uL Lhls quadranL also refers Lo any of Lhe concreLe, maLerlal, embedded soclal forms of communlLles (Lhe exLerlor forms of soclal sysLems), lncludlng modes of Lools and Lechnology, archlLecLural sLyles, forces of producLlon, concreLe lnsLlLuLlons, even wrlLLen (maLerlal) forms, and so on. 1he Lower-8lghL quadranL, ln oLher words, represenLs all Lhe extetlot forms of soclol sysLems, forms LhaL also can be seeo, forms LhaL are emplrlcal and behavloral (everyLhlng on Lhe 8lghL half of Lhe dlagram ls emplrlcal, because lL lnvolves Lhe exLerlor forms of holons, ln Lhls case, Lhe soclal holon). 1hls ls why Lhe sLudy of human soclology" (especlally ln Anglo-Saxon counLrles) has usually been Lhe sLudy of Lhe observable bebovlot of soclal sysLems (or soclal acLlon sysLems"). SomeLhlng ls a really real" sclence lf lLs daLa can be seen emplrlcally, and slnce all soclal holons do have an exLerlor form LhaL can be seen emplrlcally, soclology has all Loo ofLen conflned lLs sLudles Lo Lhls one componenL (Lhe L8 quadranL) and been very dlsLrusLful of Lhe sLudy of anyLhlng oLher Lhan monologlcal, observable varlables ln a soclal acLlon sysLem. 1hls ls why lL has been so hard for soclologlsLs Lo buck Lhe poslLlvlsLlc Lrend of sLudylng only behavlor-orlenLed acLlon sysLems, and Lo sLudy noL [usL socleLy buL also coltote, or Lhe sboteJ voloes LhaL consLlLuLe Lhe common wotlJvlews of varlous soclal sysLems-LhaL ls, Lhe lotetlots of Lhe soclal sysLems, Lhe Lower LefL (LL) quadranL. 1hus, for example, a recenL anLhology enLlLled coltotol Aoolysls (as opposed Lo soclal analysls") could flnd only four ma[or LheorlsLs worklng Lhls slde of Lhe sLreeL: eLer 8erger, Mary uouglas, Mlchel loucaulL, and !urgen Pabermas (we could cerLalnly add Charles 1aylor and Cllfford CeerLz, among a few oLhers, Lhe lnfluence of Lhese slx LheorlsLs can be heavlly felL LhroughouL Lhls presenLaLlon). 8uL Lhe edlLors' polnL ls well Laken: Whlle Lheorles, meLhods, and research lnvesLlgaLlons ln oLher areas of Lhe soclal sclences have accumulaLed aL an lmpresslve pace over Lhe pasL several decades, Lhe sLudy of culLure appears Lo have made llLLle headway." 1he reason ls LhaL Lhe orLhodox and poslLlvlsLlcally orlenLed researchers Lurned from Lhe ephemeral realm of aLLlLudes and feellngs . . . lnLersub[ecLlve reallLles . . . bellefs and values-Lhe sLuff of whlch culLure ls comprlsed-Lo Lhe more obdu-raLe [emplrlcal] facLs of soclal llfe-lncome lnequallLy, unemploymenL, ferLlllLy raLes, group dynamlcs, crlme, and Lhe llke. Cn Lhe whole, lL may be only sllghLly presumpLuous Lo suggesL LhaL Lhe soclal sclences are ln danger of abandonlng culLure enLlrely as a fleld of enqulry." 10 Abandonlng, LhaL ls, Lhe Lower LefL ln favor of Lhe Lower 8lghL. AL Lhe same Llme, Lhe edlLors noLe, Lhese four LheorlsLs are noneLheless aL Lhe forefronL of a revoluLlon ln Lhe approach Lo Lhe sLudy of culLure. Powever ephemeral" aspecLs of culLure mlghL be, varlous phenomenologlcal and analyLlcal and sLrucLural Lools can noneLheless be broughL Lo bear on Lhe lssue. 1o say someLhlng ls sub[ecLlve" ls noL Lo say lL doesn'L exlsL or can'L be carefully sLudled. Lach of Lhese LheorlsLs, Lhe edlLors polnL ouL, have aLLempLed Lo ldenLlfy systemotlc pottetos omooq tbe elemeots of coltote ltself, or paLLerns wlLhln culLure"-as l would puL lL, culLural holons, sLrucLures or paLLerns from wlLhln, noL [usL wlLhouL. Largely ouLslde Lhe malnsLream of soclal sclences, Lhese approaches have been orlenLed prlmarlly Loward Lhe realms of meanlng, symbollsm, language, and dlscourse. Lach ls rooLed ln deeper phllosophlcal LradlLlons Lhemselves qulLe dlsLlncL and ln slgnlflcanL ways allen Lo Lhe so-called 'poslLlvlsL' LradlLlon of conLemporary soclal sclence. 1he flrsL, and perhaps mosL famlllar of Lhese, ls phenomenology [8erger], Lhe second, culLural anLhropology [uouglas], Lhe Lhlrd, sLrucLurallsm [loucaulL], and Lhe fourLh, crlLlcal Lheory [Pabermas]." 11 1hese approaches have already had a profound lmpacL and are helplng Lo reverse Lhe poslLlvlsLlc Lrend where, as Lhe edlLors puL lL, nuLs and bolLs have replaced hearLs and mlnds." 8uL Lhls dlsLlncLlon beLween soclol (ln Lhe sense of soclal acLlon sysLem, Lhe emplrlcal nuLs and bolLs) and coltotol (meanlng shared worldvlews and values, hearLs and mlnds) ls very much Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe exLerlor and Lhe lnLerlor of a soclal (or communal) holon. 1hese Lwo dlmenslons are ln lnLlmaLe lnLeracLlon and correlaLlon, buL nelLher can slmply, wlLhouL furLher ado, be reduced Lo Lhe oLher (and Lhus noL explalned, buL explalned away). noLlce LhaL, because we have only so many words Lo go around, l am forced Lo use soclol ln Lwo senses: ln Lhe oottow sense (as Lhe soclal sysLem or exLerlor observable paLLerns ln a socleLy [L8], conLrasLed Lo culLural," or Lhe lnLerlor values and meanlngs LhaL cannoL be capLured emplrlcally [LL]), and soclol ln Lhe btooJ or general sense (where lL means boLh soclal, ln Lhe narrow sense, and culLural, where lL means Lhe enLlre lower half of Lhe dlagram). l LrusL LhaL ln Lhe followlng dlscusslon Lhe conLexL wlll make clear whlch meanlng ls lnLended. 8y and large, however, from now on l wlll use culLural" Lo mean Lhe Lower LefL and wlll reserve soclal" for Lhe Lower 8lghL. As for Lhe dlfference beLween soclal and culLural, here's a slmple example. lmaglne you go Lo a forelgn counLry where you do noL speak Lhe language. As soon as you arrlve ln LhaL counLry, you are lo Lhe soclal sysLem, or Lhe acLual maLerlal componenLs of Lhe counLry. ?ou are lo LhaL counLry. eople around you are speaklng a forelgn language, whlch you do noL undersLand, buL Lhe physlcally spoken words hlL your ears [usL llke Lhey do anybody else's, you and Lhe naLlves are boLh lmmersed ln Lhe lJeotlcol physlcal vlbraLlons of Lhe soclal sysLem. 8uL you don'L undersLand a word. ?ou are ln Lhe soclal sysLem, buL you are oot ln Lhe worldvlew, you are noL ln Lhe culLure. ?ou hear only Lhe exLerlors, you do noL undersLand Lhe lnLerlor meanlng. All Lhe soclal slgnlflers lmplnge on you, buL none of Lhe culLural slgnlfleds come up. ?ou are an lnslder Lo Lhe soclal sysLem buL an ouLslder Lo Lhe culLure. 1he sLudy of Lhe lnLerlor culLural meanlngs cannoL be reduced Lo a sLudy of exLerlor acLlon sysLems (even Lhough Lhey have varlous correlaLlons), or else you could know everyLhlng Lhere ls Lo know abouL a communlLy wlLhouL ever learnlng Lhe language: you would [usL reporL Lhe behavlor" of Lhe lnhablLanLs (llke Lhe behavlor of gas parLlcles), and Lo hell wlLh LhaL Lrlcky meanlng" sLuff. (loucaulL, ln hls reducLlonlsLlc archaeology phase, acLually proceeded ln [usL Lhls manner, brackeLlng botb Lhe LruLh ooJ Lhe meanlng of llngulsLlc sLaLemenLs, and [usL reporLed Lhelr sysLemaLlc behavlor, whlch caused qulLe an uproar. Pe laLer recanLed and labeled Lhe excloslve use of LhaL approach arroganL." 12 8uL lL ls an arrogance LhaL all such happy poslLlvlsm" ls prone Lo.) Lvery holon has a componenL ln Lhe Lower-8lghL quadranL, lL's [usL noL Lhe whole sLory. 1he Lower-LefL quadranL ls Lhe sLudy of shared lnLerlor meanlngs LhaL consLlLuLe Lhe worldvlew (or common worldspace) of collecLlve or communal holons. WlLh regard Lo humans, we have seen LhaL Lhese run from archalc Lo maglc Lo myLhlc Lo menLal (wlLh all sorLs of varlaLlons, and holdlng open Lhe posslblllLy of sLlll-furLher developmenLs). And as for Lhe worldspace of lower holons, l slmply mean a shared space of whaL Lhey coo respond Lo: quarks do noL respond Lo oll sLlmull ln Lhe envlronmenL, because Lhey teqlstet a very narrow range of whaL wlll have meanlng Lo Lhem, whaL wlll offect Lhem. Cuarks (and all holons) respond only Lo LhaL whlch flLs Lhelr worldspace: everyLhlng else ls a forelgn language, and Lhey are ouLslders. 1he sLudy of whaL holons coo respond Lo ls Lhe sLudy of shared worldspaces. 13 1PL 8lCP1- Anu LLl1-PAnu A1PS 1here are an enormous number of correlaLlons beLween Lhls scheme of Lhe four quadranLs and Lhe work of oLher LheorlsLs, and we wlll be explorlng Lhese ln more deLall as we proceed. lor Lhe momenL, [usL a few prellmlnary noLes. 1he enLlre 8lghL half of flgure 4-3, Lhe exLerlor half, can be descrlbed ln lL" language (or ob[ecL" language) and can be sLudled empltlcolly (ln behavlorlsLlc or poslLlvlsLlc or monologlcal Lerms). 1he enLlre 8lghL half, as we sald, ls someLhlng you can see ouL Lhere," someLhlng you can reglsLer wlLh Lhe senses or Lhelr exLenslons (Lelescopes, mlcroscopes, phoLographlc plaLes, eLc., and you Lle your Lheorlzlng Lo Lhese emplrlcal observables, whlch ls whaL monologlcal" or emplrlc-analyLlc" means). 14 1he componenLs of Lhe 8lghL half-boLh Lhe upper-8lghL and Lower- 8lghL quadranLs-are, ln Lhemselves, neuLral surfaces, neuLral exLerlors, neuLral forms, all of whlch can falrly be descrlbed ln lL" language. ?ou don'L ever have Lo engage Lhe lnLerlors of any of Lhose holons: you don'L have Lo engage ln lnLrospecLlon or lnLerpreLaLlon or meanlng or values. ?ou [usL descrlbe Lhe exLerlor form and lLs behavlor. noLhlng ls beLLer or worse, good or bad, deslrable or undeslrable, good or evll, noble or debased. 1he surface forms slmply are, and you slmply observe and descrlbe Lhem. And you coo do LhaL, Lhe surfaces forms ote Lhere, lL ls a leqltlmote and alLogeLher oecessoty sLory. lL ls [usL noL Lhe whole sLory. l wlll ofLen refer Lo Lhe sLudy of boLh Lhe upper-8lghL and Lower-8lghL quadranLs as Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh: Lhe paLh of LhaL whlch can be seen wlLh Lhe eye of flesh or lLs exLenslons. ln shorL, Lhe paLh of lL"-language (ob[ecLlvlsL, monologlcal, observable, emplrlcal, behavloral varlables). 1he 8lghL-Pand paLh has Lwo ma[or and warrlng camps: Lhe aLomlsLs, who sLudy Lhe surfaces of only lndlvlduals, and Lhe whollsLs, who lnslsL LhaL whole sysLems, and noL lndlvlduals, are Lhe prlmary ob[ecL of sLudy. 8uL boLh are equally exLerlor approaches conflned Lo surfaces only. 1hey are Lhe Lwo camps of flaLland onLology: LhaL whlch can be seen, deLecLed wlLh Lhe senses, emplrlcal Lhrough and Lhrough. 1he enLlre LefL half of Lhe dlagram, on Lhe oLher hand, coooot be seen wlLh Lhe eye of flesh (excepL as Lhose LefL- slde aspecLs become embedded ln maLerlal or exLerlor forms, whlch we wlll dlscuss laLer). ln oLher words, Lhe LefL half cannoL be descrlbed ln lL" language. 8aLher, Lhe upper-LefL ls descrlbed ln l"-language, and Lhe Lower-LefL ls descrlbed ln we"-language (as l wlll explaln ln a momenL). l wlll refer Lo boLh of Lhem as Lhe LefL-Pand paLh. Whereas Lhe 8lghL half can be seeo, Lhe LefL half musL be lotetpteteJ. 1he reason for Lhls ls LhaL sotfoces coo be seeo-Lhere Lhey are, anybody can look aL Lhem, buL depLh cannoL be dlrecLly percelved-Jeptb most be lotetpteteJ. 1he 8lghL-Pand paLh always asks, WhaL does lL Jo?" or Pow does lL wotk?" 1he LefL-Pand paLh asks, WhaL does lL meoo?" A deer sees me approach. lL sees my exLerlor form, my shape, and reglsLers all Lhe approprlaLe physlcal sLlmull comlng from my form Lo Lhe deer. 8uL whaL do Lhey meoo? Am l Lhe frlendly fellow wlLh Lhe food, or Lhe hunLer wlLh Lhe rlfle? 1he deer musL lotetptet lLs sLlmull ln Lhe cootext of lLs own wotlJspoce and how l mlghL offect lL. And Lhls ls noL [usL a maLLer of seelng: Lhe deer sees [usL flne. 8uL lL mlghL be mlstokeo ln lLs lotetptetotloo, l mlghL acLually have Lhe rlfle, noL Lhe food. All Lhe physlcal sLlmull are hlLLlng Lhe deer fully (LhaL's noL Lhe problem), Lhe problem ls, whaL do Lhey acLually meoo? 1he surfaces are qlveo, buL whaL ls lurklng ln Lhe depLhs? WhaL are Lhe lnLenLlons lylng behlnd Lhe surfaces? WhaL ls LransmlLLed emplrlcally buL noL merely glven emplrlcally? AlmosL from lLs lncepLlon, and down Lo Loday, soclal Lheory has dlvlded lnLo Lwo ofLen sharply dlsagreelng camps: hermeneuLlcs and sLrucLural-funcLlonallsm (or sysLems Lheory). PermeneuLlcs (Lhe arL and sclence of lnLerpreLaLlon) aLLempLed Lo reconsLrucL and empaLhlcally enLer Lhe shared culLural worldspace of human belngs, and Lhus brlng forLh an ooJetstooJloq of Lhe values conLalned Lhereln. SLrucLural-funcLlonallsm, on Lhe oLher hand, dlspensed wlLh meanlng (ln any parLlclpaLory sense) and looked lnsLead aL Lhe exLernal soclal sLrucLures and soclal sysLems LhaL governed Lhe behavlor of Lhe acLlon sysLem. 8otb wete bollstlc, ln Lhe sense LhaL boLh slLuaLed lndlvldual exlsLence ln a larger neLwork of communal pracLlces and lnslsLed LhaL Lhe lndlvldual could noL be undersLood wlLhouL reference Lo Lhe hollsLlc background of shared pracLlces. 8uL Lhey were, almosL exacLly, represenLaLlves of Lhe LefL-Pand and 8lghL-Pand paLhs, wlLh hermeneuLlcs asklng always, WhaL does lL meoo?" and sLrucLural-funcLlonallsm asklng lnsLead, WhaL does lL Jo?" 1o reconsLrucL meanlng (Lhe LefL-Pand paLh) l musL engage ln lotetptetotloo (hermeneuLlcs), l musL Lry Lo enLer Lhe shared depLhs, shared values, shared worldvlews of Lhe lnhablLanLs, l musL Lry Lo undersLand and descrlbe Lhe culLure ftom wltblo (whlle malnLalnlng a dellcaLe dlsLance so as Lo be able Lo reporL aL all). l cannoL slmply see meanlng, meanlng does noL slL on Lhe surface walLlng, llke a paLch of color, Lo hlL my senses. 8aLher, Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL l can, l musL tesooote wlLh Lhe lnLerlor depLh of Lhe lnhablLanLs. 1he depLh ln me (llved experlence") musL empaLhlcally allgn lLself, lnLulLlvely feel lnLo, Lhe correspondlng depLh (or llved experlence) LhaL l seek Lo undersLand ln oLhers, and noL slmply blankly reglsLer an emplrlcal paLch. Motool ooJetstooJloq ls a Lype of lnLerlor harmonlc resonance of depLh: l know whaL you mean!" WhaL, for example, does Lhe Popl 8aln uance meoo? l mlghL flnd, as many parLlclpanL observers" have, LhaL lL means, LhaL lL expresses, a connecLlon wlLh naLure felL Lo be sacred, so LhaL Lhe danclng ls boLh an expresslon of sacred naLure and a requesL dlrecLed towotJ LhaL same naLure. 1o undersLand and arLlculaLe Lhls ln a soclologlcal fashlon (and noL slmply become a member of Lhe Lrlbe), l musL look lnLo Lhe whole neLwork of shared soclal pracLlces and Lhe background unconsclous" of llngulsLlcally (and prellngulsLlcally) sLrucLured meanlngs and lnLersub[ecLlve exchanges LhaL consLlLuLe Lhe pre-undersLandlng" or background" or foreknowledge" of Lhe parLlcular worldspace or worldvlew-all of Lhe conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs LhaL sLrucLure Lhe lnLerlor values and meanlngs of a culLure, some of Lhem expllclL (requlrlng undersLandlng), and some of Lhem lmpllclL (requlrlng excavaLlon). (1haL ls a shorL summary of Lhe hermeneuLlc program from Wllhelm ullLhey and Weber and Peldegger down Lo Loday wlLh aul 8lcoeur and Pans Cadamer and CeerLz and 1aylor.) Cn Lhe oLher hand, Lo reconsLrucL fooctloo (Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh), l musL carefully, and ln largely JetocbeJ fashlon, observe noL whaL Lhe naLlves soy Lhey are dolng, buL whaL fooctloo Lhe dance acLually serves ln Lhe overall soclal acLlon sysLem (a funcLlon unknown Lo Lhe naLlves). 1he deLached observer concludes (as 1alcoLL arsons dld) LhaL Lhe dance performs Lhe funcLlon of securlng soclal solldarlLy and soclal coheslon. WheLher lL ls really golng Lo make raln or noL, or Lrylng Lo make raln or noL, ls qulLe secondary Lo our concerns, because whaL lL ls really dolng ls provldlng an occaslon LhaL blnds lndlvlduals LogeLher lnLo Lhe soclal fabrlc of Lhe Lrlbe (l.e., Lhe self-organlzlng and auLopoleLlc reglme of Lhe soclal acLlon sysLem). ln order Lo deLermlne Lhls, Lhe Lrlbe ls vlewed as a hollsLlc sysLem, wlLh lLs overall paLLern (sLrucLure) and overall funcLlon (behavlor) carefully observed, and Lhen Lhe meanlng" of any lndlvldual evenL ls slmply lLs place (or funcLlon) ln Lhe overall sysLem. (And LhaL ls a summary of Lhe sLrucLural/funcLlonal and sysLem Lheory" program ln varlous forms, from ComLe Lo arsons Lo nlklas Luhmann, and even ln lLs sLrucLurallsLlc and archaeologlcal varlanLs, Claude Levl-SLrauss Lo early loucaulL). 13 1he one paLh asklng always, WhaL does lL Jo?" and Lhus seeklng Lo offer exploootloos based on naLurallsLlc, emplrlcal, observable varlables, Lhe oLher paLh asklng always, WhaL does lL meoo?" and Lhus aLLempLlng Lo arrlve aL ooJetstooJloq LhaL would be muLual. 16 Surfaces exLend, lnLerlors lnLend-lL's sLlll almosL as slmple as LhaL. 17 Su81LL 8LuuC1lCnlSM 1here are lmporLanL LruLhs ln boLh Lhe LefL- and 8lghL-Pand approaches, and boLh are requlred for a balanced or all-quadranL" vlew. My poslLlon ls LhaL every holon has (aL leasL) Lhese four aspecLs or four dlmenslons (or four quadranLs") of lLs exlsLence, and Lhus lL can (and should) be sLudled ln lLs lnLenLlonal, behavloral, culLural, and soclal seLLlngs. no holon slmply exlsLs lo one of Lhe four quadranLs, each holon bos four quadranLs. Cf course, Lhe more prlmlLlve Lhe holon, Lhe less we seem Lo care abouL lLs lnLrlnslc value or lLs lnLenLlons or lLs culLure, whlch ls sad. 1he polnL now ls LhaL, regardless of whaL we Lhlnk of lower holons, when lL comes aL leasL Lo human belngs, none of Lhe four quadranLs can be prlvlleged. (lf you don'L belleve LhaL consclousness or prehenslon ln any form exLends below humans, a sLudy of Lhe four quadranLs wlll aL leasL show you ln whlch dlrecLlons and ln whlch ways lnLerlors would exLend lf you LhoughL oLherwlse, whlch lLself can be a very useful exerclse.) Whlch brlngs us Lo Lhe sub[ecL of gross reducLlonlsm versus subLle reducLlonlsm. Cross reducLlonlsLs, flrsL of all, do noL belleve any lnLerlors exlsL anywhere, so Lhe lssues of meanlng, value, consclousness, depLh, culLure, and lnLenLlonallLy-Lhese never come up for Lhem, and, ln facL, Lhey hope Lo dle wlLh Lhe boasL on Lhelr llps LhaL Lhey never saw a value Lhey couldn'L reduce Lo aLoms. Cross reducLlonlsm fltst reduces oll quadranLs Lo Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL, and secooJ-Lhls ls Lhe gross parL-Lhen reduces all Lhe hlgher-order sLrucLures of Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL Lo aLomlc or subaLomlc parLlcles. 1he resulL ls purely maLerlallsLlc, mechanlsLlc (usually), aLomlsLlc (always). PlsLorlcally, only a very few, hlghly glfLed nuLs have acLually Laken Lhls paLh wlLh any sorL of brllllance, sLarLlng wlLh Lhe Lplcureans and runnlng Lo Polbach, La MeLLrle, and Lhe llke (whaL olanyl referred Lo as pre[udlce backed by genlus" and Love[oy summarlzed as, 1here ls no human sLupldlLy LhaL has noL found lLs champlon"). Cpposed Lo Lhese flotlooJ otomlsts are Lhe flotlooJ bollsts. 1hey do noL reduce all holons Lo aLoms. 8aLher, Lhey reduce everyLhlng on Lhe LefL half of Lhe dlagram Lo a correspondlng reallLy on Lhe 8lghL half. 1haL ls, Lhey are Lhe sysLems LheorlsLs and Lhe sLrucLural/funcLlonallsLs, ln all Lhelr forms, from Ceneral SysLem 1heory Lo modern dynamlc sysLems Lheory Lo many of Lhe new paradlgm" and ecologlcal/hollsLlc" Lheorles. 18 As l sald, ln many cases Lhelr hearLs are ln Lhe rlghL place, buL Lhelr Lheorles-because Lhey are emplrlcal and monologlcal, because Lhey are weakesL-noodle sclences, because Lhey deal wlLh exLerlors Lhan can be seen and noL lnLerlors LhaL musL be arduously lnLerpreLed-because of all LhaL, Lhey end up wlLh a raLher lnsldlous form of reducLlonlsm, lnsldlous because Lhey are almosL compleLely unaware of whaL Lhey have done. 1hey clalm Lo embrace Lhe whole of reallLy, when ln facL Lhey have [usL devasLaLed half of lL. (As only one example now, we can look aL Pabermas's wlLherlng aLLack on sysLems Lheory, and hls demonsLraLlon LhaL, alLhough sysLems Lheory has an lmporLanL buL llmlLed place, lL ls now, by vlrLue of lLs reducLlonlsm, one of Lhe greaL modern enemles of Lhe llfeworld-whaL he refers Lo as Lhe colonlzaLlon of Lhe llfeworld by Lhe lmperaLlves of funcLlonal sysLems LhaL exLernallze Lhelr cosLs on Lhe oLher. . . . a bllnd compulslon Lo sysLem malnLenance and sysLem expanslon." 19 And whaL ls loucaulL's blopower-Lhe modern danger"-lf noL, ln large parL, Lhe sysLems/lnsLrumenLal menLallLy blologlzed and applled Lo humans, converLlng each and all Lo sLrands and means ln Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng blo-web-Lhe chlef form of coerclve power ln Lhe modern world?) WhaL Lhese sysLems and hollsLlc" LheorlsLs don'L seem Lo undersLand ls LhaL whlle Lhey have lndeed avolded qtoss teJoctloolsm-and for LhaL are Lo be hlghly pralsed-Lhey are noneLheless (and apparenLly unknown Lo Lhem) Lhe exemplars of sobtle teJoctloolsm. 1hey don'L reduce everyLhlng Lo aLoms, Lhey reduce everyLhlng ln Lhe LefL- Pand Lo a 8lghL-Pand descrlpLlon ln Lhe sysLem." 1hey reduce a four-quadranL hollsm (or kosmlc hollsm) Lo merely a 8lghL-Pand hollsm, a flaLland hollsm. And Lhey are so undersLandably proud LhaL Lhey are hollsLs, Lhey overlook Lhe flaLland parL. Cross reducLlonlsm sLlll rears lLs pecullar head every now and Lhen, usually when somebody dlscovers a recurslve law (a slmple procedure LhaL, when repeaLed, generaLes complex procedures), buL by and large lL has oot been hlsLorlcally LhaL lnfluenLlal, and cerLalnly noL as lnfluenLlal as many new-paradlgm crlLlcs seem Lo Lhlnk. 1he Lruly devasLaLlng conLrlbuLor Lo modern flaLland onLology, Lo an erasure of Lhe kosmos, has been Lhe 8lghL- Pand paLh of sysLems Lheory or sLrucLural/funcLlonallsm ln lLs many forms. 1he sysLems LheorlsLs llke Lo clalm LhaL Lhe reducLlonlsLlc vlllalns are Lhe aLomlsLs, and LhaL ln emphaslzlng Lhe whollsLlc naLure of sysLems wlLhln sysLems, Lhey Lhemselves have overcome reducLlonlsm, and LhaL Lhey are Lherefore ln a poslLlon Lo help heal Lhe planeL." Whereas all Lhey have acLually done ls use a subLle reducLlon Lo overcome a gross one. 1hese flaLland hollsLs clalm, for example, LhaL Lhe greaL negaLlve legacy" of Lhe LnllghLenmenL was lLs aLomlsLlc and dlvlslve onLology. 8uL aLomlsm was oot Lhe domlnanL Lheme of Lhe LnllghLenmenL. As we wlll see ln greaL deLall (ln chapLers 12 and 13)-and as vlrLually every hlsLorlan of Lhe perlod has made abundanLly clear-Lhe domlnanL Lheme of Lhe LnllghLenmenL was Lhe harmony of an lnLerlocklng order of belng," a sysLems harmony LhaL was behlnd everyLhlng from Adam SmlLh's greaL lnvlslble hand" Lo !ohn Locke's lnLerlocklng orders" Lo Lhe 8eformers' and Lhe uelsLs' vasL harmonlous whole of muLually lnLerrelaLed belngs." 1o glve only a few examples now, Charles 1aylor represenLs Lhe vlrLually unconLesLed concluslon of scholars LhaL for Lhe malnsLream of Lhe LnllghLenmenL, naLure as Lhe whole lnLerlocklng sysLem of ob[ecLlve reallLy, ln whlch all belngs, lncludlng man, had a naLural mode of exlsLence whlch doveLalled wlLh LhaL of all oLhers, provlded Lhe baslc model, Lhe blueprlnL for happlness and hence good. 1he LnllghLenmenL developed a model of naLure, lncludlng human naLure, as a harmonlous whole whose parLs meshed perfecLly," and Lhe unlLy of Lhe order was seen as an lnLerlocklng seL calllng for acLlons whlch formed a harmonlous whole." 20 As Alexander ope would have lL, speaklng for an enLlre generaLlon: Such ls Lhe World's greaL harmony, LhaL sprlngs from Crder, unlon, full ConsenL of Lhlngs, Where small and greaL, where weak and mlghLy, made Lo serve [each oLher], noL suffer, sLrengLhen, noL lnvade, arLs relaLe Lo Whole, All served, all servlng, noLhlng sLands alone." 21 Already Lhe ocyclopJle, basLlon of LnllghLenmenL LhoughL, had announced LhaL everyLhlng ln naLure ls llnked LogeLher," and Love[oy polnLs ouL LhaL Lhey were wonL Lo dlscourse wlLh eloquence on Lhe perfecLlon of Lhe unlversal SysLem as a whole." 22 no, Lhe downslde of Lhe LnllghLenmenL was LhaL lL Look a kosmos of botb LefL and 8lghL dlmenslons and reduced lL Lo a cosmos LhaL could be emplrlcally (or monologlcally) descrlbed: lL collopseJ tbe left bolf to lts cottelotes oo tbe klqbt bolf. lLs greaL crlme was noL gross reducLlonlsm buL sobtle teJoctloolsm. 1he CreaL Polarchy of 8elng was collapsed lnLo a harmonlous whole of lnLerlocklng orders," as !ohn Locke puL lL, buL orders LhaL now had no wlLhln, no lnLerlors, no quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, buL lnsLead could be approached Lhrough an ob[ecLlfylng and emplrlclsL gaze (all belng equal sLrands ln Lhe flaLland web). ln shorL, Lhe LefL was reduced Lo Lhe 8lghL, and Lhus lotetlots Lended Lo geL losL and flaLLened lnLo mere extetlots (and we wlll see more preclsely whaL LhaL enLalled as we proceed). 1hls lndeed ended up belng a Jlvlslve and Joollstlc onLology, preclsely because, ln descrlblng Lhe whole of reallLy ln objectlve Lerms as a harmonlous lnLerlocklng order or sysLem (Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng web), lL lefL no room for Lhe sobject LhaL was dolng Lhe descrlblng. 23 lnLerpreLaLlon, consclousness, and lnLerlor depLh were converLed (reduced) Lo exLerlor, ob[ecLlve, sysLems lnLeracLlon-l" and we" were reduced Lo hollsLlc lLs"-Lhe preclse essence of subLle reducLlonlsm. ln shorL, naLure was a harmonlous whole known by a sub[ecL LhaL could noL flL lnLo lL. And once Lhls bollstlc/losttomeotol or [usL-parLs-of-Lhe-whole" approach was applled Lo Lhe sub[ecL lLself-whaL loucaulL called knowledge closlng ln on lLself"-Lhe sub[ecL lnadverLenLly began Lo erase lLself (and noL ln Lhe sense of a genulne Lranscendence, buL ln Lhe sense of shooLlng lLself ln Lhe fooL, or raLher, ln Lhe head). reclsely because Lhe sub[ecL's worldvlew was empltlcolly completely bollstlc, Lhe sub[ecL aced lLself ouL of Lhe plcLure alLogeLher, and hovered above Lhe hollsLlc world, dangllng and dlsengaged, now helplessly, now aggresslvely (Lhus Lhe famous, or lnfamous, self-deflnlng and dlsengaged sub[ecL cuL off from Lhe hollsLlc/lnsLrumenLal world, Lhe hyper-auLonomous self" LhaL so deflned Lhe LnllghLenmenL, as we wlll see laLer ln more deLall). ln oLher words, Lhe profound duallsm lnherenL ln flaLland hollsm (namely, Lhe lsolaLed sub[ecL confronLlng an ob[ecLlvely hollsLlc world), alLhough hldden (or noL lmmedlaLely obvlous), was noneLheless already aL work, and conLrlbuLed dlrecLly Lo Lhe LnllghLenmenL's dehumanlzlng humanlsm" LhaL has been so severely crlLlclzed, from loucaulL's Age of Man" Lo Pabermas's phllosophy of Lhe sub[ecL Lo 1aylor's dlsengaged sub[ecL of lnsLrumenLally lnLerlocklng orders. 1hey all Lell a slmllar Lale of Lhe ob[ecLlfylng hollsLlc/lnsLrumenLal mode of knowlng Lurned back onLo Lhe sub[ecL, Lhus denylng or desLroylng Lhe very sub[ecLlvlLy lL soughL Lo undersLand. As we wlll see laLer ln Lhls chapLer (and agaln ln chapLer 12), Lhe flaLland hollsLlc paradlgm of Lhe LnllghLenmenL collapsed a kosmos LhaL was boLh lnLerlorly and exLerlorly holarchlc (and Lhus lncluded boLh LefL and 8lghL), lnLo a flaLland cosmos LhaL was only exLerlorly holarchlc (or 8lghL-Pand only): a flaLland web LhaL replaced lnLerlor depLh wlLh Lhe greaL unlversal sysLem of lnLerlocklng emplrlcal surfaces, and Lhus reduced all lnLerlors Lo exLerlorly percelved sLrands ln Lhe greaL funcLlonal web. 1hls hollsLlc" paradlgm sounded llke lL covered all" of reallLy (as agalnsL Lhe aLomlsLs), buL ln facL lL had [usL vlolenLly Lorn Lhe kosmos ln half, Lossed ouL depLh and lnLerlorlLy, and seLLled aggresslvely on exLerlors, surfaces, and Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng web-lnLerwoven l" and we" reduced Lo lnLerwoven lLs," whlch lronlcally lefL boLh l" and we" lsolaLed, sLranded, allenaLed, and alone, slnce none could flL lnLo Lhe harmonlous web of hollsLlc lLs. 1o say LhaL Lhe sub[ecL ls an lnseparable parL of Lhe greaL hollsLlc web"-a web descrlbed ln ob[ecLlve, process, dynamlcal, sysLems, Lhlrd-person, lL-language-ls Lo desLroy Lhe sub[ecL ln lLs own Lerms and devasLaLe lLs auLhenLlc dlmenslons, and Lhls, lf anyLhlng, was Lhe crlme of Lhe LnllghLenmenL." A 1Cu8 Cl 1PL lCu8 CuAu8An1S Cnce Lhls flaLland reducLlon occurred (whlch we wlll examlne ln greaL deLall ln chapLers 12 and 13)-Lhe LefL-Pand aspecLs of reallLy were all reduced Lo Lhelr cottespooJloq aspecLs on Lhe 8lghL Pand. reclsely because Lhere ote correlaLlons beLween all four quadranLs, Lhls Lype of reducLlonlsm can be aggresslvely carrled ouL. 1hls ls whaL makes subLle reducLlonlsm so hard Lo spoL and so hard Lo redress. lor example, l have a LhoughL, a LhoughL occurs Lo me. 1haL's Lhe glven holon, whlch we wlll use as an example. lor Lhls holon, ln Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL, Lhere ls a change ln braln physlology, a change LhaL can be descrlbed ln compleLely ob[ecLlve Lerms (lL-language): Lhere was a release of noreplnephrlne beLween Lhe neural synapses ln Lhe fronLal corLex, accompanled by hlgh-ampllLude beLa waves . . . and so on. All of whlch ls Lrue enough, and all of whlch ls very lmporLanL. 8uL LhaL ls noL how l experlenced Lhe LhoughL, and l wlll never acLually expetleoce my LhoughL ln Lhose Lerms. lnsLead, Lhe LhoughL had an lnLeresLlng and lmporLanL meanlng Lo me, whlch l may or may noL share wlLh you. And even lf you know whaL every slngle aLom of my braln ls dolng, you wlll never know Lhe acLual deLalls of my LhoughL ooless l tell yoo. 1haL ls Lhe upper-LefL quadranL or aspecL of Lhls holon, Lhls LhoughL LhaL occurred Lo me (and LhaL ls one of Lhe many reasons why Lhe upper LefL can never be reduced wlLhouL remalnder Lo Lhe upper 8lghL, sLrong and general correlaLlons and lnLeracLlons, yes, deLalled reducLlon, no). arenLheLlcally, Lhls ls why Lhe braln, even Lhough lL ls lnslde" my organlsm, ls sLlll only Lhe extetlot of my belng-Lhe braln ls sLlll upper-8lghL quadranL, sLlll extetlot. 24 l can surglcally cuL open a human body and look aL all Lhe lnsldes," even down Lo Lhe Llssues and cells and molecules, buL Lhose are noL Lhe wltblo or Lhe lotetlot, Lhey are merely more surfaces, more exLerlors LhaL now can be seeo. 1hey are lnslde surfaces, noL real lnLerlors (whlch ls why Lhey are all llsLed on Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL, Lhey are all Lhe aspecLs of holons LhaL can be emplrlcally reglsLered). 23 8uL Lhe cruclal polnL ls LhaL you can look aL Lhe lnsldes" all you wanL and you wlll never see an lotetlot, because whereas surfaces or exLerlors can be seen, lnLerlors musL be lotetpteteJ. lf l wanL Lo know whaL your braln looks llke ftom wltblo, whaL lLs acLual llved lotetlot ls llke (ln oLher words, your mloJ), Lhen l most tolk to yoo. 1here ls absoluLely no oLher way. WhaL do you Lhlnk? WhaL's up? Pow do you feel?" And as we Lalk, l wlll have Lo lotetptet whaL you say, because all depLh requlres lnLerpreLaLlon (whereas Lhe braln physlologlsL doesn'L have Lo Lalk Lo you aL all, ln facL, lf a braln physlologlsL has goL hls hands on you, you are probably dead, whlch severely llmlLs conversaLlon, Lhe braln physlologlsL can know all abouL your braln, and never know a slngle LhoughL you had). 1hls ls why Lhe surfaces are all referred Lo as monologlcal"-Lhey can be examlned wlLh a monologue, noL a dlalogue (whlch ls why depLh ls dlaloglcal or dlalecLlcal, or empaLhlc ln Lhe broadesL sense). ?ou can sLudy a bunch of movlng rocks monologlcally, you can sLudy braln physlology monologlcally, you can sLudy sulclde raLes monologlcally. 8uL you can only sLudy lnLerlors empaLhlcally, as a feel from wlLhln, and LhaL means lnLerpreLaLlon: boLh you and l mlghL be mlsLaken as we Lry Lo assess each oLher. ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, all l baslcally have Lo do ls look. l wlll need cerLaln concepLual and maLerlal Lools, lL ls Lrue, buL flnally and fundamenLally l [usL look: l look aL a sLar wlLh a Lelescope, l look aL a cell wlLh a mlcroscope, l look aL parLlcle Lralls wlLh a cloud chamber, l look aL Lhe behavlor of raLs ln a maze, l look aL a soclal sysLem wlLh emplrlcal daLa and sLaLlsLlcs. ln each of Lhese cases, l don'L have Lo Lalk Lo Lhe ob[ecL of lnvesLlgaLlon. l don'L Lry Lo reach muLual undersLandlng. l don'L Lry Lo lnLerpreL Lhe depLhs or Lhe lnLerlors. l slmply look aL Lhe surfaces, descrlbe Lhe exLerlors, descrlbe whaL l see. lL can all be done ln a monologue, lL never needs a dlalogue. And lL's noL LhaL one ls rlghL and Lhe oLher wrong, lL's LhaL boLh are exLremely lmporLanL. 1hls emphaslzes Lhe lmporLance of Lhe noLlon of slocetlty ln lnvesLlgaLlng Lhe upper-LefL quadranL. When lL comes Lo Lhe developed forms of depLh ln humans, l only have access Lo LhaL depLh vla lnLerpreLlng whaL you Lell me ln a dlalogue (and ln body language or some such communlcaLlon). AoJ yoo mlqbt be lyloq. lurLher, you mlghL be lylng Lo yourself-whlch ls where Lhe numerous sclences of depLh," such as psychoanalysls, enLer Lhe plcLure. ?ou and l can noL only LranslaLe whaL we percelve, we can mlsLranslaLe. And all Lhe varlous forms of Lhe hermeneuLlcs of susplclon" (as 8lcoeur called Lhem) seek Lo dlg beneaLh Lhe sLaLed surface conLenL and assess Lhe genulne or acLual meanlng of a communlcaLlon: noL whaL's slLLlng on Lhe surface, buL whaL hldes ln Lhe depLhs. 1he LheraplsL, for example, based on formal Lralnlng and on empaLhlc (or sympaLheLlc) lnLulLlon, mlghL conclude LhaL Lhe feellng of depresslon LhaL you are experlenclng ls acLually Lhe dlsgulsed feellngs of rage aL your faLher for abandonlng you." And lf Lhls makes sense Lo you, lf you go, Aha! LhaL's exacLly lL!," Lhen you have dlscovered a depLh ln you LhaL you dld noL know was Lhere, and LhaL you consequenLly had been mls-LranslaLlng (or mlslnLerpreLlng) all Lhose years. ?ou and Lhe LheraplsL wlll Lhen begln Lo reLranslaLe Lhose mlsLranslaLed feellngs, correcLly labellng Lhem ln Lhe conLexL of your own developmenL: you are noL sad," you are acLually mad." ln Lhls sense (whlch we wlll explore more laLer), my unconsclous," my shadow," ls Lhe sum LoLal of my pasL mlsLranslaLlons carrled lnLo Lhe presenL, where lL dlsLorLs percepLlon now (Lransference"). My feellngs of sadness" were acLually loslocete, l was lylng Lo myself ln order Lo hlde Lhe worse paln of rage aL a loved one, l dellberaLely (buL unconsclously") mlslnLerpreLed my feellngs ln order Lo proLecL myself (defense mechanlsms"). My shadow ls Lhe locus of my lnslncerlLy, my mlslnLerpreLaLlon of my own depLh (and Lhls lndeed ls whaL all forms of depLh psychology," lreudlan Lo !unglan Lo CesLalL, have ln common). lurLher, l wlll also mlsLranslaLe or mlslnLerpreL Lhe depLh ln oLhers (WhaL do you mean by LhaL!") because l have mlsLranslaLed lL ln myself. And Lhus l have Lo reread Lhe LexL of my own feellngs, locaLe Lhe source of my lnslncerlLy, and relnLerpreL my own depLh more falLhfully, wlLh Lhe help, usually, of somebody who has seen Lhe mlsLranslaLlon before and can help lotetptet me Lo myself. 1he lssues are meooloq, lotetptetotloo, and slocetlty (or lLs lack). 8ehavlorlsm, of course, wanLs noLhlng Lo do wlLh any of Lhls black box" of lnLerlor meanlng, and conslgns Lhe loL of lL, aL besL, Lo lnLervenlng varlables" lylng ln LhaL Lerra lncognlLa beLween obsetvoble sLlmull and obsetvoble response, lnLernal varlables LhaL are deflned merely as Lendencles Lo behavlor," because behavlorlsm, belng a 8lghL-Pand paLh, does noL LrusL anyLhlng lL cannoL see and monologlcally Llnker wlLh or relnforce. 26 (l wonder lf any of Lhe behavlorlsLs ever explaln Lo Lhelr spouses LhaL Lhelr shared love ls [usL an lnLervenlng varlable.) ln oLher words, behavlorlsm, llke all 8lghL-Pand paLhs, ls fundamenLally concerned wlLh ptoposltloool ttotb. 27 l, as a researcher, make a sLaLemenL or a proposlLlon abouL an ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs, and Lhe research aLLempLs Lo ascerLaln wheLher LhaL sLaLemenL ls Lrue or false (ofLen by Lrylng Lo dlsprove lL). 8uL ln all cases lL bolls down Lo sLaLemenLs llke, ls lL or ls lL noL ralnlng ouLslde?" l go and look, and l flnd ouL whaL Lhe ob[ecLlve slLuaLlon ls (lL ls lndeed ralnlng ouLslde"). CLher researchers go and look, and lf everybody agrees, we say lL ls proposlLlonally Lrue LhaL lL ls ralnlng ouLslde. All proposlLlonal LruLh ls of LhaL varleLy, alLhough lL can geL qulLe compllcaLed, and Lhe monologlcal lookloq ofLen requlres Lelescopes, mlcroscopes, LLCs, and oLher complex lnsLrumenLs of one sorL or anoLher. 8uL Lhey all aLLempL Lo allgn proposlLlons wlLh an ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs. 1hey are monologlcal, proposlLlonal, emplrlcal. 1he valldlLy crlLerlon ls one of ttotb, of maLchlng map and LerrlLory accuraLely enough. 8uL ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, Lhe valldlLy crlLerlon ls noL so much LruLh as LruLhfulness, or slncerlLy. 1he quesLlon here ls noL ls lL ralnlng ouLslde?" 1he quesLlon here ls: when l Lell you lL ls ralnlng ouLslde, am l Lelllng you Lhe LruLh or am l lylng? Cr perhaps self-decelved? Am l belng LruLhful and slncere, or decelLful and lnslncere? 1hls ls noL so much a maLLer of ob[ecLlve ttotb as one of sub[ecLlve ttotbfoloess. lL ls noL so much wheLher Lhe map maLches Lhe LerrlLory, buL wheLher Lhe mapmaker can be LrusLed. 1ruLhfulness, Lhen, ls a maLLer of LrusL and slncerlLy. reclsely because Jeptb does noL slL on Lhe surface for all Lo see, my reporLlng of depLh may or may noL be ttosteJ. 1ruLhfulness, slncerlLy, LrusLworLhlness, lnLegrlLy-Lhese are some of Lhe cruclal guldeposLs for navlgaLlng ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL. ln shorL, lL ls noL [usL a maLLer of Lrue exLerlors, buL slncere lnLerlors. And Lhls slncerlLy cannoL be deLermlned emplrlcally or ob[ecLlvely or monologlcally. We can glve people emplrlcal lle-deLecLor LesLs, buL lf Lhey have flrsL lled Lo Lhemselves, Lhe monologlcal machlne wlll wrongly lndlcaLe Lhey are Lelllng Lhe LruLh. 1he locus of slncerlLy ls noL ob[ecLlve, buL sub[ecLlve, and LhaL can only be accessed ln dlaloglcal lnLerpreLaLlon, noL monologlcal lndlcaLlon. We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhese polnLs laLer, buL Lhose are some of Lhe lndlvldual aspecLs of Lhls LhoughL LhaL occurred Lo me," Lhls LhoughL holon we are uslng as an example. 1he LhoughL holon has braln correlaLes LhaL can be deLermlned ob[ecLlvely, monologlcally, proposlLlonally (u8), gulded by LruLh, and lL has lnLerlor correlaLes LhaL can be deLermlned only dlaloglcally and lnLerpreLlvely, gulded by LruLhfulness. noL only are Lhe Lwo domalns dlfferenL ln naLure, Lhey have Jlffeteot ctltetlo for whaL ls vollJ ln each. 8uL, Lo conLlnue Lhe example, Lhose lndlvldual aspecLs olso have soclal or communal componenLs (Lhe lower half). WheLher l Lell you my speclflc LhoughLs or noL, Lhose LhoughLs do lndeed have meooloq Lo me (and would have meanlng Lo you lf l Lell Lhem Lo you), because LhaL meanlng ls lLself susLalned by a whole neLwork of background pracLlces and norms and llngulsLlc sLrucLures exlsLlng ln our shared culLure. lf l Lell Lhem Lo you and you don'L speak Lhe language, Lhen you won'L geL Lhe meanlng, even Lhough all Lhe physlcal words and sLlmull freely bombard you. 1haL ls Lhe Lower-LefL quadranL, Lhe sboteJ coltotol wotlJspoce necessary for Lhe communlcaLlon of any meanlng aL all, and wlLhouL whlch mosL (or even all) of my own prlvaLe LhoughLs would be largely meanlngless as well. 1he quesLlon here ls noL one of LruLh so much, nor even LruLhfulness, buL one of coltotol flt, of Lhe approprlaLeness or [usLness or flLness" of my meanlngs and values wlLh Lhe culLure LhaL helps Lo produce Lhem. My own lndlvldual meanlngs and values are noL reduclble Lo Lhls culLural flLness (no quadranL ls reduclble Lo any oLher), buL Lhey do depend Lhoroughly on all Lhe background conLexLs and culLural pracLlces LhaL allow me Lo form meanlngs ln Lhe flrsL place. My LhoughL-holon ls lnexLrlcably slLuaLed ln culLural conLexLs of relaLlonal exchange and lnLersub[ecLlve communlcaLlons, wlLhouL whlch my own sub[ecL (and lLs LruLhfulness) and Lhe world of ob[ecLs (wlLh Lhelr LruLh) would noL and could noL dlsclose Lhemselves ln Lhe flrsL place. lf my LhoughL-holon does noL culLurally flL, Lhen l may be a genlus rlslng above convenLlons, or l may be psychoLlc and LoLally ouL of Louch wlLh my fellows. 8uL Lhe crlLerlon ln any case ls noL so much LruLh or LruLhfulness, buL [usLness, approprlaLeness: noL wheLher my LhoughL corresponds wlLh a world of objects, nor wheLher l am belng sobjectlvely LruLhful, buL wheLher l am lotetsobjectlvely ln Lune, approprlaLely meshed wlLh Lhe culLural worldspace LhaL allows sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs Lo arlse ln Lhe flrsL place. (WheLher l agree or dlsagree wlLh aspecLs of LhaL culLure, l have ln all cases depended upon lL Lo provlde me wlLh Lhe capaclLy for lnLersub[ecLlve meanlng ln Lhe flrsL place.) ln oLher words, Lhe crlLerlon for valldlLy ln Lhe Lower-LefL quadranL ls noL [usL Lhe ttotb of my sLaLemenL, nor Lhe ttotbfoloess wlLh whlch l puL lL, buL wheLher you and l can come Lo motool ooJetstooJloq wlLh each oLher. noL ob[ecLlve, noL sub[ecLlve, buL lnLersub[ecLlve. 8uL none of Lhose meanlngs, wheLher lndlvldual or culLural, are slmply or merely dlsembodled. My lndlvldual LhoughLs reglsLer a change ln my braln physlology, llkewlse, culLural paLLerns are reglsLered ln exLerlor, maLerlal, observable soclal behavlors (even lf Lhey can'L be reduced Lo Lhem). And LhaL ls Lhe Lower-8lghL quadranL. 1haL ls, [usL as my LhoughLs have braln correlaLes, culLural meanlngs have correlaLes ln ob[ecLlve soclal lnsLlLuLlons and maLerlal soclal sLrucLures. lood producLlon, LransporLaLlon sysLems, wrlLLen records, school bulldlngs, geopollLlcal sLrucLures, behavloral acLlons of groups, wrlLLen legal codes, archlLecLural sLyles and Lhe bulldlngs Lhemselves, Lypes of Lechnology, llngulsLlc sLrucLures ln Lhelr exLerlor aspecLs (wrlLLen or spoken slgnlflers), Lechno- economlc forces of producLlon and dlsLrlbuLlon-all Lhe physlcal componenLs of a soclal acLlon sysLem, all Lhe aspecLs of a soclal sysLem LhaL can be seen emplrlcally or monologlcally. Pere Lhe crlLerlon ls noL Lhe ttotb of ob[ecLs, nor Lhe ttotbfoloess of sub[ecLs, nor Lhe mesh of lotetsobjectlve undersLandlng and meanlng, buL raLher Lhe fooctloool flt or Lhe lotetobjectlve mesh of soclal sysLems. A soclal acLlon sysLem, for example, can only produce so much buLLer or so many guns, and Lhe more of one, Lhe less of Lhe oLher-Lhey musL fooctlooolly flt wlLh whaL ls physlcally posslble (whereas, ln lnLersub[ecLlve meanlng, Lhe more meanlng l have does noL mean Lhe less meanlng avallable Lo you: Lhese are quallLles, noL quanLlLles, so Lhey don'L have Lo physlcally add or subLracL from each oLher, as quanLlLles ln funcLlonal flL musL). looctloool flt (WhaL does lL Jo?") ls, of course, Lhe ma[or valldlLy clalm recognlzed by sysLems Lheory. And LhaL ls parL of lLs sobtle teJoctloolsm. lnLerpreLlve depLh (slncerlLy and LruLhfulness) and culLural meanlng ([usLness and moral approprlaLeness) are all reduced Lo funcLlonal flL ln exLerlor surfaces: all are reduced Lo flaLland hollsm. (Lven proposlLlonal LruLh, or sub[ecL and ob[ecL correspondlng flL, ls reduced Lo funcLlonal flL, or lotetobjectlve flL, and LruLh" becomes anyLhlng LhaL furLhers Lhe auLopoleLlc reglme of Lhe self-organlzlng soclal sysLem, such Lheorles dlssolve Lhelr own LruLh value ln Lhe funcLlonal flL of LhaL whlch Lhey descrlbe, so LhaL Lhelr sub[ecLlve Lheorles become merely one among oLher lnLerob[ecLs, a very neaL Lrlck lndeed, we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls laLer.) now Lhe polnL of Lhls overall example ls slmply LhaL my slngle" LhoughL, Lhe orlglnal holon, ls noL really a slngle LhoughL as such, buL raLher a holon wlLh four lnseparable aspecLs (lnLenLlonal, behavloral, culLural, and soclal), each wlLh lLs own valldlLy clalms (sub[ecLlve LruLhfulness, ob[ecLlve LruLh, lnLersub[ecLlve [usLness, and lnLerob[ecLlve funcLlonal flL). 28 As l sald, no holon whaLsoever slmply exlsLs ln one or anoLher quadranL, all holons possess Lhese four quadranLs, and each quadranL ls lnLlmaLely correlaLed wlLh, dependenL upon, buL noL reduclble Lo, Lhe oLhers. 8uL preclsely because Lhese quadranLs are all so lnLlmaLely correlaLed, l can lndeed aLLempL an aggresslve reducLlonlsm, and lL can acLually seem Lo make a loL of sense. lor example, slnce every LhoughL does lndeed reglsLer some sorL of change ln braln physlology (even lf l have an ouL-of-Lhe-body experlence!), l can olwoys malnLaln LhaL LhoughLs are [usL braln sLaLes, even Lhough l wlll probably malnLaln (as mosL braln LheorlsLs do) LhaL Lhe braln sLaLes Lhemselves are hlgher-order (or hlerarchlcal) emergenL paLLerns LhaL cannoL be reduced Lo tbelt aLomlsLlc elemenLs. 29 1hls poslLlon ls noL yeL gross reducLlonlsm. lL ls subLle reducLlonlsm. lL has slmply reduced lnLerlor depLh, value, meanlng, and consclousness (Lhe LefL Pand) Lo funcLlonal parLs of a muLually lnLerlocklng order of hollsLlc and emplrlcal evenLs (Lhe 8lghL Pand). lL has reduced Lhree-dlmenslonal chess Lo flaLland chess, Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe cosmos, Lhe lnLerrelaLed pyramld of llfe Lo Lhe lnLerrelaLed web of llfe, lnLerrelaLed l and we Lo lnLerrelaLed lLs. ln shorL, Lhls subLle reducLlonlsm stlll tecoqolzes bolotcby (hlerarchy), buL ooly Lhe hlerarchles on Lhe 8lghL Pand-only Lhe hlerarchles of slze, exLenslon, and surface. And Lherefore Lhese hlerarchles are all fundamenLally deflned by pbyslcol loclosloo (a cell physlcally lncludes molecules, whlch physlcally lnclude aLoms, and so on, buL Lhese depLhs" are all flaLly mooovoleot: Lhey are oot holarchles of value, beauLy, meanlng, moLlvaLlon, undersLandlng, lnLenLlon, consclousness, or anyLhlng else even vaguely LefL Pand: all of Lhose genulnely lnLerlor depLhs have been scrubbed clean and emplrlcally whlLewashed ln Lhe monochrome Lones of exLerlor physlcal span, ex-span-slon, or exLenslon/lncluslon: no beLLer or worse, only blgger or smaller). 30 And Lhls sobtle teJoctloolsm ls helped by Lhe facL LhaL oll four sLrands of evoluLlon, all four quadranLs, follow Lhe LwenLy LeneLs. 1hey are all holarchlcal. 8uL whereas Lhe 8lghL Pand ls preemlnenLly lnvolved ln physlcal exLenslon (organlsms are blgger Lhan cells), Lhe LefL-Pand lnvolves lnLenLlons (concepLs per se are oot blgger or smaller Lhan symbols, even Lhough Lhey lnclude" Lhem and are more lnLenLlonal, Lhese are gradaLlons of value and beauLy, noL gradaLlons of slze). lurLher, Lhe Jeepet one proceeds, Lhe less Lhe LwenLy LeneLs Lell us anyLhlng slgnlflcanL anyway (slnce Lhey are Lhe lowesL-common-denomlnaLor facLors, Lhe weakesL-noodle laws). noneLheless, Lhe LwenLy LeneLs do capLure cerLaln fundamenLals ln all four quadranLs. 1hus, Lhls subLle reducLlonlsm can sLlll champlon all Lhe LwenLy LeneLs, Lhe noLlon of developmenL, Lhe emergenL characLerlsLlc of evoluLlon, Lhe muLually lnLerrelaLed naLure of all holons, Lhe holarchlcal naLure of all holons, and so on. All of tbot coo stlll be beottlly embtoceJ by tbe sobtle teJoctloolst, lL's [usL LhaL all holarchles of quallLy have been losL enLlrely ln holarchles of quanLlLy, and all gradaLlons of lnLerlor depLh have been replaced by gradaLlons of meanlngless exLerlors (compasslon ls beLLer Lhan murder, buL quarks are noL beLLer Lhan phoLons, and Lhus Lo explaln Lhe enLlre kosmos ln Lerms of exLerlor surfaces and emplrlcal forms ls Lo flnd only a cosmos wlLh no value whaLsoever: guaranLeed). And slnce for every evenL ln Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslon Lhere ls always sometbloq reglsLered ln Lhe 8lghL Pand, lL can appear LhaL an exhausLlve descrlpLlon of Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh acLually covers everyLhlng Lhere ls Lo be sald. uL dlfferenLly, slnce every evenL ln Lhe kosmos does lndeed have a 8lghL-Pand componenL, lL can mlsLakenly appear LhaL Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh alone exhausLs Lhe kosmos, whereas lL has merely reglsLered and measured Lhe fooLprlnLs of Lhe glanL. lL's very subLle, Lhls program of collapslng Lhe kosmos. 1PL lunuAMLn1AL LnLlCP1LnMLn1 A8AulCM As we wlll see ln chapLer 12, Lhls subLle reducLlonlsm was Lhe fooJomeotol ollqbteomeot potoJlqm. 31 And wlLhln Lhls subLle reducLlonlsm, wlLhln Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, Lhere were Lwo warrlng camps: flaLland aLomlsLs and flaLland hollsLs. And lL ls ln an unbroken llneage LhaL Loday's sysLems LheorlsLs carry on Lhe laLLer pole of Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm: Lhe Lask of botb overcomlng gross reducLlonlsm, whlch ls alLogeLher commendable, and covettly propagaLlng subLle reducLlonlsm, Lhe reducLlon of all lnLenLlon Lo exLenslon, all quallLy Lo quanLlLy, all lnLerpreLed depLhs Lo unamblguously seen surfaces, all hlerarchlcal values Lo monologlcal mesh, all lnLerlors Lo hollsLlc sLrands, all LruLh and meanlng Lo funcLlonal flL, all lnLerwoven l's and we's Lo lnLerwoven lLs. 32 1hls ls why Morrls 8erman can polnL ouL LhaL Lhe conLemporary quesL for hollsm ls [usL as formal, absLracL, 'value-free,' and dlsembodled as Lhe mechanlsLlc paradlgm lL seeks Lo replace." 33 1hls confuses and angers Lhe hollsLs, because Lhey slncerely Lhlnk Lhey are Lhe good guys, slnce Lhey managed Lo defeaL qtoss reducLlonlsm. 8uL we have shown LhaL everyLhlng ls connecLed Lo everyLhlng else!" 1he flaLland web of llfe. AlLhough Lhe lnLenLlons are ofLen genulne, Lhe gravlLaLlonal pull of flaLland makes lL a planeL very hard Lo escape. keep ln mlnd LhaL l am noL saylng sysLems Lheory and eco-hollsm ls wrong, l would noL have spenL all of chapLer 2 exLolllng lL lf l LhoughL LhaL. lL ls slmply very parLlal-whaL Pegel called a vanlLy of Lhe undersLandlng"-and LhaL vanlLy Lends Lo become dangerous, because when half Lhe kosmos clalms Lo have Lhe whole, cerLaln Lypes of aggresslon are abouL Lo ensue. ln chapLer 1 we saw LhaL, accordlng Lo Lhe hollsLs Lhemselves, we Loday suffer from a fracLured worldvlew. 1haL ls Lrue, buL desplLe Lhelr besL lnLenLlons, Lhe hollsLs have noL solved lL, Lhey have merely cloned lL. 8educlng everyLhlng Lo funcLlonal flL desLroys Lhe lnLegrlLy of each domaln, and furLher renders Lrue lnLegraLlon of each lmposslble. 1he world ls lndeed fracLured, Lhe flaLland hollsLs are some of Lhe prlme promoLers of Lhe fracLure. lL ls from Lhls flaL and faded landscape, armed wlLh good lnLenLlons and a weakesL-noodle sclence, LhaL Lhey cry ouL Lo us as our savlors. 1he hollsLs, of course, Lell Lhe Lale of Lhe LnllghLenmenL as belng prlmarlly an aLomlsLlc paradlgm, whlch Lhey malnLaln ls Lhe real cause of Lhe world's fracLure. 1hls sLory allows Lhe hollsLs Lo hlde Lhe deeper crlme of Lhe LnllghLenmenL LhaL Lhe hollsLs Lhemselves are sLlll perpeLuaLlng. As we wlll see LhroughouL Lhe remalnder of Lhls volume, modernlLy's worldvlew ls lndeed fracLured, noL because everyLhlng lsn'L reduced Lo Lhe Lower-8lghL quadranL of funcLlonal flL (Lhe eco-hollsLlc soluLlon"), buL becoose tbe foot pooJtoots tbemselves bove yet to be loteqtoteJ. And lL ls ln LhaL lnLegraLlon LhaL LruLh, LruLhfulness, meanlng, and flL can be broughL lnLo a muLual harmony. 1haL harmony-and noL a reducLlonlsm LhaL Lears lnLo Lhe fabrlc of each ln Lhe name of a preLend wholeness-ls one of Lhe overall Lhemes of Lhls volume. WhaL we wlll flnd ls LhaL funcLlonal flL ls lndeed lmporLanL, buL lL ls only parL of Lhe harmony avallable. And lL ls noL even Lhe mosL lmporLanL quadranL for Loday's world, because befote we can even aLLempL an ecologlcal heallng, we musL flrsL reach a motool ooJetstooJloq and muLual agreemenL among ourselves as Lo Lhe besL way Lo collecLlvely proceed. ln oLher words, Lhe heallng lmpulse comes noL from champlonlng funcLlonal flL (Lower 8lghL) buL muLual undersLandlng (Lower LefL). And LhaL depends flrsL and foremosL, we wlll see, on lndlvldual growLh and consclousness LransformaLlon (upper LefL). 1he LefL-Pand paLh, noL merely Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, musL Lake Lhe lead. AnyLhlng shorL of LhaL, no maLLer whaL Lhe moLlves, perpeLuaLes Lhe fracLure (or so l wlll Lry Lo demonsLraLe). ln undersLandably emphaslzlng Lhe lmporLance and Lhe urgency of eco-hollsLlc flL, many hollsLs have absoluLlzed Lhe Lower-8lghL quadranL, whlch, ln Lhus seallng lL off from any Lrue lnLegraLlon, condemns lL Lo Lhe faLe of all fragmenLs. 8educlng all domalns Lo Lhe Lower 8lghL, Lo funcLlonal flL, doesn'L [usL desLroy Lhe oLher domalns, lL desLroys Lhe Lower 8lghL as well. 1hls ls [usL anoLher way of polnLlng ouL LhaL absoluLlzlng Lhe blosphere desLroys Lhe blosphere. AL Lhls polnL of sorely needed lnLegraLlon, Lhe flaLland hollsLs are ulLlmaLely no frlends of Cala. 1hey mlghL proLecL a paLch of Cala here or Lhere, whlch ls wonderful, buL wlLhouL an overall lnLegraLlon of all four quadranLs, Cala conLlnues Lo wlLher ln Lhe wlnds of dlsregard. A genulnely kosmlc hollsm, noL cosmlc hollsm, ls whaL ls sorely needed. 1PL 8lC 1P8LL WlLh reference Lo Lhe four quadranLs: because boLh of Lhe 8lghL-Pand quadranLs are exLerlors LhaL can be descrlbed ln lL-language, l wlll someLlmes counL Lhem as one ma[or domaln, Lhe oLher Lwo belng Lhe l-language of Lhe upper LefL and Lhe we-language of Lhe Lower LefL. And for slmpllclLy's sake l wlll refer Lo Lhese as Lhe 8lg 1hree (l, we, lL). numerous comparlsons wlLh oLher researchers could be polnLed ouL here, and we wlll evenLually dlscuss Lhem ln much deLall. lor Lhe momenL we mlghL noLe LhaL Lhe 8lghL half of Lhe dlagram ls karl opper's World l (Lhe ob[ecLlve world of lL), Lhe upper LefL, World ll (Lhe sub[ecLlve world of l), and Lhe Lower LefL, World lll (Lhe culLural world of we, whlch can also, as opper polnLs ouL, be embodled or embedded ln motetlol soclal lnsLlLuLlons, or Lhe Lower 8lghL). Llkewlse, Pabermas's Lhree valldlLy clalms, for LruLh (ob[ecLs), LruLhfulness or slncerlLy (sub[ecLs), and rlghLness or [usLlce (lnLersub[ecLlvlLy), refer respecLlvely Lo Lhe 8lghL half, Lhe upper LefL, and Lhe Lower LefL (l wlll reLurn Lo Pabermas ln a momenL and emphaslze Lhe lmporLance of hls formulaLlons ln Lhls regard). 34 And ln Lhe broadesL sense Lhls ls laLo's Lhe 1rue (or proposlLlonal LruLh referrlng Lo an ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs, lL), Lhe Cood (or culLural [usLlce and approprlaLeness, we), and Lhe 8eauLlful (or Lhe lndlvldual-aesLheLlc dlmenslon, l). 1he 8lg 1hree are llkewlse kanL's Lhree crlLlques: Lhe CrlLlque of ure 8eason (LheoreLlcal lL-reason), of racLlcal 8eason or lnLersub[ecLlve morallLy (we), and of personal AesLheLlc !udgmenL (l). 1hus, alLhough oLher lLems are lncluded as well, Lhese Lhree greaL domalns-Lhe 8lg 1hree-are especlally Lhe domalns of emplrlcal sclence, morallLy, and arL. 8uL even when we move lnLo a dlscusslon of splrlLuallLy, we wlll see Lhe 8lg 1hree appear ln such all-lmporLanL formulaLlons as Lhe 1hree !ewels of 8uddhlsm: 8uddha, uharma, Sangha. 8uddha ls Lhe ulLlmaLe l, uharma Lhe ulLlmaLe lL, and Sangha Lhe ulLlmaLe We. (l wlll be especlally emphaslzlng Lhls ln subsequenL chapLers, lL ls absoluLely cruclal ln splrlLual concerns.) Charles 1aylor polnLs ouL LhaL radlcally dlfferenL senses of whaL Lhe [culLural] good ls go along wlLh qulLe dlfferenL concepLlons of whaL a human agenL ls, dlfferenL noLlons of Lhe self. Cur modern senses of Lhe self noL only are llnked Lo and made posslble by new undersLandlngs of good buL also are accompanled by new forms of narraLlvlLy and new undersLandlngs of soclal bonds and relaLlons. 1hese all evolve LogeLher, ln loose 'packages,' as lL were." 33 We are always slLuaLed ln relaLlon Lo Lhe l, Lhe we, and Lhe lL-and Lhey evolve LogeLher. And, Lo reLurn Lo Pabermas, Lhls ls Lhe essence of Lhe Pabermaslan revoluLlon. We are loescopobly sltooteJ ln relaLlon Lo Lhe 8lg 1hree, eocb of wblcb bos lts owo vollJlty clolm and lLs own sLandards, and none of whlch can be reduced Lo Lhe oLhers. WlLh any speech acL," he says, Lhe speaker Lakes up a relaLlon Lo someLhlng ln Lhe ob[ecLlve world [lL], someLhlng ln a common soclal world [we], and someLhlng ln hls own sub[ecLlve world [l]." And Lhe clalms made wlLh reference Lo each of Lhose worlds have Lhelr own valldlLy crlLerla, namely, ptoposltloool ttotb (referrlng Lo an ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs, or lL), ootmotlve tlqbtoess (culLural [usLness or approprlaLeness, we), and sobjectlve ttotbfoloess (or slncerlLy, l). And Lhls means LhaL none of Lhem can be reduced Lo Lhe oLhers: 1he world" Lo whlch sub[ecLs can relaLe wlLh Lhelr represenLaLlons or proposlLlons [proposlLlonal LruLh] was hlLherLo concelved of as Lhe LoLallLy of ob[ecLs or exlsLlng sLaLe of affalrs [lL]. 1he ob[ecLlve world ls consldered Lhe correlaLlve of all Lrue asserLorlc [proposlLlonal] senLences. 8uL lf normaLlve rlghLness [we] and sub[ecLlve LruLhfulness [l] are lnLroduced as valldlLy clalms analogous Lo LruLh, worlds" [our quadranLs"] analogous Lo Lhe world of facLs have Lo be posLulaLed for leglLlmaLely regulaLed lnLerpersonal relaLlonshlps [we] and for aLLrlbuLable sub[ecLlve experlences [l]-a world" [quadranL] noL only for whaL ls ob[ecLlve," whlch appears Lo us ln Lhe aLLlLude of Lhe Lhlrd person, buL also one for whaL ls normaLlve, Lo whlch we feel obllged ln Lhe aLLlLude of addresses, as well as one for whaL ls sub[ecLlve, whlch we elLher dlsclose or conceal [slncerlLy] ln Lhe aLLlLude of Lhe flrsL person [Lhe l]. 36 Llkewlse, each of Lhese valldlLy clalms (for LruLh, LruLhfulness, and [usLness) can be exposed Lo lLs own dlfferenL klnds of evldence, and Lhus lLs own klnd of LruLh clalms can be exposeJ to evlJeoce and cbeckeJ for Lhelr acLual vollJlty. CorrelaLlve Lo Lhe Lhree fundamenLal funcLlons of language [relaLed Lo l, we, lL], each elemenLary speech acL can be conLesLed under Lhree dlfferenL aspecLs of valldlLy. 1he hearer can re[ecL Lhe uLLerance of a speaker by elLher dlspuLlng Lhe ttotb of Lhe proposlLlon asserLed ln lL (or of Lhe exlsLenLlal presupposlLlons of lLs proposlLlonal conLenL), or Lhe tlqbtoess of Lhe speech acL ln vlew of Lhe normaLlve conLexL of Lhe uLLerance (or Lhe leglLlmacy of Lhe presupposed conLexL lLself), or Lhe ttotbfoloess of Lhe lnLenLlon expressed by Lhe speaker (LhaL ls, Lhe agreemenL of whaL ls meanL wlLh whaL ls sLaLed). 37 And so we can now reLurn Lo (and beLLer undersLand) Lhe noLlon of sobtle teJoctloolsm, or Lhe aLLempL Lo collapse Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh (or reduce Lhe LefL Pand Lo Lhe 8lghL, or reduce l" and we" Lo lL," or reduce lnLerlors Lo exLerlors, wheLher aLomlsLlc or funcLlonal): 1ruLh ls reduced Lo mere represenLaLlon (Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm"). 38 1haL ls, LhoughLs are no longer an lnLegral parL of Lhe kosmos, Lhey are merely dlsengaged and hoverlng ptoposltloos LhaL are supposed Lo mlttot Lhe cosmos, or slmply reflecL accuraLely" a world of maLLer and facLs ouL Lhere (proposlLlonal LhoughL as reflecLlng an ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs, or lLs"). 39 8eason ls reduced from a sobstootlve vlslon of Lhe kosmlc order Lo a ptoceJotol process for mapplng flaLland. 40 1ruLh no longer means aLLunemenL wlLh Lhe kosmos, buL merely how Lo map Lhe cosmos. More subLly, LruLh comes Lo mean funcLlonal flL. 1ruLh no longer refers Lo aLLunemenL wlLh Lhe kosmlc sLaLe of affalrs (lnLerlorly and exLerlorly, verLlcally and horlzonLally), nor even reflecLlon on a sLaLe of affalrs, lL comes Lo mean merely losttomeotol meoos ln Lhe auLopoleLlc self-malnLalnance of Lhe sysLem of funcLlonal flL (aL whlch polnL lL blzarrely dlssolves lLs own sLaLus, funcLlonal flLness can clalm Lo be a Lrue Lheory only by negaLlng Lhe meanlng of LruLh: Lhe Lheory, lf lL ls Lrue, musL lLself acLually be an lnsLrumenLal producLlon of Lhe sysLem, aL whlch polnL lL can no longer be sald Lo be Lrue, only useful). 41 Slmllarly, personal lnLegrlLy and lnLenLlons (uL) are reduced Lo healLhy braln funcLlonlng (u8), Lo Lhe now rampanL model of blologlcal psychlaLry (one ls depressed, noL lf one's llfe becomes meanlngless or locks voloes, buL lf one's neuroLransmlLLers lack seroLonln). Cr, llkewlse, one's personal lnLegrlLy and meanlng ls reduced Lo behavloral modlflcaLlon (also u8). noL Where am l slLuaLed ln Lhe kosmos?" buL Pow can l funcLlon beLLer ln Lhe cosmos?" noL WhaL does my exlsLence mean?" buL Pow can l geL lL Lo work beLLer?" letsoool meooloq ls Lhus reduced Lo behavloral flLness, and Lhls ls oocooscloosly [udged by Lhe prevalllng cooveotloool culLural reallLy (wlLhouL acknowledglng Lhe lmpllclL [udgmenL lnvolved). AJoptotloo to soclety" ls Lhus Lhe sLandard yardsLlck agalnsL whlch behavloral (and braln chemlsLry) modlflcaLlons are joJqeJ (expllclLly or lmpllclLly): noL wheLher adapLaLlon Lo a glven socleLy ls a good ldea or noL, buL how Lo funcLlon beLLer ln LhaL socleLy regardless (and lf you can'L adapL Lo belng a good Serb whlle you rape and murder, Lhen a llLLle rozac wlll help us over Lhose rough spoLs). 42 Self-undersLandlng ls replaced by behavloral funcLlonlng, where one relnforces Lhe deslred response wlLhouL a clue as Lo whaL responses are acLually deslrable and worLh relnforclng ln Lhe flrsL place. coltotol meooloq (LL) ls reduced Lo soclol loteqtotloo (L8), yeL anoLher verslon of funcLlonal flL. 1he whole vollJlty of a culLural seL of values ls converLed lnLo a quesLlon of wheLher Lhey promoLe soclal coheslon, funcLlonal flLness, and Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe soclal acLlon sysLem. 8y Lhls crlLerlon, Lhe nazls were alLogeLher valld, because Lhey cerLalnly had one of Lhe mosL coherenL soclal orders ever devlsed: hollsm ln acLlon. noLhlng beaLs fasclsm for a sLurdy auLopoleLlc reglme. And noLhlng shows more clearly how llmlLed soclal lnLegraLlon ls as a crlLerlon of Lhe Lrue and Lhe good. uL dlfferenLly, slnce WhaL does lL mean?" (Lhe LefL Pand) has been collapsed Lo WhaL does lL do?" (Lhe 8lghL Pand), Lhen Lhe only crlLerlon ls Pow well does lL do lL?" and noL also ls lL worLhy Lo pursue ln Lhe flrsL place?" Llkewlse, wlLh subLle reducLlonlsm, morals no longer embody a sLaLemenL of Lhe good llfe, or whaL lL means Lo lead a decenL and worLhy and noble llfe-a llfe worLh belng emulaLed, a llfe LhaL empowers, a llfe plugged lnLo moral sources LhaL lnsplre worLh and worshlp, awe and admlraLlon-buL raLher whaL ls merely requlred of us as a parL, as a fracLlon, of a soclal acLlon sysLem. lnLersub[ecLlve undersLandlng ls reduced Lo sysLems sLeerlng problems and Lechnlcal Llnkerlng. Morals and meanlngs become anemlc markers of whaL procedures are requlred for sysLems malnLenance and sysLems expanslon. 1he 1rue, and Lhe Cood, and Lhe 8eauLlful are reduced Lo place seLLlngs aL Lhe dlnner Lable of monologlcal mesh. And we are all reduced Lo whaLever promoLes Lhe funcLlonal capaclLy of Lhe auLocraLlc sysLem, reduced Lo whaL works, reduced Lo flttloq lo. 8educed Lo leadlng llfe by looklng aL a represenLaLlonal map of a flaL and faded landscape, Lrylng Lo flL lnLo LhaL landscape, and Lo Lrylng Lo persuade oLhers Lo embrace Lhe same cheerful onLologlcal sulclde. We wlll see LhaL Lhe greaL Lask of modernlLy and posLmodernlLy, as LheorlsLs from Schelllng Lo Pegel Lo Pabermas Lo 1aylor have polnLed ouL, ls noL Lo replace gross reducLlonlsm wlLh subLle reducLlonlsm (or aLomlsm wlLh flaLland hollsm), buL Lo loteqtote tbe 8lq 1btee (lnLegraLe l, we, and lL, or arL, morals, and sclence, or self, culLure, and naLure), noL by reduclng one Lo Lhe oLhers, buL by flndlng a rlchly encompasslng concepLlon of Lhe kosmos LhaL allows each Lo flourlsh ln lLs own rlghL. ln oLher words, lf Lhe greaL achlevemenL of Lhe LnllghLenmenL (and modernlLy") was Lhe necessary Jlffeteotlotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree, Lhe greaL Lask of posLmodernlLy" ls Lhelr loteqtotloo, overcomlng whaL 1aylor called a monsLer of arresLed developmenL" (boLh of Lhese polnLs wlll be dlscussed ln laLer chapLers). 43 WhaL we need Lo do, Lhen, ls look now Lo Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslons (l and we) as Lhey appear ln humans, so LhaL Lhese can be added" Lo Lhe accounLs of Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh for a more balanced overvlew, an overvlew LhaL more hopefully mlghL conLrlbuLe Lo Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree domalns. We can sLarL wlLh Pabermas. MlC8C Anu MAC8C, P?LC Anu Cn1C Pabermas beglns wlLh Lhe observaLlon LhaL Lhe some sttoctotes of cooscloosoess (hls phrase) can be found ln Lhe lndlvldual self (uL) and lLs culLural seLLlng (LL), LhaL ls, ln Lhe mlcro and macro branch of Lhe evoluLlon of human consclousness. 44 Pabermas ofLen uses soclal" ln Lhe broad sense, buL here we are cenLerlng mosLly on whaL l have called culLural, as Lhe conLexL wlll make clear: lf one examlnes soclal lnsLlLuLlons and Lhe acLlon compeLences of soclallzed lndlvlduals for general characLerlsLlcs, one encounLers Lhe same sLrucLures of consclousness. 1hls can be shown ln connecLlon wlLh [Lo glve only one example] law and morallLy. Cne can see here Lhe ldenLlLy of Lhe consclous sLrucLures LhaL are, on Lhe one hand, embodled ln Lhe lnsLlLuLlons of law and morallLy and LhaL are, on Lhe oLher hand, expressed ln Lhe moral [udgemenLs and acLlons of lndlvlduals. CognlLlve developmenLal psychology has shown LhaL ln onLogenesls Lhere are dlfferenL sLages of moral consclousness, sLages LhaL can be descrlbed ln parLlcular as preconvenLlonal, convenLlonal, and posLconvenLlonal paLLerns of problem-solvlng [whlch we wlll explaln laLer]. 1he same paLLerns Lurn up agaln ln Lhe soclal evoluLlon of moral and legal represenLaLlons. 43 As Pabermas lndlcaLes, Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe culLural holon evldence Lhe some boslc sttoctotes of cooscloosoess, and Lhese same baslc sLrucLures of consclousness show up ln Lhe developmenL or evoluLlon of boLh Lhe loJlvlJool and Lhe specles: 1he onLogeneLlc models are cerLalnly beLLer analyzed and beLLer corroboraLed Lhan Lhelr soclal-evoluLlonary counLerparLs. 8uL lL should noL surprlse us LhaL Lhere are homologous sLrucLures of consclousness ln Lhe hlsLory of Lhe specles, lf we conslder LhaL llngulsLlcally esLabllshed lnLersub[ecLlvlLy of undersLandlng marks LhaL lnnovaLlon ln Lhe hlsLory of Lhe specles whlch flrsL made posslble Lhe level of socloculLural [noospherlc] learnlng. AL Lhls level Lhe reproducLlon of socleLy and Lhe soclallzaLlon of lLs members are Lwo aspecLs of Lhe same process, tbey ote JepeoJeot oo tbe some sttoctotes. 46 LeL me repeaL LhaL Pabermas ls saylng Lwo Lhlngs here: an lndlvldual human belng and lLs socloculLural envlronmenL evldence Lhe some baslc sLrucLures of consclousness (correlaLlon of mlcro and macro), and fottbet, Lhese same baslc sLrucLures can be found ln Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe specles (onLogeneLlc and phylogeneLlc parallels). 1he homologous sLrucLures of consclousness ln Lhe hlsLorles of Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe specles [are noL resLrlcLed Lo Lhe domaln of law and morallLy. 1hey can also be found] ln Lhe domaln of ego developmenL and Lhe evoluLlon of worldvlews on Lhe one hand, and ln Lhe domaln of ego and collecLlve ldenLlLles on Lhe oLher [correlaLlons beLween uL and LL]. 47 Pere are a few of Lhe correlaLlons accordlng Lo Pabermas (and uslng only hls Lerms): an lndlvldual aL Lhe level of preoperaLlonal LhoughL parLlclpaLes ln a naLural or bodlly ldenLlLy, a shared worldvlew LhaL ls maglc-anlmlsLlc, and a preconvenLlonal morallLy, an lndlvldual aL Lhe level of concreLe operaLlonal LhoughL ls open Lo a role ldenLlLy, parLlclpaLes ln a shared worldvlew of myLhologlcal LhoughL, and ln a convenLlonal morallLy, and an lndlvldual aL Lhe level of formal operaLlonal LhoughL possesses an ego ldenLlLy, parLlclpaLes ln a shared worldvlew LhaL ls raLlonal, and evldences a posLconvenLlonal morallLy (all of whlch we wlll be explalnlng). Pabermas's polnL ls LhaL, [usL as an lnfanL of Loday develops from preconvenLlonal (maglc) Lo convenLlonal (myLhlc) Lo posLconvenLlonal (raLlonal)-whlch we wlll lnvesLlgaLe ln chapLer 6-so Lhe specles lLself evolved from maglc Lo myLhlc Lo raLlonal (ln oLher words, qulLe slmllar Lo Cebser). lL ls Lhe same baslc sLrucLures of consclousness underlylng boLh Lhe mlcro and macro branch ln boLh Lhelr onLogeneLlc and phylogeneLlc evoluLlon, and lL ls Lhe some Jevelopmeotol loqlc (holoarchlc ln naLure, l would add) LhaL governs Lhelr evoluLlon. l had Laken vlrLually Lhe ldenLlcal approach ln up ftom Jeo and ye to ye, and a few crlLlcs have ob[ecLed Lo Pabermas's and my use of phylogeneLlc and onLogeneLlc parallels, clalmlng LhaL Lhls ls an old and ouLmoded way of Lhlnklng LhaL nobody subscrlbes Lo anymore. And, lndeed, Lhe noLlon of onLo/phylo parallels-flrsL lnLroduced by LrnsL von Paeckel (1834-1919)-was orlglnally used ln such a rlgld and slmpllsLlc way LhaL Lhe enLlre noLlon lLself fell lnLo dlsrepuLe. 8uL ln lLs modern verslons lL slmply ouLllnes a serles of absLracL paLLerns LhaL lndeed show slmllarlLles, and ln Lhls verslon lL ls even accepLed by orLhodox sclence lLself, as wlLness LhaL basLlon of orLhodoxy, lsaac Aslmov, ln hls wldely respecLed New ColJe to 5cleoce: lL ls almosL lmposslble Lo run down Lhe rosLer of llvlng Lhlngs, as l have [usL done, wlLhouL endlng wlLh a sLrong lmpresslon LhaL Lhere has been a slow developmenL of llfe from Lhe very slmple Lo Lhe complex [LeneL 12a]. 1he phyla can be arranged so LhaL each seems Lo add someLhlng Lo Lhe one before [LeneL 3]. WlLhln each phylum, Lhe varlous classes can be arranged llkewlse, and wlLhln each class, Lhe orders. We can Lrace pracLlcally a re-enacLmenL of Lhe passage Lhrough Lhe phyla, even ln Lhe developmenL of a human belng from Lhe ferLlllzed egg. ln Lhe course of Lhls developmenL, Lhe egg sLarLs as a slngle cell (a klnd of proLozoon), Lhen becomes a small colony of cells (as ln a sponge), each of whlch aL flrsL ls capable of separaLlng and sLarLlng llfe on lLs own, as happens when ldenLlcal Lwlns develop. 1he developlng embryo passes Lhrough a Lwo-layered sLage (llke a coelenLeraLe), Lhen adds a Lhlrd layer (llke an echlnoderm), and so conLlnues Lo add complexlLles ln roughly Lhe order Lhe progresslvely hlgher specles do. 48 As for cognlLlve developmenL, Lhe emplrlcal concluslon of developmenLallsLs from Sllvano ArleLl Lo lageL ls LhaL Lhere are lndeed cerLaln onLo/phylo parallels ln Lhe evoluLlon of deep sLrucLures (noL surface sLrucLures), as ArleLl explalns: WhaL ls of fundamenLal lmporLance ls LhaL Lhe [onLogeneLlc and phylogeneLlc] processes Lo a large exLenL follow slmllar developmenLal plans. 1hls does noL mean llLerally LhaL ln Lhe psyche onLogeny recaplLulaLes phylogeny, buL LhaL Lhere are cerLaln slmllarlLles ln Lhe [Lwo] flelds of developmenL and LhaL we are able Lo lndlvlduallze schemes of hlghesL forms of generallLy whlch lnvolve all levels of Lhe psyche ln lLs [Lwo] Lypes of developmenL. We also recognlze concreLe varlanLs of Lhe same overall sLrucLural plans ln Lhe Lypes of developmenL." 49 1haL verslon of onLo/phylo parallels ls expllclLly accepLed by researchers and LheorlsLs from Lrlch !anLsch (recaplLulaLlon does noL acL ln a rlgld and sLrucLurally orlenLed way, buL ln Lhe sense of Lhe flexlble modlflcaLlon of a space-Llme sLrucLure") 30 Lo karl opper and !ohn Lccles (see 1be 5elf ooJ lts 8tolo). Masslve evldence has been accumulaLed ln Lhls regard by Lhe !unglans and glven lLs mosL powerful sLaLemenL ln Lrlch neumann's book 1be Otlqlos ooJ nlstoty of cooscloosoess. 8uL perhaps Lhe mosL lnLrlgulng use of Lhls noLlon ls Lo be found ln 8uperL Sheldrake, who sees general recaplLulaLlon as a form of morphlc resonance (or kosmlc memory) from all prevlous sLages of evoluLlon. lL ls as lf, he says, naLure develops hablLs-morphlc unlLs wlLh morphlc flelds, whlch he also calls holons-and once Lhese holons are developed or become seL as hablLs of naLure, Lhen naLure slmply keeps reuslng Lhem ln succeedlng sLages-anoLher verslon of compound lndlvlduallLy. nobody ls more aware Lhan Pabermas of Lhe mlsuses and fallacles Lo whlch Lhls noLlon has been puL, and lndeed he ouLllnes elghL ways LhaL Lhe noLlon has been erroneously used, ob[ecLlons whlch l sLrongly share (Lhe crlLlcs of Lhls approach mlghL wlsh Lo consulL Pabermas, because he seems Lo be much clearer abouL lLs problems Lhan Lhey are). 31 Pabermas noneLheless concludes, All provlsos noLwlLhsLandlng, cerLaln homologles can be found"-cerLaln parallels beLween Lhe developmenL of lndlvlduals and Lhe developmenL of Lhe specles. 32 We can now look dlrecLly Lo Lhese homologles, rememberlng always LhaL Lhese are noL [usL some archaeologlcal dlgs from a dlsLanL pasL, lnLeresLlng buL lrrelevanL. Cn Lhe conLrary, Lhls ls also an archaeology of our own souls. 1hese dlgs" exlsL now ln Lhe presenL, enfolded lo os as parL of our own compound lndlvlduallLy, pasL lnLerlors Laken lnLo our own presenL lnLerlors, llvlng on ln Lhe depLhs of our own belng Loday, enrlchlng us or desLroylng us, dependlng enLlrely on our own capaclLy Lo embrace and Lo Lranscend. 3 1be metqeoce of nomoo Notote 1oJoy, mokes yestetJoy meoo. -LMlL? ulCklnSCn l tblok tbot tbete ls o wlJespteoJ ooJ foclle teoJeocy, wblcb ooe sboolJ combot, to Jeslqoote tbot wblcb bos jost occotteJ os tbe ptlmoty eoemy, os lf tbls wete olwoys tbe ptloclpol fotm of opptessloo ftom wblcb ooe boJ to llbetote ooeself. Now tbls slmple ottltoJe eotolls o oombet of Jooqetoos coosepoeoces. fltst, oo locllootloo to seek oot some cbeop fotm of otcbolsm ot some lmoqlooty post fotms of bopploess tbot people JlJ oot, lo foct, bove ot oll. 1bete ls lo tbls botteJ of tbe pteseot o Jooqetoos teoJeocy to lovoke o completely mytblcol post. -MlCPLL lCuCAuL1 A1 1PlS Cln1 ln our dlscusslon, we have skeLched Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe exLerlor of lndlvldual holons up Lo Lhe complex Lrlune-bralned organlsms (homlnlds) wlLh an lnLerlor space of symbols and concepLs. 1hey llved ln a soclal holon of a group/famlly (Lrlbe) possesslng a culLural archalc worldvlew. (1hose are Lhe four quadranLs up Lo Lhls polnL ln our sLory.) 8uL Lhen someLhlng happened LhaL Lransformed homlnlds (or proLo-humans") lnLo Lrue humans (nomo sopleos). WhaL was lL? 1PL LML8CLnCL ClnOMO 5AllN5 Pabermas beglns wlLh Lhe MarxlsL ldea LhaL whaL separaLes humans-nomo sopleos-from homlnlds and oLher prlmaLes ls soclol lobot or Lhe exlsLence of an ecooomy. 8uL Pabermas flnds LhaL lL ls very llkely LhaL homlnlds also possessed an economy, and Lhus Lhe mere exlsLence of economlc exchange does noL mark Lhe speclflcally human form of llfe, does noL separaLe homlnlds from nomo sopleos. 1 lf we examlne Lhe concepL of soclal labor [economy] ln Lhe llghL of more recenL anLhropologlcal flndlngs, lL becomes evldenL LhaL lL cuLs Loo deeply lnLo Lhe evoluLlonary scale, noL only humans buL homlnlds Loo were dlsLlngulshed from Lhe anLhropold apes ln LhaL Lhey converLed Lo reproducLlon Lhrough soclal labor and developed an economy. 1he [homlnld] adulL males formed hunLlng bands, whlch (a) made use of weapons and Lools (Lechnology), (b) cooperaLed Lhrough a dlvlslon of labor, and (c) dlsLrlbuLed Lhe prey wlLhln Lhe collecLlve (rules of dlsLrlbuLlon). 1he maklng of Lhe means of producLlon and Lhe soclal organlzaLlon of labor, as well as of Lhe dlsLrlbuLlon of lLs producLs, fulfllled Lhe condlLlons for an economlc form of reproduclng llfe. 2 Slnce parL of my alm ln Lhls serles ls Lo follow Lhe course of Lhe male and female value spheres, lL ls lnsLrucLlve Lo noLe LhaL, even ln archalc homlnld socleLles, Lhese Lwo spheres were already beglnnlng Lo dlfferenLlaLe, and ofLen sharply. Pabermas: 1he socleLy of homlnlds ls more dlfflculL Lo reconsLrucL Lhan Lhelr mode of producLlon. lL ls noL clear how far beyond lnLeracLlons medlaLed by gesLures-already found among prlmaLes-Lhelr sysLem of communlcaLlon progressed. 1he con[ecLure ls LhaL Lhey possessed a looqooqe of gesLures and a sysLem of slqool colls. ln any evenL, cooperaLlve blg-game hunLlng requlres reachlng undersLandlng abouL experlences, so LhaL we have Lo assume a proLolanguage, whlch aL leasL paved Lhe way for Lhe sysLemaLlc connecLlon of cognlLlve accompllshmenLs, affecLlve expresslons, and lnLerpersonal relaLlons LhaL was so lmporLanL for homlnlzaLlon. 1he dlvlslon of labor ln Lhe homlnld groups presumably led Lo a developmenL of Lwo subsysLems: on Lhe one hand, Lhe adulL males, who were LogeLher ln egallLarlan hunLlng bands and occupled, on Lhe whole, a domlnanL poslLlon, on Lhe oLher hand, Lhe females, who gaLhered frulL and llved LogeLher wlLh Lhelr young, for whom Lhey cared. lo compotlsoo to ptlmote socletles, tbe sttoteqlc fotms of coopetotloo ooJ tbe toles of Jlsttlbotloo wete oew [my lLallcs, Pabermas ls searchlng for emergenLs], boLh lnnovaLlons were dlrecLly connecLed wlLh Lhe esLabllshmenL of Lhe flrsL mode of producLlon, tbe coopetotlve boot. 3 1hus, Pabermas concludes, Lhe emergence of an economy ls sulLable for dellmlLlng Lhe mode of llfe of Lhe homlnlds from LhaL of Lhe prlmaLes, buL lL does noL capLure Lhe speclflcally human reproducLlon of llfe." 4 8aLher, lL oppeots oow tbot tbe evolotloooty oovelty tbot Jlstloqolsbes nomo sopleos ls oot tbe ecooomy bot tbe fomlly." 3 up Lo Lhls polnL we have been uslng Lhe Lerm famlly" ln !anLsch's very loose sense, meanlng any geneLlc-relaLlve group of anlmals. 8uL Lhe speclflcally human famlly, accordlng Lo Pabermas, ls marked by an emergenL characLerlsLlc LhaL ls found nowhere else ln evoluLlon. noL homlnlds, buL humans were Lhe flrsL Lo break up Lhe soclal sLrucLure LhaL arose wlLh Lhe verLebraLes-Lhe one-dlmenslonal rank orderlng ln whlch every anlmal was LranslLlvely asslgned one and only one sLaLus. Among chlmpanzees and baboons Lhls sLaLus sysLem conLrolled Lhe raLher aggresslve relaLlons beLween adulL males, sexual relaLlons beLween male and female, and soclal relaLlons beLween Lhe old and Lhe young. A famllyllke relaLlonshlp exlsLed only beLween Lhe moLher and her young, and beLween slbllngs. lncesL beLween moLhers and growlng sons was noL permlLLed, Lhere was no correspondlng lncesL barrler beLween faLhers and daughLers, because Lhe faLher role dld noL exlsL. Lven homlnld socleLles converLed Lo Lhe basls of soclal labor dld noL yeL know a famlly sLrucLure. 6 1he novel emergence of Lhe human famlly, accordlng Lo Pabermas, occurred only as Lhe male was also asslgned Lhe role of fotbet, for lL was only ln Lhls way LhaL Lhe Lwo value spheres of Lhe male and female could be llnked. ln ways (and for reasons) LhaL we wlll examlne ln exhausLlve deLall ln volume 2 of Lhls serles, Lhe male and female value spheres had already been dlfferenLlaLed lnLo soclal labor (hunLlng) and nurLurance of Lhe young. Lenskl reporLs, for example, LhaL of Lhe known socleLles aL Lhls sLage, an asLonlshlng 97 percenL show LhaL paLLern of male/female dlfferenLlaLlon. 7 lf evoluLlon were Lo conLlnue, o oew loteqtotloo wos olso oeeJeJ. Slnce presumably Lhe female could noL be pregnanL and slmulLaneously hunL, Lhe lnLegraLlng llnk was esLabllshed by Lhe novel emergence of Lhe role of Lhe faLher, wlLh one fooL ln boLh spheres. 1he mode of producLlon of Lhe soclally organlzed hunL creaLed a sysLem problem LhaL was resolved by Lhe famlllallzaLlon of Lhe male, LhaL ls, by Lhe lnLroducLlon of a klnshlp sysLem based on exogamy. 1he male socleLy of Lhe hunLlng band became lndependenL of Lhe planL-gaLherlng females and Lhe young, boLh of whom remalned behlnd durlng Lhe hunLlng expedlLlons. WlLh Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon, llnked Lo Lhe dlvlslon of labor, Lhere arose a new need for lnLegraLlon, namely, Lhe need for a conLrolled exchange beLween Lhe Lwo subsysLems [whaL we called relaLlonal exchange wlLh same-level holons]. 8uL Lhe homlnlds apparenLly had aL Lhelr dlsposal only Lhe paLLern of sLaLus-dependenL sexual relaLlons. 1hls paLLern was noL equal Lo Lhe new need for lnLegraLlon, Lhe less so, Lhe more Lhe sLaLus order of Lhe prlmaLes was furLher undermlned by forces pushlng ln Lhe dlrecLlon of egallLarlan relaLlons wlLhln Lhe hunLlng band. Cnly a famlly sysLem based on marrlage and regulaLed descenL permlLLed Lhe adulL male member Lo llnk-vla Lhe faLher role-a sLaLus ln Lhe male sysLem of Lhe hunLlng band wlLh a sLaLus ln Lhe female and chlld sysLem, and Lhus (1) lnLegraLe funcLlons of soclal labor wlLh funcLlons of nurLure of Lhe young, and, moreover, (2) coordlnaLe funcLlons of male hunLlng wlLh Lhose of female gaLherlng.8 1he famlllallzaLlon of Lhe male. 1hus began Lhe one, slngle, endurlng, and nlghLmarlsh Lask of all subsequenL clvlllzaLlon: Lhe Lamlng of LesLosLerone. MALL AuvAn1ACL Anu lLMALL AuvAn1ACL noLlce LhaL, unllke Lhe role of Lhe faLher, Lhe role of Lhe moLher was noL sufflclenL Lo llnk Lhe Lwo value spheres, because Lhe moLher could noL, or aL any raLe dld noL, parLlclpaLe ln Lhe soclal labor of Lhe hunL (wlLh rare excepLlons). And so we see LhaL here, rlghL aL Lhe very deflnlng LransformaLlon from homlnlds Lo humans, a sexool Jlffeteotlotloo emerged, a dlfferenLlaLlon LhaL could, as we wlll see, Jlssoclote lnLo exLreme sexual polarlzaLlon. AL Lhls early polnL, Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon or asymmeLry does noL appear Lo have been sLrongly evaluaLlve-LhaL ls, one sphere was noL parLlcularly more lmporLanL or more valued Lhan Lhe oLher. lL appears Lo have been mosLly a slmple dlfferenLlaLlon of fooctloo, noL a masslve dlfferenLlaLlon of stotos. 1here ls no evldence LhaL lL was lnLensely ldeologlcal or explolLaLlve, buL raLher seems Lo have been based largely on such slmple blologlcal facLors as physlcal sLrengLh and moblllLy (male advanLage) and procreaLlon and blologlcal nurslng (female advanLage). 1hese are lnLrlcaLe and emoLlonally charged lssues, especlally for Lhe varlous schools of femlnlsm, whlch ls why Lhe second volume of Lhls serles ls devoLed Lo an exLenslve revlew of [usL such lssues. 9 Some llberal femlnlsLs feel LhaL ooy sexual dlfferenLlaLlon or asymmeLry ls due excluslvely Lo male domlnaLlon. Many radlcal femlnlsLs, on Lhe oLher hand, sLrongly accepL and embrace Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon beLween Lhe male and female value spheres (whlch, we wlll see, Lhey equaLe wlLh oqeocy and commooloo, respecLlvely), and Lhey urge socleLy Lo embrace more of Lhe laLLer and less of Lhe former. Soclal femlnlsLs Lend Lo see sexual dlfferences arlslng from dlfferenL modes of producLlon and Lechnology, and see Lhese unfalr dlfferences evenlng ouL" as caplLallsLlc modes become more human and humanlzlng. l wlll be examlnlng all of Lhose poslLlons carefully ln volume 2. 8uL unLll Lhen we need an agreed-upon Lruce ln Lhe gender wars. My clalm ls LhaL Lhe sLrucLures of human consclousness LhaL l wlll be presenLlng ln Lhe resL of Lhls volume are ln facL gender neuLral, LhaL Lhere ls no fundamenLal gender blas ln Lhe deep sLrucLures Lhemselves. nowevet, ln Lhe course of hlsLorlcal developmenL, Lhese gender-neuLral sLrucLures, for numerous reasons we wlll examlne, became loaded wlLh varlous facLors (Lechnologlcal, economlc, culLural, soclal, and lnLenLlonal) LhaL blased some of Lhese sLrucLures ln an ofLen speclflcally sub[ugaLlng and cerLalnly polarlzlng (or dlssoclaLlng) fashlon. 1hus, ln volume 2, l wlll be looklng aL each of Lhe culLural sLages or worldvlews (archalc, maglc, myLhlc, menLal, cenLaurlc) and correlaLlng Lhem wlLh Lhelr hlsLorlcal modes of maLerlal producLlon and Lechnology (foraglng, horLlculLural, agrarlan, lndusLrlal, lnformaLlonal)-as shown ln llgure 3-1. lurLher, l wlll Lhen speclflcally examlne Lhe stotos of meo ooJ womeo lo eocb of tbose stoqes. My clalm ls LhaL a consensus of llberal, radlcal, and soclal femlnlsL vlews already exlsLs on many of Lhese lmporLanL lssues, and l wlll presenL Lhose aL LhaL polnL. ln Lhe meanLlme, when we reach, for example, Lhe myLhlc-agrarlan sLrucLure ln Lhe presenL dlscusslon, l wlll have llLLle Lo say abouL Lhe sLaLus of women ln Lhose socleLles, even Lhough Lhe sLrong consensus of orLhodox and femlnlsL researchers allke ls LhaL sexual polarlzaLlon and male domlnaLlon of Lhe publlc sphere were aL Lhelr blstotlcol peok (and almosL reversed from some of Lhe prevlous horLlculLural socleLles, where many femlnlsLs feel women were aL Lhelr greaLesL power). l would [usL llke Lo polnL ouL LhaL Lhe facL LhaL l don'L dlscuss LhaL lssue now does noL mean l am lgnorlng lL. 8uL l wlll lndlcaLe [usL a few of Lhe ways LhaL l belleve Lhls approach ls novel. ln sLudylng gender and posslble gender dlfferences, whaL ls requlred loltlolly ls a seL of consLanLs LhaL acknowledge cerLaln unamblguous dlfferences ln funcLlon (women glve blrLh and lacLaLe, and men have on average a moderaLe advanLage ln physlcal sLrengLh and moblllLy-Lhese speclflc dlfferences, for example, are emphaslzed by femlnlsL researchers from !aneL ChafeLz Lo !oyce nlelsen, as we wlll see). 1hese slmple dlfferences mlghL noL seem all LhaL lmporLanL Loday, buL hlsLorlcally and prehlsLorlcally Lhey were ofLen some of Lhe mosL lmporLanL and deLermlnlng facLors ln all of culLure. lor example, when Lhe anlmal-drawn plow was developed and evenLually replaced Lhe handheld hoe for farmlng (Lhls ls referred Lo as a shlfL from horLlculLural Lo agrarlan modes), Lhere was a masslve shlfL from a largely female work force Lo a largely male work force, due almosL enLlrely Lo Lhe facL LhaL Lhe plow, unllke Lhe hoe or dlgglng sLlck, ls a heavy plece of equlpmenL. ln horLlculLural socleLles, women produced abouL 80 percenL of Lhe foodsLuffs (and consequenLly shared conslderable publlc power wlLh men), a pregnanL woman could sLlll easlly use a handheld hoe, buL noL a plow. When Lhe plow was lnvenLed, men Look up vlrLually all of Lhe producLlve work, Lhe maLrlfocal modes of producLlon gave way Lo paLrlfocal modes, and Lhe relgnlng delLy flgures swlLched from CreaL MoLher Lo CreaL laLher focus. (eggy Sanday has demonsLraLed LhaL predomlnanL female delLy flgures appear almosL excluslvely ln horLlculLural socleLles-abouL a Lhlrd of Lhem have female-only delLles, and anoLher Lhlrd have male and female delLles, whereas vlrLually oll agrarlan socleLles have mole-ooly delLles. 1hus, one of Lhe concluslons of volume 2 ls LhaL where women work Lhe flelds wlLh a hoe, Cod ls a Woman, where men work Lhe flelds wlLh a plow, Cod ls a Man. LxacLly how LhaL flLs wlLh any endurlng mascullne and femlnlne faces of SplrlL ls a ma[or Loplc of volume 2. Are Lhese delLy flgures [usL economlc byproducLs, or ls someLhlng more endurlng belng reflecLed here?) lemlnlsL researchers such as !aneL ChafeLz have polnLed ouL LhaL women who parLlclpaLed ln heavy plowlng had a much hlgher raLe of mlscarrlage, and Lhus lL was noL Lo tbelt geneLlc advanLage Lo do so. 1bls aspecL of Lhe shlfL from maLrlfocal Lo paLrlfocal, ln oLher words, cannoL reasonably be ascrlbed Lo oppresslon or male domlnaLlon, buL Lo a jolot declslon on Lhe parL of men and women ln Lhe face of a seL of naLural glvens. 1haL lnlLlal dlfferenLlaLlon of fooctloo, however, could be (and ln many cases was) parlayed lnLo a dlfference ln stotos, wlLh males domlnaLlng Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere and women relegaLed Lo Lhe prlvaLe/reproducLlve sphere. And whaL we wlll wanL Lo examlne are Lhese naLural dlfferenLlaLlons as Lhey moved lnLo Jlssoclotloos (and exLreme sexual polarlzaLlons) LhaL dlsadvanLaged one or Lhe oLher sex (and usually boLh)-aL eocb of Lhe slx or so ma[or epochs/sLages/sLrucLures we wlll be examlnlng. ln oLher words, we wlll flnd LhaL a seL of consLanLs (a handful of facLors LhaL, accordlng Lo mosL femlnlsL researchers, have noL changed much from culLure Lo culLure, such as blrLhlng/nurslng), when applled Lo Lhe varlous gender-neuLral sLrucLures of consclousness and sLages of Lechnologlcal unfoldlng, wlll toqetbet qeoetote tbe speclflc qeoJet Jlffeteoces lo tbe stotos of meo ooJ womeo ot eocb stoqe (and Lhls wlll help us Lo declde whaL ls, and whaL ls noL, oppresslon). 1hese consLanLs (such as physlcal sLrengLh/moblllLy and blrLhlng/nurslng) are presenLed ln volume 2 (SLrong and Weak unlversals ln Lhe Sexual Scheme"), and how Lhey play ouL and unfold, for beLLer and for worse, ls examlned ln flve or slx chapLers followlng. WhaL we are dlscusslng now, however, ls slmply Lhe gender-neuLral sLrucLures of consclousness wlLhln whlch Lhese sexual and gender polarlzaLlons would occur. MALL Anu lLMALL Ll8L8A1lCn 8efore we plck up Lhe sLory of Lhe evoluLlon of Lhese consclousness sLrucLures, leL me glve a flnal example of Lhe ground we wlll be coverlng laLer ln Lhls chapLer (and exLenslvely ln volume 2). Some of whaL l am golng Lo say now wlll noL make LoLal sense unLll Lhe end of Lhls chapLer (afLer l have lnLroduced some much-needed evldence), buL lL would be useful Lo lnLroduce Lhe general Loplcs aL Lhls polnL, because of boLh Lhelr lmporLance and Lhelr lnLrlcacy. (We wlll reLurn Lo Lhese Loplcs aL Lhe end of Lhe chapLer and revlew Lhem ln llghL of Lhe maLerlal presenLed.) arL of Lhe dlsagreemenL beLween llberal femlnlsm (men and women are fundamenLally equlvalenL ln capaclLles) and radlcal femlnlsm (men and women represenL Lwo qulLe dlfferenL value spheres, Lhe former belng hyperauLonomous, lndlvlduallsLlc, a blL power-crazed, buL generally oqeocy-otleoteJ, Lhe laLLer belng more relaLlonal, nurLurlng, permeable, and commooloo-otleoteJ) ls LhaL Lhese Lwo approaches are almosL lmposslble Lo reconclle, and Lhls has caused much dlssenslon, someLlmes qulLe blLLer, wlLhln Lhe ranks of Lhe women's movemenL. 8uL whaL lf Lhe radlcal femlnlsLs are rlghL when lL comes Lo Lhe blospherlc componenL of human belngs, and Lhe llberal femlnlsLs are rlghL when lL comes Lo Lhe noospherlc componenL? lf Lhls lnLegraLlon could be effecLed ln a genulne fashlon, and noL merely as a verbal flourlsh, we could slmulLaneously honor some of Lhe lmporLanL dlfferences ln sexual belng-so emphaslzed by Lhe radlcal femlnlsLs-and yeL also lnslsL on, and malnLaln, equallLy before Lhe law (whlch means, ln Lhe noosphere)-Lhe lmporLanL demand of llberal femlnlsLs. 8uL lL would mean someLhlng else as well, someLhlng even more lmporLanL. ln Lhls chapLer we wlll see Lhe evldence (presenLed by numerous researchers) LhaL Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere dld noL flnally Jlffeteotlote ln Lhe WesL unLll around Lhe slxLeenLh-sevenLeenLh cenLury. (1haL Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon wenL Loo far lnLo Jlssoclotloo-LhaL ls one of our cenLral Loplcs, buL for Lhe momenL, lL ls a separaLe lssue.) 1he polnL now ls LhaL, wlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, Lhe roles of men and women were no longer necessarlly or auLomaLlcally deLermlned (or largely lnfluenced) by blologlcal facLors (such as physlcal sLrengLh/moblllLy and blrLhlng/nurslng), facLors LhaL, one way or anoLher, had largely JomlooteJ noL only Lhe relaLlon of men Lo women buL also of men Lo men, up Lo LhaL polnL ln hlsLory. ln oLher words, wlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, blology was no longer desLlny. 1haL ls, no longer oecessotlly desLlny: Lhe relaLlonshlps beLween men and women (and men and men) were no longer necessarlly domlnaLed by Lhe heavy hand of blologlcal dlfferences and deLermlnanLs, physlcal sLrengLh and reproducLlon. 1hus, as evoluLlon conLlnued Lo move lnLo Lhe noosphere and Lranscend lLs excluslve groundlng ln Lhe blosphere, Lhose Lwo unlversals LhaL we brlefly menLloned-bodlly sLrengLh and bodlly reproducLlon-wblcb bove voloe ooly lo tbe blospbete, coolJ be ttoosceoJeJ os well (l.e., preserved and negaLed). 1hls, of course, ls a maLLer of degree, blology ls sLlll preserved and lLs lncllnaLlons sLlll Laken up and reworked by culLure, buL Lhe greaLer Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon, Lhe greaLer Lhe posslble negaLlon and reworklng. lf, for Lhe momenL, we slmply agree wlLh Lhe radlcal femlnlsLs LhaL Lhe female value sphere" Lends Lo emphaslze commooloo, Lhen Lhls value sphere could be decoupled from excloslve blologlcal reproducLlon and could begln Lo enLer Lhe world of agency or producLlon or male culLure," whlle sLlll reLalnlng lLs rooLs ln Lhe rlchness of Lhe reproducLlve sphere. 1he more evoluLlon Lranscended Lhe blosphere, Lhe more women could parLlclpaLe ln botb worlds (noospherlc-menLal and blospherlc-famlllal), because ln Lhe world of Lhe mlnd, physlcal sLrengLh, for example, ls lttelevoot. ln oLher words, wlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, women could also become oqeots ln Lhe noosphere (blstotlcol oqeots), as well as belng grounded ln Lhe blosphere. AoJ tbls pteclsely tevetses tbe toles tbot meo ooJ womeo boJ ployeJ op to tbls polot lo blstoty. revlously, Lhe male and female spheres were lnLegraLed by placlng Lhe male ln Lhe famlly vla Lhe role of Lhe faLher (as bloloqlcol oqeot), now Lhe Lwo spheres could be lnLegraLed-demanded Lo be lnLegraLed-by placlng Lhe female ln Lhe publlc sphere (as ooospbetlc oqeot). 1hus, aL Lhls presenL Llme ln hlsLory-ln toJoys world-lL ls especlally Lhe role of Lhe femole os blstotlcol oqeot LhaL can btlJqe tbe two voloe spbetes, whereas ln all prevlous hlsLory LhaL role raLher necessarlly fell Lo Lhe male as faLher (Lhls famlllallzaLlon of Lhe male" ls Lhe polnL LhaL Pabermas has [usL lnLroduced ln our narraLlve). 10 ln Lhls way, and Lhls way only, l belleve, can we malnLaln Lhe oLherwlse paradoxlcal and confuslng LruLh-a paradoxlcal LruLh LhaL has ofLen crlppled femlnlsm vls-a-vls female llberaLlon"-ln Lhls way only can we malnLaln botb LhaL women oow sLand open Lo and ln need of llberaLlon yeL ptevloosly were oot acLlng ln an unllberaLed (or duped) fashlon. 1he wldespread emergence of Lhe women's movemenL ln Lhe sevenLeenLh and elghLeenLh cenLurles occurred preclsely because Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere were flnally dlfferenLlaLed. 11 And Lhls lnescapably means LhaL Lhe wldespread emergence of Lhe women's movemenL was noL prlmarlly Lhe ooJoloq of a nasLy sLaLe of affalrs LhaL easlly could have been dlfferenL, buL raLher lL marked Lhe emetqeoce of an alLogeLher oew sLaLe of affalrs LhaL was ln slgnlflcanL ways oopteceJeoteJ. WhaL had grounded botb men and women ln narrowly based blologlcal roles was an evoluLlonary process LhaL was lLself, unLll falrly recenLly, grounded ln Lhe blosphere, and LhaL only recenLly ls now ln Lhe process of llberaLlng botb men and women from conflnemenL Lo Lhose parLlcular roles, whlch were necessary aL Lhe Llme buL are now ouLmoded, and Lhe lead ln Lhls evoluLlonary LransformaLlon can mosL easlly come (as ?nesLra klng has polnLed ouL) prlmarlly ln Lhe form of women assumlng culLural agency and noL [usL famlly communlon ([usL as ln Lhe prevlous lnLegraLlon, Lhe famlllallzaLlon of Lhe male, men were placed ln famlly communlon and noL [usL culLural agency). 1bot ls Lhe new lnLegraLlon now demanded on a socleLal level. And vlewlng lL ln Lhls evoluLlonary llghL allows us Lo bypass much of Lhe sLandard and useless rheLorlc LhaL men have been oppresslve plgs from day one, wlLh Lhe unavoldable lmpllcaLlon LhaL women have been herded sheep. lL's noL so much LhaL LhaL vlew ls demeanlng Lo men, alLhough lL ls meanL Lo be, buL raLher LhaL one cannoL clalm women have been oppressed for flve Lhousand years (some say for flve hundred Lhousand years) wlLhouL slmulLaneously lmplylng LhaL women are sLuplder and/or weaker Lhan men-Lhere are no oLher explanaLlons. lf we see Lhe blologlcally dlfferenLlaLed roles of men and women as someLhlng lmposed by men on women, Lhen we have Lo slmulLaneously assume Lhe compleLe plglflcaLlon of men and Lhe LoLal sheeplflcaLlon of women. 1o auLomaLlcally assume LhaL dlfferenLlaLlon of roles ls Lhe resulL of domlnaLlon ls Lo auLomaLlcally deflne a parLlcular group as vlcLlm, whlch auLomaLlcally and lrrevocably dlsempowers LhaL group ln Lhe very aLLempL Lo llberaLe lL. 12 8uL lf men and women were largely operaLlng ln Lhe face of cerLaln blologlcal glvens, ooJ lf Lhese glvens are no longer prlmarlly deLermlnaLe, tbeo boLh men and women sLand ln need of llberaLlon from Lhose prevlously conflnlng roles. 1he paLrlarchy" was noL someLhlng LhaL could have slmply and easlly been avolded or bypassed (wherever evoluLlon moved beyond Lhe hoe, Lhe paLrlarchy accompanled lL). 13 lf lL could have been easlly bypassed buL wasn'L, Lhen men lndeed are plgs and women dolLs. 1he paLrlarchy, however, ls noL someLhlng LhaL needs Lo be reversed buL raLher someLhlng LhaL needs Lo be ouLgrown: and LhaL releases Lhe male from blame and Lhe female from sheepdom. And lL furLher allows us Lo see Lhe real cause of Lhe unforLunaLe reslsLance Lo Loday's femlnlsm. lL ls noL a reslsLance Lo undolng Lhousands of years of male obnoxlousness and female dupedom, buL a reslsLance Lo Lhe emergence of an eotltely oovel sttoctote of cooscloosoess, a sLrucLure LhaL, havlng for Lhe flrsL Llme ln hlsLory dlfferenLlaLed Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere (whlch, among many oLher Lhlngs, cteoteJ femlnlsm), ls now ln Lhe process of Lrylng desperaLely Lo lnLegraLe boLh women and men lnLo LhaL uLLerly new worldspace. 1haL ls whaL ls feared and reslsLed (by many men and many women). And LhaL ls Lhe new lnLegraLlon of whlch l wlll speak aL lengLh (under Lhe names cenLaur" and vlslon-loglc," Lhe sLage beyond egolc-raLlonal). We wlll see LhaL Lhere have lndeed been forms of oppresslon and sub[ugaLlon, buL Lhese have Lo be [udged, noL agalnsL Loday's sLrucLures of consclousness, buL agalnsL whaL could have been oLherwlse aL a glven prevlous sLrucLure. wltblo tbe posslbllltles of a glven sLrucLure, we [udge lLs degree of nasLlness: Lhe [udgmenL needs Lo be sLage-speclflc and sLage-approprlaLe. And Lhls means we have Lo carefully reconsLrucL Lhe noLlon of oppresslon ln Lhls regard, because lf someLhlng coolJ oot occot under any glven clrcumsLances aL a parLlcular Llme, Lhen Lhe noL occurrlng" cannoL slmply be ascrlbed Lo oppresslon wlLhouL furLher ado. lf, for example, wldespread femlnlsm could noL have emerged unLll Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and blosphere, Lhen lLs nonexlsLence ln earller culLures was oot Lhe resulL of oppresslon, buL Lhe resulL of noL-yeL-enough evoluLlon, an enLlrely dlfferenL sLory: women were noL belng weak and lgnoranL and men were noL belng lnsenslLlve slobs (noLhlng, LhaL ls Lo say, ouL of Lhe ordlnary). When Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere were flnally dlfferenLlaLed, blology was no longer desLlny. Women could begln Lo move ouL of Lhe blosphere and lnLo Lhe noosphere, albelL agalnsL much reslsLance Lo Lhls new emergence. (And lndeed, every male Loday sLarLs hls own developmenL as a blospherlc beasL, and he won'L geL lL" unLll he, Loo, dlfferenLlaLes noosphere and blosphere, and acLs from Lhe former, noL Lhe laLLer. 1he baLLle has Lo be foughL anew wlLh every blrLh, and Lhe reslsLance, ln dlfferenL forms, ls presenL ln boLh women and men. olls conslsLenLly showed, for example, LhaL ln Lhe unlLed SLaLes a ma[orlLy of men favored Lhe Lqual 8lghLs AmendmenL buL a ma[orlLy of women re[ecLed lL. 1he new emergence ls dlfflculL for all, preclsely because lL ln many ways means leavlng Lhe predeLermlnaLedness and comforL of blologlcal glvens.) ln Lhe course of hlsLory and prehlsLory, lL would Lake Lhree or four ma[or and profound culLural LransformaLlons Lo cllmb up and ouL of Lhls blologlcal desLlny. (And each sLep would have lLs own and very new forms of paLhology and posslble dlssoclaLlon, all of whlch would have Lo be negoLlaLed-someLlmes noL very successfully.) AL Lhls polnL ln our narraLlve, we are sLlll aL Lhe very flrsL LransformaLlon. 1he flrsL sexual-funcLlonal Jlffeteotlotloo has [usL Laken place, based largely on slmple blospherlc dlfferences (physlcal sLrengLh/moblllLy versus blrLhlng/nurslng). And Lhe flrsL ma[or loteqtotloo of Lhese Lwo spheres has also occurred: placlng Lhe male ln botb worlds vla Lhe alLogeLher novel emergence of Lhe role of Lhe faLher. MAClCAL-AnlMlS1lC WlLh Lhe famlllallzaLlon of Lhe male, and Lhe emergence of human socloculLural evoluLlon, we move from Lhe archalc Lo Lhe maglc. 1he archalc ls for boLh Cebser and myself a loose caLchall" epoch LhaL slmply and globally represenLs oll Lhe sLrucLures of consclousness up Lo and lncludlng Lhe flrsL homlnlds. We could [usL as easlly have broken Lhe archalc down lnLo lLs dozens of componenLs and lndlvldual sLages, such as Lhe more deLalled breakdown glven ln flgure 4-1 (where everyLhlng up Lo concepLs ls Lhe archalc fund"). 1he archalc ls slmply a symbol of Lhe LoLallLy of our rlch evoluLlonary hlsLory, buL lL ls noL [usL a symbol, because Lhls hlsLory llves on ln each of us as parL of our presenL compound lndlvlduallLy. As for Lhe maglcal sLrucLure lLself, accordlng Lo Lhe exLenslve research of Pabermas and hls assoclaLes: ApparenLly Lhe maglcal-anlmlsLlc represenLaLlonal world of paleollLhlc socleLles was very parLlcularlsLlc and noL very coherenL. 1he orderlng represenLaLlons of myLhology [l.e., early myLhology, and noL Lhe complex myLhology LhaL ls Lhe nexL sLage, Lhe myLhologlcal sLage proper] flrsL made posslble Lhe consLrucLlon of a complex of analogles ln whlch all naLural and soclal phenomena were lnLerwoven and could be Lransformed lnLo one anoLher [maglcal dlsplacemenL"]. ln Lhe egocenLrlc world concepLlon of Lhe chlld aL Lhe preoperaLlonal level of LhoughL, Lhese phenomena are made relaLlve Lo Lhe cenLer of Lhe chlld's ego, slmllarly, ln soclomorphlc worldvlews Lhey are made relaLlve Lo Lhe cenLer of Lhe Lrlbal group. 1hls does noL mean LhaL Lhe members of Lhe group have formed a dlsLlncL consclousness of Lhe normaLlve reallLy of a socleLy sLandlng aparL from ob[ecLlvaLed naLure-tbese two teqloos bove oot yet beeo cleotly sepototeJ [l.e., Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere have noL yeL been clearly dlfferenLlaLed/lnLegraLed]. 1hls maglcal-anlmlsLlc sLage ls characLerlzed by a convenLlonal klnshlp organlzaLlon, a preconvenLlonal sLage of law, and an egocenLrlc lnLerpreLlve sysLem. . . . 14 reoperaLlonal Lhlnklng, for cognlLlve anLhropologlsLs, ls Lhlnklng LhaL works wlLh lmages, symbols, and concepLs (buL noL yeL complex rules and formal operaLlons). lL ls also called represenLaLlonal" because symbols and concepLs essenLlally presenL and represenL (make and maLch) sensory ob[ecLs ln Lhe exLernal world. lor Lhls reason, cognlLlve psychologlsLs and anLhropologlsLs refer Lo represenLaLlonal LhoughL as belng close to tbe boJy." 1haL ls, Lhe noosphere ls [usL emerglng, Lhe mlnd ls [usL emerglng, and as such lL ls sLlll relaLlvely undlfferenLlaLed from Lhe blosphere, from Lhe body and sensorlmoLor lnLelllgence. 13 1hls ls why Pabermas refers Lo Lhe self-ldenLlLy of Lhls sLage as a oototol ldenLlLy or a body-based ldenLlLy (as lreud puL lL, Lhe ego ls flrsL and foremosL a bodyego"). lL ls noL yeL an ldenLlLy based upon exLenslve menLal rules and roles-whlch develop only wlLh Lhe nexL sLage, Lhe concreLe operaLlonal-and so Lhe law and morallLy of Lhls sLage ls llkewlse body-based, dependenL upon physlcal pragmaLlc concerns and nalve lnsLrumenLal hedonlsm." As McCarLhy summarlzes lL, Lhe lndlvldual aL Lhls ptecooveotloool moral sLage ls responslve Lo culLural rules and labels of good and bad, rlghL and wrong, buL lnLerpreLs Lhese labels ln Lerms of elLher Lhe physlcal or Lhe hedonlsLlc consequences of acLlon (punlshmenL, reward, exchange of favor), or ln Lerms of Lhe pbyslcol powet of Lhose who enunclaLe Lhe rules and labels." 16 lL ls also called maglcal" (by Pabermas, Cebser, lageL) because Lhe mlnd and body are sLlll relaLlvely undlfferenLlaLed, and Lhus menLal lmages and symbols are ofLen confused or even ldenLlfled wlLh Lhe physlcal evenLs Lhey represenL, and consequenLly menLal lnLenLlons are belleved Lo be able Lo maglcally" alLer Lhe physlcal world, as ln voodoo, exoLerlc manLra, Lhe feLlsh, maglcal rlLual, sympaLheLlc maglc," or maglc ln general (we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls Loplc ln Lhe nexL chapLer). 17 Llkewlse, and from Lhe oLher slde of Lhe lndlssoclaLlon, physlcal ob[ecLs are allve," possesslng noL [usL prehenslon buL expllclLly personal lnLenLlons (anlmlsm). ln oLher words, because Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere are noL yeL clearly dlfferenLlaLed/lnLegraLed, Lhe sub[ecL has speclal power over Lhe ob[ecL (maglc) and Lhe ob[ecL has speclal sub[ecLlve quallLles (anlmlsm). WheLher LhaL was or was noL splrlLual" ln any genulne sense we wlll lnvesLlgaLe laLer. CognlLlve anLhropologlsLs ofLen refer Lo Lhls as global syncreLlsm" or lndlssoclaLlon." Pabermas explalns: [ln Lhese socleLles] collecLlve ldenLlLy was secured Lhrough Lhe facL LhaL lndlvlduals Lraced Lhelr descenL Lo Lhe flgure of a common ancesLor [klnshlp] and Lhus, ln Lhe framework of Lhelr worldvlew, assured Lhemselves of a common cosmogonlc orlgln. Cn Lhe oLher hand, Lhe personal ldenLlLy of Lhe lndlvldual developed Lhrough ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh a Lrlbal group, whlch was ln Lurn percelved as parL of a naLure lnLerpreLed ln lnLeracLlon [maglcal] caLegorles. As soclal reallLy was noL yeL clearly dlsLlngulshed from naLural reallLy, Lhe boundarles of Lhe soclal world merged lnLo Lhose of Lhe world ln general. WlLhouL clearly deflned boundarles of Lhe soclal sysLem Lhere was no naLural or soclal envlronmenL ln Lhe sLrlcL sense, conLacLs wlLh allen Lrlbes were lnLerpreLed ln accord wlLh Lhe famlllar klnshlp connecLlon. 18 lL ls LhaL lndlssoclaLlon LhaL ls so ofLen euloglzed by 8omanLlcs, because, l belleve, Lhey mlsLake lndlssoclaLlon for lnLegraLlon. 1he maglcal-anlmlsLlc sLrucLure, as lovely as lL mlghL appear Lo us [aded moderns, was noL an lnLegraLlon of Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere, because Lhese had noL yeL been dlfferenLlaLed ln Lhe flrsL place. AL Lhe same Llme-and for preclsely Lhe same reason-LhaL lack of separaLlon" mlghL have embodled a Lype of ecologlcal wlsdom, a wlsdom LhaL many moderns are undersLandably Lrylng Lo recapLure. namely, Lhe Lrlbal klnshlp consclousness, sLlll lylng close Lo Lhe body," close Lo Lhe blosphere, was for [usL LhaL reason someLlmes more ecologlcally sound," more ln Lune wlLh naLural wlsdom, wlLh Lhe LarLh and lLs many moods. And Lhus lL ls small wonder LhaL, ln Lhese ecologlcally dlsasLrous Llmes, many moderns are aLLempLlng Lo resurrecL Lhe naLural wlsdom of Lrlbal awareness more aLLuned wlLh Lhe blosphere. l am ln compleLe sympaLhy wlLh LhaL approach, l am noL ln sympaLhy wlLh Lhe aLLempL Lo Lurn back Lhe clock and elevaLe Lhls sLrucLure Lo a prlvlleged sLaLus of lnLegraLlve power LhaL lL slmply dld noL possess. lurLher, wheLher close Lo naLure" auLomaLlcally LranslaLes lnLo ecologlcally sound" ls hoLly debaLed. lock of copoclty Lo devasLaLe Lhe envlronmenL on a large scale does noL auLomaLlcally mean pteseoce of wlsJom, leL alone reverence for Lhe envlronmenL. And, ln facL, many Lrlbes, as Lenskl polnLs ouL, slmply remalned aL one locaLlon unLll Lhey had ecologlcally depleLed Lhe area, and Lhen were forced Lo move on. 1rlbal awareness was ln all cases close Lo naLure, ln Lhe sense of lndlssoclaLed, ecologlcally sound ls anoLher maLLer. 8lane Llsler ls speclflc: lf we carefully examlne boLh our pasL and presenL, we see LhaL many peoples pasL and presenL llvlng close Lo naLure have all Loo ofLen been bllndly desLrucLlve of Lhelr envlronmenL. Whlle many lndlgenous socleLles have a greaL reverence for naLure, Lhere are also boLh non-WesLern and WesLern peasanL and nomadlc culLures LhaL have overgrazed and overculLlvaLed land, declmaLed foresLs, and, where populaLlon pressures have been severe, kllled off anlmals needlessly and lndlfferenLly. And whlle Lhere ls much we can learn Loday from Lrlbal culLures, lL ls lmporLanL noL Lo lndlscrlmlnaLely ldeallze all non-WesLern culLures and/or blame all our Lroubles on our secular-sclenLlflc age. lor clearly such Lrlbal pracLlces as cannlballsm, LorLure, and female genlLal muLllaLlon anLedaLe modern Llmes. And some lndlgenous . . . socleLles have been as barbarous as Lhe mosL 'clvlllzed' 8oman emperors or Lhe mosL 'splrlLual' ChrlsLlan lnqulslLors." 19 As 8ene uubos summarlzes Lhe avallable evldence, All over Lhe globe and aL all Llmes ln Lhe pasL, men have plllaged naLure and dlsLurbed Lhe ecologlcal equlllbrlum, usually ouL of lgnorance, buL also because Lhey have always been more concerned wlLh lmmedlaLe advanLages Lhan wlLh long-range goals. Moreover, Lhey could noL foresee LhaL Lhey were preparlng for ecologlcal dlsasLers, nor dld Lhey have a real cholce of alLernaLlves." 20 1heodore 8oszak, hlmself a sLaunch advocaLe of a cerLaln Lype of prlmal/Lrlbal wlsdom," noneLheless polnLs ouL LhaL ln many lnsLances Lrlbal socleLles have abused and even rulned Lhelr hablLaL. ln prehlsLorlc Llmes, Lhe Lrlbal and nomadlc people of Lhe MedlLerranean basln overcuL and overgrazed Lhe land so severely LhaL Lhe scars of Lhe resulLlng eroslon can sLlll be seen. 1helr sacramenLal sense of naLure dld noL offseL Lhelr lgnorance of Lhe long-range damage Lhey were dolng Lo Lhelr hablLaL." Llkewlse, he says, oLher lndlgenous or prlmal socleLles have, ln Lhelr lgnorance, bllghLed porLlons of Lhelr hablLaL sufflclenLly Lo endanger Lhelr own survlval. 8lver valleys have been devasLaLed, foresLs denuded, Lhe Lopsoll worn away, buL Lhe damage was llmlLed and Lemporary." 21 1he correcL concluslon, ln oLher words, ls LhaL Lhe prlmal/Lrlbal sLrucLure lo ltself dld oot necessarlly possess ecologlcal wlsdom, lL slmply lockeJ tbe meoos Lo lnfllcL lLs lgnorance on larger porLlons of Lhe global commons. 1he maln dlfference beLween Lrlbal and modern eco-devasLaLlon ls noL presence or lack of wlsdom, buL presence of more dangerous means, where Lhe some lgnorance can now be played ouL on a devasLaLlng scale. As we wlll see, our masslvely lncreased means have led, for Lhe flrsL Llme ln hlsLory, Lo an equally masslve dlssoclaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, and Lhus Lhe cote ls noL Lo reacLlvaLe Lhe Lrlbal form of ecologlcal lgnorance (Lake away our means), nor Lo conLlnue Lhe modern form of LhaL lgnorance (Lhe free markeL wlll save us), buL raLher Lo evolve and develop lnLo an lnLegraLlve mode of awareness LhaL wlll-also for Lhe flrsL Llme ln hlsLory-loteqtote Lhe blosphere and noosphere ln a hlgher and deeper unlon (all of whlch we wlll lnvesLlgaLe laLer ln Lhls chapLer). LvoluLlon moved beyond Lrlballsm, and lLs llmlLed capaclLy for soclal-planeLary lnLegraLlon, for many reasons, lL seems. 1rlbes may or may noL have known how Lo remaln reverenLlal of naLure, lL was otbet Lrlbes Lhey could noL lnLegraLe, and Lhls because Lhey lacked recourse Lo a blndlng cooveotloool level of law and morallLy LhaL very soon would sLarL Lo bulld unlfled socleLles ouL of separaLe and confllcLlng Lrlbal deslres. 1he problem wasn'L geLLlng along wlLh naLure ln Lhe blospbete, lL was geLLlng along wlLh oLher and confllcLlng lnLeresLs ln Lhe ooospbete LhaL broughL Lrlballsm Lo lLs llmlLs for evoluLlonary lnLegraLlve power. Pabermas and hls collaboraLors (parLlcularly klaus Lder and 8alner uoberL), who have been carefully sLudylng Lhe anLhropologlcal daLa, have mapped ouL some of Lhe lobeteot llmltotloos LhaL broughL Lrlbal klnshlp sysLems Lo an evoluLlonary dead end. ln Lhe evoluLlonarlly promlslng neollLhlc socleLles, sysLem problems arose whlch could noL be managed wlLh an adapLlve capaclLy llmlLed by Lhe klnshlp prlnclple of organlzaLlon. lor example, ecologlcally condlLloned problems of land scarclLy and populaLlon denslLy or problems havlng Lo do wlLh an unequal dlsLrlbuLlon of soclal wealLh. 1hese problems, lttesolvoble wltblo tbe qlveo ftomewotk, became more and more vlslble Lhe more frequenLly Lhey led Lo confllcLs LhaL overloaded Lhe archalc [maglc] legal lnsLlLuLlons (courLs of arblLraLlon, feudlng law). A few socleLles under Lhe pressure of evoluLlonary challenges from such problems made use of Lhe cognlLlve poLenLlal ln Lhelr worldvlews [cognlLlve capaclLles of hlgher moral-pragmaLlc sLages noL yeL soclally embedded] and lnsLlLuLlonallzed-aL flrsL on a Lrlal basls-an admlnlsLraLlon of [usLlce aL a convenLlonal level [myLhlc- membershlp, concreLe operaLlonal]. 1hus, for example, Lhe war chlef was empowered Lo ad[udlcaLe cases of confllcL, no longer only accordlng Lo Lhe dlsLrlbuLlon of power, buL accordlng Lo soclally recognlzed norms grounded ln LradlLlon. Law was no longer only LhaL on whlch Lhe parLles could agree. 22 lL was aL Lhls polnL LhaL complex sysLems of myLhology, whaLever oLher funcLlons Lhey mlghL have performed, began Lo serve flrsL and foremosL as a way Lo unlfy peoples beyooJ mete blooJ lloeoqe. 1he human race was noL only self-adapLlng, lL was self-Lranscendlng. 1he phenomenon Lo be explalned ls Lhe emergence of a pollLlcal order LhaL organlzed a socleLy so tbot lts membets coolJ belooq to Jlffeteot lloeoqes. 1he funcLlon of soclal lnLegraLlon passed from klnshlp relaLlons Lo pollLlcal relaLlons. CollecLlve ldenLlLy was no longer represenLed ln Lhe flgure of a commoo oocestot buL ln LhaL of a commoo tolet [or leader or governor, who someLlmes, buL noL always, would abuse Lhls newly emergenL power, we wlll reLurn Lo Pabermas's LhoughLs on Lhls laLer, he ls aL presenL focuslng on Lhe necessary and new lnLegraLlve power broughL by Lhls LransformaLlon, and noL on any of lLs parLlcular abuses, whlch are leglon and whlch he also dlscusses ln greaL deLall]. A rullng poslLlon gave Lhe rlghL Lo exerclse leglLlmaLe [or agreed-upon] power. 1he leglLlmacy of power could noL be based solely on auLhorlzaLlon Lhrough klnshlp sLaLus, for clalms based on famlly poslLlon, or on leglLlmaLe klnshlp relaLlons ln general, were llmlLed preclsely by Lhe pollLlcal power of Lhe ruler. LeglLlmaLe power crysLalllzed around Lhe funcLlon of admlnlsLerlng [usLlce and around Lhe poslLlon of Lhe [udge afLer Lhe law was recognlzed ln such a way LhaL lL possessed Lhe characLerlsLlcs of cooveotloool motollty. 1hls was Lhe case when Lhe [udge, lnsLead of belng bound as a mere referee Lo Lhe conLlngenL consLellaLlons of power of Lhe lnvolved parLles, could [udge accordlng Lo lnLersub[ecLlvely recognlzed legal norms sancLlfled by LradlLlon, when he Look Lhe lnLenLlon of Lhe agenL lnLo accounL as well as Lhe concreLe consequences of acLlon, and when he was no longer gulded by Lhe ldeas of reprlsal for damages caused and resLoraLlon of a sLaLus quo anLe [characLerlsLlc of preconvenLlonal morallLy], buL punlshed Lhe gullLy parLy's vlolaLlon of a rule. LeglLlmaLe power had ln [Lhls] lnsLance Lhe form of a power Lo dlspose of Lhe means of sancLlon ln a convenLlonal admlnlsLraLlon of [usLlce. AL Lhe same Llme, myLhologlcal worldvlews also Look on-ln addlLlon Lo Lhelr explanaLory funcLlon-[usLlflcaLory funcLlons. . . . 23 ln shorL, whaL was needed was noL Lrlbal buL LransLrlbal awareness, negaLlng buL preservlng hereLofore lsolaLed Lrlbal lnLeresLs ln a hlgher and wlder communlon, and myLhology, noL maglc, provlded Lhe key for Lhls new Lranscendence. And so: some people Loday euloglze Lhe prlmal Lrlbal socleLles because of Lhelr ecologlcal wlsdom" or Lhelr reverence for naLure" or Lhelr nonaggresslve ways." l don'L Lhlnk Lhe evldence supporLs any of Lhose vlews ln a sweeplng and general fashlon. 8aLher, l euloglze Lhe prlmal Lrlbal socleLles for an enLlrely dlfferenL reason: we are all Lhe sons and daughLers of Lrlbes. 1he prlmal Lrlbes are llLerally our rooLs, our foundaLlons, Lhe basls of all LhaL was Lo follow, Lhe sLrucLure upon whlch all subsequenL human evoluLlon would be bullL, Lhe cruclal ground floor upon whlch so much hlsLory would have Lo resL. 1oday's exlsLenL Lrlbes, and Loday's naLlons, and Loday's culLures, and Loday's accompllshmenLs-all would Lrace Lhelr llneage ln an unbroken fashlon Lo Lhe prlmal Lrlbal holons upon whlch a human famlly Lree was abouL Lo be bullL. And looklng back on our ancesLors ln LhaL llghL, l am sLruck wlLh awe and admlraLlon for Lhe asLonlshlng creaLlvlLy-Lhe otlqlool breakLhrough creaLlvlLy-LhaL allowed humans Lo rlse above a glven naLure and begln bulldlng a noosphere, Lhe very process of whlch would brlng Peaven down Lo LarLh and exalL Lhe LarLh Lo Peaven, Lhe very process of whlch would evenLually blnd all peoples of Lhe world LogeLher ln, lf you wlll, one global Lrlbe. 8uL ln order for LhaL Lo occur, Lhe orlglnal, prlmal Lrlbes had Lo flnd a way Lo Lranscend Lhelr lsoloteJ Lrlbal klnshlp llneages: Lhey had Lo flnd a way Lo go LransLrlbal, and myLhology, noL maglc, provlded Lhe key for Lhls new Lranscendence. M?1PCLCClCAL 1he LranslLlon Lo socletles otqoolzeJ tbtooqb o stote requlred Lhe relaLlvlzaLlon of Lrlbal ldenLlLles and Lhe consLrucLlon of a more absLracL [meanlng less body-bound] ldenLlLy LhaL no longer based Lhe membershlp of lndlvlduals on common descenL buL on belonglng ln common Lo a LerrlLorlal organlzaLlon. 1hls Look place flrsL Lhrough ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh Lhe flgure of a ruler who could clalm close connecLlon and prlvlleged access Lo Lhe myLhologlcal orlglnary powers. ln Lhe framework of myLhologlcal worldvlews Lhe lnLegraLlon of dlfferenL Lrlbal LradlLlons was accompllshed Lhrough a large-scale, syncreLlc expanslon of Lhe world of Lhe gods-a soluLlon LhaL proved Lo be raLher unsLable [and preclplLaLed Lhe nexL ma[or LransformaLlon, whlch we wlll examlne ln a momenL]. 24 lL wasn'L LhaL maglcal-anlmlsLlc socleLles had no myLhologles, for Lhey dld. lL was slmply LhaL, as !oseph Campbell explalned, Lhe rlse of Lhe flrsL early sLaLes was marked by an exploslon of codlfled myLhologles-an enormous dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon of myLhlc moLlfs-and Pabermas's polnL ls LhaL Lhese myLhologles became a large parL of Lhe lnLegraLlng sLrucLures for socleLy (l.e., provldlng boLh culLural meanlng and soclal lnLegraLlon). As we saw, ln Lhe prevlous or maglcal sLrucLure, personal ldenLlLy was oototol or body-based, and collecLlve ldenLlLy was llkewlse klnshlp or blood-bound, parLlcularly Lhrough a common ancesLor. WlLhouL a common ancesLor (or klnshlp llneage), Lhere was no way Lo soclally lnLegraLe varlous lnLeresLs. WlLh Lhe rlse of Lhe myLhologlcal sLrucLure, however, personal ldenLlLy swlLched Lo a tole ldenLlLy ln a socleLy of a common polltlcol (noL geneLlcally relaLed) ruler, and Lhls ruler was glven leglLlmacy noL because of blood Lles buL because of hls (or someLlmes her) speclal relaLlon Lo myLhologlcal gods/goddesses-myLhlc-membershlp." under Lhls arrangemenL, an enormous number of noL-geneLlcally-relaLed Lrlbes could be unlfled and lnLegraLed, someLhlng Lhe preconvenLlonal maglcal sLrucLure-lylng close Lo Lhe body and close Lo naLure-could never accompllsh. Cnly wlLh Lhe LranslLlon Lo socleLles organlzed around a sLaLe do myLhologlcal worldvlews also Lake on Lhe leglLlmaLlon of sLrucLures of [governance], whlch already presuppose Lhe convenLlonal sLage of morallzed law. 1hus Lhe nalve aLLlLude Lo myLh [characLerlsLlc of Lhe maglcal] musL have changed by LhaL Llme. WlLhln a more sLrongly dlfferenLlaLed Lemporal horlzon, myLh ls dlsLanLlaLed Lo a LradlLlon LhaL sLands ouL from Lhe normaLlve reallLy of socleLy and from a parLlally ob[ecLlvaLed naLure. WlLh perslsLlng soclomorphlc LralLs, Lhese developed myLhs esLabllsh a unlLy ln Lhe manlfold of appearances, ln formal respecLs, Lhls unlLy resembles Lhe soclocenLrlc-ob[ecLlvlsLlc world concepLlon of Lhe sLage of concreLe operaLlons [and convenLlonal-sLage morallLy].23 We wlll laLer address ln more deLall Lhe Loplc of wheLher Lhese myLhs acLually conLalned any genulnely LranscendenLal, mysLlcal, or LransformaLlve splrlLual capaclLles (as malnLalned by, e.g., Carl !ung and !oseph Campbell). lor Lhe momenL leL us only noLe LhaL Lhese varlous epochs," such as Lhe maglcal or myLhlcal, refer only Lo Lhe ovetoqe mode of consclousness achleved aL LhaL parLlcular Llme ln evoluLlon-a cerLaln cenLer of gravlLy" around whlch Lhe socleLy as a whole orblLed. ln any glven epoch, some lndlvlduals wlll fall below Lhe norm ln Lhelr own developmenL, and oLhers wlll reach qulLe beyond lL. Pabermas sLrongly belleves, for example, LhaL even ln preoperaLlonal maglcal Llmes, some lndlvlduals clearly developed cognlLlve capaclLles all Lhe way up Lo formal operaLlonal cognlLlon, noL as fully formed sLrucLures buL as poLenLlals for undersLandlng. 1hls ls an example of whaL l referred Lo ln up ftom Jeo as Lhe leadlng edge or most oJvooceJ form of consclousness evoluLlon, ln conLrasL Lo Lhe ovetoqe mode of Lhe Llme. And l belleve LhaL Lhe evldence clearly suggesLs LhaL, Lo sLay wlLh Lhe maglcal sLrucLure as an example, Lhe mosL advanced mode of LhaL Llme was noL [usL formal operaLlonal, alLhough l belleve LhaL was clearly presenL, buL beyond LhaL Lo Lhe psychlc level (evldenced, e.g., ln shamans), as a poLenLlal for a cettolo type of undersLandlng and awareness (whlch we wlll examlne ln chapLer 8). My polnL ls LhaL ln each epoch, Lhe most oJvooceJ mode of Lhe Llme-ln a very small number of lndlvlduals exlsLlng ln relaLlonal exchange ln mlcrocommunlLles (lodges, academles, sanghas) of tbe slmllotly JeptbeJ-began Lo peneLraLe noL only lnLo hlgher modes of ordlnary cognlLlon (Lhe ArlsLoLles of Lhe Llme) buL also lnLo genulnely LranscendenLal, Lranspersonal, mysLlcal realms of awareness (Lhe 8uddhas of Lhe Llme). 1hus, ln Lhe maglcal, as l [usL menLloned, Lhe mosL advanced mode seems Lo have been Lhe psychlc (embodled ln a few genulne shamans or ploneers of yoglc awareness), ln myLhologlcal Llmes Lhe mosL advanced mode seems Lo have reached lnLo whaL ls known as Lhe subLle realm (embodled ln a few genulne salnLs), and ln menLal-egolc Llmes Lhe mosL advanced modes reached lnLo Lhe causal realm (embodled ln a few genulne sages), all of whlch we wlll dlscuss ln chapLer 8. 26 8uL Lhe ovetoqe mode of Lhe myLhologlcal epoch dld noL reach lnLo Lhese subLler and Lranspersonal dlmenslons, buL remalned grounded ln a concreLe-llLeral lnLerpreLaLlon of myLh (e.g., Moses acLually dld parL Lhe 8ed Sea, as an emplrlcal facL). 1here ls preclous llLLle LhaL ls Lransperson-ally lnsplred abouL such llLeral myLhs, raLher, as Pabermas suggesLs, Lhey clearly represenL Lhe soclocenLrlc lnLegraLlon offered by concreLe operaLlons and convenLlonal morallLy, and for LhaL reason were exLremely lmporLanL ln movlng soclal lnLegraLlon beyond Lhe Lrlbal and Lhe preconvenLlonal-and wlLh LhaL Lhelr LranscendenLal sLaLus, excepLlonally lmporLanL buL llmlLed, seems mosL deflnlLely Lo end. M?1PlC-8A1lCnAL 1he word totloool ls an lmposslble label, lL means a mllllon Lhlngs Lo a mllllon people, and noL all of Lhe meanlngs are klnd. Moreover, even lf we declde whaL lL means, Lhere are sLlll several dlfferenL Lypes of lL." Weber, for example, dlfferenLlaLed beLween purposlve-raLlonallLy (such as sclenLlflc-Lechnologlcal knowledge), formal raLlonallLy (such as maLhemaLlcs), and lnLersub[ecLlve or pracLlcal raLlonallLy (as dlsplayed ln morallLy and communlcaLlon). CognlLlve psychologlsLs and anLhropologlsLs Lend Lo use totlooollty Lo mean formal operaLlonal cognlLlon," whlch slmply means Lhe capaclLy noL [usL Lo Lhlnk, buL Lo Lhlnk abouL Lhlnklng (and Lhus operaLe upon" Lhlnklng: formal operaLlonal"). Slnce you can operaLe upon or teflect opoo your own LhoughL processes, you are Lo some degree free of Lhem, you can Lo some degree ttoosceoJ Lhem, you can Lake petspectlves dlfferenL from your own, you can enLerLaln bypotbetlcol posslblllLles, and you can become hlghly lottospectlve. As we wlll see ln Lhe nexL chapLer, all of Lhese come lnLo exlsLence wlLh Lhe emergence of formal operaLlonal cognlLlon, or raLlonallLy." Moreover, slnce you can now teflect oo your own LhoughLs and paLLerns of behavlor, you wlll now seek Lo [usLlfy your LhoughLs and acLlons, based noL slmply on whaL you were LaughL, or on whaL your socleLy Lells you (LhaL ls Lhe rule-bound or conformlsL or convenLlonal or soclocenLrlc mode of Lhe prevlous concreLe operaLlonal cognlLlon), buL raLher on a revlew of Lhe teosoos and Lhe acLual evlJeoce for such bellefs. uld Moses teolly parL Lhe 8ed Sea? 8aLlonallLy, ln Lhls sense, means LhaL you seek reasonable reasons" for your bellefs. WhaL ls Lhe evldence? Why should l belleve Lhls? Who says so? Where dld you geL LhaL ldea? And flnally, because we can reflecL on our own LhoughL processes, and Lhus Lo some degree remove ourselves from Lhem, we become capable of lmaglnlng all sorLs of oLher posslbllltles, we become Jteomets ln Lhe Lrue sense of Lhe word. CLher perspecLlves, oLher bellefs, oLher horlzons open before Lhe mlnd's eye, and Lhe soul can Lake fllghL ln Lhe worlds of Lhe noL-yeL-seen. 8aLlonallLy ls Lhe greaL doorway Lo Lhe lnvlslble, Lhrough whlch, and Lhen beyond whlch, lle so many secreLs noL glven Lo Lhe senses or Lo convenLlons (whlch ls why all Lrue mysLlclsm ls LransraLlonal and never anLlraLlonal, rlghL LhoughL" always precedes rlghL medlLaLlon"). 1hus, Lhe ldea LhaL raLlonallLy ls somehow dry and absLracL," or LhaL lL has no feellngs," ls way off Lhe mark. 8aLlonallLy creaLes a deeper spoce of posslblllLles Lhrough whlch deeper and wlder feellngs can run, feellngs noL bound Lo one's lsolaLed deslres or Lhe narrow conflnes of offlclal convenLlonal reallLy. 1he facL LhaL raLlonallLy ls a relaLlvely hlgh level of developmenL means, as always, LhaL lL coo repress lLs lower holons, parLlcularly emoLlons of sex and aggresslon, and tbot, as always, leads Lo paLhology. And lL ls Lhe potboloqlcol expresslon of raLlonallLy LhaL has glven raLlonallLy a bad name (dry and absLracL"), buL LhaL ls deflnlLely noL characLerlsLlc of Lhe sLrucLure as a whole. Powever, slnce totloool ls someLhlng of a loaded word, we mlghL beLLer use Lhe word teosoooble-Lhey mean Lhe same Lhlng: whaL are your reasons, why are you dolng LhaL? And Lhls ls why raLlonallLy or reasonableness Lends Lo be oolvetsol ln characLer, and ls hlghly lnLegraLlve. lf my reasons are golng Lo be valld, l wanL Lo know LhaL Lhey make sense, or LhaL Lhey hold Lrue, noL [usL for me or my Lrlbe or my lsolaLed culLure (however lmporLanL Lhose mlghL also be). lf sclence, for example, ls golng Lo be Lrue, Lhen we are noL golng Lo have a Plndu chemlsLry LhaL ls dlfferenL from a Cerman chemlsLry LhaL ls dlfferenL from a Creek chemlsLry. 1here ls slmply chemlsLry, and lLs LruLh ls noL forced or coerced or ldeologlcally lmposed, buL ls freely open Lo any who wlsh Lo look lnLo lLs reasons. 1hls doesn'L mean LhaL we can'L have speclal culLural dlfferences LhaL make each socleLy unlque and speclal, lL means LhaL only raLlonallLy wlll allow Lhese dlfferences Lo exlsL slde by slde by seelng Lhem as dlfferenL perspecLlves ln a more unlversal space, someLhlng LhaL culLural dlfferences, lefL Lo Lhelr own convenLlonal or soclocenLrlc or eLhnocenLrlc devlces, could never do. lL ls only raLlonallLy, ln oLher words, LhaL allows Lhe beglnnlng emergence of a Lruly global or planeLary neLwork, whlch, freed from any parLlcular socleLy, can allow all socleLles Lhelr own unlque and speclal place. 8uL you can lmaglne whaL happened hlsLorlcally when Lhe myLhologlcal sLrucLure (Moses parLed Lhe 8ed Sea) ran lnLo Lhe newly emerglng raLlonal sLrucLure (WhaL does LhaL mean, parLed Lhe 8ed Sea? Where ls your evldence for LhaL?). Was lL really rlghL for Lhe gods Lo lle and rape, as Pomer had malnLalned? Cr could Lhe myLhs slmply be wtooq? luLarch records hls faLher saylng Lo hlm: ?ou seem Lo me Lo be handllng a very large and dangerous quesLlon-or raLher you are dlsLurblng sub[ecLs whlch oughL Lo be lefL alone, when you quesLlon Lhe oplnlon we hold abouL Lhe gods, and ask reason and proof for everyLhlng." 1he lndlcLmenL handed down by Lhe clLy of ALhens began, SocraLes ls gullLy of refuslng Lo recognlze Lhe gods of Lhe SLaLe." lL ended wlLh, 1he penalLy demanded ls deaLh." When asked, as was cusLomary, lf SocraLes could suggesL an alLernaLlve punlshmenL, he suggesLed free meals for llfe. 8uL he refused a prlson escape LhaL had been arranged for hlm, and freely drank Lhe hemlock. ln chooslng deaLh lnsLead of sLaLe myLhology, SocraLes dled for Lhe cause of emergenL reason. 1he resL of humanlLy, however, dld noL move qulLe as fasL ln LhaL parLlcular LransformaLlon. 8aLher, ln Lhls clash beLween myLh and newly emerglng reason, Lhe LradlLlonal myLhologlcal sLrucLures were aL flrsL totlooollzeJ. 1haL ls, Lhe old myLhs were propped up wlLh raLlonal reasons. And Lhls sLrucLure, ln general, l call myLhlc-raLlonal. 27 Pabermas does noL speclflcally use Lhe Lerm mytblc-totloool, he speaks of Lhe raLlonallzaLlon of myLhologlcal organlzaLlon, an essenLlally slmllar noLlon. Pabermas makes several lnLeresLlng observaLlons abouL Lhls myLhlc-raLlonal space. llrsL of all, we are deallng wlLh Lhe oolvetsollzloq Lendency ln raLlonallLy-Lhe deslre of raLlonallLy Lo embrace, make room for, and lnLegraLe a qlobol or plooetoty consclousness. 8uL Lhls planeLary or global Lendency flrsL expressed lLself ln an aLLempL Lo exLend a pottlcolot mytboloqy Lo world-embraclng dlmenslons. ln oLher words, a mlllLary aLLempL Lo conquer as many peoples as posslble. 1hus, accordlng Lo Pabermas, aL Lhls polnL hlsLorlcally we see Lhe emergence, around Lhe world, of Lhe greaL Lmplres. lrom Lhe lncas Lo Lhe Aryans, from Lhe AzLecs Lo Lhe Alexanders, from Lhe khans Lo Lhe 8omans: Lhe comlng of Lhe Lmplres was Lhe flrsL bruLal sLep ln a planeLary expanslon sLruggllng Lo reach beyond lsolaLed culLures by slmple conquesL. Cnce conquered, Lhe peoples were Lhen usually glven a genulnely equal access Lo cltlzeosblp (ln many cases Lhls lncluded clLlzenshlp for women, slaves, and chlldren). 8uL Lhese clLlzens could only be qlobol clLlzens lf Lhe emplre lLself conquered Lhe globe-LhaL ls, lf everybody embraced Lhe myLhology LhaL raLlonallLy was Lrylng Lo prop up-lf everybody became Lrue bellevers" ln Lhe chosen myLhlc god or goddess (we sLlll see Lhls Lype of myLhlc-lmperlallsm operaLlve ln Lhe world Loday), a raLher LwlsLed verslon of planeLary clLlzenshlp. Llkewlse, Lhe old myLhologlcal sLrucLures had conLalned lmpllclLly anoLher Lype of parLlal move Loward global or planeLary clLlzenshlp, namely, epool cltlzeos of tbe foltb. AlLhough Lhls was also a falLerlng sLep ln Lhe rlghL dlrecLlon, lL Loo suffered from Lhe facL LhaL Lhe varlous myLhologles Lhemselves sLlll JlffeteJ ftom eocb otbet. All ChrlsLlans anywhere, of whaLever color or race or sex, were equally saved, buL all Plndus would go Lo hell. 1he greaL myLhologles, and Lhe greaL emplres LhaL carrled Lhem Lo varlous corners of Lhe globe, ran up agalnsL Lhelr own lnherenL llmlLaLlons for lnLegraLlve power, slmply because Lhey ran lnLo each oLher, and Lhe only way Lo overcome Lhose dlfferences was Lo shed parLlcularlsLlc and dlvlslve myLhologles and Lransform Lo a more global reasonableness (Lhe oext sLage, Lhe menLal-raLlonal). 8uL we are now aL Lhe polnL where Lhe old myLhologles, carrled now by emplres, are Lrylng Lo be propped up and raLlonallzed. 8uL LhaL means LhaL Lhere was already a profound break wlLh pure myLhologlcal LhoughL, whlch prevlously was slmply accepLed on lLs own Lerms. Pabermas: lor Lhls reason, lmperlally developed clvlllzaLlons [emplres] had Lo secure Lhelr collecLlve ldenLlLy ln a way LhaL presupposed a break wlLh myLhologlcal LhoughL. 1he unlversallsLlc world lnLerpreLaLlons of Lhe greaL founders of rellglons and of Lhe greaL phllosophers grounded a commonallLy of convlcLlon medlaLed Lhrough a Leachlng LradlLlon and permlLLlng only absLracL ob[ecLs of ldenLlflcaLlon. As members of unlversal communlLles of falLh, clLlzens could recognlze Lhelr ruler and Lhe order represenLed by hlm so long as lL was posslble Lo render pollLlcal domlnaLlon plauslble ln some sense as Lhe legacy of an order of Lhe world and of salvaLlon LhaL was belleved ln and poslLed absoluLely [myLhlc dogma]. 1he greaL emplres had Lo demarcaLe Lhemselves from a desoclallzed ouLer naLure [blosphere] as well as from Lhe soclal envlronmenL of Lhose allen Lo Lhe emplre. 8uL slnce collecLlve ldenLlLy could now be secured only by way of docLrlnes wlLh a unlversal clalm, Lhe pollLlcal order also had Lo be ln accord wlLh Lhls clalm-Lhe emplres were noL unlversal ln name alone [buL ln aLLempLed global conquesL as well]. . . . 8uL Lhe reallLy of otbet empltes was lncompaLlble wlLh Lhls deflnlLlon of Lhe boundarles and soclal envlronmenL of an emplre. uesplLe Lhe exlsLence of Lrade relaLlons, and desplLe Lhe dlffuslon of lnnovaLlons, Lhe emplres shlelded Lhemselves from Lhls danger, beLween Lhemselves Lhey malnLalned no dlplomaLlc relaLlons ln Lhe sense of an lnsLlLuLlonallzed forelgn pollcy. 1helr pollLlcal exlsLence was noL dependenL on a sysLem of reclprocal recognlLlon [Lhey were noL Lruly raLlonal-planeLary]. 28 Lven Lhough lL was a myLhologlcal worldvlew LhaL was Lrylng Lo be propped up, Lhe propplng up was neverLheless belng done wlLh formal operaLlonal LhoughL, and Lhus cenLral parLs of Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal world were cenLered around formal raLlonallLy and lLs unlversallzlng or global ouLreach: 1here arlse cosmologlcal worldvlews, phllosophles, and Lhe hlgher rellglons [so-called raLlonal rellglons"], whlch replace Lhe narraLlve explanaLlons of myLhologlcal accounLs wlLh argumenLaLlve foundaLlons [Lhey glve reasons]. 1he LradlLlons golng back Lo Lhe greaL founders are an expllclLly Leachable knowledge LhaL can be dogmaLlzed, LhaL ls, professlonally raLlonallzed. ln Lhelr arLlculaLed forms raLlonallzed worldvlews are an expresslon of formal operaLlonal LhoughL and of a moral consclousness gulded by [posLconvenLlonal] prlnclples. 29 8uL a propplng-up ls sLlll a propplng-up. And ln one of Lhe mosL dlfflculL of all hlsLorlcal LransformaLlons, a unlversal or global reasonableness began slowly Lo supplemenL local and dlvlslve myLhologles, myLhologles LhaL, preclsely because Lhey could noL be unlversally argued and supporLed by shared evldence, could only be supporLed mlllLarlly and lmperlallsLlcally. 8uL slowly, ln boLh Lhe LasL and WesL, began Lo emerge raLlonal phllosophles, raLlonal sclences, raLlonal pollcles, raLlonal rellglons-some of whlch lndeed polnLed beyooJ reason, buL all of whlch depended on reason as a plaLform LhaL could secure a common and muLual undersLandlng for anyone, of any color, race, or creed, who cared Lo Lalk abouL lL, share Lhelr evldence, dlscuss Lhelr reasons, and noL slmply shouL dogmaLlsms and clalm dlvlne supporL. 8A1lCnAL As Lhe planeLary reach of reasonableness began Lo shake off Lhe dlvlslve myLhologles, emplres gave way Lo modern sLaLes-whlch aL leasL formally and muLually tecoqolzeJ one anoLher, Lhus maklng room for each on Lhe planeL. 1he modern sLaLe Lhus separaLed from lLs embeddedness ln parLlcular myLhologles-tbe oll-lmpottoot sepototloo of cbotcb ooJ stote-and furLher removed lLself from Lhe economlc sphere by allowlng Lhe emergence of a global markeL economy, all of whlch had Lo be grounded ln unlversallsLlc reasons (buL sLlll Llnged, lnlLlally, by remnanLs of lmperlallsm, whlch lndlcaLed noL an excess of reason buL a lack of lL). 1he hlghesL prlnclples losL Lhelr unquesLlonable characLer, rellglous falLh and Lhe LheoreLlcal aLLlLude became teflectlve. 1he advance of Lhe modern sclences and Lhe developmenL of moral-pracLlcal wlll-formaLlon were no longer pre[udlced by an order LhaL-alLhough grounded-was poslLed absoluLely [myLhology]. lor Lhe flrsL Llme, Lhe unlversallsLlc [global] poLenLlal already conLalned ln Lhe raLlonallzed worldvlews could be seL free. 1he oolty of tbe wotlJ could no longer be secured ob[ecLlvely, Lhrough hyposLaslzlng unlfylng prlnclples (Cod, 8elng, or naLure), henceforLh lL could be asserLed only reflecLlvely, Lhrough Lhe unlLy of reason. 1he unlLy of LheoreLlcal and pracLlcal reason Lhen became Lhe key problem for modern world lnLerpreLaLlons. . . . 30 ln oLher words, lL was no longer slmply Lhe case of a sub[ecL Lrylng Lo look aL and undersLand and operaLe on a world of ob[ecLs (concreLe operaLlonal), lL was Lhe sub[ecL looklng aL and Lrylng Lo undersLand and operaLe on ltself, lL was Lhe sub[ecL Lrylng Lo undersLand Lhe sobject (formal operaLlonal). Suddenly, very suddenly, humanlLy had Laken a new Lurn, a new Lranscendence, had dlscovered a new and deeper lnLerlor, wlLh a new and hlgher consclousness, and LhaL consclousness was Lo be found by lookloq wltblo. As we wlll see, Pabermas, Cebser, and l (and many oLhers) place Lhe rough beglnnlng of Lhls new emergence (egolc-raLlonal) ln Lhe mlddle of Lhe flrsL mlllennlum 8CL, buL lL reaches lLs frulLlon wlLh Lhe rlse of Lhe modern sLaLe, roughly Lhe slxLeenLh cenLury ln Lurope. We wlll be concenLraLlng on Lhls frulLlon, buL leL us aL leasL noLe LhaL whaL many of Lhe cenLral endeavors of Lhls enLlre perlod have ln common ls a new Lype of lookloq wltblo. ln phllosophy, for Lhe flrsL Llme, Lhe Lheme ls noL WhaL ls Lhere Lo know?" buL Pow can l know lL?" noL WhaL ob[ecLs are ouL Lhere?" buL WhaL ls Lhe sLrucLure of Lhe sub[ecL LhaL wanLs Lo know?" lrom SocraLes' uelphlc know Lhyself" Lo Lhe exhausLlve lnLrospecLlons of Pume and Locke and uescarLes and kanL (and nagar[una and Carab uor[e and Chlh-l and la-Lsang), Lhe common Lheme heard over and over and over agaln: Look wlLhln. We see preclsely Lhe same Lhlng wlLh Lhe rlse of Lhe raLlonal rellglons," whlch does noL mean LhaL Lhese rellglons were ooly raLlonal-lndeed, Lhelr alm was Lo go even beyond raLlonallLy ln all cases. 8uL Lhese were Lhe flrsL greaL rellglons LhaL Look Lhelr sLand, oot ln a myLhologlcal panLheon of gods and goddesses oot tbete LhaL had Lo be appeased Lhrough maglc or myLhlc rlLual, buL raLher Look as Lhelr stottloq polnL: 1he klngdom of Peaven ls wltblo," as !esus of nazareLh would puL lL. Llkewlse, Lhe essenLlal message of CauLama Lhe 8uddha could be summarlzed ln Lhe sLaLemenL uon'L worry abouL gods, goddesses, splrlLs, Lhe afLerllfe, any of LhaL-raLher, look very carefully aL Lhe naLure of your own sub[ecL, your own self, and Lry Lo peneLraLe Lo Lhe boLLom of LhaL, for lf enllghLenmenL exlsLs, lL lles Lhrough an undersLandlng of (and golng beyond) Lhe sub[ecL lLself." All of LhaL was radlcally, toJlcolly new. lor preclsely Lhe same reasons, lndlvlduals were no longer ldenLlfled by Lhe slmple and unreflexlve toles LhaL Lhey played ln socleLy, as was Lhe case wlLh eLhnocenLrlc and myLhlc-membershlp socleLles. 8aLher, ln a posLconvenLlonal socleLy, lndlvlduals were ldenLlfled ln many ways by Lhelr own free cholces, os ftee sobjects, wlLhln Lhe broad consLralnLs of clvll law. ln oLher words, as Pabermas puLs lL, an eqo ldenLlLy replaced a tole ldenLlLy. 1hls domaln of decenLrallzed lndlvldual declslons was organlzed on unlversallsLlc prlnclples ln Lhe framework of bourgeols clvll law. lL was Lhereby supposed LhaL Lhe prlvaLe, auLonomous, legal sub[ecLs pursued Lhelr lnLeresLs ln Lhe morally neuLrallzed domaln of lnLercourse ln a purposlve-raLlonal manner, ln accord wlLh general [unlversal] maxlms. lrom Lhls converslon of Lhe producLlve sphere Lo unlversallsLlc [global] orlenLaLlons Lhere proceeded a sLrong sLrucLural compulslon for Lhe developmenL of personallLy sLrucLures LhaL replaced convenLlonal role ldenLlLy wlLh ego ldenLlLy. [As l sald, Pabermas and l boLh place Lhe beglnnlng of Lhls change Lo ego ldenLlLy ln Lhe mlddle of Lhe flrsL mlllennlum 8CL, buL lL reaches lLs frulLlon here, wlLh Lhe rlse of Lhe modern sLaLe, beglnnlng roughly ln Lhe slxLeenLh cenLury ln Lurope]. ln facL, emanclpaLed members of bourgeols socleLy, whose convenLlonal [soclocenLrlc] ldenLlLy had been shaLLered, could know Lhemselves as one wlLh Lhelr fellow clLlzens ln Lhelr characLer as (a) free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, (b) morally free sub[ecLs, and (c) pollLlcally free sub[ecLs (Lhe clLlzen as democraLlc clLlzen of Lhe sLaLe). 31 1hls ls an exLraordlnary developmenL, for many reasons (so much so LhaL Lhe Lhlrd volume ln Lhls serles ls devoLed Lo lL). 8uL, aL Lhls polnL, leL us brlefly reLurn Lo Lhe Lhemes ralsed earller ln Lhls chapLer and aL leasL noLe how Lhls new egolc-raLlonal emergence (wlLh, among many oLher Lhlngs, lLs dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere) would affecL Lhe sexes, for lL ls here LhaL we flnd some of Lhe mosL surprlslng developmenLs. Ll8L8A1lCn ln 1PL nCCSPL8L Accordlng Lo mosL radlcal femlnlsLs, one of Lhe speclal sLrengLhs of women ls Lhelr ages-old connecLlon wlLh Lhe LarLh, wlLh naLure, wlLh emboJlmeot (ln facL, a good summary of Lhe female value sphere accordlng Lo radlcal femlnlsm would be embodlmenL ln communlon"). 1he radlcal femlnlsLs malnLaln LhaL woman's speclal assoclaLlon wlLh embodled naLure needs Lo be honored and cherlshed and celebraLed. 1he connecLlon of woman and naLure ls Lhe source of female power and freedom and llberaLlon. Accordlng Lo mosL llberal femlnlsLs, lL ls preclsely Lhe opposlLe. 1he equaLlon of woman and naLure, Lhey malnLaln, ls tbe prlmary and overwhelmlng source of female oppresslon. 1he woman/naLure ldenLlLy," Lhey belleve, has been Lhe prlmary ldenLlflcaLlon LhaL men have, LhroughouL Lhe ages (llLerally from day one), used Lo keep women locked ouL of Lhe noosphere (ouL of Lhe publlc, producLlve, legal, culLural, power-wleldlng sphere). Woman = naLure" LranslaLes dlrecLly lnLo barefooL, pregnanL, and ln Lhe klLchen," and Lhe llberal femlnlsLs are alarmed LhaL Lhe radlcal femlnlsLs are even Lhlnklng such LhoughLs, leL alone champlonlng Lhem. 8uL my polnL ls LhaL, once Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere had dlfferenLlaLed, lL was-lL ls-an enLlrely dlfferenL world, where all Lhe old equaLlons suddenly Lake on enLlrely new meanlngs. And alLhough some of Lhose meanlngs mlghL lndeed have been oppresslve ln Lhe pasL, Lhey are noL necessarlly so ln Lhe new world (ln Lhe new worldspace, llLerally). llrsL, even lf Lhe radlcal femlnlsLs are rlghL, and woman's speclal power ls her rooLedness ln naLure and body (Lhe blosphere), noneLheless Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere meanL LhaL women were no longer [usL LhaL, or only LhaL, or excluslvely LhaL. Slnce Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere had aL Lhls polnL been clearly dlfferenLlaLed on a collecLlve scale, Lhls ls Lhe flrsL Llme LhaL Lhe excloslve ldenLlLy woman/naLure" was no longer needed, or approprlaLe, or even relevanL (as an excloslve ldenLlLy, whlch does noL deny Lhe radlcal femlnlsL clalm LhaL women have speclal connecLlons wlLh LarLh and body and naLure, lL means only LhaL LhaL ls noL oll Lhey are or have). lL was here, ln Lhe clearly dlfferenLlaLed noosphere, LhaL Lhere was Lhen no concelvable reason LhaL women could noL enLer Lhe world of pobllc oqeocy (brlnglng wlLh Lhem Lhelr own forms of communlon). 8lologlcal roles were no longer prlmary, physlcal sLrengLh was no longer Lhe ma[or deLermlnaLe of publlc power, Lhe parameLers of blospherlc evoluLlon were shadlng lnLo Lhose of noospherlc evoluLlon, such LhaL tlqbt began Lo replace mlqbt. And lL was tlqbt for Lhe female Lo assume culLural agency ln Lhe newly dlfferenLlaLed world, a rlghL LhaL wasn'L pteveoteJ before buL was slmply meooloqless before (on any collecLlve scale). And lndeed, lL ls preclsely here, and oevet before, LhaL we flrsL sLarL Lo see Lhe beglnnlng of a wldespread and organlzed women's movemenL, a movemenL noL [usL dlsconLenL abouL Lhls or LhaL parLlcular mlsLreaLmenL (whlch had happened slnce day one), buL abouL women's place ln socleLy oo tbe wbole. 1hls was radlcally new-a new emergence, a new Lranscendence, and a new dlfferenLlaLlon LhaL JemooJeJ o oew loteqtotloo-woman as publlc and hlsLorlcal oqeot (where hereLofore, as we saw, LhaL role largely fell Lo Lhe male as faLher). 1hus, we do noL flnd Lhe emergence of a wldespread women's movemenL prlor Lo Lhls Llme, noL because women were duped or bralnwashed or submlsslve chaLLel, buL because llberaLlon ln Lhe femlnlsL sense (woman as free agenL) was vlrLually meanlngless as long as Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere were noL clearly dlfferenLlaLed, flrsL, and as long as Lhe sLaLe and Lhe economlc sphere were noL clearly dlfferenLlaLed, second (boLh of whlch came Lo frulLlon, we have sald, around Lhe slxLeenLh cenLury). 32 AL LhaL polnL, and noL before, Lhe rlghLs of women as free agenLs would have profound meanlng and profound deslrablllLy. And lndeed, Lhe flrsL greaL femlnlsL LreaLlse anywhere ln hlsLory was Mary WollsLonecrafL's vloJlcotloo of tbe klqbts of womoo, wrlLLen ln 1792. 33 Women dld noL Lhen suddenly become sLrong and lnLelllgenL and responslble afLer a mllllon years of dupedom, buL raLher, uslng Lhe some lnLelllgence and sLrengLh and lnslghL wlLh whlch Lhey had mlned Lhe naLural wlsdom of Lhe blosphere for a mllllon years, Lhey now saw Lhe flrsL sLrucLural openlng ln Lhe noosphere and Lhey acLed lmmeJlotely on lL. lL would be a mere Lwo hundred years laLer-a bllnk ln evoluLlonary Llme-LhaL women would secure access Lo Lhe publlc and pollLlcal sphere of agency ln Lhe form of Lhe rlghL Lo voLe and Lhe rlghL Lo own possesslons. 1hls was blazlngly fasL acLlon on Lhe parL of women once Lhe sLrucLural condlLlons of soclal llfe had swlLched lLs cenLer of gravlLy from Lhe blosphere Lo Lhe noosphere. And so henceforLh, Lhe role of Lhe faLher (Lhe famlllallzaLlon of Lhe male") woolJ oo looqet sofflce to llok tbe two voloe spbetes, buL would have Lo be [olned by Lhe role of female as hlsLorlcal oqeot, equal noospherlc agenL (noL [usL embodled ln communlon, buL enculLuraLed ln agency). And here ls where Lhe llberal femlnlsL argumenL surely flnds lLs sLrongesL volce and lLs unshakable moral auLhorlLy. 8uL slnce Lhe noosphere Lranscends and lncludes Lhe blosphere, Lhere ls no reason LhaL Lhe llberal cannoL embrace Lhe radlcal and Lhen add lLs own exLra demands. lL's noL llke we're on a flaLland playlng fleld, where more of Lhe one means less of Lhe oLher. Cn a mulLldlmenslonal fleld, ln Lhe real kosmos, Lhe more of boLh, Lhe beLLer. ln oLher words, speclal rooLedness ln Lhe blosphere can lndeed be reasonably clalmed-Lhere ls llLerally o mlllloo yeots of rlch LradlLlon of Lhe wlse woman who feels Lhe currenLs of embodlmenL ln naLure and communlon, and celebraLes lL wlLh heallng rlLuals and knowlng ways of connecLlng wlsdom, a wlsdom LhaL does noL worshlp merely Lhe agenLlc sun and lLs glarlng brlghLness, buL flnds ln Lhe depLhs and Lhe organlc dark Lhe ways of belng llnked ln relaLlonshlp, LhaL puLs care above power and nurLurance above self-rlghLeousness, LhaL reweaves Lhe fragmenLs wlLh concern, and mldwlfes Lhe communlons and Lhe unsung connecLlons LhaL susLaln us each and all. And flnds, above all, LhaL belng a self ls always belng a self-ln-relaLlonshlp. 1he llberal poslLlon oughL Lo be able gladly Lo embrace all LhaL, as rooLedness, and Lhen add lLs own speclal and emergenL ldeas and demands-whlch are preclsely Lhose demands moJe posslble for Lhe flrsL Llme ln hlsLory by Lhls exLraordlnary new emergence, by Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, by Lhe emergence of global raLlonallLy-and Lhose demands are exacLly Lhe posslblllLles we [usL saw Pabermas elaboraLe, applled now Lo women as well: Lo be (a) free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, (b) morally free sub[ecLs, and (c) pollLlcally free sub[ecLs. And LhaL ls Lhe endurlng LruLh and sLrengLh of llberal femlnlsm, whlch arose aL Lhls Llme, and noL before Lhls Llme, preclsely Lo announce LhaL emergenL LruLh. 1here ls one flnal LwlsL ln Lhe sLory. lf Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe blosphere and noosphere (and Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree) began ln earnesL only wlLh modernlLy, lL ls noneLheless Lhe case, as we wlll see, LhaL Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon has Lended ln many respecLs Lo sllde lnLo Jlssoclotloo. And LhaL glves Lhe radlcal femlnlsL componenL of Lhe lnLegraLlon an lmporLanL and urgenL welghL. We have somehow forgoLLen our embodlmenL. And furLher: Slnce woman, body, naLure" have ofLen been dlfferenL aspecLs of Lhe same dlssoclaLed fabrlc, Lhls glves a cerLaln cogency Lo Lhe concerns of Lhe ecofemlnlsLs as well (Lhough we don'L necessarlly have Lo embrace Lhelr LheoreLlcal and hlsLorlcal explanaLlons, whlch Lend Lo Lhe ldeologlcal). 1hls ls all parL of Lhe new lnLegraLlon (cenLaurlc," vlslon-loglc") LhaL l have been referrlng Lo, and whlch lnvolves, among oLher Lhlngs, Lhe lnLegraLlon of mlnd and body, Lhe lnLegraLlon of noosphere and blosphere (oftet Lhelr dlfferenLlaLlon). And slnce, for wbotevet reasons, LhroughouL hlsLory and prehlsLory Lhere was a speclal connecLlon beLween woman, naLure, and body, 34 Lhen Lhe lnLegraLlon of mlnd and body means vlrLually Lhe same as Lhe lnLegraLlon of male and female-ln each of us. AL LhaL polnL, botb Lhe male and Lhe female would have one fooL ln Lhe blosphere ooJ one fooL ln Lhe noosphere-an emergenL lnLegraLlon uLLerly oopteceJeoteJ, and Lhe exacL meanlng of whlch we are all sLlll Lrylng Lo flgure ouL. Whlch ls why Lhe pasL ls of no real help here. Calllng on lnherlLed archeLypes and old myLhologlcal moLlfs ls of llLLle help ln Lhls new, emergenL, and unprecedenLed endeavor. Llkewlse, many ecofemlnlsLs feel Lhey have Lo be able Lo polnL Lo a pasL socleLy (almosL always horLlculLural) where women were equal" ln order Lo show LhaL such equallLy ls aL leasL a posslblllLy of human naLure and human socleLles. 8uL my polnL ls LhaL Lhe posslblllLy lLself ls an emetqeot-lL oevet was, buL ls now comlng Lo be-and so we don'L oeeJ Lo wlldly relnLerpreL Lhe pasL ln order Lo flnd hope for Lhe fuLure. We are looklng aL an emergence, noL an exhumaLlon, aL a blrLh, noL a dlslnLermenL. So l suppose lL ls all somehow deeply symbollc LhaL Mary WollsLonecrafL dled glvlng blrLh Lo Mary Shelley, who wroLe ltookeostelo. A deaLh, a blrLh, a monsLer. 1he lmage of LhaL monsLer!" seems Lo flL how boLh men and women vlew each oLher as Lhelr new and unprecedenLed roles ln Lhe noosphere conLlnue Lo be worked ouL, and why, l suppose, a cerLaln klndness on boLh sldes ls so necessary. 1hroughouL Lhls new and dlfflculL lnLegraLlon-Lhls deaLh and Lhls new blrLh-each sex ls Lhe monsLer of Lhe oLher's creaLlon. vlSlCn-LCClC/LAnL1A8? Whlch brlngs us up Lo Lhe presenL, and Lhe new lnLegraLlon LhaL ls sLruggllng Lo emerge, ln all four quadranLs. . . . We are concerned no longer wlLh culLural lnflecLlons, buL wlLh a passage from one culLure sLage Lo anoLher. ln all prevlous ages, only resLrlcLed porLlons of Lhe surface of Lhe earLh were known. Men looked ouL from Lhe narrowesL, upon a somewhaL larger nelghborhood, and beyond LhaL, a greaL unknown. 1hey were all, so Lo say, lnsular: bound ln. Whereas our vlew ls conflned no longer Lo a spoL of space on Lhe surface of Lhls earLh. lL surveys Lhe whole of Lhe planeL. And Lhls facL, Lhls lack of horlzon, ls someLhlng new. 1hose words, by Lhe greaL Leo lrobenlus ln hls Mooomeoto 1ettotom, were wrlLLen ln 1929. 1he prevlous age, LhaL of Lhe early emergence of Lhe raLlonal and lLs flrsL exLraordlnary dlscoverles, lrobenlus called Lhe MonumenLal Age, and Lhe openlng of Lhe new, [usL now under way, he called Lhe Clobal or World CulLure. As raLlonallLy conLlnues lLs quesL for a Lruly unlversal or global or planeLary ouLlook, noncoerclve ln naLure, lL evenLually glves way Lo a Lype of cognlLlon l call vlslon-loglc or neLwork-loglc. Where raLlonallLy glves all posslble perspecLlves, vlslon-loglc adds Lhem up lnLo a LoLallLy, whlch ls slmply Lhe new and hlgher lnLerlor holon. Auroblndo gave Lhe classlc descrlpLlon of vlslon-loglc, whlch can freely express lLself ln slngle ldeas, buL lLs mosL characLerlsLlc movemenL ls a mass ldeaLlon, a sysLem or LoLallLy of LruLh-seelng aL a slngle vlew, Lhe relaLlons of ldea wlLh ldea, of LruLh wlLh LruLh, self-seen ln Lhe lnLegral whole." WhaL l am Lrylng Lo do ln Lhls book, and whaL you are Lrylng Lo do as you read lL (or oLher slmllar books), ls use vlslon-loglc: noL [usL reasonably declde Lhe lndlvldual lssues, buL hold Lhem LogeLher aL once ln mlnd, and [udge how Lhey all flL LogeLher as a LruLh-vlslon. ln oLher words, vlslon-loglc ls a hlgher holon LhaL opetotes opoo (and Lhus Lranscends) lLs [unlor holons, such as slmple raLlonallLy lLself. As such, vlslon-loglc can hold ln mlnd conLradlcLlons, lL can unlfy opposlLes, lL ls dlalecLlcal and nonllnear, and lL weaves LogeLher whaL oLherwlse appear Lo be lncompaLlble noLlons, as long as Lhey relaLe LogeLher ln Lhe new and hlgher holon, oeqoteJ ln Lhelr parLlallLy buL ptesetveJ ln Lhelr poslLlve conLrlbuLlons. 1hls ls, for example, whaL Pegel called 8eason" as opposed Lo Lhe undersLandlng" (or Lhe slmpler, emplrlc- analyLlc raLlonallLy of proposlLlons, or ArlsLoLellan loglc). And Lhls ls why Pegel malnLalned LhaL Lhe cenLral deflnlng characLerlsLlc of 8eason (vlslon-loglc) was lLs capaclLy Lo unlfy opposlLes and see ldenLlLy-ln-dlfference. (As such, Pegel was one of Lhe flrsL greaL phllosophers of vlslon-loglc, as were Schelllng, WhlLehead, and a few oLhers we wlll explore laLer, and noL [usL because of Lhelr sysLemaLlc wholeness-LhaL had been aLLempLed before-buL because of Lhelr expllclL grasp of ldenLlLy-ln-dlfference or nonblfurcaLed 8eason" or vlslon-loglc, beyond whlch lles Lhe LransraLlonal alLogeLher.) And lL ls vlslon-loglc LhaL drlves and underlles Lhe posslblllLy of a Lruly planeLary culLure (or, raLher, Lhe flrsL Lrue forms of planeLary organlzaLlon, whlch Lhemselves wlll mosL llkely evolve accordlng Lo yeL hlgher caLegorles, as we wlll see). 8ecall LhaL we lefL off Pabermas's accounL wlLh Lhe emergence (beglnnlng on a collecLlve scale around slxLeenLh- cenLury Lurope) of an eqo lJeotlty (flrsL secured by men, relaLlvely swlfLly followed by women) whereln oll people were consldered (1) free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, (2) morally free sub[ecLs, and (3) pollLlcally free sub[ecLs as clLlzens of Lhe democraLlc sLaLe (whlch also, of course, for Lhe flrsL Llme ln hlsLory, would puL a flnal end Lo slavery and back LhaL emanclpaLlon by law). 8uL, Pabermas conLlnues, Lhese absLracL deLermlnaLlons are besL sulLed Lo Lhe ldenLlLy of wotlJ cltlzeos, noL Lo LhaL of clLlzens of a pottlcolot sLaLe LhaL has Lo malnLaln [and defend] lLself agalnsL oLher sLaLes." 33 ln oLher words, legally, morally, and pollLlcally free sub[ecLs: Lhls ls a sLaLe of affalrs LhaL acLually applles Lo world clLlzens, noL [usL Lo clLlzens of Lhls or LhaL sLaLe. 1he free sub[ecL, creaLed by raLlonallLy, could noL easlly or for long be conflned Lo Lhe sLaLe, buL belonged raLher Lo whaL Pabermas calls global forms of lnLercourse" and permanenL varlaLlon of all reference sysLems"-LhaL ls, vlslon-loglc. 1hus, Lrue world clLlzenshlp belongs noL Lo naLlonal organlzaLlons buL Lo planeLary organlzaLlons (as Pabermas puLs lL, 1he need for coordlnaLlon aL a supra-naLlonal level cannoL easlly be saLlsfled as long as governmenLs have Lo leglLlmaLe Lhemselves excluslvely ln Lerms of naLlonal declslons"). 36 1he modern naLlon-sLaLe, founded upon lnlLlal raLlonallLy, has run lnLo lLs own lnLernal conLradlcLlons or llmlLaLlons, and can only be released by a vlslon- loglc/planeLary LransformaLlon. 1PL CLn1Au8 ln vlSlCn-LCClC 1he worldvlew or worldspace of vlslon-loglc l also refer Lo as exlsLenLlal" and cenLaurlc." LxlsLenLlal" we wlll examlne ln a momenL. CenLaur" ls Lhe myLhlc beasL, half human and half horse, whlch l (and oLhers such as PuberL 8enolL and Lrlk Lrlkson) have Laken as a symbol of Lhe lnLegraLlon of body and mlnd, or blosphere and noosphere. lor lf lL ls Lrue LhaL, a few hundred years ago, we flnally succeeded ln clearly dlfferenLlaLlng Lhese Lwo greaL domalns, lL ls equally Lrue LhaL we have noL yeL found a way Lo lnLegraLe Lhem. Cn Lhe conLrary: Lhe necessary dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere has now moved clearly lnLo Lhe beglnnlng sLages of Jlssoclotloo, and, lndeed, some ecologlsLs feel LhaL Lhe dlssoclaLlon ls fasL becomlng lrreverslble. 8e LhaL as lL may, LhaL some sorL of dlssoclaLlon ls under way ls all buL undenlable. lL ls Lhe lnLegraLlve power of vlslon-loglc, l belleve, and noL Lhe lndlssoclaLlon of Lrlbal maglc or Lhe lmperlallsm of myLhlc lnvolvemenL LhaL ls desperaLely needed on a global scale. lor lL ls vlslon-loglc wlLh lLs cenLaurlc/planeLary worldvlew LhaL, ln my oplnlon, holds Lhe only hope for Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe blosphere and noosphere, Lhe supranaLlonal organlzaLlon of planeLary consclousness, Lhe genulne recognlLlon of ecologlcal balance, Lhe unresLralned and unforced forms of global dlscourse, Lhe nondomlnaLlng and noncoerclve forms of federaLed sLaLes, Lhe unresLralned flow of worldwlde communlcaLlve exchange, Lhe producLlon of genulne world clLlzens, and Lhe enculLuraLlon of female agency (l.e., Lhe lnLegraLlon of male and female ln boLh Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere)-all of whlch, ln my oplnlon, ls neverLheless slmply Lhe plaLform for Lhe Lruly lnLeresLlng forms of hlgher and Lranspersonal sLaLes of consclousness lylng yeL ln our collecLlve fuLure-lf Lhere ls one. !ean Cebser refers Lo Lhe emerglng vlslon-loglc as Lhe loteqtol-opetspectlvol" mlnd, whlch ls a parLlcularly apL phrase. 1he prevlous sLrucLure (Lhe egolc-raLlonal), Cebser refers Lo as Lhe raLlonal-perspecLlval," because raLlonallLy can lndeed Lake dlfferenL petspectlves, as we saw. 8uL vlslon-loglc, or Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval mlnd, adds up all Lhe perspecLlves toot eosemble, and Lherefore ptlvlleqes oo petspectlve os flool: lL ls aperspecLlval. 1he aperspecLlval mlnd, ln oLher words, ls holonlc Lhrough and Lhrough: conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs forever. Cf course, every sLrucLure of consclousness ls acLually holonlc (Lhere are only holons), buL vlslon-loglc consclously grasps Lhls facL for Lhe flrsL Llme, and Lhus flnds lLs own operaLlon lncreaslngly LransparenL Lo lLself (Lhls Lransparency," accordlng Lo Cebser, ls a prlmary characLerlsLlc of Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval mlnd.) AperspecLlvlLy expresses lLself ln a sLrucLure of consclousness whlch ls ln process of emerglng and ls, Lherefore, new," he says. We would llke Lo deslgnaLe Lhls new sLrucLure Lhe 'lnLegral sLrucLure' of consclousness, and Lhe modallLy of Lhe world ln Lhe process of emerglng Lhe 'aperspecLlve world.'" Cebser's masLerplece, 1be vet-lteseot Otlqlo, was compleLed ln 1933, Lhe culmlnaLlon of several decades of LhoughL and research. Pe dled ln 1973 and Lhus he dld noL llve Lo see Lhe full exLenL of Lhe exploslon of aperspecLlvlsm ln Loday's posLmodern world. noL only has Lhe aperspecLlval vlslon-loglc deflned posLmodernlLy (ln lLs besL aspecLs), lL has also deflned many of posLmodernlLy's self-consclous problems: lndlvlduals are noL only aware of holonlc and aperspecLlval space, buL are ofLen LoLally losL ln lL. 1he posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs, for example, have gone from saylng LhaL no conLexL, no perspecLlve, ls flnal, Lo saylng LhaL no perspecLlve has any advanLage over any oLher, aL whlch polnL Lhey careen unconLrollably ln Lhelr own labyrlnLh of ever-recedlng holons, losL ln aperspecLlval space. 1haL all perspecLlves lnLerrelaLe, or LhaL no perpsecLlve ls flnal (aperspecLlvlsm), does noL mean LhaL Lhere are no relaLlve merlLs among Lhem. 1he posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs go from saylng Lhere ls no flnal perspecLlve" (or perspecLlves are boundless") Lo saylng Lherefore Lhere ls no advanLage ln any perspecLlve over anoLher." 1hls levellng of perspecLlves ls noL an lnLerrelaLlon of all perspecLlves buL ls lLself merely one parLlcular and coverLly prlvlleged perspecLlve (and Lhus ends up, as we have seen, belng perfecLly self-conLradlcLory: Lhere ls no advanLaged perspecLlve excepL mlne, whlch malnLalns LhaL all oLher perspecLlves are noL so prlvlleged). 1he posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs confuse Lhelr own aperspecLlval madness wlLh llLerary and pollLlcal crlLlque, followlng, l presume, Lhe ploneerlng lnsanlLy of 8aLallle. noneLheless l belleve, and l Lhlnk Cebser would agree, LhaL recenL evenLs have, lf anyLhlng, sLrengLhened hls Lhesls: for beLLer or for worse, Lhe world ls ln Lhe mldsL of Lhe LorLurous blrLh Lhroes of a collecLlve emergence of an enLlrely new sLrucLure of consclousness, Lhe cenLaur ln vlslon-loglc, Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval mlnd. Cebser refers Lo such LransformaLlons as muLaLlons ln consclousness," emphaslzlng Lhelr radlcally emergenL naLure. noneLheless, each sLrucLure unfolds holarchlcally, Lranscendlng and lncludlng lLs predecessor(s). none of Lhese muLaLlons of consclousness ls responslble for Lhe loss of prevlous posslblllLles and properLles, buL suddenly lncorporaLes Lhem lnLo a new sLrucLure. WlLhln Lhe muLaLlons of consclousness Lhere Lakes place a process of re- arrangemenL beyond Lhe reach of mere space-Llme-bound evenLs, an [emergenL] process, whlch manlfesLs lLself dlsconLlnuously, or by leaps and bounds. WlLh every new muLaLlon of awareness, consclousness unfolds more powerfully. . . ." 37 1hls new lnLegral-aperspecLlval sLrucLure ls, of course, loteqtotlve. 8uL lnLegral vlslon-loglc ls noL merely a sum of prevlous parLs-LhaL, agaln, would be mere horlzonLal expanslonlsm, noL verLlcal and creaLlve emergence (and Lranscendence). As Cebser says, 1he parL ls Lo a cerLaln degree always a beLrayal of Lhe whole, for whlch reason Lhe sum of Lhe parLs also only ylelds a flcLlLlous buL noL an efflcaclous whole." Llkewlse, Lhe dlalecLlcal naLure of vlslon- loglc-LhaL ls, Lhe unlLy-of-opposlLes concelved menLally (as muLual lnLerpeneLraLlon")-ls a hallmark of Lhe lnLegral sLrucLure, ls lnLrlnslc Lo Lhe emergenL aperspecLlval consclousness." 8uL Lhe emphasls, lndeed, ls on lnLegraLlon. As Ceorg leuersLeln, Cebser's ablesL lnLerpreLer, says of Lhe lnLegral- aperspecLlval sLrucLure: 1hls nascenL sLrucLure of consclousness, for Lhe flrsL Llme ln human hlsLory, permlLs Lhe consclous lnLegraLlon of all prevlous (buL co-presenL) sLrucLures, and Lhrough Lhls acL of lnLegraLlon Lhe human personallLy becomes, as lL were, LransparenL Lo lLself. . . ." 38 Llkewlse, cenLaurlc-lnLegral awareness lnLegraLes Lhe body and mlnd ln a new Lransparency, Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere, once flnally dlfferenLlaLed, can now be lnLegraLed ln a new embrace. leuersLeln Lherefore refers Lo Lhls newly emerglng sLrucLure as psychosomaLlc," lnvolvlng Lhe resurrecLlon of Lhe body," evldenced ln such movemenLs as hollsLlc medlclne and ecologlcal senslLlvlLy. lL ls a whole-bodlly evenL," he says, feellng Lhrough Lhe llveJ body. lL does noL Lake fllghL from bodlly exlsLence ln any form. 8aLher lL ls grounded ln one's unmlLlgaLed accepLance of, or prlmal LrusL ln, corporeallLy. lt ls tbe ttoospoteot boJy-mloJ." reclsely because Lhls cenLaurlc awareness Lranscends (buL lncludes) so much of Lhe verbal-menLal-egolc dlmenslon, LhaL enLlre dlmenslon lLself becomes locteosloqly objectlve, lncreaslngly LransparenL, Lo cenLaurlc consclousness. Where prevlously Lhe verbal-menLal-egolc self used Lhose sLrucLures as someLhlng wltb wblcb Lo vlew (and co-creaLe) Lhe world, now Lhose sLrucLures Lhemselves lncreaslngly become an ob[ecL of awareness and lnvesLlgaLlon by cenLaurlc consclousness (lL ls noL [usL Lhe mlnd looklng ob[ecLlvely and represenLaLlonally" aL exLernal ob[ecLs-Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm"-buL Lhe mlnd looklng aL Lhe mlnd lnLersub[ecLlvely). 1hls ls behlnd Cebser's clalm LhaL lnLegral-aperspecLlval consclousness ls especlally a consclousness of language. As he puLs lL, Language lLself ls LreaLed as a prlmordlal phenomenon by recognlzlng lLs orlglnaLlng-creaLlve naLure. SLrucLurally, a new esLlmaLlon of grammaLlcal aspecLs and a novel use of synLacLlcal freedom are evldenL" (and here we are on Lhe Lrall of loucaulL and uerrlda, and Lhe whole llngulsLlc Lurn" daLlng especlally Lo de Saussure). Llkewlse, Cebser relaLes Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval sLrucLure Lo Lhe emergence of mosL forms of phenomenology, wlLh Lhelr emphasls on a posLraLlonal paradlgm" LhaL ls also embodled." Pe parLlcularly focuses on 8ergson, Pusserl, and Peldegger, alLhough he had some sharp crlLlclsms of Lhem as well (Lhe lasL-named ls also a ploneer" of posLsLrucLurallsm, and hls noLlon of Lhe uesttoktloo of raLlonallsL onLology appears ln uerrlda as deconsLrucLlon). Cebser's full genlus comes Lo Lhe fore ln hls brllllanL descrlpLlons, across vlrLually all dlsclpllnes, of Lhe muLaLlon, now globally ln progress, from raLlonal-perspecLlvlsm Lo lnLegral-aperspecLlvlsm, and l cannoL hope Lo do any sorL of [usLlce Lo hls exhllaraLlng presenLaLlon. (8eaders are urged Lo consulL 1be vet-lteseot Otlqlo-lL ls by far Lhe ploneerlng book ln emergenL worldvlews"-and an excellenL lnLroducLlon, Ceorg leuersLeln's 5ttoctotes of cooscloosoess.) Cebser knows Lhls aperspecLlval sLrucLure so lnLlmaLely LhaL he can spoL even Lhe mosL LellLale slgns of lLs emergence ln vlrLually any endeavor. Pere are [usL a few of Lhe areas he covers ln enormous deLall (and remember, 1be vet-lteseot Otlqlo was publlshed ln 1933, Lhe followlng llsL Lherefore lncludes only some of Lhe very earllesL slgns of Lhe emergence of vlslon-loglc, of Lhose movemenLs LhaL would be posLraLlonal" or posL-sLrucLural" or posLmodern" ln Lhe besL sense, Lhose movemenLs aLLempLlng Lo overcome Lhe self-deflnlng sub[ecL" and Lhe Age of Man," Lhose movemenLs LhaL would polnL noL [usL Lo a dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, buL Lo Lhelr lnLegraLlon as well): bloloqy (e.g., Pans urlesch, Pugo de vrles), motbemotlcs (PllberL's axlomaLlcs), psycboloqy (boLh lreud and !ung ln Lhelr own ways wlLh an emphasls on depLh psychology), pbllosopby (llngulsLlcs, phenomenology), jotlsptoJeoce (where care and responslblllLy have enLered Lhe language of law ln [uxLaposlLlon Lo [usLlce and rlghLs . . . Lhls leads Lo 'open [usLlce,' a hlLherLo lmposslble flexlblllLy"-noLlce Lhe lnLegraLlon of agency-rlghLs and communlon-responslblllLy, whlch we posLulaLed as one of Lhe cenLaurlc hallmarks), ecooomlcs (leuersLeln Lakes L. l. Schumacher Lo be mosL recenLly represenLaLlve), blstoty (e.g., Arnold 1oynbee and Swlss hlsLorlan !. 8. von Salls), moslc (Schoenberg, SLravlnsky-Lhe new muslc ls aperspecLlval lnasmuch as lL seeks Lo overcome Lhe earller flxlLles of meLer or LonallLy as aspecLs of aesLheLlcs"), otcbltectote (lrank Lloyd WrlghL, Le Corbusler, Alvar AalLo), palnLlng (uelacrolx revolLed agalnsL Lhe Lyranny of Lhe sLralghL llne, and Cezanne flrsL serlously challenged Lhe relgn of perspecLlvlLy"), and, of course, Lhe new pbyslcs, assoclaLed especlally wlLh LlnsLeln and lanck (alLhough Lhls ls noL, as popularlzers such as lred Alan Wolf would have lL, a proof of mysLlclsm", as leuersLeln commenLs, lL would be lmprudenL Lo lgnore Lhe myLhologlzlng Lrend wlLhln Lhe new physlcs, whlch Cebser would readlly have recognlzed as regresslve raLher Lhan lnLegraLlve"). As for Lhe cenLaurlc-lnLegral dlmenslon belng a fully worldcenLrlc vlslon, Cebser refers Lo lL as oolvetsol-loteqtol" and world open," world LransparenL"-whlch leuersLeln, correcLly l belleve, equaLes wlLh Lhe rlslng Clobal or laneLary CulLure. ln Cebser's words, Lhe perspecLlves of Lhe egolc-raLlonal world are replaced by Lhe open expanse of Lhe open world," Lhe opetspectlvol wotlJ"-Lhe culmlnaLlon of Lhe worldcenLrlc vlslon sLarLed by raLlonallLy and compleLed by vlslon-loglc. nelLher Cebser nor l (nor Murphy nor Pabermas, nor any of Lhe evoluLlonary-orlenLed LheorlsLs) see Lhe emergence of Lhe aperspecLlval worldcenLrlc" sLrucLure as belng a sure Lhlng, as belng somehow guaranLeed. noL only does evoluLlon, as Mlchael Murphy puL lL, meander more Lhan progress, noL only, when lL does progress, ls Lhere always Lhe dlalecLlc of progress", Lhere ls also Lhe ever-lurklng posslblllLy LhaL Lhe whole Lhlng mlghL slmply blow up, LhaL evoluLlon wlll Lake a wrong Lurn (ln Lhe shorL run), buL a wrong Lurn LhaL lncludes us, LhaL Lhe sLresses lnduced by Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere wlll make Lhe whole sysLem unsusLalnable. LvoluLlon, we have amply seen, ls noL predlcLable, only reconsLrucLable. nor does Lhe facL LhaL Lhe lnLegral sLrucLure ls lnLegral guaranLee LhaL Lhe necessary lnLegraLlon wlll ln facL occur. 1he clalm ls slmply, Lo puL lL ln Lhe Lerms we have been uslng, LhaL Lhe lnLegral sLrucLure coo lnLegraLe Lhe physlosphere, Lhe blosphere, and Lhe noosphere-lL has Lhe poteotlol for LhaL lnLegraLlon. WheLher LhaL poLenLlal becomes acLual ls up Lo you and me, lL depends on Lhe concreLe acLlons LhaL each of us Lakes. As always, we have Lo make Lhe fuLure LhaL ls glven Lo us. 1PL lCu8 CuAu8An1S llgure 3-1 ls a summary of Lhe four quadranLs as we have followed Lhem ln Lhe evoluLlonary curve Lhus far. Llke all dlagrams, lL ls very schemaLlc and leaves ouL more Lhan lL lncludes. 8uL lL wlll serve Lo lndlcaLe Lhe four quadranLs and a handful of Lhelr mllesLones up Lo Lhe presenL. A few polnLs abouL Lhe dlagram: ln Lhe Lower-8lghL quadranL, where evoluLlon enLers Lhe human domaln, l have only lndlcaLed Lhe mosL concreLe forms of geopollLlcal sLrucLures. 8uL Lhls quadranL lncludes Lhe extetlot of any of Lhe soclol aspecLs of human lnLeracLlon, lncludlng forces of producLlon and Lechno-economlc modes (bow and arrow, horLlculLural Lools, agrarlan lmplemenLs, lndusLrlal machlnery, compuLers, and so on), archlLecLural sLrucLures, LransporLaLlon sysLems, physlcal lnfrasLrucLure, even wrlLLen (maLerlal) forms of books, legal codes, llngulsLlc sLrucLures, verbal slgnlflers, and so forLh. Llkewlse, ln Lhe Lower LefL, Lhe culLural, l have lncluded only worldvlews, buL Lhls quadranL also lncludes lnLerpreLlve undersLandlngs, culLural meanlngs ln general, collecLlve and group ldenLlLles, lnLersub[ecLlve moral and eLhlcal undersLandlng, and so on. 39 ln Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL, as evoluLlon moves lnLo Lhe human domaln, l have lndlcaLed sLaLes marked by Sl1, Sl2, and Sl3. 1hese are Lhe sLrucLure-funcLlons of Lhe human braln LhaL correspond wlLh concreLe operaLlonal, formal operaLlonal, and vlslon-loglc. 1hese are currenLly belng mapped uslng L1 and oLher sophlsLlcaLed lnsLrumenLs, and l am slmply lndlcaLlng Lhe correlaLlon, whaLever lL Lurns ouL Lo be, wlLh Lhese symbols. Lverybody agrees LhaL menLal sLaLes and sLrucLures have some sorL of correlaLes ln braln physlology, and Lhls ls all l mean by Lhe symbols Sl1, eLc. 40 llqote 5-1. 5ome uetolls of tbe loot OooJtoots Cf course, we can also draw Lhls dlagram as a serles of lnLerfoldlng or nesLed pyramlds, so LhaL several of Lhe mulLldlmenslonal relaLlonshlps wlLhln each quadranL could be beLLer lndlcaLed. 8uL Lhen lL would begln Lo lose Lhe advanLage of a cerLaln Lype of slmpllclLy. As long as lLs schemaLlc and slmpllfylng naLure ls kepL flrmly ln mlnd, Lhls flgure wlll sufflce. We wlll conLlnue Lo draw on Lhe lmpllcaLlons of Lhls dlagram-and Lhe four quadranLs-as we conLlnue Lo unfold our narraLlve. 1PL WC8Lu ln 18AnSlC8MA1lCn AbouL Lhe cenLaurlc/planeLary LransformaLlon, now halLlngly buL unmlsLakably ln progress, l wlll make only a few passlng commenLs now (all of volume 3 ls devoLed Lo Lhls Loplc). 1he prevlous, myLhlc-lmperlal emplres (LasL and WesL, norLh and SouLh), wlLh Lhelr lnherenL domlnaLor hlerarchles, were deconsLrucLed by Lhe rlse of egolc-raLlonallLy (wherever lL dld arlse) and Lhe swlLch from a role ldenLlLy Lo an ego ldenLlLy, and Lhe correlaLlve rlse of Lhe democraLlc sLaLe, where domlnaLor hlerarchles were replaced, ln law, by (1) free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, (2) morally free sub[ecLs, and (3) pollLlcally free sub[ecLs as clLlzens of Lhe democraLlc sLaLe. 1here sLlll exlsL, of course, myLhlc-lmperlallsms LhaL wlsh Lo domlnaLe Lhe world-LhaL ls, lmperlallsms LhaL wlll accord you Lhe sLaLus of equal world clLlzen lf you embrace Lhe parLlcular myLhology (wlLh lLs parLlcular domlnaLor hlerarchy). lf you don'L wanL Lo embrace Lhe myLhology, Lhey wlll be glad Lo help you do so. We sLlll hear Lhe rumble of myLhologlcal fundamenLallsm arlse from all corners of Lhe globe, ln secular and rellglous gulses, none of whlch conceal Lhelr lnherenL drlve Lo salvaLlon vla domlnaLlon (and Lhe women ln Lhese socleLles supporL Lhe domlnaLlon every blL as much as Lhe men do). 8uL Lhe rlse of raLlonallLy-alLhough lL generaLed Lhe worldspace ln whlch all peoples coolJ be recognlzed as free and equal sub[ecLs of Lhe law and pollLlcally free sub[ecLs as clLlzens-dld noL produce, or has noL yeL produced, LransformaLlons of a qlobol (and noL [usL naLlonal) naLure LhaL would seek Lo soclally empower Lhe world ln a noncoerclve and nondomlnaLlng fashlon, LhaL would be drlven by a recognlLlon of whaL we all have ln common as human belngs and noL whaL we have ln common merely as bellevers ln a parLlcular and dlvlslve myLhology or as members of a parLlcular eLhnocenLrlc Lrlbe (however much Lhose dlfferences would also be cherlshed and honored ln a wotlJceottlc conLexL). WlLh one ma[or excepLlon. 1he only serlous qlobol soclal movemenL, ln all of hlsLory Lo daLe, has been Lhe lnLernaLlonal labor movemenL (Marxlsm), whlch had one greaL, endurlng, and leglLlmaLe sLrengLh-and one alLogeLher faLal weakness. 1he sLrengLh was LhaL lL dlscovered a common LralL LhaL all humans possess, regardless of race, creed, naLlonallLy, myLhology, or gender: we all have Lo secure our bodlly survlval Lhrough soclal labor of one sorL or anoLher. We all have Lo eaL. And Lhus soclal labor puLs us all ln Lhe same boaL, makes us all world clLlzens. 1hls movemenL was genulne enough, and serlous enough, and moJe socb lmmeJlote qooJ seose to so mooy people LhaL lL seL off Lhe flrsL modern qlobolly loteot revoluLlons from 8ussla Lo Chlna Lo SouLh Amerlca. Such for lLs genulnely noble sLrengLhs. lLs faLal weakness was LhaL lL dld noL [usL qtoooJ hlgher culLural endeavors ln Lhe economlc or maLerlal realm (Lhe physlosphere), lL dld noL [usL qtoooJ Lhem ln soclal labor and maLerlal exchange-lL teJoceJ Lhem Lo LhaL exchange, reduced Lhem Lo Lhelr lowesL common denomlnaLor, reduced Lhem Lo maLerlal producLlons and maLerlal values and maLerlal means, wlLh all hlgher producLlons, especlally splrlLuallLy, servlng only as Lhe oplaLe of Lhe masses. 41 ln a nuLshell, LhaL movemenL dld noL [usL ground Lhe noosphere ln Lhe physlosphere (whlch ls vlLally lmporLanL because of compound lndlvlduallLy), lL reduced Lhe noosphere Lo Lhe physlosphere, such an egreglous reducLlon LhaL lL Look evoluLlon less Lhan a mere cenLury Lo begln Lo erase LhaL mlsLake ln earnesL. 1hls reducLlonlsLlc LhrusL of Marxlsm, because lL could flnd no supporL ln Lhe real kosmos, had Lo be converLed lnLo a rellglous myLhology, and Lhus had Lo press lLs vlslon ln an lmperlallsLlc fashlon. 1he oLher ma[or movemenL LhaL has shown, or has clalmed, some posslblllLles for underplnnlng a global clLlzenshlp ls Lhe Creens movemenL. Whlle l have enormous sympaLhy for LhaL movemenL as a pottlcolot endeavor, l belleve lL comes nowhere close Lo havlng Lhe lnLegraLlve poLenLlal for a planeLary federaLlon of world clLlzens freely embraclng lLs LeneLs (forced Lo embrace lLs LeneLs, yes, buL LhaL ls noL unresLralned global dlscourse buL a new coerclon). lor Lhe Creens are ln essenLlally Lhe same predlcamenL as Lhe MarxlsLs-boLh of Lhem are reduclng hlgher levels Lo lower levels slmply because of Lhe undlspuLed facL LhaL Lhe lower ls lndeed mote fooJomeotol (and Lherefore necessary buL noL sufflclenL for Lhe llfe of Lhe hlgher and deeper). Where Lhe MarxlsLs Lended Lo reduce all concerns Lo Lhe maLerlal exchanges of Lhe physlosphere, Lhe Creens Lend Lo reduce all concerns Lo Lhe ecologlcal exchanges of Lhe blosphere. 1hls ls deflnlLely a sLep up from Lhe MarxlsLs, buL lL does noL escape Lhe facL LhaL lL ls sLlll a Lype of lowesL common denomlnaLor approach, whlch ls Lrue and lmporLanL as far as lL goes (as ls Marxlsm), buL caLasLrophlc beyond LhaL parLlcular polnL, and uLLerly lncapable of moblllzlng world clLlzens beyooJ LhaL parLlcular polnL. 1he Creens use, as Lhelr phllosophlcal plaLform, Lwo cenLral noLlons: (1) Lhe culLural noosphere ls a parL of Lhe larger whole of Lhe blosphere, and (2) Lhe web-of-llfe sysLems Lheory. 1he flrsL noLlon ls lncorrecL, as we have seen, and Lhe second noLlon ls a form of subLle reducLlonlsm, as we have also seen. As such, any movemenL based on Lhose LeneLs ls unllkely Lo secure global lnLegraLlon and susLalnable balance. WhaL ls needed, raLher, ls a more lnLegraLlve approach LhaL works wlLh our presenL hlsLorlcal acLuallLles. A planeLary culLure wlll ln effecL have Lo deal wlLh equlLable maLerlal-economlc dlsLrlbuLlon ln Lhe physlosphere (Lhe endurlng concern of Marx, even lf we re[ecL hls parLlcular soluLlons), and lL wlll have Lo deal wlLh susLalnable ecologlcal dlsLrlbuLlon ln Lhe blosphere (Lhe endurlng conLrlbuLlon of Lhe Creens). 8uL lL wlll have Lo go much furLher and deal speclflcally and nonreducLlonlsLlcally wlLh Lhe noosphere and lts dlsLrlbuLlons and dlsLorLlons, and lL wlll have Lo do so wlLh someLhlng oLher Lhan reducLlonlsLlc web-of-llfe Lheorles, lf lL ls Lo freely engage Lhe moLlvaLlon of an enLlre globe. lL wlll have Lo work Loward speclflc Lheorles of free noospherlc exchange, lncludlng buL Lranscendlng ecologlcal concerns.42 Soclal labor could unlLe world clLlzens Lo Lhe exLenL, buL only Lo Lhe exLenL, LhaL we all share maLLer ln common. 1he Creens can unlLe world clLlzens Lo Lhe exLenL, buL only Lo Lhe exLenL, LhaL we all share bodles ln common. 8uL lL wlll Lake a vlslon-loglc movemenL of Lremendous lnLegraLlve power (lnLegral-aperspecLlval as unlversal-lnLegral) ln order Lo unlLe world clLlzens on Lhe ceotootlc basls LhaL we all share maLLer ooJ bodles ooJ mlnds ln common (noL Lo menLlon a SplrlL and a Self prlor Lo oll LhaL). 1he Creens have produced a promlslng plaLform, buL lf lL lsn'L any more Lhan LhaL (and lL lsn'L so far, neglecLlng noospherlc exchange), Lhen lL wlll be merely snapped up by egolc- raLlonallLy sLrucLures of caplLal producLlon, and we wlll slmply have Mcuonald's selllng burgers ln recyclable bags, whlch ls nowhere near anyLhlng deservlng Lo be called a laneLary 1ransformaLlon. ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe plotfotm for an emerglng world culLure ls belng bullL by lnLernaLlonal markeLs of maLerlal- economlc exchange, and by Lhe lncreaslngly free exchange of raLlonallLy sLrucLures, parLlcularly emplrlc-analyLlc sclence and compuLer-LransmlLLed lnformaLlon (Lhe Age of lnformaLlon" ls slmply Lhe Age of noosphere"), all of whlch are supranaLlonal ln essenLlal characLer (we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL). As for Lhe comlng LransformaLlon lLself, lL ls belng bullL, as all pasL LransformaLlons have been, ln Lhe hearLs and mlnds of Lhose loJlvlJools who Lhemselves evolve Lo cenLaurlc planeLary vlslon. lor Lhese lndlvlduals creaLe a cognlLlve poLenLlal" ln Lhe form of oew wotlJvlews (ln Lhls case, cenLaurlc-planeLary) LhaL ln Lurn feed back lnLo Lhe ongolng malnsLream of soclol lostltotloos, unLll Lhe prevlously marglnallzed" worldvlew becomes anchored ln lnsLlLuLlonal forms whlch Lhen caLapulL a collecLlve consclousness Lo a new and hlgher order. 43 1he revoluLlon, as always, wlll come from Lhe wlLhln and be embedded ln Lhe wlLhouL. And, aL Lhls polnL, 44 aslde from Lhe lnner work LhaL each of us lndlvldually can do, l personally see no obvlous collecLlve bearers of Lhe new and deeper wlLhln. 1PL ulALLC1lC Cl 8CC8LSS 8ecall LhaL one of Lhe deflnlng aspecLs of evoluLlon ls LhaL lL brlngs new and emergenL posslblllLles and Lherefore new and poLenLlal paLhologles. Pabermas, worklng from a dlfferenL angle, arrlves aL Lhe same concluslon, and he refers Lo lL as Lhe dlalecLlc of progress": LvoluLlonarlly lmporLanL lnnovaLlons mean noL only a new level of learnlng buL a new problem slLuaLlon as well, LhaL ls, a new caLegory of burdens LhaL accompany Lhe new soclal formaLlon. 1he dlalecLlc of progress can be seen ln Lhe facL LhaL wlLh Lhe acqulslLlon of problem-solvlng ablllLles new problem slLuaLlons come Lo consclousness. A hlgher sLage of developmenL of producLlve forces and of soclal lnLegraLlon does brlng rellef from problems of Lhe superseded [prevlous] soclal formaLlon. 8uL Lhe problems LhaL arlse aL Lhe new sLage of developmenL can-lnsofar as Lhey are aL all comparable wlLh Lhe old ones-lncrease ln lnLenslLy. 1hus we can make an aLLempL Lo lnLerpreL soclal evoluLlon Laklng as our gulde Lhose ptoblems and oeeJs LhaL are flrsL broughL abouL by evoluLlonary advances. AL every sLage of developmenL Lhe soclal-evoluLlonary learnlng process lLself generaLes new resources, whlch mean new dlmenslons of scarclLy and Lhus new hlsLorlcal needs. 43 Pabermas's crlLlque of 8omanLlc regresslon ls along Lhe same llnes as mlne: of course Lhere are new problems and new paLhologles aL each sLage of developmenL, buL Lo Lake only Lhe paLhologles of Lhe hlgher sLage and compare Lhem wlLh only Lhe achlevemenLs of Lhe prevlous sLage ls perverse ln Lhe exLreme. WhaL ls requlred, raLher, ls a balanced vlew LhaL Lakes lnLo accounL Lhe llmlLaLlons and fallures of Lhe prevlous sLage LhaL necesslLaLed and propelled a new evoluLlonary LransformaLlon beyooJ Lhem. Pabermas glves one very long paragraph where he ouLllnes hls vlew of whaL amounLs Lo a phylogeneLlc needs hlerarchy, lncludlng Lhe achlevemenLs and Lhe burdens of each of Lhe ma[or sLages we have examlned so far. lL ls worLh sLudylng (all lLallcs are hls): WlLh Lhe LranslLlon Lo Lhe socloculLural form of llfe, LhaL ls, wlLh Lhe lnLroducLlon of Lhe famlly sLrucLure [durlng preoperaLlonal/maglc], Lhere arose tbe ptoblem of Jemotcotloq [beqlooloq Lo dlfferenLlaLe] soclety ftom extetool ootote. ln neollLhlc socleLles, aL Lhe laLesL, harmonlzlng socleLy wlLh Lhe naLural envlronmenL became LhemaLlc [problemaLlc]. ower over naLure came lnLo consclousness as a scarce resource [whlch confllcLs sharply wlLh Lhe euloglzed accounLs of Lhls sLage]. 1he experlence of powerlessness ln relaLlon Lo Lhe conLlngencles of exLernal naLure had Lo be lnLerpreLed away ln myLh and maglc. WlLh Lhe lnLroducLlon of a collecLlve pollLlcal order [myLhlc and myLhlc-raLlonal], Lhere arose tbe ptoblem of tbe self-teqolotloo of tbe soclol system. ln developed clvlllzaLlons, aL Lhe laLesL, Lhe achlevemenL of order by Lhe sLaLe became a cenLral need. Legal securlLy came Lo consclousness as a scarce resource. 1he experlence of soclal represslon and arblLrarlness had Lo be balanced wlLh leglLlmaLlons of domlnaLlon. 1hls was accompllshed ln Lhe framework of raLlonallzed world vlews [myLhlc-raLlonal] (Lhrough whlch, moreover, Lhe cenLral problem of Lhe prevlous sLage-powerlessness-could be defused). ln Lhe modern age [egolc-raLlonal], wlLh Lhe auLonomlzaLlon of Lhe economy (and complemenLarlzaLlon of Lhe sLaLe), Lhere arose tbe ptoblem of o self-teqoloteJ excbooqe of tbe soclol system wltb extetool ootote [blomaLerlal economlc exchange]. ln lndusLrlal caplLallsm, aL Lhe laLesL, socleLy consclously placed lLself under Lhe lmperaLlves of economlc growLh and lncreaslng wealLh. value came lnLo consclousness as a scarce resource. 1he experlence of soclal lnequallLy called lnLo belng soclal movemenLs and correspondlng sLraLegles of appeasemenL. 1hese seemed Lo lead Lo Lhelr goal ln soclal welfare sLaLe mass democracles (ln whlch, moreover, Lhe cenLral problem of Lhe precedlng sLage-legal lnsecurlLy-could be defused). llnally, lf posLmodern socleLles, as Lhey are Loday envlsloned from dlfferenL angles [planeLary/vlslon- loglc], should be characLerlzed by a prlmacy of Lhe sclenLlflc and educaLlonal sysLems, one can speculaLe abouL Lhe emergence of tbe ptoblem of o self-teqoloteJ excbooqe of soclety wltb lotetool ootote [by whlch he means, essenLlally, self-esLeem and self-acLuallzaLlon and lLs paLhologles, he speclflcally menLlons exlsLenLlal anomle]. Agaln a scarce resource would become LhemaLlc-noL Lhe supply of power, securlLy, or value, buL Lhe supply of moLlvaLlon and meanlng. 46 1he emergence of a new level solves or defuses" some of Lhe cenLral problems and llmlLaLlons of Lhe prevlous sLage (or else lL wouldn'L emerge), buL lL also lnLroduces lLs own new problems and new scotce tesootces. Cne can'L help buL noLlce LhaL Lhls hlerarchy of deflclency needs" or scarce resources" bears sLrlklng resemblance Lo Abraham Maslow's (and !ane Loevlnger's and oLhers') presenL-day onLogeneLlc needs hlerarchy-from safeLy/power Lo convenLlonal securlLy/belonglng Lo personal/egolc value Lo exlsLenLlal meanlng. l belleve lL ls no accldenL LhaL l have long referred Lo Lhe cenLaurlc level as Lhe exlsLenLlal level of meanlng, and l belleve lL ls no accldenL LhaL Lhere would be Pabermas/Maslow/Loevlnger parallels (all of whlch we wlll reLurn Lo ln chapLers 6 and 7). 8uL any way we sllce Lhe evoluLlonary ple, Lhere ls where we sLand Loday: on Lhe verge of a planeLary LransformaLlon, sLruggllng Lo be secured by raLlonallLy and compleLed by vlslon-loglc, and embedded ln global- planeLary soclal lnsLlLuLlons. 18AnSnA1lCnALlSM 1he qlobol naLure of Lhls LransformaLlon ls now belng drlven, parLlcularly ln lLs Lechnologlcal-economlc base, by Lhree lnLerrelaLed facLors: (1) Lhe necesslLy Lo proLecL Lhe global commons," Lhe common blosphere LhaL belongs Lo no naLlon, no Lrlbe, no creed, no race, (2) Lhe necesslLy Lo regulaLe Lhe world flnanclal sysLem, whlch no longer responds Lo naLlonal borders, (3) Lhe necesslLy Lo malnLaln a modlcum of lnLernaLlonal peace and securlLy, whlch ls now noL so much a maLLer of ma[or war beLween any Lwo naLlons, buL beLween a new order" of loosely federaLed naLlons and renegade reglmes LhreaLenlng world peace. 47 1he polnL ls LhaL all Lhree of Lhose concerns no longer respond Lo acLlons Laken merely on Lhe parL of lndlvldual naLlons. noL one of Lhose problems can be solved on a naLlonal level. 1hey are llLerally LransnaLlonal crlses demandlng LransnaLlonal, worldcenLrlc responses. And exacLly how Lo negoLlaLe Lhls dlfflculL LranslLlon, wlLh naLlons volunLarlly surrenderlng some of Lhelr soverelgnLy for Lhe global beLLermenL-Lhereln preclsely ls Lhe exLremely dlfflculL naLure of Lhls posLnaLlonal" global LranslLlon. 8uL Lhe slLuaLlon ls clear enough: Lhese are LransnaLlonal crlses LhaL have rendered naLlonal responses obsoleLe. As l sald, l wlll noL aL Lhls Llme enLer lnLo a dlscusslon of Lhe lnLrlcacles of Lhese crlses and Lhe requlslLe global LransformaLlon, excepL Lo lndlcaLe one facLor cruclal Lo our dlscusslon aL Lhls polnL. AlLhough each of Lhose Lhree facLors have lmporLanL maLerlal-economlc componenLs (Lhe relaLlonal exchange of moneLary-flnanclal sysLems, Lhe proLecLlon of Lhe blo-maLerlal global commons, Lhe physlcal securlLy of nonaggresslon beLween naLlons)-none of Lhose physlcal and maLerlal and economlc componenLs coo be secoteJ ln Lhe long run wlLhouL a cottespooJloq cbooqe lo cooscloosoess among Lhe clLlzens of Lhe naLlons sotteoJetloq some of Lhelr soverelgnLy for Lhe LransnaLlonal good. 1hus, soluLlons Lo Lhe varlous global crlses cerLalnly demand efforLs on Lhe ecologlcal-economlc-flnanclal fronL, whlch ls where mosL efforLs are now belng concenLraLed. 8uL lL's a loslng proposlLlon wlLhouL a correspondlng shlfL ln worldvlews LhaL wlll ollow clLlzens and Lhelr governmenLs Lo percelve Lhe greaLer advanLage ln Lhe lesser deaLh (Lhe surrender of some soverelgnLy for Lhe greaLer good). 1rlbal consclousness wlll noL do, myLhlc-lmperlallsm wlll surrender noLhlng, eLhnocenLrlc cleanslng could care less abouL a worldcenLrlc consensus. MyLhlc-membershlp ls and always has been perfecLly wllllng Lo sacrlflce Lhe llves of lLs Lrue bellevers (and Lhus even more so Lhe llves of nonbellevers) ln order Lo advance Lhe cause of Lhe Cne 1rue Cod, and lf LhaL means global sulclde ln exchange for llfe eLernal, well, LhaL's a small prlce, no? And maglcal blood cleanslng would raLher Lake lLs eLhnlc Lrlbal self, and Lhe world, lnLo obllvlon Lhan mlx wlLh unpure Lrlbes. 1hus, wlLhouL ln any way denylng Lhe cruclal lmporLance of Lhe ecologlcal and economlc and flnanclal facLors ln Lhe world-demandlng LransformaLlon, leL us noL forgeL LhaL Lhey all resL ulLlmaLely on a correlaLlve LransformaLlon ln human consclousness: Lhe global embrace, and lLs plurallsLlc world-federaLlon, can only be seeo, and ooJetstooJ, and lmplemeoteJ, by lndlvlduals wlLh a unlversal and global vlslon-loglc, where Lhe new scotce tesootces lnvolve noL only maLerlal-economlc shorLages, buL Lhe resources of a meooloq-lo-llfe LhaL can oo looqet be foooJ ln self or Lrlbe or race or naLlon, buL wlll flnd lLs conLexL, lLs Lherapla, lLs omega, and lLs release, ln a worldcenLrlc embrace Lhrough whlch runs Lhe blood of a common humanlLy and beaLs Lhe slngle hearL of a very small planeL sLruggllng for lLs own survlval, and yearnlng for lLs own release lnLo a deeper and a Lruer Lomorrow. MuL1lCuL1u8ALlSM ln Lhe meanLlme, lL seems Lo be Lhe case LhaL Lhe vasL ma[orlLy of Lhe world's populaLlon does noL now need ways Lo geL beyond raLlonallLy, buL ways Lo geL up Lo lL. 1he greaL mass of Lhe world's soclal holons are sLlll caughL ln maglc and warrlng Lrlballsms based on blood and eLhnlc llneage, or ln myLhologlcal emplre-bulldlng: remnanLs of Marxlsm as a myLhlc-raLlonal world rellglon", ChrlsLlan and Musllm fundamenLallsLs who would converL" (coerce) Lhe world, myLhlc-rellglous mlsslonarles wlLh a global and proselyLlzlng fury, a Lype of naLlonal-economlc lmperlallsm borderlng on a myLhology of Lhe leadlng developed counLrles, and-sLrangesL of all-a dlssoluLlon of some of Lhe greaL modern myLhlc-lmperlallsL SLaLes lnLo Lhelr Lrlbal subholons, baLhed ln blood and klnshlp llneage and Lrlbal warfare on a vlclous scale: Lhe reLrlballzaLlon of large porLlons of Lhe world. 48 1hus, Lhe slngle greaLesL wotlJ ttoosfotmotloo would slmply be Lhe embrace of global reasonableness and plurallsLlc Lolerance-Lhe global embrace of egolc-raLlonallLy (on Lhe way Lo cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc). 1he mulLlculLural movemenL," whlch clalms a unlversal Lolerance of all culLures freed from Lhe logocenLrlc, raLlonal-cenLrlc, LurocenLrlc" domlnance and hegemony, ls a sLep ln Lhe rlghL dlrecLlon, wlLh all good lnLenLlons, buL ends up belng self-conLradlcLory and flnally hypocrlLlcal. lL may clalm Lo be noL raLlonal-cenLrlc," buL ln facL culLural Lolerance ls secured only by raLlonallLy as unlversal plurallsm, by a capaclLy Lo menLally puL yourself lnLo Lhe oLher person's shoes and Lhen declde Lo honor or aL leasL LoleraLe LhaL vlewpolnL even lf you don'L agree wlLh lL. ?ou, operaLlng from Lhe plurallsm of raLlonal worldspace, mlghL declde Lo LoleraLe Lhe ldeas of a myLhlc-bellever, Lhe problem ls, Lhey wlll noL LoleraLe yoo-and, ln facL, hlsLorlcally Lhey would burn your LoleranL Lall aL Lhe sLake ln order Lo save your soul (wheLher your savlors be ChrlsLlan, MarxlsL, Musllm, or ShlnLo). ln oLher words, mulLlculLurallsm ls a noble, logocenLrlc, and raLlonal endeavor LhaL slmply mlslJeotlfles lts owo stooce and clalms Lo be noL raLlonal because some of Lhe Lhlngs lt toletotes are noL raLlonal. 8uL lLs own Lolerance ls raLlonal Lhrough and Lhrough, and rlghLly so. 8aLlonallLy ls Lhe only sLrucLure LhaL wlll LoleraLe sLrucLures oLher Lhan lLself. nor can a genulne mulLlculLurallsm be esLabllshed by feellngs" or by comlng from Lhe hearL," because my feellngs are merely mloe, noL necessarlly yoots or tbelts. Cnly ln Lhe space of raLlonal plurallsm can dlfferenL feellngs and LhoughLs and deslres be glven a falr play and an equal volce. lL ls from Lhe plaLform of raLlonal plurallsm LhaL Lhe nexL sLage, Lhe Lruly aperspecLlval-lnLegral (and unlversal-lnLegral), can be reached. uL dlfferenLly, mulLlculLurallsm ls a noble aLLempL Lo move Lo Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval sLrucLure, buL, llke many posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs, lL Lhoroughly confuses Lhe facL LhaL no perspecLlve ls flnal wlLh Lhe noLlon LhaL all perspecLlves are Lherefore slmply equal. lL Lhus falls Lo noLlce LhaL LhaL sLance lLself acLually (and approprlaLely) tejects all narrower perspecLlves (whlch clearly shows LhaL all perspecLlves are oot equal). ln oLher words, Lhe mulLlculLs" regress from no sLance ls ulLlmaLe" Lo every sLance ls equally accepLable," Lhus burylng (and denylng) Lhelr own oLherwlse accuraLe [udgmenL LhaL lesser sLances and smaller perspecLlves are ooocceptoble. 1hey correcLly gllmpse aperspecLlval space, buL Lhen geL Lhoroughly dlsorlenLed ln Lhe dlzzlfylngly holonlc naLure of ever-slldlng conLexLs, falllng Lo noLlce LhaL slldlng conLexLs do noL ln any way prevenL some conLexLs from sLlll belng telotlvely bettet Lhan less encompasslng conLexLs. 1hus, LhaL everyLhlng ls relaLlve does noL mean noLhlng ls beLLer, lL means some Lhlngs are, lndeed, relaLlvely beLLer Lhan oLhers, all Lhe Llme. nelLher aLoms nor molecules are flnal or ulLlmaLe consLlLuenLs of Lhe unlverse, noneLheless, wbetevet Lhey appear, molecules olwoys conLaln aLoms ln a deeper embrace. (lndeed, Lhe whole polnL of LlnsLeln's somewhaL mlslabeled relaLlvlLy Lheory" was Lo flnd lovotloot Lransforms across relaLlve spaceLlme.) 1he sysLem ls relaLlve and slldlng, for sure, buL lL slldes ln sLable ways, and Lhls sLablllLy-ln-relaLlvlLy allows Lhe Lypes of cottect [udgmenLs LhaL Lhe mulLlculLurallsLs do ln facL make (namely, LhaL plurallsLlc Lolerance ls bettet Lhan narrow-mlnded lnLolerance)-even Lhough Lhelr own Lheory (mlsLaken Lo be we have no [udgmenLs slnce all [udgmenLs are relaLlve")-even Lhough Lhelr own Lheory cannoL accounL for Lhelr acLual sLance (even Lhough Lhelr own Lheory, ln facL, denles Lhelr acLual sLance). 8y falllng Lo see Lhe Jeflolteoess of telotlve [udgmenLs-and Lhus belng LoLally dlsorlenLed and losL ln aperspecLlval space-Lhey mlss Lhe loteqtol parL, Lhe oolvetsol-lnLegral parL, of Lhelr own sLance, and Lhus Lhey all Loo ofLen regress lnLo a rloL of ldlosyncraLlc dlfferences LhaL desLroys Lhe lnLegrlLy of Lhelr own poslLlon. ln a recenL u.S. courL case, a Chlnese man found hls wlfe, also Chlnese, havlng an affalr. Pe Look a claw hammer and savagely beaL her Lo deaLh. Pe was ocpoltteJ on Lhe mulLlculL defense": LhaL's whaL Lhey do ln Chlna, and we have Lo honor culLural dlfferences, slnce no perspecLlve ls beLLer" Lhan anoLher. AperspecLlval madness. As for LurocenLrlsm" belng somehow desplcable, Lhe dlvldlng llne ls noL and should noL be betweeo culLures-some culLures are good," some are bad," some are hlgher," some are lower." 8aLher, Lhe dlvldlng llne ls wltblo culLures-lL ls beLween Lhose who, ln ooy culLure, wlsh Lo develop from egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc, from maglc Lo myLhlc Lo reason-planeLary (flrsL as formal raLlonallLy, Lhen compleLed as cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc). lor Lhe mosL parL, Lhese raLlonallLy sLrucLures are olteoJy avallable for Lhose lndlvlduals and soclal sysLems who can endure Lhe LransformaLlon beyond Lhelr own provlnclal dogmaLlsms and embrace lnLernaLlonal recognlLlon and muLual respecL for each oLher's parLlcular exlsLence. 1hls LransformaLlon-from Lhe submergence of Lhe lndlvldual ln collecLlve myLhlc-membershlp LoLallLles Lo Lhe emergence of Lhe lndlvldual person or ego-sub[ecL, legally and morally and pollLlcally free wlLhln raLlonal space secured by law-has already been embraced by 8ussla and Lhe LasLern 8loc (whlch has Lemporarlly Lhrown some of lLs [unlor holons back lnLo vlclous LrlballsLlc warrlng slmply because Lhese Lrlbal subholons were once held LogeLher by Marxlsm as a mlllLary myLhlc-raLlonal emplre: ln holonlc dlssoluLlon, Lhe paLh of regresslon follows Lhe reverse llne of bulldup, whlch now means: rampanL reLrlballzaLlon). lurLher, Lhe LransformaLlon from myLhlc-membershlp Lo egolc-raLlonallLy (and lLs perlls) ls already open Lo Chlna, Cuba, Llbya, lraq, norLh korea, Serbla, and any oLher soclal holon LhaL wlshes Lo surrender lLs myLhlc superlorlLy" and [oln Lhe communlLy of naLlons governed by lnLernaLlonal law and muLual recognlLlon, LhaL wlshes Lo cease dlssoclaLlng and spllLLlng off from Lhe free exchange of planeLary consclousness, LhaL wlshes Lo relnLegraLe lnLo a common world splrlL and collecLlve sharlng of reason and communlcaLlon and vlslon. (1hls does noL excuse Lhose naLlon-sLaLes, parLlcularly Lhe unlLed SLaLes, !apan, and an omlnously emerglng forLress Lurope"-whlch are sLlll dlsLorLlng supranaLlonal exchanges for Lhelr own parLlcular lnLeresLs and remnanLs of myLhlc-lmperlal hegemony-does noL prevenL or relleve Lhem from conLlnulng Lo search for more reasonable and equlLable exchanges wlLh Lhe world communlLy aL large, and parLlcularly wlLh regard Lo Lhe common blosphere). 8uL for Lhose lndlvlduals who have already done so, for Lhose who have begun Lo emerge as cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc, for Lhose who Lake Lhelr sLand ln a planeLary awareness beyond Lhls or LhaL narrow parochlallsm, for Lhose aLLempLlng Lo secure a cenLaurlc ldenLlLy LhaL lnLegraLes physlosphere and blosphere and noosphere (ln male and female allke), and looklng for LhaL sense of meanlng, exlsLenLlal meanlng, global meanlng-for Lhose small few, Lhe slmple llvloq of a planeLary perspecLlvlsm (LhaL ls, an lnLegral-aperspecLlvlsm) creaLes small pockeLs of leadlng-edge consclousness, creaLes small pockeLs of cognlLlve poLenLlal" LhaL slowly buL surely feed back lnLo collecLlve worldvlews and Lhen lnLo soclal lnsLlLuLlons Lhemselves (uL Lo LL Lo L8), and once maLerlally embedded and lnsLlLuLlonallzed, Lhose lnsLlLuLlonal sLrucLures auLomaLlcally, as lL were, acL as pacers of LransformaLlon for all who follow. And LransformaLlon lnLo whaL, exacLly? ls Lhe cenLaur Lhe end of Lhe llne? uL lL anoLher way: ls Lhere any concelvable reason LhaL evoluLlon, whlch has labored so mlghLlly for flfLeen bllllon years and produced so much undenlable wondermenL, would [usL up and abrupLly cease? Are Lhere noL hlgher splrals lylng yeL ahead? lf we have dlscerned even Lhe vaguesL feaLures of Llme's arrow, can we noL sLand on LlpLoe and foresee dlmly Lhe arrow's arc lnLo Lomorrow? 6 Moqlc, Mytblc, ooJ 8eyooJ 1bot llttle ptlqs ooJ tbtee-poottet-moJ meo moy bove tbe coocelt tbot tbe lows of ootote ote coostootly btokeo fot tbelt sokes-socb oo loteoslflcotloo of evety kloJ of selflsboess loto tbe loflolte, loto tbe lmpettloeot, coooot be btooJeJ wltb too mocb cootempt. AoJ yet cbtlstloolty jooy fotm of mytblc- lltetollsm] owes lts ttlompb to tbls mlsetoble flottety of petsoool voolty. lt wos pteclsely oll tbe follotes, oll tbe tebellloos-mloJeJ, oll tbe less fovoteJ, tbe wbole scom ooJ tefose of bomoolty wbo wete tbos woo ovet to lt. 1be solvotloo of tbe sool-lo plolo looqooqe. tbe wotlJ tevolves otoooJ me. -l8lLu8lCP nlL1ZSCPL ln 1PL LAS1 chapLer we looked aL Lhe formaLlve sLages ln Lhe collecLlve evoluLlon of Lhe human specles, up Lo Lhe presenL-archalc Lo maglc Lo myLhlc Lo menLal (or egolc-raLlonal on Lhe verge of cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc). ln Lhls chapLer we wlll examlne Lhose same sLages, Lhose baslc holons, as Lhey appear ln an lndlvldual's developmenL Loday. And Lhls wlll seL Lhe sLage for a dlscusslon of any fuLure-and posslbly hlgher-developmenLs, ln Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe specles as a whole. And sLralnlng Lo see Lhe arc of Llme's arrow lnLo Lomorrow, brlngs some surprlses lndeed. 1PL 8L/18AnS lALLAC? Lver slnce l began wrlLlng on Lhe dlsLlncLlons beLween preraLlonal (or prepersonal) sLaLes of awareness and LransraLlonal (or Lranspersonal) sLaLes-whaL l called Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy-l have become more convlnced Lhan ever LhaL Lhls undersLandlng ls absoluLely cruclal for grasplng Lhe naLure of hlgher (or deeper) or Lruly splrlLual sLaLes of consclousness. 1he essence of Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy ls lLself falrly slmple: slnce boLh preraLlonal sLaLes and LransraLlonal sLaLes are, ln Lhelr own ways, nonraLlonal, Lhey appear slmllar or even ldenLlcal Lo Lhe unLuLored eye. And once pre and Lrans are confused, Lhen one of Lwo fallacles occurs: ln Lhe flrsL, all hlgher and LransraLlonal sLaLes are teJoceJ Lo lower and preraLlonal sLaLes. Cenulne mysLlcal or conLemplaLlve experlences, for example, are seen as a regresslon or Lhrowback Lo lnfanLlle sLaLes of narclsslsm, oceanlc aduallsm, lndlssoclaLlon, and even prlmlLlve auLlsm. 1hls ls, for example, preclsely Lhe rouLe Laken by lreud ln 1be lotote of oo lllosloo. ln Lhese reducLlonlsLlc accounLs, raLlonallLy ls Lhe greaL and flnal omega polnL of lndlvldual and collecLlve developmenL, Lhe hlgh-waLer mark of all evoluLlon. no deeper or wlder or hlgher conLexL ls LhoughL Lo exlsL. 1hus, llfe ls Lo be llved elLher raLlonally, or neuroLlcally (lreud's concepL of neurosls ls baslcally anyLhlng LhaL deralls Lhe emergence of raLlonal percepLlon-Lrue enough as far as lL goes, whlch ls [usL noL all LhaL far). Slnce no hlgher conLexL ls LhoughL Lo be real, or Lo acLually exlsL, Lhen whenever any genulnely LransraLlonal occaslon occurs, lL ls lmmedlaLely explalned as a teqtessloo Lo preraLlonal sLrucLures (slnce Lhey are Lhe only nonraLlonal sLrucLures allowed, and Lhus Lhe only ones Lo accepL an explanaLory hypoLhesls). 1he superconsclous ls reduced Lo Lhe subconsclous, Lhe Lranspersonal ls collapsed Lo Lhe prepersonal, Lhe emergence of Lhe hlgher ls relnLerpreLed as an lrrupLlon from Lhe lower. All breaLhe a slgh of rellef, and Lhe raLlonal worldspace ls noL fundamenLally shaken (by Lhe black Llde of Lhe mud of occulLlsm!" as lreud so qualnLly explalned lL Lo !ung). Cn Lhe oLher hand, lf one ls sympaLheLlc wlLh hlgher or mysLlcal sLaLes, buL one sLlll coofoses pre and Lrans, Lhen one wlll elevote all preraLlonal sLaLes Lo some sorL of LransraLlonal glory (Lhe lnfanLlle prlmary narclsslsm, for example, ls seen as an unconsclous slumberlng ln Lhe mystlco oolo). !ung and hls followers, of course, ofLen Lake Lhls rouLe, and are forced Lo read a deeply Lranspersonal and splrlLual sLaLus lnLo sLaLes LhaL are merely lndlssoclaLed and undlfferenLlaLed and acLually lacklng any sorL of lnLegraLlon aL all. ln Lhe elevaLlonlsL poslLlon, Lhe Lranspersonal and LransraLlonal mysLlcal unlon ls seen as Lhe ulLlmaLe omega polnL, and slnce egolc-raLlonallLy does lndeed Lend Lo deny Lhls hlgher sLaLe, Lhen egolc-raLlonallLy ls plcLured as Lhe low polot of human posslblllLles, as a debasemenL, as Lhe cause of sln and separaLlon and allenaLlon. When raLlonallLy ls seen as Lhe anLl-omega polnL, so Lo speak, as Lhe greaL AnLl-ChrlsL, Lhen ooytbloq nonraLlonal geLs swepL up and lndlscrlmlnaLely glorlfled as a dlrecL rouLe Lo Lhe ulvlne, lncludlng much LhaL ls lnfanLlle and regresslve and preraLlonal: ooytbloq Lo geL rld of LhaL nasLy and skepLlcal raLlonallLy. l belleve becoose lL ls absurd" (1erLulllan)-Lhere ls Lhe baLLle cry of Lhe elevaLlonlsL (a sLrand LhaL runs deeply Lhrough 8omanLlclsm of any sorL). lreud was a reducLlonlsL, !ung an elevaLlonlsL-Lhe Lwo sldes of Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy. And Lhe polnL ls LhaL Lhey are botb half rlghL and half wrong. A good deal of neurosls ls lndeed a flxaLlon/regresslon Lo preraLlonal sLaLes, sLaLes LhaL are noL Lo be glorlfled. Cn Lhe oLher hand, mysLlcal sLaLes do lndeed exlsL, beyond (noL beneaLh) raLlonallLy, and Lhose sLaLes are noL Lo be reduced. lor mosL of Lhe recenL modern era, and cerLalnly slnce lreud (and Marx and Ludwlg leuerbach), Lhe reducLlonlsL sLance Loward splrlLuallLy has prevalled-oll splrlLual experlences, no maLLer how hlghly developed Lhey mlghL ln facL be, were slmply lnLerpreLed as regresslons Lo prlmlLlve and lnfanLlle modes of LhoughL. Powever, as lf ln overreacLlon Lo all LhaL, we are now, and have been slnce Lhe slxLles, ln Lhe Lhroes of varlous forms of elevaLlonlsm (exempllfled by, buL by no means conflned Lo, Lhe new Age movemenL). All sorLs of endeavors, of no maLLer whaL orlgln or of whaL auLhenLlclLy, are slmply elevaLed Lo LransraLlonal and splrlLual glory, and Lhe ooly quallflcaLlon for Lhls wonderful promoLlon ls LhaL tbe eoJeovot be ooototloool. Aoytbloq raLlonal ls wrong, ooytbloq nonraLlonal ls splrlLual. SplrlL ls lndeed nonraLlonal, buL lL ls Lrans, noL pre. lL Lranscends buL lncludes reason, lL does noL regress and exclude lL. 8eason, llke any parLlcular sLage of evoluLlon, has lLs own (and ofLen devasLaLlng) llmlLaLlons, represslons, and dlsLorLlons. 8uL as we have seen, Lhe lnherenL problems of one level are solved (or defused") only aL Lhe nexL level of developmenL, Lhey are noL solved by regresslng Lo a prevlous level where Lhe problem can be merely lgnored. And so lL ls wlLh Lhe wonders and Lhe Lerrors of reason: lL brlngs enormous new capaclLles and new soluLlons, whlle lnLroduclng lLs own speclflc problems, problems solved only by a Lranscendence Lo Lhe hlgher and LransraLlonal realms. 1 Many of Lhe elevaLlonlsL movemenLs, alas, are noL beyond reason buL beneaLh lL. 1hey Lhlnk Lhey are, and Lhey announce Lhemselves Lo be, cllmblng Lhe MounLaln of 1ruLh, whereas, lL seems Lo me, Lhey have merely sllpped and fallen and are slldlng rapldly down lL, and Lhe exhllaraLlng rush of sklddlng unconLrollably down evoluLlon's slope Lhey call followlng your bllss." As Lhe earLh comes rushlng up aL Lhem aL Lermlnal veloclLy, Lhey are bold enough Lo offer Lhls colllslon course wlLh ground zero as a new paradlgm for Lhe comlng world LransformaLlon, and Lhey feel oh-so-sorry for Lhose who waLch Lhelr comlng crash wlLh Lhe same fasclnaLlon as one waLches a LwenLy-car plleup on Lhe hlghway, and Lhey sadly nod as we decllne Lo [oln ln LhaL parLlcular advenLure. 1rue splrlLual bllss, ln lnflnlLe measure, lles up LhaL hlll, noL down lL. We wlll wanL Lo look aL Lhe deeper, hlgher sLrucLures of awareness, Lhe LransraLlonal sLrucLures. 8uL ln order Lo fully undersLand Lhem, we need flrsL Lo look carefully aL Lhe preraLlonal sLrucLures, so we wlll know, lf noLhlng else Lhan by a process of subLracLlon, whaL Lhe Lranspersonal sLaLes are llke. So as we plck up Lhe sLory of onLogeny aL Lhe archalc and maglc sLrucLures, and follow lL lnLo Lhe realms of Lhe superconsclous, lL ls Lhese Lwo dlsLorLlons-reducLlonlsm and elevaLlonlsm-LhaL we wlll mosL wanL Lo Lry Lo avold. CCCnl1lvL LvCLu1lCn We are now followlng Lhe developmenL of Lhe lotetlot of an loJlvlJool human holon ln Loday's world, a recaplLulaLlon, ln broad sLroke, of Lhe same baslc holons we saw, ln Lhe lasL chapLer, emerge over hlsLorlcal and prehlsLorlcal epochs ln Lhe varlous culLural worldspaces (worldspaces sLlll avallable Loday owlng Lo compound lndlvlduallLy, and spaces LhaL unfold ln Lhe same sequence ln lndlvldual developmenL). As Sheldrake says, lL ls as lf naLure, once lL has produced a baslc holon and made sure lL funcLlons adequaLely, keeps uslng Lhe same holon ln subsequenL developmenL as bulldlng blocks (ptesetvloq Lhe baslc holon buL oeqotloq lLs parLlalness or excluslvlLy by Lranscendlng lL ln a hlgher, deeper paLLern). Lach lnLerlor developmenL LhaL we wlll be followlng ls, of course, governed by Lhe LwenLy LeneLs (Lhough noL by Lhose alone), and Lhus each developmenL lnvolves a new and creaLlve emergence, a new Lranscendence, a new depLh, a new lnLerlorlLy, a new dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon, a greaLer degree of relaLlve auLonomy (greaLer capaclLy for boLh agency and for communlon), a greaLer degree of consclousness, a greaLer LoLal embrace-wlLh new fears, new anxleLles, new needs, new scarclLles, new deslres, new moral engagemenLs ln new shared worldvlews, and Lhe ever-presenL posslblllLy of new and hlgher paLhologles and dlsLorLlons. nowhere have Lhe vlclsslLudes of Lhe mlnd's developmenLal emergence been charLered ln greaLer deLall Lhan ln Lhe works of !ean lageL, and alLhough nobody lmaglnes LhaL lageL's sysLem ls wlLhouL lLs own lnadequacles, noneLheless Lhe wealLh of research and daLa LhaL he and hls colleagues generaLed over a four-decade perlod sLands as one of a handful of Lhe Lruly greaL conLrlbuLlons Lo psychology (and phllosophy and rellglon). WlLhouL, Lherefore, endorslng all of Lhe lageLlan sysLem, l would llke Lo draw on hls daLa (and some of hls concluslons) Lo polnL ouL very carefully Lhe naLure of Lhe mlnd's developmenL from archalc Lo maglc Lo myLhlc Lo menLal, as lL appears ln Loday's onLogeny. lor lf Lhere can be leglLlmaLe quesLlons abouL, for example, Lhe maglcal- anlmlsLlc" Llmes ln Lhe phylogeneLlc pasL, Lhere can be much less doubL abouL LhaL sLrucLure (and abouL Lhe myLhlc sLrucLure) as lL appears ln developmenL Loday. lurLher, and [usL as lmporLanL for our concern, a slmple sLudy of lageL ls Lhe qulckesL cure for elevaLlonlsm. lor whaL we flnd as we carefully sLudy lageL ls LhaL Lhe producLlons of, say, Lhe preoperaLlonal mlnd lnlLlally look very hollsLlc, very lnLerconnecLed, very rellglous" ln a sense, unLll we even barely scraLch Lhe surface and flnd Lhe whole producLlon supporLed by egocenLrlsm, arLlflclallsm, flnallsm, anLhropocenLrlsm, and lndlssoclaLlon. We Lhen have Lwo very clear cholces: Lry Lo prop up Lhose producLlons as belng really rellglous," or look elsewhere for a genulne Cod. WAvLS Anu S18LAMS 8efore ouLllnlng lageL's flndlngs on cognlLlve developmenL, a brlef word abouL my overall psychologlcal model, of whlch cognlLlve developmenL ls only a parL. 1hls model conslsLs essenLlally of waves, sLreams, sLaLes, and self. woves are Lhe baslc levels of consclousness (abouL a dozen ma[or levels LhaL range from subconsclous Lo self- consclous Lo superconsclous). l call Lhem waves" Lo lndlcaLe Lhe fluld naLure of Lhese levels of consclousness, Lhe facL LhaL Lhey lnLerpeneLraLe and overlap (llke colors ln a ralnbow) and are noL rlgld rungs ln a ladder. 5tteoms are Lhe varlous developmenLal llnes (such as cognlLlve, moral, psychosexual, affecLlve, lnLerpersonal, splrlLual, and so on) LhaL develop relaLlvely lndependenLly Lhrough Lhe baslc levels or waves (so LhaL a person can, for example, be aL a falrly hlgh level of developmenL cognlLlvely, a medlum level emoLlonally, and a low level morally, developmenL, ln oLher words, ls anyLhlng buL a llnear, sLep-by-sLep affalr). 5totes refers Lo alLered sLaLes of consclousness (such as peak experlences), whlch are brlef, Lemporary, buL ofLen powerful experlences, especlally of Lhe Lranspersonal realms (however, lf developmenL lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal ls Lo become permanenL and noL merely passlng, Lhese stotes musL be converLed Lo ttolts: alLered sLaLes musL become permanenL sLrucLures or levels of consclousness). And Lhe self refers Lo Lhe self-sysLem LhaL navlgaLes Lhe waves, sLreams, and sLaLes as lL makes lLs way Lhrough Lhe greaL 8lver of Llfe. Waves and sLreams-or levels and llnes-are operaLlve ln all four quadranLs. 1hey are slmply Lhe grades and clades of evoluLlon-Lhe levels of holons and Lhe llnes of holons. 1haL ls, Lhey are Lhe levels of sLrucLural complexlLy, and Lhe llnes of developmenL LhaL move Lhrough Lhose levels. ln flgure 3-1, Lhe levels, waves, or grades are glven as LhlrLeen ln number (a hlghly slmpllfled summary). Lach quadranL, alLhough lL shares Lhe same baslc levels or waves, has lLs own Lypes of llnes or sLreams. lor example, uL: affecLlve developmenL, ego developmenL, cognlLlve developmenL (e.g., preop Lo conop Lo formop Lo posLformal), u8: blologlcal growLh, neuro-physlologlcal developmenL, behavloral evoluLlon, LL: culLural worldvlews, values, muLual undersLandlng, group ldenLlLles, L8: Lechno-economlc forms, geopollLlcal sLrucLures, evoluLlon of soclal sysLems, and so on. ln each of Lhe quadranLs, Lhe varlous llnes can unfold ln a relaLlvely lndependenL fashlon, buL Lhe polnL ls LhaL any holon ln any llne has correlaLes aL Lhe same level ln all Lhe oLher quadranLs (same-level relaLlonshlp"). And, of course, each llne of developmenL, ln any quadranL, follows Lhe LwenLy LeneLs. WhaL we have covered so far (ln very general ouLllne) ls Lhe phylogeneLlc evoluLlon of all four quadranLs up Lo Loday (as lndlcaLed ln flgure 3-1), uslng phylogeneLlc" ln Lhe broad sense as Lhe evoluLlonary hlsLory of any class of holons. locuslng on human holons, we also examlned Lhe phylogeneLlc evoluLlon of culLural worldvlews (archalc Lo maglc Lo myLhlc Lo raLlonal Lo vlslon-loglc), whlch ls only one llne of developmenL (buL a very lmporLanL llne) ln Lhe Lower-LefL quadranL (we also Louched on a few developmenLal llnes ln Lhe Lower 8lghL, such as Lhe Lechno- economlc sLream from foraglng Lo horLlculLural Lo agrarlan Lo lndusLrlal Lo lnformaLlonal). ln Lhls chapLer, we wlll examlne Lhe developmenL, ln Loday's lndlvldual, of Lhe cognlLlve llne of developmenL, whlch ls only one llne of developmenL (buL a very lmporLanL llne) ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL. We have already seen LhaL Lhese llnes are relaLed (slmllar holons are reused" onLogeneLlcally and phylogeneLlcally ln boLh mlcro and macro), and now we wlll see ample evldence of Lhls ln Loday's onLogeneLlc developmenL. llnally, a word abouL lageL's research lLself. lL has laLely become fashlonable and pollLlcally correcL Lo dlsmlss lageL's work enLlrely (lL ls hlerarchlcal," lL ls rlgldly llnear," lL ls paLrlarchal," eLc.). lageL's overall sysLem, lL ls qulLe Lrue, has several lnadequacles, buL Lhese are rarely why lL ls crlLlclzed, whlle Lhe reasons LhaL lL ls commonly dlsmlssed do noL Lhemselves hold up. 1he ma[or lnadequacy of lageL's sysLem, mosL scholars now agree, ls LhaL lageL suggesLed LhaL cognlLlve developmenL (concelved as loglco-maLhemaLlcal compeLence) ls Lhe ma[or axls of developmenL, and LhaL all oLher domalns are subservlenL Lo Lhe cognlLlve. ln oLher words, lageL made Lhe cognlLlve sLream Lhe only ma[or sLream, and Lhe lmpllcaLlon was LhaL all oLher sLreams fall wlLhln LhaL one, whereas Lhere ls now abundanL evldence LhaL Lhe varlous developmenLal sLreams can unfold ln a relaLlvely lndependenL manner (so LhaL a person can be aL a hlgh level of cognlLlve developmenL whlle remalnlng aL a medlum level ln oLher llnes and aL a low level ln sLlll oLhers). ln my model, for example, Lhe cognlLlve llne ls merely one of some Lwo-dozen developmenLal llnes, none of whlch, as llnes, can clalm preemlnence. (lL should be remembered LhaL ln Lhls chapLer we are examlnlng only Lhe cognlLlve llne-as a graphlc example of evoluLlonary holons-and Lhus we are oot presenLlng an overall or lnLegral psychology [for whlch, see loteqtol lsycboloqy, volume lour of Lhe collecteJ wotks]). 8uL as for Lhe cognlLlve llne lLself, lageL's work ls sLlll very lmpresslve, moreover, afLer almosL Lhree decades of lnLense cross-culLural research, Lhe evldence ls vlrLually unanlmous: lageL's sLages up Lo formal operaLlonal are unlversal and cross-culLural. As only one example, llves Actoss coltotes-ctoss-coltotol nomoo uevelopmeot ls a hlghly respecLed LexLbook wrlLLen from an openly llberal perspecLlve (whlch ls ofLen susplclous of unlversal" sLages). 1he auLhors (P. Cardlner, !. MuLLer, and Corlnne kosmlLzkl) carefully revlew Lhe evldence for lageL's sLages of sensorlmoLor, preoperaLlonal, concreLe operaLlonal, and formal operaLlonal. 1hey found LhaL culLural seLLlngs someLlmes alLer Lhe tote of developmenL, or an empbosls on cerLaln aspecLs of Lhe sLages-buL noL Lhe sLages Lhemselves or Lhelr cross-culLural valldlLy. 1hus, for sensorlmoLor: ln facL, Lhe quallLaLlve characLerlsLlcs of sensorlmoLor developmenL remaln nearly ldenLlcal ln all lnfanLs sLudled so far, desplLe vasL dlfferences ln Lhelr culLural envlronmenLs" (p. 88). lor preoperaLlonal and concreLe operaLlonal, based on an enormous number of sLudles LhaL lnclude nlgerlans, Zamblans, lranlans, Algerlans, nepalese, Aslans, Senegalese, Amazon lndlans, and AusLrallan Aborlglnes: WhaL can we conclude from Lhls vasL amounL of cross-culLural daLa? llrsL, supporL for Lhe unlversallLy of Lhe sLrucLures or operaLlons underlylng Lhe preoperaLlonal perlod ls hlghly convlnclng. Second, . . . Lhe quallLaLlve characLerlsLlcs of concreLe operaLlonal developmenL (e.g., sLage sequences and reasonlng sLyles) appear Lo be unlversal [alLhough] Lhe raLe of cognlLlve developmenL . . . ls noL unlform buL depends on ecoculLural facLors." AlLhough Lhe auLhors do noL use exacLly Lhese Lerms, Lhey conclude LhaL Lhe deep sLrucLures of Lhe sLages are unlversal buL Lhe surface sLrucLures depend sLrongly on culLural, envlronmenLal, and ecologlcal facLors-ln oLher words, all four quadranLs are profoundly lnvolved ln lndlvldual developmenL. llnally, lL appears LhaL alLhough Lhe raLe and level of performance aL whlch chlldren move Lhrough lageL's concreLe operaLlonal perlod depend on culLural experlence [acLually, on all four quadranLs], chlldren ln dlverse socleLles sLlll proceed ln Lhe same sequence he predlcLed" (pp. 91-92). lewer lndlvlduals ln any culLures (Amerlcan, Aslan, Afrlcan, or oLherwlse) reach formal operaLlonal cognlLlon, and Lhe reasons glven for Lhls vary. lL mlghL be LhaL formal operaLlonal ls a genulnely hlgher sLage LhaL fewer Lherefore reach (greaLer depLh, less span), as l belleve. lL mlghL be LhaL formal operaLlonal ls a genulne capaclLy buL noL a genulne sLage, as Lhe auLhors belleve (l.e., only some culLures emphaslze formal operaLlonal and Lherefore Leach lL). Lvldence for Lhe exlsLence of lageL's formal sLage ls Lherefore sLrong buL noL concluslve. ?eL Lhe pollLlcally correcL have used Lhls one lLem Lo dlsmlss oll of lageL's sLages, whereas Lhe correcL concluslon, backed by enormous evldence, ls LhaL all of Lhe sLages up Lo formal operaLlonal have now been adequaLely demonsLraLed Lo be unlversal and crossculLural. We can now look aL Lhe conLours of Lhese unlversal sLages. AlLhough l belleve Lhe sLages aL and beyond formop are also unlversal (lncludlng vlslon-loglc and Lhe general LransraLlonal sLages), ln a sense Lhe mosL dlspuLed and conLroverslal ground lnvolves sLages leadlng up Lo formal operaLlonal, for Lhese are Lhe sLages-archalc, maglc, and myLhlc-LhaL are so lnLenslvely debaLed as Lo Lhelr splrlLual" merlL. 8eallzlng LhaL Lhese are exacLly Lhe sLages of lageL's sLudles LhaL have conslsLenLly held up Lo cross-culLural evldence allows us Lo see Lhem ln a more accuraLe llghL, l belleve. As suggesLed, lageL dlvlded cognlLlve developmenL lnLo four broad sLages-sensorlmoLor (0-2 years), preoperaLlonal or preop" (2-7 years), concreLe operaLlonal or conop" (7-11 years), and formal operaLlonal or formop" (11 years onward). 2 Lach of Lhese broad sLages he dlvlded lnLo several subsLages. We wlll Lake Lhem one aL a Llme, wlLh a few brlef correlaLlons wlLh oLher ma[or researchers. WaLchlng Lhese many correlaLlons beLween onLo and phylo, mlcro and macro, one can'L help buL marvel aL Lhe facL LhaL once naLure creaLes a holon, naLure uses lL Llme and Llme agaln. 1he kosmos creaLlvely brlngs forLh a holon (LeneL 2c: self-Lranscendence), whereupon lL ls sub[ecLed Lo lnLense selecLlon pressures (l.e., lt most flt wltb oll foot pooJtoots). lor as long as lL ls selecLed (flLs all four quadranLs), lL conLlnues Lo exlsL, elLher on lLs own, and/or Laken up and lncluded ln a hlgher superholon, where lL llves on as a relaLlvely lndependenL subholon. 1here ls a kosmlc economy ln all Lhls LhaL ls genulnely awe-lnsplrlng. Who would have LhoughL LhaL Lhe flrsL aLoms exlsLlng ln Lhe flrsL far-flung galaxles, sLreLchlng across bllllons of mlles and exlsLlng bllllons of years ago, would now be Lhe lngredlenLs, Lhe acLual subholons, ln your very own body, as you now slL here readlng all Lhls? SLnSC8lMC1C8 (A8CPAlC Anu A8CPAlC-MAClC) 1he human belng aL concepLlon ls a slngle-celled holon, embraclng ln lLself, as [unlor holons, organelles, molecules, aLoms, and subaLomlc parLlcles, reachlng all Lhe way back lnLo Lhose dark shadows LhaL fade lnLo Lhe evoluLlonary nlghL. 8y Lhe Llme of blrLh, Lhe human belng has developed from proLoplasmlc lrrlLablllLy Lo sensaLlon Lo percepLlon Lo lmpulse Lo proLo-emoLlon, embraclng each as a successlve holon ln lLs own compound lndlvlduallLy. 8uL none of Lhese funcLlons ls yeL clearly JlffeteotloteJ (or lnLegraLed), and Lhe flrsL years of llfe are a qulck comlng-Lo-Lerms wlLh Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere boLh wlLhln and wlLhouL, ln preparaLlon for Lhe emergence of Lhe noosphere, whlch beglns ln earnesL around age Lwo wlLh Lhe emergence of language. 1hus lageL, for example, ln speaklng of Lhe flrsL year of llfe, says LhaL Lhe self ls here motetlol, so Lo speak." lL ls sLlll, LhaL ls, embedded prlmarlly ln Lhe physlosphere. ln Lhe flrsL place, Lhe lnfanL cannoL easlly dlsLlngulsh beLween sub[ecL and ob[ecL or self and maLerlal envlronmenL, buL lnsLead llves ln a sLaLe of prlmary narclsslsm" (lreud) or oceanlc aduallsm" (ArleLl) or pleromaLlc fuslon" (!ung) or prlmary lndlssoclaLlon" (lageL). 1he lnfanL's self and Lhe maLerlal envlronmenL (and especlally Lhe moLher) are ln a sLaLe of prlmlLlve nondlfferenLlaLlon or lndlssoclaLlon. Cn Lhe psychosexual slde, Lhls ls Lhe oral phase" because Lhe lnfanL ls comlng Lo Lerms wlLh food, physlcal nourlshmenL, llfe ln Lhls physlosphere. SomeLlme beLween Lhe fourLh and Lhe nlnLh monLh, Lhls archalc lndlssoclaLlon glves way Lo a pbyslcol bodyself JlffeteotloteJ from Lhe pbyslcol envlronmenL-Lhe real blrLh" of Lhe lndlvldual physlcal self. MargareL Mahler acLually refers Lo lL as haLchlng." 1he lnfanL blLes lLs Lhumb and lL hurLs, blLes Lhe blankeL and lL doesn'L. 1here ls a dlfference, lL learns, beLween Lhe physlcal self and Lhe physlcal oLher. AnoLher way Lo puL Lhls ls Lo say LhaL, wlLh Lhls flrsL ma[or dlfferenLlaLlon (or flrsL ma[or fulcrum of developmenL," as researchers call lL), 3 consclousness seots lLself ln Lhe physlcal body, grounds lLself ln Lhe physlosphere of Lhe lndlvldual holon and noL ln Lhe physlosphere of Lhe soclal holon (lLs envlronmenL). Many researchers, from kernberg Lo Mahler, have concluded LhaL lf, due Lo physlologlcal/geneLlc facLors or repeaLed Lrauma, consclousness falls Lo seaL lLself ln Lhe physlcal self, Lhe resulL ls psycbosls of one sorL or anoLher. 4 sychosls ls many Lhlngs (lncludlng, perhaps, an lnflux from hlgher dlmenslons), buL lL cerLalnly lncludes a fallure Lo esLabllsh a grounded physlcal self clearly dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe envlronmenL. 1he psychoLlc, as 8. u. Lalng puL lL, ls consLanLly [umplng ouL of Lhe body", he or she cannoL easlly dlfferenLlaLe where Lhe body sLops and Lhe chalr beglns, sub[ecL and ob[ecL collapse ln a sLaLe of fuslon and confuslon, wlLh halluclnaLory blurrlng of boundarles, and so forLh. sychosls, we may say, ls a fallure Lo dlfferenLlaLe and lnLegraLe Lhe physlosphere. lf all goes relaLlvely well, Lhen Lhe lnfanL ttoosceoJs Lhls archalc fuslon sLaLe and emerges or haLches as a grounded physlcal self. 1he seosotlmotot petloJ (0-2 years) ls Lhus predomlnanLly concerned wlLh dlfferenLlaLlng Lhe pbyslcol self from Lhe pbyslcol envlronmenL, and resulLs, Loward Lhe end of Lhe second year, ln whaL lageL calls physlcal ob[ecL permanence," Lhe capaclLy of Lhe lnfanL Lo undersLand LhaL physlcal ob[ecLs exlsL lndependenLly of hlm or her (l.e., Lhe physlcal world exlsLs lndependenLly of one's egocenLrlc wlshes abouL lL). 1hus, ouL of an lnlLlal sLaLe of ptlmoty loJlssoclotloo (proLoplasmlc," lageL also calls lL), Lhe physlcal self and Lhe physlcal oLher emerge: lL ls Lhrough a progresslve dlfferenLlaLlon LhaL Lhe lnLernal world comes lnLo belng and ls conLrasLed wlLh Lhe exLernal. nelLher of Lhese Lwo Lerms ls glven aL Lhe sLarL. . . . ConsequenLly, durlng Lhe gradual and slow dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe lnlLlal proLoplasmlc reallLy lnLo ob[ecLlve and sub[ecLlve reallLy, lL ls clear LhaL each of Lhe Lwo Lerms [lnLerlor and exLerlor, LefL Pand and 8lghL Pand] ln process of dlfferenLlaLlon wlll evolve ln accordance wlLh lLs own sLrucLure. . . . 1hls phenomenon ls very general. uurlng Lhe early sLages Lhe [physlcal] world and Lhe self are one, nelLher Lerm ls dlsLlngulshed from Lhe oLher. 8uL when Lhey become dlsLlncL, Lhese Lwo Lerms begln by remalnlng very close Lo each oLher: Lhe world ls sLlll consclous and full of lnLenLlons, Lhe self ls sLlll maLerlal, so Lo speak, and only sllghLly lnLerlorlzed. AL every sLage Lhere remaln ln Lhe concepLlon of naLure whaL we mlghL call adherences," fragmenLs of lnLernal experlence whlch sLlll cllng Lo Lhe exLernal world. 3 AL Lhe end of Lhe sensorlmoLor perlod, Lhe physlcal self and physlcal oLher are clearly dlfferenLlaLed, buL as Lhe mloJ beqlos to emetqe wlLh preop, tbe meotol lmoqes ooJ symbols tbemselves ote loltlolly foseJ ooJ coofoseJ wltb tbe extetool wotlJ, leadlng Lo whaL lageL calls adherences," whlch chlldren Lhemselves wlll evenLually re[ecL as belng lnadequaLe and mlsleadlng. We have dlsLlngulshed [several] varleLles of adherences deflned ln Lhls way. 1here are, Lo begln wlLh, durlng a very early sLage, feellngs of parLlclpaLlon accompanled someLlmes by maglcal bellefs, Lhe sun and moon follow us, and lf we walk, lL ls enough Lo make Lhem move along, Lhlngs noLlce us and obey us, llke Lhe wlnd, Lhe clouds, Lhe nlghL, eLc., Lhe moon, Lhe sLreeL lamps, eLc., send us dreams Lo annoy us," eLc., eLc. ln shorL, Lhe world ls fllled wlLh Lendencles and lnLenLlons whlch are [cenLered on] our own. A second form of adherence, closely allled Lo Lhe precedlng, ls LhaL consLlLuLed by anlmlsm, whlch makes Lhe chlld endow Lhlngs wlLh consclousness and llfe [orlenLed solely Loward Lhe chlld]. . . . ln Lhls maglco- anlmlsLlc order: on Lhe one hand, we lssue commands Lo Lhlngs (Lhe sun and Lhe moon, Lhe clouds and Lhe sky follow us), on Lhe oLher hand, Lhese Lhlngs acqulesce ln our deslres because Lhey Lhemselves wlsh Lo do so. 6 A Lhlrd form ls arLlflclallsm [anLhropocenLrlsm]. 1he chlld beglns by Lhlnklng of Lhlngs ln Lerms of hls own l": Lhe Lhlngs around hlm Lake noLlce of man and are made for man, everyLhlng abouL Lhem ls wllled and lnLenLlonal, everyLhlng ls organlzed for Lhe good of men. lf we ask Lhe chlld, or Lhe chlld asks hlmself, how Lhlngs began, he has recourse Lo man Lo explaln Lhem. 1hus arLlflclallsm ls based on feellngs of parLlclpaLlon whlch consLlLuLe a very speclal and very lmporLanL class of adherences. 7 As we wlll see, lageL belleves LhaL Lhe ma[or and ln many ways deflnlng characLerlsLlc of all adherences ls eqoceottlsm, or an early and lnlLlal lnablllLy Lo Lranscend one's own perspecLlve and undersLand LhaL reallLy ls noL self-cenLered. uevelopmenL Lhus proceeds slowly from egocenLrlsm Lo perspecLlvlsm, from reallsm Lo reclproclLy and muLuallLy, and from absoluLlsm Lo relaLlvlLy: 1hls formula means LhaL Lhe chlld, afLer havlng regarded hls own polnL of vlew as absoluLe, comes Lo dlscover Lhe posslblllLy of oLher polnLs of vlew and Lo concelve of reallLy as consLlLuLed, no longer by whaL ls lmmedlaLely glven, buL by whaL ls common Lo all polnLs of vlew Laken LogeLher. Cne of Lhe flrsL aspecLs of Lhls process ls Lhe passage from reallsm of percepLlon Lo lnLerpreLaLlon properly so called. All Lhe younger chlldren Lake Lhelr lmmedlaLe percepLlons as Lrue, and Lhen proceed Lo lnLerpreL Lhem accordlng Lo Lhelr own egocenLrlc relaLlons. 1he mosL sLrlklng example ls LhaL of Lhe clouds and Lhe heavenly bodles, of whlch chlldren belleve LhaL Lhey follow us. 1he sun and moon are small globes Lravellng a llLLle way above Lhe level of Lhe roofs of houses and followlng us abouL on our walks. Lven Lhe chlld of 6-8 years does noL heslLaLe Lo Lake Lhls percepLlon as Lhe expresslon of LruLh, and, curlously enough, he never Lhlnks of asklng hlmself wheLher Lhese heavenly bodles do noL also follow oLher people. When we ask Lhe capLlous quesLlon as Lo whlch of Lwo people walklng ln opposlLe dlrecLlons Lhe sun would prefer Lo follow, Lhe chlld ls Laken aback and shows how new Lhe quesLlon ls Lo hlm. [Clder chlldren,] on Lhe oLher hand, have dlscovered LhaL Lhe sun follows everybody. lrom Lhls Lhey conclude LhaL Lhe LruLh lles ln Lhe teclptoclty of tbe polots of vlew: LhaL Lhe sun ls very hlgh up, LhaL lL follows no one. . . . 8 lageL ls aL palns Lo lndlcaLe LhaL Lhe process of dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon beLween lnLernal and exLernal world ls a long and slow one. lL ls noL, for example, LhaL maglco-anlmlsLlc bellefs are presenL aL one sLage and Lhen compleLely dlsappear aL Lhe nexL, buL raLher LhaL cognlLlons referred Lo as maglcal" become progresslvely less and less as developmenL proceeds, movlng from a pure maglcal auLlsm" Lo menLal egocenLrlclLy Lo reclprocal and muLual sharlng. ln a very lmporLanL passage lageL geLs Lo Lhe hearL of Lhe maLLer: lor Lhe consLrucLlon of Lhe ob[ecLlve world and Lhe elaboraLlon of sLrlcL reasonlng boLh conslsL ln a gradual teJoctloo of eqoceottlclty ln favor of . . . reclproclLy of vlewpolnLs. ln boLh cases, Lhe lnlLlal sLaLe ls marked by Lhe facL LhaL Lhe self ls confused wlLh Lhe exLernal world and wlLh oLher people, Lhe vlslon of Lhe world ls falslfled by sub[ecLlve adherences, and Lhe vlslon of oLher people ls falslfled by Lhe facL LhaL Lhe personal polnL of vlew predomlnaLes, almosL Lo Lhe excluslon of all oLhers. 1hus ln boLh cases, LruLh ls obscured by Lhe ego. 1hen, as Lhe chlld dlscovers LhaL oLhers do noL Lhlnk as he does, he makes efforLs Lo adapL hlmself Lo Lhem, he bows Lo exlgencles of conLrol and verlflcaLlon whlch are lmplled by dlscusslon and argumenL, and Lhus comes Lo replace egocenLrlc loglc by Lhe loglc creaLed by soclal llfe. We saw LhaL exacLly Lhe same process Look place wlLh regard Lo Lhe ldea of reallLy. 1here ls Lherefore an egocenLrlc loglc [LP] and an egocenLrlc onLology [8P], of whlch Lhe consequences are parallel: Lhey boLh falslfy Lhe perspecLlve of relaLlons and of Lhlngs, because Lhey boLh sLarL from Lhe assumpLlon LhaL oLher people undersLand us and agree wlLh us from Lhe flrsL, and LhaL Lhlngs revolve around us wlLh Lhe sole purpose of servlng us and resembllng us. 9 A noLe on Lermlnology: lageL dlvldes each of Lhe ma[or cognlLlve sLages lnLo aL leasL Lwo subsLages (early and laLe preop, early and laLe conop, early and laLe formop), and l have generally followed lageL ln Lhls regard. Slnce we have also been uslng Cebser's general worldvlew Lermlnology of archalc, maglc, myLhlc, and menLal (wlLh Lhe clear lmpllcaLlon LhaL Lhey are referrlng Lo essenLlally slmllar sLages), l wlll ofLen hybrldlze Cebser's Lermlnology Lo maLch lageL's subsLages, so LhaL we have a conLlnuum of archalc, archalc-maglc, maglc, maglc-myLhlc, myLhlc, myLhlc- raLlonal, raLlonal, raLlonal-exlsLenLlal (and lnLo vlslon-loglc, psychlc, eLc.). 1hese parLlcular names are, of course, arblLrary, buL Lhe acLual sLages Lhey refer Lo are based on exLenslve emplrlcal/phenomenologlcal research. l also belleve Lhese names (such as maglc, myLhlc-raLlonal, eLc.) help Lo capLure Lhe essenLlal flavor" of each sLage and sub-sLage. 1he preponderance of lndlssoclaLlons and adherences" aL Lhe sensorlmoLor and early preoperaLlonal (Lhe archalc and Lhe archalc-maglc-roughly 0-3 years) have led lageL hlmself Lo ofLen refer Lo Lhls general early perlod as one of maglcal cognlLlons" or maglc proper." As he explalns: 1he flrsL [general sLage] ls LhaL whlch precedes any clear consclousness of Lhe self, and may be arblLrarlly seL down as lasLlng unLll Lhe age of 2-3, LhaL ls, Llll Lhe appearance of Lhe flrsL whys," whlch symbollze ln a way Lhe flrsL awareness of reslsLance ln Lhe exLernal world. As far as we can con[ecLure, Lwo phenomena characLerlze Lhls flrsL sLage [Lhe overall archalc-maglc]. lrom Lhe [lnLernal] polnL of vlew, lL ls pure ootlsm, or LhoughL akln Lo dreams or daydreams, LhoughL ln whlch LruLh ls confused wlLh deslre. 1o every deslre corresponds lmmedlaLely an lmage or llluslon whlch Lransforms Lhls deslre lnLo reallLy, Lhanks Lo a sorL of pseudo-halluclnaLlon or play. no ob[ecLlve observaLlon or reasonlng ls posslble: Lhere ls only a perpeLual play whlch Lransforms percepLlons and creaLes slLuaLlons ln accordance wlLh Lhe sub[ecL's pleasure [Lhls ls a sLage LhaL ls ofLen euloglzed and elevaLed" by Lhe 8omanLlcs, such as norman C. 8rown, Lo a splrlLual non-dual" sLaLe, whereas lL ls acLually, as we have seen, a very egocenLrlc, narclsslsLlc sLaLe: preraLlonal, noL LransraLlonal]. lrom Lhe onLologlcal vlewpolnL, whaL corresponds Lo Lhls manner of Lhlnklng ls prlmlLlve psycboloqlcol coosollty, probably ln a form LhaL lmplles moqlc proper [hls lLallcs, l refer Lo lL as archalc-maglc]: Lhe bellef LhaL any deslre whaLsoever can lnfluence ob[ecLs, Lhe bellef ln Lhe obedlence of exLernal Lhlngs. Maglc and auLlsm are Lherefore Lwo dlfferenL sldes of one and Lhe same phenomenon-LhaL confuslon beLween Lhe self and Lhe world. . . . 10 8LCL8A1lCnAL (MAClC Anu MAClC-M?1PlC) lf all goes relaLlvely well, Lhe lnfanL ttoosceoJs Lhe early archalc fuslon sLaLe and emerges or haLches as a grounded physlcal self. 8uL lf Lhe lnfanL's physlcal body ls now separaLed from Lhe envlronmenL, lLs emoLlonal body ls noL. 1he lnfanL's emotloool self sLlll exlsLs ln a sLaLe of lndlssoclaLlon from oLher emotloool ob[ecLs, ln parLlcular Lhe moLherlng one. 8uL Lhen, around elghLeen monLhs or so, Lhe lnfanL learns Lo Jlffeteotlote lts feelloqs from Lhe feelloqs of otbets (Lhls ls Lhe second ma[or dlfferenLlaLlon, or second fulcrum"). lLs own blosphere ls dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe blosphere of Lhose around lL-ln oLher words, lL Lranscends lLs embeddedness ln Lhe undlfferenLlaLed blosphere. Cnce agaln, as wlLh every holon, lL manlfesLs noL [usL a capaclLy for self-preservaLlon and self-adapLaLlon, buL also for self-Lranscendence. Mahler refers Lo Lhls cruclal LransformaLlon (Lhe second fulcrum) as Lhe separaLlon-lndlvlduaLlon phase," or Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon-and-lnLegraLlon of a sLable emotloool self (whereas Lhe prevlous fulcrum, as we saw, was Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon of Lhe pbyslcol self). Mahler acLually calls Lhls fulcrum Lhe psychologlcal blrLh of Lhe lnfanL," because Lhe lnfanL emerges from lLs emoLlonal fuslon wlLh Lhe (m)oLher. A developmenLal mlscarrlage aL Lhls crlLlcal fulcrum (accordlng Lo Mahler, kernberg, and oLhers) resulLs ln Lhe narclsslsLlc and borderllne paLhologles, because lf Lhe lnfanL does noL dlfferenLlaLe-separaLe lLs feellngs from Lhe feellngs of Lhose around lL, Lhen lL ls open Lo belng flooded" and swepL away" by lLs emoLlonal envlronmenL, on Lhe one hand (Lhe borderllne syndromes), or lL can LreaL Lhe enLlre world as a mere exLenslon of lLs own feellngs (Lhe narclsslsLlc condlLlon)-boLh of whlch resulL from a fallure Lo Lranscend an embeddedness ln Lhe undlfferenLlaLed blosphere. Cne remalns ln lndlssoclaLlon wlLh, or merged" wlLh, Lhe blosphere, sLuck ln Lhe blosphere, [usL as wlLh Lhe prevlous psychoses one remalns merged wlLh or sLuck ln Lhe physlosphere. 8y around age Lhree, lf all has gone relaLlvely well, Lhe young chlld has a sLable and coherenL physlcal self and emoLlonal self, lL has dlfferenLlaLed and lnLegraLed, Lranscended and preserved, lLs own physlosphere and blosphere. 8y Lhls Llme language has begun Lo emerge, and developmenL ln Lhe noosphere beglns ln earnesL. 1hus, Lhe lnLenslLy of Lhe early archalc-maglc decllnes wlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of emoLlonal self and emoLlonal oLher (24-36 monLhs)-buL, accordlng Lo lageL, maglcal cognlLlons cootlooe to Jomloote tbe eotlte eotly pteopetotloool petloJ (2-4 years), Lhe perlod l slmply call maglc." ln oLher words, Lhe flrsL ma[or layer of Lhe noosphere ls maglcal. uurlng Lhls perlod, Lhe newly emerglng lmages and symbols do noL merely represenL ob[ecLs, Lhey are LhoughL Lo be concreLely pott of tbe tbloqs tbey tepteseot, and Lhus word maglc" abounds: up Lo Lhe age of 4-3, [Lhe chlld] Lhlnks LhaL he ls forclng" or compelllng Lhe moon Lo move, Lhe relaLlon Lakes on an aspecL of dynamlc parLlclpaLlon or of maglc. lrom 4 Lo 3 he ls more lncllned Lo Lhlnk LhaL Lhe moon ls Lrylng Lo follow hlm: Lhe relaLlon ls anlmlsLlc. Closely akln Lo Lhls parLlclpaLlon ls moqlcol coosollty, maglc belng ln many respecLs slmply parLlclpaLlon: Lhe sub[ecL regards hls gesLures, hls LhoughLs, or Lhe ob[ecLs he handles, as charged wlLh efflcacy, Lhanks Lo Lhe very parLlclpaLlons whlch he esLabllshes beLween Lhose gesLures, eLc., and Lhe Lhlngs around hlm [adherences"]. 1hus a cerLaln word acLs upon a cerLaln Lhlng, a cerLaln gesLure wlll proLecL one from a cerLaln danger, a cerLaln whlLe pebble wlll brlng abouL Lhe growLh of waLer lllles, and so on. . . . 11 lageL refers Lo such maglcal cognlLlons as a form of parLlclpaLlon"-LhaL ls, Lhe sub[ecL and Lhe ob[ecL, and varlous ob[ecLs Lhemselves, are llnked" by cerLaln Lypes of adherences, or felL connecLlons, connecLlons LhaL noneLheless vlolaLe Lhe rlch fabrlc of relaLlons acLually consLlLuLlng Lhe ob[ecL. 1hls ls very much whaL lreud referred Lo as Lhe prlmary process, whlch ls governed by Lwo general laws, LhaL of dlsplacemenL and LhaL of condensaLlon. ln Jlsplocemeot, Lwo dlfferenL ob[ecLs are equaLed or llnked" because Lhey share slmllar parLs or predlcaLes (a relaLlon of slmllotlty: lf one Aslan person ls bad, all Aslans musL be bad). ln cooJeosotloo, dlfferenL ob[ecLs are relaLed because Lhey exlsL ln Lhe same space (a relaLlon of cootlqolty: a lock of halr of a greaL warrlor conLalns" ln condensed form Lhe power of Lhe warrlor). (1here ls anoLher way Lo caLegorlze Lhls. Lach holon ls an agency-ln-communlon. ulsplacemenL confuses dlfferenL holons because Lhey share slmllar agency. CondensaLlon confuses dlfferenL holons because Lhey share slmllar communlons. 1he former ls meLaphor, Lhe laLLer ls meLonym. 1hls leads Lo a hosL of lnLeresLlng correlaLlons, whlch l wlll reserve for a noLe). 12 uL slmply, such prlmary process or maglcal cognlLlon ls noL yeL capable of grasplng Lhe noLlon of a boloo. lL does noL seL whole and parL ln a rlch neLwork of motool relaLlonshlps, buL shorL-clrculLs Lhe process by merely collapslng or confuslng varlous wholes and parLs-whaL lageL calls syncreLlsm and [uxLaposlLlon (agaln, slmllarlLy and conLlgulLy). Maglcal cognlLlon, Lhen, ls of fused and confused wholes and parLs, and noL muLually relaLed wholes and parLs. 1hese fused neLworks" of sycreLlc wholes" oppeot very hollsLlc (or holographlc"), buL are acLually noL very coherenL and do noL even maLch Lhe already avallable sensorlmoLor evldence. [1hls] Lype of relaLlon ls pottlclpotloo. 1hls Lype ls more frequenL Lhan would aL flrsL appear Lo be Lhe case, buL lL dlsappears afLer Lhe age of 3-6. lLs prlnclple ls Lhe followlng: Lwo Lhlngs beLween whlch Lhere subslsL relaLlons elLher of resemblance [slmllarlLy, meLaphor] or of general afflnlLy [conLlgulLy, meLonym], are concelved as havlng someLhlng ln common whlch enables Lhem Lo acL upon one anoLher aL a dlsLance, or more preclsely, Lo be regarded one as a source of emanaLlons, Lhe oLher as Lhe emanaLlon of Lhe flrsL. 1hus alr or shadows ln a room emanaLe from Lhe alr and shadows ouL of doors. 1hus also dreams, whlch are senL Lo us by blrds who llke Lhe wlnd." [1he chlld] beglns, lndeed, as we do, by feellng Lhe analogy of Lhe shadow casL by Lhe book wlLh Lhe shadows of Lrees, houses, eLc. 8uL Lhls analogy does noL lead hlm Lo any [muLual] relaLlon: lL slmply leads hlm Lo ldenLlfy Lhe parLlcular cases wlLh one anoLher. So LhaL we have here, noL analogy proper, buL syncreLlsm. 1he chlld argues as follows: 1hls book makes a shadow, Lrees, houses, eLc., make shadows. 1he book's shadow (Lherefore) comes ftom tbe ttees and Lhe houses." 1hus, from Lhe polnL of vlew of Lhe cause or of Lhe sLrucLure of Lhe ob[ecL, Lhere ls parLlclpaLlon, syncreLlsLlc schemas resulLlng from Lhe fuslon of slngular Lerms. . . . 13 1PL SPll1 l8CM MAClC 1C M?1PlC As we move from early preoperaLlonal (2-4 years, maglc") Lo laLe preoperaLlonal (4-7 years, maglc-myLhlc"), slmllar Lypes of adherences conLlnue Lo domlnaLe awareness. 8uL one cruclal dlfference comes Lo Lhe fore: maglc proper-Lhe bellef LhaL Lhe sub[ecL can maglcally alLer Lhe ob[ecL-dlmlnlshes rapldly. ConLlnued lnLeracLlon wlLh Lhe world evenLually leads Lhe sub[ecL Lo reallze LhaL hls or her LhoughLs do noL egocenLrlcally conLrol, creaLe, or govern Lhe world. 1he hldden llnkages" don'L hold up ln reallLy. Maglc proper Lhus dlmlnlshes, or raLher, Lhe omnlpoLenL maglc of Lhe lndlvldual sub[ecL-a maglc LhaL no longer works"-ls slmply ttoosfetteJ to otbet sobjects. Maybe l can'L order Lhe world around, buL uaddy (or Cod or Lhe volcano splrlL) can. And Lhus onLo Lhe scene come crashlng a hundred gods and goddesses, all capable of dolng whaL l can no longer do: mlraculously alLer Lhe paLLerns of naLure ln order Lo caLer Lo my wanLs. Whereas ln Lhe earller maglcal sLages proper, Lhe secreL of Lhe unlverse was Lo learn Lhe rlghL Lype of word maglc LhaL would Jltectly alLer Lhe world, Lhe focus now ls Lo learn Lhe rlghL rlLuals and prayers LhaL wlll make Lhe gods and goddesses lnLervene and alLer Lhe world for me. lageL: 1he posslblllLy of mlracles ls, of course, admlLLed, or raLher, mlracles form parL of Lhe chlld's concepLlon of Lhe world, slnce law [aL Lhls sLage] ls a moral Lhlng wlLh Lhe posslblllLy of numerous excepLlons [suspended by Cod" or a powetfol otbet]. Chlldren have been quoLed who asked Lhelr parenLs Lo sLop Lhe raln, Lo Lurn splnach lnLo poLaLoes, eLc. 14 1hus Lhe shlfL from maglc Lo maglc-myLhlc. lageL: 1he flrsL sLage ls maglcal: we make Lhe clouds move by walklng. 1he clouds obey us aL a dlsLance. 1he average age of Lhls sLage ls 3. 1he second sLage [maglc-myLhlc] ls boLh arLlflclallsL and anlmlsLlc. Clouds move because Cod or [oLher] men make Lhem move. 1he average age of Lhls sLage ls 6." 13 lL ls from Lhls maglc-myLhlc sLrucLure LhaL so many of Lhe world's classlcal myLhologles seem ln large parL Lo lssue. As hlllp Cowan polnLs ouL, uurlng Lhe [laLe preop or maglc-myLhlc] sLage, Lhere ls sLlll a confuslon beLween physlcal and personal causallLy, Lhe physlcal world appears Lo operaLe much Lhe way people do. All of Lhese examples [show LhaL laLe preop] chlldren have already developed elaboraLe myLhologles abouL cosmlc quesLlons such as Lhe naLure of llfe (and deaLh) and Lhe cause of wlnd [and so forLh]. lurLher, Lhese myLhologles show many slmllarlLles from chlld Lo chlld across culLures and do noL seem Lo have been dlrecLly LaughL by adulLs." 16 M?1P Anu A8CPL1?L 1hls dlrecLly brlngs us, of course, Lo Lhe work of Carl !ung and hls concluslon LhaL Lhe essenLlal forms and moLlfs of Lhe world's greaL myLhologles-Lhe archalc forms" or archeLypes"-are collecLlvely lnherlLed ln Lhe lndlvldual psyche of each of us. lL ls noL ofLen reallzed LhaL lreud was ln compleLe agreemenL wlLh !ung abouL Lhe exlsLence of Lhls archalc herlLage. lreud was sLruck by Lhe facL LhaL lndlvlduals ln Lherapy kepL reproduclng essenLlally slmllar phanLasles," phanLasles LhaL seemed Lherefore somehow Lo be collecLlvely lnherlLed. Whence comes Lhe necesslLy for Lhese phanLasles and Lhe maLerlal for Lhem?" he asks. Pow ls lL Lo be explalned LhaL Lhe same phanLasles are always formed wlLh Lhe same conLenL? l have an answer Lo Lhls whlch l know wlll seem Lo you very darlng. l belleve LhaL Lhese prlmal phanLasles are a phylogeneLlc possesslon. ln Lhem Lhe lndlvldual sLreLches ouL Lo Lhe experlences of pasL ages." 17 1hls phylogeneLlc or archalc herlLage" lncludes, accordlng Lo lreud, abbrevlaLed repeLlLlons of Lhe evoluLlon undergone by Lhe whole human race Lhrough long-drawn-ouL perlods and from pre-hlsLorlc ages." AlLhough, as we wlll see, lreud and !ung dlffered profoundly over Lhe acLual naLure of Lhls archalc herlLage, lreud neverLheless made lL very clear LhaL l fully agree wlLh !ung ln recognlzlng Lhe exlsLence of Lhls phylogeneLlc herlLage." 18 lageL has also wrlLLen exLenslvely on hls essenLlal agreemenL wlLh and appreclaLlon of !ung's work. 8uL he dlffers sllghLly wlLh !ung ln LhaL he does noL see Lhe archeLypes Lhemselves as belng dlrecLly lnherlLed from pasL ages, buL raLher as belng Lhe secondary byproducLs of cognlLlve sLrucLures whlch Lhemselves are slmllar wherever Lhey develop and whlch, ln lnLerpreLlng a common physlcal world, generaLe common moLlfs. 8uL wheLher we follow lreud, !ung, or lageL, Lhe concluslon ls essenLlally Lhe same: all Lhe world's greaL myLhologles exlsL Loday ln each of us, ln me and ln you. 1hey are produced, and can aL any Llme be produced, by Lhe archalc, Lhe maglc, and Lhe myLhlc sLrucLures of our own compound lndlvlduallLy (and classlcally by Lhe maglc-myLhlc sLrucLure). 1he quesLlon Lhen cenLers-and here lreud and !ung blLLerly parLed ways-on Lhe naLure and funcLlon of Lhese myLhlc moLlfs, Lhese archeLypes. Are Lhey metely lnfanLlle and regresslve (lreud), or do Lhey also conLaln a rlch source of splrlLual wlsdom (!ung)? lageL, needless Lo say, slded wlLh lreud on Lhls parLlcular lssue. l have already suggesLed LhaL l do noL see Lhese parLlcular archeLypes" as belng qulLe Lhe hlgh source of Lranspersonal wlsdom LhaL !ung belleved, buL Lhe slLuaLlon ls very subLle and complex, and we wlll reLurn Lo lL laLer ln Lhls chapLer, ln connecLlon wlLh !oseph Campbell, and dlscuss lL more fully. Campbell, we wlll see, belleves LhaL ln cerLaln clrcumsLances (whlch we wlll explore), Lhe early myLhlc archeLypes can carry profound rellglous and splrlLual meanlng and power. 8uL even Campbell clearly acknowledges (and lndeed sLresses) LhaL Lhe early and laLe preoperaLlonal sLages Lhemselves are boLh marked by a greaL deal of eqoceottlsm, ootbtopoceottlsm, and qeoceottlsm. uL dlfferenLly, sLlll lylng close Lo Lhe body," preoperaLlonal cognlLlon does noL easlly Lake Lhe role of oLher, nor does lL sLlll clearly dlfferenLlaLe Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere. Lven ln laLe preoperaLlonal Lhlnklng, Lhe chlld flrmly belleves LhaL names are a parL of, or acLually exlsL ln, Lhe ob[ecLs LhaL are named. WhaL are names for?" a chlld of flve was asked. 1hey are whaL you see when you look aL Lhlngs." Where ls Lhe name of Lhe sun?" lnslde Lhe sun." As one chlld summarlzed lL: lf Lhere weren'L any words lL would be very bad. ?ou couldn'L make anyLhlng. Pow could Lhlngs have been made?" !oseph Campbell commenLs: ln Lhe cosmologles of archalc man, as ln Lhose of lnfancy, Lhe maln concern of Lhe creaLor was ln Lhe weal and woe of man. LlghL was made so LhaL we should see, nlghL so LhaL we mlghL sleep, sLars Lo foreLell Lhe weaLher, clouds Lo warn of raln. 1he chlld's vlew of Lhe world ls noL only qeoceottlc, buL eqoceottlc. And lf we add Lo Lhls slmple sLrucLure Lhe Lendency recognlzed by lreud, Lo experlence all Lhlngs ln assoclaLlon wlLh Lhe sub[ecLlve formula of Lhe famlly romance [Cedlpus/LlecLra], we have a raLher LlghL and very sllghL vocabulary of elemenLary ldeas, whlch we may expecL Lo see varlously lnflecLed and applled ln Lhe myLhologles of Lhe world. 19 8L8LSSlCn 1be emetqeoce of tbe ooospbete: llrsL lmages (aL around 7 monLhs), Lhen symbols (Lhe flrsL full-fledged symbol probably belng Lhe word no!"), Lhen concepLs (around 3-4 years), all alded lmmeasurably by Lhe emergence of language. 20 l menLloned Lhe word no!" as belng Lhe flrsL symbol, and LhaL word summarlzes all Lhe sLrengLhs-and all Lhe weaknesses-of Lhe newly emerglng noosphere. no" ls Lhe flrsL form of speclflcally menLal Lranscendence. lmages begln Lhls menLal Lranscendence, buL lmages are Lled Lo Lhelr sensory referenLs. WlLh no" l can for Lhe flrsL Llme decllne Lo acL on my bodlly lmpulses or on your deslres (whlch every parenL dlscovers ln Lhe chlld durlng Lhe Lerrlble Lwos"). lor Lhe flrsL Llme ln developmenL, Lhe chlld can begln Lo Lranscend lLs merely blologlcal or blocenLrlc or ecocenLrlc embeddedness, begln Lo exerL conLrol over bodlly deslres and bodlly dlscharges and bodlly lnsLlncLs, whlle also separaLlng-lndlvlduaLlng" lLself from Lhe wlll of oLhers. 1he lreudlan fuss over LolleL Lralnlng" and Lhe anal phase" slmply refers Lo Lhe facL LhaL a menLal- llngulsLlc self ls beqlooloq Lo emerge and beglnnlng Lo exerL some Lype of consclous wlll and consclous conLrol over lLs sponLaneous blospherlc producLlons, and over lLs belng conLrolled" by oLhers as well. ln shorL, lL ls only wlLh language LhaL Lhe chlld can dlfferenLlaLe lLs mlnd and body, dlfferenLlaLe lLs menLal wlll and lLs bodlly lmpulses, and Lhen begln Lo loteqtote lLs mlnd and body. 1hls ls Lhe Lhlrd ma[or dlfferenLlaLlon, or Lhe Lhlrd fulcrum. 1he follote Lo dlfferenLlaLe mlnd and body-Lhe fallure Lo Lranscend aL Lhls sLage-ls anoLher way Lo say remalns sLuck ln Lhe body or Lhe blosphere," whlch, we saw, ls Lhe prlmary developmenLal leslon underlylng Lhe narclsslsLlc/borderllne paLhologles. 8uL no!" can go Loo far, and Lhereln lles all Lhe horrors of Lhe noosphere. lor lf lL ls lndeed wlLh language LhaL Lhe chlld can dlfferenLlaLe mlnd and body, dlfferenLlaLe Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, LhaL Jlffeteotlotloo (as always) can go Loo far and resulL ln Jlssoclotloo. 1he mlnd does noL [usL Lranscend and lnclude Lhe body, lL represses Lhe body, represses lLs sensuallLy, represses lLs sexuallLy, represses lLs rlch rooLs ln Lhe blosphere. 8epresslon, ln Lhe lreudlan (and !unglan) sense, comes lnLo exlsLence only wlLh Lhe language barrler," wlLh a no!" carrled Lo exLremes. And Lhe resulL of Lhls exLreme no!" ls Lechnlcally called neurosls" or psychoneurosls." Lvery neurosls, ln oLher words, ls a mlnlaLure ecologlcal crlsls. lL ls a refusal Lo lnclude ln Lhe compound lndlvldual some aspecL of organlc llfe, emoLlonal-sexual llfe, reproducLlve llfe, sensuous llfe, llbldlnal llfe, blospherlc llfe. lL ls a denlal of our rooLs and our foundaLlon. neurosls, ln Lhls sense, ls an assaulL on Lhe blosphere by Lhe noosphere, an aLLempL Lo render extloct some aspecLs of our own organlc holons. 8uL Lhese blospherlc holons do noL Lhereby merely dlsappear (nor could Lhey wlLhouL kllllng Lhe lndlvldual). 8aLher, Lhe repressed holons reLurn ln dlsgulsed forms known as neuroLlc sympLoms"-anxleLles and depresslons and obsesslons-palnful sympLoms of a blosphere lgnored, a blosphere now forclng lLself lnLo consclousness ln hldden forms, aLLempLs Lo Lhrow Lhe noosphere off lLs back. 21 And Lhe neuroLlc sympLoms dlsappear, or are healed, only as consclousness relaxes lLs represslon, reconLacLs and befrlends Lhe blosphere LhaL exlsLs lo lts owo beloq, and Lhen lnLegraLes LhaL blosphere wlLh Lhe newly emergenL noosphere ln lLs own case. 1hls ls called uncoverlng Lhe shadow," and Lhe shadow ls . . . Lhe blosphere. 1hus, lf remalnlng stock ln Lhe blosphere resulLs ln Lhe borderllne/narclsslsLlc condlLlons, golng Lo Lhe oLher exLreme and olleootloq Lhe blosphere resulLs dlrecLly ln Lhe psychoneuroses. lL follows LhaL our presenL-day worldwlde ecologlcal crlsls ls, ln Lhe very sLrlcLesL sense of Lhe Lerm, a worldwlde collecLlve neurosls-and ls abouL Lo resulL ln a worldwlde nervous breakdown. 1hls crlsls, l repeaL, ls ln no way golng Lo desLroy Lhe blosphere"-Lhe blosphere wlll survlve, ln some form or anoLher (even lf [usL vlral and bacLerlal), no maLLer whaL we do Lo lL. WhaL we are dolng, raLher, ls alLerlng Lhe blosphere ln a way LhaL wlll noL supporL hlgher llfe forms and especlally wlll noL supporL Lhe noosphere. 1haL alLeraLlon" ls ln facL a represslon, an allenaLlon, a denlal of our common ancesLry, a denlal of our relaLlonal exlsLence wlLh all of llfe. lL ls noL a desLrucLlon of Lhe blosphere buL a Jeolol of Lhe blosphere, and tbot ls Lhe preclse deflnlLlon of psychoneurosls. WhaL lreud found hls paLlenLs dolng on a couch ln vlenna, we have now collecLlvely managed Lo do Lo Lhe world aL large. And who shall be oot docLor? CCnC8L1L CL8A1lCnAL (M?1PlC Anu M?1PlC-8A1lCnAL) Assumlng developmenL goes relaLlvely smooLhly, Lhen wlLh Lhe flrsL slgnlflcanL dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe mlnd and body (Lhe Lhlrd fulcrum), Lhe mlnd can Lranscend lLs embeddedness ln a merely bodlly orlenLaLlon-absorbed ln lLself (egocenLrlc)-and begln Lo enLer Lhe world of oLher mlnds. 8uL Lo do so lL musL learn Lo toke tbe tole of otbet-a new, emergenL, and very dlfflculL Lask. ln oLher words, Lhe self has gone from a pbysloceottlc ldenLlLy (flrsL fulcrum) Lo a bloceottlc ldenLlLy (second fulcrum) Lo an early ooospbetlc ldenLlLy (Lhlrd fulcrum), all of whlch are Lhoroughly eqoceottlc and ootbtopoceottlc (maglc and maglc-myLhlc all cenLered on Lhe self and orlenLed excluslvely Lo Lhe self, however oLherworldly" or sacred" lL mlghL all appear). lf Lhe sensorlmoLor and preoperaLlonal world ls egocenLrlc, Lhe concreLe operaLlonal world ls socloceottlc (cenLered noL so much on a bodlly ldenLlLy as on a tole ldenLlLy, as we wlll see). lL sLlll conLalns myLhlc" and anLhropocenLrlc" elemenLs because, as Cowan puLs lL, Lhere are sLlll varlous colorlngs of Lhe prevlous sLages" 22 (whlch ls why l call early and laLe conop, respecLlvely, myLhlc and myLhlc-raLlonal). A more dlfferenLlaLed causaLlon by flve elemenLs" (waLer, wlnd, earLh, flre, eLher) Lends Lo replace more syncreLlc explanaLlons, and Lhere ofLen emerges a bellef ln causaLlon by preformaLlon" (Lhe acorn conLalns a fully formed buL mlnlaLure oak Lree). 8uL by far Lhe mosL slgnlflcanL LransformaLlon or Lranscendence occurs ln Lhe capaclLy Lo toke tbe tole of otbet-noL [usL Lo reallze LhaL oLhers have a dlfferenL perspecLlve, buL Lo be able Lo menLally reconsLrucL LhaL perspecLlve, Lo puL oneself ln Lhe oLher's shoes. ln whaL became known as Lhe 1hree MounLalns 1ask, lageL and 8arbel lnhelder exposed chlldren from four Lo Lwelve years old Lo a play seL LhaL conLalned Lhree clay mounLalns, each of a dlfferenL color, and a Loy doll. 1he quesLlons were slmple: whaL do you see, and whaL does Lhe doll see? 1he Lyplcal response of Lhe preoperaLlonal chlld ls LhaL Lhe doll sees Lhe same Lhlng LhaL Lhe chlld ls looklng aL, even lf Lhe doll ls faclng only, say, Lhe green mounLaln. 1he chlld does noL undersLand LhaL Lhere are dlfferenL perspecLlves lnvolved. AL a laLer sLage of preop, Lhe chlld wlll correcLly lndlcaLe LhaL Lhe doll has a dlfferenL perspecLlve, buL Lhe chlld cannoL say exacLly whaL LhaL ls. 8uL wlLh Lhe emergence of concreLe operaLlonal, Lhe chlld wlll easlly and readlly descrlbe Lhe Lrue perspecLlve of Lhe doll (e.g., l am looklng aL all Lhree mounLalns, buL Lhe doll ls only looklng aL Lhe green mounLaln"). lnvesLlgaLlon of Lhese and slmllar Lasks (by 8oberL Selman, !ohn llavell, and oLhers) has conflrmed Lhe general concluslon: only wlLh Lhe emergence of concreLe operaLlonal LhoughL can Lhe chlld Lranscend hls or her egocenLrlc perspecLlve and Lake Lhe tole of otbet. As Pabermas would puL lL, a tole ldenLlLy supplemenLs a oototol (or bodlly) ldenLlLy (Lhe body cannoL Lake Lhe role of oLher). 1he chlld learns hls or her tole ln a socleLy of otbet toles, and musL now learn Lo Jlffeteotlote LhaL role from Lhe role of oLhers and Lhen loteqtote LhaL role ln Lhe newly emergenL worldspace (Lhls ls Lhe fourLh ma[or fulcrum, Lhe fourLh ma[or dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon of self- developmenL). 1he fundamenLal locus of self-ldenLlLy Lhus swlLches from eqoceottlc Lo socloceottlc. lnlLlally Lhe chlld ls lndlssoclaLed from hls or her role, ls embedded or sLuck" ln lL ([usL as he or she was lnlLlally sLuck ln Lhe physlosphere and Lhen sLuck ln Lhe blosphere). 1hls unavoldable (and lnlLlally necessary) soclocenLrlc embeddedness" leads Lo whaL ls varlously known as Lhe cooveotloool stoqes of morallLy (kohlberg/Cllllgan), Lhe belooqloqoess needs (Maslow), Lhe coofotmlst mode (Loevlnger). Whlch ls why paLhology aL Lhls sLage ls known generally as scrlpL paLhology." Cne ls havlng Lrouble, noL wlLh Lhe physlosphere (psychoses), noL wlLh Lhe blosphere (borderllne and neuroses)-raLher, one ls stock ln Lhe early roles and scrlpLs glven by one's parenLs, one's socleLy, one's peer group: scrlpLs LhaL are noL, and lnlLlally cannoL be, checked agalnsL furLher evldence, and Lherefore scrlpLs LhaL are ofLen ouLmoded, wrong, even cruel (l'm no good, l'm roLLen Lo Lhe core, l can'L do anyLhlng rlghL," eLc., Lhese do noL so much concern boJlly lmpolses, as ln Lhe psychoneuroses, buL raLher soclol joJqmeots abouL one's soclol stooJloq, one's role). 1herapy here lnvolves dlgglng up Lhese scrlpLs and exposlng Lhese mytbs Lo Lhe llghL of more maLure reason and more accuraLe lnformaLlon, Lhus rewrlLlng Lhe scrlpL." (1hls ls, for example, Lhe prlmary approach of cognlLlve Lherapy and lnLerpersonal Lherapy, noL so much Lhe dlgglng up of burled and allenaLed bodlly lmpulses, as lmporLanL as LhaL may be, buL replaclng false and dlsLorLlng cognlLlve maps wlLh more reasonable [udgmenLs). 23 Lqually lmporLanL Lo Lhe Laklng of toles ls Lhe capaclLy of conop Lo work wlLh menLal toles. We saw LhaL preop works wlLh lmages (plcLorlal represenLaLlon), symbols (nonplcLorlal represenLaLlon), and concepLs (whlch represenL an enLlre class of Lhlngs). 8ules go one sLep furLher and opetote opoo concreLe classes, and Lhus Lhese rules (llke mulLlpllcaLlon, class lncluslon, hlerarchlzaLlon) begln Lo grasp Lhe lncredlbly rlch relaLlonshlps beLween varlous wholes and parLs. 1haL ls, concreLe operaLlonal ls Lhe flrsL sLrucLure LhaL can clearly grasp Lhe naLure of a holon, of LhaL whlch ln one relaLlonshlp ls a whole and ot tbe some tlme ln anoLher relaLlonshlp ls merely a parL (whlch ls why voloe bolotcbles sLarL Lo emerge sponLaneously ln chlldren aL Lhls polnL, Lhey swlLch from Lhe raLher sLrong elLher-or" deslres of preop Lo a cootlooom of ptefeteoces). All of Lhls, of course, depends upon Lhe capaclLy of conop Lo begln Lo Lake dlfferenL perspecLlves and relaLe Lhose perspecLlves Lo each oLher. 8ecause of lLs capaclLy Lo operaLe wlLh boLh rules and roles, l also call Lhls sLrucLure Lhe rule/role mlnd. lo telotloo to tbe ptevloos stoqe(s), lL represenLs a greaLer Lranscendence, a greaLer auLonomy, a greaLer lnLerlorlLy, a hlgher and wlder ldenLlLy, a greaLer consclousness, buL one LhaL, as ln all prevlous sLages, ls lnlLlally capLured" by Lhe self and Lhe ob[ecLs-now a soclal self and now soclal ob[ecLs (roles)-LhaL domlnaLe Lhls sLage. And Lhus a self now open Lo new and hlgher paLhologles, whlch demand new and dlfferenL Lheraples. no longer sLuck ln Lhe physlosphere, sLuck ln Lhe blosphere, or sLuck ln Lhe early egosphere," Lhe paLhologlcal self ls here sLuck ln Lhe soclosphere, embedded ln a parLlcular socleLy's rules and myLhs and dogmas, wlLh no way Lo Lranscend LhaL myLhlc-membershlp, and Lhus desLlned Lo play ouL Lhe roles and rules of a parLlcular and lsolaLed socleLy. MyLhlc-membershlp ls soclocenLrlc and Lhus etbooceottlc: one ls lo Lhe culLure (a member of Lhe culLure) lf one accepLs Lhe prevalllng myLhology, and one ls excommunlcaLed from Lhe culLure lf Lhe bellef sysLem ls noL embraced. ln Lhls sLrucLure, Lhere ls no way a global or planeLary culLure can even be concelved unless lL lnvolves Lhe lmposlng of one's parLlcular myLhology on all peoples: whlch ls [usL whaL we saw wlLh Lhe myLhlc-lmperlallsm of Lhe greaL emplres, from Lhe Creek and 8oman Lo Lhe khans and Sargons Lo Lhe lncas and AzLecs. 1hese greaL emplres all overcame Lhe egocenLrlsm of local and warrlng Lrlbes by subsumlng Lhelr reglmes lnLo LhaL of Lhe emplre (Lhus negaLlng and preservlng Lhem ln a larger reach or communlon), and Lhls was accompllshed ln parL, as we saw, by Lhe umbrella of a myLhology LhaL unlfled dlfferenL Lrlbes, noL by blood or klnshlp (for LhaL ls lmposslble, slnce each Lrlbe has a dlfferenL llneage), buL raLher by a common myLhologlcal orlgln LhaL could unlLe Lhe varlous roles (as Lhe Lwelve 1rlbes of lsrael were unlLed by a common ?ahweh). 8uL as maLure egolc-raLlonallLy beglns Lo emerge, eLhnocenLrlc glves way Lo worldcenLrlc. 1PL LCC We saw LhaL Pabermas referred Lo Lhe Lranscendence from conop Lo formop as a LransformaLlon from a tole ldenLlLy Lo an eqo ldenLlLy. Lgo" here doesn'L mean egocenLrlc", on Lhe conLrary, lL means movlng from a socloceottlc Lo a wotlJceottlc capaclLy, a capaclLy Lo dlsLance oneself from one's egocenLrlc and eLhnocenLrlc embeddedness and conslder whaL would be falr for all peoples and noL merely one's own. lL would be helpful, Lhen, Lo dlscuss Lhe meanlng of Lhe word eqo. arLlcularly ln Lranspersonal clrcles, no word has caused more confuslon. qo, along wlLh totlooollty, ls generally tbe dlrLy word ln mysLlcal, Lranspersonal, and new Age clrcles, buL few researchers seem even Lo deflne lL, and Lhose who do, do so dlfferenLly. We can, of course, deflne eqo any way we llke as long as we are conslsLenL. MosL new Age wrlLers use Lhe Lerm very loosely Lo mean a separaLe-self sense, lsolaLed from oLhers and from a splrlLual Cround. unforLunaLely, Lhese wrlLers do noL clearly dlsLlngulsh sLaLes LhaL are pre-egolc from Lhose LhaL are Lransegolc, and Lhus half of Lhelr recommendaLlons for salvaLlon are ofLen recommendaLlons for varlous ways Lo regress, and Lhls rlghLly sends alarms Lhrough orLhodox researchers. noneLheless, Lhelr general concluslon ls LhaL all Lruly splrlLual sLaLes are beyond ego," whlch ls Lrue enough as far as lL goes, buL whlch Lerrlbly confuses Lhe plcLure unless lL ls carefully quallfled. ln mosL psychoanalyLlcally orlenLed wrlLers, Lhe ego has come Lo mean Lhe process of organlzlng Lhe psyche," and ln Lhls regard many researchers, such as Pelnz kohuL, now prefer Lhe more general Lerm self. 1he ego (or self), as Lhe prlnclple LhaL glves unlLy Lo Lhe mlnd, ls Lhus a cruclal and fundamenLal organlzlng paLLern, and Lo Lry Lo go beyond ego" would mean noL Lranscendence buL dlsasLer, and so Lhese orLhodox LheorlsLs are uLLerly perplexed by whaL beyond ego" could posslbly mean, and who could posslbly deslre lL-and, as far as LhaL deflnlLlon goes, Lhey Loo are qulLe rlghL. (We'll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL.) ln phllosophy a general dlsLlncLlon ls made beLween Lhe emplrlcal ego, whlch ls Lhe self lnsofar as lL can be an ob[ecL of awareness and lnLrospecLlon, and Lhe ure Lgo or LranscendenLal Lgo (kanL, llchLe, Pusserl), whlch ls pure sub[ecLlvlLy (or Lhe observlng Self), whlch can never be seen as an ob[ecL of any sorL. ln Lhls regard, Lhe pure Lgo or pure Self ls vlrLually ldenLlcal wlLh whaL Lhe Plndus call ALman (or Lhe pure WlLness LhaL lLself ls never wlLnessed-ls never an ob[ecL-buL conLalns all ob[ecLs ln lLself). lurLhermore, accordlng Lo such phllosophers as llchLe, Lhls pure Lgo ls one wlLh absoluLe SplrlL, whlch ls preclsely Lhe Plndu formula ALman = 8rahman. 1o hear SplrlL descrlbed as pure Lgo ofLen confuses new Agers, who generally wanL eqo Lo mean only Lhe devll" (even Lhough Lhey hearLlly embrace Lhe ldenLlcal noLlon ALman = 8rahman). 1hey are equally confused when someone llke !ack Lngler, a LheorlsL sLudylng Lhe lnLerface of psychlaLry and medlLaLlon, sLaLes LhaL meJltotloo locteoses eqo stteoqtb," whlch lL mosL cerLalnly does, because ego sLrengLh" ln Lhe psychlaLrlc sense means capaclLy for dlslnLeresLed wlLnesslng." 8uL Lhe new Agers Lhlnk LhaL medlLaLlon means beyond ego," and Lhus anyLhlng LhaL sLrengLhens Lhe ego ls slmply more of Lhe devll. And so Lhe confuslons go. qo ls slmply LaLln for l." lreud, for example, never used Lhe Lerm eqo, he used Lhe Cerman pronoun Jos lcb, or Lhe l," whlch SLrachey unforLunaLely LranslaLed as Lhe ego." And conLrasLed Lo Lhe l" was whaL lreud called Lhe s, whlch ls Cerman for lL," and whlch, also unforLunaLely, was LranslaLed as Lhe ld" (LaLln for lL"), a Lerm lreud never used. 1hus lreud's greaL book 1be qo ooJ tbe lJ was really called 1he l and Lhe lL." lreud's polnL was LhaL people have a sense of l-ness or selfness, buL someLlmes parL of Lhelr own self appears forelgn, allen, separaLe from Lhem-appears, LhaL ls, as an lL" (we say, 1he anxleLy, lL makes me uncomforLable," or 1he deslre Lo eaL, lL's sLronger Lhan me!" and so forLh, Lhus rellnqulshlng responslblllLy for our own sLaLes). When parLs of Lhe l are spllL off or repressed, Lhey appear as sympLoms or lLs" over whlch we have no conLrol. lreud's baslc alm ln Lherapy was Lherefore Lo reunlLe Lhe l and Lhe lL and Lhus heal Lhe spllL beLween Lhem. Pls mosL famous sLaLemenL of Lhe goal of Lherapy-Where ld was, Lhere ego shall be"-acLually reads, Where lL was, Lhere l shall be." WheLher one ls a lreudlan or noL, Lhls ls sLlll Lhe mosL accuraLe and succlncL summary of all forms of uncoverlng psychoLherapy, and lL slmply polnLs Lo an expanslon of ego, an expanslon of l-ness, lnLo a hlgher and wlder ldenLlLy LhaL lnLegraLes prevlously allenaLed processes. 1he Lerm eqo can obvlously be used ln a large number of qulLe dlfferenL ways, from Lhe very broad Lo Lhe very narrow, and lL ls alLogeLher necessary Lo speclfy whlch usage one lnLends, or else lnLermlnable argumenLs arlse LhaL are generaLed only by an arblLrary semanLlc cholce. ln Lhe broadesL sense, eqo means self" or sub[ecL," and Lhus when lageL speaks of Lhe earllesL sLages belng egocenLrlc," he does oot mean LhaL Lhere ls a clearly dlfferenLlaLed self or ego seL aparL from Lhe world. ne meoos jost tbe opposlte: Lhe self ls oot dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe world, Lhere ls oo sLrong ego, and Lhus Lhe world ls LreaLed as an exLenslon of Lhe self, egocenLrlcally." Cnly wlLh Lhe emergence of a sLrong and dlfferenLlaLed ego (whlch occurs from Lhe Lhlrd Lo Lhe flfLh fulcrums, culmlnaLlng ln formop, or raLlonal perspecLlvlsm)-only wlLh Lhe emergence of Lhe maLure ego does egocenLrlsm dle down! 1he pre-egolc" sLages are Lhe mosL egocenLrlc! 1hus, lL ls only aL Lhe level of formal operaLlonal LhoughL (as we wlll see ln a momenL) LhaL a Lruly sLrong and dlfferenLlaLed self or ego emerges from lLs embeddedness ln bodlly lmpulses and pre-glven soclal roles, and LhaL, lndeed, ls whaL Pabermas refers Lo as an eqo lJeotlty, a fully separaLed-lndlvlduaLed sense of self. 1o repeaL: Lhe ego," as used by psychoanalysls, lageL, and Pabermas (and oLhers), ls Lhus less egocenLrlc Lhan lLs pre-egolc predecessors! 24 l wlll mosL ofLen use Lhe Lerm eqo ln LhaL speclflc sense, slmllar Lo lreud, lageL, Pabermas, and oLhers-a raLlonal, lndlvlduaLed sense of self, dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe exLernal world, from lLs soclal roles (and Lhe superego), and from lLs lnLernal naLure (ld). ln Lhls usage, Lhere are pte-eqolc realms (parLlcularly Lhe archalc and Lhe maglc), where Lhe self ls poorly dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe lnLernal and exLernal world (Lhere are only ego nuclel," as psychoanalysls puLs lL). 1hese pre-egolc realms are, Lo repeaL, Lhe mosL egocenLrlc (slnce Lhe lnfanL or chlld doesn'L have a sLrong ego, lL Lhlnks LhaL Lhe world feels whaL lL feels, wanLs whaL lL wanLs, caLers Lo lLs every deslre: lL does noL clearly separaLe self and oLher, and Lhus LreaLs Lhe oLher as an exLenslon of Lhe self). 1he ego beglns more sLably Lo emerge ln Lhe myLhlc sLage (as a petsooo or tole) and flnally emerges, ln Lhe formal operaLlonal sLage, as a self clearly dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe exLernal world and from lLs varlous roles (personae), whlch ls Lhe culmlnaLlon of Lhe overall eqolc realms. Plgher developmenLs lnLo more splrlLual realms are Lhen referred Lo as belng ttooseqolc, wlLh Lhe clear undersLandlng LhaL Lhe ego ls belng negaLed buL also preserved (as a funcLlonal self ln convenLlonal reallLy). 1he self ln Lhese hlgher sLages l wlll refer Lo as Lhe Self (and noL Lhe pure Lgo, unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, because Lhls confuses everybody), and l wlll explaln all of LhaL ln more deLall as we proceed. 23 1hese Lhree large realms are also referred Lo, ln very general Lerms, as Lhe subconsclous (pre-egolc), Lhe self- consclous (egolc), and Lhe superconsclous (Lransegolc), or as Lhe prepersonal, Lhe personal, and Lhe Lranspersonal, or as Lhe preraLlonal, Lhe raLlonal, and Lhe LransraLlonal. 1he polnL ls LhaL eocb of Lhose sLages ls a lesseoloq of eqoceottlsm as one moves closer Lo Lhe pure Self. 26 1he moxlmom of egocenLrlsm, as lageL demonsLraLed, occurs ln Lhe prlmary or physlcal lndlssoclaLlon (Lhe flrsL fulcrum, where self-ldenLlLy ls physlocenLrlc), because Lhe enLlre maLerlal world ls absorbed ln Lhe self-sense and cannoL even be consldered aparL from Lhe self-sense. 1hls archalc-auLlsLlc sLage ls noL one wlLh Lhe enLlre world ln bllss and [oy," as many 8omanLlcs Lhlnk, buL a swallowlng of Lhe maLerlal world lnLo Lhe self: Lhe chlld ls all mouLh, and everyLhlng else ls merely food. As ldenLlLy swlLches from physlocenLrlc Lo blocenLrlc or ecocenLrlc (fulcrum-2), Lhere ls a lessenlng of pure auLlsm" (self-only!") buL a blossomlng of emoLlonal narclsslsm or emotloool eqoceottlsm (fulcrum-2), whlch Mahler summarlzed as narclsslsm aL lLs peak!" (She also summarlzed lL as Lhe world ls Lhe lnfanL's oysLer": grandlose-omnlpoLenL fanLasles). 1he emergence of Lhe preop mlnd (fulcrum-3) ls a lessenlng of LhaL emoLlonal egocenLrlsm, buL a blossomlng of egocenLrlc (and geocenLrlc) maglc-less prlmlLlve Lhan Lhe prevlous sLage, buL sLlll shoL Lhrough wlLh egocenLrlc adherences: Lhe world exlsLs cenLered on humans. 1he emergence of Lhe conop mlnd (fulcrum-4) ls a lessenlng of LhaL egocenLrlc maglc (where Lhe self ls cenLral Lo Lhe cosmos), buL lL ls replaced wlLh an etbooceottlsm, where one's parLlcular group, culLure, or race ls supreme. noneLheless, aL Lhe same Llme Lhls allows Lhe beglnnlng of whaL lageL calls a Jeceotetloq, where one can decenLer or sLand aslde from Lhe egocenLrlsm of Lhe early mlnd and lnsLead Lake Lhe role of oLher, and Lhls comes Lo a frulLlon wlLh a fottbet Jeceotetloq, a furLher lessenlng of egocenLrlsm, ln formal operaLlonal (where one can Lake Lhe perspecLlve, noL [usL of oLhers ln one's group, buL of oLhers ln oLher groups: wotlJceottlc or non-eLhnocenLrlc). ln oLher words, each sLage ttoosceoJs lLs predecessor and ls tbetefote less egocenLrlc, less caughL ln Lhe narrower and shallower perspecLlve, buL lnsLead reaches ouL more and more Lo embrace deeper and wlder occaslons. 1he self becomes less and less egocenLrlc, and Lhus embraces more and more holons as worLhy of equal respecL. As we wlll see when we follow evoluLlon lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal domaln, Lhese developmenLs converge on an lnLulLlon of Lhe very ulvlne as one's very Self, common ln and Lo all peoples (ln facL, all senLlenL belngs), a Self LhaL ls Lhe greaL omega polnL of Lhls enLlre serles of Jecteosloq eqoceottlsm, of decenLerlng from Lhe small self ln order Lo flnd Lhe blg Self-a Self common ln and Lo all belngs and Lhus escaplng Lhe egocenLrlsm (and eLhnocenLrlsm) of each. 1he compleLely decenLered self ls Lhe all-embraclng Self (as Zen would say, Lhe Self LhaL ls no-self). WhaL else could evolotloo as Jecteosloq eqoceottlsm posslbly mean? Lmbraclng ldenLlLles LhaL lnclude more and more belngs, boLh deeper and wlder-whaL ls Lhe chaoLlc ALLracLor here? Where else does lL look llke Lhls serles ls golng? Where else could lL posslbly go? lC8MAL CL8A1lCnAL AL Lhls polnL, we are Lraclng Lhe emergence of a sLrong raLlonal ego ouL of lLs embeddedness ln myLhlc-membershlp, and Lhls brlngs us Lo lageL's formal operaLlonal sLage. lormal operaLlonal awareness Lranscends buL lncludes concreLe operaLlonal LhoughL, and Lhus formop can opetote opoo Lhe holons LhaL consLlLuLe conop-and LhaL, ln facL, ls Lhe prlmary deflnlLlon of fotmol opetotloool. Where concreLe operaLlonal uses rules of LhoughL Lo Lranscend and operaLe on Lhe concreLe world, formal operaLlonal uses a new lnLerlorlLy Lo Lranscend and operaLe on Lhe rules of LhoughL Lhemselves. lL ls a new dlfferenLlaLlon allowlng a new lnLegraLlon (and a Jeepet and wlJet ldenLlLy). Agaln Lhls sounds Lerrlbly dry and absLracL, buL Lhe resulLs are noL. llrsL and foremosL, formal operaLlonal awareness brlngs wlLh lL a new world of feellngs, of dreams, of wlld passlons and ldeallsLlc sLrlvlngs. lL ls Lrue LhaL raLlonallLy lnLroduces a new and more absLracL undersLandlng of maLhemaLlcs, loglc, and phllosophy, buL Lhose are all qulLe secondary Lo Lhe prlmary and deflnlng mark of reason: teosoo ls o spoce of posslbllltles, posslblllLles noL Lled Lo Lhe obvlous, Lhe glven, Lhe mundane, Lhe profane. 8eason, we sald earller, ls Lhe greaL gaLeway Lo Lhe unseen, Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe lnvlslble worlds, whlch ls usually Lhe lasL way people Lhlnk of raLlonallLy. 8uL Lhlnk of Lhe greaL mysLlcs such as laLo and yLhagoras, who saw raLlonal lorms or ldeas as Lhe grand paLLerns upon whlch all of manlfesLaLlon was based, paLLerns LhaL were uLLerly lnvlslble Lo Lhe eye of flesh and could only be seen lnLerlorly, wlLh Lhe eye of mlnd. Cr Lhlnk of Lhe greaL physlclsLs such as Pelsenberg and !eans, who malnLalned LhaL Lhe ulLlmaLe bulldlng blocks of Lhe unlverse are maLhemaLlcal lorms, also seen only wlLh Lhe mlnd's eye. Cr of Lhe greaL vedanLln and Mahayana sages, who malnLalned LhaL Lhe enLlre vlslble world ls [usL a preclplLaLe of Lhe mlnd's lnLerlor lorms or seed-syllables." lor all of Lhese LheorlsLs (and many more llke Lhem), 8eason was noL an absLracLlon from Lhe concreLe physlcal world, raLher, Lhe concreLe world was a reducLlon or condensaLlon of Lhe greaL menLal lorms lylng beyond Lhe grasp of Lhe senses, lorms whlch conLalned eo poteotlo all posslble manlfesL worlds. lageL approaches Lhls whole Loplc by showlng LhaL, whereas Lhe concreLe operaLlonal chlld can lndeed operaLe upon Lhe concreLe world, Lhe chlld aL LhaL sLage ulLlmaLely remalns Lled Lo Lhe obvlous and Lhe glven and Lhe phenomenal, whereas Lhe formal operaLlonal adolescenL wlll meotolly see varlous and dlfferenL posslble arrangemenLs of Lhe glven. Agaln, a Lyplcal lageLlan experlmenL sounds very dry and absLracL and far removed from ordlnary evenLs, buL whaL lL acLually lndlcaLes ls Lhe power of Lhe creaLlve lmaglnaLlon. l'll slmpllfy conslderably: A chlld ls presenLed wlLh flve glasses whlch conLaln colorless llqulds. 1hree of Lhe glasses conLaln llqulds LhaL, lf mlxed LogeLher, wlll produce a yellow color. 1he chlld ls asked Lo produce a yellow color. 1he preop chlld wlll randomly comblne a few glasses, Lhen glve up. lf she accldenLally hlLs upon Lhe rlghL soluLlon, she wlll glve a maglcal explanaLlon (1he sun made lL happen", lL came from Lhe clouds"). 1he conop chlld wlll eagerly begln by comblnlng Lhe varlous glasses, Lhree aL a Llme. She does Lhls concreLely, she wlll slmply conLlnue Lhe concreLe mlxlng unLll she hlLs upon Lhe rlghL soluLlon or evenLually geLs Llred and qulLs. 1he formop adolescenL wlll beqlo by Lelllng you LhaL you have Lo Lry all Lhe posslble comblnaLlons of Lhree glasses. She has a menLal plan or formal operaLlon LhaL leLs her see, however vaguely, LhaL oll posslble comblnaLlons have Lo be Lrled. She doesn'L have Lo sLumble Lhrough Lhe acLual concreLe operaLlons Lo undersLand Lhls. 8aLher, she sees, wlLh Lhe mlnd's eye, LhaL oll posslbllltles most be tokeo loto occooot. ln oLher words, Lhls ls a very telotloool Lype of awareness: all Lhe posslble relaLlons LhaL Lhlngs can have wlLh each oLher need Lo be held ln awareness-and Lhls ls radlcally new. 1hls ls noL Lhe wholeness" of syncreLlc fuslon, where Lhe lnLegrlLy of wholes and parLs ls vlolaLed ln a maglcal fuslon, buL raLher a relaLlonshlp of muLual lnLeracLlon and muLual lnLerpeneLraLlon, where wholes and parLs, whlle remalnlng perfecLly dlscreLe and lnLacL, are also seen Lo be whaL Lhey are by vlrLue of Lhelr relaLlonshlps Lo each oLher. 1he preop chlld, and Lo a lesser exLenL Lhe conop chlld, Lhlnks LhaL Lhe color yellow ls a slmple properLy of Lhe llqulds, Lhe formop adolescenL undersLands LhaL Lhe color ls a telotloosblp of varlous llqulds. lormal operaLlonal awareness, Lhen, ls Lhe flrsL Lruly ecoloqlcol moJe of owoteoess, ln Lhe sense of grasplng muLual lnLerrelaLlonshlps. lL ls noL embeJJeJ ln ecology (LhaL would be fulcrum-2), lL ttoosceoJs ecology (wlLhouL denylng lL), and Lhus can reflecL on Lhe web of relaLlonshlps consLlLuLlng lL. As varlous researchers have polnLed ouL, Lo use Cowan's parLlcular phraslng: Agaln Lhe emphasls ln formal [operaLlonal] schemes ls on Lhe coordlnaLlon of [varlous] sysLems. noL only can adolescenLs [aL Lhls sLage] observe and reason abouL changes ln Lhe lnLerlor of [an lndlvldual], Lhey can also be concerned wlLh reclprocal changes ln Lhe surroundlng envlronmenL. Cnly Lhen, for example, wlll Lhey be able Lo concepLuallze an ecologlcal sysLem ln whlch changes ln one aspecL may lead Lo a whole sysLem of changes ln Lhe bolooce beLween oLher aspecLs of naLure." 27 So Lhe flrsL equaLlon we need ls: fotmol opetotloool = ecoloqlcol. 1he facL LhaL formop ls also sLrong enough, as we have seen, Lo poLenLlally repress Lhe blosphere, resulLlng ln ecologlcal caLasLrophe, lndlcaLes merely LhaL ecologlcal caLasLrophe ls an unforLunaLe posslblllLy, buL noL an lnherenL componenL, of raLlonallLy. As always, we wanL Lo Lease aparL Lhe paLhologlcal manlfesLaLlons of any sLage from lLs auLhenLlc achlevemenLs, and celebraLe Lhe laLLer even as we Lry Lo redress Lhe former. 1he facL LhaL ecologlcal awareness becomes even greaLer aL Lhe nexL sLage, Lhe cenLaurlc, should noL deLracL from Lhe facL LhaL lL beqlos here, wlLh Lhe formal operaLlonal undersLandlng of muLual relaLlonshlps, and lL does noL begln prlor Lo Lhls sLage aL all (prlor Lo Lhls are syncreLlc wholes, whlch sound ecologlcal" buL acLually consLlLuLe a cerLaln vlolence Lo Lhe lnLegrlLy of whole/parLs). 1he second equaLlon we need ls: fotmol opetotloool = ooJetstooJloq of telotlvlty. 1he capaclLy Lo Lake dlfferenL perspecLlves, we saw, beglns ln earnesL wlLh conop. 8uL wlLh Lhe emergence of formop, all Lhe varlous perspecLlves can be held ln mlnd, however loosely, and Lhus all of Lhem become telotlve Lo each oLher. ln a seL of experlmenLs, a snall moves along a board, whlch lLself ls movlng along a Lable. Cnly chlldren aL Lhe formal operaLlons sLage can undersLand Lhe dlsLance whlch Lhe snall Lravels relaLlve Lo Lhe board ooJ Lo Lhe Lable. Pere we flnd Lhe lnLellecLual equlpmenL necessary for concepLlons of relaLlvlLy-LhaL Llme Laken or space Lravelled cannoL be absoluLe, buL musL be measured relaLlve Lo some arblLrary polnL." 28 1he Lhlrd equaLlon LhaL we need ls: fotmol opetotloool = oooootbtopoceottlc. 1he egocenLrlc, geocenLrlc, anLhropocenLrlc noLlons of reallLy, so prevalenL ln Lhe earller maglc and myLhlc sLages, and so deflnlng of Lhose sLages, flnally begln Lo wlnd down and lose Lhelr grlp on awareness, and humans Lake Lhelr rlghLful place ln Lhe greaL holarchy of belng as one seL of wholes LhaL are parLs ln all sorLs of oLher wholes, wlLh no whole and no parL belng flnally prlvlleged. And noL merely egocenLrlsm buL soclocenLrlsm or eLhnocenLrlsm beglns Lo wlnd down. WlLh Lhe comlng of formop, Lhe rules and norms of any glven socleLy can Lhemselves be reflecLed upon and [udged by more unlversal prlnclples, prlnclples LhaL apply noL [usL Lo Lhls or LhaL culLure, or Lhls or LhaL Lrlbe, buL Lo Lhe mulLlculLurallsm of unlversal perspecLlvlsm. noL My counLry rlghL or wrong," buL ls my counLry acLually rlghL?" noL concreLe moral rules such as Lhe 1en CommandmenLs (1hou shalL have no oLher gods before me"-lnLerLrlbal squabbllng), buL more unlversal sLaLemenLs, prlnclples of [usLlce and mercy and compasslon, of reclproclLy and equallLy, based on muLual respecL for lndlvlduals and Lhe dlcLaLes of consclence based on tlqbts (as an auLonomous wbole) and tespooslbllltles (as a pott of a larger whole-agency and communlon, rlghLs and responslblllLles). 1hus kohlberg, Cllllgan, and Pabermas (Lo name a few) all refer Lo Lhls general sLage as postcooveotloool (whlch doesn'L mean posLculLural or posLsoclal, buL slmply posLconformlsL ln some slgnlflcanL ways). SocraLes versus ALhens. MarLln LuLher klng, !r., versus segregaLlon. Candhl versus culLural lmperlallsm. 1hus, we have seen moral developmenL move from a ptecooveotloool orlenLaLlon, whlch ls sLrongly egocenLrlc, geocenLrlc, blocenLrlc, narclsslsLlc, bound Lo Lhe body's separaLe feellngs and naLure's lmpulses (Lhe flrsL Lhree fulcrums), Lo a cooveotloool or soclocenLrlc or eLhnocenLrlc orlenLaLlon, bound Lo one's socleLy, culLure, Lrlbe, or race, Lo a postcooveotloool or worldcenLrlc orlenLaLlon, operaLlng ln Lhe space of unlversal plurallsm and global grasp (Lhese sLages have been elaboraLed by lageL, 8aldwln, kohlberg, Cllllgan, Pabermas, Loevlnger, 8roughLon, Selman, eLc.). 29 lor all Lhese reasons, Lhe lndlvldual aL Lhls sLage, who can no longer rely on socleLy's glven roles ln order Lo esLabllsh an ldenLlLy, ls Lhus Lhrown back on hls or her own lnner resources. Who am l?" becomes, for Lhe flrsL Llme, a burnlng quesLlon, and Lhe self-esLeem needs emerge from Lhe belonglngness needs (Maslow), or a consclenLlous" self emerges from a conformlsL" mode (Loevlnger). A fallure Lo negoLlaLe Lhls palnfully self-consclous phase (fulcrum 3")-a Jlffeteotlotloo from eLhnocenLrlsm and soclocenLrlsm-resulLs ln Lhe characLerlsLlc paLhology of Lhls sLage, whlch Lrlkson called an ldenLlLy crlsls." 1hls ls noL a problem of merely flndlng an approprlaLe tole ln socleLy (LhaL would be scrlpL paLhology), lL ls one of flndlng a self LhaL may or may noL flL wlLh socleLy aL all (1horeau on clvll dlsobedlence comes Lo mlnd). ln addlLlon Lo formal operaLlonal awareness belng ecologlcal, relaLlonal, and nonanLhropocenLrlc, we have already menLloned several of lLs oLher properLles: lL ls Lhe flrsL sLrucLure LhaL ls hlghly reflexlve and hlghly lnLrospecLlve, lL ls experlmenLal (or hypoLheLlco-deducLlve) and relles on evldence Lo seLLle lssues, lL ls unlversal as plurallsm or perspecLlvlsm, and lL ls proposlLlonal (can undersLand whaL lf" and as lf" sLaLemenLs, Lhe facL LhaL formop ls Lhe flrsL sLrucLure LhaL can grasp as lf" sLaLemenLs Lurns ouL Lo be exLremely lmporLanL when lL comes Lo lnLerpreLlng myLhology, as we wlll see ln Lhe followlng secLlon on !oseph Campbell). 8uL all of Lhese are [usL varlaLlons on Lhe cenLral Lheme: reason ls a space of posslblllLles. no wonder adolescence and Lhe emergence of formop ls a Llme of wlld passlons and exploslve ldeallsms, of fanLasLlc dreamlng and herolc urges, of uLoplan yells and revoluLlonary upsurge, of deslres Lo change Lhe enLlre world and ldeallsLlcally sLralghLen lL all ouL, of feellngs and emoLlons unleashed from Lhe merely glven and offered lnsLead Lhe space of all posslblllLles, a space Lhrough whlch Lhey roam and rampage wlLh love and passlon and wlldesL Lerror. And all of Lhls, all of lL, comes from belng able Lo see Lhe posslblllLles of wbot mlqbt be, posslblllLles seen only wlLh Lhe mlnd's eye, posslblllLles LhaL polnL Loward worlds noL yeL ln exlsLence and worlds noL yeL really seen, Lhe greaL, greaL doorway Lo Lhe lnvlslble and Lhe beyond, as laLo, and yLhagoras, and Shankara, and every mysLlc worLh hls or her salL has always, always known. 1he hlgher developmenLs do lndeed lle beyond reason, buL never, never, beneaLh lL. !CSLP CAM8LLL 1here ls no greaLer frlend of myLhology Lhan !oseph Campbell, and l mean LhaL ln a good sense. ln a serles of arLlculaLe and exLremely well-researched books, Campbell has done more Lhan any oLher person, wlLh Lhe posslble excepLlons of Mlrcea Lllade and Carl !ung, Lo champlon Lhe poslLlon LhaL myLhologlcal LhoughL ls Lhe prlmary carrler of splrlLual and mysLlcal awareness. l and counLless researchers have drawn on hls works Llme and agaln, and hls meLlculous scholarshlp and deLalled analyses never fall Lo lnsplre. And, among many oLher Lhlngs, lL ls !oseph Campbell, vla 8oberL 8ly, who ls responslble for much of Lhe men's movemenL" and Lhe myLhopoeLlc" movemenL ln general. And yeL hls poslLlon, l belleve, ls flnally unLenable, and can be demonsLraLed Lo be so uslng hls own assumpLlons and hls own concluslons. lor hls poslLlon ls, ln Lhe lasL analysls, a form of elevaLlonlsm, and lL ls necessary Lo face Lhls dlrecLly lf we are ever Lo make sense of Lhe Lruly deeper or hlgher developmenLs of genulne splrlLual and mysLlcal experlence. lor, as we sald earller, one of Lhe besL ways Lo know whaL auLhenLlc mysLlcal experlence ls, ls Lo know whaL lL ls noL. 1o begln wlLh, Campbell openly accepLs Lhe essenLlals of Lhe lageLlan sysLem. 1haL ls, he accepLs Lhe facL LhaL Lhe baslc moLlfs of myLhologlcal LhoughL are produced by Lhe lnfanLlle and chlldhood sLrucLures of preop and early conop, and he expllclLly says so uslng lageLlan Lerms. As [usL one of hundreds of lnsLances: 1he Lwo orders-Lhe lnfanLlle and Lhe rellglous-are aL leasL analogous, and lL may well be LhaL Lhe laLLer ls slmply a LranslaLlon of Lhe former Lo a sphere ouL of range of crlLlcal observaLlon [reason]. lageL has polnLed ouL LhaL alLhough Lhe llLLle myLhs of genesls lnvenLed by chlldren Lo explaln Lhe orlglns of Lhemselves and of Lhlngs may dlffer, Lhe baslc assumpLlon underlylng all ls Lhe same: namely, LhaL Lhlngs have been made by someone, and LhaL Lhey are allve and responslve Lo Lhe commands of Lhelr creaLors. 1he orlgln myLhs of Lhe world's myLhologlcal sysLems dlffer Loo, buL ln all [of Lhem] Lhe convlcLlon ls held (as ln chlldhood), wlLhouL proof, LhaL Lhe llvlng unlverse ls Lhe handlwork . . . of some faLher-moLher or moLher-faLher Cod [arLlflclallsm/anLhropocenLrlsm]. 1hese Lhree prlnclples [maglcal parLlclpaLlon, anlmlsm, and anLhropocenLrlsm] may be sald Lo consLlLuLe Lhe axlomaLlc, sponLaneously supposed frame of reference of all chlldhood experlence, no maLLer whaL Lhe local deLalls of Lhls experlence happen Lo be. And Lhese Lhree prlnclples, lL ls no less apparenL, are preclsely Lhose mosL generally represenLed ln Lhe myLhologles and rellglous sysLems of Lhe whole world. 30 Campbell cheerfully and even enLhuslasLlcally acknowledges all of Lhls, and he does so because he has a plan. Pe has a plan, LhaL ls, Lo salvage myLhology, Lo prove LhaL myLhology ls really" rellglous and genulnely splrlLual, and ls noL, ln facL, merely a devlce of chlldhood. 1he plan ls Lhls: 1he myLhologlcal producLlons of preop and conop, he says, are always Laken very lltetolly and cooctetely, a polnL l have also been aL palns Lo emphaslze. 8uL, Campbell says, ln a vety few lndlvlduals, Lhe myLhs are oot tokeo lltetolly, buL are raLher Laken lo oo os lf" fosbloo (hls Lerms), ln a playful fashlon LhaL releases one from Lhe concreLe myLh and ushers one lnLo more LranscendenLal realms. And Lhls, he says, ls Lhe teol funcLlon of myLh, and Lherefore Lhls ls how all myLhs have Lo be [udged. lor Lhe masses lL remalns Lrue LhaL myLh ls an llluslon, a dlsLorLlon, an lnfanLlle and chlldlsh approach Lo reallLy (all hls phrases), buL for Lhe very few who can see Lhrough Lhem, myLhs become Lhe gaLeway Lo Lhe genulnely mysLlcal. And he belabors Lhe polnL LhaL mytbs, oot teosoo, olooe coo Jo tbls, and Lhls ls Lhelr wonderful funcLlon. And here he sLarLs runnlng lnLo grave dlfflculLles. When myLhs are Laken concreLely and llLerally, Campbell says, Lhey serve Lhe mundane funcLlon of lnLegraLlng lndlvlduals lnLo Lhe socleLy and worldvlew of a glven culLure, and ln LhaL ordlnary funcLlon, he says, Lhey serve no splrlLually LranscendenLal or mysLlcal purpose aL all, whlch ls Lrue enough. l myself see LhaL mundane lnLegraLlon as tbe cenLral, endurlng, and exLremely lmporLanL funcLlon of myLhs aL LhaL sLage of developmenL-slmple culLural meanlng and correlaLlve soclal lnLegraLlon (aL a preop and conop level). Campbell acknowledges LhaL funcLlon, buL slnce he ls looklng for a way Lo elevaLe myLhs Lo a Lranspersonal sLaLus, Lhose funcLlons become qulLe secondary Lo hlm. ln facL, he says, when people Lake myLhs llLerally-whlch, he says, 99.9 percenL of myLhlc bellevers do-Lhen tbose mytbs become JlstotteJ. Pe ls very emphaLlc abouL Lhls: lL musL be conceded, as a baslc prlnclple of our naLural hlsLory of Lhe gods and heroes, LhaL whenever a myLh has been Laken llLerally lLs sense has been perverLed." 31 LeL us lgnore, for Lhe momenL, LhaL Lhls lmplles LhaL 99.9 percenL of myLhlc bellevers are perverLed (lnsLead of sLage-speclflcally qulLe adequaLe), and look lnsLead Lo Lhose very, very few lndlvlduals who do noL Lake myLh llLerally buL raLher ln an as lf" fashlon. 8y as lf" Campbell expllclLly means Lhe use glven Lo lL by kanL ln hls ltoleqomeoo to vety lotote 5ystem of Metopbyslcs, where kanL says LhaL we can only hold our knowledge of Lhe world ln an as lf" or posslble reallLles" fashlon. Campbell Lhen drlves Lo Lhe hearL of hls argumenL: l am wllllng Lo accepL Lhe word of kanL, as represenLlng Lhe vlew of a conslderable meLaphyslclan. And applylng lL Lo Lhe range of fesLlval games and aLLlLudes [usL revlewed [by whlch he means Lhe aLLlLude LhaL does noL Lake myLh serlously or llLerally]-from Lhe mask of Lhe consecraLed hosL and Lemple lmage, LransubsLanLlaLed worshlper and LransubsLanLlaLed world-l can see, or belleve l can see, LhaL a prlnclple of teleose operaLes LhroughouL Lhe serles by way of an as lf", and LhaL, Lhrough Lhls, Lhe lmpacL of all so-called reallLy" upon Lhe psyche ls LransubsLanLlaLed. 32 ln oLher words, a myLh ls belng a real myLh" when lL ls oot belng Laken as Lrue, when lL ls belng held ln an as lf" fashlon. And Campbell knows perfecLly well LhaL an as lf" sLance ls posslble ooly wltb fotmol opetotloool owoteoess. 1hus, accordlng Lo hls own concluslons, a myLh offers lLs release" ooly when lL ls Lranscended by, and held flrmly ln, Lhe space of posslblllLles and as-lfs offered by raLlonallLy. lL ls teosoo, and reason alone, LhaL can release myLh from lLs concreLe llLeralness and hold lL ln a playful, as-lf, whaL-lf fashlon, uslng lL as an oooloqy of whaL hlgher sLaLes mlghL be llke, whlch ls someLhlng LhaL myLh, by lLself, could oevet do (as Campbell blzarrely concedes). 33 lL ls people such as Campbell and !ung and Lllade, opetotloq ftom o wlJespteoJ occess to totlooollty-someLhlng Lhe orlglnaLors of myLh dld noL have-who tbeo read deeply symbollc as lfs" lnLo Lhem, and who llke Lo play wlLh myLhs and use Lhem as analogles and have greaL good fun wlLh Lhem, whereas Lhe acLual myLhlc-bellevers do noL play wlLh Lhe myLhs aL all, buL Lake Lhem deadly serlously and refuse ln Lhe leasL Lo open Lhem Lo reasonable dlscourse or any sorL of as lf" aL all. ln shorL, a myLh serves Campbell's maln funcLlon ooly when lL ceases Lo be a myLh and ls released lnLo Lhe space of reason, lnLo Lhe space of alLernaLlves and posslblllLles and as-lfs. WhaL sLrucLure does he Lhlnk kanL ls operaLlng from? 1hus, ln all of Campbell's presenLaLlons, he Lakes Lwo Lacks: he fltst lays ouL Lhe concreLe and llLeral way LhaL 99.9 percenL of bellevers Lake Lhe myLh. And here he ls noL ofLen klnd. Pe clearly desplses concreLe myLhlc-bellefs (Cn Lhe popular slde, ln Lhelr popular culLs, Lhe lndlans [l.e., from lndla] are, of course, as poslLlvlsLlc ln Lhelr readlngs of Lhelr myLhs as any farmer ln 1ennessee, rabbl ln Lhe 8ronx, or pope ln 8ome. krlshna acLually danced ln manlfold rapLure wlLh Lhe gopls, and Lhe 8uddha walked on waLer"). 34 lnsLead of seelng Lhe concreLe myLh as Lhe ooly way LhaL myLh coo be belleved aL LhaL sLage of developmenL, and Lhus as belng petfectly oJepoote and noble (lf parLlal and llmlLed) fot tbot stoqe, he Lakes Lhe concreLe bellef ln maglc and myLh as a perverslon," as lf Lhls sLrucLure acLually had a cholce for whlch lL could be condemned. Pe ls ln facL denlgraLlng an enLlre serles of developmenLal sLages LhaL represenLed exLraordlnary advances ln Lhelr own ways, and were no more a perverslon of splrlLual developmenL Lhan an acorn ls a perverslon of an oak. 8uL he most condemn Lhese sLages per se because he [udges Lhem agalnsL bls elevaLed verslon of real myLhology," whereas l am noL condemnlng Lhese sLages per se because Lhey were Lhemselves Lhe real McCoy, Lhe genulne lLem: Lhey were dolng exoctly whaL ls approprlaLe and deflnlLlve and sLage-speclflc for myLhology. 5ecooJ, Campbell Lhen suggesLs Lhe ways LhaL Lhose very few (who do noL Lake Lhe myLh llLerally) have used Lo ttoosceoJ Lhe myLh (and are Lherefore, l would llke Lo polnL ouL, no longer dolng anyLhlng LhaL could remoLely be called myLhology). 1hls lnvolves flrsL and foremosL, for Campbell, holdlng Lhe myLh ln Lhe space of as lf", LhaL ls, holdlng lL ln Lhe space of reason (wlLh Lhe posslblllLy of Lhen golng furLher and Lranscendlng reason as well). And here Campbell commlLs Lhe classlc pre/Lrans fallacy. Slnce Lhe preraLlonal realms are deflnlLely myLhologlcal, Lhen Campbell wanLs Lo call Lhe LransraLlonal realms myLhologlcal" as well, slnce Lhey Loo are nonraLlonal (and slnce he wanLs Lo salvage myLhology wlLh a fleld promoLlon). So on Lhe one slde he lumps LogeLher oll nonraLlonal endeavors (from prlmlLlve myLhology Lo hlghly developed conLemplaLlve encounLers), and on Lhe oLher slde-Lhe bad" slde-he dumps poor reason, even as he hlmself ls ln facL (and raLher hypocrlLlcally) uslng Lhe space of reason Lo salvage hls myLhs. MyLhologlcal symbols Louch and exhllaraLe cenLers of llfe beyond Lhe reach of vocabularles of reason." 33 1here ls lndeed a beyond reason," buL bow mocb mote so ls lL beyond myLhology." And, ln facL, lL ls noL ln pralse of myLhology," buL raLher beyond myLhology," Lo whlch Lhe enLlre corpus of Campbell's work lnexorably polnLs. ln surveylng hls Lruly magnlflcenL, four-volume masLerplece, 1be Mosks of CoJ, Campbell leaves us wlLh one flnal message: As any eLhnologlsL, archaeologlsL, or hlsLorlan would observe, Lhe myLhs of Lhe dlfferlng clvlllzaLlons have senslbly varled LhroughouL Lhe cenLurles and broad reaches of manklnd's resldence ln Lhe world, lndeed Lo such a degree LhaL Lhe vlrLue" of one myLhology has ofLen been Lhe vlce" of anoLher, and Lhe heaven of Lhe one Lhe oLher's hell. Moreover, wlLh Lhe old horlzons now gone LhaL formerly separaLed and proLecLed Lhe varlous culLure worlds and Lhelr panLheons, a verlLable CottetJommetooq has flung lLs flames across Lhe unlverse. CommunlLles LhaL were once comforLable ln Lhe consclousness of Lhelr own myLhologlcally guaranLeed godllness flnd, abrupLly, LhaL Lhey are devlls ln Lhe eyes of Lhelr nelghbors. 36 1he eLhnocenLrlc and dlvlslve naLure of myLhology ls fully conceded. LamenLlng Lhls sLaLe of affalrs (even Lhough lL ls lnherenL ln myLhology as myLhlc-lmperlallsm), Campbell concludes LhaL some more qlobol undersLandlng of a broader, deeper klnd tboo ooytbloq eovlslooeJ ooywbete lo tbe post ls oow tepolteJ." 1he hope, lndeed, lles beyond parochlal and provlnclal myLhology. And beyond myLhology ls global and unlversal reason (and tbeo beyond reason . . .). nowhere ls Campbell's pre/Lrans confuslon more palnfully obvlous Lhan ln hls aLLempL Lo dlsplace or deconsLrucL raLlonal sclence (and Lhus slmulLaneously elevaLe myLhology). And agaln, Lhe embarrassmenL ls esLabllshed by hls own premlses and hls own loglcal concluslons, whlch a mlnd as flne as Campbell's can lgnore only by pre[udlce. Slnce Campbell's alm ls Lo prove LhaL reason and sclence are ln no sense hlgher" Lhan real" myLhology, he beglns flrsL by polnLlng ouL LhaL even Lhe worldvlew of sclence ls acLually a myLhology. lf he can do Lhls successfully, he wlll have puL sclence and myLhology on Lhe same level. Pe proceeds Lo ouLllne four facLors (or four funcLlons) LhaL all myLhologles have ln common. 37 1he flrsL he calls meLaphyslcal," whose funcLlon ls Lo reconclle waklng consclousness Lo . . . Lhls unlverse os lt ls." 1he second funcLlon ls Lo provlde an lnLerpreLaLlve LoLal lmage of Lhe same," an lnLerpreLlve cosmology. 1he Lhlrd ls socloculLural, Lhe valldaLlon and malnLenance of a soclal order." And Lhe fourLh ls psychologlcal, or lndlvldual orlenLaLlon and lnLegraLlon (ln oLher words, hls four funcLlons are Lhe 8lg 1hree wlLh an lnLegraLlng overvlew). And, of course, deflned ln LhaL way, sclence (or Lhe sclenLlflc worldvlew) does lndeed perform all four funcLlons of myLhology. 8uL Lhen, adds Campbell, sclence of course does some oLher Lhlngs LhaL myLhology per se does noL, such as lLs specLacular dlscoverles ln evoluLlon, medlclne, englneerlng, and so forLh. ln oLher words, raLlonallLy/sclence does everyLhlng myLh does, plus someLhlng exLra. 1haL, of course, ls Lhe deflnlLlon of a hlgher sLage. Campbell recognlzes LhaL myLhology orlglnaLes from a pottlcolot stoqe of human developmenL (whlch he happlly concedes ls Lhe chlldhood of men and women), and Lhen he olso deflnes lL as whaL oll sLages have ln common (namely, hls four funcLlons, whlch are slmply a varlaLlon on Lhe four quadranLs and Lhus are presenL aL all sLages of human developmenL). 8y Lhls sneaky dual deflnlLlon he hopes Lo be able botb Lo concede myLhology's chlldlshness ooJ run lL Lhrough all hlgher sLages, Lhus allowlng hlm noL only Lo salvage myLhology (slnce lL ls now whaL all sLages have ln common) buL also Lo push lL all Lhe way Lo lnflnlLy, all Lhe way Lo Lranspersonal SplrlL. 8uL Lhe four funcLlons (Lhe four quadranLs) are noL a deflnlLlon of myLhology's funcLlons, Lhey are a deflnlLlon of evoluLlon's funcLlons. 1hey are a deflnlLlon of human holons funcLlonlng aL each and every sLage of developmenL, no more (and no less) presenL ln myLhology Lhan ln maglc or ln sclence or ln cenLaurlc unfoldlngs. MyLhology has no speclal clalm whaLsoever on Lhe four quadranLs, myLhology ls slmply one parLlcular lnsLance of Lhe four quadranLs (myLhology ls Lhe four quadranLs as concelved by conop, [usL as sclence ls Lhe four quadranLs as concelved by formop). Whlch only leaves Campbell's oLher deflnlLlon: myLhology can rlghLly lay clalm only Lo Lhe chlldhood of men and women. And runnlng tbot deflnlLlon Lo lnflnlLy slmply resulLs ln Lhe lnfanLlllzaLlon of SplrlL. Campbell's dual deflnlLlons acLually undo each oLher, and polnL lnsLead Lo Lhe lnexorable concluslon: beyond myLhology ls reason, and beyond boLh ls SplrlL. 1PL 8CMAn1lC vlLW Cl M?1PlC-MLM8L8SPl MyLhlc-membershlp does lndeed provlde, or can provlde, an loteosely cobeslve soclol otJet, prlnclpally because lL can exporL dlsorder and excommunlcaLe unbellevers. noLhlng so wonderfully concenLraLes a communlLy as Lhe prospecL of belng burned aL Lhe sLake for dlsagreelng wlLh lLs worldvlew. And, on Lhe oLher hand, reason coo be Jlstoptlve of socleLles, can lack Lhe soclal glue" of some myLhlc- membershlp culLures, preclsely because Lhe omega polnL of raLlonallLy ls noL soclocenLrlc or eLhnocenLrlc buL worldcenLrlc (or global or unlversal): shorL of LhaL lL sLops unhapplly (as ln a Candhl or a SocraLes or a 1horeau or a MarLln LuLher klng, !r.). And lf Lhe eLhnocenLrlcally dlsrupLlve capaclLy of unlversal reason ls, wlLhouL furLher ado, compared wlLh Lhe happy eLhnocenLrlsm of myLhology, lL wlll appear LhaL Lhe emergence of raLlonallLy was somehow a masslve loss of culLural meanlng and soclal lnLegraLlon, whereas Lhls ls only Lrue from an eLhnocenLrlc (or myLhlc-membershlp) blas. new lnLegraLlons are belng soughL by evoluLlon on a oow-qlobol level, and Lhls requlres, as ln all pasL LransformaLlons, Lhe deconsLrucLlon of more llmlLed and provlnclal perspecLlves. MyLhology has Lrled Lo go global for Lhe pasL Len Lhousand years and falled ln every slngle aLLempL (aLLempLs whlch, as we have seen, because Lhey lacked Lhe depLh of genulnely unlversal reason, had Lo be pressed always ln a mlllLary-lmperlallsLlc fashlon). 8eason has Lhe global copoclty and global loteot, buL ls sLlll developlng and evolvlng Lhe meoos, and ln Lhls endeavor lL ls reslsLed by every myLhology whlch feels lLs god and goddess LhreaLened. lurLher, even wlLhln naLlon-sLaLes, reason provldes a Jeepet form of lnLegraLlon (even lf occaslonally shaky)-namely, Lhrough Lhe telotloool excbooqe of self-esteem, and noL Lhe relaLlonal exchange of conformlsL roles ln Lhe preesLabllshed domlnaLor hlerarchy. MyLhlc members are happy lf Lhey flL snugly lnLo Lhe myLhologlcal hlerarchy, for all are Lhen sharlng a slmllar depLh. 8uL raLlonal clLlzens are happy ooly lf Lhey coexlsL ln relaLlonal exchange wlLh oLher clLlzens aL LhaL new depLh, LhaL ls, wlLh oLher equally free clLlzens-leqolly, motolly, and polltlcolly free sub[ecLs (as a worldcenLrlc sLandard, regardless of race, color, creed, or gender). lor somebody genulnely aL Lhe egolc-raLlonal level, Lhe very LhoughL of oLher humans noL havlng access Lo Lhese freedoms ls very palnful (whereas for Lhose aL Lhe myLhlc-membershlp level, Lhe palnful LhoughL ls Lhe ldea of oLher human belngs noL embraclng Lhelr parLlcular Cod and Lhus noL belng saved": LhaL oLhers would noL embrace Lhelr Cod sends agonles of proselyLlzlng fury Lhrough Lhelr souls, lnfldels are lotoletoble, and can acLually be kllled ln order Lo save Lhem). 1he raLlonal sLrucLure can toletote myLhlc-bellevers because lL ls a deeper and wlder embrace (whereas myLhlc- bellevers cannoL and wlll noL LoleraLe raLlonal aLLacks). And LhaL raLlonal LransformaLlon ls more culLurally meooloqfol and soclally loteqtotloq on a Jeepet (and Lherefore wlJet) level, even lf lL appears less head- knocklngly solld Lhan LhaL of Lhe shallower and narrower engagemenL of myLhlc-membershlp. 1haL reason Lhen lnLroduces lLs own lnherenL problems and runs up agalnsL lLs own lnherenL llmlLaLlons (and can be released only ln Lhe LransraLlonal domalns)-LhaL ls no cause Lo board Lhe 8egress Lxpress and seL Lhe Way 8ack Machlne Lo medleval or horLlculLural or foraglng or whaL-noL: Lhey all had Lhelr chance. 1hey all falled-each ln Lhelr own speclal and wonderful and specLacular fashlon. 1PL 8A11LL Cl WC8LuvlLWS We have seen LhaL each sLage of developmenL Lranscends and lncludes, negaLes and preserves, lLs predecessor(s), and Lhls shows up ln a parLlcularly lnLeresLlng fashlon when lL comes Lo Lhe varlous worldvlews Lhemselves. When we only have access Lo preoperaLlonal awareness, Lhen Lhe kosmos appears as maglcal. When we have access Lo concreLe operaLlonal awareness, Lhen Lhe kosmos appears as myLhlcal. When we have access Lo formal operaLlonal, Lhe kosmos appears raLlonal-sclenLlflc (and lL can, as a secondary lssue, Lhen be reduced Lo Lhe flaLland cosmos, Lhls flaLland Lhen makes Lhe prevlous maglc and myLhlc sLrucLures look all LhaL more appeallng, a facL explolLed by Lhe 8omanLlcs-buL LhaL's anoLher parL of our sLory). WlLh even hlgher sLrucLures, we wlll see, Lhe kosmos appears ln oLher and qulLe dlfferenL forms. ln each of Lhese LransformaLlons or supersesslons, noLlce whaL ls ptesetveJ and whaL ls oeqoteJ. As maglc glves way Lo myLhlc, Lhe preoperaLlonal sLrucLures Lhemselves are preserved. 1haL ls, Lhe capaclLy Lo form lmages, symbols, and concepLs (Lhe componenLs or holons of preop) are all Laken up and enfolded ln Lhe concreLe operaLlonal mlnd (as subholons or oecessoty compooeots). none of Lhese capaclLles are losL, buL are now slmply operaLed upon by Lhe hlgher mlnd. 8uL Lhe maglcal wotlJvlew ls losL, or negaLed, or dropped alLogeLher (aL leasL as a domlnanL focus of awareness). 38 1haL ls, Lhe preop cognlLlve sLrucLures are Laken up and ptesetveJ ln Lhe new cognlLlve sLrucLures of conop (ln a very frlendly" manner as componenLs or subholons of lLs own belng), buL Lhe maglcal worldvlew ls negaLed and teploceJ by Lhe myLhlc worldvlew. lndeed, slnce Lhey are now motoolly excloslve, Lhey become sLeadfasL enemles (Lhey are muLually excluslve because each was consLlLuLed by belng tbe excluslve sLrucLure, l wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL wlLh some examples). 1hus, Lhe myLhlc worldvlews-whlch always slLuaLe mlraculous powet ln a greaL CLher (gods or goddesses), around whlch soclal coheslon can Lhen be bullL beyooJ mere blood and klnshlp Lles-Lhese myLhlc worldvlews are consLanLly aL war wlLh maglc, because maglc slLuaLes mlraculous power ln a human lndlvldual (sorcerer, wlLch, wlzard), and Lhls regresslon from soclocenLrlc Lo egocenLrlc power rlghLly alarms Lhe myLhlc worldvlews: lL ls Laken, noL alLogeLher lncorrecLly, as a moral regresslon, for whlch myLhlc worldvlews have hlsLorlcally devlsed many lngenlous and unpleasanL soluLlons. Llkewlse, when formal operaLlonal awareness emerges, lL lncorporaLes and lncludes Lhe cognlLlve sLrucLures of conop (lLs capaclLy Lo form rules, Lake roles, and so on), buL lL acLlvely oeqotes Lhe myLhlc worldvlew LhaL ls generaLed when you ooly have concreLe operaLlons. 8aLlonallLy ptesetves, as parL of lLs own belng, ln a frlendly" way, Lhe conop sLrucLures (as subholons of lLs new and hlgher reglme), buL lL teploces Lhe myLhlc worldvlew wlLh Lhe raLlonal worldvlew, and once agaln, Lhe Lwo become sLeadfasL enemles. 1hls ls why Lhe Church, beglnnlng around Lhe slxLeenLh cenLury, was lnvolved ln a war on Lwo fronLs: flghLlng regresslon Lo maglc, and flghLlng supersesslon by sclence. 1he Callleos and Lhe sorcerers were boLh lnLroduced Lo Lhe lnqulslLor. And Lhls ls why, conversely, sclence ls noL only always aLLempLlng Lo furLher lLs research, buL also consLanLly baLLllng myLhs, wlLh Lhelr lnherenL Lendencles Lo domlnaLor-hlerarchles, and always under Lhe baLLle cry of volLalre: 8emember Lhe cruelLles!" (1here are few or no domlnaLor hlerarchles ln Lhe maglcal sLrucLure or ln maglcal culLures, because preop cannoL consLrucL a hlerarchy ln Lhe flrsL place, leL alone a domlnaLor hlerarchy. WlLh Lhe emergence of conop, hlerarchles are lndeed creaLed-noL only menLally, buL soclally, pollLlcally, and rellglously-a manla for casLe sysLems and domlnaLor hlerarchles sprlng up wherever maglc glves way Lo myLh, and preclsely because conop cannoL reach lnLo postcooveotloool modes, Lhese hlerarchles are olwoys rlgldly and concreLely seL, as are Lhe llLeral myLhs LhaL prop Lhem up: Lo change Lhe soclal hlerarchy ls Lo Jomoqe Lhe god/goddess/ruler and Lhus brlng caLasLrophlc reLrlbuLlon Lo Lhe socleLy lLself. WlLh raLlonallLy, Lhese domlnaLor hlerarchles are deconsLrucLed because Lhey are noL based on worldcenLrlc or posLconvenLlonal sLandards, and raLlonallLy ls noL happy shorL of LhaL omega polnL. 1hls ls one of Lhe maln Loplcs of volume 2, and l menLlon lL now as slmply anoLher lnsLance of Lhe Lenslons lnherenL beLween Lhe varlous worldvlews.) ln each case, Lhe baslc sLrucLures of Lhe prevlous sLage are Laken up and preserved ln Lhe new and wlder holon, buL Lhe worldvlew, whlch was qeoetoteJ when Lhere was ooly or excloslvely Lhe prevlous and lower sLage-LhaL ls negaLed and replaced by a new worldvlew (whlch wlll ln Lurn fade lf developmenL conLlnues). 39 1hus, ln Lhe same fashlon, lf developmenL does proceed lnLo Lhe hlgher or Lranspersonal domalns, Lhe baslc sLrucLures of raLlonallLy are all embraced and lncorporaLed, ln a frlendly way, as subholons ln Lhe new awareness, buL Lhe metely sclenLlflc worldvlew, bullL by excloslve raLlonallLy-bullL when all you have ls raLlonallLy-LhaL worldvlew ls replaced wlLh a splrlLual orlenLaLlon (as we wlll see). 1hls ls an example of whaL ln chapLer 2 was called baslc sLrucLures and excluslvlLy sLrucLures, slnce developmenL lncludes Lhe belng buL negaLes Lhe parLlallLy," and l gave Pawall's sLaLehood as an example. l wanL Lo glve anoLher example here, because a general grasp of Lhls fundamenLal developmenLal process ls cruclal, l belleve, Lo undersLandlng any of Lhe genulnely deeper or hlgher sLages of growLh and developmenL. lf we use a crude ladder analogy Lhe relaLlonshlp can more easlly be seen. 1he acLual rungs ln Lhe ladder are Lhe baslc sLrucLures or levels ln any developmenLal llne (such as Lhe cognlLlve). Lach hlgher rung resLs on Lhe lower rungs, and no maLLer how hlgh up Lhe ladder you cllmb, all Lhe rungs are necessary. ull ouL a lower rung and Lhe whole ladder collapses. Lach rung ls a boslc sttoctote (or baslc holon-such as lmages, symbols, concepLs, rules), and each ls ptesetveJ ln Lhe overall ladder. 8uL as you cllmb Lhe ladder, you geL a dlfferenL perspecLlve on Lhe world around you: each rung has a dlfferenL worldvlew, and Lhe hlgher rungs can see more of Lhe world (Lhey have a hlgher worldvlew). And alLhough each of Lhe tooqs remalns ln exlsLence as you cllmb (your cllmb acLually depends upon Lhem), Lhe varlous worldvlews are teploceJ. ?ou cannoL be aL, say, rung 7 and slmulLaneously see Lhe world from Lhe shallower rung 1, even Lhough you are sLlll sLandlng ln parL on rung 1 lLself. 1he belng, Lhe rungs, are preserved, buL Lhe parLlallLy or excluslvlLy, Lhe parLlal worldvlews, are oeqoteJ and teploceJ. (unLll, of course, you sLop cllmblng, aL whlch polnL you have Lhe" worldvlew LhaL wlll aLLempL Lo subsume all else.) 1hus, each LransformaLlon upward ls a paradlgm war"-a baLLle royale over how Lo excluslvely vlew Lhe world. And we wlll see, as we conLlnue our accounL of Lhe hlgher sLages of growLh, LhaL as myLh hlsLorlcally defeaLed maglc, and reason defeaLed myLh, Lhe fuLure paradlgm wars wlll be foughL around reason lLself and lLs poLenLlal successors. And lf hlsLory ls any gulde, Lhe new paradlgm wars wlll be equally unpleasanL. 1PL vALuL Cl 1PL M?1PCLCClCAL A8CACP 1he value of lncludlng a properly lnLerpreLed myLhologlcal approach ls LhaL lL can help us, of Loday's raLlonal worldvlew, geL ln Louch wlLh aspecLs of our rooLs, our foundaLlons, some of Lhe archaeologlcal layers of our own presenL awareness. lrom lreud Lo !ung Lo lageL Lo Cebser, Lhese rooLs are recognlzed. And LhaL geLLlng ln Louch," LhaL befrlendlng of our rooLs, ls empowerlng and enrlchlng and energlzlng. 1here ls a rush of energy released ln readlng !ung or Campbell or Lllade-we are waLerlng our rooLs, and Lhey help send forLh new branches. 8uL all of LhaL happens preclsely because Lhey are lower holons ln a now-hlgher awareness-Lhey are more fundamenLal (and less slgnlflcanL)-and Lhe real power comes preclsely from Louchlng Lhelr baslc sLrucLures (archeLypal") whlle slmoltooeoosly tobbloq tbem of tbelt excloslve wotlJvlew. lf we were slmply, merely, acLually reacLlvaLlng Lhe lower worldvlew lLself, Lhls would be wholesale regresslon Lo Je-JlffeteotloteJ sLrucLures (borderllne and psychoLlc, whlch lndeed someLlmes occurs). And Lhls, l belleve, ls behlnd !ung's dual sLance Loward Lhe archeLypes: lL ls alLogeLher necessary Lo conLacL and befrlend Lhem, buL lL ls flnally necessary Lo Jlffeteotlote and loJlvlJoote from Lhem, break Lhem of Lhelr power over us. ln oLher words, befrlend Lhe lmages, rob Lhem of Lhelr worldvlew. 8uL as for Lhe lmages and symbols and early concepLs Lhemselves, as for Lhese archeLypes," Lhey lle ln Lhe dlrecLlon of downward, noL upward (shallower, noL deeper). 1hls ls why, l belleve, however !ung varlously deflned Lhe archeLypes, he always malnLalned Lhey were nexL Lo Lhe lnsLlncLs," or Lhe lnsLlncLs' lmage of Lhemselves." 1haL ls, as Llllane lrey-8ohn explalns, 1he connecLlon beLween lnsLlncL and archeLypal lmage appeared Lo [!ung] so close LhaL he drew Lhe concluslon LhaL Lhe Lwo were coupled. Pe saw Lhe prlmordlal lmage ['archeLype'] as Lhe self- porLralL of Lhe lnsLlncL-ln oLher words, Lhe lnsLlncL's percepLlon of lLself." 40 lnsLlncLs-Lhe drlves of Lhe repLlllan braln sLem and paleomammallan llmblc sysLem-Lhese are Lhe sLrucLures nexL Lo" Lhe archeLypes, whlch slLuaLes Lhem perfecLly on Lhe specLrum of consclousness. SensaLlon, percepLlon, lmpulse (lnsLlncL), lmage, symbol, concepL, rule . . . Lhe archeLypes are, for Lhe mosL parL, collecLlve, fundamenLal lmages lylng nexL Lo lmpulse/lnsLlncL. 41 And proceedlng ln Lhe Jltectloo of Lhe archeLypes we Lherefore evenLually run lnLo, noL SplrlL, buL aLoms. !ung: 1he deeper layers of Lhe psyche lose Lhelr lndlvldual unlqueness as Lhey reLreaL farLher and farLher lnLo darkness. 'Lower down' Lhey become lncreaslngly exLlngulshed ln Lhe body's maLerlallLy, l.e., ln chemlcal subsLances." 42 ln oLher words, Lhe !unglan archeLypes are oot Lhe LranscendenLal archeLypes or lorms found ln laLo, Pegel, Shankara, or Asanga and vasubandhu. 1hese laLLer lorms-Lhe Lrue archeLypes, Lhe ldeal lorms-are Lhe creaLlve paLLerns sald Lo underlle all manlfesLaLlon and glve paLLern Lo chaos and form Lo kosmos (whlch we wlll lnvesLlgaLe ln chapLer 9). 1he !unglan archeLypes, on Lhe oLher hand, are for Lhe mosL parL Lhe maglco-myLhlc moLlfs and archalc lmages"-Lhey should really be called proLoLypes"-collecLlvely lnherlLed by you and by me from pasL sLages of developmenL, archalc holons now formlng parL of our own compound lndlvlduallLy (Lhey come from below up, noL from above down). And comlng Lo Lerms wlLh Lhese archalc holons-befrlendlng and maklng consclous and dlfferenLlaLlng/lnLegraLlng Lhese proLoLypes-ls a useful endeavor, noL because Lhey are our LransraLlonal fuLure, buL because Lhey are our preraLlonal pasL. l agree eotltely wlLh !ung on Lhe necesslLy of dlfferenLlaLlng and lnLegraLlng Lhls archalc herlLage, l do noL belleve LhaL Lhls has much Lo do wlLh genulne mysLlcal splrlLuallLy. 43 keep ln mlnd also LhaL for !ung, Lhe archeLypes are collectlvely lnherlLed archalc lmages, Lhey arlse from Lhe common, day-Lo-day, normal and typlcol expetleoces of men and women everywhere, so LhaL Lhere ls an archeLype of Lhe MoLher, Lhe laLher, Lhe LrlcksLer, Lhe shadow, Lhe uroboros (serpenL), and so on. 1hese slLuaLlons are encounLered by vlrLually everybody everywhere, and so Lhe lmprlnLs" of Lhese encounLers over Lhe mlllennla became engraved ln Lhe braln, so Lo speak (or, less Lamarcklanly, Lhose who were born wlLh Lhe guldlng lmprlnL, whlch helps a person orlenL Loward Lyplcal slLuaLlons, would be more llkely Lo survlve and reproduce and pass Lhe lmage along). 8uL ln any glven pasL era (and Loday as well), Lhe number of lndlvlduals who octoolly ttoosceoJeJ lnLo profoundly mysLlcal occaslons was very, very small (as we saw Campbell polnL ouL). ln oLher words, even under Lhe besL of clrcumsLances, Lhere slmply weren'L enough mysLlcs Lo lmprlnL Lhe enLlre or collecLlve human race: profound mysLlcal experlence ls oot a common, Lyplcal, everyday occurrence LhaL could be swepL up and lncluded ln pasL collecLlve evoluLlonary lmprlnLs. 44 And ln no way ls Loday's profound mysLlcal awareness an experlence of yesLerday's ordlnary, collecLlve, Lyplcal experlences. Lxcellence ln any era ls noL an experlence of yesLerday's collecLlve normallLy, made Lo sound splrlLual" by calllng lL collecLlve," as lf a whole bunch more of average could equal exLraordlnary, as lf mulLlplylng medlocrlLy would equal excellence. 1hus, Lo glve only one example, ln !ean 8olen's books, such as CoJJesses lo vetywomoo and CoJs lo vetymoo, Lhere ls a wonderful presenLaLlon of all Lhe archeLypal" gods and goddesses LhaL are collecLlvely lnherlLed by men and women (from Lhe sLeadlness and paLlence of PesLla Lo Lhe sexuallLy and sensuallLy of AphrodlLe Lo Lhe sLrengLh and lndependence of ArLemls). 8uL Lhese gods and goddesses are noL Lranspersonal modes of awareness, or genulnely mysLlcal lumlnoslLles, buL slmply a collecLlon of Lyplcal and everyday self-lmages (and personae) avallable Lo men and women. CollecLlve Lyplcal ls noL Lranspersonal. 43 now l belleve LhaL Lhere are lndeed mysLlcal archeLypes" (ln Lhe LranscendenLal sense l menLloned above, and Lo whlch we wlll reLurn), buL Lhese archeLypes cannoL be explalned as an lnherlLance from Lhe pasL, Lhey are sLrange ALLracLors lylng ln our fuLure, omega polnLs LhaL have noL been collectlvely manlfesLed anywhere ln Lhe pasL, buL are noneLheless avallable Lo each and every lndlvldual as sttoctotol poteotlols, as fuLure sLrucLures aLLempLlng Lo come down, noL pasL sLrucLures sLruggllng Lo come up. 1PL MLn'S MCvLMLn1 ln reLreaLlng Lo Lhe wllderness, and banglng drums, and conLacLlng Lhe archalc lmages of man as warrlor, hunLer, klng, wlld man, and so forLh, many modern men are helped Lo reconLacL Lhese archalc holons and be Lhereby enrlched and energlzed and glven rooLs. Cur modern culLure has Loo ofLen negaLed Lhese holons whlle falllng Lo also preserve Lhem ln an lnLegraLed and accepLable fashlon, and Lhus a reLurn Lo rooLs" ls alLogeLher approprlaLe and benlgn. 8uL Lhe polnL, noLlce, ls LhaL Lhese are men who, ln Lhe plenLlful space of reason, play ouL Lhese myLhs ln an as-lf fashlon, Lhus Lranscendlng Lhem ln Lhe very process of playlng wlLh Lhem (and Lhose who don'L Lranscend Lhem, Lhose who Lake Lhese myLhs serlously, geL lnLo a greaL deal of emoLlonal Lrouble-Lhe wlld man" as a myLh ls one Lhlng, as a llLeral role model, qulLe anoLher). 8uL l have been sLruck by Lhe facL LhaL vlrLually every woman l know, and every woman who has wrlLLen abouL Lhe men's movemenL, ls compleLely olotmeJ by lL. 1hey Lhlnk lL ls elLher dlsgusLlng, or preposLerous, or sllly, or obscene. 1he llberal femlnlsLs are ouLraged by lL, because Lhey malnLaln LhaL men, belng essenLlally oppressors, have no rlghL Lo complaln abouL anyLhlng, and Lhey see a gaLherlng of men" as noLhlng buL a chance for [allors Lo flne- Lune Lhe arL of oppresslon. 1he radlcal femlnlsLs, who oLherwlse so sLralghLforwardly champlon Lhe dlfferences beLween Lhe sexes, appear never Lo have had exacLly tbls dlfference ln mlnd, and reacL wlLh a very uneasy queaslness Lo Lhe whole affalr. 8uL under all Lhese reacLlons Lhere seems Lo be a pervaslve fear. A gaLherlng of wlld men ls ftlqbteoloq Lo mosL women, of whaLever ldeologlcal persuaslon, and l Lhlnk wlLh good reason. 1he archalc lmages, sLlll lylng close Lo Lhe body," close Lo Lhe lnsLlncLs, close Lo Lhe blosphere, are under sway of Lhose blologlcal unlversals, sLrong unlversals, ln whlch and by whlch blospherlc men have always domlnaLed women (wheLher or noL lnLenLlonally). Cnly ln Lhe noosphere can equallLy be concelved and found and enforced. 1he wlld man ls Lhe metely blospherlc male, Lhe lnsLlncLual male, where Lhe physlcal body rules, where lnLersexual muLuallLy ls suspended, where communlcaLlon ls a grunL and a groan and a Po!" And ln Lhe sound of Lhe drums poundlng from Lhe foresL, Loday's woman hears, l belleve, a mllllon years of physlcal domlnance rumbllng from Lhe depLhs, and noL one of Lhem llkes whaL she hears. 8LASCn 8LLLASLS M?1P We already saw LhaL ln Campbell's oplnlon Lhe really real" (or mosL lmporLanL) funcLlon of a myLh occurs when lL ls Laken ln an as-lf fashlon. ln oLher words, Lhe hldden power" of myLh ls teleoseJ when lL ls Laken up ln Lhe open space creaLed by raLlonallLy. And now we can see why: when reason Lakes up myLh, lL befrlends Lhe belng buL negaLes lLs parLlalness, and Lhus ftees Lhe myLhlc sLrucLure from lLs lmprlsonmenL ln a shallower occaslon. lL ls reason, and reason alone, LhaL frees Lhe lumlnoslLy Lrapped ln myLh. 1hus reason ftees whaLever splrlL manages Lo reslde ln myLh-a splrlL sLruggllng from wlLhln, Lo geL ouL. WheLher raLlonallLy appears splrlLual" or noL ls uLLerly beslde Lhe polnL. lL cerLalnly does noL appear myLhologlcal," and lf LhaL ls whaL one means by splrlLual," Lhen reason ls noL LhaL. 8uL genulne splrlLuallLy, we wlll see, ls prlmarlly a measure of depLh and a dlsclosure of depLh. 1here ls mote splrlLuallLy ln reason's Jeolol of Cod Lhan Lhere ls ln myLh's offltmotloo of Cod, preclsely because Lhere ls mote Jeptb. (And Lhe LransraLlonal, ln Lurn, dlscloses yeL more depLh, yeL more SplrlL, Lhan elLher myLh or reason). 8uL Lhe very Jeptb of reason, lLs capaclLy for unlversal-plurallsm, lLs lnslsLence on unlversal Lolerance, lLs grasp of global-planeLary perspecLlvlsm, lLs lnslsLence on unlversal benevolence and compasslon: Lhese are Lhe manlfesLaLlons of lLs genulne depLh, lLs qeooloe splrlLuallLy. 1hese capaclLles are noL teveoleJ Lo reason from wltboot (by a myLhlc source), Lhey lssue from wltblo lLs own sLrucLure, lLs own lobeteot depLh (whlch ls why lL does noL need recourse Lo a myLhlc god Lo lmplemenL lLs agenda of unlversal benevolence, why even an aLhelsL" acLlng from raLlonal-unlversal compasslon ls more splrlLual Lhan a fundamenLallsL acLlng Lo converL Lhe unlverse ln Lhe name of a myLhlc-membershlp god). 1haL Lhe SplrlL of reason does noL fly Lhrough Lhe sky hurllng LhunderbolLs and oLherwlse spend lLs Llme Lurnlng splnach lnLo poLaLoes speaks more, noL less, on lLs behalf. M?1PCLCC? 1CuA? So perhaps we can begln Lo see LhaL Lhe uses of myLhology ln Loday's world are many and varled. lor one Lhlng, llLeral-fundamenLal myLhologlcal moLlfs are Lhe maln soclal cemenL ln many culLures (lncludlng a very large segmenL of our own), and as dlvlslve and lmperlallsLlc as Lhose myLhologles are, Lhelr parLlcular eLhnocenLrlc and soclal- lnLegraLlve power has Lo be reckoned wlLh carefully. Cne cannoL slmply challenge or deconsLrucL Lhe myLhs of such socleLles (or segmenLs of socleLles) and expecL Lhem Lo survlve (or expecL Lhem Lo acqulesce wlLhouL a flghL). Moreover, even ln socleLles organlzed around a raLlonal-plurallsLlc worldvlew, each and every lndlvldual noneLheless beqlos llfe aL Lhe archalc, Lhen Lhe maglc, Lhen Lhe myLhlc, before (and lf) arrlvlng aL Lhe raLlonal. Cne of Lhe greaL problems wlLh Lhe LnllghLenmenL was LhaL 8eason was slmply supposed Lo replace all of LhaL rlghL down Lo Lhe rooLs, so LhaL every chlld would be born, more or less, an enllghLened and LoleranL raLlonallsL. Slnce Lhe tobolo was toso, all we had Lo do was wrlLe 8-L-A-S-C-n across Lhe clean slaLe, and all would follow wonderfully. needless Lo say, lL doesn'L work llke LhaL. Lvery chlld sLlll has Lo negoLlaLe Lhe archalc worldvlew, Lhen deconsLrucL LhaL wlLh Lhe maglcal worldvlew, Lhen deconsLrucL LhaL wlLh Lhe myLhlc, Lhen deconsLrucL LhaL wlLh Lhe raLlonal (on Lhe way Lo Lhe LransraLlonal). Lach of Lhese LransformaLlons ls a serles of palnful deaLhs and reblrLhs, and Lhe Lyplcal lndlvldual aLLempLs Lo sLop Lhe paln by sLopplng Lhe LransformaLlon. Cone ls Lhe Llme (ln Lhe developed LasL and WesL) when one could seLLle comforLably ln Lhe maglc or even Lhe myLhlc mode. 1he cenLer of gravlLy of Lhe world soul," so Lo speak, has moved lnLo raLlonal modes of unlversal plurallsm, and Lhus Lhe earllesL LhaL an lndlvldual can aborL LransformaLlon (and sLop" Lhe paln), wlLhouL soclal censure, ls somewhere around Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal (LhaL ls, even lf one cllngs Lo myLh, lL has Lo be propped up wlLh raLlonallzaLlons, because everywhere raLlonallLy lmplnges on lL). And, lndeed, Lhe ma[orlLy of lndlvlduals ln raLlonal socleLles sLlll seLLle ln somewhere around Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal, uslng all Lhe formldable powers of raLlonallLy Lo prop up a parLlcular, dlvlslve, lmperlallsLlc myLhology and an aggresslvely fundamenLallsLlc program of sysLemaLlc lnLolerance. As such, Lhey are consLanLly aL war wlLh maglc, wlLh otbet myLhs, and wlLh reason, all of whlch Lhey vlew slmply as Lhe devll's work. 1he modern soluLlon Lo Lhls developmenLal nlghLmare ls LhaL Lhe raLlonallLy sLrucLure of Lhe democraLlc sLaLe toletotes maglc and myLhlc subholons, buL lL has, vla Lhe all-lmporLanL separaLlon of church and sLaLe, temoveJ tbe wotlJvlews of Lhose subholons from Lhe organlzlng reglme of Lhe socleLy, whlch lLself ls deflned by a raLlonal Lolerance of everyLhlng buL lnLolerance. 8ecause Lhese subholons are robbed of Lhelr power Lo qoveto excloslvely, Lhey are robbed of pushlng Lhelr myLhlc-lmperlallsLlc expanslonlsm vla naLlonal-mlllLary means, Lhough Lhls doesn'L prevenL Lhem from always aglLaLlng Lo LllL Lhe sLaLe Loward Lhelr own fundamenLallsLlc values. (And, of course, for Lhose naLlons where Lhe myLhlc holons ote Lhe governlng reglme, mlllLary expanslonlsm ls sLlll Lhe rule, and, ln Lhese cases, as usual, lL lsn'L wheLher one can acLually wln and coerce oLhers Lo Lhe falLh, buL wheLher one can earn Lhe rlghL Lo dle Lrylng.) 8uL even for Lhose who have developed beyond a concreLe myLhologlcal approach Lo Lhe world, Lhe myLhologlcal sLrucLures Lhemselves, as we [usL saw, are now [unlor holons ln Lhe person's own compound lndlvlduallLy, and should be honored as a rlch source of one's own belng and one's own rooLs. And Lhereln, as l lndlcaLed, lles Lhe real value of Lhe !unglan/Campbell/myLhopoeLlc approach (dlvesLed of lLs elevaLlonlsm). 8uL lf genulne splrlLuallLy ls noL, as l malnLaln, a producL of Lhe pasL (or of pasL archeLypes), Lhen whaL abouL Lhe greaL splrlLual flgures, LasL and WesL, who deflnlLely exlsLed ln Lhe pasL? WhaL abouL Lhe 8uddhas, Lhe ChrlsLs, Lhe krlshnas? Are Lhey noL expresslng some pasL capaclLy, some pasL archeLypal wlsdom LhaL we have losL Louch wlLh? And ln conLacLlng our own splrlLuallLy, aren'L we conLacLlng some pasL poLenLlal LhaL we have losL or denled or forgoLLen? LosL, perhaps, buL noL from Lhe pasL. LeL me repeaL whaL l sald above abouL Lhe Lrue archeLypes," Lhe LranscendenLal and Lranspersonal sLrucLures, as a remlnder: Lhey cannoL be explalned as an lnherlLance from Lhe pasL, Lhey are sLrange ALLracLors lylng ln our fuLure, omega polnLs LhaL have noL been collectlvely manlfesLed anywhere ln Lhe pasL, buL are noneLheless avallable Lo each and every lndlvldual as sttoctotol poteotlols, as fuLure sLrucLures aLLempLlng Lo come down, noL pasL sLrucLures sLruggllng Lo come up. 1he greaL and rare mysLlcs of Lhe pasL (from 8uddha Lo ChrlsL, from al-Palla[ Lo Lady 1sogyal, from Pul-neng Lo Plldegard) were, ln facL, ahead of Lhelr Llme, and are sLlll ahead of ours. ln oLher words, Lhey mosL deflnlLely are oot flgures of Lhe pasL. 1hey are flgures of Lhe fuLure. ln Lhelr splrlLuallLy, Lhey dld noL Lap lnLo yesLerday, Lhey Lapped lnLo Lomorrow. ln Lhelr profound awareness, we do noL see Lhe seLLlng sun, buL Lhe new dawn. 1hey absoluLely dld noL lnherlL Lhe pasL, Lhey lnherlLed Lhe fuLure. lL ls Lo LhaL fuLure we can now Lurn. 7 1be lottbet keocbes of nomoo Notote 1bls ooe beloq ooJ cooscloosoess ls lovolveJ bete lo mottet. volotloo ls tbe ptocess by wblcb lt llbetotes ltself, cooscloosoess oppeots lo wbot seems to be locooscleot jl.e., mottet, tbe pbyslospbete], ooJ ooce bovloq oppeoteJ ls self-lmpelleJ jself-otqoolzloq] to qtow blqbet ooJ blqbet ooJ ot tbe some tlme to eolotqe ooJ Jevelop towotJ o qteotet ooJ qteotet petfectloo. llfe ls tbe fltst step of tbls teleose of cooscloosoess, mloJ ls tbe secooJ. 8ot tbe evolotloo Joes oot flolsb wltb mloJ, lt owolts teleose loto sometbloq qteotet, o cooscloosoess wblcb ls spltltool ooJ soptomeotol. 1bete ls tbetefote oo teosoo to pot o llmlt to evolotloooty posslblllty by tokloq oot pteseot otqoolzotloo ot stotos of exlsteoce os flool. -S8l Au8C8lnuC WL A8L ?L1 Lhe basLard sons and daughLers of an evoluLlon noL yeL done wlLh us, caughL always beLween Lhe fragmenLs of yesLerday and Lhe unlons of Lomorrow, unlons apparenLly desLlned Lo carry us far beyond anyLhlng we can posslbly recognlze Loday, and unlons LhaL, llke all such blrLhs, are exqulslLely palnful and unbearably ecsLaLlc. And wlLh yeL [usL Lhe sllghLesL look-once agaln, wlLhln-new marrlages unfold, and Lhe drama carrles on. 1PL ln1L8lC8 CAS1LL l have been consLanLly emphaslzlng LhaL each sLage of evoluLlon, ln whaLever domaln, lnvolves a new emergence and Lherefore a new depLh, or a new lnLerlorlLy, wheLher LhaL applles Lo molecules or Lo blrds or Lo dolphlns, and LhaL each new wlLhln ls also a golng beyond, a Lranscendence, a hlgher and wlder ldenLlLy wlLh a greaLer LoLal embrace. 1he formula ls: golng wlLhln = golng beyond = greaLer embrace. And l wanL Lo make very clear exacLly whaL LhaL means. 1hls ls exLremely lmporLanL, l Lhlnk, because Lhe hlgher sLages of developmenL, Lhe LransraLlonal and Lranspersonal and mysLlcal sLages, all lnvolve a new golng wlLhln, a new lnLerlorness. And Lhe charge has been clrculaLlng, for qulLe some Llme now, LhaL endeavors such as medlLaLlon are somehow narclsslsLlc and wlLhdrawn. LnvlronmenLallsLs, ln parLlcular, ofLen clalm LhaL medlLaLlon ls somehow escaplsL" or egocenLrlc," and LhaL Lhls golng wlLhln" slmply lgnores Lhe real" problems ln Lhe real" world ouL Lhere." reclsely Lhe opposlLe. lar from belng some sorL of narclsslsLlc wlLhdrawal or lnward lsolaLlon, medlLaLlon (or Lranspersonal developmenL ln general) ls a slmple and naLural conLlnuaLlon of Lhe evoluLlonary process, where every golng wlLhln ls also a golng beyond Lo a wlder embrace. 8ecall LhaL Lwo of our LeneLs (8 and 12d) sLaLed LhaL lncreaslng evoluLlon means lncreaslng depLh and lncreaslng relaLlve auLonomy. ln Lhe realm of human developmenL, Lhls parLlcularly shows up ln Lhe facL LhaL, accordlng Lo developmenLal psychology (as we wlll see), lncreaslng growLh and developmenL always lnvolve locteosloq lotetoollzotloo (or lncreaslng lnLerlorlzaLlon). And as paradoxlcal as lL lnlLlally sounds, Lhe mote lotetlotlzeJ a person ls, Lhe less ootclsslstlc hls or her awareness becomes. So we need Lo undersLand why, for all schools of developmenLal psychology, Lhls equaLlon ls Lrue: lncreaslng developmenL = locteosloq lnLerlorlzaLlon = Jecteosloq narclsslsm (or decreaslng egocenLrlsm). ln shorL, we need Lo undersLand why Lhe more lnLerlor a person ls, Lhe less egocenLrlc he or she becomes. 8egln wlLh lnLerlorlzaLlon. LvoluLlon, Lo ParLmann [founder of psychoanalyLlc developmenLal psychology], ls a process of ptoqtesslve lotetoollzotloo, for, ln Lhe developmenL of Lhe specles, Lhe organlsm achleves lncreased lndependence from lLs envlronmenL, Lhe resulL of whlch ls LhaL 'reacLlons whlch orlglnally occurred ln relaLlon Lo Lhe exLernal world are lncreaslngly dlsplaced lnLo Lhe lnLerlor of Lhe organlsm.' 1he more lndependenL Lhe organlsm becomes, Lhe greaLer lLs lndependence from Lhe sLlmulaLlon of Lhe lmmedlaLe envlronmenL." 1 1hls applles Lo Lhe lnfanL, for example, when lL no longer dlssolves ln Lears lf food ls noL lmmedlaLely forLhcomlng. 8y lnLerlorlzlng lLs awareness, lL ls no longer merely buffeLed by Lhe lmmedlaLe flucLuaLlons ln Lhe envlronmenL: lLs relaLlve auLonomy-lLs capaclLy Lo remaln sLable ln Lhe mldsL of shlfLlng clrcumsLances-lncreases. 1hls progresslve lnLernallzaLlon ls a cornersLone of psychoanalyLlc developmenLal psychology (from ParLmann Lo 8lanck and 8lanck Lo kernberg Lo kohuL). lL ls lmpllclL ln !ung's noLlon of lndlvlduaLlon. Llkewlse, lageL descrlbed LhoughL as lnLernallzed acLlon," Lhe capaclLy Lo lnLernally plan an acLlon and anLlclpaLe lLs course wlLhouL belng merely a reacLlve auLomaLon-and so forLh. ln oLher words, for developmenLal psychology, lncreaslng developmenL = lncreaslng lnLerlorlzaLlon = lncreaslng relaLlve auLonomy. 1hls, of course, ls slmply LeneL 12d as lL shows up ln humans. 1he second llnk ln Lhe equaLlon concerns narclsslsm, whlch ls roughly synonymous wlLh egocenLrlsm, abouL whlch we have already sald much. We need only recall LhaL lncreaslng developmenL lnvolves preclsely Lhe capaclLy Lo Lranscend one's lsolaLed and sub[ecLlve polnL of vlew, and Lhus Lo flnd hlgher and wlder perspecLlves and ldenLlLles. lageL referred Lo Lhe enLlre developmenLal process as one of Jecteosloq eqoceottlsm, or whaL he also called decenLerlng." uLLlng Lhese all LogeLher, we have: lncreaslng developmenL = lncreaslng lnLerlorlzaLlon = lncreaslng auLonomy = decreaslng narclsslsm (decenLerlng). ln oLher words, Lhe more one can qo wltblo, or Lhe more one can lnLrospecL and reflecL on one's self, Lhen Lhe more deLached from LhaL self one can become, Lhe more one can rlse above LhaL self's llmlLed perspecLlve, and so Lhe less narclsslsLlc or less egocenLrlc one becomes (or Lhe more JeceoteteJ one becomes). 1hls ls why lageL ls always saylng Lhlngs LhaL soooJ paradoxlcal, such as: llnally, as Lhe chlld becomes consclous of hls sub[ecLlvlLy, he rlds hlmself of hls egocenLrlclLy." 2 1he more he can sub[ecLlvely reflecL on hls self, Lhe more he can Lranscend lL-hls sub[ecLlvlLy, hls lotetlotlty, rlds hlm of hls egocenLrlclLy. Poward Cardner does a masLerful [ob of summarlzlng developmenL as belng Lhe Lwo processes of decreaslng egocenLrlsm and lncreaslng lnLerlorlLy. 1he flrsL ls Lhe decllne of egocenLrlsm. 1he young chlld ls, ln lageL's Lerms, LoLally egocenLrlc-meanlng noL LhaL he Lhlnks selflshly only abouL hlmself, buL Lo Lhe conLrary, LhaL he ls lncapable of Lhlnklng abouL hlmself. 1he egocenLrlc chlld ls unable Lo dlfferenLlaLe hlmself from Lhe resL of Lhe world, he has noL separaLed hlmself ouL from oLhers or from ob[ecLs. 1hus he feels LhaL oLhers share hls paln or hls pleasure, LhaL hls mumbllngs wlll lnevlLably be undersLood, LhaL hls perspecLlve ls shared by all persons, LhaL even anlmals and planLs parLake of hls consclousness. ln playlng hlde-and-seek he wlll 'hlde' ln broad vlew of oLher persons, because hls egocenLrlsm prevenLs hlm from recognlzlng LhaL oLhers are aware of hls locaLlon. 1he whole course of human developmenL can be vlewed as a conLlnulng decllne ln egocenLrlsm. . . ." 3 And Lhls decreaslng narclsslsm ls dlrecLly connecLed wlLh Lhe second Lrend ln menLal growLh," namely, Lhe Lendency Loward lnLernallzaLlon or lnLerlorlzaLlon. 1he lnfanL elLher solves problems by hls acLlvlLy upon Lhe world or he does noL solve Lhem aL all. 1he older chlld, on Lhe oLher hand, can achleve many lnLellecLual breakLhroughs wlLhouL overL physlcal acLlons. Pe ls able Lo reallze Lhese acLlons lnLerlorly, Lhrough concreLe and formal operaLlons." 4 8y acLlng on Lhe self lnLerlorly, LhaL self ls decenLered, and Lhls allows, among many oLher Lhlngs, Lhe conLlnulng expanslon (decenLerlng) of moral response from egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc (lnLegral- aperspecLlval). ln shorL, Lhe more one qoes wltblo, Lhe more one qoes beyooJ, and Lhe more one can Lhus embrace a Jeepet lJeotlty wlLh a wlJet petspectlve. MedlLaLlon, Lhen, as we wlll see ln deLall, lnvolves yeL a furLher qoloq wltblo, and Lhus a furLher qoloq beyooJ, Lhe dlscovery of a new and hlgher awareness wlLh a new and wlder ldenLlLy-and Lhus medlLaLlon ls one of Lhe slngle sLrongesL anLldoLes Lo egocenLrlsm and narclsslsm (and geocenLrlsm and anLhropocenLrlsm and soclocenLrlsm). And leL us remember lageL's cenLral polnL abouL egocenLrlsm, namely, LhaL egocenLrlsm obscures Lhe LruLh." lL follows LhaL medlLaLlon, as an anLldoLe Lo egocenLrlsm, would lnvolve a subsLanLlal lncrease ln capaclLy for ttotb Jlsclosote, a clearlng of Lhe cobwebs of selfcenLrlc percepLlon and an openlng ln whlch Lhe kosmos could more clearly manlfesL, and be seen, and be appreclaLed-for whaL lL ls and noL for whaL lL can do for me. ln shorL, every wltblo Lurns us oot lnLo more of Lhe kosmos. 1hls ls whaL seems Lo so confuse Lhe flaLland hollsLs (and Lhe ecologlcal crlLlcs of conLemplaLlon), because ln Lhelr flaLland world of self and cosmos, Lhe mote aLLenLlon you place on one, Lhe less aLLenLlon you have for Lhe oLher (and Lhey wanL everyone's eyes rlveLed on exLerlor naLure), whereas ln Lhe plurldlmenslonal and holoarchlc kosmos, Lhe mote Lhe depLhs of Lhe self are dlsclosed, Lhe mote Lhe correspondlng depLhs of Lhe kosmos reveal Lhemselves. (We wlll see where all LhaL leads ln a momenL.) 1hls general movemenL of wltblo-ooJ-beyooJ ls noLhlng new wlLh humans: lL ls a slmple conLlnuaLlon of Lhe kosmlc evoluLlonary process, whlch ls self-developmenL Lhrough self-Lranscendence," Lhe same process aL work ln aLoms and molecules and cells, a process LhaL, ln Lhe human domalns, conLlnues naLurally lnLo Lhe superconsclous, wlLh preclsely noLhlng occulL or mysLerlous abouL lL. vlSlCn-LCClC 1he capaclLy Lo go wlLhln and look ot raLlonallLy resulLs ln a qoloq beyooJ raLlonallLy, and Lhe flrsL sLage of LhaL golng-beyond ls vlslon-loglc. lf you are aware of belng raLlonal, whaL ls Lhe naLure of LhaL awareness, slnce lL ls now blgger Lhan raLlonallLy? 1o be aware of raLlonallLy ls no longer Lo have only raLlonallLy, yes? numerous psychologlsLs (8runer, llavell, ArleLl, Cowan, kramer, Commons, 8asseches, Arlln, eLc.) have polnLed ouL LhaL Lhere ls much evldence for a sLage beyond lageL's formal operaLlonal. lL has been called dlalecLlcal," lnLegraLlve," creaLlve synLheLlc," lnLegral-aperspecLlval," posLformal," and so forLh. l, of course, am uslng Lhe Lerms vlsloo-loqlc or oetwotk-loqlc. 8uL Lhe concluslons are all essenLlally Lhe same: lageL's formal operaLlonal ls consldered Lo be a problem-solvlng sLage. 8uL beyond Lhls sLage are Lhe Lruly creaLlve sclenLlsLs and Lhlnkers who deflne lmporLanL problems and ask lmporLanL quesLlons. Whlle lageL's formal model ls adequaLe Lo descrlbe Lhe cognlLlve sLrucLures of adolescenLs and compeLenL adulLs, lL ls noL adequaLe Lo descrlbe Lhe Lowerlng lnLellecL of nobel laureaLes, greaL sLaLesmen and sLaLeswomen, poeLs, and so on." 3 1rue enough. 8uL l would llke Lo glve a dlfferenL emphasls Lo Lhls sLrucLure, for whlle very few people mlghL acLually galn Lhe Lowerlng sLaLus of a nobel laureaLe," Lhe spoce of vlslon-loglc (lLs worldspace or worldvlew) ls avallable for any who wlsh Lo conLlnue Lhelr growLh and developmenL. ln oLher words, Lo progress Lhrough Lhe varlous sLages of growLh does noL mean LhaL one has Lo exLraordlnarlly masLer each and every sLage, and demonsLraLe a genlus comprehenslon aL LhaL sLage before one can progress beyond lL. 1hls would be llke saylng LhaL no lndlvlduals can move beyond Lhe oral sLage unLll Lhey become gourmeL cooks. lL ls noL even necessary Lo be able Lo arLlculaLe Lhe characLerlsLlcs of a parLlcular sLage (chlldren progress beyond preop wlLhouL ever belng able Lo deflne lL). lL ls merely necessary Lo develop an oJepoote competeoce aL LhaL sLage, ln order for lL Lo serve [usL flne as a plaLform for Lhe Lranscendence Lo Lhe nexL sLage. ln order Lo Lranscend Lhe verbal, lL ls noL necessary Lo flrsL become Shakespeare. Llkewlse, ln order Lo develop formal raLlonallLy, lL ls noL necessary Lo learn calculus and proposlLlonal loglc. Lvery Llme you lmaglne dlfferenL ouLcomes, every Llme you see a posslble fuLure dlfferenL from Loday's, every Llme you dream Lhe dream of whaL mlghL be, you are uslng formal operaLlonal awareness. And from LhaL plaLform you can enLer vlslon-loglc, whlch means noL LhaL you have Lo become a Pegel or a WhlLehead ln order Lo advance, buL only LhaL you have Lo Lhlnk globally, whlch ls noL so hard aL all. 1hose who wlll mostet Lhls sLage, or any sLage for LhaL maLLer, wlll always be relaLlvely few, buL all are lnvlLed Lo pass Lhrough. 8ecause vlslon-loglc Lranscends buL lncludes formal operaLlonal, lL compleLes and brlngs Lo frulLlon many of Lhe Lrends begun wlLh unlversal raLlonallLy lLself (whlch ls why many wrlLers refer Lo vlslon-loglc as maLure reason" or dlalecLlcal reason" or synLheLlc reason," and so on). And some LheorlsLs slmply subdlvlde formal operaLlonal awareness lnLo several subsLages, wlLh Lhe hlghesL of Lhose sLages belng whaL we are calllng vlslon-loglc. !ames lowler, for example, dlvldes formop lnLo early formop, dlchoLomlzlng formop, dlalecLlcal formop, and synLheLlc formop (Lhe flrsL Lwo belng whaL l am calllng raLlonallLy, and Lhe lasL Lwo belng vlslon-loglc, alLhough all four are reason" ln Lhe very broadesL sense). lncldenLally, lowler's exLremely lmporLanL work on Lhe sLages of falLh" (whose deLalls l wlll reserve for a noLe) 6 ls yeL anoLher clear accounL of Lhe evoluLlon from maglc Lo myLhlc-llLeral Lo Lhe unlversal commonwealLh of belng." ln oLher words, raLlonallLy ls global, vlslon-loglc ls more global. 1ake Pabermas, for example (ln commoolcotloo ooJ tbe volotloo of 5oclety). lormal operaLlonal raLlonallLy esLabllshes Lhe posLconvenLlonal sLages of, flrsL, clvll llberLles" or legal freedom" for all Lhose bound by law," and Lhen, ln a more developed sLage, lL demands noL [usL legal freedom buL also moral freedom" for all humans as prlvaLe persons." 8uL even furLher, maLure or communlcaLlve reason (our vlslon-loglc) demands boLh moral and pollLlcal freedom" for all human belngs as members of a world socleLy." 1hus, where raLlonallLy began Lhe wotlJceottlc orlenLaLlon of unlversal plurallsm, vlslon-loglc brlngs lL Lo a maLure frulLlon by demandlng noL [usL legal and moral freedom, buL legal and moral and pollLlcal freedom (lncludes Lhe prevlous sLage and adds someLhlng cruclal: Lranscends and lncludes). ln [usL Lhe same way, ecologlcal and relaLlonal awareness, whlch sLarLed Lo emerge wlLh formal operaLlonal, comes Lo a ma[or frulLlon wlLh vlslon-loglc and Lhe cenLaurlc worldvlew. lor, ln beglnnlng Lo Jlffeteotlote from raLlonallLy (look aL lL, operaLe upon lL), vlslon-loglc can, for Lhe flrsL Llme, loteqtote reason wlLh lLs predecessors, lncludlng llfe and maLLer, all as [unlor holons ln lLs own compound lndlvlduallLy. ln oLher words, and l lnLend Lo emphaslze Lhls heavlly, cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc can lnLegraLe physlosphere, blosphere, and noosphere ln lLs own compound lndlvlduallLy (and Lhls ls, as l suggesLed ln chapLer 3, Lhe nexL ma[or sLage of leadlng-edge global LransformaLlon, even Lhough mosL of Lhe work yeL Lo be done" ls sLlll geLLlng Lhe globe up Lo decenLered unlversal-raLlonal plurallsm ln Lhe flrsL place). 1hls overall lnLegraLlon (physlosphere, blosphere, and noosphere, or maLLer, body, mlnd) ls borne ouL, for example, by Lhe researches of 8roughLon, Loevlnger, Selman, Maslow, and oLhers. As only one example, buL an lmporLanL one, we can Lake Lhe work of !ohn 8roughLon. As usual, Lhls new cenLaurlc sLage possesses noL [usL a new cognlLlve capaclLy (vlslon-loglc)-lL also lnvolves a new sense of ldenLlLy (cenLaurlc), wlLh new deslres, new drlves, new needs, new percepLlons, new Lerrors, and new paLhologles: lL ls a new and hlgher self ln a new and wlder world of oLhers. And 8roughLon has very carefully mapped ouL Lhe developmenLal sLages of self and knowlng LhaL lead up Lo Lhls new cenLaurlc mode of belng-ln-Lhe-world. 7 1o slmpllfy conslderably, 8roughLon asked lndlvlduals from preschool age Lo early adulLhood: whaL or where ls your self? Slnce Lhls was a verbal sLudy, 8roughLon began wlLh Lhe laLe preop chlld (maglc-myLhlc), whlch he calls level zero. AL Lhls sLage, chlldren unlformly reply LhaL self ls lnslde" and reallLy ls ouLslde." 1houghLs are noL dlsLlngulshed from Lhelr ob[ecLs (sLlll maglcal adherences, Lhe chlld has noL compleLed fulcrum Lhree). AL level one, sLlll ln Lhe laLe preop sLage, chlldren belleve LhaL Lhe self ls ldenLlfled wlLh Lhe physlcal body, buL Lhe mlnd conLrols Lhe self and can Lell lL whaL Lo do, so lL ls Lhe mlnd LhaL moves Lhe body. 1he relaLlon of mlnd Lo body ls one of auLhorlLy: Lhe mlnd ls a blg person and Lhe body ls a llLLle person (l.e., mlnd and body are slowly dlfferenLlaLlng). Llkewlse, LhoughLs are dlsLlngulshed from ob[ecLs, buL Lhere ls no dlsLlncLlon beLween reallLy and appearance (nalve reallsm"). Level Lwo occurs aL abouL ages seven Lo Lwelve years (conop). Mlnd and body are lnlLlally dlfferenLlaLed aL Lhls level (compleLlon of fulcrum Lhree), and Lhe chlld speaks of Lhe self as belng, noL a body, buL a petsoo (a soclal tole or petsooo, fulcrum four), and Lhe person lncludes boLh mlnd and body. AlLhough LhoughLs and Lhlngs are dlsLlngulshed, Lhere ls sLlll a sLrong personallsLlc flavor Lo knowledge (remnanLs of egocenLrlsm), so facLs and personal oplnlons are noL easlly dlfferenLlaLed. AL level Lhree, occurrlng around eleven Lo sevenLeen years (early formop), Lhe soclal personallLy or tole ls seen as a folse ootet oppeotooce, dlfferenL from Lhe ttoe looet self." Pere we see very clearly Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe self (Lhe raLlonal ego) from lLs embeddedness ln soclocenLrlc roles-Lhe emergence of a new lnLerlorlLy or relaLlve auLonomy whlch ls owote of, ooJ tbos ttoosceoJs ot JlslJeotlfles ftom, overL soclal roles. 1he self ls whaL Lhe person's naLure normally ls, lL ls a klnd of essence and remalns lLself over changes ln menLal conLenLs." Llkewlse, and for preclsely Lhe same reasons, reflecLlve self-awareness appears aL Lhls level." (1hls ls fulcrum flve, Lhe raLlonal and reflexlve ego dlfferenLlaLlng from, and Lhus Lranscendlng, soclocenLrlc or myLhlc-membershlp roles, wlLh Lhe correlaLlve posslble paLhology of ldenLlLy crlsls." noLlce also LhaL Lhe new ego-self ls beqlooloq Lo remaln as wltoess Lo Lhe sLream of menLal evenLs, and ls noL merely carrled away by any passlng LhoughLs, Lhe adolescenL aL Lhls sLage reporLs LhaL someLhlng remalns lLself over changes ln menLal conLenLs.") AL level four, or laLe formop, Lhe person becomes capable of hypoLheLlco-deducLlve awareness (whaL lf, as lf), and reallLy ls concelved ln Lerms of telotlvlty and lotettelotloosblps (ecology and relaLlvlLy, ln Lhe broadesL sense, as we have seen). 1he self ls vlewed as a posLulaLe lendlng unlLy and lnLegrlLy Lo personallLy, experlence, and behavlor" (Lhls ls Lhe maLure ego"). 8uL, and Lhls ls very Lelllng, developmenL can Lake a cynlcal Lurn aL Lhls sLage. lnsLead of belng Lhe prlnclple lendlng unlLy and lnLegrlLy Lo experlence and behavlor, Lhe self ls slmply lJeotlfleJ wltb expetleoce ooJ bebovlot. ln Lhe cynlcal behavlorlsLlc Lurn of Lhls sLage, Lhe person ls a cyberneLlc sysLem gulded Lo fulflllmenL of lLs maLerlal wanLs. AL Lhls level, radlcal emphasls on seelng everyLhlng wlLhln a relaLlvlsLlc or sub[ecLlve frame of reference leaves Lhe person close Lo a sollpslsLlc poslLlon." 1he world ls seen as a greaL relaLlvlsLlc cybetoetlc system, so hollsLlc" LhaL lL leaves no room for Lhe acLual sub[ecL ln Lhe ob[ecLlve neLwork. 1he self Lherefore hovers above reallLy, dlsengaged, dlsenchanLed, dlsembodled. lL ls close Lo a sollpslsLlc poslLlon": hyperagency cuL off from all communlons. And Lhls, as we have seen, ls essenLlally Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm: a perfecLly hollsLlc world LhaL leaves a perfecLly aLomlsLlc self. 8 A LranscendenLal self can bond wlLh oLher LranscendenLal selves, whereas a merely emplrlcal self dlsappears lnLo Lhe emplrlcal web and lnLerlocklng order, never Lo be heard from agaln. (no sLrand ln Lhe web ls ever or can ever be aware of Lhe whole web, lf lL could, Lhen lL would cease Lo be merely a sLrand. 1hls ls noL allowed by sysLems Lheory, whlch ls why, as Pabermas demonsLraLed, sysLems Lheory always ends up lsolaLlonlsL and egocenLrlc, or sollpslsLlc.") 8uL for a more LranscendenLal self Lo emerge, lL has flrsL Lo Jlffeteotlote from Lhe merely empltlcol self, and Lhus we flnd, wlLh 8roughLon: At level flve tbe self os obsetvet ls JlstloqolsbeJ ftom tbe self-coocept os koowo." ln oLher words, someLhlng resembllng a pure observlng Self (a LranscendenLal WlLness or ALman, whlch we wlll lnvesLlgaLe ln a momenL) ls beglnnlng Lo be clearly dlsLlngulshed from Lhe emplrlcal ego or ob[ecLlve self-lL ls a new lnLerlorlLy, a new golng wlLhln LhaL goes beyond, a new emergence LhaL Lranscends buL lncludes Lhe emplrlcal ego. 1hls beglnnlng Lranscendence of Lhe ego we are, of course, calllng Lhe cenLaur (Lhe beglnnlng of fulcrum slx, or Lhe slxLh ma[or dlfferenLlaLlon LhaL we have seen so far ln Lhe developmenL of consclousness). 9 1hls ls Lhe realm of vlslon-loglc leadlng Lo cenLaurlc lnLegraLlon, whlch ls why aL Lhls sLage, 8roughLon found LhaL reallLy ls deflned by Lhe cobeteoce of Lhe lotetptetlve ftomewotk." 1hls lnLegraLlve sLage comes Lo frulLlon aL 8roughLon's lasL ma[or level (laLe cenLaurlc), where mloJ ooJ boJy ote botb expetleoces of oo loteqtoteJ self," whlch ls Lhe phrase l have mosL ofLen used Lo deflne Lhe cenLaurlc or bodymlnd-lnLegraLed self. reclsely because awareness has JlffeteotloteJ from (or dlsldenLlfled from, or Lranscended) an excloslve ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh body, persona, ego, and mlnd, lL can now loteqtote Lhem ln a unlfled fashlon, ln a new and hlgher holon wlLh each of Lhem as [unlor parLners. hyslosphere, blosphere, noosphere-excluslvely ldenLlfled wlLh none of Lhem, Lherefore capable of lnLegraLlng all of Lhem. 8uL everyLhlng ls noL sweeLness and llghL wlLh Lhe cenLaur. As always, new and hlgher capaclLles brlng wlLh Lhem Lhe poLenLlal for new and hlgher paLhologles. As vlslon-loglc adds up all Lhe posslblllLles glven Lo Lhe mlnd's eye, lL evenLually reaches a dlsmal concluslon: personal llfe ls a brlef spark ln Lhe cosmlc vold. no maLLer how wonderful lL all mlghL be now, we are sLlll golng Lo dle: JteoJ, as Peldegger sald, ls Lhe auLhenLlc response of Lhe exlsLenLlal (cenLaurlc) belng, a dread LhaL calls us back from self-forgeLLlng Lo self-presence, a dread LhaL selzes noL Lhls or LhaL parL of me (body or persona or ego or mlnd), buL raLher Lhe LoLallLy of my belng-ln-Lhe-world. When l auLhenLlcally see my llfe, l see lLs endlng, l see lLs deaLh, and l see LhaL my oLher selves," my ego, my personas, were all susLalned by lnauLhenLlclLy, by an ovolJooce of Lhe awareness of lonely deaLh. A profound exlsLenLlal malalse can seL ln-Lhe characLerlsLlc paLhology of Lhls sLage (fulcrum slx). no longer proLecLed by anLhropocenLrlc gods and goddesses, reason gone flaL ln lLs happy capaclLy Lo explaln away Lhe MysLery, noL yeL dellvered lnLo Lhe hands of Lhe superconsclous-we sLare ouL blankly lnLo LhaL dark and gloomy nlghL, whlch wlll very shorLly swallow us up as surely as lL once spaL us forLh. 1olsLoy: 1he quesLlon, whlch ln my flfLleLh year had broughL me Lo Lhe noLlon of sulclde, was Lhe slmplesL of all quesLlons, lylng ln Lhe soul of every man: WhaL wlll come from whaL l am dolng now, and may do Lomorrow? WhaL wlll come from my whole llfe?" CLherwlse expressed-Why should l llve? Why should l wlsh for anyLhlng?" Agaln, ln oLher words, ls Lhere any meanlng ln my llfe whlch wlll noL be desLroyed by Lhe lnevlLable deaLh awalLlng me?" 1haL quesLlon would oevet arlse Lo Lhe maglcal sLrucLure, LhaL sLrucLure has abundanL, even exorblLanL meanlng because Lhe unlverse cenLers always on lL, was made for lL, caLers Lo lL dally: every ralndrop sooLhes lLs soul because every conflrmlng drop reassures lL of lLs cosmocenLrlclLy: Lhe greaL splrlL wraps lL ln Lhe wlnd and whlspers Lo lL always, l exlsL for you. 1haL quesLlon would oevet arlse Lo a myLhlc-bellever: Lhls soul exlsLs only for lLs Cod, a Cod LhaL, by a happy colncldence, wlll save Lhls soul eLernally lf lL professes bellef ln Lhls Cod: a muLual admlraLlon socleLy desLlned for a bad lnflnlLy. A crlsls of falLh and meanlng ls lmposslble from wlLhln Lhls clrcle (a crlsls occurs only when Lhls soul suspecLs Lhls Cod). 1haL quesLlon would never beseL Lhe happy raLlonallsL, who long ago became a happy raLlonallsL by decldlng never Lo ask such quesLlons agaln, and Lhen forgeLLlng, renderlng unconsclous, Lhls quesLlon, and susLalnlng Lhe unconsclousness by rldlcullng Lhose who ask lL. no, LhaL quesLlon arlses from a self LhaL knows Loo much, sees Loo much, feels Loo much. 1he consolaLlons are gone, Lhe skull wlll grln ln aL Lhe banqueL, lL can no longer Lranqulllze lLself wlLh Lhe Lrlvlal. lrom Lhe depLhs, lL crles ouL Lo gods no longer Lhere, searches for a meanlng noL yeL dlsclosed, sLlll Lo be lncarnaLed. lLs very agony ls worLh a mllllon happy maglcs and a Lhousand bellevlng myLhs, and yeL lLs only consolaLlon ls lLs unrelenLlng paln-a paln, a dread, an empLlness LhaL feels beyond Lhe comforLs and dlsLracLlons of Lhe body, Lhe persona, Lhe ego, looks bravely lnLo Lhe face of Lhe vold, and can no longer explaln away elLher Lhe MysLery or Lhe 1error. lL ls a soul LhaL ls much Loo awake. lL ls a soul on Lhe brlnk of Lhe Lranspersonal. 1PL 18AnSL8SCnAL uCMAlnS We have repeaLedly seen LhaL Lhe problems of one sLage are only de-fused" aL Lhe nexL sLage, and Lhus Lhe only cure for exlsLenLlal angsL ls Lhe Lranscendence of Lhe exlsLenLlal condlLlon, LhaL ls, Lhe Lranscendence of Lhe cenLaur, negaLlng and preservlng lL ln a yeL hlgher and wlder awareness. lor we are here beglnnlng Lo pass ouL of Lhe noosphere and lnLo Lhe Lheosphere, lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal domalns, Lhe domalns noL [usL of Lhe self-consclous buL of Lhe superconsclous. A greaL number of lssues need Lo be clarlfled as we follow evoluLlon (and Lhe LwenLy LeneLs) lnLo Lhe hlgher or deeper forms of Lranspersonal unfoldlng. llrsL and foremosL, lf Lhls hlgher unfoldlng ls Lo be called rellglous" or splrlLual," lL ls a very far cry from whaL ls ordlnarlly meanL by Lhose Lerms. We have spenL several chapLers palnsLaklngly revlewlng Lhe earller developmenLs of Lhe archalc, maglc, and myLhlc sLrucLures (whlch are usually assoclaLed wlLh Lhe world's greaL rellglons), preclsely because Lhose sLrucLures are whaL Lranspersonal and conLemplaLlve developmenL ls oot. And here we can deflnlLely agree wlLh Campbell: lf 99.9 percenL of people wanL Lo call maglc and myLhlc real rellglon," Lhen so be lL for Lhem (LhaL ls a leglLlmaLe use), 10 buL LhaL ls noL whaL Lhe world's greaLesL yogls, salnLs, and sages mean by mysLlcal or really rellglous" developmenL, and ln any evenL ls noL whaL l have ln mlnd. Campbell, however, ls qulLe rlghL LhaL a very, very few lndlvlduals, durlng Lhe maglc and myLhlc and raLlonal eras, were lndeed able Lo go beyond maglc, beyond myLhlc, and beyond raLlonal-lnLo Lhe LransraLlonal and Lranspersonal domalns. And even lf Lhelr Leachlngs (such as Lhose of 8uddha, ChrlsL, aLan[all, admasambhava, 8uml, and Chlh-l) were snapped up by Lhe masses and LranslaLed downward lnLo maglc and myLhlc and egolc Lerms-Lhe salvaLlon of Lhe lndlvldual soul"-LhaL ls noL whaL Lhelr Leachlngs clearly and even blaLanLly sLaLed, nor dld Lhey lnLenLlonally lend any supporL Lo such endeavors. 1helr Leachlngs were abouL Lhe teleose from lndlvlduallLy, and noL abouL lLs everlasLlng perpeLuaLlon, a groLesque noLlon LhaL was equaLed flaL-ouL wlLh hell or samsara. 1helr Leachlngs, and Lhelr conLemplaLlve endeavors, were (and are) LransraLlonal Lhrough and Lhrough. 1haL ls, alLhough all of Lhe conLemplaLlve LradlLlons alm aL golng wlLhln and beyond reason, Lhey all stott wlLh reason, sLarL wlLh Lhe noLlon LhaL LruLh ls Lo be esLabllshed by evlJeoce, LhaL LruLh ls Lhe resulL of expetlmeotol meLhods, LhaL LruLh ls Lo be testeJ ln Lhe laboraLory of personal expetleoce, LhaL Lhese LruLhs are open Lo all Lhose who wlsh Lo tty tbe expetlmeot and Lhus dlsclose fot tbemselves Lhe LruLh or falslLy of Lhe splrlLual clalms-and LhaL dogmas or glven bellefs are preclsely whaL hlnder Lhe emergence of deeper LruLhs and wlder vlslons. 1hus, each of Lhese splrlLual or Lranspersonal endeavors (whlch we wlll carefully examlne) clalms LhaL Lhere exlsL hlgher domalns of awareness, embrace, love, ldenLlLy, reallLy, self, and LruLh. 8uL Lhese clalms are noL dogmaLlc, Lhey are noL belleved ln merely because an auLhorlLy proclalmed Lhem, or because soclocenLrlc LradlLlon hands Lhem down, or because salvaLlon depends upon belng a Lrue bellever." 8aLher, Lhe clalms abouL Lhese hlgher domalns are a cooclosloo based on hundreds of years of experlmenLal lnLrospecLlon and communal verlflcaLlon. lalse clalms are tejecteJ on Lhe basls of cooseosool evlJeoce, and furLher evldence ls used Lo ad[usL and flne-Lune Lhe experlmenLal concluslons. 1hese splrlLual endeavors, ln oLher words, are sclenLlflc ln any meanlngful sense of Lhe word, and Lhe sysLemaLlc presenLaLlons of Lhese endeavors follow preclsely Lhose of any tecoosttoctlve scleoce. C8!LC1lCnS 1C 1PL 18AnSL8SCnAL 1he common ob[ecLlons Lo Lhese conLemplaLlve sclences are noL very compelllng. 1he mosL Lyplcal ob[ecLlon ls LhaL Lhese mysLlcal sLaLes are prlvaLe and lnLerlor and cannoL be publlcly valldaLed, Lhey are merely sub[ecLlve." 1hls ls slmply noL Lrue, or raLher, lf lL ls Lrue, Lhen lL applles Lo any and all nonemplrlcal endeavors, from maLhemaLlcs Lo llLeraLure Lo llngulsLlcs Lo psychoanalysls Lo hlsLorlcal lnLerpreLaLlon. nobody has ever seen, ouL Lhere" ln Lhe sensory world," Lhe square rooL of a negaLlve one. 1haL ls a maLhemaLlcal symbol seen only lowotJly, prlvaLely," wlLh Lhe mlnd's eye. ?eL a communlLy of Lralned maLhemaLlclans know exacLly whaL LhaL symbol means, and Lhey can share LhaL symbol easlly ln lnLersub[ecLlve awareness, and Lhey can conflrm or re[ecL Lhe proper and conslsLenL uses of LhaL symbol. !usL so, Lhe prlvaLe" experlences of conLemplaLlve sclenLlsLs can be shared wlLh a communlLy of Lralned conLemplaLlves, grounded ln a common and shared experlence, and open Lo conflrmaLlon or rebuLLal based on publlc evldence. 8ecall LhaL Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh ls open Lo emplrlcal verlflcaLlon, whlch means LhaL Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon of holons, Lhelr form or exLerlors, can lndeed be seen" wlLh Lhe senses or Lhelr exLenslons. 8uL Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslon-Lhe lnLerlor slde-coooot be seen emplrlcally ouL Lhere," alLhough lL can be lnLernally expetleoceJ (and alLhough lL has emplrlcal cottelotes: my lnLerlor LhoughLs reglsLer on an LLC buL cannoL be deLermlned or lnLerpreLed or known from tbot evldence). LveryLhlng on Lhe LefL Pand, from sensaLlons Lo lmpulses Lo lmages and concepLs and so on, ls an lotetlot expetleoce known Lo me Jltectly by ocpoolotooce (whlch can lndeed be ob[ecLlvely descrlbed," buL only Lhrough an lnLersub[ecLlve communlLy aL Lhe some Jeptb, where lL relles on lotetptetotloo from Lhe some depLh). ultect spltltool expetleoce ls slmply Lhe hlgher reaches of Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, and Lhose experlences are as real as any oLher dlrecL experlences, and Lhey can be as easlly shared (or dlsLorLed) as any oLher experlenLlal knowledge. 11 (1he only way Lo deny Lhe valldlLy of dlrecL lnLerlor experlenLlal knowledge-wheLher lL be maLhemaLlcal knowledge, lnLrospecLlve knowledge, or splrlLual knowledge-ls Lo Lake Lhe behavlorlsL sLance and ldenLlfy lnLerlor experlence wlLh exLerlor behavlor. Should somebody menLlon LhaL Lhls ls Lhe cynlcal LwlsL or paLhologlcal agency of 8roughLon's level four?) 1here ls, of course, one provlso: Lhe experlmenLer most, ln hls or her own case, bove JevelopeJ tbe tepolslte coqoltlve tools. lf, for example, we wanL Lo lnvesLlgaLe concreLe operaLlonal LhoughL, a communlLy of Lhose who have only developed Lo Lhe preoperaLlonal level wlll noL do. lf you Lake a preop chlld, and ln fronL of Lhe chlld pour Lhe waLer from a shorL faL glass lnLo a Lall Lhln glass, Lhe chlld wlll Lell you LhaL Lhe Lall glass has more waLer. lf you say, no, Lhere ls Lhe same amounL of waLer ln boLh glasses, because you [usL saw me pour Lhe same waLer from one glass Lo Lhe oLher, Lhe chlld wlll have no ldea whaL you're Lalklng abouL. no, Lhe Lall glass has more waLer." no maLLer how many Llmes you pour Lhe waLer back and forLh beLween Lhe Lwo glasses, Lhe chlld wlll deny Lhey have Lhe same amounL of waLer. (lnLeresLlngly, lf you vldeoLape Lhe chlld aL Lhls sLage, and Lhen walL a few years unLll Lhe chlld has developed conop-aL whlch polnL lL wlll seem uLLerly obvlous Lo hlm LhaL Lhe glasses have Lhe same amounL of waLer-and Lhen show Lhe chlld Lhe earller vldeoLape, he wlll deny LhaL lL's hlm. Pe Lhlnks you've docLored Lhe vldeoLape, he cannoL lmaglne anybody belng LhaL sLupld.) 1he preop chlld ls lmmetseJ ln a world LhaL lncludes conop reallLles, ls JteocbeJ ln Lhose reallLles, and yeL cannoL see" Lhem: Lhey are all oLherworldly." AL every sLage of developmenL, ln facL, Lhe nexL hlgher sLage always appears Lo be a compleLely oLher world," an lnvlslble world"-lL has llLerally no exlsLence for Lhe lndlvldual, even Lhough Lhe lndlvldual ls ln facL sotototeJ wlLh a reallLy LhaL conLalns Lhe oLher" world. 1he lndlvldual's Lhls-worldly" exlsLence slmply cannoL comprehend Lhe oLherworldly" characLerlsLlcs lylng all around lL. AL Lhe same Llme, Lhese hlgher or deeper worldspaces (wheLher of conop or formop or anyLhlng hlgher) are noL locaLed elsewbete ln physlcal space-Llme. 1hey are locaLed bete, ln Jeepet percepLlons of tbls world. Otbet wotlJs become tbls wotlJ wlLh lncreaslng developmenL and evoluLlon. 1he worldspace of conop ls a compleLely oLher world Lo Lhe preop chlld (even Lhough he or she ls ofLen stotloq Jltectly ot lt), anoLher world LhaL noneLheless becomes perfecLly obvlous, presenL, seen, and Lhls-worldly" aL Lhe conop sLage, and whaL was Lhe fuss all abouL? 8uL prlor Lo Lhe lncreased developmenL and evoluLlon, Lhere ls noLhlng from Lhe presenL Lhls-world LhaL wlll allow Lhe chlld Lo adequaLely grasp Lhe oLher world (or else Lhe oLher world would have already become a real Lhls-world). !usL so wlLh Lhe hlgher or Lranspersonal developmenLs. Lxplaln Lhem Lo someone aL Lhe raLlonal level, and all you geL, aL besL, ls LhaL deer-caughL-ln-Lhe-headllghLs blank sLare (aL worsL, you geL someLhlng llke, And dld we forgeL Lo Lake our rozac Loday?"). So Lhe flrsL Lhlng l would llke Lo emphaslze ls LhaL Lhe hlgher sLages of Lranspersonal developmenL are sLages LhaL are Laken from Lhose who have acLually developed lnLo Lhose sLages and who dlsplay palpable, dlscernlble, and repeaLable characLerlsLlcs of LhaL developmenL. 1he sLages Lhemselves can be totlooolly tecoosttocteJ (explalned ln a raLlonal manner afLer Lhe facL), buL Lhey cannoL be raLlonally experlenced. 1hey can be experlenced only by a LransraLlonal conLemplaLlve developmenL, whose sLages unfold ln Lhe same manner as any oLher developmenLal sLages, and whose experlences are every blL as real as any oLhers. 8uL one musL be adequaLe Lo Lhe experlence, or lL remalns an lnvlslble oLher world. When Lhe yogls and sages and conLemplaLlves make a sLaLemenL llke, 1he enLlre world ls a manlfesLaLlon of one Self," LhaL ls oot a merely raLlonal sLaLemenL LhaL we are Lo Lhlnk abouL and see lf lL makes loglcal sense. lL ls raLher a descrlpLlon, ofLen poeLlc, of a dlrecL apprehenslon or a dlrecL experlence, and we are Lo LesL Lhls dlrecL experlence, noL by mulllng lL over phllosophlcally, buL by Laklng up Lhe experlmenLal meLhod of conLemplaLlve awareness, developlng Lhe requlslLe cognlLlve Lools, and Lhen dlrecLly looklng for ourselves. As Lmerson puL lL, WhaL we are, LhaL only can we see." LAnCuACL Anu M?S1lClSM ln Lhls regard, anoLher common ob[ecLlon ls LhaL mysLlcal or conLemplaLlve experlences, because Lhey cannoL be puL lnLo plaln language, or lnLo any language for LhaL maLLer, are Lherefore noL eplsLemologlcally grounded, are noL real knowledge." 8uL Lhls slmply bypasses Lhe problem of whaL llngulsLlcally slLuaLed knowledge means ln Lhe flrsL place. Saussure, as l menLloned earller, malnLalned LhaL all llngulsLlc slgns have Lwo componenLs, Lhe slgnlfler and Lhe slgnlfled, ofLen represenLed as S/S. 1he slqolflet ls Lhe wrlLLen or spoken symbol or sound, Lhe motetlol compooeot of Lhe slgn (such as Lhe physlcal lnk forms wrlLLen on Lhls page, or Lhe physlcal alr vlbraLlons as you speak). 1he slqolfleJ ls whaL comes Lo your mlnd when you see or hear Lhe slgnlfler. 1hus, l physlcally wrlLe Lhe word Joq on Lhls page-LhaL ls Lhe slgnlfler. ?ou read Lhe word, and you undersLand LhaL l mean someLhlng llke a furry anlmal wlLh four legs LhaL goes wuff-wuff-LhaL ls Lhe slgnlfled, LhaL ls whaL comes Lo your mlnd. A slqo ls a comblnaLlon of Lhese Lwo componenLs, and Lhese Lwo componenLs are, of course, Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon of Lhe slgn (Lhe physlcal exLerlor) and Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslon of Lhe slgn (Lhe lnLerlor awareness or meanlng). And boLh of Lhose are dlsLlngulshed from Lhe acLual tefeteot, or whaLever lL ls LhaL Lhe slgn ls polnLlng" Lo, wheLher lnLerlor or exLerlor. 1hus, Lhe slgnlfler ls Lhe word Joq, Lhe referenL ls Lhe real dog, and Lhe slgnlfled ls whaL comes Lo your mlnd when you read or hear Lhe slgnlfler Joq. Saussure's genlus was Lo polnL ouL LhaL Lhe slqolfleJ ls noL merely or slmply Lhe same as Lhe tefeteot, because whaL comes Lo mlnd" depends on a whole hosL of facLors oLher Lhan Lhe real dog, and Lhls ls whaL makes llngulsLlc reallLy so fasclnaLlng. Saussure's polnL-and Lhls ls whaL acLually lgnlLed Lhe whole movemenL of sLrucLurallsm-ls LhaL Lhe slgn cannoL be undersLood as an lsolaLed enLlLy, because ln and by lLself tbe slqo ls meooloqless (whlch ls why dlfferenL words can represenL Lhe same Lhlng ln dlfferenL languages, and why meanlng" ls never a slmple maLLer of a word polnLlng Lo a Lhlng, because how could dlfferenL words represenL Lhe same Lhlng?). 8aLher, slgns musL be undersLood as parL of a holarchy of dlfferences lnLegraLed lnLo meanlngful sLrucLures. 8oLh Lhe slgnlflers and Lhe slgnlfleds exlsL as holons, or whole/parLs ln a chaln of whole/parLs, and, as Saussure made clear, lL ls Lhelr telotloool stooJloq LhaL coofets meooloq on each (language ls a meanlngful sysLem of meanlngless elemenLs: os olwoys, Lhe reglme or sLrucLure of Lhe superholon confers meanlng on Lhe subholons, meanlng whlch Lhe subholons do noL and cannoL possess on Lhelr own). ln oLher words, Lhe slgnlflers and Lhe slgnlfleds exlsL as a sLrucLure of conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs, and meanlng lLself ls cootext-boooJ. Meanlng ls found noL ln Lhe word buL ln Lhe conLexL: Lhe bark of a dog ls noL Lhe same as Lhe bark of a Lree, and Lhe dlfference ls noL ln Lhe word, because Lhe word botk ls Lhe same ln boLh phrases-lL ls Lhe relaLlonal conLexL LhaL deLermlnes lLs meanlng: Lhe eotlte sttoctote of language ls lnvolved ln Lhe meanlng of each and every Lerm-Lhls was Saussure's greaL lnslghL. And Lhls, as usual, conLrlbuLed Lo a spllL beLween 8lghL- and LefL-Pand LheorlsLs. 1he 8lghL-Pand LheorlsLs, or Lhe pure sLrucLurallsLs, wanLed Lo sLudy only Lhe extetlot sttoctote of tbe system of slqolflets ln language and ln culLure (an approach whlch ln Lurn gave way Lo Lhe posLsLrucLurallsLs, who wanLed Lo free Lhe slgnlfler from any groundlng aL all-as ln loucaulL's archaeology or uerrlda's grammaLology-and see lL as free-floaLlng or slldlng, and anchored only by power or pre[udlce: meanlng ls lndeed conLexL-dependenL, buL conLexLs are boundless, and Lhus meanlng ls arblLrarlly lmposeJ by power or pre[udlce-Lhe so-called posLsLrucLural revoluLlon" of free-floaLlng slgnlflers"). 1he LefL-Pand LheorlsLs wanLed Lo sLudy Lhe conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs of lotetlot meooloq, Lhe slqolfleJs LhaL can only be lotetpteteJ, noL seen, and lnLerpreLed only ln a conLexL of background culLural pracLlces (Lhe hermeneuLlclsLs, from Peldegger Lo kuhn and 1aylor and aspecLs of WlLLgensLeln). 8uL boLh Lhe hermeneuLlcal LefL-Pand paLh and Lhe sLrucLurallsL 8lghL-Pand paLh agreed LhaL slgns can only be undersLood conLexLually (wheLher ln Lhe conLexL of shared culLural pracLlces LhaL provlde Lhe foreknowledge or background or conLexL for common lnLerpreLaLlon, or ln Lhe conLexL of shared nonlndlvldual llngulsLlc sLrucLures. l argued ln chapLer 4 LhaL boLh of Lhese approaches are equally lmporLanL-Lhey represenL Lhe lnLerlor and Lhe exLerlor of Lhe llngulsLlc holon-and lndeed even loucaulL came Lo Lhls undersLandlng). 12 All of whlch relaLes Lo mysLlclsm ln Lhls way: Lhe word Joq has a shared meanlng Lo you and Lo me because LhaL slgn exlsLs ln a shared llngulsLlc sLrucLure and a shared culLural background of soclal and lnLerpreLlve pracLlces. 8uL whaL lf you had never seen a real dog? WhaL Lhen? l could of course descrlbe one Lo you, buL Lhe word wlll be meanlngless unless Lhere are some polnLs of shared experlence LhaL wlll allow you Lo call up" ln your mlnd Lhe same slqolfleJ LhaL l mean wlLh Lhe slqolflet dog." (SubsLlLuLe Lhe word 8oJJbo-ootote for Joq and you can see Lhe lmporLance of Lhls llne of LhoughL for mysLlcal experlence, whlch we wlll explore ln a mlnuLe.) 1he hermeneuLlclsLs are qulLe rlghL ln LhaL regard: Lhe same llngulsLlc sLrucLures LhaL you and l share are oot eoooqb, ln Lhemselves, Lo glve you Lhe proper slgnlfled. ?ou and l have Lo share a commoo llveJ expetleoce ln order Lo assume ldenLlcal slgnlflcaLlon. lurLher, Lhe acLual experlence of seelng a dog ls noL lLself a metely llngulsLlc experlence. 1he slgnlfler, Lhe word Joq, ls noL Lhe acLual dog, noL Lhe acLual referenL. Cbvlously, Lhe LoLal experlence of Lhe real dog cannoL lLself be puL lnLo words, puL lnLo slgnlflers. 8uL Lhe facL LhaL Lhe real dog can'L be fully capLured ln words does noL mean LhaL Lhe real dog doesn'L exlsL or lsn'L real. lL means only LhaL Lhe slgnlfler has sense only lf you and l have had a slmllar experlence, a common shared llfeworld experlence, and Lhen l wlll know whaL you mean when you say, 1haL dog scared me." ln shorL, no dlrecL experlence can be fully capLured ln words. 13 Sex can'L be puL lnLo words, you've elLher had Lhe experlence or you haven'L, and no amounL of poeLry wlll Lake lLs place. SunseLs, eaLlng cake, llsLenlng Lo 8ach, rldlng a blke, geLLlng drunk and Lhrowlng up-belleve me, none of Lhose are capLured ln words. And Lhus, so whaL lf splrlLual experlences can'L be capLured ln words elLher? 1hey are no more and no less handlcapped ln Lhls regard Lhan any oLher experlence. lf l say dog" and you've had Lhe experlence, you know exacLly whaL l mean. lf a Zen masLer says LmpLlness," and you've had LhaL experlence, you wlll know exacLly whaL ls meanL. lf you haven'L had Lhe experlence dog" or Lhe experlence LmpLlness," merely addlng more and more words wlll never, under any clrcumsLances, convey lL. 1hus, lf we are golng Lo level LhaL charge aL mysLlclsm, Lhen we musL level lL aL dogglness and sunseLness and every oLher experlence LhaL happens Lo come our way. (1hls ls really Lhe cheapesL of Lhe cheap shoLs flred aL mysLlclsm.) Conversely, words do [usL flne as slgnlflers for experlence, wheLher mundane or splrlLual, lf we boLh, you and l, have had slmllar experlences ln a conLexL of shared background pracLlces. Zen masLers Lalk abouL LmpLlness all Lhe Llme! And Lhey know exacLly whaL Lhey mean by Lhe words, and Lhe words are petfectly oJepoote Lo convey whaL Lhey mean, lf you have had Lhe experlence (for whaL Lhey mean can only be dlsclosed ln Lhe shared praxls of zazen, or medlLaLlon pracLlce). Co one sLep furLher. lf l say Lo a conop chlld, lL ls as lf l were elsewhere," Lhe chlld mlghL nod her head as lf she acLually undersLood all Lhe meanlngs of LhaL sLaLemenL. 1he conop chlld already possesses Lhe shared llngulsLlc sLrucLure (and grammar) Lo declpher Lhe words. 8uL, as we have seen, slnce Lhe conop chlld cannoL fully grasp Lhe lmpllcaLlons of as-lf sLaLemenLs, she doesn'L really undersLand whaL ls slqolfleJ by my sLaLemenL. Cnce Lhe hlgher sLrucLure of formop emerges, however, Lhls wlll usher Lhe chlld lnLo a wotlJspoce where as-lf" ls noL [usL a slgnlfler buL a slqolfleJ LhaL has an exlsLlng tefeteot ln LhaL formop worldspace: noL [usL a word, buL a dlrecL undersLandlng LhaL more or less sponLaneously [umps Lo mlnd whenever we hear or see Lhe word, and whlch refers Lo a genulnely exlsLlng enLlLy ln Lhe raLlonal worldspace. ln oLher words, oll slgns exlsL ln a conLlnuum of Jevelopmeotol tefeteots and Jevelopmeotol slqolfleJs. 1he tefeteot of a slgn ls noL [usL lylng around ln Lhe" world walLlng for any and all Lo slmply look aL lL, Lhe referenL exlsLs ooly ln a wotlJspoce LhaL ls lLself ooly dlsclosed ln Lhe process of developmenL, and Lhe slqolfleJ exlsLs only ln Lhe lotetlot petceptloo of Lhose who have developed Lo LhaL worldspace (whlch sLrucLures Lhe background lnLerpreLlve meanlng LhaL allows Lhe slgnlfled Lo emerge). No omooot of expetleoce by Lhe conop chlld wlll ever show her Lhe meanlng of an as-lf" dog, because Lhe as-lf dog does noL exlsL ooywbete ln Lhe conop worldspace, lL exlsts only ln Lhe formop worldspace, and Lhus lL ls a referenL LhaL demands a developmenLal slgnlfled Lo even be percelved ln Lhe flrsL place. 1o Lake lL a polnL aL a Llme: Lhe slqolflets of slgns (such as Lhe words on Lhls page) are always physlcal, Lhey are always maLerlal componenLs, ln whlch no meanlng resldes aL all (Saussure's polnL), and because Lhe slgnlflers are physlcal, even my dog can see Lhem (and, of course, sees no meanlng ln Lhem, or raLher, sees Lhem from a sensorlmoLor level, as someLhlng Lo eaL, perhaps). 1haL ls because Lhe acLual tefeteot of a slgn exlsLs only ln a wotlJspoce (sensorlmoLor, maglcal, myLhlcal, menLal, eLc.) LhaL ls lLself dlsclosed only aL a parLlcular level of depLh (preop, conop, formop, eLc.). And ln Lhe same way, Lhe correspondlng slqolfleJ of Lhe slgn exlsLs only ln Lhe lotetlot petceptloo of Lhose who have developed Lhe tepolslte Jeptb. (All of Lhls occurs ln a conLexL of culLural and soclal pracLlces, or an lnLersub[ecLlve communlLy of Lhe same-depLhed.) 14 8oLh Lhe conop chlld and my dog can see Lhe physlcal words as-lf", nelLher of Lhem can undersLand Lhe phrase. 1he emplrlcal marklngs are meanlngless. 1he chlld and Lhe dog do noL possess Lhe developmenLal slgnlfled, and Lhus Lhey cannoL see Lhe acLual referenL. Several examples of referenLs and worldspaces: rocks exlsL ln Lhe sensorlmoLor worldspace, anlmlsLlc clouds exlsL ln Lhe maglc worldspace, SanLa Claus exlsLs ln Lhe myLhlc worldspace, Lhe square rooL of a negaLlve one exlsLs ln Lhe raLlonal worldspace, archeLypes exlsL ln Lhe subLle worldspace, and so on-noL as preglven ob[ecLs, buL as Lhe producL of all four quadranLs. And Lhus, ln order Lo undersLand Lhe referenLs represenLed by Lhose slgnlflers (from rocks" Lo archeLypes") one musL possess Lhe requlslLe depLh Lhrough one's own lnLerlor developmenL (so LhaL Lhose slgnlflers can evoke Lhe approprlaLe slgnlfled: when you read Lhe square rooL of a negaLlve one," you know whaL LhaL means, whaL LhaL slgnlfles, buL only lf you have developed Lo formop). !usL so, Lhe words 8oJJbo-ootote and CoJbeoJ and 5pltlt and ubotmokoyo are slgnlflers whose tefeteots exlsL only ln Lhe Lranspersonal or spltltool wotlJspoce, and Lhey Lherefore requlre, for Lhelr undersLandlng, a Jevelopmeotol slqolfleJ, an approprlaLely developed lnLerlor or LefL-Pand dlmenslon correspondlng wlLh Lhe exLerlor word, or else Lhey remaln only words, llke Lhe unseen dog, Lhls unseen SplrlL. And wlLhouL Lhe developmenLal slgnlfled, words wlll capLure nelLher Lhe dog nor Lhe SplrlL. And noLe: l can run around unLll l flnd a dog and show you Lhe dog, because we boLh exlsL ln Lhe sensorlmoLor worldspace and Lhere ls no developmenLal reason why you can'L spoL a dog. Cr, ln Lhe oLher example, Lhere ls no reason you can'L undersLand an as-lf dog, whose referenL exlsLs ln Lhe raLlonal worldspace. We olteoJy share LhaL worldspace. We have already ttoosfotmeJ Lo LhaL level of depLh: an enLlre and shared world of referenLs are Lherefore lylng around for us Lo apprehend (because we have olteoJy creaLed Lhe worldspace or Lhe openlng ln whlch Lhey can manlfesL). 8uL l can'L run around and flnd 8uddha and show you LhaL, unless you have developed Lhe requlslLe cognlLlons LhaL wlll allow you Lo resonaLe wlLh Lhe slqolflet whose tefeteot exlsLs only ln Lhe splrlLual worldspace and whose slqolfleJ exlsLs only ln Lhe consclousness of Lhose who have awakened Lo LhaL space. vALlul1? CLAlMS Cl M?S1lClSM lf l wanL Lo know wheLher lL ls ralnlng or noL, l go Lo Lhe wlndow and look ouL, and sure enough, raln. 8uL perhaps l am mlsLaken, or perhaps my eyeslghL ls poor. Would you check? ?ou go Lo Lhe wlndow and yes, raln. 1haL ls a very slmpllfled form of Lhe Lhree sLrands of any valld knowledge quesL (wheLher of Lhe LefL- or 8lghL- Pand paLh). 13 1he flrsL ls lojooctloo, whlch ls always of Lhe form, lf you wanL Lo know Lhls, do Lhls." lf you wanL Lo know lf a cell has a nucleus, Lhen geL a mlcroscope, learn Lo Lake hlsLologlcal secLlons, sLaln Lhe cell, puL lL under Lhe mlcroscope, and look. lf you wanL Lo know Lhe meanlng of nomlet, Lhen learn Lngllsh, geL Lhe book, and read. lf you wanL Lo know wheLher 2 + 2 ls really 4, Lhen learn arlLhmeLlc Lheory, Lake Lhe Lheorems, run Lhem Lhrough your mlnd, and check Lhe resulLs. 1he varlous lojooctloos, ln oLher words, lead Lo or dlsclose or open up Lhe posslblllLy of an lllumlnaLlon, an apprehenslon, an lnLulLlon, or a dlrecL experlenclng of Lhe domaln addressed by Lhe ln[uncLlon. ?ou see" Lhe meanlng of nomlet, or wheLher lL ls ralnlng, or why 2 + 2 really ls 4. 1hls ls Lhe second sLrand, Lhe lllumlnaLlon or opptebeosloo. ?ou see or apprehend, vla a dlrecL experlence, Lhe dlsclosed daLa of Lhe domaln. 16 8uL you could be mlsLaken, and Lhus you check your resulLs, your daLa, wlLh oLhers who have compleLed Lhe flrsL Lwo sLrands, wlLh oLhers who have performed Lhe ln[uncLlons and obLalned Lhe daLa. ln Lhls communlLy of peers, you compare and conflrm-or re[ecL-your orlglnal daLa. And Lhls ls Lhe Lhlrd sLrand, commoool coofltmotloo (or refuLaLlon). 1hese Lhree sLrands-ln[uncLlon, lllumlnaLlon, conflrmaLlon-are Lhe ma[or componenLs ln any valld knowledge quesL. 17 Cne of Lhe greaL values of 1homas kuhn's work (and LhaL of Lhe pragmaLlsLs before hlm, and ln parLlcular Peldegger's analyLlc-pragmaLlc" slde) was Lo draw aLLenLlon Lo Lhe lmporLance of ln[uncLlons or octool ptoctlces ln generaLlng knowledge, and furLher, ln generaLlng Lhe type of knowledge LhaL coolJ be arLlculaLed ln a glven worldspace. 1haL ls, soclal ptoctlces, or soclal lojooctloos (and l mean soclal" ln Lhe broad sense as socloculLural"), are cruclal ln creaLlng and dlscloslng Lhe Lypes of worldspace ln whlch Lypes of sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs appear (and Lhus Lhe Lypes of knowledge LhaL coo unfold). 1he referenLs of knowledge, as we saw above, exlsL only ln speclflc worldspaces, and Lhose worldspaces are noL slmply glven emplrlcally, lylng around for all and sundry Lo percelve. 18 8aLher, Lhese worldspaces are dlsclosed/creaLed by cognlLlve LransformaLlons ln Lhe conLexL of background ln[uncLlons or soclal pracLlces. 19 uL slmply, Lhe flrsL sLrand of knowledge accumulaLlon ls never slmply Look", lL ls uo Lhls, Lhen look." kuhn, ln one of Lhe greaL mlsundersLood concepLs of our era, polnLed ouL LhaL normal sclence proceeds by way of exemploty lojooctloos-LhaL ls, shared pracLlces and meLhods LhaL sclenLlsLs agree dlsclose and address Lhe lmporLanL lssues of Lhelr fleld. kuhn called such an agreed-upon ln[uncLlon an exemplar" or a paradlgm"-an exemplary pracLlce or Lechnlque or meLhodology LhaL all agreed was cenLral Lo furLherlng Lhe knowledge quesL. And lL was Lhe paradlgm, Lhe exemplary ln[uncLlon, LhaL dlsclosed a Lype of daLa, so LhaL Lhe paradlgm lLself was a maLLer of consensus, noL merely correspondence. ln Lhe academlc world of Lhe Lwo culLures, many LheorlsLs ln Lhe under-funded humanlLles (and vlrLually everybody ln Lhe new Age movemenL) selzed upon Lhe noLlon of paradlgm" as a way Lo undercuL Lhe auLhorlLy of normal sclence, bolsLer Lhelr own deparLmenLs, reduce emplrlcal facLs Lo arblLrary soclal convenLlons-and Lhen propose Lhelr own, new and lmproved paradlgm." ln all of Lhese, paradlgm" was mlsLaken as some sorL of overall Lheory or concepL or noLlon, Lhe ldea belng LhaL lf you came up wlLh a new and beLLer Lheory, Lhe facLual evldence could be lgnored because LhaL was [usL old paradlgm." Among oLher Lhlngs, Lhls meanL LhaL emplrlcal sclence dldn'L really show any progress," buL was merely a shlfLlng of oplnlons (paradlgms") LhaL had no tefeteot excepL ln Lhe arblLrary cooveotloos of sclenLlsLs (and Lhese convenLlons were always charged wlLh some sorL of lsm" LhaL Lhe new paradlgm would overcome). All of Lhls lgnored kuhn's repeaLed lnslsLence LhaL laLer sclenLlflc Lheorles are beLLer Lhan earller ones for solvlng puzzles ln Lhe qulLe ofLen dlfferenL envlronmenLs Lo whlch Lhey are applled. 1hls ls noL a relaLlvlsL's poslLlon, and lL dlsplays Lhe sense ln whlch l am a convlnced bellever ln sclenLlflc progress." 20 8uL by collapslng paradlgm" lnLo a mere Lheory (lLself unanchored), Lhe sclenLlflc enLerprlse could be collapsed lnLo varlous forms of llLerary chlLchaL (and Lhe new masLers of Lhe unlverse were Lherefore . . . Lhe llLerary crlLlcs). And llkewlse, on Lhe new Age fronL, a flurry of new paradlgms" could Lhen sLep ln and redress Lhe ugllness of Lhe old paradlgm. 8uL paradlgms are flrsL and foremosL lojooctloos, acLual ptoctlces (all of whlch have nondlscurslve componenLs LhaL never are enLered ln Lhe Lheorles Lhey supporL)-Lhey are meLhods for dlscloslng new daLa ln an addressed domaln, and Lhe paradlgms wotk because Lhey are Lrue ln any meanlngful sense of Lhe word. Sclence makes real ptoqtess, as kuhn sald, because successlve paradlgms cumulaLlvely dlsclose more and more lnLeresLlng daLa. Lven loucaulL acknowledged LhaL Lhe naLural sclences, even lf Lhey had sLarLed as sLrucLures of power, had separaLed from power (lL was Lhe pseudosclences of blopower LhaL remalned shoL Lhrough wlLh power masqueradlng as knowledge). nelLher Lhe new Agers nor Lhe new paradlgmers" had anyLhlng resembllng a new paradlgm, because all Lhey offered was more Lalk-Lalk. 1hey had no new Lechnlques, no new meLhodologles, no new exemplars, no new ln[uncLlons-and Lherefore no new daLa. All Lhey possessed, Lhrough a mlsreadlng of kuhn, was a pseudo-aLLempL Lo Lrump normal sclence and replace lL wlLh Lhelr ldeologlcally favorlLe readlng of Lhe kosmos. 1he conLemplaLlve LradlLlons, on Lhe oLher hand, have always come flrsL and foremosL wlLh a seL of ln[uncLlons ln hand. 1hey are, above all else, a seL of ptoctlces, pracLlces LhaL requlre years Lo masLer (much longer Lhan Lhe Lralnlng of Lhe average sclenLlsL). 1hese ln[uncLlons (zozeo, sblkoo-tozo, vlpossooo, conLemplaLlve lnLrospecLlon, sotsooq, Jotsboo-all of whlch we wlll dlscuss)-Lhese are noL Lhlngs Lo Lhlnk, Lhey are Lhlngs Lo do. Cnce one masLers Lhe exemplar or Lhe paradlgmaLlc pracLlce (sLrand one), Lhen one ls ushered lnLo a worldspace ln whlch new daLa dlsclose Lhemselves (sLrand Lwo). 1hese are dlrecL apprehenslons or lllumlnaLlons-ln a word, Jltect spltltool expetleoces (oolo mystlco, sototl, keosbo, sboktlpot, ooJo, sbobJ, eLc.). 1hese daLa are rlgorously checked (sLrand Lhree) ln Lhe communlLy of Lhose who have also compleLed Lhe flrsL Lwo sLrands (ln[uncLlon and lllumlnaLlon). 8ad daLa are teboffeJ by Lhe communlLy (Lhe sangha) of Lhose whose cognlLlve eyes are adequaLe Lo Lhe addressed domaln. 1hus, as l covered ln more deLall ln ye to ye, auLhenLlc knowledge has a componenL LhaL ls slmllar Lo kuhn's paradlgm (namely, Lhe ln[uncLlon), a componenL LhaL ls slmllar Lo Lhe broad emplrlcal demand for evldence or daLa or experlence (namely, Lhe lllumlnaLlon or apprehenslon, wheLher LhaL be from sensory experlence, menLal experlence, or splrlLual experlence), and a componenL slmllar Lo Slr karl opper's falllblllsLlc crlLerlon (namely, Lhe poLenLlal conflrmaLlon or refuLaLlon by a communlLy of Lhe adequaLe). Accordlngly, conLemplaLlve knowledge ls, or can be, genulne knowledge, because lL follows all Lhree sLrands of valld knowledge accumulaLlon. 1PL 8LCCnS18uC1lCn Cl 1PL CCn1LMLA1lvL A1P Cf course, Lhls does noL prevenL Lhe varlous conLemplaLlve LradlLlons from possesslng Lhelr own parLlcular and culLure-bound Lrapplngs, conLexLs, and lnLerpreLaLlons. 8uL Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL Lhe conLemplaLlve endeavor dlscloses unlversal aspecLs of Lhe kosmos, Lhen Lhe deep sLrucLures of Lhe conLemplaLlve LradlLlons (buL noL Lhelr surface sLrucLures) would be expecLed Lo show cross-culLural slmllarlLles aL Lhe varlous levels of depLh creaLed/dlsclosed by Lhe medlLaLlve ln[uncLlons and paradlgms. ln oLher words, Lhe deep sLrucLures of worldspaces (archalc, maglc, myLhlc, raLlonal, and Lranspersonal) show cross-culLural and largely lnvarlanL feaLures aL a deep level of absLracLlon, whereas Lhe surface sLrucLures (Lhe acLual sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs ln Lhe varlous worldspaces) are naLurally and approprlaLely qulLe dlfferenL from culLure Lo culLure. !usL as Lhe human mlnd unlversally grows lmages and symbols and concepLs (even Lhough Lhe acLual conLenLs of Lhose sLrucLures vary conslderably), so Lhe human splrlL unlversally grows lnLulLlons of Lhe ulvlne, and Lhose Jevelopmeotol slqolfleJs unfold ln an evoluLlonary and reconsLrucLlble fashlon, [usL llke any oLher holon ln Lhe kosmos (and Lhelr referenLs are [usL as real as any oLher slmllarly dlsclosed daLa). ln Lhe pasL few decades Lhere has been a concerLed efforL on Lhe parL of many researchers (such as SLanlslav Crof, 8oger Walsh, lrances vaughan, uanlel 8rown, !ack Lngler, uanlel Coleman, Charles 1arL, uonald 8oLhberg, Mlchael Zlmmerman, Seymour 8oorsLeln, Mark LpsLeln, uavld Lukoff, Mlchael Washburn, !oel lunk, !ohn nelson, !ohn Chlrban, 8oberL lorman, lrancls Lu, Mlchael Murphy, Mark Waldman, !ames ladlman, myself, and oLhers) 21 Lo raLlonally reconsLrucL Lhe hlgher sLages of Lranspersonal or conLemplaLlve developmenL-sLages LhaL conLlnue naLurally or normally beyond Lhe ego and cenLaur lf arresL or flxaLlon does noL occur. Much of Lhls work has been summarlzed ln 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess: cooveotloool ooJ cootemplotlve letspectlves oo uevelopmeot (Wllber, Lngler, and 8rown), and l wlll noL repeaL lLs conLenLs. 8uL Lhe concluslon ls sLralghLforward. As 8rown and Lngler summarlze lL: 1he ma[or [conLemplaLlve] LradlLlons we have sLudled ln Lhelr orlglnal languages presenL an unfoldlng of medlLaLlon experlence ln Lerms of a stoqe moJel: for example, Lhe Mahamudra from Lhe 1lbeLan 8uddhlsL LradlLlon, Lhe vlsuddhlmagga from Lhe all 1heravada LradlLlon, and Lhe ?oga SuLras from Lhe SanskrlL Plndu LradlLlon. 1be moJels ote sofflcleotly slmllot to soqqest oo ooJetlyloq commoo lovotloot sepoeoce of stoqes, desplLe vasL culLural and llngulsLlc dlfferences as well as sLyles of pracLlce. 1hls developmenLal model has also been found Lo be conslsLenL wlLh Lhe sLages of mysLlcal or lnLerlor prayer found ln Lhe !ewlsh (kabballsL), lslamlc (Sufl), and ChrlsLlan mysLlcal LradlLlons (see, for example, Chlrban's chapLer ln 1toosfotmotloos), and 8rown has also found lL ln Lhe Chlnese conLemplaLlve LradlLlons. 1heorlsLs such as ua Avabhasha have glven exLenslve hermeneuLlc and developmenLal readlngs from whaL now appears Lo be aL leasL a represenLaLlve sampllng from every known and avallable conLemplaLlve LradlLlon (see, for example, 1be 8osket of 1oletooce), and Lhey are ln fundamenLal and exLenslve agreemenL wlLh Lhls overall developmenLal model. 1he evldence, Lhough sLlll prellmlnary, sLrongly suggesLs LhaL, aL a mlnlmum, tbete ote foot qeoetol stoqes of ttoospetsoool Jevelopmeot, each wlLh aL leasL Lwo subsLages (and some wlLh many more). 1hese four sLages l call Lhe psycblc, Lhe sobtle, Lhe coosol, and Lhe oooJool. Lach of Lhese sLages follows Lhe same paLLerns and shows Lhe same developmenLal characLerlsLlcs as all Lhe oLher sLages of consclousness evoluLlon: each ls a holon followlng Lhe LwenLy LeneLs (a new dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon, a new emergence wlLh a new depLh, a new lnLerlorlLy, eLc.), each possesses a new and hlgher sense of self exlsLlng ln a new and wlder world of oLhers, wlLh new drlves, new cognlLlons, new moral sLances, and so forLh, each possesses a deep sLrucLure (baslc deflnlng paLLern) LhaL ls culLurally lnvarlanL buL wlLh surface sLrucLures (manlfesLaLlons) LhaL are culLurally condlLloned and molded, and each has a new and hlgher form of posslble paLhology (wlLh Lhe excepLlon of Lhe unmanlfesL end" polnL, alLhough even LhaL ls noL wlLhouL cerLaln posslble compllcaLlons ln lLs manlfesLaLlon). l have elsewhere glven prellmlnary descrlpLlons of Lhe deep sLrucLures (and paLhologles) of each of Lhese four ma[or sLages. 22 lnsLead of repeaLlng myself, l have for Lhls presenLaLlon slmply chosen four lndlvlduals who are especlally represenLaLlve of Lhese sLages, and wlll leL Lhem speak for us. 1hey are (respecLlvely) 8alph Waldo Lmerson, SalnL 1eresa of vlla, MelsLer LckharL, and Srl 8amana Maharshl. Lach also represenLs Lhe type of mystlclsm Lyplcal aL each sLage: naLure mysLlclsm, delLy mysLlclsm, formless mysLlclsm, and nondual mysLlclsm (each of whlch we wlll dlscuss). And each represenLs a form of Lomorrow, a shape of our desLlny yeL Lo come. Lach rode Llme's arrow ahead of us, as genluses always do, and Lhus, even Lhough loomlng ouL of our pasL, Lhey call Lo us from our fuLure. 8 1be ueptbs of tbe ulvloe noly bteotb Jlvloely stteoms tbtooqb tbe lomlooos fotm wbeo tbe feost comes to llfe, ooJ flooJs of love ote lo motloo, ooJ, woteteJ by beoveo, tbe llvloq stteom toots wbeo lt tesoooJs beoeotb, ooJ tbe olqbt teoJets bet tteosotes, ooJ op oot of btooks tbe botleJ qolJ qleoms.- AoJ, ftleoJly spltlt, jost os ftom yoot seteoely cootemplotlve btow yoot toy JesceoJs, secotely blessloq, omooq mottols, so yoo wltoess to me, ooJ tell me, tbot l mlqbt tepeot lt to otbets, fot otbets too Jo oot belleve lt. . . . -l8lLu8lCP PCLuL8Lln 1PL CCn1lnulnC evoluLlonary process of wlLhln-and-beyond brlngs new wlLhlns . . . and new beyonds. 1PL S?CPlC LLvLL We lefL off wlLh Lhe emergence of Lhe cenLaur, whlch ls, so Lo speak, on Lhe border beLween Lhe personal and Lhe Lranspersonal. lf Lhe flrsL Lhree general domalns were Lhose of maLLer, llfe, and mlnd, Lhe nexL general domaln (LhaL of Lhe psychlc and subLle) ls Lhe domaln of Lhe sool, as l wlll use Lhe Lerm. And Lhe flrsL rule of Lhe soul ls: lL ls Lranspersonal. 1he word ttoospetsoool ls somewhaL awkward and confuses many people. 8uL Lhe polnL ls slmply, as Lmerson puL lL, 1be sool koows oo petsoos." Pe explalns (and noLe: Lmerson LhroughouL Lhese quoLes uses Lhe mascullne, as was Lhe cusLom of Lhe Llme, were he allve Loday he would use femlnlne and mascullne, for Lhe whole polnL of hls noLlon of Lhe Cver-Soul was LhaL lL was nelLher male nor female, whlch ls why lL could anchor a Lrue llberaLlon from any and all resLrlcLlve roles: 1he soul knows no persons"): ersons are supplemenLary Lo Lhe prlmary Leachlng of Lhe soul. ln youLh we are mad for persons. Chlldhood and youLh see all Lhe world ln Lhem. 8uL Lhe larger experlence of man dlscovers Lhe ldenLlcal naLure [Lhe same self or soul] appearlng Lhrough Lhem all. ln all conversaLlon beLween Lwo persons LaclL reference ls made, as Lo a Lhlrd parLy, Lo a common naLure. 1haL Lhlrd parLy or common naLure ls noL soclal, lL ls lmpersonal, ls Cod. 1 1he soul ls wlLhouL persons, and Lhe soul ls grounded ln Cod. lmpersonal," however, ls noL qulLe rlghL, because lL Lends Lo lmply a compleLe negaLlon of Lhe personal, whereas ln hlgher developmenL Lhe personal ls negaLed and preserved, or Lranscended and lncluded: hence, Lranspersonal." So l Lhlnk lL's very lmporLanL, ln all subsequenL dlscusslon, for us Lo remember LhaL ttoospetsoool means personal plos," noL personal mlnus." 8uL whaL could an acLual Lranspersonal" experlence really mean? lL's noL nearly as mysLerlous as lL sounds. 8ecall LhaL aL Lhe cenLaur, accordlng Lo Lhe research of 8roughLon (and many oLhers), Lhe self ls olteoJy beglnnlng Lo Lranscend Lhe emplrlcal ego or Lhe emplrlcal person (Lhe observer ls dlsLlngulshed from Lhe self-concepL as known"). ?ou yourself can, rlghL now, be aware of your ob[ecLlve self, you can observe your lndlvldual ego or person, you are aware of yourself generally. 8uL who, Lhen, ls dolng Lhe observlng? WhaL ls lL LhaL ls observlng or wlLnesslng your lndlvldual self? 1haL Lherefore ttoosceoJs your lndlvldual self ln some lmporLanL ways? Who or whaL ls tbot? 1he noble Lmerson: All goes Lo show LhaL Lhe soul ln man ls noL an organ, buL anlmaLes and exerclses all Lhe organs, ls noL a funcLlon, llke Lhe power of memory, of calculaLlon, of comparlson, buL uses Lhese as hands and feeL, ls noL a faculLy, buL a llghL, ls noL Lhe lnLellecL or Lhe wlll, buL Lhe masLer of Lhe lnLellecL and Lhe wlll, ls Lhe background of our belng, ln whlch Lhey lle,-an lmmenslLy noL possessed and LhaL cannoL be possessed. lrom wlLhln or from behlnd, a llghL shlnes Lhrough us upon Lhlngs and makes us aware LhaL we are noLhlng, buL Lhe llghL ls all. 2 1he observer ln you, Lhe WlLness ln you, Lranscends Lhe lsolaLed petsoo ln you and opens lnsLead-from wlLhln or from behlnd, as Lmerson sald-onLo a vasL expanse of awareness no longer obsessed wlLh Lhe lndlvldual bodymlnd, no longer a respecLer or abuser of persons, no longer fasclnaLed by Lhe passlng [oys and seL-aparL sorrows of Lhe lonely self, buL sLandlng sLlll ln sllence as an openlng or clearlng Lhrough whlch llghL shlnes, noL from Lhe world buL lnLo lL-a llghL shlnes tbtooqb os upon Lhlngs." 1bot wblcb observes or wlLnesses Lhe self, Lhe person, ls preclsely Lo LhaL degree ftee of Lhe self, Lhe person, and tbtooqb tbot opeoloq comes pourlng Lhe llghL and power of a Self, a Soul, LhaL, as Lmerson puLs lL, would make our knees bend." A man ls Lhe facade of a Lemple whereln all wlsdom and all good ablde. WhaL we commonly call man [as an lndlvldual person" or ego], Lhe eaLlng, drlnklng, counLlng man, does noL, as we know hlm, represenL hlmself, buL mlsrepresenLs hlmself. Plm we do noL respecL, buL Lhe soul, whose organ he ls, lf he would leL lL appear Lhrough hls acLlon, would make our knees bend. When lL breaLhes Lhrough hls lnLellecL, lL ls genlus, when lL breaLhes Lhrough hls wlll, lL ls vlrLue, when lL flows Lhrough hls affecLlon, lL ls love. And Lhe bllndness of Lhe lnLellecL beglns when lL would be someLhlng of lLself [be lLs own person"]. 1he weakness of Lhe wlll beglns when Lhe lndlvldual would be someLhlng of hlmself. All reform alms ln some one parLlcular Lo leL Lhe soul have lLs way Lhrough us. . . . 3 And Lhose persons tbtooqb wbom Lhe soul shlnes, tbtooqb wbom Lhe soul has lLs way," are noL Lherefore weak characLers, Llmld personallLles, meek presences among us. 1hey are personal plus, noL personal mlnus. reclsely because Lhey are no longer excluslvely ldenLlfled wlLh Lhe lndlvldual personallLy, and yeL because Lhey sLlll preserve Lhe personallLy, Lhen tbtooqb tbot personallLy flows Lhe force and flre of Lhe soul. 1hey may be sofL-spoken and ofLen remaln ln sllence, buL lL ls a Lhunderous sllence LhaL verlLably drowns ouL Lhe egos chaLLerlng loudly all around Lhem. Cr Lhey may be anlmaLed and very ouLgolng, buL Lhelr dynamlsm ls magneLlc, and people are drawn somehow Lo Lhe presence, fasclnaLed. Make no mlsLake: Lhese are sLrong characLers, Lhese souls, someLlmes wlldly exaggeraLed characLers, someLlmes world-hlsLorlcal, preclsely because Lhelr personallLles are plugged lnLo a unlversal source LhaL rumbles Lhrough Lhelr velns and rudely raLLles Lhose around Lhem. l belleve, for example, LhaL lL was preclsely Lhls flre and force LhaL allowed Lmerson, more Lhan any oLher person ln Amerlcan hlsLory, Lo acLually deflne Lhe lnLellecLual characLer of Amerlca lLself. Cne of hls essays, 1he Amerlcan Scholar," had, as one hlsLorlan puL lL, an lnfluence greaLer Lhan LhaL of any slngle work ln Lhe nlneLeenLh cenLury." Cllver Wendell Polmes called lL our lnLellecLual ueclaraLlon of lndependence." !ames 8ussell Lowell explalned: 1he urlLan revolL had made us eccleslasLlcally, and Lhe 8evoluLlon pollLlcally lndependenL, buL we were sLlll soclally and lnLellecLually moored Lo Lngllsh LhoughL, Llll Lmerson cuL Lhe cable and gave us a chance aL Lhe dangers and Lhe glorles of blue waLer. . . ." And Lhe message, Lhls rlnglng ueclaraLlon of lndependence? 1he Soul ls Lled Lo oo lndlvldual, oo culLure, oo LradlLlon, buL rlses fresh ln every person, beyond every person, and grounds lLself ln a LruLh and glory LhaL bows Lo noLhlng ln Lhe world of Llme and place and hlsLory. We all musL be, and can only be, a llghL unLo ourselves." 4 And Lhen ln a phrase LhaL, as Polmes lndlcaLed, raLLled all of Amerlca, Lmerson announced: All LhaL Adam had, all LhaL Caesar could, you have and can do"-because lL ls Lhe same Self ln each of us. Why bow Lo pasL heroes, he asks, when all we are bowlng Lo ls our own Soul? Suppose Lhey were vlrLuous, dld Lhey wear ouL vlrLue?" 1he moqoetlsm of Lhe greaL heroes ls only Lhe call from our own Self, he says. Why Lhls grovellng Lo Lhe pasL when Lhe same Soul shlnes now and only now and always now? And Lhen Lmerson swlfLly and lrrevocably cuL Lhe cable and seL us all-noL [usL Amerlcans-afloaL on Lhe dangers and Lhe glorles of blue waLer: 1rusL Lhyself: every hearL vlbraLes Lo LhaL lron sLrlng. . . . 1he magneLlsm whlch all orlglnal acLlon exerLs ls explalned when we lnqulre Lhe reason of self-LrusL. Who ls Lhe 1rusLee? WhaL ls Lhe aborlglnal Self, on whlch a unlversal rellance may be grounded? . . . 1he lnqulry leads us Lo LhaL source, aL once Lhe essence of genlus, of vlrLue, and of llfe. . . . ln LhaL deep force, Lhe lasL facL behlnd whlch analysls cannoL go, all Lhlngs flnd Lhelr common orlgln. lor Lhe sense of belng whlch ln calm hour arlses, we know noL how, ln Lhe Soul, ls noL dlverse from Lhlngs, from space, from llghL, from Llme, from man, buL one wlLh Lhem and proceeds obvlously from Lhe same source whence Lhelr llfe and belng also proceed. . . . Pere ls Lhe founLaln of acLlon and of LhoughL. Pere are Lhe lungs of LhaL lnsplraLlon whlch glveLh man wlsdom. . . . We lle ln Lhe lap of lmmense lnLelllgence, whlch makes us recelvers of lLs LruLh and organs of lLs acLlvlLy. When we dlscern [usLlce, when we dlscern LruLh, we do noLhlng of ourselves, buL allow a passage Lo lLs beams. . . . 1he relaLlons of Lhe Soul Lo Lhe dlvlne splrlL are so pure LhaL lL ls profane Lo seek Lo lnLerpose helps. lL musL be LhaL when Cod speakeLh he should communlcaLe, noL one Lhlng, buL all Lhlngs, should flll Lhe world wlLh hls volce, should scaLLer forLh llghL, naLure, Llme, souls, from Lhe cenLer of Lhe presenL LhoughL, and new daLe and new creaLe Lhe whole. Whenever a mlnd ls slmple and recelves a dlvlne wlsdom, old Lhlngs pass away-means, Leachers, LexLs, Lemples fall, lt llves oow and absorbs pasL and fuLure lnLo Lhe presenL hour. All Lhlngs are made sacred by relaLlon Lo lL-one as much as anoLher. All Lhlngs are dlssolved Lo Lhelr cenLer by Lhelr cause, and ln Lhe unlversal mlracle peLLy and parLlcular mlracles dlsappear. lf Lherefore a man clalms Lo know and speak of Cod and carrles you backward Lo Lhe phraseology of some old mouldered naLlon ln anoLher counLry, ln anoLher world, belleve hlm noL. ls Lhe acorn beLLer Lhan Lhe oak whlch ls lLs fullness and compleLlon? Whence Lhen Lhls worshlp of Lhe pasL? 1he cenLurles are consplraLors agalnsL Lhe sanlLy and auLhorlLy of Lhe Soul. 1lme and space are buL physlologlcal colors whlch Lhe eye makes, buL Lhe Soul ls llghL: where lL ls, ls day, where lL was, ls nlghL, and hlsLory ls an lmperLlnence and an ln[ury lf lL be any Lhlng more Lhan a cheerful apologue or parable of my belng and becomlng. 3 1o emphaslze LhaL Lhe Soul, Lhe aborlglnal Self," ls common ln and Lo all belngs, Lmerson ofLen refers Lo lL as Lhe Cver-Soul," one and Lhe same ln all of us, ln all belngs as such. 1he overall number of Souls ls buL one: 1he only propheL of LhaL whlch musL be, ls LhaL greaL naLure ln whlch we resL as Lhe earLh lles ln Lhe sofL arms of Lhe aLmosphere, LhaL unlLy, LhaL Cver-Soul, wlLhln whlch every man's parLlcular belng ls conLalned and made one wlLh all oLher, LhaL common hearL of whlch all slncere conversaLlon ls Lhe worshlp, Lo whlch all rlghL acLlon ls submlsslon, LhaL over-powerlng reallLy whlch confuLes our Lrlcks and LalenLs, and consLralns every one Lo pass for whaL he ls, and Lo speak from hls characLer [soul] and noL from hls Longue [ego], and whlch evermore Lends Lo pass lnLo our LhoughL and hand and become wlsdom and vlrLue and power and beauLy. . . . And Lhls because Lhe hearL ln Lhee ls Lhe hearL of all, noL a valve, noL a wall, noL an lnLersecLlon ls Lhere anywhere ln naLure, buL one blood rolls unlnLerrupLedly an endless clrculaLlon Lhrough all men, as Lhe waLer of Lhe globe ls all one sea, and, Lruly seen, lLs Llde ls one. . . . lL ls one llghL whlch beams ouL of a Lhousand sLars. lL ls one soul whlch anlmaLes all men. . . . We llve ln successlon, ln dlvlslon, ln parLs, ln parLlcles. MeanLlme wlLhln man ls Lhe Soul of Lhe whole, Lhe wlse sllence, Lhe unlversal beauLy, Lo whlch every parL and parLlcle ls equally relaLed, Lhe eLernal CnL. 6 And so once agaln we see LhaL a new and deeper wltblo has broughL us Lo a new and wlder beyooJ, a beyond LhaL ls noL dlverse from Lhlngs, from space, from llghL, from Llme, from man, buL one wlLh Lhem and proceeds obvlously from Lhe same source whence Lhelr llfe and belng also proceed." 1hls new wlLhln-and-beyond ls noL [usL beyond a soclocenLrlc ldenLlLy Lo a worldcenLrlc ldenLlLy wlLh all human belngs (whlch Lhe raLlonal-ego/cenLaur assumes ln lLs global or unlversal posLconvenLlonal awareness), buL Lo an ldenLlLy, a consclous unlon, wlLh all of manlfesLaLlon lLself: noL [usL wlLh all humans, buL wlLh all naLure, and wlLh Lhe physlcal cosmos, wlLh all belngs greaL and small"-a unlon or ldenLlLy LhaL 8ucke famously called cosmlc consclousness." We could say: from Lhe worldcenLrlc cenLaur Lo dlrecL cosmlc consclousness. (When you conslder Lhe remarkable achlevemenL LhaL decenLered worldcenLrlc awareness ls, lL's noL LhaL far of a [ump). 7 1hus, Lhe cenLaur could loteqtote Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere, buL Lhe Cver-Soul becomes, or ls Jltectly ooe wltb, Lhe physlosphere and blosphere and noosphere. lL ls slmple conLlnuaLlon of Lhe deepenlng and wldenlng of ldenLlLy, grounded ln an awareness very much wlLhln, and very much beyond, me. And Lmerson means Lhls llLerally! Accordlng Lo Lmerson, Lhls cosmlc consclousness ls noL poeLry (Lhough he ofLen expresses lL wlLh unmaLched poeLlc beauLy)-raLher, lL ls a dlrecL reallzaLlon, a dlrecL apprehenslon, and ln LhaL deep force, Lhe lasL facL behlnd whlch analysls cannoL go, all Lhlngs flnd Lhelr common orlgln. lL ls one llghL whlch beams ouL of a Lhousand sLars. lL ls one soul whlch anlmaLes all." lor Lhe Cver-Soul ls also experlenced as Lhe World Soul, slnce self and world are here flndlng a common founLaln, common source." 8 1he Cver-Soul (or World Soul) ls an lnlLlal apprehenslon of Lhe pure WlLness or aborlglnal Self, whlch sLarLs Lo emerge, however halLlngly, as an experlenLlal reallLy aL Lhls psychlc sLage. 9 (We wlll see how Lmerson LreaLs Lhls WlLness ln a momenL.) WlLh Lhe Cver-Soul, Lhe World Soul, lL ls noL LhaL lndlvlduallLy dlsappears, buL LhaL-once agaln-lL ls negaLed and preserved ln a deeper and wlder ground, a ground LhaL consplcuously lncludes all of naLure and lLs glorles. 1hls cosmlc consclousness ls someLlmes referred Lo as naLure mysLlclsm," buL LhaL ls a somewhaL mlsleadlng Lerm. lor Lhls psychlc-level mysLlclsm embraces noL [usL ootote buL also coltote, and calllng lL naLure mysLlclsm" confuses lL wlLh a merely blocenLrlc regresslon, an ecocenLrlc lndlssoclaLlon, and Lhls ls noL aL all whaL Lmerson has ln mlnd (as we wlll see). 8uL slnce Lhe Cver-Soul ls an experlenced ldenLlLy wlLh all manlfesLaLlon, lL ls an ldenLlLy LhaL mosL deflnlLely and exuberanLly embtoces ootote, and, Lo LhaL degree, lL beglns Lo undercuL Lhe sub[ecL/ob[ecL duallsm. 10 Lmerson explalns: We see Lhe world plece by plece, as Lhe sun, Lhe moon, Lhe anlmal, Lhe Lree, buL Lhe whole, of whlch Lhese are Lhe shlnlng parLs, ls Lhe soul [Lhe Cver-Soul, Lhe World Soul]. . . . And Lhls deep power ln whlch we exlsL and whose beaLlLude ls all accesslble Lo us, ls noL only self-sufflclng and perfecL ln every hour, buL Lhe acL of seelng and Lhe Lhlng seen, Lhe seer and Lhe specLacle, Lhe sub[ecL and Lhe ob[ecL, are one. 11 ln hls famous LransparenL eyeball" secLlon from Lhe essay Notote, Lmerson speaks movlngly of Lhe unlon of Lhe Soul and naLure, and of Lhe capaclLy of naLure, when rlghLly approached, Lo ellclL Lhls cosmlc consclousness. 1he LransparenL eyeball" ls, of course, an lnLlmaLlon of Lhe pure WlLness ln Lhe form of Lhe Cver-Soul, whereln all mean egoLlsm vanlshes, l am noLhlng, l see all": 1o speak Lruly, few adulL persons can see naLure. MosL persons do noL see Lhe sun. AL leasL Lhey have a very superflclal seelng. . . . Crosslng a bare common, ln snow puddles, aL LwlllghL, under a clouded sky, wlLhouL havlng ln my LhoughLs any occurrence of speclal good forLune, l have en[oyed a perfecL exhllaraLlon. l am glad Lo Lhe brlnk of fear. . . . WlLhln Lhese planLaLlons of Cod, a decorum and sancLlLy relgn, a perennlal fesLlval ls dressed, and Lhe guesL sees noL how he should Llre of Lhem ln a Lhousand years. ln Lhe woods, we reLurn Lo reason and falLh. 1here l feel LhaL noLhlng can befall me ln llfe,-no dlsgrace, no calamlLy, whlch naLure cannoL repalr. SLandlng on Lhe bare ground,-my head baLhed by Lhe bllLhe alr, and upllfLed lnLo lnflnlLe space,-all mean egoLlsm vanlshes. l become a LransparenL eyeball, l am noLhlng, l see all, Lhe currenLs of unlversal 8elng clrculaLe Lhrough me, l am parL or parcel of Cod. 12 WhaL dlsLlngulshes Lhls profound naLure mysLlclsm" from a slmple naLure lndlssoclaLlon or ecocenLrlc lmmerslon or blospherlc regresslon (whlch would be egocenLrlc and anLhropocenLrlc, as we have seen) ls Lhe reallzaLlon LhaL naLure ls noL SplrlL buL an exptessloo of SplrlL, radlanL and glorlous and perfecL ln lLs own way, buL an expresslon noneLheless. Lmerson says naLure ls noL splrlL buL a symbol of splrlL. Lmerson ls noL regresslng Lo fulcrum-2 (blocenLrlc lmmerslon and nondlfferenLlaLlon)! Lmerson ls very clear on Lhls dlsLlncLlon beLween naLure teqtessloo, on Lhe one hand, and a mysLlclsm LhaL also embtoces naLure, on Lhe oLher-and Lhls dlsLlncLlon raLher upseLs hls envlronmenLallsL fans, who seem Lo wanL Lo epoote a flnlLe and Lemporal naLure wlLh an lnflnlLe and eLernal SplrlL: 8eauLy ln naLure ls noL ulLlmaLe. lL ls Lhe herald of lnward and eLernal beauLy, and ls noL alone a solld and saLlsfacLory good. . . . naLure ls a symbol of splrlL. . . . 8efore Lhe revelaLlons of Lhe Soul, Llme, space and naLure shrlnk away. . . . ln Lhe hour of vlslon Lhere ls noLhlng LhaL can be called graLlLude, nor properly [oy. 1he Soul ralsed over passlon beholds ldenLlLy and eLernal causaLlon, percelves Lhe self-exlsLence of 1ruLh and 8lghL, and calms lLself wlLh knowlng LhaL all Lhlngs go well. vasL spaces of naLure, Lhe ALlanLlc Ccean, Lhe SouLh Sea, long lnLervals of Llme, years, cenLurles, are of no accounL. . . . LeL us sLun and asLonlsh Lhe lnLrudlng rabble of men and books and lnsLlLuLlons by a slmple declaraLlon of Lhe dlvlne facL. 8ld Lhe lnLruders Lake Lhe shoes from off Lhelr feeL, for Cod ls here wlLhln. LeL our slmpllclLy [udge Lhem, and our doclllLy Lo our own law demonsLraLe Lhe poverLy of naLure beslde our naLlve rlches. 13 lL ls, ln facL, accordlng Lo Lmerson, an alleglance Lo Lhe senses and naLure, ln lLself, LhaL blloJs us Lo Lhe lnLerlor lnLulLlon of Lhe Cver-Soul and Lhe Cod wlLhln and beyond: 1o Lhe senses and Lhe unrenewed undersLandlng, belongs a sorL of lnsLlncLlve bellef ln Lhe absoluLe exlsLence of naLure. ln Lhelr vlew man and naLure are lndlssolubly [olned. 1hlngs are ulLlmaLes, and Lhey never look beyond Lhelr sphere [lageL's egocenLrlc reallsm"]. . . . Pls mlnd ls lmbruLed, and he ls a selflsh savage. . . . 1he presence of lnLulLlon 14 mars Lhls falLh [ln naLure]. 1he flrsL efforL of LhoughL Lends Lo relax Lhls despoLlsm of Lhe senses whlch blnds us Lo naLure as lf we were a parL of lL, and shows us naLure aloof, and, as lL were, afloaL. unLll Lhls hlgher agency lnLervened [lnLulLlon], Lhe anlmal eye sees, wlLh wonderful accuracy, sharp ouLllnes and colored surfaces. When Lhe eye of lnLulLlon opens, Lo ouLllne and surface are aL once added grace and expresslon. 1hese proceed from lmaglnaLlon and affecLlon, and abaLe somewhaL of Lhe angular dlsLlncLlons of ob[ecLs. lf Lhe lnLulLlon be sLlmulaLed Lo more earnesL vlslon, ouLllnes of surfaces become LransparenL, and are no longer seen, causes and splrlLs are seen Lhrough Lhem. 1he besL momenLs of llfe are Lhese dellclous awakenlngs of Lhe hlgher powers, and Lhe reverenLlal wlLhdrawlng of naLure before lLs Cod. 13 At tbe some tlme, as Lmerson polnLs ouL, Lhls does oot mean LhaL naLure ls aparL from SplrlL or dlvorced from SplrlL or allen Lo SplrlL-LhaL ls a common bellef ln Lhe myLhlc sLrucLure (Campbell called lL myLhlc dlssoclaLlon"), buL lL flnds no place ln genulne psychlc mysLlclsm. All of naLure, every nook and cranny, ls ln SplrlL, baLhed by SplrlL, awash ln SplrlL, Lhere ls no polnL ln naLure LhaL ls noL LoLally permeaLed and enveloped by SplrlL. 1hese dlsLlncLlons are cruclal, because Lhey allow us Lo dlsLlngulsh carefully and clearly beLween Lhree qulLe dlfferenL worldvlews on Lhe telotloo betweeo ootote ooJ spltlt: 1he flrsL ls moqlcol loJlssoclotloo, where splrlL ls slmply equaLed wlLh naLure (naLure = splrlL), predlfferenLlaLed, very Lhls-worldly." 1he second ls mytblc Jlssoclotloo, where naLure and splrlL are onLologlcally separaLe or dlvorced, very oLherworldly." 1he Lhlrd ls psycblc mystlclsm: naLure ls a perfecL expresslon of splrlL (or as Splnoza puL lL, naLure ls a subseL of splrlL), 16 oLherworldly" and Lhls-worldly" are unlLed and con[olned. WlLh reference Lo Lhe Lhlrd: Cne of Lhe ma[or and deflnlng characLerlsLlcs of psychlc-level mysLlclsm ls LhaL lL ls a consclous ldenLlLy wlLh physlosphere and blosphere and noosphere-lL does noL slmply prlvllege Lhe blosphere, lL ls no mere geocenLrlc/egocenLrlc lndlssoclaLlon and regresslon. Lven Lhough Lhls mysLlclsm ofLen Lakes lLs glorlous exulLaLlon ln Lhe wonders of naLure, noneLheless, as Lmerson consLanLly emphaslzes, Lhls ls Lhe Self of ootloo and of ootote"-LhaL ls, Lhe mysLlcal unlon of maLLer, llfe, ooJ culLure, noL merely a blospherlc lmmerslon. Were lL only Lhe Self of naLure and noL also of naLlon (culLure and morallLy), Lhen lL would be a perfecLly regresslve, duallsLlc, and amorallsL sLance, glorlfylng merely an egocenLrlc [oy ln flndlng oneself vlLally reflecLed ln Lhe blosphere (and Lhe raln whlspers ln lLs ear, l am here for you). 8aLher, lL ls Lhe unlon of Lhe human motol eoJeovot wlLh Lhe dlsplay of ootote os qlveo LhaL so dlsLlngulshes naLlon-naLure" mysLlclsm from Lhe narclsslsLlc naLure worshlp" of mere senLlmenLallsm (Lhe Lechnlcal polnLs of Lhls argumenL are glven ln noLe 16). 1hls ls mosL deflnlLely oot an ecologlcal self, lL ls an Lco-noeLlc Self, 1he Self of naLlon and of naLure," Lhe Cver-Soul LhaL ls Lhe World Soul. 17 lndeed, lf naLure means Lhe blosphere, and naLure (or SplrlL) means Lhe All, means Lhe physlosphere and Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere and Lhelr Cround, Lhen Lmerson's polnL ls very slmple: Lhe worshlpers of naLure are Lhe desLroyers of naLure. Lmerson, Lhen, ls slnglng songs Lo naLure, noL naLure. And LhaL ls why he malnLalns LhaL naLure lmmerslon and naLure worshlp pteveot Lhe reallzaLlon of naLure, or Lhe SplrlL wlLhln and beyond, whlch Lranscends all, embraces all. And Lhls ls whaL he means by naLure-naLlon" mysLlclsm: Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere unlLed ln Lhe Lheosphere, or Lhe Cver-Soul LhaL ls slmulLaneously Lhe World Soul. And so he arrlves aL Lhe very Lrue concluslon: naLure worshlpers are Lhe desLroyers of naLure, Lhe desLroyers of SplrlL, Lhey would, he says, never look wltblo long enough Lo flnd Lhe Lrue beyond, Lhe Cver-Soul oot of wblcb boLh culLure and naLure emerge (and whlch Lherefore lovlngly embraces boLh), Lhey would never look wlLhln for naLure, Lhey only sLare wlLhouL aL naLure, and Lhus, as he puLs lL, Lhelr mlnds are lmbruLed, Lhey remaln a selflsh savage-geocenLrlc, egocenLrlc. !usL as all of Lhe lower ls ln Lhe hlgher buL noL all Lhe hlgher ls ln Lhe lower (buL raLher permeaLes" Lhe lower), so all of naLure ls ln SplrlL buL noL all of SplrlL ls Lo be found ln naLure. 8aLher, SplrlL permeaLes naLure Lhrough and Lhrough, lLself remalnlng behlnd naLure, beyond naLure, noL conflned Lo naLure and noL ldenLlfled wlLh naLure, buL oevet, aL any polnL, dlvorced from naLure or seL aparL from naLure. Lmerson ls preclse: 8uL when, followlng Lhe lnvlslble sLeps of LhoughL, we come Lo lnqulre, Whence ls maLLer? and WhereLo? many LruLhs arlse Lo us ouL of Lhe recesses of consclousness. We learn LhaL Lhe hlghesL ls presenL Lo Lhe soul of man, LhaL Lhe dread unlversal essence, whlch ls noL wlsdom, or love, or beauLy, or power, buL all ln one, and each enLlrely, ls LhaL for whlch all Lhlngs exlsL, and LhaL by whlch Lhey are, LhaL splrlL creaLes, LhaL behlnd naLure, LhroughouL naLure, splrlL ls presenL, one and noL compound lL does noL acL upon us from wlLhouL, LhaL ls, ln space and Llme, buL splrlLually, or Lhrough ourselves: Lherefore, LhaL splrlL . . . does noL bulld up naLure otoooJ us, buL pots lt fottb tbtooqb os, as Lhe llfe of Lhe Lree puLs forLh new branches and leaves Lhrough Lhe pores of Lhe old. 18 1haL SplrlL does noL bulld up naLure around us, buL puLs forLh naLure Lhrough us: Lhere ls Lhe profound dlfference beLween naLure/naLlon mysLlclsm and mere blocenLrlc lmmerslon, Lhere ls Lhe Lelllng dlfference beLween Lhe Lco- noeLlc Self and Lhe merely ecologlcal self, Lhere ls Lhe dlfference beLween Lranscendence and regresslon. Pere, Lhen, ls a summary of Lhe wldely accepLed lnLerpreLaLlon of Lmerson's vlew: (1) naLure ls noL SplrlL buL a symbol of SplrlL (or a manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL), (2) sensory awareness ln lLself does noL reveal SplrlL buL obscures lL, (3) an ascendlng or LranscendenLal currenL ls requlred Lo dlsclose SplrlL, (4) SplrlL ls undersLood only as naLure ls Lranscended (l.e., SplrlL ls lmmanenL ln naLure, buL fully dlscloses lLself only ln a Lranscendence of naLure-ln shorL, SplrlL Lranscends buL lncludes naLure). 1hose polnLs are largely unconLesLed by Lmerson scholars [see Lhe ye of 5pltlt, chapLer 11, noLe 2]. ln concludlng Lhls brlef survey of Lhe psychlc level and Lhe cosmlc consclousness of naLure-naLlon mysLlclsm, Lhere are Lwo polnLs l would llke Lo emphaslze. 1he flrsL ls LhaL, as l Lhlnk ls now obvlous, Lhls new qoloq wltblo has resulLed ln a new qoloq beyooJ: a new and hlgher lnLerlor ldenLlLy (Cver-Soul) accompanled by a new and wlder embrace of oLhers (World Soul)-a slngle Soul embraclng Lhe physlosphere, blosphere, and noosphere ln one lovlng caress. 19 Cnce agaln we go wlLhln and fall wlLhouL Lo flnd Lhls Llme . . . an acLual cosmlc consclousness. 8uL Lhls movemenL lLself ls ln no way any dlfferenL from all Lhe prevlous sLages LhaL we have examlned, all of whlch were self- developmenL Lhrough self-Lranscendence," a new golng wlLhln Lo a deeper and wlder beyond. And Lhls Cver-Soul recognlLlon dawns preclsely and only as Lhe separaLe self, Lhe ego or cenLaur, ls Lranscended. Schopenhauer would agree enLlrely wlLh Lmerson (and so many oLhers) on LhaL cruclal polnL. ln Schopenhauer's words: When one ls no longer concerned wlLh Lhe Where, Lhe When, Lhe Why and Lhe WhaL-for of Lhlngs, buL only and alone wlLh Lhe WhaL, and leLs go even of all absLracL LhoughLs abouL Lhem, lnLellecLual concepLs and consclousness, buL lnsLead of all LhaL, glves over Lhe whole force of one's splrlL Lo Lhe acL of percelvlng, becomes absorbed ln lL and leLs every blL of one's consclousness be fllled ln Lhe quleL conLemplaLlon of Lhe naLural ob[ecL lmmedlaLely presenL-be lL a landscape, a Lree, a rock, a bulldlng, or anyLhlng else aL all, acLually and fully losloq ooeself ln Lhe ob[ecL: forgeLLlng one's lndlvlduallLy, one's wlll, and remalnlng Lhere only as a pure sub[ecL, a clear mlrror Lo Lhe ob[ecL-so LhaL lL ls as Lhough Lhe ob[ecL alone were Lhere, wlLhouL anyone regardlng lL, and Lo such a degree LhaL one mlghL no longer dlsLlngulsh Lhe beholder from Lhe acL of beholdlng, [Lhen] Lhe Lwo have become ooe. . . . 20 Schopenhauer's clear mlrror Lo Lhe ob[ecL" ls, of course, Lmerson's LransparenL eyeball," whlch ls perfecLly Lranspersonal, or no longer merely lndlvldual. Schopenhauer: 1he person absorbed ln Lhls mode of seelng ls no longer an lndlvldual-Lhe lndlvldual has losL hlmself ln Lhe percepLlon-buL ls a pure, wlll-less, palnless, Llmeless, Sub[ecL of Apprehenslon." 1he Cver-Soul as lnLlmaLlon of Lhe pure and Llmeless WlLness. . . . 1he second Lhlng l would llke Lo emphaslze ls Lhe relaLlon of Lhe global Self or Cver-Soul Lo Lhe whole noLlon of morallLy and moral developmenL lLself. 1hls ls a connecLlon, lL seems Lo me, overlooked by mosL of Loday's moral LheorlsLs, buL uLLerly obvlous Lo Lmerson and Schopenhauer (and noL Lhem alone). We have seen Lhe developmenL of Lhe motol seose evolve from physlocenLrlc Lo blocenLrlc Lo egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc (worldcenLrlc" belng Lhe global or planeLary or unlversallzlng reach of raLlonallLy and Lhen vlslon-loglc). And here, aL Lhe psychlc level, Lhe worldcenLrlc cooceptloo glves way Lo a dlrecL worldcenLrlc expetleoce, a dlrecL experlence of Lhe global Self/World, Lhe Lco-noeLlc Self, where each lndlvldual ls seen as an expresslon of Lhe same Self or Cver-Soul. And whaL has LhaL Lo do wlLh morallLy? LveryLhlng, accordlng Lo Lmerson and Schopenhauer, for ln seelng LhaL all senLlenL belngs are expresslons of one Self, Lhen all belngs are LreaLed os one's Self. And tbot reallzaLlon-a profound frulLlon of Lhe Jeceotetloq LhrusL of evoluLlon-ls Lhe only source of Lrue compossloo, a compasslon LhaL does noL puL self flrsL (egocenLrlc) or a parLlcular socleLy flrsL (soclocenLrlc) or humans flrsL (anLhropocenLrlc), nor does lL Lry merely ln LhoughL Lo acL os lf we are all unlLed (worldcenLrlc), buL dlrecLly and lmmedlaLely breaLhes Lhe common alr and beaLs Lhe common blood of a PearL and 8ody LhaL ls one ln all belngs. 1be wbole polot of tbe motol sepoeoce, lLs very ground and lLs very goal, lLs omega polnL, lLs chaoLlc ALLracLor, ls Lhe drlve Loward Lhe Cver-Soul, where LreaLlng oLhers as one's Self ls noL a moral lmperaLlve LhaL has Lo be enforced as an oughL or a should or a dlfflculL lmposlLlon, buL comes as easlly and as naLurally as Lhe rlslng of Lhe sun or Lhe shlnlng of Lhe moon. 21 1hls moral oneness lnLenslfles ln Lhe subLle and causal (as we wlll see), buL lL flrsL becomes dlrecLly obvlous here, ln Lhe psychlc, and lssues naLurally ln Lhe sponLaneous compasslon lobeteot ln Lhe Cver-Soul, a compasslon on whlch all prevlous moral endeavors depended, buL a compasslon of whlch all prevlous endeavors were buL mere and parLlal gllmmers. ln Lhe llghL of Lhe Cver-Soul, lL becomes perfecLly obvlous: all prevlous eLhlcs were Lrled and found wanLlng, all prevlous sLruggles for Lhe llfe Cood and 1rue were Loo parLlal and Loo llmlLed and much Loo narrow Lo saLlsfy-all wanLed Lo LasLe Lhls, Lhe unlversal compasslon Lhrough unlversal ldenLlLy wlLh Lhe commonwealLh of all belngs: LhaL l would see ln an CLher my own Self, wlLh love drlvlng Lhe embrace, and compasslon lssulng ln Lhe LenderesL of mercles. Schopenhauer: 1he sorL of acL LhaL l am here dlscusslng ls . . . compasslon, whlch ls Lo say: lmmedlaLe parLlclpaLlon, released from all oLher conslderaLlons, flrsL, ln Lhe paln of anoLher, and Lhen, ln Lhe allevlaLlon or LermlnaLlon of LhaL paln, whlch alone ls Lhe Lrue ground of all auLonomous rlghLeousness and of all Lrue human love. An acL can be sald Lo have genulne moral worLh only ln so far as lL sLems from Lhls source [Lhe common Self], and conversely, an acL from any oLher source has none. 1he weal and woe of anoLher comes Lo lle dlrecLly ln my hearL ln exacLly Lhe same way-Lhough noL always Lo Lhe same degree-as oLherwlse only my own would lle, as soon as Lhls senLlmenL of compasslon ls aroused, and LherewlLh, Lhe dlfference beLween hlm and me ls no longer absoluLe. And Lhls really ls amazlng-even mysLerlous. 22 1he mysLery, of course, ls Lhe mysLery of Lhe Cver-Soul allowlng us Lo tecoqolze ootselves lo eocb otbet, beyond Lhe llluslons of separaLlon and duallLy. Schopenhauer: lor lf plurallLy and dlsLlncLlon [separaLe selves"] belong only Lo Lhls world of oppeotooces, and lf one and Lhe same 8elng ls whaL ls beheld ln all Lhese llvlng Lhlngs, well Lhen, Lhe experlence LhaL dlssolves Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe l and Lhe noL-l cannoL be false. Cn Lhe conLrary: lLs opposlLe musL be false. 1he former experlence underlles Lhe mysLery of compasslon, and sLands, ln facL, for Lhe reallLy of whlch compasslon ls Lhe prlme expresslon. 1bot experlence, Lherefore, musL be Lhe meLaphyslcal ground of eLhlcs and conslsL slmply ln Lhls: LhaL ooe lndlvldual should recognlze ln oootbet, hlmself ln hls own Lrue belng. 23 1PL Su81LL LLvLL AL Lhe psychlc level, Lhe unlversallzlng and global Lendencles of reason and vlslon-loglc come Lo frulLlon ln a dlrecL experlence-lnlLlal, prellmlnary, buL unmlsLakable-of a Lruly unlversal Self, common ln and Lo all belngs, ln a dlrecL experlence of Lhe unlLy of Lhe physlosphere, blosphere, and noosphere, as an expresslon and embrace of LhaL Self or Soul, so much so LhaL Lhls Self ls undersLood Lo be prlor Lo, wlLhln, and beyond maLLer, llfe, and mlnd, so LhaL, for all Lhe glorlous radlance of a SplrlL embodled, noneLheless maLLer and naLure and clvlllzaLlon all wlLhdraw before Lhelr Cod." AL Lhe same Llme, Lhls ls no mere sollpslsm. lL ls a hlgher Self or l, mosL assuredly, buL also a hlgher 1ruLh (or lL) and a wlder CommunlLy (or We)-Lhe Cver-Soul as Lhe World Soul ln Lhe commonwealLh of all belngs as an ob[ecLlve SLaLe of Affalrs. 24 1he 8lg 1hree ln yeL deeper unfoldlngs, hlgher reaches, wlder communlLles, sLronger afflrmaLlons. . . . AL Lhe subLle level, Lhls process of lnLerlorlzaLlon" or wlLhln-and-beyond" lnLenslfles-a new Lranscendence wlLh a new depLh, a new embrace, a hlgher consclousness, a wlder ldenLlLy-and Lhe soul and Cod enLer an even deeper lnLerlor marrlage, whlch dlscloses aL lLs summlL a dlvlne unlon of Soul and SplrlL, a unlon ptlot Lo any of lLs manlfesLaLlons as maLLer or llfe or mlnd, a unlon LhaL ouLshlnes any concelvable naLure, here or anywhere else. naLure-naLlon mysLlclsm glves way Lo uelLy mysLlclsm, and Lhe Cod wlLhln announces lLself ln Lerms undreamL of ln gross manlfesLaLlon, wlLh a LlghL LhaL bllnds Lhe sun and a Song LhaL Lhunders naLure and culLure lnLo sLunned and awesLruck sllence. naLure lovers here scream loul!," as lf beyond Lhe glorles of naLure Lhere should be no oLher glory, as lf Lhe vlslble and Langlble scene exhausLed Lhe wonders of Lhe kosmos, as lf ln all Lhe worlds and posslble worlds Lhrough all eLernlLy, Lhelr beloved naLure alone should be allowed Lo shlne. 8uL naLure, dear sweeL naLure, ls morLal and flnlLe. lL was born, lL wlll remaln a blL, and lL wlll pass. lL was creaLed, lL wlll be undone. And ln all cases, lL ls bounded, and llmlLed, and doomed Lo Lhe decay LhaL marks all manlfesL worlds. l am somehow recepLlve of Lhe greaL soul, and Lhereby l do overlook Lhe sun and Lhe sLars and feel Lhem Lo be Lhe falr accldenLs and effecLs whlch change and pass," as Lmerson sald. We are, of course, perfecLly free Lo ldenLlfy wlLh naLure, and Lo flnd a geocenLrlc earLh-rellglon LhaL consoles us ln our passlng mlserles. We are free Lo ldenLlfy wlLh a flnlLe, llmlLed, morLal LarLh, we are noL free Lo call lL lnflnlLe, unllmlLed, lmmorLal, eLernal. 1haL SplrlL whlch ls wlLhln and beyond Lhe LarLh, whlch ls prlor Lo Lhe LarLh buL noL oLher Lo Lhe LarLh, LhaL SplrlL whlch ls source and supporL and goal of all-LhaL SplrlL ls lnLulLed aL Lhe psychlc and comes Lo Lhe fore ln Lhe subLle sLage of consclousness evoluLlon, uLLerly lncludlng Lhe prevlous sLages, uLLerly ouLshlnlng Lhem. LeL Lhe LarLh and Cosmos and Worlds dlssolve, and see SplrlL sLlll shlnlng ln Lhe LmpLlness, never arlslng, never dlssolvlng, never bllnklng once ln Lhe worlds of creaLed Llme. 1haL [oy," says 1eresa, ls greaLer Lhan all Lhe [oys of earLh, and greaLer Lhan all lLs dellghLs, and all lLs saLlsfacLlons, and Lhey are apprehended, Loo, very dlfferenLly, as l have learned by experlence."23 ln Lhe lotetlot costle, one of Lhe Lruly greaL LexLs of subLle-level developmenL, 1eresa descrlbes very clearly Lhe sLages of evoluLlon of Lhe llLLle buLLerfly," as she calls her soul, Lo lLs unlon wlLh Lhe very ulvlne, and she does so ln Lerms of seven manslons," or seven sLages of growLh. 1he flrsL Lhree sLages deal wlLh Lhe ordlnary mlnd or ego, unregeneraLe" ln Lhe gross, manlfesL world of LhoughL and sense. ln Lhe flrsL Manslon, LhaL of PumlllLy, Lhe ego ls sLlll ln love wlLh Lhe creaLures and comforLs ouLslde Lhe CasLle, and musL begln a long and searchlng dlsclpllne ln order Lo Lurn wlLhln. ln Lhe second Manslon (Lhe racLlce of rayer), lnLellecLual sLudy, edlflcaLlon, and good company sLrengLhen Lhe deslre and capaclLy Lo lnLerlorlze and noL merely scaLLer and dlsperse Lhe self ln exLerlor dlsLracLlons. ln Lhe Manslon of Lxemplary Llfe, Lhe Lhlrd sLage, dlsclpllne and eLhlcs are flrmly seL as a foundaLlon of all LhaL ls Lo follow (very slmllar Lo Lhe 8uddhlsL noLlon LhaL sllo, or moral dlsclpllne, ls Lhe foundaLlon of Jbyooo, or medlLaLlon, and ptojoo, or splrlLual lnslghL). 1hese are all oototol (or personal) developmenLs. ln Lhe fourLh manslon, a sopetoototol (or Lranspersonal) grace enLers Lhe scene wlLh Lhe rayer of 8ecollecLlon and Lhe rayer of CuleL (whlch 1eresa dlfferenLlaLes by Lhelr bodlly effecLs). ln boLh, Lhere ls a calmlng and slowlng of gross-orlenLed faculLles (memory, LhoughLs, senses) and a consequenL openlng Lo deeper, more lnLerlor spaces wlLh correlaLlve graces," whlch 1eresa calls, aL Lhls sLage, splrlLual consolaLlons" (because Lhey are consollng Lo Lhe self, noL yeL Lranscendlng of Lhe self). Cn Lhe oLher hand, lL ls also as lf Lhe soul lLself ls acLually beglnnlng Lo emerge aL Lhls sLage: 1he senses and all exLernal Lhlngs seem gradually Lo lose Lhelr hold, whlle Lhe soul, on Lhe oLher hand, regalns lLs losL conLrol." And Lhls carrles a gllmmer of Lhe LruLh Lo come, namely, LhaL Cod ls wlLhln us." 26 ln Lhe flfLh manslon, vla Lhe rayer of unlon, a SplrlLual 8eLroLhal occurs, where Lhe soul flrsL dlrecLly emerges and lnLulLs SplrlL resldlng ln Lhe deepesL lnLerlor of lLs own hearL (Lhe psychlc). l say emerge," because even lf Lhe soul was prevlously presenL ln Lhe depLhs, lL now comes Lo Lhe fore. And Lhls occurs ln one parLlcularly slgnlflcanL LransformaLlon, accordlng Lo 1eresa. 1he lndlvldual experlences, for Lhe flrsL Llme, a compleLe cessotloo 27 of all faculLles, and ln LhaL pure absorpLlon, Lhe self LasLes lLs prlmordlal unlon wlLh Cod (or whaL 1eresa also calls uncreaLe SplrlL). lor as long as such a soul ls ln Lhls sLaLe, lL can nelLher see nor hear nor undersLand: Lhe perlod ls always shorL [aL Lhls early sLage]. Cod lmplanLs Plmself ln Lhe lnLerlor of LhaL soul ln such a way LhaL, when lL reLurns Lo lLself, lL cannoL posslbly doubL LhaL Cod has been ln lL and lL has been ln Cod." 28 And here 1eresa uses perhaps her mosL famous meLaphor. rlor Lo Lhls LransformaLlve absorpLlon, Lhe unregeneraLe self (or ego) ls, says 1eresa, llke a sllkworm. 8uL one LasLe of unlon (llLerally, [usL a slngle experlence of Lhls, she says, however brlef), and Lhe self ls changed forever. Cne LasLe of absorpLlon ln uncreaLe SplrlL, and Lhe worm emerges a buLLerfly. As we mlghL puL lL, Lhe ego dles and Lhe soul emerges. (All mean egoLlsm vanlshes, Lhe currenLs of unlversal 8elng clrculaLe Lhrough me, l am parL or parcel of Cod.") 1eresa: And now leL us see whaL becomes of Lhls sllkworm. When lL ls ln Lhls sLaLe of [cessaLlon/absorpLlon], and qulLe dead Lo Lhe world, lL comes ouL a llLLle whlLe buLLerfly. Ch, greaLness of Cod, LhaL a soul should come ouL llke Lhls afLer belng closely unlLed for so shorL a Llme-never, l Lhlnk, for as long as half an hour [ln cessaLlon]. lor Lhlnk of Lhe dlfference beLween an ugly worm and a whlLe buLLerfly, lL ls [usL Lhe same here. 1he soul cannoL Lhlnk how lL can have merlLed such a blesslng-whence such a blesslng could have come Lo lL, l meanL Lo say, for lL knows qulLe well LhaL lL has noL merlLed lL aL all. 29 Cne LasLe, and Lhe buLLerfly ls born, Lhe soul ls born (or emerges from lLs slumber ln ego, lLs losLness ln Lhe exLerlor cocoon of form, and, of course, Lhe buLLerfly ls Lhe omega polnL of Lhe sllkworm). 1he resL of lotetlot costle descrlbes Lhe exLraordlnary [ourney of Lhls llLLle buLLerfly Loward LhaL prlmordlal llame ln whlch, aL lasL, lL wlll happlly dle (Lo be, once agaln, reborn on yeL a deeper level, LhaL of unlon wlLh uncreaLe SplrlL). ln Lhe slxLh manslon, Lover and 8eloved, buLLerfly and Cod, soul and uncreaLe SplrlL, see each oLher" for exLended perlods of Llme. Whereas Lhe absorpLlon of Lhe llfLh Manslon mlghL lasL up Lo a half-hour, varlous Lypes of absorpLlon here lasL a day or several days, she says (even lf Lhe cessaLlon lLself ls sLlll shorLllved). 1he soul ls so compleLely absorbed and Lhe undersLandlng so compleLely LransporLed-for as long as a day, or even for several days-LhaL Lhe soul seems lncapable of grasplng anyLhlng LhaL does noL awaken Lhe wlll Lo love, Lo Lhls lL ls fully awake, whlle asleep as regards all aLLachmenL. . . ." 30 8uL each new sLage of growLh, we have seen, lnLroduces new Lypes of posslble paLhology, and so lL ls wlLh Lhe llLLle buLLerfly. Many people Lhlnk LhaL Lhe famous uark nlghL of Lhe Soul," a phrase lnLroduced by 1eresa's frlend and collaboraLor SalnL !ohn of Lhe Cross, ls LhaL Lerrlble dark perlod before one flnds uncreaLe SplrlL. 8uL noL so, Lhe uark nlghL occurs ln LhaL perlod oftet one has LasLed unlversal 8elng buL before one ls esLabllshed ln lL, for one has now seen aradlse . . . and seen lL fade. 1he LormenL ls now agonlzlng. 1he llLLle buLLerfly suffers much, much more LorLure" (1eresa's Lerm) Lhan anyLhlng Lhe ego suffers or even could suffer. 1hls ls a much greaLer Lrlal," Lhe llLLle buLLerfly reporLs, especlally lf Lhe palns are severe, ln some ways, when Lhey are very acuLe, l Lhlnk Lhey are Lhe greaLesL Lrlal LhaL exlsLs. lor Lhey affecL Lhe soul boLh ouLwardly and lnwardly, Llll lL becomes so much oppressed as noL Lo know whaL Lo do wlLh lLself. 1here are many Lhlngs whlch assaulL her soul wlLh an lnLerlor oppresslon so keenly felL and so lnLolerable LhaL l do noL know Lo whaL lL can be compared. . . ." 31 She ls consclous of a sLrange sollLude, slnce Lhere ls noL a creaLure on Lhe whole earLh who can be a companlon Lo her-ln facL, l do noL belleve she would flnd any ln Peaven, save Plm Whom she loves: on Lhe conLrary, all earLhly companlonshlp ls LormenL Lo her. She Lhlnks of herself as of a person suspended alofL, unable elLher Lo come down and resL anywhere on earLh or Lo ascend lnLo Peaven. She ls parched wlLh LhlrsL, yeL cannoL reach Lhe waLer, and Lhe LhlrsL ls noL a Lolerable one buL a klnd LhaL noLhlng can quench. . . . 32 1he dlalecLlc of progress, here unleashed ln lLs mosL subLle yeL agonlzlng form. Cn Lhe more poslLlve slde, lL ls here ln Lhe SlxLh Manslon LhaL all sorLs of subLle-level phenomena begln Lo emerge ln consclousness, and 1eresa chronlcles Lhem wlLh asLonlshlng clarlLy: Lhe lnLerlor lllumlnaLlons, Lhe rapLures, Lhe subLle sounds and vlslons, Lhe Lypes of LranqullllLy and recollecLlon, ecsLasy, rapLure, or Lrance (for l Lhlnk Lhese are all Lhe same)." MosL of Lhese vlslons (laLe psychlc and early subLle) are ln Lhemselves Lransverbal (Lhe revelaLlons are communlcaLed Lo lL wlLhouL words," ln a way LhaL lnvolves no clear uLLerance of speech"). 33 8uL Lhe cenLral evenL remalns, ln each of Lhem, Lhe posslblllLy of Lhe absorpLlon ln uncreaLe SplrlL. When Lhe soul ls Lhus cleansed, Cod unlLes lL wlLh Plmself. 1he soul becomes one wlLh Cod." 34 All of whlch culmlnaLes ln Lhe SevenLh Manslon, where acLual SplrlLual Marrlage occurs, and vlslon glves way Lo dlrecL apprehenslon or dlrecL experlence-Lhe unlon of Lhe whole soul wlLh Cod." 33 Cnce Lhls unlon ls apprehended, lL seems so obvlous, says 1eresa, LhaL we can'L even flnd a doorway" Lhrough whlch lL occurred (whlch ls very remlnlscenL of Zen's gaLeless gaLe"), and, ln Lrylng Lo descrlbe Lhls secreL yeL perfecLly obvlous unlon, words, of course, mlserably fall her (buL only because she cannoL assume LhaL we have had Lhe experlence): 1hls secreL unlon Lakes place ln Lhe deepesL cenLer of Lhe soul, whlch ls where Cod dwells, and l do noL Lhlnk Lhere ls any need of a door by whlch Lo enLer lL. l say Lhere ls no need of a door because all LhaL has so far been descrlbed [Lhe earller slx sLages or manslons] seems Lo have come Lhrough Lhe medlum of Lhe senses and [menLal] faculLles. 8uL whaL passes ln Lhe unlon of Lhe SplrlLual Marrlage, ln Lhe cenLer of Lhe soul, ls very dlfferenL. 1hls lnsLanLaneous [unlon] of Cod Lo Lhe soul ls so greaL a secreL and subllme a favor, and such dellghL ls felL by Lhe soul, LhaL l do noL know wlLh whaL Lo compare lL. . . . 36 ln Lhe slxLh manslon, 1eresa says, Lhls dlvlne unlon ls lndeed apprehended, buL only brlefly and sporadlcally. She llkens Lhls prellmlnary unlon Lo Lwo candles [olned aL Lhe ends: Lhey Lhen glve one llghL, buL Lhe Lwo candles can be broken aparL agaln. noL so Lhe Lrue SplrlLual Marrlage: 8uL here lL ls llke raln falllng from Lhe heavens lnLo a rlver or sprlng, Lhere ls noLhlng buL waLer Lhere and lL ls lmposslble Lo dlvlde or separaLe Lhe waLer belonglng Lo Lhe rlver from LhaL whlch fell from Lhe heavens. Cr lL ls as lf a Llny sLreamleL enLers Lhe sea, from whlch lL wlll flnd no way of separaLlng lLself, or as lf ln a room Lhere were Lwo large wlndows Lhrough whlch Lhe llghL sLreamed ln: lL enLers ln dlfferenL places buL lL all becomes one. 37 ln Lhls brlef skeLch, l have menLloned, buL have noL dwelled on Lhe deLalls of, Lhe posslble paLhologles LhaL beseL Lhe Lranspersonal sLages (four dlfferenL sLages, four very dlfferenL Lypes of posslble paLhologles). Sufflce lL Lo say LhaL Lhey each lnvolve (as always) problems of dlfferenLlaLlon and lnLegraLlon aL Lhe new level, problems of agency and communlon-Loo much of one or Lhe oLher, and a fallure of balance: problems of lnflaLlng Lhe self aL LhaL sLage or loslng Lhe self ln Lhe oLhers of LhaL sLage (Loo much agency or Loo much communlon). 38 lL ls cruclally lmporLanL, Lhen, Lo dlsLlngulsh Lhese new and hlgher paLhologles-of fulcrums seven (psychlc), elghL (subLle), and nlne (causal)-from Lhe lower and prlmlLlve paLhologles (parLlcularly fulcrums one, Lwo, and Lhree). 1eresa ls poslLlvely brllllanL ln dlsLlngulshlng Lhe agonles of Lhe soul ln lLs hlgher manslons or sLages from Lhose emoLlonal problems LhaL characLerlze Lhe lower faculLles. She clearly dlsLlngulshes, for example, Lhree Lypes of lnner volces"-Lhose of Lhe fancy" or lmaglnaLlon," whlch can be halluclnaLory and dlseased," she says, Lhose LhaL are verbal, and may or may noL represenL Lrue wlsdom (for Lhey may also be decepLlve and dlseased"), and Lhose LhaL are Lransverbal alLogeLher, represenLlng dlrecL lnLerlor apprehenslon. She has an exqulslLe and preclse dlscrlmlnaLlng awareness beLween fancles" and halluclnaLlons" and dlrecL lnLulLlve apprehenslons, and she explalns Lhe dlfferences aL lengLh. She glves clear and classlc phenomenologlcal descrlpLlons of so many of Lhe subLle-level apprehenslons: lnLerlor lllumlnaLlon, sound, bllss, and undersLandlng beyond ordlnary Llme and place, genulne archeLypal lorm as creaLlve paLLern (noL myLhlc moLlf), and psychlc vlslon glvlng way Lo pure nonverbal, Lransverbal, subLle lnLulLlon, all summaLlng ln Lhe unlon of Lhe whole soul wlLh uncreaLed SplrlL." As for Lhe use of Lhe Lerm supernaLural" by cerLaln conLemplaLlves (boLh LasL and WesL), care should be Laken Lo dlfferenLlaLe whaL Lhey mean by LhaL Lerm and whaL, for example, Lhe myLhlc or rellglous llLerallsL means by lL. LlLeral or myLhlc ChrlsLlanlLy, for example, orlglnaLlng from Lhe maglc-myLhlc and myLhlc sLages of developmenL, and beseL by myLhlc dlssoclaLlon," lmaglnes Cod as a Cosmlc laLher seL above and aparL from naLure (onLologlcally dlvorced), and Lhus any acLlon on Cod's parL ls and musL be supernaLural"-a mlraculous" suspenslon of Lhe laws of naLure on behalf of Pls chlldren," acLlvlLles LhaL are all noneLheless varlaLlons on Lurnlng splnach lnLo poLaLoes. 1hls Jlssoclotloo of naLural" and supernaLural," and a praylng, a begglng, for Lhe laLLer Lo mlraculously lnLervene ln Lhe former, Lmerson calls meanness and LhefL," a vlclous cravlng for commodlLles: ln whaL prayers do men allow Lhemselves! rayer looks abroad and asks for some forelgn addlLlon Lo come Lhrough some forelgn vlrLue, and loses lLself ln endless mazes of naLural and supernaLural, and medlaLorlal and mlraculous. rayer LhaL craves a parLlcular commodlLy ls vlclous. [1rue] rayer ls Lhe conLemplaLlon of Lhe facLs of llfe from Lhe hlghesL polnL of vlew. lL ls Lhe sollloquy of a beholdlng and [ubllanL soul. lL ls Lhe splrlL of Cod pronounclng hls works good. As soon as Lhe man ls aL one wlLh Cod, he wlll noL beg. 8uL prayer as a means Lo effecL a prlvaLe end ls meanness and LhefL. lL supposes duallsm and noL a unlLy ln naLure and consclousness. 39 Cod's supernaLural" lnLervenLlon ln naLure": Lhls bears no relaLlon Lo Lhe conLemplaLlve vlew of Lhe psychlc and subLle sLages. Cod or SplrlL ls noL seL aparL from naLure, buL raLher ls Lhe Cround of naLure, and lndeed of all manlfesLaLlon-as 1eresa puLs lL, Cod ls lo oll tbloqs by pteseoce ooJ powet ooJ esseoce." SupernaLural," ln Lhls usage, slmply means LhaL Lhe oototol unlon of SplrlL wltb oll tbloqs becomes a cooscloos teollzotloo ln some, and LhaL consclous reallzaLlon ls called supernaLural, noL because Lhe unlon ls presenL only ln Lhem and noL ln naLure, buL because Lhey are dlrecLly reallzlng lL. 1eresa's splrlLual frlend and collaboraLor, Lhe exLraordlnary !ohn of Lhe Cross, explalns lL Lhus: 1hls unlon beLween Cod and creaLures always exlsLs. 8y lL Pe conserves Lhelr belng so LhaL lf Lhe unlon would end Lhey would cease Lo exlsL [SplrlL as Cround of 8elng]. ConsequenLly, ln dlscusslng unlon wlLh Cod, we are noL dlscusslng Lhe subsLanLlal unlon whlch ls always exlsLlng, buL Lhe unlon and LransformaLlon of Lhe soul ln Cod. 1hls LransformaLlon ls supernaLural, Lhe oLher naLural. 40 As for Lhls lnner LransformaLlon, Lhls lnLerlor reallzaLlon, 1eresa speaks movlngly Lo her slsLer nuns, and Lo us, from Lhe dlrecL experlence of Lhe conLemplaLlve hearL: lL becomes evldenL LhaL Lhere ls someone" ln Lhe lnLerlor of Lhe soul who sends forLh Lhese arrows and Lhus glves llfe Lo Lhls llfe, and LhaL Lhere ls a sun whence Lhls greaL llghL proceeds, whlch ls LransmlLLed ln Lhe lnLerlor parL of Lhe soul. 1he soul, as l sald, nelLher moves from LhaL cenLer nor loses lLs peace, [lL] leaves Lhe soul ln a sLaLe of pure splrlLuallLy, so LhaL lL mlghL be [olned wlLh uncreaLed SplrlL. Ch, Cod help me! WhaL a dlfference Lhere ls beLween hearlng and bellevlng Lhese words and belng led ln Lhls way Lo reallze how Lrue Lhey are! Lach day Lhls soul wonders more, for she feels LhaL Lhey have never lefL her, and percelves qulLe clearly, ln Lhe way l have descrlbed, LhaL 1hey [Lhe Lrue words"] are ln Lhe lnLerlor of her hearL-ln Lhe mosL lnLerlor place of all and ln lLs greaLesL depLhs. 41 1hls new depLh, Lhls new wlLhln, whlch ls a new beyond, uLLerly ttoosceoJs naLure, uLLerly embtoces naLure, and ls Lhus emboJleJ ln naLure, as perhaps Auroblndo explalned mosL forcefully: lLs flrsL effecL has been Lhe llberaLlon of llfe and mlnd ouL of MaLLer, lLs lasL effecL has been Lo asslsL Lhe emetqeoce of a splrlLual consclousness, a splrlLual wlll and splrlLual sense of exlsLence ln Lhe LerresLrlal belng so LhaL he ls no longer solely preoccupled wlLh hls ouLermosL llfe or wlLh menLal pursulLs and lnLeresLs, buL has learned Lo look wlLhln, Lo dlscover hls lnner belng, hls splrlLual self, Lo asplre Lo overpass [negaLe and preserve] earLh and her llmlLaLlons. As he grows more and more lnward, hls boundarles menLal [noospherlc], vlLal [blospherlc], and splrlLual begln Lo broaden, Lhe bonds LhaL held llfe, mlnd, soul Lo Lhelr flrsL llmlLaLlons loosen or snap, and man Lhe menLal belng beglns Lo have a gllmpse of a larger klngdom of self and world closed Lo Lhe flrsL earLh-llfe. lf he makes Lhe lnward movemenL whlch hls own hlghesL vlslon has held up before hlm as hls greaLesL splrlLual necesslLy, Lhen he wlll flnd Lhere ln hls lnner belng a larger consclousness, a larger llfe. An acLlon from wlLhln and an acLlon from above can overcome Lhe predomlnance of Lhe maLerlal formula, dlmlnlsh and flnally puL an end Lo Lhe power of Lhe lnconsclence, subsLlLuLe SplrlL for MaLLer as hls consclous foundaLlon of belng and llberaLe lLs hlgher powers Lo Lhelr compleLe and characLerlsLlc expresslon ln Lhe llfe of Lhe soul embodled ln naLure. 42 Whlch ls why 1eresa slngs of embtocloq oll cteototes from Lhe cenLer of Lhe love and [oy LhaL now overflows from her lnnermosL belng: 1hese are very unsklllful comparlsons Lo represenL so preclous a Lhlng, buL l am noL clever enough Lo Lhlnk ouL any more: Lhe real LruLh ls LhaL Lhls [oy makes Lhe soul so forgeLful of lLself, and of everyLhlng, LhaL lL ls consclous of noLhlng, and able Lo speak of noLhlng, save of LhaL whlch proceeds from lLs [oy. . . . LeL us [oln wlLh Lhls soul, my daughLers all. Why should we wanL Lo be more senslble Lhan she? WhaL can glve us greaLer pleasure Lhan Lo do as she does? And may all Lhe creaLures [oln wlLh us for ever and ever. Amen, amen, amen." 43 And Lhe llLLle buLLerfly? WhaL has become of her? As Lhe ego (sllkworm) dled and was reborn as Lhe soul (buLLerfly), so now Lhe soul, afLer Lraverslng Lhe psychlc and subLle domalns and servlng lLs purpose well, enLers flnally lnLo lLs SplrlLual Marrlage, lLs own omega polnL, lLs deeper and greaLer conLexL, and Lhus dles Lo lLs lesser belng, dles as a separaLe self. lor lL ls here," she says sofLly, LhaL Lhe llLLle buLLerfly dles, and wlLh Lhe greaLesL [oy, because ChrlsL ls now lLs llfe." Whlch brlngs us Lo Lhe causal. 1PL CAuSAL ln Lhe subLle level, Lhe Soul and Cod unlLe, ln Lhe causal level, Lhe Soul and Cod are boLh Lranscended ln Lhe prlor ldenLlLy of Codhead, or pure formless awareness, pure consclousness as such, Lhe pure Self as pure SplrlL (ALman = 8rahman). no longer Lhe Supreme unlon" of Cod and Soul, buL Lhe Supreme ldenLlLy" of Codhead. As MelsLer LckharL puL lL, l flnd ln Lhls breakLhrough LhaL Cod and l are one and Lhe same." As we wlll see, Lhls pure formless SplrlL ls sald Lo be Lhe Coal and SummlL and Source of all manlfesLaLlon. And LhaL ls Lhe coosol. Colng wltblo and beyooJ even Lhls pure Source and pure SplrlL-whlch ls LoLally formless, boundless, unmanlfesL-Lhe Self/SplrlL awakens Lo an ldenLlLy wlLh, and as, oll lorm, all manlfesLaLlon (gross, subLle, and causal), wheLher hlgh or low, ascendlng or descendlng, sacred or profane, manlfesL or unmanlfesL, flnlLe or lnflnlLe, Lemporal or eLernal. 1hls ls noL a parLlcular sLage among oLher sLages-noL Lhelr Coal, noL Lhelr Source, noL Lhelr SummlL-buL raLher Lhe Cround or Suchness or lsness of oll sLages, aL all Llmes, ln all dlmenslons: Lhe 8elng of all belngs, Lhe CondlLlon of all condlLlons, Lhe naLure of all naLures. And LhaL ls Lhe NooJool. l have chosen MelsLer LckharL and Srl 8amana Maharshl Lo lllusLraLe boLh of Lhese sLages" (causal and nondual), slnce we flnd ln boLh of Lhem noL only a breakLhrough to Lhe causal, buL also tbtooqb Lhe causal Lo Lhe ulLlmaLe or nondual, and as lnadequaLe and mlsleadlng as words here lnvarlably are, aL leasL an lndlcaLlon of Lhese Lwo movemenLs" can be clearly and unmlsLakably dlscerned ln boLh of Lhese exLraordlnary sages. Srl 8amana Maharshl (echolng Shankara) summarlzes Lhe vlewpolnL" of Lhe ulLlmaLe or nondual reallzaLlon: 1he world ls lllusory, 8rahman alone ls 8eal, 8rahman ls Lhe world. 1he flrsL Lwo llnes represenL pure causal-level awareness, or unmanlfesL absorpLlon ln pure or formless SplrlL, llne Lhree represenLs Lhe ulLlmaLe or nondual compleLlon (Lhe unlon of Lhe lormless wlLh Lhe enLlre world of lorm). 1he Codhead completely ttoosceoJs all worlds and Lhus completely locloJes all worlds. lL ls Lhe flnal wlLhln, leadlng Lo a flnal beyond-a beyond LhaL, conflned Lo absoluLely ootbloq, embraces absoluLely evetytbloq. LckharL beglns by polnLlng Lo Lhe need, flrsL and foremosL, for a Lranscendence or a breakLhrough" (a word he colned ln Cerman) from Lhe flnlLe and creaLed realm Lo Lhe lnflnlLe and uncreaLed source or orlgln (Lhe causal), a dlrecL and fotmless owoteoess LhaL ls wlLhouL self, wlLhouL oLher, and wlLhouL Cod. ln Lhe breakLhrough, where l sLand free of my own wlll and of Lhe wlll of Cod and of all hls works and of Cod hlmself, Lhere l am above all creaLures and am nelLher Cod nor creaLure. 8aLher, l am whaL l was and whaL l shall remaln now and forever. 1hen l recelve an lmpulse [awareness] whlch shall brlng me above all Lhe angels. ln Lhls lmpulse l recelve wealLh so vasL LhaL Cod cannoL be enough for me ln all LhaL makes hlm Cod, and wlLh all hls dlvlne works. lor ln Lhls breakLhrough l dlscover LhaL l and Cod are one. 1here l am whaL l was, and l grow nelLher smaller nor blgger, for l am an lmmovable cause LhaL moves all Lhlngs. 1herefore also l am unborn, and followlng Lhe way of my unborn [unmanlfesL] belng l can never dle. lollowlng Lhe way of my unborn belng l have always been, l am now, and shall remaln eLernally. 44 ln order for Cod and Lhe Soul Lo exlsL, Lhere musL be duallLy or separaLlon beLween Lhem, and Lhls duallLy, says LckharL, obscures Lhe prlmordlal Codhead: When l sLlll sLood ln my flrsL cause, Lhere l had no Cod and was cause of myself. 1here l wllled noLhlng, l deslred noLhlng, for l was a pure 8elng ln dellghL of Lhe LruLh. 1here l sLood, free of Cod and of all Lhlngs. 8uL when l Look leave from Lhls sLaLe and recelved my creaLed belng, Lhen l had a Cod. 43 1hls Codhead (or whaL LckharL also calls Cod beyond Cod") ls radlcally free of any flnlLe or creaLed Lhlng, wheLher of maLLer or naLure or mlnd or vlslons or Soul or Cod. LckharL refers Lo Lhls compleLely LranscendenLal, free, or unmanlfesL sLaLe by words such as Abyss," unborn," formless," prlmordlal orlgln," empLlness," noLhlngness." LmpLy yourself of evetytbloq. 1haL ls Lo say, empLy yourself of your ego [or any sorL of separaLe-self sense, soul, or oversoul] and empLy yourself of all Lhlngs and of all LhaL you are ln yourself and conslder yourself as whaL you are ln Cod. Cod ls a belng beyond belng and a noLhlngness beyond belng. 1herefore, be sLlll and do noL fllnch from Lhls empLlness. 46 1hls empLlness" ls noL a Lheory. Lven less ls lL poeLry" (whlch l have ofLen heard). nor ls lL a phllosophlcal suggesLlon. lL ls a dlrecL apprehenslon (dlrecL experlence" ls noL qulLe rlghL, slnce lL ls free of Lhe duallLy of sub[ecL and ob[ecL, and slnce lL never enLers Lhe sLream of Llme and Lhus ls never experlenLlal" ln any Lyplcal sense)-free of LhoughLs, free of duallLles, free of Llme and Lemporal successlon: l speak Lherefore of a Codhead from whlch as yeL noLhlng emanaLes and noLhlng moves or ls LhoughL abouL. Lven lf Lhe soul were Lo see Cod lnsofar as he ls Cod or lnsofar as Cod can be lmaglned or lnsofar as he ls a LhoughL, Lhls same lnsufflclency would be Lhere. 8uL when all lmages of Lhe soul are Laken away and Lhe soul [ls] only Lhe slngle Cne, Lhen Lhe pure belng of Lhe soul flnds resLlng ln lLself Lhe pure, formless 8elng of Lhe dlvlne. . . . nelLher space nor Llme Louch Lhls place. noLhlng so much hlnders Lhe soul's undersLandlng of Cod as Llme and space. 1lme and space are parLs of Lhe whole, buL Cod ls one. So lf Lhe soul ls Lo recognlze Cod, lL musL do so beyond space and Llme. lor Cod ls nelLher Lhls nor LhaL [oetl, oetl"] ln Lhe way of Lhe manlfold Lhlngs of earLh, slnce Cod ls one. lf Lhe soul wanLs Lo know Cod, lL cannoL do so ln Llme. lor so long as Lhe soul ls consclous of Llme or space or any oLher [ob[ecL], lL cannoL know Cod. know Lhen LhaL all our perfecLlon and all our bllss depend on Lhe facL LhaL Lhe lndlvldual goes tbtooqb and beyooJ all creaLlon and all LemporallLy and all belng, and enLers Lhe foundaLlon LhaL ls wlLhouL foundaLlon. 1hey musL arrlve aL forgeLfulness [of ob[ecLs] and no-self consclousness-and Lhere musL be absoluLe sllence Lhere and sLlllness. 47 ln Lhls sLaLe of formless and sllenL awareness, one does noL see Lhe Codhead, for one ls Lhe Codhead, and knows lL from wlLhln, self-felL, and noL from wlLhouL, as an ob[ecL. 1he pure WlLness (whlch LckharL calls Lhe essence of Lhe Sub[ecL") cannoL be seen, for Lhe slmple reason LhaL lL ls Lhe Seer (and Lhe Seer lLself ls pure LmpLlness, Lhe pure openlng or clearlng ln whlch all ob[ecLs, experlences, Lhlngs and evenLs arlse, buL whlch lLself merely abldes). AnyLhlng seeo ls [usL more ob[ecLs, more flnlLe Lhlngs, more creaLures, more lmages or concepLs or vlslons, whlch ls exacLly wbot lt ls oot. lL ls free of all names and barren of all forms, LoLally free and vold, [usL as Cod ls vold and free ln hlmself. lL ls LoLally one and slmple, [usL as Cod ls one and slmple, so LhaL we can ln no manner gaze upon lL [see lL as an ob[ecL, lL ls Lhe Seer, noL anyLhlng seen, and Lhe Seer ls pure LmpLlness, ouL of whlch seen ob[ecLs emerge]. 1here Lhe means" ls sllenL, for nelLher a creaLure nor an lmage can enLer Lhere. 1he soul knows ln LhaL place nelLher acLlon nor knowledge. lL ls noL aware ln LhaL place of any klnd of lmage, elLher from lLself or from any oLher creaLure. ?ou should love hlm as he ls, a noL-Cod, noL-mlnd, noL-person, noL-lmage-even more, as he ls a pure, clear Cne, separaLe from all Lwoness. ?ou should love Cod mlndlessly, LhaL ls, so LhaL your soul ls wlLhouL mlnd and free from all menLal acLlvlLles, for as long as your soul ls operaLlng llke a mlnd, so long does lL have lmages and represenLaLlons. 8uL as long as lL has lmages, lL has lnLermedlarles, and as long as lL has lnLermedlarles, lL has nelLher oneness nor slmpllclLy. And Lherefore your soul should be bare of all mlnd and should sLay Lhere wlLhouL mlnd. 48 lollowlng SalnL ulonyslus, LckharL refers Lo Lhls mlndless" or unknowlng presence," or pure formless awareness wlLhouL menLal lnLermedlarles, as ulvlne lgnorance." Whoever does noL leave all exLernal aspecLs of creaLures can nelLher be recelved lnLo Lhls dlvlne blrLh nor be born. 1he more you are able Lo brlng all your powers Lo a unlLy and a forgeLfulness of all Lhe ob[ecLs and lmages you have absorbed, and Lhe more you deparL from creaLures and Lhelr lmages, Lhe nearer and more recepLlve you are. lf you were able Lo become compleLely unaware of all Lhlngs, aLLaln a forgeLfulness of Lhlngs and of self, Lhe more [Lhere ls] Lhe sllenL darkness where you wlll come Lo a recognlLlon of Lhe unknown, LransbegoLLen Cod. lor Lhls lgnorance draws you away from all knowledge abouL Lhlngs, and beyond Lhls lL draws you away from yourself. 49 Llke LckharL, Srl 8amana Maharshl, lndla's greaLesL modern sage, beqlos by merely glvlng us some verbal polnLers and lnformaLlon abouL Lhe Self and lLs relaLlon Lo Cod (and Codhead). 8uL he wlll soon, we wlll see, go beyond mere chaLLer and polnL dlrecLly Lo Lhe unknown and unknowlng Source. So here he speaks ln poslLlve" Lerms, before drawlng us lnLo ulvlne lgnorance. 1he Self ls known Lo everyone buL noL clearly. 1he 8elng ls Lhe Self. l am" ls Lhe name of Cod. Cf all Lhe deflnlLlons of Cod, none ls lndeed so well puL as Lhe 8lbllcal sLaLemenL l AM 1PA1 l AM. 1he AbsoluLe 8elng ls wbot ls-lL ls Lhe Self. lL ls Cod. knowlng Lhe Self, Cod ls known. ln facL, Cod ls none oLher Lhan Lhe Self. 30 And here 8amana clearly means Codhead," as he hlmself ofLen polnLed ouL: CreaLlon ls by Lhe enLlre Codhead breaklng lnLo Cod and naLure." 31 As for Lhe pure Self/SplrlL or Codhead, 8amana consLanLly repeaLs, ln words vlrLually ldenLlcal Lo LckharL's (and Lo Lhe sages of Lhls level Lhe world over) LhaL Lhe Self ls noL body, noL mlnd, noL LhoughL, lL ls noL feellngs, noL sensaLlons, noL percepLlons, lL ls radlcally free of all ob[ecLs, all sub[ecLs, all duallLles, lL cannoL be seen, cannoL be known, cannoL be LhoughL. ln LhaL sLaLe Lhere ls 8elng alone. 1here ls no you, nor l, nor he, no presenL, nor pasL, nor fuLure. lL ls beyond Llme and space, beyond expresslon. lL ls ever Lhere." 32 1he Self ls noL Lhls, noL LhaL," whlch ln SanskrlL ls Lhe oetl, oetl" l brackeLed ln LckharL's quoLaLlon. 1he Self ls noL Lhls, noL LhaL, preclsely because lL ls Lhe pure WlLness of Lhls or LhaL, and Lhus ln all cases Lranscends any Lhls and any LhaL. 1he Self cannoL even be sald Lo be Cne," for LhaL ls [usL anoLher quallLy, anoLher ob[ecL LhaL ls percelved or wlLnessed. 1he Self ls noL SplrlL", raLher, lL ls LhaL whlch, rlghL now, ls wlLnesslng LhaL concepL. 1he Self ls noL Lhe WlLness"-LhaL ls [usL anoLher word or concepL, and Lhe Self ls LhaL whlch ls wlLnesslng LhaL concepL. 1he Self ls noL LmpLlness, Lhe Self ls noL a pure Self-and so on. 1here are nelLher good nor bad quallLles ln Lhe Self. 1he Self ls free from all quallLles. CuallLles perLaln Lo Lhe mlnd only. lL ls beyond quallLy. lf Lhere ls unlLy, Lhere wlll also be duallLy. 1he numerlcal one glves rlse Lo oLher numbers. 1he LruLh ls nelLher one nor Lwo. lL ls as lL ls. eople wanL Lo see Lhe Self as someLhlng. 1hey deslre Lo see lL as a blazlng llghL, eLc. 8uL how could LhaL be? 1he Self ls noL llghL, noL darkness, noL any observed Lhlng. 1he Self ls ever Lhe WlLness. lL ls eLernal and remalns Lhe same all along. 33 8amana ofLen refers Lo Lhe Self by Lhe name l-l," slnce Lhe Self ls Lhe slmple WlLness of even Lhe ordlnary l." We are all, says 8amana, perfecLly aware of Lhe l-l, for we are all aware of our capaclLy Lo wlLness ln Lhe presenL momenL. 8uL we mlstoke Lhe pure l-l or pure Seer wlLh some sorL of ob[ecL tbot coo be seeo and ls Lhus preclsely oot Lhe Seer or Lhe Lrue Self, buL ls merely some sorL of memory or lmage or ldenLlLy or self-concepL, all of whlch are ob[ecLs, none of whlch ls Lhe WlLness of ob[ecLs. We ldenLlfy Lhe l-l wlLh Lhls or LhaL l, and Lhus ldenLlfled wlLh a mere flnlLe and Lemporal ob[ecL, we suffer Lhe sllngs and arrows of all flnlLe ob[ecLs, whereas Lhe Self remalns ever as lL ls, Llmeless, eLernal, unborn, unwaverlng, undylng, ever and always presenL. 1he l-l ls always Lhere. 1here ls no knowlng lL [as an ob[ecL]. lL ls noL a new knowledge acqulred. 1he l-l ls always Lhere. 1here ls no one who even for a Lrlce falls Lo experlence Lhe Self. ln deep sleep you exlsL, awake, you remaln. 1he same Self ls ln boLh sLaLes. 1he dlfference ls only ln Lhe awareness and Lhe non-awareness of Lhe world. 1he world rlses wlLh Lhe mlnd and seLs wlLh Lhe mlnd. 1haL whlch rlses and seLs ls noL Lhe Self. 1he lndlvldual ls mlserable because he confounds Lhe mlnd and body wlLh Lhe Self. lL ls Lhe naLure of Lhe mlnd Lo wander. 8uL you are noL Lhe mlnd. 1he mlnd sprlngs up and slnks down. lL ls lmpermanenL, LranslLory, whereas you are eLernal. 1here ls noLhlng buL Lhe Self. 1o ablde as Lhe Self ls Lhe Lhlng. never mlnd Lhe mlnd. lf Lhe mlnd's source ls soughL, Lhe mlnd wlll vanlsh leavlng Lhe Self unaffecLed. 34 1he mlnd vanlshed" ls, of course, LckharL's mlndless awareness" (and Zen's no-mlnd," eLc.). 8amana Lherefore counsels us Lo seek Lhe sootce of Lhe mlnd, Lo look for LhaL whlch ls aware of Lhe menLal or personal l," for tbot ls Lhe Lranspersonal l-l," unchanged by Lhe flucLuaLlons of any parLlcular sLaLes, parLlcular ob[ecLs, parLlcular clrcumsLances, parLlcular blrLhs, parLlcular deaLhs. 1raclng Lhe source of l," Lhe prlmal l-l alone remalns over, and lL ls lnexpresslble. 1he seaL of 8eallzaLlon ls wlLhln and Lhe seeker cannoL flnd lL as an ob[ecL ouLslde hlm. 1haL seaL ls bllss and ls Lhe core [Lhe ulLlmaLe depLh] of all belngs. Pence lL ls called Lhe PearL. 1he mlnd now sees lLself dlverslfled as Lhe unlverse. lf Lhe dlverslLy ls noL manlfesL lL remalns ln lLs own essence, lLs orlglnal sLaLe, and LhaL ls Lhe PearL. LnLerlng Lhe PearL means remalnlng wlLhouL dlsLracLlons [ob[ecLs]. 1he PearL ls Lhe only 8eallLy. 1he mlnd ls only a LranslenL phase. 1o remaln as one's Self ls Lo enLer Lhe PearL. 1he Self ls noL born nor does lL dle. 1he sages see everyLhlng ln Lhe Self. 1here ls no dlverslLy ln lL. lf a man Lhlnks LhaL he ls born and cannoL avold Lhe fear of deaLh, leL hlm flnd ouL lf Lhe Self has any blrLh. Pe wlll dlscover LhaL Lhe Self always exlsLs, LhaL Lhe body whlch ls born resolves lLself lnLo LhoughL and LhaL Lhe emergence of LhoughL ls Lhe rooL of all mlschlef. llnd Lhe source of LhoughLs. 1hen you wlll ablde ln Lhe ever- presenL lnmosL Self and be free from Lhe ldea of blrLh and Lhe fear of deaLh. 33 As one pursues Lhls self-lnqulry" lnLo Lhe source of LhoughLs, lnLo Lhe source of l" and Lhe world," one enLers a sLaLe of pure empLy awareness, free of all ob[ecLs whaLsoever-preclsely LckharL's compleLely unaware of all Lhlngs"-whlch ln vedanLa ls known as oltvlkolpo somoJbl (oltvlkolpo means wlLhouL any quallLles or ob[ecLs"). ln awareness, Lhere ls perfecL clarlLy, perfecL consclousness, buL Lhe enLlre manlfesL world (up Lo and lncludlng Lhe subLle) slmply ceoses to otlse, and one ls dlrecLly lnLroduced Lo whaL LckharL called Lhe naked exlsLence of Codhead." Srl 8amana: lf you hold Lo Lhe Self [remaln as WlLness ln all clrcumsLances], Lhere ls no second. When you see Lhe world you have losL hold of Lhe Self. Cn Lhe conLrary, hold Lhe Self and Lhe world wlll noL appear. 8y unswervlng vlgllanL consLancy ln Lhe Self, ceaseless llke Lhe unbroken flow of waLer, ls generaLed Lhe naLural or changeless sLaLe of nlrvlkalpa samadhl, whlch readlly and sponLaneously ylelds LhaL dlrecL, lmmedlaLe, unobsLrucLed and unlversal percepLlon of 8rahman, whlch Lranscends all Llme and space. 36 lor 8amana and LckharL (and noL Lhem alone), Lhe causal ls a Lype of ulLlmaLe omega polnL (buL lL ls noL, as we wlll see, Lhe end of Lhe sLory). As Lhe 5ootce of all manlfesLaLlon, lL Lhe Cool of all developmenL. 8amana: 1hls ls Self- 8eallzaLlon, and Lhereby ls cuL asunder Lhe knoL of Lhe PearL [Lhe separaLe-self sense], Lhls ls Lhe llmlLless bllss of llberaLlon, beyond doubL and duallLy. 1o reallze Lhls sLaLe of freedom from duallLy ls Lhe sommom booom of llfe: and he alone LhaL has won lL ls a jlvoomokto (Lhe llberaLed one whlle yeL allve), and noL he who has merely a LheoreLlcal undersLandlng of Lhe Self or Lhe deslred end and alm of all human behavlor. 1he dlsclple ls Lhen en[olned Lo remaln ln Lhe beaLlLude of Aham-8rahman-'l-l' ls Lhe AbsoluLe." 37 1PL nCnuuAL Such ls Lhe formless causal. 8uL Lhe causal ls noL, as LckharL puL lL, Lhe flnal Word." When one breaks Lhrough Lhe causal absorpLlon ln pure unmanlfesL and unborn SplrlL, Lhe enLlre manlfesL world arlses once agaln, buL Lhls Llme as a perfecL expresslon of SplrlL and as SplrlL. 1he lormless and Lhe enLlre world of manlfesL lorm-pure LmpLlness and Lhe whole kosmos-are seen Lo be noL-Lwo (or nondual). 1he WlLness ls seen Lo be evetytbloq LhaL ls wlLnessed, so LhaL, as 8amana puLs lL, 1he ob[ecL Lo be wlLnessed and Lhe WlLness flnally merge LogeLher [and dlsappear as separaLe enLlLles] and AbsoluLe consclousness alone relgns supreme." 8uL tbls nondual consclousness ls noL oLher Lo Lhe world: 8rahman ls Lhe World." 1hls move from causal unmanlfesL Lo nondual embrace, 8amana refers Lo as Lhe developmenL from nlrvlkalpa Lo soboj somoJbl, whlch means unbroken and sponLaneously so," a sLaLe" ln whlch Lhe whole cosmos [kosmos] ls conLalned ln Lhe PearL, wlLh perfecL equallLy of all, for grace ls all-pervadlng and Lhere ls noLhlng LhaL ls noL Lhe Self. All Lhls world ls 8rahman." 38 MelsLer LckharL explalns boLh of Lhese movemenLs (uLLerly Lranscendlng Lhe world, uLLerly embraclng lL): llrsL, 8e asleep Lo all Lhlngs": LhaL means lgnore Llme, creaLures, lmages [causal]. And Lhen you could percelve whaL Cod works ln you. 1haL ls why Lhe soul says ln Lhe Song of Songs, l sleep buL my PearL waLches." 1herefore, lf all creaLures are asleep ln you, you can percelve whaL Cod works ln you [as Codhead]. Second: Concern yourself wlLh all Lhlngs." 1hls has Lhree meanlngs. 1haL means, flrsL, selze Cod ln all Lhlngs, for Cod ls ln all Lhlngs. 1he second meanlng ls: Love your nelghbor as yourself." lf you love one human belng more Lhan anoLher, LhaL ls wrong. lf you love your faLher and moLher and yourself more Lhan anoLher human belng, LhaL ls wrong. And lf you love your own happlness more Lhan anoLher's, LhaL ls also wrong. 1he Lhlrd meanlng ls Lhls: Love Cod ln all Lhlngs equally. lor Cod ls equally near Lo all creaLures. And among all Lhese creaLures Cod does noL love any one more Lhan any oLher. Cod ls all and ls one. All Lhlngs become noLhlng buL Cod [nondual]. 39 When all Lhlngs are noLhlng buL Cod, Lhere are Lhen no Lhlngs, and no Cod, buL only tbls. no ob[ecLs, no sub[ecLs, only Lhls. no enLerlng Lhls sLaLe, no leavlng lL, lL ls absoluLely and eLernally and always already Lhe case: Lhe slmple feellng of belng, Lhe baslc and slmple lmmedlacy of any and all sLaLes, prlor Lo Lhe four quadranLs, prlor Lo Lhe spllL beLween lnslde and ouLslde, prlor Lo seer and seen, prlor Lo Lhe rlse of worlds, ever- presenL as pure resence, Lhe slmple feellng of belng: empLy awareness as Lhe openlng or clearlng ln whlch all worlds arlse, ceaselessly: l-l ls Lhe box Lhe unlverse comes ln. Abldlng as l-l, Lhe world arlses as before, buL now Lhere ls no one Lo wlLness lL. l-l ls noL ln here" looklng ouL Lhere": Lhere ls no ln here, no ouL Lhere, only Lhls. lL ls Lhe radlcal end Lo all egocenLrlsm, all geocenLrlsm, all blocenLrlsm, all soclocenLrlsm, all LheocenLrlsm, because lL ls Lhe radlcal end of all cenLrlsms, perlod. lL ls Lhe flnal Jeceotetloq of all manlfesL realms, ln all domalns, aL all Llmes, ln all places. As uzogchen 8uddhlsm would puL lL, because all phenomena are prlmordlally empLy, all phenomena, [usL as Lhey are, are self-llberaLed as Lhey arlse. ln LhaL pure empLy awareness, l-l am Lhe rlse and fall of all worlds, ceaselessly, endlessly. l-l swallow Lhe kosmos and span Lhe cenLurles, unLouched by Llme or Lurmoll, embraclng each wlLh prlmordlal purlLy, flerce compasslon. lL has never sLarLed, Lhls nlghLmare of evoluLlon, and Lherefore lL wlll never end. lL ls as lL ls, self-llberaLed aL Lhe momenL of lLs very arlslng. And lL ls only tbls. 1he All ls l-l. l-l ls LmpLlness. LmpLlness ls freely manlfesLlng. lreely manlfesLlng ls self-llberaLlng. Zen, of course, would puL lL all much more slmply, and polnL dlrecLly Lo [usL tbls. SLlll pond A frog [umps ln lop! 1PL Lnu Cl PlS1C8? uoes hlsLory, Lhen, have a flnal omega polnL, Lhe Cmega of all prevlous and lesser omegas? ls Lhere an acLual Lnd Lo PlsLory as we know lL? Where all belngs unlLe ln Lhelr consclous reallzaLlon of Codhead? Are we all belng drawn Lo LhaL one, far-off ulvlne LvenL" LhaL dlssolves lLs own Lrall? Many mysLlcally lncllned wrlLers have made Lhls assumpLlon, lL does make a cerLaln amounL of flrsL-blush sense. lrom Lhe Aquarlan Consplracy" Lo 1ellhard's flnal Cmega-polnL," from Lhe dawn of a new Age" Lo 1lmewave Zero"-Lhe mlllenarlan Lnd of PlsLory has been exuberanLly announced. Such LheorlsLs as 1erence Mckenna and !ose Arguelles have even been good enough Lo calculaLe Lhe acLual daLe of Lhls flnal omega polnL, and lL ls uecember 2012-1lmewave Zero." 60 nor, of course, ls Lhls Lhe flrsL Llme we have seen such Lnd of PlsLory" noLlons, and ln chapLer 2 we saw why such noLlons acLually make a cerLaln amounL of sense and have some degree of LruLh Lo Lhem. 1o summarlze LhaL dlscusslon: Lvery senlor dlmenslon acLs as a LransformaLlve omega polnL for lLs [unlor dlmenslon, exerLlng a palpable pull of Lhe deeper and wlder on Lhe shallower and narrower. A holon's reglme ls Lhe LransformaLlve omega-polnL for lLs owo growLh and developmenL, faclllLaLed perhaps by morphlc resonance from Lhe sum LoLal of slmllar forms acLlng as omega. ln self-ttoosceoJeoce, however, Lhe emergenL and senlor level exerLs omega pull on [unlor dlmenslons, someLhlng LhaL nelLher Lhey Lhemselves, nor Lhelr morphlcally resonaLlng parLners, could do alone. 61 And shorL of reachlng lLs lmmedlaLely senlor omega, LhaL lesser dlmenslon suffers Lhe sllngs and arrows of an ouLrageous forLune of parLlalness, dlvlslon, allenaLlon. Lach deeper and wlder conLexL condemns Lhe lesser Lo sufferlng (or raLher, Lhe narrower suffers from Lhe boundarles of lLs own laceraLlng llmlLaLlons). And evoluLlon, ln Lhe broadesL sense, ls a senslLlve fllghL from Lhe paln of parLlallLy. Lach deeper and wlder conLexL ln Lhe kosmos Lhus exerLs an omega pull on Lhe shallower and narrower conLexLs, and when LhaL parLlcular wlder depLh ls reached, LhaL parLlcular omega pull subsldes, wlLh Lhe new depLh flndlng LhaL lL now exlsLs ln a yeL-wlder and yeL-deeper conLexL of lLs own, whlch now exerLs an unrelenLlng omega force Lo once agaln Lranscend, Lo once agaln embrace more of Lhe kosmos wlLh care and consclousness. ln shorL, no holon resLs happy shorL of flndlng lLs own lmmedlaLely deeper conLexL, lLs own omega polnL, whlch means LhaL each holon rushes Lo Lhe Lnd of lLs own PlsLory. ln Lhe WesL, slnce Lhe Llme of Lhe LnllghLenmenL, Lhe greaL omega polnL or Lnd of PlsLory has generally been plcLured as some form of totlooollty (elLher formop, as ln Lhe classlcal LnllghLenmenL, or vlslon-loglc, as wlLh Pegel)-and modernlLy belleved Lhls Lo be Lhe case because LhaL was, lndeed, lLs presenL sLaLe of developmenL, Lo whlch all lesser occaslons had polnLed, and from whlch raLlonallLy had flnally and LrlumphanLly emerged. 8emember Lhe cruelLles!"-volLalre's baLLle cry of Lhe LorLures LhaL maglc and myLhlc had lnfllcLed on hlsLory, Lhe LorLures of lesser omega polnLs bruLally cuLLlng lnLo each oLher ln search of . . . reason. 1hls omega polnL of raLlonallLy can Lherefore be seen permeaLlng Lhe Lheorles of vlrLually all developmenLallsLs ln Lhe wake of modernlLy. We see lL ln lreud: maglcal and myLhlc prlmary-process cognlLlon glves way, afLer much relucLance and Lurmoll, Lo Lhe secondary (maLure) process of raLlonallLy. We see lL ln Marx: raLlonallLy, as a worldcenLrlc mode of cognlLlon, wlll, wlLh lLs economlc developmenLs, overcome egocenLrlc and eLhnocenLrlc class dlvlslons and usher ln a Lrue communlon of equally free sub[ecLs. We see lL ln lageL: preop Lo conop Lo formop, wlLh each prevlous sLage sufferlng Lhe llmlLaLlons of lLs own lncapaclLles. kohlberg and Cllllgan: egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc reason. Pegel: Self-poslLlng SplrlL reLurns Lo lLself ln Lhe form of global 8eason, Lhe culmlnaLlon of PlsLory lLself. And Pabermas: muLual undersLandlng ln unresLralned communlcaLlve acLlon unfolded by raLlonallLy ls Lhe omega polnL of lndlvldual and soclal evoluLlon lLself. 1he llsL ls vlrLually endless. And, as we dlscussed earller, Lhey are all, os fot os tbey qo, essenLlally correcL ln many lmporLanL ways, and Lhey each can Leach us much abouL expandlng Lhe clrcle and Lhe conLexL of care. (revlously, Lhe myLhlc sLrucLure had sald Lhe some tbloq abouL ltself ln relaLlon Lo archalc and maglc: lL had clalmed LhaL Lhe comlng of Lhe myLhlc Cod was an end Lo all Lrlbal hlsLory-and LhaL was also Lrue enough.) lrancls lukuyama recenLly caused an lnLernaLlonal sensaLlon wlLh Lhe publlcaLlon of 1be oJ of nlstoty, ln whlch he asks wheLher, aL Lhe end of Lhe LwenLleLh cenLury, lL makes sense for us Lo speak of a coherenL and dlrecLlonal PlsLory of humanklnd? 1he answer l arrlve aL ls yes, for Lwo separaLe reasons. Cne has Lo do wlLh economlcs, and Lhe oLher has Lo do wlLh whaL ls Lermed Lhe 'sLruggle for recognlLlon.'" 62 1he sLruggle for recognlLlon" ls slmply Lhe Lheme, developed from Pegel Lo Pabermas Lo 1aylor, LhaL motool tecoqoltloo-whaL we have also been calllng Lhe ftee excbooqe of motool self-esteem among all peoples (Lhe emergence of Lhe raLlonal-egolc self-esLeem needs)-ls an omega polnL LhaL pulls hlsLory and communlcaLlon forward Loward Lhe free emergence of LhaL muLual recognlLlon. 5bott of tbot emetqeoce, hlsLory ls a bruLallzaLlon of one self or group of selves Lrylng Lo Lrlumph over, domlnaLe, or sub[ugaLe oLhers. When, on Lhe oLher hand, human belngs unlversally recognlze each oLher as belngs wlLh a cerLaln worLh or dlgnlLy," Lhen blstoty ln LhaL sense comes to oo eoJ because Lhe longlng LhaL had drlven Lhe hlsLorlcal process-Lhe sLruggle for recognlLlon-has been saLlsfled ln a socleLy characLerlzed by unlversal and reclprocal recognlLlon. no oLher arrangemenL of human soclal lnsLlLuLlons ls beLLer able Lo saLlsfy Lhls longlng, and hence no furLher progresslve hlsLorlcal change ls posslble." 63 1he Lnd of PlsLory. Lcholng Pegel, lukuyama noLes LhaL Lhls does noL mean LhaL Lhe naLural cycle of blrLh, llfe, and deaLh would end, or LhaL lmporLanL evenLs would no longer happen, or LhaL newspapers reporLlng Lhem would cease Lo be publlshed. lL means, raLher, LhaL Lhere would be no furLher progress ln Lhe developmenL of underlylng prlnclples and lnsLlLuLlons, because all of Lhe really blg quesLlons had been seLLled." 64 1he really blg quesLlons" would be seLLled ln Lhls sense: once we have arrlved aL Lhe worldcenLrlc raLlonal sLrucLures LhaL boLh allow and demand (1) free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, (2) morally free sub[ecLs, and (3) pollLlcally free sub[ecLs as world clLlzens (worldcenLrlc agenLs ln worldcenLrlc communlons)-once we have arrlved aL LhaL, whaL more, speclflcally, coolJ Lhere be Lo do ln tbot domaln? ln LhaL domaln, Lhe really blg quesLlons would have been seLLled." And l belleve LhaL ls lndeed Lrue. We would, of course, conLlnue Lo flne-Lune Lhe ways Lo lmplemenL Lhese freedoms, and help ensure Lhelr global equlLy. And we mlghL, lndeed, flnd oew freedoms, and new ways Lo exLend Lhe old freedoms. 8uL Lhese Lhree facLors would surely form an lmporLanL plaLform for any new developmenLs. And Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL PlsLory up Lo LhaL polnL has been Lhe clash of facLlons LhaL refused Lhose Lhree facLors, Lhen Lhls would lndeed mark Lhe Lnd of LhaL PlsLory. All of whlch, as l sald, can be Lrue (and ls Lrue, l Lhlnk) and sLlll leave open-and sLlll demand-LhaL furLher blstotlcol changes are lndeed posslble, however much Lhey wlll bulld upon Lhe plaLform of muLual egolc self-esLeem and self-recognlLlon-and for Lhe slmple reason LhaL Lhere are lndeed sLrucLures of consclousness beyooJ tbe eqolc, sLrucLures LhaL, ln Lhelr own Lurn, exerL new and subLler omega pulls on Lhe already acLuallzed self-esLeem needs. And Lhese new omega pulls wlll mosL assuredly Jestoblllze Lhe apparenLly secure" sLrucLure of unlversal egolc recognlLlon (whlch wlll be ptesetveJ, for sure . . . buL also palnfully oeqoteJ, ln Lhe fuLure paradlgm wars seL Lo rock Lhe globe). ln oLher words, Lhere are lndeed some more really blg quesLlons" LhaL would sLlll need Lo be seLLled: PlsLory would noL have ended, only Lgolc PlsLory. Whlch brlngs us Lo Lhe Loplc of Lhe yeL deeper or hlgher sLrucLures (beyond Lhe ego), and wheLher Lhe whole developmenLal process wlll ever acLually culmlnaLe ln a genulne and uLLer Lnd of all posslble PlsLory. lor LhaL ls whaL ls lmplled ln Lhe mlllenarlan Lhemes of 1lmewave Zero: Lhe absoluLe Cmega of all omegas, Lhe Lnd of all ends, Lhe evaporaLlon of dlsunlLy, Lhe dlsappearance of appearance lnLo Lhe uLLer Abyss, Lhe resLauranL aL Lhe end of Lhe unlverse, where Lhe Lruly LasL Supper wlll flnally be served. . . . 8ecall LhaL, ln flgure 3-1, l lncluded Lhe developmenLs ln Lhe four quadranLs up Lo vlslon- loglc/cenLaurlc/planeLary, whlch ls, as lL were, Lhe leadlng edge of Lhe World Soul's evoluLlon aL Lhls polnL ln Llme (or so l would malnLaln). And Lhus, aL Lhls polnL, any hlgher developmenLs, ln all four quadranLs, have Lo occur Lhrough an lndlvldual's own efforLs (uL), evldenced ln lndlvldual bodlly LransformaLlons (u8), pracLlced ln a mlcro-communlLy or sangha of Lhe slmllarly depLhed (LL), wlLh lLs own mlcrosoclal sLrucLure (L8). As Lhese hlgher poLenLlals begln Lo emerge collecLlvely-ln Lhe decades, cenLurles, mlllennla ahead 63 -we can only guess aL whaL Lhe acLual surface sLrucLures wlll be llke, for none of LhaL ls predeLermlned. 1hese hlgher sLrucLures (psychlc, subLle, causal, nondual) are slmply poLenLlal worldspaces, pre-onLologlcal worldspaces, LhaL are glven only as poLenLlals, noL as faLe. 8uL we do know LhaL Lhey are sttoctotol poteotlols of Lhe human bodymlnd, because slnce lLs emergence ln lLs presenL form (around flfLy Lhousand years ago), LhaL bodymlnd has lndeed supporLed reallzaLlons across Lhe specLrum (has supporLed Lhe reallzaLlons of a 8uddha, a Caudapada, a uame !ullan, a Lady 1sogyal). ln oLher words, LhaL bodymlnd has olteoJy supporLed psychlc, subLle, causal, and nondual reallzaLlons, and Lhus, by a reconsLrucLlve sclence, we know Lhose poLenLlals are already avallable. 1hls ls noL an o ptlotl Pegellan deducLlon, lL ls an o postetlotl concluslon. 1he sLrucLural poLenLlals are Lherefore avallable, buL how Lhey unfold wlll depend upon Lhe muLual lnLeracLlon and lnLerplay beLween oll foot pooJtoots-lnLenLlonal, behavloral, culLural, and soclal-as all four conLlnue Lo evolve ln hlsLory, and oooe of LhaL ls predeLermlned ln any sLrong sense. !usL as, for example, when Lhe human bodymlnd wlLh lLs complex Lrlune braln emerged ln lLs presenL form (agaln, around flfLy Lhousand years ago), LhaL braln already possessed Lhe poLenLlal (or Lhe hard-wlrlng) for symbollc loglc, buL LhaL poLenLlal would have Lo awalL culLural, soclal, and lnLenLlonal developmenLs before lL could dlsplay lLs form and funcLlon, [usL so wlLh Lhe hlgher poLenLlals: how Lhey wlll unfold remalns Lo be seen. 8uL Lhe facL LhaL Lhey are Lhere ls demonsLraLed by Lhe facL LhaL Lhey have already unfolded ln some lndlvlduals (8uddha Lo krlshna), and Lhey are Lhus already avallable Lo any lndlvldual, aL any Llme, who chooses Lo conLlnue hls or her own evoluLlon wlLhln and beyond. And so Lhe quesLlon remalns: glven all of LhaL, ls Lhere sLlll any sense ln whlch a collecLlve humanlLy would evenLually evolve lnLo an AbsoluLe Cmega olnL, a pure ChrlsL Consclousness (or some such) for all belngs? Are we headlng for Lhe ulLlmaLe Lnd of PlsLory, Lhe Cmega of all omegas? uoes lL even exlsL? And Lhe answer ls LhaL lL does exlsL, and we are noL headlng Loward lL. Cr away from lL. Cr around lL. uncreaLe SplrlL, Lhe causal unmanlfesL, ls Lhe naLure and condlLlon, Lhe source and supporL, of Lhls and every momenL of evoluLlon. lL does noL enLer Lhe sLream of Llme aL a beglnnlng or exlL aL Lhe end. lL upholds all Llmes and supporLs all places, wlLh no parLlallLy aL all, and Lhus exerLs nelLher push nor pull on hlsLory. As Lhe uLLerly lormless, lL does noL eotet Lhe sLream of form aL ooy polnL. And yeL, as 8amana sald, Lhere ls a sense ln whlch lL ls lndeed Lhe sommom booom, Lhe ulLlmaLe Cmega olnL, ln Lhe sense LhaL no flnlLe Lhlng wlll resL shorL of release lnLo Lhls lnflnlLy. 1he lormless, ln oLher words, ls lndeed an ulLlmaLe Cmega, an ulLlmaLe Lnd, buL an Lnd LhaL ls never reached lo Lhe world of form. lorms conLlnue endlessly, ceaselessly, holarchlcally forever (unless Lhe unlverse collapses ln on lLself, reLreaLlng back along Lhe paLh lL came-Lo sLarL anew, one presumes). lorms conLlnue endlessly, holarchlcally-holons all Lhe way up, all Lhe way down-Lhe unlverse as a self- reflexlvely lnflnlLe hall of mlrrors. 1hls ls why Lhe subLle level, whlch does lndeed acL as a manlfesL omega pull Lo lLs lesser and [unlor dlmenslons, ls sald noneLheless Lo conLaln llLerally an lnflnlLe number of subLle levels wlLhln subLle levels wlLhln subLle levels-ln bllllons and bllllons of oLher unlverses! 1hus, ln Lhe world of lorm, Lhe ulLlmaLe Cmega appears as an ever-recedlng horlzon of fulflllmenL (Lhe ever- recedlng horlzon of Lhe LoLallLy of manlfesLaLlon), 66 forever pulllng us forward, forever reLreaLlng lLself, Lhus always conferrlng wholeness and parLlalness ln Lhe same breaLh: Lhe wholeness of Lhls momenL ls parL of Lhe whole of Lhe nexL momenL: Lhe world ls always compleLe and lncompleLe ln any glven momenL, and Lhus condemned Lo a fulflllmenL LhaL ls never fulfllled: Lhe forms rush and run forward Lo a reward LhaL reLreaLs wlLh Lhe run lLself. 8uL aL any sufflclenLly developed polnL ln an lndlvldual's developmenL, a radlcal leap (LckharL's breakLhrough") lnLo Lhe lormless can occur. 1he hlgher Lhe developmenL, Lhe easler and more llkely Lhe [ump wlll occur. ?eL Lhe lormless lLself ls noL Lhe resulL of LhaL [ump, nor does lL Lhen come Lo be. lL ls Lhere, from Lhe sLarL, as one's own Crlglnal lace, Lhe lace one had before Lhe 8lg 8ang, Lhe lace LhaL looks ouL from each and every senLlenL belng ln each and every unlverse, calllng ouL Lo each and all for muLual Self-, and noL [usL self-, recognlLlon. Ablde as LmpLlness, embrace all lorm: Lhe llberaLlon ls ln Lhe LmpLlness, never flnally ln Lhe lorm (Lhough never aparL from lL). And Lhus even lf l reallze Lhe sommom booom, even lf l cuL abrupLly off Lhe paLh of endless form and flnd myself ln Lhe lormless, sLlll, sLlll, and sLlll Lhe world of form goes on-lnLo Lhe psychlc, lnLo Lhe subLle, lnLo Lhe bllllons and bllllons of unlverses of form avallable and avallable and avallable, endlessly, ceaselessly, dramaLlcally. LvoluLlon seeks only Lhls lormless sommom booom-lL wanLs ooly Lhls ulLlmaLe Cmega-lL rushes forward always and solely ln search of tbls-and lL wlll oevet flnd lL, because evoluLlon unfolds ln Lhe world of form. 1he kosmos ls drlven forward endlessly, searchlng ln Lhe world of Llme for LhaL whlch ls alLogeLher Llmeless. And slnce lL wlll oevet flnd lL, lL wlll oevet ceose Lhe search. Samsara clrcles endlessly, and LhaL ls always Lhe bruLal nlghLmare hldden ln lLs hearL. And Lhe LwenLy LeneLs are Lhe form and funcLlon, Lhe sLrucLure and Lhe paLLern, of Lhls endless dream. 8CCk 1WC Amooq tbe coltotol loveotloos of mookloJ tbete ls o tteosoty of Jevlces, tecbolpoes, lJeos, ptoceJotes, ooJ so oo, tbot coooot exoctly be teoctlvoteJ, bot ot leost coostltote, ot belp coostltote, o cettolo polot of vlew wblcb coo be vety osefol os o tool fot ooolyzloq wbots qoloq oo oow-ooJ to cbooqe lt. -MlCPLL lCuCAuL1 5ome bove JecloteJ tbot lt lles wltblo oot cbolce to qoze opoo o wotlJ of eveo qteotet wooJet ooJ beooty. lt ls solJ by tbese tbot tbe expetlmeots of tbe mystlcs ote teloteJ to tbe ttoosmototloo of tbe eotlte uolvetse. 1bls metboJ, ot ott, ot scleoce, ot wbotevet we cboose to coll lt (sopposloq lt to exlst, ot to bove exlsteJ), ls slmply coocetoeJ to testote tbe Jellqbts of lotoJlse, to eooble meo ooJ womeo, lf tbey wlll, to loboblt o wotlJ of joy ooJ spleoJoot. lt ls petbops posslble tbot tbete ls socb oo expetlmeot, ooJ tbot tbete ote some wbo bove moJe lt. -PAMCLL 9 1be woy up ls tbe woy uowo 1be sofest qeoetol cbotoctetlzotloo of tbe wbole westeto pbllosopblc ttoJltloo ls tbot lt cooslsts of o setles of footootes to lloto. -ALl8Lu nC81P WPl1LPLAu 8ot tbls mocb ot ooy tote l coo offltm oboot ooy pteseot ot fotote wtltets wbo pteteoJ to koowleJqe of tbe mottets wltb wblcb l cooceto myself jmystlcol koowleJqe of tbe Ooe], lo my joJqemeot lt ls lmposslble tbot tbey sboolJ bove ooy ooJetstooJloq of tbe sobject. lt ls oot sometbloq tbot coo be pot loto wotJs llke otbet btoocbes of leotoloq, ooly oftet looq pottoetsblp lo o commoo llfe jcootemplotlve commoolty] JevoteJ to tbls vety tbloq Joes ttotb flosb opoo tbe sool, llke o flome kloJleJ by o leoploq spotk. No tteotlse by me coocetoloq lt exlsts ot evet wlll exlst. -LA1C, SevenLh LplsLle l1 PAS ALWA?S sLruck me as odd LhaL so much of our WesLern LradlLlon ls supposed Lo be a serles of fooLnoLes Lo laLo, and yeL Lhe cruclal book Lo whlch we are all fooLnoLes . . . was never wrlLLen. no LreaLlse by me concernlng lL exlsLs or ever wlll exlsL." Scholars generally agree LhaL laLo was here referrlng Lo Lhe mysLlcal knowledge of Lhe Cne, Lhe Cood beyond 8elng" (as laLo also calls lL). 1here, apparenLly, was Lhe hearL of Lhe laLonlc message, and yeL tbot he never commlLLed Lo prlnL (whereas he had no Lrouble wrlLlng volumes on eLhlcs, on Lhe archeLypal lorms, eplsLemology, pollLlcs, love, and so forLh). 8uL on LhaL cenLral polnL, laLo was sllenL, as sllenL he could only be. 1haL knowledge" or dlvlne lgnorance" ls noL verbal buL Lransverbal, lL ls noL of Lhe mlnd buL of no-mlnd", lL ls noL parL of a dlscurslve phllosophy" or merely Lalklng rellglon" buL a conLemplaLlve flash of LruLh ln Lhe soul." And whlle Lhls LruLh or sudden lllumlnaLlon can be dlrecLly and ln[uncLlvely sbowo (by long conLemplaLlve pracLlce ln communlLy, as laLo puL lL), lL cannoL be fully solJ or verbally passed on (wlLhouL Lhe correspondlng developmenLal slgnlfled ln any lndlvldual). 1he Lrue fooLnoLes on tbot knowledge would be merely a serles of empLy clrcles and flngers polnLlng Lo Lhe moon. l would llke Lo pursue Lhls legacy of laLo for several reasons. Cne ls LhaL, lf WesLern clvlllzaLlon ls a serles of fooLnoLes Lo laLo, Lhe fooLnoLes are fracLured. AnoLher ls LhaL we see ln laLo one of Lhe flrsL clear descrlpLlons of Lwo movemenLs relaLed Lo Lhe unspoken Cne, or Lwo movemenLs" relaLed Lo SplrlL lLself (Lo Lhe exLenL lL can be verballzed aL all). 1he flrsL movemenL ls a Jesceot of Lhe Cne lnLo Lhe world of Lhe Many, a movemenL LhaL acLually creaLes Lhe world of Lhe Many, blesses Lhe Many and confers Coodness on oll of lL: SplrlL lmmooeot ln Lhe world. 1he oLher ls Lhe movemenL of reLurn or osceot from Lhe Many Lo Lhe Cne, a process of rememberlng or recollecLlng Lhe Cood: SplrlL ttoosceoJeot Lo Lhe world. lor, as we wlll see, whlle laLo emphaslzed botb movemenLs, WesLern clvlllzaLlon has been a baLLle royale betweeo Lhese Lwo movemenLs, beLween Lhose who wanLed only Lo llve ln Lhls world" of Manyness and Lhose who wanLed Lo llve only ln Lhe oLher world" of LranscendenL Cneness-botb of Lhem equally and caLasLrophlcally forgeLLlng Lhe unlfylng PearL, Lhe unspoken Word, LhaL lnLegraLes boLh AscenL and uescenL and flnds SplrlL boLh Lranscendlng Lhe Many and embraclng Lhe Many. ln laLo, as we wlll see ln a momenL, Lhe Lwo movemenLs are glven equal emphasls and equal lmporLance, because boLh were grounded ln Lhe unspoken Cne of sudden lllumlnaLlon. 8uL when LhaL unlfylng Cne ls forgoLLen, Lhen Lhe Lwo movemenLs fall aparL lnLo warrlng opposlLes, lnLo asceLlc and represslve Ascenders, on Lhe one hand, who seem wllllng Lo desLroy Lhls world" (of naLure, body, senses) ln favor of anyLhlng Lhey lmaglne as an oLher world", and, on Lhe oLher hand, Lhe shadow-hugglng uescenders, who fuss abouL ln Lhe world of Llme looklng for Lhe 1lmeless, and who, ln Lrylng Lo Lurn Lhe flnlLe realm lnLo an lnflnlLe value, end up dlsLorLlng Lhls world" as horrlbly as do Lhe Ascenders, preclsely because Lhey wanL from Lhls world" someLhlng LhaL lL could never dellver: salvaLlon. 1hese Lwo sLraLegles-denylng creaLlon, seelng only creaLlon, Lhe Ascenders and Lhe uescenders-have been Lhe Lwo maln forms of fracLured fooLnoLes Lo laLo LhaL have plagued WesLern clvlllzaLlon for Lwo Lhousand years, and lL ls wlLh Lhese fracLured fooLnoLes LhaL Lhe WesL (and noL lL alone) has deeply and cruelly carved lLs lnlLlals on Lhe lnnocenL face of Peaven and of LarLh. And flnally, l wanL Lo examlne laLo's legacy because lL ls ln Lhese Lwo movemenLs-Lhe Cne descendlng lnLo Lhe Many, Lhe Many ascendlng back Lo Lhe Cne-LhaL we wlll flnd some of Lhe lasL clues we need Lo undersLand Lhe mascullne and femlnlne faces of Cod, lf such lndeed exlsL. 1PL 1WC LLCAClLS Cl LA1C ArLhur Love[oy, ln hls hlghly acclalmed book 1be Cteot cbolo of 8eloq, has brllllanLly Lraced ouL Lhese Lwo opposlLe and confllcLlng legacles of laLo-Lhe uescendlng and Lhe Ascendlng-whlch we may also call Lhe manyness sLraLegy" and Lhe oneness sLraLegy." 1he former emphaslzes Lhe creaLed world of manyness, Lhe laLLer Lhe uncreaLed source or orlgln-and boLh, Laken ln and by Lhemselves, are duallsLlc Lhrough and Lhrough, no maLLer how much Lhey mlghL call Lhemselves monlsLlc, nondual, all-encompasslng, hollsLlc, and whaLnoL. urawlng on Love[oy, 1 buL noL conflned Lo hls lnLerpreLaLlons, l would llke Lo Lrace ouL Lhe hlsLory of Lhls duallsm, Lhe duallsm of whlch all oLher WesLern duallsms are merely an lncldenLal subseL, and Lhe duallsm LhaL, ln [usL recenL Llmes, ls showlng slgns of belng overcome. MosL people Lend Lo remember laLo Lhe Ascender," sLrlvlng for Lhe oLher world" of eLernal oneness, and lgnorlng" Lhe Lemporal world of Lhe creaLed many, Lhe mere shadows ln Lhe Cave. And, lndeed, laLo clearly maps ouL Lhe Ascendlng paLh from Lhe Many Lo Lhe Cne. ln LreaLlses such as 1be kepobllc and 1be 5ymposlom, laLo Lraces Lhe [ourney of Lhe soul from lLs lnfaLuaLlon wlLh Lhe maLerlal realm of Lhe lmmedlaLe senses, Lhrough Lhe menLal realm of hlgher lorms, Lo a splrlLual lmmerslon ln Lhe eLernal and unspoken Cne. ln Lhls AscenL, lL cerLalnly appears LhaL laLo ls descrlblng-and lL ls qulLe cerLaln LhaL hls neoplaLonlc successors were descrlblng-Lhe general movemenL LhaL we have called Lhe evoluLlon or developmenL from maLLer Lo body Lo mlnd Lo soul Lo splrlL, culmlnaLlng ln Lhe Cood beyond 8elng" dlsclosed ln sudden lllumlnaLlon," whlch ls boLh Lhe sommlt and Lhe qool of Lhe soul's [ourney ln Llme. As Love[oy puLs lL, 1he Cood ls Lhe unlversal ob[ecL of deslre, LhaL whlch draws all souls Loward lLself [ulLlmaLe Cmega], and Lhe chlef good for man even ln Lhls llfe ls noLhlng buL Lhe conLemplaLlon of Lhls absoluLe or essenLlal Cood." 2 1hls Cood Lranscends all posslble manlfesLaLlon-laLo even says lL acLually Lranscends exlsLence. . . . 1he whole soul musL be wheeled round from LhaL whlch ls sub[ecL Lo becomlng [Lhe enLlre world of Llme and manlfesLaLlon] unLll lL ls able Lo endure Lhe conLemplaLlon of tbot wblcb ls . . ." (1be kepobllc). laLo refers Lo Lhls conLemplaLlon of LhaL whlch ls" as belng Lhe SpecLaLor of all Llme and exlsLence"-a pure SpecLaLor (WlLness) whlch ls lLself noL Lhls, noL LhaL." WhaLever meLaphorlc or myLhlc or poslLlve aLLrlbuLes laLo occaslonally asslgned Lo Lhe AbsoluLe, Lhere can be llLLle doubL LhaL whaL he flnally had ln mlnd was oetl, oetl," or pure LranscendenLal (formless) awareness, Lhe summlL and source of all belng, and abouL whlch, sLrlcLly speaklng, noL even LhaL could be sald, as Love[oy makes very clear: 1he lnLerpreLers of laLo ln boLh anclenL and modern Llmes have endlessly dlspuLed over Lhe quesLlon wheLher Lhe absoluLe Cood was for hlm ldenLlcal wlLh Lhe concepLlon of Cod. lf [Cod] be Laken for Lhe eos petfectlsslmom, Lhe summlL of Lhe hlerarchy of belng, Lhe ulLlmaLe and only compleLely saLlsfylng ob[ecL of conLemplaLlon, Lhere can be llLLle doubL LhaL Lhe ldea of Lhe Cood wos Lhe Cod of laLo, and Lhere can be none LhaL lL became Lhe Cod of ArlsLoLle, and of mosL of Lhe phllosophlc Lheologles of Lhe Mlddle Ages, and of nearly all Lhe modern laLonlzlng poeLs and phllosophers. 1he aLLrlbuLes of Cod were, ln sLrlcLness, expresslble only ln oeqotloos of tbe otttlbotes of tbls wotlJ. ?ou could Lake, one afLer anoLher, any quallLy or relaLlon or klnd of ob[ecL presenLed ln naLural experlence, and say, wlLh Lhe Sage ln Lhe upanlshad: 1he Lrue reallLy ls oot tbls, lL ls oot tbot. . . ." 3 Love[oy, Lo hls greaL credlL, sLaLes clearly LhaL laLo's unspoken Cne ls noL prlmarlly a phllosophlcal Lheory or argumenL, lL ls noL poeLry or myLh, and lL ls noL, ln Lhe lasL analysls, a raLlonal argumenL for lorms-lL ls a Jltect mystlcol expetleoce (Love[oy calls lL a naLural rellglous experlence"), culLlvaLed ln conLemplaLlon among Lhe llke- splrlLed and ttoosmltteJ Jltectly from Leacher Lo sLudenL llke a flame klndled by a leaplng spark," as laLo sald. 1aken ln and by lLself, Lhls Ascendlng slde of laLo deals, l have suggesLed, wlLh a mysLlcal or LranscendenL awareness beyond 8elng," beyond manlfesLaLlon, beyond all quallLles (causal/formless), and nexL Lo whlch Lhe enLlre manlfesL world appears a shadow, a copy, an llluslon. And, lndeed, laLo saw Lhe enLlre manlfesL world as a pale lmage of a 8eallLy and LlghL beyond Lhe Cave of Shadows, Lhe Cave ln whlch Lhe LroglodyLes are chalned, Lhe Cave of fleeLlng sensory lmpresslons and flucLuaLlng menLal oplnlons. All 1ruLh, all Coodness, all 8eauLy was Lo be found, flnally and fully, only ln Lhe conLemplaLlve absorpLlon ln Lhe eLernal and unspoken Cne. no oLher release ls posslble, no oLher release can be deslred, and Lhose wlLhouL Lhls sudden lllumlnaLlon, laLo Lells us, are forever losL ln Lhe sufferlng and Lurmoll of Lhe fleeLlng and flnlLe and Lemporal world. no maLLer how much beauLy" or [oy" or wondermenL" we mlghL flnd ln Lhe manlfesL realm, lL remalns only a shadow (Lmerson's symbol") of Lhe 8eauLy beyond, whlch ls revealed ln dlrecL conLemplaLlve experlence and conflrmed by all who have Lhe eyes Lo see. 1hls Ascendlng aspecL of laLo, ln oLher words, can be falrly well lndlcaLed ln Lhe sLandard reallzaLlon of causal- level awareness wherever lL ls found: 1he world ls lllusory (shadowy), 8rahman alone ls real." uL oLherwlse: flee Lhe Many, flnd Lhe Cne. And Lhus was seL Lhe sLandard Ascendlng Coal of WesLern clvlllzaLlon. lL would become Lhe Cod of ArlsLoLle and of AugusLlne, and Lherefore of vlrLually all of ChrlsLlanlLy, boLh ln popular and esoLerlc forms (LasLern, 8oman, and roLesLanL). lL would become Lhe Coal of Lhe CnosLlcs and ManlchaelsLs, so much so LhaL any Lrace of Lhe flnlLe and shadowy world was equaLed flaL-ouL wlLh evll. And when rellglon lLself became passe, Lhe same Coal slmply [umped Lo Lhe Age of LnllghLenmenL, and conLlnued ln unabaLed and undenLed fashlon lLs ever-ascendlng yearnlngs for Lhe llghL. And for Lhose who found 8eason obnoxlous, lL would neverLheless equally and [usL as lnLensely flre every poeLlc and arLlsLlc lmaglnaLlon LhaL found llfe as glven unbearable and eLernlLy a release. We wlll reLurn Lo Lhls hlsLory ln a momenL, buL such have been Lhe Ascenders, ln [usL a few of Lhelr many gulses. 8uL Lhe absoluLely cruclal polnL ls LhaL LhaL was only bolf of whaL laLo seL ln moLlon. now lf laLo had sLopped here," says Love[oy, Lhe subsequenL hlsLory of WesLern LhoughL would, lL can hardly be doubLed, have been profoundly dlfferenL from whaL lL has been." lndeed, mosL of laLo's crlLlcs-or raLher, Lhose who see hlm merely as an Ascender, and Lhose who decry hls oLherworldllness"-seem Lo Lhlnk LhaL he acLually dld sLop here. 8uL," Love[oy polnLs ouL, Lhe mosL noLable-and Lhe less noLed-facL abouL hls hlsLorlc lnfluence ls LhaL he dld oot merely glve Lo Luropean oLherworldllness lLs characLerlsLlc form and phraseology and dlalecLlc, buL LhaL he also gave Lhe characLerlsLlc form and phraseology and dlalecLlc Lo preclsely Lhe conLrary Lendency-Lo a pecullarly exobetoot kloJ of tbls-wotlJlloess." 4 1hls exuberanL Lhls-worldllness" ls whaL so many of laLo's ecologlcal crlLlcs have mlssed. 1hey seL up a sLraw laLo and Lhen LrlumphanLly, bolsLerously knock lL down, and all congraLulaLe Lhemselves on Lhelr Lhls-worldly vlcLory. 8uL laLo ls noL so easlly manhandled. lor hls own phllosophy no sooner reaches lLs cllmax ln whaL we may call Lhe oLherworldly dlrecLlon [Ascendlng] Lhan lL reverses course. Pavlng arrlved aL Lhe concepLlon [Lhe naLural rellglous experlence"] of a pure perfecLlon allen Lo all Lhe caLegorles of ordlnary LhoughL and ln need of noLhlng exLernal Lo lLself [causal awareness], he forLhwlLh flnds ln [usL Lhls LranscendenL and absoluLe 8elng Lhe necesslLaLlng ground of tbls wotlJ, and he does noL sLop shorL of Lhe asserLlon of Lhe oecesslty and wottb of Lhe exlsLence of oll coocelvoble kloJs of flnlLe, Lemporal, lmperfecL, and corporeal belngs.3 1he manlfesL realm, far from belng a world of shadows ln Lhe Cave, ls now seen as Lhe realm and very embodlmenL of Lhe 8adlance of SplrlL lLself, suffused wlLh Coodness and wlLh Love. 1he world of sense could no longer be adequaLely descrlbed as an ldle fllckerlng of lnsubsLanLlal shadow-shapes, aL Lwo removes from boLh Lhe Cood and Lhe 8eal. noL only dld Lhe Sun lLself [Lhe causal Cne] produce cave, and flre, and movlng shapes, and Lhe shadows, and Lhelr beholders, buL ln dolng so lL manlfesLed a properLy of lLs own naLure noL less essenLlal-and, as mlghL well appear, eveo mote excelleot-Lhan LhaL pure radlance upon whlch no earLhly eye could sLeadfasLly gaze. 1he shadows were as needful Lo Lhe Sun as Lhe Sun Lo Lhe shadows, tbelt exlsteoce wos tbe vety coosommotloo of lts petfectloo." 6 And Lhus Lhelr exlsLence was cause for an exuberanL Lhls-worldly celebraLlon and embrace! And so, afLer esLabllshlng an ascendlng reLurn Lo Lhe Cne," laLo Lhen seLs forLh a genulnely cteotloo-ceoteteJ splrlLuallLy, an effulgence and embrace of Lhe radlanL splendor of Lhe Many. 1he purely Ascended Cne, far from belng a compleLe erfecLlon ln lLself, ls vlewed as decldedly lofetlot Lo a Cne LhaL also flows ouL of lLself and lnLo all manlfesLaLlon, lnLo all creaLlon. lndeed, for laLo, an AbsoluLe LhaL cannoL creaLe ls no AbsoluLe aL all, and Lhus Lrue erfecLlon means a erfecLlon whose superabundance flows ouL and lnLo all belngs wlLhouL excepLlon. ln Lhe 1lmoeos-Lhe book LhaL would have such a slngular lmpacL on all subsequenL WesLern cosmologles-laLo Lraces ouL Lhe creaLlve superabundance and overflowlng of Lhe Cne Lhrough a creaLor Cod and world of archeLypal lorms lnLo humans (mlnd) and Lhen oLher llvlng creaLures (body) and Lhe world of physlcal exlsLence (maLLer). 1hus, as Lhe neoplaLonlsLs would spell lL ouL: from splrlL Lo soul Lo mlnd Lo body Lo maLLer-each level ls sald Lo be an ouLflowlng of lLs senlor dlmenslon, so LhaL Lhe Cne Source and Cround of all ls reflecLed ln each, Lo lLs own degree. 1he enLlre unlverse laLo Lherefore llkens Lo a glanL superorganlsm," wlLh all parLs lnLerwoven wlLh one anoLher and wlLh Lhelr eLernal Cround (laLo belng an arLlculaLe spokesman for Cala). 1he enLlre manlfesL world-tbls wotlJ-laLo calls a vlslble, senslble Cod." 1hus, laLo's Self-Sufflclng erfecLlon ls also, and aL Lhe same Llme, a Self-LmpLylng lecundlLy. lL ls noL only Lhe sommlt and qool of ascenL, lL ls Lhe sootce and otlqlo and fundamenLal reallLy of all descenL, of all manlfesLaLlon, of all creaLlon. As Love[oy puLs lL, A Llmeless and lncorporeal Cne became Lhe ground as well as Lhe dynamlc source of Lhe exlsLence of a Lemporal and maLerlal and exLremely mulLlple and varlegaLed unlverse." 7 And, laLo leaves no doubL whaLsoever, Lhls SplrlL-ln-CreaLlon (or Cne-ln-Many) ls much more compleLe and full and perfecL, as lL were, Lhan unmanlfesL SplrlL alone. Pe lmplles, and on occaslon acLually sLaLes, LhaL Lhe merely unmanlfesL SplrlL (causal) ls ln a Lype of Lenslon or envy" wlLh manlfesLaLlon, and LhaL Lhls Lenslon ls overcome only as lL ls seen LhaL all of manlfesLaLlon, of every posslble Lype and degree ln every posslble world-all of lL ls Lhe 8adlance of SplrlL. So Lhere ls laLo's flnal sLance, and he means lL ln a very sLrong way: SplrlL ls mote perfecL lo Lhe world Lhan oot of lL. 1hus Lhe compleLlon, Lhe all-necessary Lhlrd llne of nondual reallzaLlon: 8rahman ls Lhe world" (or agaln, nlrvana and samsara are noL Lwo"). And so lL was LhaL laLo aL Lhls polnL unlLed or lnLegraLed Lhe paLh of AscenL wlLh Lhe paLh of uescenL, glvlng an equal emphasls Lo Lhe Cne and Lo Lhe Many, Lo nlrvana and Lo samsara. Cr, as Love[oy puLs lL, tbe two otlqloolly Jlstloct sttolos lo llotos tbooqbt ote bete foseJ." 8 We can Lherefore summarlze laLo's overall poslLlon ln words LhaL would apply Lo any nondual sLance wherever lL appears (as we have already seen lL apply Lo LckharL and 8amana): flee Lhe Many, flnd Lhe Cne, havlng found Lhe Cne, embrace Lhe Many os Lhe Cne. Cr, ln shorL: 8eLurn Lo Cne, embrace Many. 1he exuberanL and lovlng and uncondlLlonal embrace of Lhe Many ls Lhe ftoltloo and coosommotloo of Lhe erfecLlon of Lhe Cne, and wlLhouL whlch Lhe Cne remalns duallsLlc, fracLured, envlous." 9 1hls lnLegraLlon may be LhoughL of (very crudely and, as always, somewhaL mlsleadlngly) as a CreaL Clrcle. 1he descendlng or manlfesLlng or creaLlve paLh moves from Lhe Lop of Lhe clrcle Lo Lhe boLLom, and Lhe ascendlng or reLurnlng paLh from Lhe boLLom Lo Lhe Lop-boLh arcs Lraverslng Lhe some Jlmeosloos-whlch ls why, as we wlll see, 1he way up ls Lhe way down." 1hus, uescenL ls noL bad, unless Laken ln and by lLself, on Lhe conLrary, lL ls Lhe CreaLlve Source and MaLrlx of all LhaL ls and Lhe frulLlon of erfecLlon lLself. Llkewlse, AscenL ls noL bad, unless Laken ln and by lLself, on Lhe conLrary, lL ls Lhe reallzaLlon of Lhe SummlL and Coal of all LhaL ls. 1he polnL, we mlghL say, ls LhaL Lhe clrcle of Ascendlng and uescendlng energles musL always be unbroken: Lhls world" and Lhe oLher world" unlLed ln one ongolng, everlasLlng, exuberanL embrace. WlSuCM Anu CCMASSlCn 1he laLonlc and neoplaLonlc LradlLlons (and slmllar nondual LradlLlons ln Lhe LasL) Lherefore malnLalned LhaL Lhe Cood" or erfecL Cne ls expressed ln and as Lhe Coodness" of all creaLlon. 1hose Lwo Lerms-Lhe Cood" and Coodness"-are exLremely lmporLanL, because we wlll see Lhese acLual Lerms repeaLed agaln and agaln ln subsequenL hlsLory: 1he paLh of AscenL ls Lhe paLh of Lhe CooJ, Lhe paLh of uescenL ls Lhe paLh of CooJoess. lndeed, wherever Lhe nondual LradlLlons would appear-LradlLlons unlLlng and lnLegraLlng Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng paLhs, ln Lhe LasL and ln Lhe WesL-we flnd a slmllar seL of Lhemes expressed so consLanLly as Lo border on maLhemaLlcal preclslon. lrom 1anLra Lo Zen, from Lhe neoplaLonlsLs Lo Suflsm, from Shalvlsm Lo kegon, sLaLed ln a Lhousands dlfferenL ways and ln a hundred dlfferenL conLexLs, noneLheless Lhe same essenLlal word would rlng ouL from Lhe nondual PearL: Lhe Many reLurnlng Lo and embraclng Lhe Cne ls Cood, and ls known as wlsJom, Lhe Cne reLurnlng Lo and embraclng Lhe Many ls Coodness, and ls known as compossloo. wlsJom knows LhaL behlnd Lhe Many ls Lhe Cne. Wlsdom sees Lhrough Lhe confuslon of shlfLlng shapes and passlng forms Lo Lhe groundless Cround of all belng. Wlsdom sees beyond Lhe shadows Lo Lhe Llmeless and formless LlghL (ln 1anLra, Lhe self-lumlnoslLy of 8elng). Wlsdom, ln shorL, sees LhaL Lhe Many ls Cne. Cr, as ln Zen, wlsdom or ptojoo sees LhaL lorm ls LmpLlness (Lhe solld" and subsLanLlal" world of phenomena ls really fleeLlng, lmpermanenL, lnsubsLanLlal-llke a bubble, a dream, a shadow," as 1be ulomooJ 5otto puLs lL). Wlsdom sees LhaL Lhls world ls lllusory, 8rahman alone ls real." 8uL lf wlsdom sees LhaL Lhe Many ls Cne, compossloo knows LhaL Lhe Cne ls Lhe Many, LhaL Lhe Cne ls expressed epoolly ln each and every belng, and so each ls Lo be LreaLed wlLh compasslon and care, noL ln any condescendlng fashlon, buL raLher because each belng, exacLly as lL ls, ls a perfecL manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL. 1hus, compasslon sees LhaL Lhe Cne ls Lhe Many. Cr, as ln Zen, compasslon or kotooo sees LhaL LmpLlness ls lorm (Lhe ulLlmaLe empLy uharmakaya ls noL oLher Lo Lhe enLlre world of lorm, so LhaL pra[na or wlsdom ls Lhe blrLh of Lhe 8odhlsaLLva and karuna or compasslon ls Lhe moLlvaLlon of Lhe 8odhlsaLLva). Compasslon sees LhaL 8rahman ls Lhe world," and LhaL, as laLo puL lL, Lhe enLlre world ls a vlslble, senslble Cod." And lL was furLher malnLalned, ln LasL and WesL allke, LhaL Lhe loteqtotloo of AscenL and uescenL ls Lhe ooloo of wlsdom (whlch sees LhaL Many ls Cne) and compasslon (whlch sees LhaL Cne ls Many). 1he love we have for Lhe Cne ls exLended equally Lo Lhe Many, slnce Lhey are ulLlmaLely noL-Lwo, Lhus unlLlng wlsdom and compasslon ln every momenL of percepLlon. (1hls ls Lhe secreL of all LanLrlc splrlLuallLy, wheLher of Lhe LasL or of Lhe WesL, as we wlll see ln volume 2.) We wlll be golng over Lhese deLalls as we proceed, for now, Lhe essenLlal polnL ls slmply LhaL elLher Lhe Ascendlng or uescendlng paLh, Laken ln and by lLself, ls caLasLrophlc. SLarL wlLh uescenL or CuLflow or Lffulgence: creaLlon ls noL a sln, creaLlon ls noL evll (as Lhe Ascenders, Lhe CnosLlcs, Lhe ManlchaelsLs, Lhe 1heravadlns would all malnLaln)-creaLlon ls noL a sln, geLLlng losL ln creaLlon ls. lor aL LhaL polnL, Lhe creaLures LhaL exptess Lhe flnal perfecLlon of SplrlL oow become merely Lhe shadows ln Lhe Cave obscotloq SplrlL. ln laLo's verslon: Lhe soul, once havlng been grounded ln Lhe radlanL glorles of Lhe unspoken Cne, falls away" from Lhe Cne, Lhrough Lhe menLal lorms or archeLypes and lnLo Lhe maLerlal and bodlly realm of Lhe senses, and flnds lLself Lhere, so Lo speak, losL and confused. ln Lhe lboeJtos, SocraLes speaks of Lhe soul (uncreaLe and lmmorLal") as a wlnged charloLeer" LhaL Laken as a whole . . . Lraverses Lhe enLlre unlverse [kosmos], when lL ls wlnged and perfecL lL moves on hlgh and governs all creaLlon." 1he reglon of whlch l speak," he says, ls Lhe abode of Lhe reallLy wlLh whlch Lrue knowledge ls concerned, a reallLy wltboot colot ot sbope, lnLanglble buL uLLerly real, apprehenslble only by Lhe plloL of Lhe soul." 10 Pere souls can make Lhe clrcular revoluLlon" Lhrough all of manlfesLaLlon and back Lo Lhe sLarLlng polnL" wlLhouL belng caughL ln lL, losL ln lL, bound by lL. And Lhe Lwo horses" of Lhe charloL-vlLallLy and appeLlLe (represenLlng Lhe body)-are glven ambrosla" and necLar" Lo drlnk-Lhese horses (Lhe body) are no lmpedlmenL Lo salvaLlon aL all. 8uL some souls geL carrled away," noL by Lhe body or Lhe Lwo horses, buL by an lmbalance or unrullness beLween Lhe horses and Lhe charloLeer (Lhe soul), and Lhe faulL lles squarely wlLh Lhe charloLeer. 1hey begln Lo see parLs, buL noL Lhe whole," SocraLes says. CreaL ls Lhe confuslon and sLruggle and sweaL, and many souls are lamed and many have Lhelr wlngs all broken Lhrough Lhe feebleness of Lhelr charloLeers." lf Lhe soul can reLaln lLs vlslon of eLernal 1ruLh, Lhen, SocraLes says, lL can remaln unscaLhed, and lf lL can conLlnue Lhus for ever shall be for ever free from hurL"-free, we mlghL say, from Lhe sufferlng of Lhe round of blrLh and deaLh, whlch SocraLes speaks of aL lengLh (Lhe greaL clrculL of pasL llves"). 8uL when a soul falls Lo follow and mlsses Lhe vlslon, [lL] slnks beneaLh Lhe botJeo of fotqetfoloess. . . ." And lL ls Lhls fotqetfoloess of Lhe Crlgln, and noL Lhe exlsLence of manlfesLaLlon, LhaL consLlLuLes Lhe lall. Lvery human soul by lLs very naLure has beheld Lrue 8elng. . . . 8eauLy was once ours Lo see ln all lLs brlghLness. Whole were we who celebraLed LhaL fesLlval, and whole and unspoLLed and serene were Lhe ob[ecLs [creaLlon lLself] revealed Lo us ln Lhe llghL of LhaL mysLlc vlslon. ure was Lhe llghL and pure were we. . . ." 11 1he lall ls reversed, Lhen, noL by eraslng creaLlon, buL by reverslng our forgeLfulness, of boLh Lhe Cood of Lhe pure Cne and Lhe Coodness of Lhe unsLalned Many. kecollectloo (or remembrance of Source) ls Lhus Lhe paLh of 8eLurn, Lhe paLh of AscenL. 8uL," says SocraLes, lL ls noL every soul LhaL flnds lL easy Lo use lLs pteseot expetleoce [whlch ls a dlrecL radlance of SplrlL] as a means of recollecLlng Lhe world of reallLy. lL ls only by Lhe rlghL use of such alds Lo recollecLlon, whlch form a conLlnual lnlLlaLlon lnLo Lhe perfecL mysLlc vlslon, LhaL a man can become perfecL ln Lhe Lrue sense of Lhe word." noL only ls creaLlon oot Lhe cause of Lhe lall, lL ls Lhe conLlnual loltlotloo lnLo Lhe perfecL 8edempLlon. ln oLher words, Lhls world ls noL a sln, fotqettloq LhaL Lhls world" ls Lhe radlance and Coodness of SplrlL-Lhere ls Lhe sln. lL ls noL my lnLenLlon ln Lhese secLlons Lo glve exLenslve cross-culLural references Lo Lhe same Lhemes, buL perhaps we should aL leasL noLlce LhaL, ln Lhe LasL recollecLlon" or smtltl, mlndfulness," ls Lhe beglnnlng of vlrLually all paLhs of conLemplaLlon, Lhe alm of whlch ls Lhe temembetloq LhaL one's Lrue naLure ls 8uddha-naLure, LhaL ALman ls 8rahman. And Lhls ls mosL deflnlLely sald Lo be a rememberlng or a recognlLlon or a recollecLlon of LhaL whlch one already ls, buL has slmply forgoLLen or lgnored (ovlJyo = lgnorance," forgeLLlng"). LnllghLenmenL or awakenlng (boJbl, moksbo) ls noL a brlnglng lnLo belng of LhaL whlch was noL, buL a reallzlng of LhaL whlch always already ls. (uo noL preLend LhaL by medlLaLlon you are golng Lo become 8uddha," says Puang o. ?ou have always been 8uddha buL have forgoLLen LhaL slmple facL. Pard ls Lhe meanlng of Lhls saylng!") Llkewlse, ChrlsL's ln[uncLlon, uo Lhls ln temembtooce of me," ls a remembrance LhaL noL l buL ChrlsL llveLh ln me" (yeL anoLher verslon of ALman = 8rahman). As hllosophla sald Lo 8oeLhlus ln hls dlsLress, ?ou have forgoLLen who you are." L8CS Anu 1PAnA1CS 1haL whlch was dls-membered musL be re-membered. 1hls re-memberlng or re-collecLlng or re-unlLlng ls Lhe aLh of AscenL, whlch, SocraLes says, ls drlven by Lros, by Love, by Lhe flndlng of greaLer and greaLer unlon-a hlgher and wlder ldenLlLy, as we have been puLLlng lL. 8y means of Lros, says SocraLes, Lhe lovers are Laken ouL of Lhemselves and lnLo a larger unlon wlLh Lhe beloved, and Lhls Lros conLlnues from Lhe ob[ecLs of Lhe body Lo Lhe mlnd Lo Lhe soul, unLll Lhe flnal unlon ls re-collecLed and remembered. tos, as SocraLes (laLo) uses Lhe Lerm, ls essenLlally whaL we have been calllng self-Lranscendence (LeneL 2c), Lhe very moLor of AscenL or developmenL or evoluLlon: Lhe flndlng of ever-hlgher self-ldenLlLy wlLh ever-wlder embrace of oLhers. And Lhe opposlte of LhaL was regresslon or dlssoluLlon, a move downward Lo less unlLy, more fragmenLaLlon (whaL we called Lhe self-dlssoluLlon facLor, LeneL 2d). And here l wlll glve one lasL comparlson: lreud, lL ls well known, flnally came Lo see all psychlc llfe governed by Lwo opposlng forces"-Lros and 1hanaLos, whlch are usually referred Lo as sex and aggresslon, alLhough LhaL ls noL Lhe flnal way LhaL lreud deflned Lhem. ln Ao Ootlloe of lsycboooolysls lreud glves hls flnal sLaLemenL: AfLer long heslLancles and vaclllaLlons, we have declded Lo assume Lhe exlsLence of only Lwo baslc lnsLlncLs, tos and tbe Jesttoctlve lostloct. 1he alm of Lhe flrsL of Lhese baslc lnsLlncLs ls Lo esLabllsh ever greaLer unlLles-ln shorL, Lo blnd LogeLher." 1here ls no mlsLaklng Lhe meanlng of LhaL: lL ls pure Lros. 1he alm of Lhe second ls, on Lhe conLrary, Lo undo connecLlons and so Lo desLroy Lhlngs. ln Lhe case of Lhe desLrucLlve lnsLlncL we may suppose LhaL lLs flnal alm ls Lo lead whaL ls llvlng lnLo an lnorganlc sLaLe [maLLer]. lor Lhls reason we also call lL Lhe Jeotb lostloct." lreud, of course, was severely crlLlclzed by vlrLually everybody, lncludlng hls own followers, for proposlng Lhe deaLh lnsLlncL (LhanaLos), buL clearly lL ls exacLly whaL we have ln mlnd wlLh Lhe self-dlssoluLlon facLor. lL ls slmply Lhe lmpulse Lo move Lo a lower level ln Lhe holarchy, and lLs flnal alm ls Lherefore lnsenLlenL maLLer, exacLly as lreud sald. 8uL Lhe only polnL LhaL l wlsh Lo emphaslze ls LhaL even lreud-one of Lhe WesL's greaLesL psychologlsLs, and cerLalnly lLs arch-anLlmysLlc-found LhaL human mlsery could be reduced Lo a bottle and Jlsbotmooy beLween Lhe aLh of AscenL and Lhe aLh of uescenL, as lL appears ln each of us. As ls well known, lreud found no soluLlon Lo Lhe dlsconLenL, and remalned profoundly pesslmlsLlc abouL Lhe human condlLlon. reclsely because lreud dld noL, llke laLo, carry AscenL Lo lLs concluslon ln Lhe Cne, he had no way whaLsoever Lo unlLe lL wlLh a radlanL uescenL lnLo Lhe Many. no way, LhaL ls, Lo unlLe Lros and 1hanaLos-Lo unlLe Lhe way up and Lhe way down-Lo overcome Lhelr eLernal sLrlfe. 12 lreud clearly and accuraLely saw Lros, he clearly and accuraLely saw 1hanaLos, and perhaps more clearly Lhan anybody ln hlsLory, he saw LhaL so much human mlsery ls and always wlll be a baLLle beLween Lhe Lwo, and LhaL Lhe only soluLlon Lo our sufferlng ls a unlon of Lros and 1hanaLos-and yeL Lhere ls preclsely noLhlng lreud could do abouL lL. 1here he was sLranded, and Lhere he lefL us sLranded. Lacklng Lhe unlfylng PearL, Lhe unspoken Cne, LhaL [olns AscenL and uescenL ln Lhe everlasLlng Clrcle of 8edempLlon and Lmbrace, lreud slmply remalned as one of Lhe many, and cerLalnly one of Lhe greaLesL, of Lhe fracLured fooLnoLes Lo laLo. LC1lnuS lrom laLo Lhe Lorch of nonduallLy, Lhe lnLegraLlve vlslon, sLlll lnLacL, passed mosL noLably Lo loLlnus (203-270 CL), who gave lL one of Lhe mosL compleLe, mosL compelllng, mosL powerful sLaLemenLs Lo be found anywhere, aL any Llme, ln any form, anclenL or modern, LasL or WesL. no oLher mysLlcal Lhlnker," says Wllllam lnge, even approaches loLlnus ln power and lnslghL and profound splrlLual peneLraLlon." Lven SalnL AugusLlne sLood back ln awe: 1he uLLerance of laLo, Lhe mosL pure and brlghL ln all phllosophy, scaLLerlng Lhe clouds of error, has shone forLh mosL of all ln loLlnus, who has been deemed so llke hls masLer LhaL one mlghL Lhlnk Lhem conLemporarles, lf Lhe lengLh of Llme beLween Lhem dld noL compel us Lo say LhaL ln loLlnus laLo llved agaln." Whereas oLher laLonlc Leachers were ofLen referred Lo as dlvlne," Lhe superlaLlve mosL dlvlne" was always reserved for loLlnus. And even lf we are one of Lhe many moderns Lo whom dlvlne" ls meanlngless, Lhen we sLlll have Lo come Lo Lerms wlLh Lhe facL LhaL, as WhlLLaker puL lL, loLlnus ls Lhe greaLesL lndlvldual Lhlnker beLween ArlsLoLle and uescarLes," and LhaL, accordlng Lo 8enn, no oLher Lhlnker has ever accompllshed a revoluLlon so lmmedlaLe, so comprehenslve, and of such prolonged duraLlon." 13 8esldes belng a profoundly orlglnal phllosopher and conLemplaLlve sage, loLlnus was a synLheslzlng genlus of unparalleled proporLlon, and Lhereln lles much of hls lmporLance. 8orn ln LgypL aL Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe Lhlrd cenLury (nobody knows where, exacLly, and he never sald), he spenL much of hls formaLlve years ln Alexandrla, sLudylng wlLh hls maln Leacher, Lhe remarkable Ammonlus Saccas (1hls ls Lhe man l was looklng for," he exclalmed afLer hearlng hls flrsL lecLure, he sLayed wlLh hlm for Len years). lrom Lhere he wenL Lo 8ome, where Lhe emperor Calllenus and hls wlfe, Salonlna, showed hlm greaL favor, and Lhere he LaughL for Lhe resL of llfe, aLLracLlng such dlsclples as Amellus and orphyry (Lhe greaL roclus would evenLually carry on Lhe llneage). Slmple ln hls hablLs," says orphyry, Lhough wlLhouL any harsh asceLlclsm, he won all hearLs by hls genLle and affecLlonaLe naLure [Lhls apparenLly ls no exaggeraLlon, for durlng hls enLlre Llme ln 8ome, he made no known enemles, an almosL lmposslble feaL], and hls sympaLhy wlLh all LhaL ls good and beauLlful ln Lhe world. Pls counLenance, naLurally handsome, seemed Lo radlaLe llghL and love when he dlscoursed wlLh hls frlends." 14 loLlnus, by hls own accounL, had numerous profound experlences of Lhe all-Lranscendlng, all-pervadlng Codhead,"13 and Lhls, of course, was Lhe cenLral plllar of hls Leachlng, along wlLh speclflc conLemplaLlve ptoctlces (ln[uncLlons) Lo acLuallze Lhls reallzaLlon ln one's own case. ln addlLlon Lo recollecLlon or conLemplaLlon (golng wlLhln and beyond), he descrlbes whaL amounLs Lo a Lype of karma yoga llke LhaL of Lhe 8boqovoJ Clto: qtoooJeJ lo uolty, Jo yoot Joty, and do so ln a Lhoroughly Lhls-worldly" fashlon. karl !aspers wrlLes LhaL he was called upon as an arblLer ln quarrels, buL never had an enemy. ulsLlngulshed men and women on Lhe polnL of deaLh broughL hlm Lhelr chlldren Lo educaLe and enLrusLed hlm wlLh Lhelr forLunes Lo admlnlsLer. ConsequenLly, hls house was full of boys and glrls." A house full of orphaned chlldren? And Lhls ls Lhe man abouL whom !aspers says, very accuraLely and wlLh much admlraLlon, no phllosopher has llved more ln Lhe Cne Lhan loLlnus"! Clearly, when loLlnus sald LhaL Lhe Lrue Cne embraces Lhe Many, he meanL lL. Whlle loLlnus was vlslLlng a counLry house ln Campanla, faLal sympLoms appeared, and hls frlend and physlclan LusLochlus was senL for, whlch apparenLly Look a blL of Llme, for when LusLochlus flnally arrlved, loLlnus sald only, l was walLlng for you, before LhaL whlch ls dlvlne ln me deparLs Lo unlLe lLself wlLh Lhe ulvlne ln Lhe unlverse," whereupon he closed hls eyes and ceased breaLhlng. Alexandrla of Lhe Lhlrd cenLury was exLraordlnary for Lhe cross-currenLs of lnLellecLual, phllosophlcal, and splrlLual Leachlngs LhaL poured ln, llLerally, from all over Lhe world-Lhere has probably been noLhlng else qulLe llke lL ln Lhe hlsLory of Lhe WesL. ClemenL and Crlgen (arguably Lhe Lwo mosL lmporLanL of Lhe early Church laLhers) were fellow Lownsmen of loLlnus. ln Alexandrla, one had dlrecL access Lo aL leasL Lhe followlng Leachers or Lhelr schools: Lhe Coddess culL of lsls, MlLhra worshlp, luLarch (eclecLlc laLonlsm), Lhe neo-yLhagoreans, Lhe Crphlc-ulonyslan mysLerles, Apollonlus of 1yana, Lhe exLraordlnary !ewlsh mysLlc hllo, Manlchaeanlsm, Lhe all-lmporLanL SLolcs, numenlus, Lhe greaL Afrlcan novellsL Apulelus, much of Lhe PermeLlc wrlLlngs, Lhe Magl, 8rahmanlc Plndulsm, early 8uddhlsm, and vlrLually every varleLy of CnosLlclsm (whlch had orlglnaLed ln Syrla, and evenLually found lLs greaLesL proponenL ln valenLlnus)-noL Lo menLlon Lwo of Lhe mosL lmporLanL founders of ChrlsLlanlLy. lL ls only a sllghL exaggeraLlon Lo say LhaL loLlnus Look Lhe besL elemenLs from each school and [eLLlsoned Lhe resL (ln facL, aL age LhlrLy-nlne, he dellberaLely [olned Lmperor Cordlanus's LasLern campalgn ln order Lo famlllarlze hlmself wlLh whaLever wlsdom LradlLlons he mlghL flnd), and, based on hls own profound conLemplaLlve experlences, fashloned Lhe whole Lhlng lnLo whaL can only be called an awesome vlslon, as coherenL as lL ls beauLlfully compelllng. (Lven 8erLrand 8ussell, falrly [aded ln all Lhlngs splrlLual, malnLalned LhaL we could [udge a phllosopher accordlng Lo Lhe 1rue, or Lhe Cood, or Lhe 8eauLlful. 1he 1rue belonged, presumably, Lo 8erLrand, Lhe Cood belonged, he sald, Lo Splnoza. 8uL Lhe 8eauLlful . . . ah, Lhe 8eauLlful, LhaL belonged Lo loLlnus.) lL ls wlLh loLlnus LhaL Lhe CreaL Polarchy of 8elng recelves lLs flrsL comprehenslve presenLaLlon, alLhough Lhe noLlon lLself, of course, goes back dlrecLly Lo laLo and ArlsLoLle (and earller). ln Lhls chapLer l have been uslng Lhe slmple maLLer-body-mlnd-soul-splrlL, buL flgure 9-1 ls a more compleLe verslon of Lhe holarchy as glven by loLlnus. All of Lhe words used ln flgure 9-1, lncludlng Lhose ln parenLheses (buL noL ln brackeLs), are Laken dlrecLly from Wllllam lnge. And leL me repeaL LhaL alLhough we have Lo wrlLe Lhese levels" down ln a llnear" fashlon, a beLLer represenLaLlon mlghL be a serles of concenLrlc spheres, expandlng and enveloplng, and LhaL developmenL Lhrough Lhe expandlng spheres" ls noL a llnear or unldlrecLlonal affalr, buL may besL be represenLed as, say, a splral sLalrcase, wlLh all sorLs of ups and downs, buL an overall and unmlsLakable dlrecLlon: Lranscend and embrace. All of Lhese ldeas, we wlll see, are sLrongly emphaslzed ln loLlnus. AbsoluLe Cne (Codhead) SaLchlLananda/Supermlnd (Codhead) nous (lnLulLlve Mlnd) [subLle] lnLulLlve Mlnd/Cvermlnd Soul/World-Soul [psychlc] lllumlned World-Mlnd CreaLlve 8eason [vlslon-loglc] Plgher-mlnd/neLwork-mlnd Loglcal laculLy [formop] Loglcal mlnd ConcepLs and Cplnlons ConcreLe mlnd [conop] lmages Lower mlnd [preop] leasure/paln (emoLlons) vlLal-emoLlonal, lmpulse ercepLlon ercepLlon SensaLlon SensaLlon vegeLaLlve llfe funcLlon vegeLaLlve MaLLer MaLLer (physlcal) LC1lnuS Au8C8lnuC llqote 9-1. 1be Cteot nolotcby occotJloq to llotloos ooJ AotobloJo 16 lor comparlson, l have lncluded Lhe developmenLal holarchy as glven by Srl Auroblndo, generally regarded as Lhe greaLesL synLheslzer of Lhe phllosophles and psychologles of lndla (all of Lhe words are Auroblndo's, lncludlng Lhose ln parenLheses buL noL brackeLs). 1haL Lhe greaLesL synLheslzers of Lhe WesL and Lhe LasL are ln such fundamenLal agreemenL ls, l Lhlnk, no real surprlse. 1he hlgher sLages (psychlc, subLle, and causal/ulLlmaLe) ln boLh loLlnus and Auroblndo are essenLlally as l descrlbed Lhem ln Lhe prevlous chapLer. We mlghL slmply noLe, for loLlnus, LhaL ln Lhe subLle level (nous or Cod), ln knowlng Cod, splrlL knows lLself" and we flnd ourselves and Lhe whole one wlLh Cod." 8uL LhaL unlon only flnds lts ground ln Lhe causal Codhead beyond exlsLence and beyond knowledge." 1o reach Lhls formless sLaLe, says loLlnus, SLrlp Lhyself of evetytbloq. We musL noL be surprlsed LhaL LhaL whlch exclLes Lhe keenesL of longlngs ls wltboot ooy fotm, even splrlLual form." 17 1hls empLylng of self and ob[ecLs (and even of splrlLual form) resulLs, once agaln, ln formless (nlrvlkalpa) samadhl, as lnge words lL, Lhe mysLlcal experlence of formless lnLulLlon." 1he Soul," as loLlnus puLs lL, wlll noL allow lLself Lo be dlsLracLed by anyLhlng exLernal [any ob[ecL], buL wlll lgnore Lhem all, as aL flrsL by noL [geLLlng losL ln] Lhem, and Lhen aL lasL by oot eveo seeloq tbem [unmanlfesL absorpLlon], lL wlll noL even know lLself, and so lL wlll ablde as Lhe Cne." 18 8uL Lhls dlvlne darkness" or unknowlngness" ls noL a blank sLaLe or Lrance, noL a loss of consclousness buL an lnLenslflcaLlon of lL. 1he Cne ln loLlnus," says lnge, ls noL unconsclous, buL superconsclous, noL lnfra-raLlonal buL supra-raLlonal." loLlnus hlmself seems Lo have clearly ln mlnd (or ln no-mlnd) LhaL ever-wakeful awareness or WlLness LhaL ls presenL even ln dream and deep sleep: he says LhaL all ob[ecLs, even splrlLual 8eauLy, parade by ln fronL of lL," buL LhaL lL lLself remalns a wokefoloess beyooJ 8eloq," a sleepless llghL" whlch ls lnborn and presenL Lo us even when we sleep," and dlrecLed noL on Lhe fuLure buL on Lhe presenL, or raLher, on Lhe eLernal now and Lhe always presenL." We cannoL see lL as an ob[ecL because Lhere ls no duallLy here-lL ls noL an ob[ecL buL an aLmosphere." 19 1he Cne ls noL a numerlcal one, as so many of loLlnus's lnLerpreLers lmaglne. As he paLlenLly buL dryly puLs lL, Lhe Cne ls noL one of Lhe unlLs LhaL make up Lhe number Lwo." 1o say LhaL Lhe whole world ls one and undlvlded" would be Lo mlss Lhe polnL enLlrely, for LhaL lLself ls merely a concepL, and a duallsLlc concepL aL LhaL. 1he real" Cne ls Lhe ever-presenL Wakefulness LhaL ls aware of any concepL, lncludlng Cne," buL ls oot ltself LhaL or any oLher lmage, LhoughL, or ob[ecL, buL embraces all, equally and fully, wlLh ever-presenL Wakefulness. And Lhus (Lo lapse back lnLo language) Lhls Cne," belng noLhlng ln lLself, can be, and ls, Lhe Cround of all LhaL arlses. loLlnus speaks of lL (meLaphorlcally) as Lhe founLaln of llfe and Lhe founLaln of Cod, Lhe source of 8elng, Lhe cause of Lhe Cood, Lhe rooL of Soul. 1hese flow ouL of Lhe Cne, bot oot lo socb o woy os to Jlmlolsb lt." 20 Wakefulness ls wakefulness, no maLLer whaL parades by," and so Wakefulness ls never dlmlnlshed by any ob[ecL LhaL lL wlLnesses, and yeL ls never aparL from whaL lL wlLnesses elLher, [usL as Lhe reflecLlons on an empLy mlrror are never aparL from lL. And Lhus loLlnus can easlly make Lhe nondual leap: SplrlL noL only engenders all Lhlngs, lt ls oll tbloqs" 21 (Lhe all- lmporLanL Lhlrd llne of Lhe nondual reallzaLlon: Lhe Many are lllusory, Lhe Cne alone ls 8eal, Lhe Cne ls Lhe Many-8rahman ls Lhe World). Whlch brlngs hlm rlghL back Lo Lhe uncondlLlonal embrace of Lhls and any world, and a houseful of wayward orphans. Scholars usually Lake loLlnus's sysLem (and Auroblndo's and all such slmllar Lranspersonal holarchles) Lo be prlmarlly a form of phllosophy or meLaphyslcs": Lhe varlous levels, parLlcularly Lhe hlgher ones, are lmaglned Lo be some sorL of LheoreLlcal consLrucLs LhaL are deduced, loglcally, or posLulaLed, speculaLlvely, Lo accounL for exlsLence and manlfesLaLlon. 8uL ln facL Lhese sysLems are, Lhrough and Lhrough, from Lop Lo boLLom, Lhe resulLs of acLual conLemplaLlve apprehenslons and dlrecL developmenLal phenomenology. 1he hlgher levels of Lhese sysLems cannoL be experlenced or deduced totlooolly, and nobody from loLlnus Lo Auroblndo Lhlnks Lhey can. Powever, oftet tbe foct of dlrecL and repeaLed experlenLlal dlsclosures, Lhey can be raLlonally reconsLrucLed and presenLed as a sysLem." 8uL Lhe sysLem," so called, has been dlscovered, noL deduced, and checked agalnsL dlrecL experlence ln a communlLy of Lhe llke-mlnded and llke-splrlLed (lL ls no accldenL LhaL lnge refers Lo loLlnus's splrlLuallLy as belng based on experlmenLal verlflcaLlon"-falLh beglns as an experlmenL and ends as an experlence"). 22 noL a slngle componenL of Lhese sysLems ls hldden Lo experlence or nesLled safely away ln a meLaphyslcal" domaln LhaL cannoL be checked cognlLlvely wlLh Lhe approprlaLe Lools. 1here ls absoluLely noLhlng meLaphyslcal" abouL Lhese sysLems: Lhey are emplrlcal-phenomenologlcal developmenLal psychology aL lLs mosL rlgorous and mosL comprehenslve, carrled sLralghLforwardly and openly lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal domalns vla Lhe experlmenLal lnsLrumenL of conLemplaLlon. 23 ln shorL, Lhey follow all Lhree sLrands of valld knowledge accumulaLlon-ln[uncLlon, apprehenslon, conflrmaLlon/refuLaLlon. And one can dlsmlss" Lhese hlgher levels of developmenL only on Lhe same grounds LhaL Lhe Churchmen refused Lo look Lhrough Callleo's Lelescope: dogmaLlc sLubbornness Lells me LhaL Lhere's noLhlng Lo see. 1PL WA? u lS 1PL WA? uCWn lor loLlnus (and Auroblndo), we flnd LhaL oo tbe lotb of Asceot-or whaL loLlnus calls 8eflux (reLurn)-each successlve level goes beyond and yeL subsumes or envelops," as loLlnus says, lLs predecessors-Lhe famlllar concepL of developmenL as successlve holons. 24 All of Lhe lower ls ln Lhe hlgher, he says, buL noL all of Lhe hlgher ls ln Lhe lower (for ln essence lL Lranscends Lhe lower). 8uL all of Lhe hlgher pervades" or permeaLes" Lhe lower (Lhere ls noLhlng LranscendenL LhaL ls noL also lmmanenL"). lor loLlnus, all developmenL ls envelopmenL. 1hus, a Lyplcal loLlnlan sLaLemenL ls (Lo use lnge's phraslng), 1he World-Soul ls noL ln Lhe world, raLher, Lhe World ls ln lL, embraced by lL and moulded by lL." Cr agaln, 1he Soul ls noL ln Lhe 8ody, buL Lhe 8ody ls [ln Lhe Soul,] enveloped and peneLraLed by Lhe Soul whlch creaLed lL." loLlnus means Lhls for each level, and Lhls ls, of course, Lhe sLandard asymmeLry of emergence LhaL we have seen aL every sLage of developmenL. 8uL Lhe neL resulL ls LhaL, as lnge puLs lL: naLure presenLs us wlLh a llvlng chaln of belng [holarchy], an unbroken serles of ascendlng or descendlng values. 1he whole consLlLuLes a harmony, ln whlch each grade ls ln" Lhe nexL above. Lach exlsLence ls Lhus vlLally connecLed wlLh all Lhe oLhers, a concepLlon LhaL asserLs Lhe rlghL of [all] exlsLences Lo be whaL and where Lhey are. 23 1he aLh of AscenL or 8eflux Lhus Lraces, ln reverse order, Lhe aLh of CreaLlon or uescenL or Lfflux, for, as PeracllLus had polnLed ouL, 1he way up ls Lhe way down, Lhe way down ls Lhe way up." As we sald earller, boLh paLhs Lraverse Lhe same dlmenslons. 8uL lf LhaL ls so, Lhen when dld Lhe aLh of uescenL occur? loLlnus would answer, lL ls occurrlng rlghL now. ln Lhls Llmeless momenL, all Lhlngs lssue forLh from Lhe AbsoluLe Cne, ceaselessly. Lach grade or dlmenslon of belng ls a sLepped-down verslon of lLs senlor dlmenslon, each has lLs ground, lLs reallLy, and lLs explanaLlon ln Lhe level above lL (Lhus, ln Lfflux, desLroy any hlgher dlmenslon and all lower dlmenslons would lose Lhelr ground, buL noL vlce versa, Lhe hlgher ls ln" Lhe lower as lLs qtoooJ, oot as lLs compooeot). 26 And yeL men and women, accordlng Lo loLlnus, are oocooscloos of any of Lhe levels or poteotlols LhaL are rlghL now avallable above Lhelr own level of Jevelopmeot. All of Lhose lLallclzed words are glven promlnence ln loLlnus. 27 lndeed, hlsLorlans have ofLen Lraced Lhe flrsL clear concepLlon of Lhe unconsclous Lo loLlnus. AlLhough we have a lower unconsclous LhaL conLalns malnly lmages and fanLasles, says loLlnus, all of Lhe blqbet levels of belng are for mosL people merely poteotlols walLlng Lo be octoollzeJ ln Lhelr own case and manlfesLed ln Lhelr own belng. 1hus sln," for loLlnus, ls noL a no" buL a noL yeL"-we have noL yeL" reallzed our Lrue poLenLlals, and so we are glven Lo sln." Sln ls Lhus overcome noL by a new bellef buL a new growLh. An acorn ls noL a sln, lL ls slmply noL yeL an oak. And Lhls growLh or acLuallzaLlon occurs preclsely Lhrough a ptocess of developmenL, namely, Lhe aLh of AscenL, because Lhe self ls noL qlveo Lo sLarL wlLh." 28 A kCSMCS Cl L8CS Anu ACAL MosL slgnlflcanLly, aL each sLage of AscenL, accordlng Lo loLlnus, Lhe lower has Lo be embraced" and permeaLed," so LhaL uescenL and embrace should, lf all goes well, occot wltb eocb stoqe of AscenL and developmenL (up Lo one's presenL level). ln ChrlsLlan Lerms, tos or LranscendenLal wlsdom (Lhe lower reachlng up Lo Lhe hlgher) has Lo be balanced wlLh compasslon or Aqope (Lhe hlgher reachlng down and embraclng Lhe lower)-aL each and every sLage. 1hls general noLlon-of a mulLldlmenslonal kosmos lnLerwoven by Ascendlng and uescendlng paLLerns of Love (Lros and Agape)-would become a domlnanL Lheme of all neoplaLonlc schools, and exerL a profound lnfluence on vlrLually all currenLs of subsequenL LhoughL, up Lo (and beyond) Lhe LnllghLenmenL. 1hrough AugusLlne and ulonyslus, lL would permeaLe all of ChrlsLlanlLy, ln one form or anoLher, from 8oeLhlus Lo !akob 8oehme, from Lhe greaL vlcLorlne mysLlcs (Pugh and 8lchard) Lo SalnL CaLherlne and uame !ullan, from SalnL 1eresa and SalnL !ohn of Lhe Cross Lo 1auler and LckharL. 1hrough nlcholas Cusanus and Clordano 8runo lL would help [olL Lhe Mlddle Ages lnLo Lhe 8enalssance. 1hrough novalls and Schelllng, lL would be Lhe rooLs of Lhe 8omanLlc and ldeallsL 8ebelllon agalnsL Lhe flaLland aspecLs of Lhe LnllghLenmenL. lL would flnd lLs way lnLo Lelbnlz and Splnoza and Schopenhauer, and make lLs way Lo Lmerson and !ames and !ung. Lven Locke would operaLe wlLhln lLs broad framework, Lhough he would collapse Lhe frame conslderably. lndeed, when Love[oy Lraces Lhe lnfluence of Lhe CreaL Chaln, and refers Lo lL as Lhe domlnanL offlclal phllosophy of Lhe greaLer parL of clvlllzed manklnd Lhrough mosL of lLs hlsLory," Lhe hand of loLlnus lurks, vlrLually wlLhouL excepLlon, Lhere ln Lhe background. 1hus, Lo glve only a qulck example now, Lhe Cambrldge laLonlsLs, who would have such an lnLeresLlng hand ln Lhe moldlng of modernlLy, had Lhelr rooLs ln Lhe laLonlsm of Lhe 8enalssance, as developed ln Lhe fourLeenLh cenLury by llclno and lco. 1hls was a laLonlsm very lnfluenced by loLlnus. lL was a docLrlne ln whlch love played a cenLral parL, noL only Lhe ascendlng love of Lhe lower for Lhe hlgher, laLo's tos, buL also a love of Lhe hlgher whlch expressed lLself ln care for Lhe lower, whlch could easlly be ldenLlfled wlLh ChrlsLlan Aqope. 1he Lwo LogeLher make a vasL clrcle of love Lhrough Lhe unlverse." 29 1he CreaL Clrcle, LhaL ls, of refluxlng Lros (Lhe Many reLurnlng Lo Lhe Cne: wlsdom and Lhe Cood) and effluxlng Agape (Lhe Cne becomlng Many: Coodness and compasslon). ln Lhls general concepLlon (whlch ls how l wlll use Lhe Lerms from now on), Lros ls Lhe love of Lhe lower reachlng up Lo Lhe hlgher (AscenL), Agape ls Lhe love of Lhe hlgher reachlng down Lo Lhe lower (uescenL). ln lndlvldual developmenL, one osceoJs vla Lros (or expandlng Lo a hlgher and wlder ldenLlLy), and Lhen loteqtotes vla Agape (or reachlng down Lo embrace wlLh care all lower holons), so LhaL balanced developmenL ttoosceoJs buL locloJes-lL ls negaLlon and preservaLlon, ascenL and descenL, Lros and Agape. Llkewlse, Lhe love of Lhe kosmos reachlng down to os from a hlgher level Lhan our presenL sLage of developmenL ls also Agape (compasslon), helplng us Lo respond wlLh Lros unLll Lhe sootce of LhaL Agape ls oot owo developmenLal level, our own self. 1he Agape of a hlgher dlmenslon ls Lhe omega pull for our own Lros, lnvlLlng us Lo ascend, vla wlsdom, and Lhus expand Lhe clrcle of our own compasslon for more and more belngs. (And noL [usL ln Lhe WesL ls Agape sLressed. Many LanLrlc and yoglc schools-Auroblndo's for example-puL prlme emphasls on Lhe descenL of Lhe supermlnd," Lhe agape of Lhe supermlnd LhaL comes down" ln order Lo pull us up Lo an ldenLlLy wlLh lL, so LhaL we Lhen express LhaL agape or compasslon for all belngs now ln" us, as usual, Agape and Lros are unlLed only ln Lhe nondual PearL.) 30 PC8CS Anu 1PAnA1CS As we wlll evenLually see ln much deLall, when Lros and Agape are oot loteqtoteJ ln Lhe lndlvldual, Lhen Lros appears as lbobos and Agape appears as 1boootos. 1haL ls, unlnLegraLed Lros does noL [usL reach up Lo Lhe hlgher levels and Lranscend Lhe lower, lL allenaLes Lhe lower, represses Lhe lower-and does so ouL of feot (hobos), fear LhaL Lhe lower wlll drag lL down"-always lL ls Lhe fear LhaL Lhe lower wlll conLamlnaLe lL," dlrLy lL," pull lL down." hobos ls Lros ln fllghL from Lhe lower lnsLead of embraclng Lhe lower. hobos ls AscenL dlvorced from uescenL. And hobos, we can see, ls Lhe ulLlmaLe force of all teptessloo (a rancld Lranscendence). Cr, Lo say Lhe same Lhlng, hobos ls Lros wlLhouL Agape (Lranscendence wlLhouL embrace, negaLlon wlLhouL preservaLlon). And hobos drlves Lhe mere Ascenders. ln Lhelr franLlc wlsh for an oLher world," Lhelr ascendlng Lros sLrlvlngs, oLherwlse so approprlaLe, are shoL Lhrough wlLh hobos, wlLh asceLlc represslon, wlLh a denlal and a fear and a haLred of anyLhlng Lhls-worldly," a denlal of vlLal llfe, of sexuallLy, of sensuallLy, of naLure, of body (and always of woman). 1hey are dangerous people, Lhese Ascenders, for Lhe vlolenL hand of hobos lurks always behlnd Lhe love" of Lhe hlgher LhaL Lhey profess Lo all and sundry. WlLh Lears sLreamlng down Lhe face and upward-Lurned eyes, Lhese Ascenders are ready Lo desLroy Lhls world-or aL Lhe very leasL, neglecL lL Lo deaLh-ln order Lo geL Lo Lhe romlsed Land, a land LhaL, however vaguely lL mlghL acLually be concelved, ls clearly enough undersLood Lo be ooytbloq bot Lhls land, deflnlLely noL tbls world, whlch ls shadows Lo Lhe core, decepLlons ln depLh, llluslons aL besL, demonlc aL worse. 1he Ascenders are desLroylng Lhls world, because lL ls Lhe one world Lhey are all cerLaln LhaL Lhey Lhoroughly desplse. 1hanaLos, on Lhe oLher hand, ls uescenL dlvorced from AscenL. lL ls Lhe lower ln fllghL from Lhe hlgher, compasslon gone mad: noL [usL embraclng Lhe lower buL teqtessloq Lo Lhe lower, noL [usL caresslng buL remalnlng sLuck ln lL (flxaLlon, arresL)-cosmlc reducLlonlsm run amok. And Lhe end game of LhaL reducLlonlsLlc drlve ls deaLh and maLLer, wlLh no connecLlon Lo Source. 1hanaLos ls Agape ln fllghL from Lhe hlgher lnsLead of expresslng Lhe hlgher. lL preserves Lhe lower buL refuses Lo negaLe lL (and Lhus remalns sLuck ln lL). And as hobos ls Lhe source of represslon and dlssoclaLlon, 1hanaLos ls Lhe source of regresslon and reducLlon, flxaLlon and arresL. lL aLLempLs Lo save Lhe lower by kllllng Lhe hlgher. ln oLher words, 1hanaLos ls Agape wlLhouL Lros. And 1hanaLos drlves Lhe mere uescenders. Away wlLh all oLher worlds," Lhey [oyously proclalm, as Lhelr downward-Lurned eyes rlveL on Lhe wonders of mulLlpllclLy, and Lhelr lnflnlLe [oy beglns Lhe gruesome Lask of flLLlng lLself lnLo a flnlLe recepLacle. Away wlLh all oLher worlds," as Lhey maLch Lhelr [oy Lo Lhe shadows, klss and hug Lhe spokes ln samsara's grlndlng wheel, marry Lhe source of Lhelr mlsery. And Lhelr fallure Lo flnd flnal release ln Lhe Cave, Lhelr rage aL Lhe flnlLe cage, ls Lurned merely on any of Lhelr poor fellows who happen Lo dlsagree wlLh Lhem and Lhelr love of shadows. 1he hlgher doesn'L embrace Lhe lower, Lhe hlgher ls kllled ln Lhe name of Lhe lower: noL Agape, buL 1hanaLos, and Lhe hand of deaLh Louches every love LhaL Lhe uescenders profess for all and sundry, Lears also sLreamlng down Lhe face wlLh compasslon" wrlLLen all over lL. 1hey are dangerous people, Lhese uescenders, for ln Lhe name of Agape and compasslon, oLherwlse so approprlaLe, Lhey mlsLakenly desLroy all hlgher ln a franLlc aLLempL Lo embrace Lhe lower. And more dangerous sLlll: ln Lhelr aLLempL Lo make tbls poor flnlLe world lnLo a world of lnflnlLe value-and every uescender does exacLly LhaL ln a Lhousand dlfferenL ways-Lhey slowly, palnfully, lnevlLably, desLroy Lhls very world, by placlng on lL a burden Lhe poor beasL could never carry. 1he uescenders are desLroylng Lhls world, because Lhls world ls Lhe only world Lhey have. LC1lnuS'S A11ACk Cn 1PL CnCS1lCS 1he need Lo balance and unlLe AscenL and uescenL, Lros and Agape, wlsdom and compasslon, Lranscendence and lmmanence-Lhls nondual lnLegraLlon ls Lhe greaL and endurlng conLrlbuLlon of loLlnus, and lL wlll sLand always, l belleve, as a lumlnous beacon Lo all Lhose who Llre of Lhe vlolence and bruLallLy of Lhe merely Ascendlng or merely uescendlng Lralls. loLlnus was uncompromlslng wlLh Lhose who wanLed Lo glorlfy elLher Lhls world or Lhe oLher world-Lhey were boLh mlsslng Lhe polnL enLlrely. Lach expanslon of Lhe self, loLlnus says, brlngs more and more of Lhe exLernal world" loto ourselves, lL doesn'L shuL more and more of lL ouL. World denlal-Lhe denlal of any exlsLenL, for LhaL maLLer-ls for loLlnus Lhe perfecL slgn of slckness. 31 nowhere ls Lhls more forcefully seen Lhan ln loLlnus's exLraordlnary aLLack on Lhe CnosLlcs, who were archeLypal Ascenders, vlewlng all of manlfesLaLlon as noLhlng buL shadows, and evll shadows aL LhaL. 1he CnosLlcs had lndeed achleved a causal-level lnLulLlon (1he world ls lllusory, 8rahman alone ls real"), buL Lhey had noL broken Lhrough Lo Lhe nondual (8rahman ls Lhe world"). 1hey Lhus LaughL LhaL Lhe world ls evll, Lhe body ls a Lomb, Lhe senses are Lo be desplsed. 1hls apparenLly lnfurlaLed Lhe usually even-Lempered loLlnus, and he eloquenLly responded ln a passage LhaL [usLly became world-famous: uo noL suppose LhaL a man becomes good by desplslng Lhe world and all Lhe beauLles LhaL are ln lL. 1hey [Lhe CnosLlcs] have no rlghL Lo profess respecL for Lhe gods of Lhe world above. When we love a person, we love all LhaL belongs Lo hlm, we exLend Lo Lhe chlldren Lhe affecLlon we feel for Lhe parenL. now every Soul ls a daughLer of Lhe [Codhead]. Pow can tbls wotlJ be separaLed from Lhe spltltool world? 1hose who desplse whaL ls so nearly akln Lo Lhe splrlLual world, prove LhaL Lhey know noLhlng of Lhe splrlLual world, excepL ln name. . . . LeL lL [any lndlvldual soul] make lLself worLhy Lo conLemplaLe Lhe CreaL Soul by rlddlng lLself, Lhrough quleL recollecLlon, of decelL and of all LhaL bewlLches vulgar souls. lor lL leL all be quleL, leL all lLs envlronmenL be aL peace. LeL Lhe earLh be quleL and Lhe sea and alr, and Lhe heaven lLself walLlng. LeL lL observe how Lhe Soul flows ln from all sldes lnLo Lhe resLlng world, pours lLself lnLo lL, peneLraLes lL and lllumlnes lL. Lven as Lhe brlghL beams of Lhe sun enllghLen a dark cloud and glve lL a golden border, so Lhe Soul when lL enLers lnLo Lhe body of Lhe heaven glves lL llfe and Llmeless beauLy and awakens lL from sleep. So Lhe world, grounded ln a Llmeless movemenL by Lhe Soul whlch suffuses lL wlLh lnLelllgence, becomes a llvlng and blessed belng. . . . lL [SplrlL/Soul] glves lLself Lo every polnL ln Lhls vasL body, and vouchsafes lLs belng Lo every parL, greaL and small, Lhough Lhese parLs are dlvlded ln space and manner of dlsposlLlon, and Lhough some are opposed Lo each oLher, oLhers dependenL on each oLher. 8uL Lhe Soul ls noL dlvlded, nor does lL spllL up ln order Lo glve llfe Lo each lndlvldual. All Lhlngs llve by Lhe Soul lo lts eotltety [l.e., ulLlmaLely Lhere are no degrees, no levels, buL slmply pure resence], lL ls all presenL everywhere. 1he heaven, vasL and varlous as lL ls, ls one by Lhe power of Lhe Soul, and by lL ls Lhls unlverse of ours ulvlne. 1he sun Loo ls ulvlne, and so are Lhe sLars, and we ourselves, lf we are worLh anyLhlng, are so on accounL of Lhe Soul. 8e persuaded LhaL by lL Lhou can aLLaln Lo Cod. And know LhaL Lhou wllL noL have Lo go far afleld. . . . 32 loLlnus goes on Lo polnL ouL LhaL Lhose who would flnd an oLher world" aparL from Lhls world" have mlssed Lhe whole polnL. 1here ls no Lhls world" or oLher world"-lL ls all a maLLer of one's percepLlon. 1here ls noL even any golng up" or comlng down." no movemenL ln space Lakes place. SplrlL and Soul are everywhere and nowhere." We are ln Peaven" whenever we ln hearL and mlnd remember Cod", we are lmmersed ln MaLLer" whenever we forgeL Cod. Same place, dlfferenL percepLlon. loLlnus expllclLly and ofLen sLaLes LhaL we wlll ottlve ot tbe All wltboot cbooqe of ploce." 1hose who Lalk of Lhls world" or an oLher world" have botb mlssed Lhe polnL-Lhey are Lhe uescenders or Lhe Ascenders, noL Lhe Whole-PearLed. Wllllam lnge glves an alLogeLher exLraordlnary summary of Lhe worldvlew of loLlnus, and lL ls worLh quoLlng aL lengLh (all lLallcs are mlne): loLlnus concelves Lhe unlverse as a llvlng chaln of belng, an unbroken serles of ascendlng and descendlng values and exlsLences. 1he whole consLlLuLes a harmony, each grade ls ln" Lhe nexL above, each exlsLence ls vlLally connecLed wlLh all oLhers. 8uL Lhose grades whlch are lnferlor ln value are also lmperfecLly real, so looq os we look ot tbem lo Jlscoooexloo [Lhe lmperfecLlon" and Lhe lnferlor value" appear only when we dlsconnecL Lhem from SplrlL and Lhus fall Lo see LhaL each ls a perfecL expresslon of Lhe ulvlne-agaln, ln a nonanLhropocenLrlc or decenLered" fashlon]. 1hey are characLerlzed by lmpermanence and lnner dlscord, unLll we see Lhem ln Lhelr Lrue relaLlons. 1hen we percelve Lhem Lo be lnLegral parLs of Lhe eLernal sysLole and dlasLole [efflux and reflux] ln whlch Lhe llfe of Lhe unlverse conslsLs, a llfe ln whlch Lhere ls noLhlng arblLrary or lrregular, seelng LhaL all . . . acL ln accord wlLh Lhelr own naLure. 1he perfecL and Llmeless llfe of Lhe ulvlne SplrlL overflows ln an lncessanL sLream of creaLlve acLlvlLy, whlch spends lLself only when lL has reached Lhe lowesL conflnes of belng [maLLer], so LhaL every posslble manlfesLaLlon of ulvlne energy, every hue of Lhe ulvlne 8adlance, every varleLy ln degree as well as ln klnd, ls reallzed somewhere and somehow. And by Lhe slde of Lhls ouLward flow of creaLlve energy [Agape and Lfflux] Lhere ls anoLher currenL whlch carrles all Lhe creaLures back Loward Lhe source of Lhelr belng. lL ls Lhls cenLrlpeLal movemenL [Lros and 8eflux] LhaL dlrecLs Lhe acLlve llfe of all creaLures. 1hls asplraLlon, whlch slumbers even ln unconsclous belngs [ls ln all holons as Lhe self-Lranscendlng drlve], ls Lhe malnsprlng [also] of Lhe moral, lnLellecLual, and esLheLlc llfe of humanklnd. 33 As we wlll see ln chapLer 11, Lhls ls Lhe kosmos of Lros and Agape LhaL would meeL Lhe LnllghLenmenL, where Lhe emplrlcal/represenLaLlonal verslon of raLlonallLy (monologlcal or 8lghL-Pand reason) would collapse Lhe kosmos lnLo a flaLland lnLerlocklng order of hollsLlc elemenLs, wlLh Lhe embarrassed sub[ecL dangllng over Lhe flaLland hollsLlc world wlLh absoluLely no ldea how lL goL Lhere. 8ecause all of Lhe kosmos does lndeed have some sorL of correlaLes ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon, lL Lhus undersLandably appeared LhaL sclenLlflc poslLlvlsm and naLurallsm could and would cover all posslble bases, because sclence does lndeed reglsLer so many slgnlflcanL alLeraLlons ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand world. ln Lhls collapse of Lhe kosmos (subLle reducLlonlsm), Lhe rlch verLlcal and horlzonLal Polarchy, drlven by Lros and Agape, was reduced Lo a merely horlzonLal holarchy, drlven by surfaces and lLs" alone. 34 1he necessary collecLlve evoluLlon from myLhlc Lo raLlonal was Lhe LnllghLenmenL's greaL achlevemenL, Lhe unnecessary collapse of Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe hollsLlc flaLland was lLs greaL and endurlng crlme. lor lL was preclsely Lhls nondual kosmos LhaL broke ln Lwo, crlppled and fallen, ln Lhe comlng nlghLmare of WesLern splrlLuallLy and phllosophy and sclence. 1he fracLured fooLnoLes Lo laLo began Lo llLLer Lhe landscape wlLh Lhelr parLlallLles and favored duallsms, and lL ls now, [usL now, only now, LhaL we have begun Lo plck up Lhe pleces. 10 1bls-wotlJly, OtbetwotlJly 1bete ls tbos oo locessoot moltlpllcotloo of tbe loexboostlble Ooe ooJ oolflcotloo of tbe loJefloltely Mooy. 5ocb ote tbe beqlooloqs ooJ eoJloqs of wotlJs ooJ of loJlvlJool beloqs. expooJeJ ftom o polot wltboot posltloo ot Jlmeosloos ooJ o oow wltboot Jote ot Jototloo. -A . k . CCCMA8ASWAM?, summarlzlng Lhe essence of boLh Plndulsm and 8uddhlsm 1PL C8LA1 uuALlSM of all duallsms, l have suggesLed, ls beLween Lhls world" and an oLher world." lL has lnfecLed our splrlLuallLy, our phllosophy, our sclence, lL runs as equally Lhrough Lhe represslve Ascenders who wlsh only Lhe oLher world" of eLernal release, as Lhrough Lhe shadow-hugglng uescenders who wanL salvaLlon solely ln Lhe passlng glorles of Lhls world." lL sllces Lhrough every Age of LnllghLenmenL wlLh lLs upward-yearnlng 8eason and every 8omanLlc reacLlon LhaL seeks lnsLead Lo explore every downward-Lurnlng darkness and depLh. lL governs where we seek our salvaLlon, and whlch world" we wlll lgnore or desLroy ln order Lo geL lL. lL ls Lhe cause of blLLer, blLLer acrlmony beLween Lhe Lwo camps, wlLh each formally accuslng Lhe oLher of belng Lhe eplLome and essence of evll (llLerally): 1he Ascenders accuse Lhe uescenders of belng losL ln Lhe Cave of Shadows, of belng maLerlallsLs, hedonlsLs, panLhelsLs, reducLlonlsLs, and noLhlng-morlsLs" (Lhey belleve ln noLhlng more" Lhan can be grasped wlLh Lhe senses). 1o Lhe Ascenders, Lhls world" ls, ln form and funcLlon, lllusory aL besL, evll aL worsL-and Lhe uescenders are Lhe prlmary represenLaLlves of LhaL evll. 1he uescenders accuse Lhe Ascenders of belng represslve, purlLanlcal, llfe-denylng, sex-denylng, earLh-desLroylng, and body-lgnorlng. ln Lhelr aLLempLs Lo rlse above Lhls world," Lhe Ascenders have ln facL done more Lo desLroy Lhls world and lnLroduce evll lnLo Lhls world Lhan any oLher force, so lL ls preclsely Lhe oLherworldly" sLance, accordlng Lo Lhe uescenders, LhaL spews evll lnLo tbls world, and Lhe Ascenders are Lhe prlmary represenLaLlves of LhaL evll. And Lhey are boLh rlghL. Cr, we mlghL say, Lhey are boLh half rlghL and half wrong-Lhe fracLured fooLnoLes Lo laLo. l can make Lhls clearer by resLaLlng Lhe concluslons of Lhe lasL chapLer and lnLroduclng our new Loplcs: Accordlng Lo Lhe nondual schools (laLo/loLlnus, LckharL, vedanLa, Mahayana 8uddhlsm, 1anLra, eLc.), reallLy-Lhe real world"-ls nelLher Lhls world nor Lhe oLher world, alLhough lL cannoL easlly or accuraLely be JesctlbeJ, lL can dlrecLly be sbowo, or dlrecLly apprehended ln lmmedlaLe awareness Lhrough conLemplaLlve pracLlce ln communlLy. And lf we musL speak abouL lL, Lhen we musL lnclude aL Lhe leasL Lhe followlng Lhree polnLs, noL because Lhese polnLs acLually descrlbe 8eallLy, buL because Lhey acL as a curb and resLralnL Lo our always- lnadequaLe Lheorlzlng. 1. 1be Ooe ls tbe CooJ to wblcb oll tbloqs osplte. 1he AbsoluLe ls Lhe SummlL and Coal of all evoluLlon, all ascenL, all manlfesLaLlon. lL provldes Lhe moLlve, Lhe acLlon, Lhe pull" of all Lhlngs Lo acLuallze Lhelr own hlghesL poLenLlal, whaLever LhaL poLenLlal mlghL be. Accordlng Lo WhlLehead, Lhls ls Lhe Cod LhaL acLs Lhrough genLle persuaslon" for all creaLlve emergence. As ArlsLoLle would puL lL, Lhe Cood ls Lhe flool coose Loward whlch all belngs, however lmperfecL, are pulled. 1he Cne as Lhe CooJ ls Lhe flnal omeqo polot of all ascenL and all wlsdom. lL ls Lhe reLurn of Lhe Many Lo Lhe Cne. (1aken ln and by lLself, Lhls, of course, ls Lhe Cod of Lhe Ascenders.) 2. 1be Ooe ls tbe CooJoess ftom wblcb oll tbloqs flow. lL ls Lhe Crlgln and Lhe Source of all manlfesLaLlon, aL all Llmes, ln all places. 1here ls a Llmeless creaLlvlLy or overflow of Lhe Cne lnLo Lhe Many. All Lhlngs, hlgh or low, sacred or profane, yesLerday or Lomorrow, lssue forLh from Lhe dlvlne lounLalnhead, Lhe Source of all, Lhe Crlgln of all. 1he Cne as CooJoess ls Lhe fltst coose of all causes, lL ls Lhe olpbo polot of all worlds, and as such, all worlds express Lhe Coodness, Lhe compasslon, Lhe love and superabundance of Lhe ulvlne. 1hls creaLlve superabundance of Lhe Cne (as alpha polnL) ls an unconLalnable ouLflowlng LhaL resulLs ln Lhe lenlLude and varleLy and mulLlpllclLy of Lhls world, so LhaL Lhls world ls lLself a vlslble Cod," expresslng compasslon and Coodness Lhrough and Lhrough, and Lhls world ls Lo be fully embraced as such. lL ls Cod as Lhe Many. (1aken ln and by lLself, Lhls ls Lhe Cod of Lhe uescenders.) 3. 1be Absolote ls tbe NooJool CtoooJ of botb tbe Ooe ooJ tbe Mooy. lL ls equally and boLh Cood and Coodness, Cne and Many, AscenL and uescenL, Alpha and Cmega, Wlsdom and Compasslon. 8oLh Ascendlng and uescendlng aLhs express profound LruLhs-nelLher of Lhelr LruLhs ls denled (ln facL, boLh are sLrongly asserLed). 8uL nelLher paLh alone expresses Lhe whole 1ruLh, and nelLher paLh alone lmblbes fully of 8eallLy. 8eallLy ls noL [usL SummlL (omega) and noL [usL Source (alpha), buL ls Suchness-Lhe Llmeless and ever-presenL Cround whlch ls equally and fully presenL ln and as every slngle belng, hlgh or low, ascendlng or descendlng, effluxlng or refluxlng. 1 ln Lhe CreaL Clrcle of uescenL and AscenL, Lhe nondual can be represenLed as Lhe paper on whlch Lhe enLlre clrcle ls drawn, or agaln, lL can be represenLed as Lhe cenLer of Lhe clrcle lLself, whlch ls epolJlstoot to oll polots on Lhe clrcumference (Lhe cenLer whlch ls everywhere, Lhe clrcumference, nowhere"). 8elngs coo be sald Lo be closer Lo or farLher from Lhe SummlL or Lhe Source (LhaL ls Lhe meanlng of Lhe CreaL Chaln of 8elng), buL no belng ls closer Lo or farLher from Suchness, Lhere ls no up" or down." Lach lndlvldual belng ls, fully and compleLely, [usL as lL ls, preclsely [usL as lL ls, Lhe Cne and Lhe All. 1hls ls why, ln nondual Suchness, lL ls absoluLely oot LhaL each belng ls a pott of Lhe Cne, or parLlclpaLes ln Lhe Cne, or ls an aspecL of Lhe Cne. ln oLher words, lL ls noL, as ln panLhelsm, LhaL each ls merely a plece of Lhe Cne," a sllce of Lhe ple, or a sLrand ln Lhe Web. As loLlnus Lells us repeaLedly, lndlvldual splrlLs are noL parL of Lhe Cne SplrlL." 2 An lndlvldual holon ls noL parL of Lhe Cne SplrlL because each lndlvldual holon ls Lhe Cne SplrlL lo lts eotltety-Lhe lnflnlLe, belng radlcally dlmenslonless, ls fully presenL aL each and every polnL of spaceLlme (or, as Zen would have lL, LmpLlness ln lLs enLlreLy" ls compleLely presenL ln each and every lorm: LmpLlness ls noL Lhe sum LoLal of lorm, lL ls Lhe essence of lorm, lL ls Lherefore presenL ln Lhe sum LoLal as well, buL noLhlng has been added by Lhe LoLallLy LhaL was noL presenL ln each lndlvlduallLy). We remember loLlnus saylng, lL [lnflnlLe Soul/SplrlL] glves lLself Lo every polnL ln Lhls vasL body, and vouchsafes lLs belng Lo every parL, greaL and small, Lhough Lhese parLs are dlvlded ln space and manner of dlsposlLlon, and Lhough some are opposed Lo each oLher, oLhers dependenL on each oLher. 8uL Lhe Soul ls noL dlvlded, nor does lL spllL up ln order Lo glve llfe Lo each lndlvldual. All Lhlngs llve by Lhe Soul lo lts eotltety, lL ls all presenL everywhere." 1he Cne ls fully presenL ln Lach. We don'L have Lo add up each flnlLe Lhlng Lo geL a sysLems splrlL"-each lndlvldual Lhlng, [usL as lL ls, ls fully expresslve of SplrlL. 1hls ls why Lhe nondual LradlLlons are so radlcally ooolnsLrumenLal ln Lhelr value orlenLaLlons: lndlvldual holons do noL have value merely because Lhey are potts of a greaL web, Lhey have value because, [usL as Lhey are, Lhey are perfecL manlfesLaLlons of Lhe prlmordlal urlLy of SplrlL. ln Lhe sysLems web-of-llfe splrlLuallLy, all Lhlngs derlve Lhelr value secondarlly, derlve Lhelr value exLrlnslcally and lnsLrumenLally as sLrands ln Lhe exLended web, whlch alone ls supposed Lo be flnally real." Cn Lhe conLrary, as loLlnus puLs lL, Lach parL of Lhe All ls lnflnlLe." noLlce Lhree very dlfferenL Lhlngs here: Lhe Cne, Lhe Lach, and Lhe All. Lach flnlLe Lhlng exlsLs as parL of All flnlLe Lhlngs, buL Lhe splrlLuallLy" ls noL found ln Lhe All, buL ln Lhe Cne LhaL ls fully presenL ln boLh Lach and All. (1he web-of-llfe sysLems LheorlsLs geL Lhe All buL mlss Lhe Cne.) 8uL because Lhe Cne ls lndeed fully presenL ln boLh Lach and All, Lhen addlLlonally, as loLlnus says, All ls each, and each ls all, and lnflnlLe Lhe glory" 3 -Lhe web of llfe ls Lhere, lL's [usL very parLlal, and very secondary Lo Lhe lnflnlLe empLy Cround LhaL ls Lhe Source and Suchness of every parL and every whole, regardless of how much we add up Lhe never-endlng serles of whole/parLs (a serles LhaL ln lLself ls [usL Pegel's bad lnflnlLy"). 1o flnlsh our summary: 8eallLy ls SummlL (omega), and Source (alpha), and Lhelr common ground as Suchness (nondual). 4 lL ls ln Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng paLhs LhaL Lhe nondual awareness flashes: 1he world ls lllusory, 8rahman alone ls real, 8rahman ls Lhe world." AnyLhlng shorL of LhaL reallzaLlon degeneraLes lnLo [usL Lhe Ascenders (8rahman alone ls real) or [usL Lhe uescenders (8rahman ls Lhe world). And l am suggesLlng LhaL LhaL ls noL [usL a LheoreLlcal nlceLy or an esoLerlc conLemplaLlve concern. l am suggesLlng LhaL LhaL ls preclsely whaL happened ln Lhe ensulng serles of fracLured fooLnoLes Lo laLo LhaL ls called WesLern clvlllzaLlon. LA81P ln 1PL 8ALAnCL lL ls ofLen sald LhaL laLo was Lhe oLherworldly phllosopher and ArlsLoLle was Lhe Lhls-worldly phllosopher. And yeL once agaln, as Love[oy demonsLraLes, Lhls ls exacLly backward. lL ls Lrue LhaL ArlsLoLle spenL much of hls Llme ln Lhls-worldly analysls and LhoughL, buL Lhe Cod of ArlsLoLle, unllke laLo's, ls a purely Ascendlng Cod. ArlsLoLle's Cod was Lhe sommlt and hlghesL qool of all creaLlon (omega), buL was oot Lhe source or orlgln or founLalnhead of creaLlon (alpha). ln facL, ArlsLoLle's Cod was noL ln creaLlon aL all, excepL as Lhe flnal cause of all belngs, whlch means as Lhe goal whlch Lhey would always sLrlve Loward and never reach. 1hlngs dld noL come ftom ArlsLoLle's Cod, Lhey are only qoloq towotJ lL. ln oLher words, ArlsLoLle undersLood very well and very accuraLely Lhe erfecL Cne as Lhe Cood, buL noL aL all Lhe manlfesLaLlon of LhaL Cne as Coodness or creaLlve lenlLude. Love[oy: 1he reverse process [LhaL of creaLlve Lfflux, descrlbed by laLo and exLended by loLlnus] flnds no place ln Lhe sysLem of ArlsLoLle. Pls Cod generaLes noLhlng. LxcepL for a few lapses lnLo Lhe common fashlons of speech, ArlsLoLle adheres conslsLenLly Lo Lhe noLlon of self-sufflclency as Lhe essenLlal aLLrlbuLe of uelLy [causal], and he sees LhaL lL precludes any [relaLlonshlp Lo flnlLe belngs LhaL would be lmplled by lLs creaLlng Lhem]. lL ls Lrue LhaL Lhls unmoved erfecLlon ls for ArlsLoLle Lhe cause of all moLlon and of all Lhe acLlvlLy of lmperfecL belngs, buL lL ls Lhelr flnal cause only. 1he bllss whlch Cod unchanglngly en[oys ln hls never-endlng self-conLemplaLlon ls Lhe Cood afLer whlch all oLher Lhlngs yearn and, ln Lhelr varlous measures and manners, sLrlve. 8uL Lhe unmoved Mover ls no world-ground, hls naLure and exlsLence do noL explaln why Lhe oLher Lhlngs exlsL, why Lhere are so many of Lhem, why Lhe modes and degrees of Lhelr declenslon from Lhe dlvlne perfecLlon are so varlous. Pe Lherefore cannoL provlde a basls for Lhe prlnclple of lenlLude. 3 ArlsLoLle, Lhen, qulLe aparL from hls exLraordlnary conLrlbuLlons Lo Lhls-worldly" undersLandlng, was aL rooL Lhe WesL's archeLypal Ascender. And Lhus Lhe flrsL greaL fracLured fooLnoLe Lo laLo. laLo, we have seen, champloned boLh AscenL and uescenL, SummlL and Source. 1hese Lwo currenLs-laLo's Cod boLh ln Lhe world and beyond lL, ArlsLoLle's Cod only beyond lL-would enLer Lhe currenLs of WesLern clvlllzaLlon wlLh Lwo dlameLrlcally opposed agendas: befrlend Lhe world, begrudge Lhe world. A fracLured laLo could be called on Lo supporL eltbet vlew, ArlsLoLle could be called on ooly for Lhe laLLer. 1he welghL of oplnlon, Lhen, was already precarlously Llpped ln favor of Lhe Ascenders. lf Lhe whole laLo was noL evoked, Lhere was preclous llLLle lefL Lo hold anybody on earLh. And such preclsely was Lhe plaLform-wobbllng now beLween Lhls world and Lhe oLher world-upon whlch WesLern culLure was abouL Lo be bullL. 1PL unLA81PL? 18lnl1? loLlnus had held Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng currenLs LogeLher admlrably, expresslng and pollshlng Lhe orlglnal laLonlc nonduallLy. 6 And Lhe nondual school of laLo/loLlnus would have almosL cerLalnly carrled Lhe day-as Lhe essenLlally slmllar nondual sysLems of Shankara and nagar[una would do for Plndulsm and 8uddhlsm, respecLlvely 7 -were lL noL for one overwhelmlng and uLLerly declslve facLor: Lhe enLrance on Lhe scene of myLhlc- llLeral ChrlsLlanlLy. WlLh lLs myLhlc-dlssoclaLed Cod onLologlcally dlvorced from naLure and human naLure-whaL 1llllch called Lhe sLrlcL duallsm of a dlvlne sphere ln heaven and a human sphere on earLh"-Lhere was no way Lo flnally qtoooJ Cod ln tbls world. And Lhus oo woy tbot o bomoo beloqs flool Jestloy coolJ be teollzeJ lo tbls llfe, lo tbls boJy, oo tbls eottb. 8 1hus Lhe oLher-worldly Ascenders, fracLured Lhrough and Lhrough-and drlven ln parL, as all excluslve Ascenders are, by hobos (fear of earLh, body, naLure, woman, sex, and sense)-could and would domlnaLe (alLhough never excluslvely rule) Lhe WesLern scene for a mlllennlum. 8uL Lhe lronlc polnL ls LhaL Lhls myLhlcally ascended Cod wasn'L even a Lruly ascendenL or LranscendenL Cod-lL wasn'L even a CnosLlc or causal-level Cne (excepL for a very few reallzers). lL was, Lhrough and Lhrough, a myLhlc- level producLlon: a geocenLrlc, egocenLrlc, anLhropocenLrlc local volcano god-?ahweh by name-whose Lrue sLrucLural colors were shown preclsely ln Lhe facL LhaL Pe Louched human hlsLory only by lnLerferlng wlLh lL, elLher Lo reward" or punlsh" Pls chosen" peoples or, more ofLen, Lo mlraculously smlLe Lhe enemles of Pls chosen people, or Lo oLherwlse spend Pls Llme Lurnlng splnach lnLo poLaLoes. 1here ls slmply no mlsLaklng Lhe sLrucLure of consclousness LhaL auLhors such producLlons, and lL has led Lo some very harsh [udgmenLs from Lhe more profound Lhlnkers of Lhe ChrlsLlan (and !udalc) LradlLlon lLself, sLarLlng wlLh ClemenL and Crlgen (and hllo), all of whom would concur wlLh aul 1llllch: 1hlngs llke mlraculous lnLervenLlons of Cod, speclal lnsplraLlons and revelaLlons are beneaLh Lhe level of real rellglous experlence. 8ellglon lLself ls lmmeJlocy [by whlch he means preclsely Lhe lmmedlacy of baslc Wakefulness or pure resence, whlch ls SplrlL lo us, as 1llllch hlmself makes very clear]. 1he supernaLurallsLlc herlLage abouL Lhe suspenslon of Lhe laws of naLure for Lhe sake of mlracles collapses compleLely." 9 8uL, as l have Lrled Lo make clear, lL was noL Lhe slmple exlsLence of Lhe 8oman ChrlsLlan myLhlc emplre LhaL was problemaLlc. 1haL myLhlc-raLlonal sLrucLure acLed as Lhe baslc prlnclple of culLural meanlng and soclal lnLegraLlon for vlrLually a Lhousand years, lL was phase-speclflcally opptoptlote eoooqb, brlnglng wlLh lL all Lhe advances (and all Lhe dlsasLers) LhaL we dlscussed ln Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal secLlon of chapLer 3, parLlcularly new forms of soclocenLrlc morallLy and Lhe beglnnlng bellef (posLconvenLlonal) ln Lhe epool sLaLus of oll clLlzens under Lhe (8oman) law and ln Lhe eyes of Cod-repleLe, of course, wlLh all Lhe emplre-bulldlng and lmperlallsm and mlllLary globallzlng" aLLempLs lnherenL ln Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal sLrucLure. When we dlscuss Lhe sysLems of laLo or loLlnus (or nagar[una or Shankara), we are speaklng of Lhe mosL advanced or leadlng edge of consclousness developmenL for LhaL perlod, l have no expecLaLlon LhaL LhaL would or could have become Lhe average-mode consclousness aL LhaL polnL ln Llme, nor do l [udge Lhe average-mode consclousness of LhaL Llme wlLh Lhe sLandards of Loday's average mode. lL was noL Lhe arrlval of Lhe 8oman ChrlsLlan myLhlc-mlllLary emplre LhaL was Lhe parLlcular problem, lL was whaL Lhe worldvlew of LhaL average-mode developmenL dld Lo Lhe leadlng-edge worldvlew: lL pronounced lL anaLhema, condemned lL, and condemned lL Lhoroughly, rlgorously, even vlclously aL Llmes (parLlcularly ln Lhe CounLer-8eformaLlon), and ln ways LhaL (wlLh very few excepLlons) happened nowhere else ln world hlsLory on qulLe LhaL scale. Lvery sLrucLure of consclousness ls susplclous of all hlgher sLrucLures, sLrucLures lylng wlLhln and beyond lL, sLrucLures LhaL are ln facL lLs own lnherenL poLenLlal, buL sLrucLures LhaL requlre a frlghLenlng deaLh and reblrLh Lo unfold ln each case. And socleLles, lL seems, can be arranged along a conLlnuum of Lolerance for Lhose sLrucLures LhaL exlsL hlgher Lhan Lhe sLrucLure of lLs own prlnclples of soclal organlzaLlon and coheslon. 1he very success, and Lhe consLanL LhreaLs, Lo Lhe myLhlc-mlllLary ChrlsLlan emplre puL Lolerance-never a sLrong polnL ln myLhlc sLrucLures-vlrLually ouL of Lhe quesLlon. Any ouLspoken person who evldenced a sLrucLure of consclousness hlgher Lhan Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal was, correcLly enough, vlewed as a polltlcol LhreaL and condemned, ln effecL, for Lreason. 10 1he condemnaLlon was ofLen pandemlc: Lhe sLrucLures of 8eason (and sclence) were condemned because Lhey demanded evlJeoce (reason was Lherefore allowed only ln servlce of uogma). 1he psychlc level of naLure-naLlon mysLlclsm was condemned because lL broughL Cod Loo much lnLo" Lhls world, lL dragged Cod down" from Pls celesLlal Lhrone and Lhe Peavenly ClLy above. SubLle-level mysLlclsm was condemned, or aL besL barely LoleraLed, because lL broughL Lhe soul op too close Lo Cod. And Lhe Church became absoluLely apoplecLlc lf anybody expressed a causal-level lnLulLlon of supreme ldenLlLy wlLh Codhead-Lhe lnqulslLlon would burn Clordano 8runo aL Lhe sLake and condemn Lhe Lheses of MelsLer LckharL on such grounds. 8uL LhaL was an old sLory for causal-level 8eallzers aL Lhe hands of myLhlc bellevers, sLarLlng wlLh !esus of nazareLh, whose own causal-level reallzaLlon (l and Lhe laLher are Cne") would noL be LreaLed klndly. Why do you sLone me?" !esus asks. ls lL for good works?" 1he plous reply: no, lL ls noL for good works, lL ls because you, belng a man, make yourself ouL Cod." Pls reply LhaL we are oll sons (and daughLers) of Cod" was losL on Lhe crowd, and LhaL reallzaLlon led hlm, as lL would al-Palla[ and 8runo and Crlgen and a long llne of subsequenL 8eallzers, Lo a grlsly deaLh for boLh pollLlcal and rellglous reasons-lL was slmulLaneously a LhreaL Lo Lhe sLaLe and Lo Lhe old rellglon. Church dogma handled Lhe case of Lhe exLraordlnary 8eallzer from nazareLh ln a very lngenlous way, uslng all Lhe powers of raLlonallLy Lo prop up Lhe myLh. lL was Lrue, Lhey granLed, LhaL !esus was one wlLh Cod (or, as Lhey would laLer puL lL, Cod ls one subsLance wlLh Lhree ersons-1erLulllan's ttloltos-and Lhe erson of !esus has Lwo naLures: ulvlne and Puman). 8ot let tbe coosol-level Asceosloo stop tbete. no oLher person shall be allowed Lhls 8eallzaLlon, even Lhough, as everybody plalnly knew aL Lhe Llme, !esus never made a slngle remark suggesLlng LhaL he alone had or could have Lhls 8eallzaLlon, and he expllclLly forbade hls followers Lo use Lhe Lerm Messlah" ln reference Lo hlm. 8uL, as many commenLaLors have polnLed ouL, lf Lhe nazarene had ln facL reallzed a Codhead LhaL belongs Lo all, equally and fully, Lhen Lhere was no way he could be made Lhe sole properLy of an excluslve myLhology. uL blunLly, Lhere was no way Lo markeL hlm. So !esus was made, noL Lhe sufferlng servanL of all humanklnd, whlch ls all he ever clalmed, buL Lhe Sole Son of !ehovah, lltetolly. ln oLher words, he was Lucked downward and seamlessly lnLo Lhe prevalllng myLhology, and seen as yeL anoLher (buL much greaLer) lnsLance of a mlraculous and supernaLural lotetveotloo lo blstoty Lo save a new group of cboseo peoples: Lhose who embraced Lhe Church, Lhe one Lrue way and only salvaLlon for all souls (whlch meanL: Lhe only way for lmperlal-pollLlcal coheslon of Lhe myLhlc emplre). 1he reallzaLlon of Lhe nazarene was Lhus placed on a pedesLal and made an uLLerly oolpoe ptopetty of Lhe Church (and noL dlrecLly a properLy of Lhe Soul). 11 lL should be remembered LhaL aL Lhls sLage ln developmenL, Lhe moral and pollLlcal spheres (church and sLaLe) had noL yeL been fully dlfferenLlaLed (whlch ls Lrue for all myLhologlcal sLrucLures-Lhe head of sLaLe galns leglLlmacy, we saw, by clalmlng myLhogenlc sLaLus, by clalmlng Lo be speclally connecLed Lo, descended from, or one wlLh Lhe gods/goddesses: CleopaLra ls lsls). As 1llllch explalns, 1hls meanL LhaL Lhe person who breaks Lhe canonlc law of docLrlnes ls noL only a betetlc, one who dlsagrees wlLh Lhe fundamenLal docLrlnes of Lhe church, buL he ls also a ctlmlool agalnsL Lhe sLaLe. Slnce Lhe hereLlc undermlnes noL only Lhe church buL also Lhe sLaLe, he musL be noL only excommunlcaLed buL also dellvered lnLo Lhe hands of Lhe clvll auLhorlLles Lo be punlshed as a crlmlnal." 12 1he Church would produce mooy greaL phllosophers (reason), and mooy greaL psychlc and subLle mysLlcs, buL no maLLer how much Lhese reallzers Lrled Lo downplay Lhe myLhs, no maLLer how much Lhey allegorlzed Lhem or as- lffed Lhem or lnLerpreLed Lhem owoy, Lhere was always Lhe one fundamenLal dogma LhaL hung llke a welghL around Lhelr aLLempLs Lo Lranscend, LhaL crashed down on Lhelr shoulders and plnned Lhem Lo Lhe ground and never buL never budged an lnch: tbe ottetly oolpoe ooJ oooteptoJoclble teollzotloo of Iesos. 13 1he Ascenslon lLself was lmmedlaLely myLhologlzed, followlng Lhe very old myLhlc moLlf of Lhe Lhree-day-dead- and-resurrecLed lunar consorL of Lhe LarLh goddess (ln Lhe pagan rlLuals, as well as ln Lhe ChrlsLlanlzed verslon, one would eaL Lhe flesh" and drlnk Lhe blood" of Lhe consorL, Lhus Lo parLlclpaLe ln lLs resurrecLed powers). 14 lndlvldual ChrlsLlans who shared Lhe proper myLhlc bellef (or falLh) would Lherefore also be resurrecLed, afLer deaLh, on !udgmenL uay, ln anoLher world, where Lhelr bodles would be reassembled (um, excuse me, lsn'L LhaL my fourLh meLacarpal you've goL Lhere?") Lo slL forever wlLh !ehovah, Pls Son, and Company. 1here was no way for lndlvlduals Lo flnd enllghLenmenL or ascenslon lo tbls llfe, oo tbls eottb. Any and all who clalmed oLherwlse were Lhus lmmedlaLely boLh hereLlcs ooJ crlmlnals. Agaln, l have no quarrel wlLh LhaL phase-speclflc myLhlc-raLlonal sLrucLure and Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon LhaL lL (necessarlly) gave Lo Lhe 8eallzaLlon of Lhe AdepL from nazareLh. lL was a cruclal componenL of soclal lnLegraLlon and culLural meanlng aL LhaL polnL ln developmenL, and lL apparenLly served lLs purposes qulLe well. 1he problem, raLher, was Lhe degree Lo whlch and Lhe fury wlLh whlch Lhls 8eallzaLlon was so Lhoroughly teJoceJ Lo myLhlc levels. 8arely has a causal-level reallzaLlon been LranslaLed so dramaLlcally JowowotJ. 8arely has such a powerful reallzaLlon been allowed Lo produce so few some-level teollzotloos lo lts followets. noL 8uddha, noL Shankara, noL Lao 1zu, noL valenLlnus, noL numenlus, noL Apollonlus, noL uogen, noL la-Lsang, noL Chlh-l, noL Carab uor[e, noL 1songkapa, noL admasambhava-none would be so Lhoroughly teJoceJ. lL ls slmply asLonlshlng. MyLhs would, of course, grow up around all of Lhose reallzers, preclsely for Lhose who relaLe Lo reallLy ln LhaL degree, buL Lhelr flnal Leachlng, causal/nondual, was avallable Lo all who embraced Lhe pracLlce, engaged Lhe ln[uncLlons, wenL beyond myLh and reason and psychlc and subLle, and dlscovered Lhe LmpLy Cround ln Lhelr own case. And Lo any sLudenL who awakened Lo dlscover LhaL he or she was acLually Cne wlLh Lhe lnflnlLe Cround, ln formless lJeotlty, Lhe reply came back, ln all cases: CongraLulaLlons! ?ou flnally dlscovered who you are!" 1he reply LhaL came back from Lhe Church was: you shall now be LoasL. 1he pecullar and neL effecL of all Lhls was LhaL, alLhough Lhe Cod of Lhe Church was prlmarlly an Ascendlng Cod-ln Lhls aspecL, oLherworldly Lo Lhe core-tbete wos oo woy to coosommote tbe Asceosloo, noL even for Lhe leadlng-edge few, only !esus had done LhaL. 13 And whlle we mlghL Lo varylng degrees parLlclpaLe" ln ChrlsL's naLure, Lhere could be no Lrue and whole-bodled 8eallzaLlon and Ascenslon unLll afLer deaLh, aL some oLher Llme, and cerLalnly ln some oLher world. 1bls world ls merely a runway for Lhe real Lakeoff. reclsely because Lhere was no way Lo consummaLe Lhe Ascenslon ln Lhls body, ln Lhls llfe, on Lhls earLh, Lhere was oo woy wbotsoevet for Lhe Way up Lo splll over lnLo Lhe Way uown. no way, LhaL ls, for causal-level Cneness wlLh Lhe Cood Lo lssoe fottb ln all-pervadlng, all-embraclng Coodness, grounded Lhoroughly ln Lhls world, resplendenL os Lhe enLlre world. 16 1haL exLraordlnary reversal LhaL laLo (and all nondual reallzers) had made-Lranscend Lhls world, awaken as Lhls world-could noL be called upon as compass. lteclsely because Lhe Ascenslon could noL be consummaLed, Lhe WesL was locked lnLo a perpeLually frusLraLed AscendenL yearnlng-a yearnlng for a Coal LhaL would oevet be offlclally allowed, and Lherefore a perpeLual yearnlng LhaL could oevet be saLlsfled and leL go of-Lhe perpeLual lLch ln Lhe WesLern psyche LhaL was never allowed Lo be scraLched and Lhen forgoLLen-Lhe ascendenL carroL on a very long sLlck held above and ln fronL of Lhe collecLlve donkey LhaL assured LhaL Lhe poor beasL would always lurch forward and never be allowed Lo eaL. lL was Lhese ftosttoteJ Ascenders, Lhese frozen Ascenders, who would call on (1) Lhe oLher-worldly ArlsLoLle, (2) Lhe oLher-worldly bolf of laLo, and (3) Lhe myLhlc oLher world of Lhe Cnly 8egoLLen and Cnly Ascended Son of Cod. And Lhere was Lhe Lrue Poly 1rlnlLy, Lhe unearLhly 1rlnlLy, LhaL carved ouL Lhe nexL Lhousand years of WesLern culLure, a 1rlnlLy LhaL, lf lL never LoLally ruled Lhe scene, always offlclally domlnaLed lL. 1PL 1WC CCuS WlLhouL dlrecL access Lo Lhe unlfylng and unspoken Cne, Lhe Lwo paLhs, Ascendlng and uescendlng, became loglcally lncompaLlble and uLLerly lrreconcllable. Slnce Lrue and full AscenL was blocked (even LheoreLlcally), Lhen Lrue and full uescenL could be nelLher dlrecLly experlenced nor correcLly formulaLed (even LheoreLlcally). 1he Cne World of laLo/loLlnus fracLured lnLo Lhls world" versus Lhe oLher world," and Lhls duallsm produced Lwo dlameLrlcally opposed and absoluLely lncompaLlble World SLances, wlLh Lwo very dlfferenL (and lrreconcllable) vlews of Lhe good llfe," of men and women's ulLlmaLe place ln Lhe unlverse, of Lhe ob[ecL and naLure of human desLlny, of where self- fulflllmenL was Lo be found, of Lhe very ldeals LhaL one oughL Lo have ln Lhls llfe, and, mosL lmporLanL, of Lhe Lypes of pracLlcal goals LhaL one oughL Lo sLrlve Lo fulflll ln Lhls llfe. lL produced, ln facL, Lwo uLLerly lrreconcllable Cods. lL was agreed, by boLh sldes, LhaL Lhe flnal good for a human belng was Lhe lmltotlo uel-Lhe lmlLaLlon or conLemplaLlon or absorpLlon ln Cod. 8ot wblcb CoJ? 1he ascendlng Cod LhaL Lakes all Lhlngs back Lo Lhe Cne, or Lhe descendlng Cod LhaL dellghLs ln Lhe dlverslLy of Lhe Many? WlLhouL Lhe unlfylng PearL, Lhey seem uLLerly lncompaLlble, and Lherefore do l shun Lhe world and seek only Lhe Cne, or do l follow Lhe creaLlve Cod and embrace Lhe Coodness of all creaLlon and flnd my Cod fully expressed Lhere? 1he nondual answer has always been: do one, Lhen Lhe oLher, embraclng flnally boLh. As only one example, Auroblndo: 1he splrlLual LransformaLlon culmlnaLes ln a permanenL ascenslon from Lhe lower consclousness Lo Lhe hlgher consclousness, followed by an effecLlve permanenL descenL of Lhe hlgher naLure lnLo Lhe lower." Llkewlse, ln Lhe Zen oxherdlng plcLures, whlch express Lhe Len sLages" Lo enllghLenmenL, Lhe flrsL seven plcLures deplcL an excluslve search for Lhe Cne and a wlLhdrawal from Lhe world-Lhe ascenL Lo Lhe Cood. 1he elghLh plcLure ls an empLy clrcle-pure formless LmpLlness (causal). 1he flnal plcLure shows Lhe person enLerlng Lhe markeLplace wlLh open hands"-Lhe embrace of Lhe Many, Lhe effulgenL aLh of Compasslon and creaLlon-cenLered" splrlLuallLy. 1he lmporLanL polnL ls LhaL whaL perfecLly unlLes Lhe Lwo paLhs-Lhe way up and Lhe way down-ls Lhe elghLh plcLure, Lhe empLy clrcle, whlch ls noL merely a Lheory of nonduallLy buL Lhe dlrecL reallzaLlon of formless LmpLlness (causal SplrlL). Lacklng access Lo LhaL, Lhe Lwo paLhs have oo Jltect expetleotlol polot of cootoct, and Lhey Lherefore fall merely lnLo LheoreLlcally dls[olnLed affalrs, one vetsos Lhe oLher, and Lhere ls no way whaLsoever Lo unlLe Lhem ln Lheory or ln facL. And LhaL, we wlll see, ls preclsely whaL happened. WLS1L8n vLuAn1A lrom loLlnus Lhe Cne World vlslon, embraclng fully boLh AscenL and uescenL, had passed, vlrLually unscaLhed and lnLacL, Lo Lhe remarkable SalnL ulonyslus (who, because he or she was mlsLakenly LhoughL Lo be aul's flrsL ALhenlan converL, had a profound lmpacL on all subsequenL ChrlsLlan mysLlclsm, Lhe acLual auLhor remalns unknown, hence Lhe name pseudo-ulonyslus"). 1he mysLlclsm of Lhe pseudo-ulonyslus ls vlrLually ldenLlcal Lo LhaL of loLlnus, excepL now lL ls flLLed qulLe seamlessly lnLo ChrlsLlan Lheology and ChrlsLlan Lermlnology: Lhe same wlne, sllghLly new casks. 1here ls, of course, Lhe perllous AscenL sLralghL Lo Lhe formless Codhead, ooJ a perfecL uescenL Lo a lovlng embrace of Lhe enLlre world of Lhe Many-Lhe sLandard message of all nondual schools: ttoosceoJ absoluLely every slngle Lhlng ln Lhe kosmos, embtoce absoluLely every slngle Lhlng ln Lhe kosmos-wlLh cholceless compasslon or love. ulonyslus: Love whlch works good Lo all Lhlngs, pre-exlsLlng overflowlngly ln Lhe Cood, moved lLself Lo creaLlon, as beflLs Lhe superabundance by whlch all Lhlngs are creaLed. 1he Cood by belng exLends lLs Coodness Lo all Lhlngs [wlLhouL excepLlon!]. lor as our sun, oot by cboosloq ot tokloq tbooqbt buL by merely beloq, enllghLens all Lhlngs, so Lhe Cood by lLs mere exlsLence sends forLh upon all Lhlngs Lhe beams of lLs Coodness. 17 SalnL AugusLlne (334-430 CL) brllllanLly carrled on much of Lhe loLlnlan LradlLlon, wlLh a few subLle LwlsLs and addlLlons. 1here ls much ln AugusLlne's Leachlng LhaL ls clearly nondual and profound ln lLs lmpllcaLlons, parLlcularly as concerns Lhe unlon of Lros and Agape, Lhe uLLer prlmacy of lnLrospecLlon for a knowledge of Cod, Lhe creaLlve power of Amor (love), and Lhe cenLral lmporLance of a LransformaLlon of consclousness (a LransformaLlon of wlll) ln order Lo awaken Lo Lhe ulvlne. MosL lmporLanL of all, l belleve, ls LhaL wlLh AugusLlne we see Lhe flrsL flowerlng of a WesLern form of vedanLa LhaL would, perhaps, have a more profound lmpacL on subsequenL WesLern phllosophy (and clvlllzaLlon) Lhan any oLher slngle ldea, bar none-and whlch l wlll Lry Lo summarlze ln a paragraph: laLo's SpecLaLor" and loLlnus's ever-presenL Wakefulness" are developed by AugusLlne lnLo a full-fledged concepLlon of Lhe lnLerlor WlLness (AugusLlne would say Lhe Soul) as LhaL whlch cannoL, under any clrcumsLances, be doubLed. SLarL wlLh general doubL, says AugusLlne, and doubL absoluLely everyLhlng you can. ?ou wlll flnd LhaL you can doubL Lhe rellablllLy of loglc (lL mlghL be wrong), you can even doubL Lhe reallLy of sense lmpresslons (Lhey mlghL be a halluclnaLlon). 8uL even ln Lhe mosL lnLense doubL, you are aware of Lhe doubL lLself, ln your lmmeJlote owoteoess Lhere ls cettoloty, even lf lL ls only a cerLalnLy LhaL you are doubLlng-and you can never shake LhaL cerLalnLy. Any LruLh ln Lhe extetlot world can be doubLed, buL always Lhere ls Lhe cettoloty of lnLerlor lmmeJloteoess or baslc Wakefulness, and Cod, sald AugusLlne, lles ln and Lhrough LhaL baslc Wakefulness, whose cerLalnLy ls never, and can never be, acLually doubLed. 1hus Lhe exlsLence of Cod, as Lhe lmmedlacy of self-presence (or baslc Wakefulness), ls an unshakable cerLalnLy. Cod ls even Lhe lmmedlaLeness of Lhe very presupposlLlon, or acLual ground, behlnd Lhe doubL abouL Cod's exlsLence. lf you are aware of Lhe LhoughL l don'L belleve ln Cod," well, says AugusLlne, LhaL ls already Cod. 8ellef ln Cod, and doubL ln Cod, boLh presuppose Cod. lurLher, ln Lhe lnLlmacy and lmmedlaLeness of presence, Lhere ls no sub[ecL-ob[ecL duallLy. l do noL sLand back from Lhls lmmedlaLe presence and look aL lL, lf l dld, LhaL would be merely anoLher seen ob[ecL, noL Lhe lmmedlacy ln whlch Lhls seelng occurs. Cod ls Lhe ulLlmaLe ptlos of self and of world. Cod ls seen ln Lhe soul. Cod ls ln Lhe cenLer of humans, before Lhe spllL lnLo sub[ecLlvlLy and ob[ecLlvlLy. Cod ls noL a sLrange belng whose exlsLence or nonexlsLence one mlghL dlscuss. 8aLher, Cod ls our own o ptlotl. ln Cod Lhe spllL beLween Lhe sub[ecL and ob[ecL, and Lhe deslre of Lhe sub[ecL Lo know Lhe ob[ecL, are overcome. 1here ls no such gap. Cod ls glven Lo Lhe sub[ecL as nearer Lo lLself Lhan lL ls Lo lLself." 18 Cod, for AugusLlne, ls whaL you know befote you know ooytbloq else, and upon whlch evetytbloq else depends, and someLhlng LhaL can oevet acLually be doubLed. Cod as Lhe ground, noL [usL of all belng, buL of our own lmmedlaLe and prlmordlal awareness-Lhls ls Lhe call of AugusLlne. Pow slmllar Lo Lhe LasLern LradlLlons! 1he ordlnary mlnd, [usL LhaL ls Lhe 1ao." ln Zen, Lhe ordlnary mlnd means Lhe mlnd ln lLs slmple lmmedlacy, before any efforL or duallLy. ln 1lbeLan 8uddhlsm, Lhe ulLlmaLe uharmakaya ls tlqpo, Lhe clarlLy of Lhe lmmedlacy of presenL awareness, prlor Lo sub[ecL and ob[ecL. And we already saw 8amana dlscourse on Lhe lmposslblllLy of ever belng wlLhouL Lhe Self: lf you Lhlnk you have noL found or seen Lhe prlmordlal Self, Lhe awareness of LhaL lack ls ltself Lhe supposedly lacklng Self. 1hese LradlLlons are noL saylng LhaL you have 8uddha-naLure buL don'L know lL: you know lL buL won'L admlL lL. 1hls WesLern vedanLa, as l have called lL, 19 passed, ln lLs varlous forms, from AugusLlne Lo uescarLes, Splnoza, 8erkeley, kanL, llchLe, Schelllng, Pegel, Pusserl, Peldegger, and SarLre, Lo menLlon a few. 8aslc Wakefulness, lmmedlaLe consclousness, ls whaL we have and all we have, everyLhlng else ls phenomenal (kanL), or deducLlve (uescarLes), or exLerlor (Splnoza), or Lwlce-removed (Pusserl, SarLre). SplrlL, as baslc Wakefulness, ls noL someLhlng LhaL needs Lo be proven, buL someLhlng LhaL even Lhe exlsLence of doubL olwoys ptesopposes as lLs own ground. And Lhus, SplrlL (or consclousness or pure Lgo or LranscendenLal Self or baslc openness) ls noL someLhlng hard Lo flnd buL raLher lmposslble Lo avold. We have seen LhaL each sLage of developmenL ls a golng wlLhln-and-beyond. 1hls ls clearly spoLLed by AugusLlne, and he sLaLes lL ln such a profound and persuaslve form LhaL, accordlng Lo Charles 1aylor, Lhls noLlon of lnwardness" would llLerally color an enLlre clvlllzaLlon. Careful and sober scholars (such as 1llllch and 1aylor) are slmply asLonlshed aL whaL Lhls man wroughL. 1llllch says AugusLlne ls Lhe man who ls more Lhan anyone else Lhe represenLaLlve of Lhe WesL, he ls Lhe foundaLlon of everyLhlng Lhe WesL had Lo say." 20 ln regard Lo Lhls golng wlLhln-and-beyond, AugusLlne plcks up Lhe argumenL from loLlnus LhaL Lhe lnLerlor Lranscends and envelops Lhe exLerlor, and Lhe lnLerlor lLself Lhen dlssolves ln Lhe Cne, so LhaL, as Cllson summarlzes lL, AugusLlne's paLh ls one leadlng from Lhe exLerlor Lo Lhe lnLerlor and from Lhe lnLerlor Lo Lhe superlor," whlch 1aylor phrases as Colng wlLhln . . . Lakes me beyond." 1hls had a profound hlsLorlcal lmpacL because lL Look Lhe noLlon of lotetlotlty presenL ln loLlnus (and hlnLed aL ln laLo) and puL lL fully cenLer sLage. 1he paLh Lo ulLlmaLe 8eallLy ls noL ouLslde, lL ls lnslde. 5tottloq wlLh reason, one goes wltblo reason, Lo Lhe baslc lmmedlacy aL lLs base, and LhaL lmmedlacy Lakes me beyooJ reason Lo Lhe Cround of Lhe kosmos lLself. So LhaL flnally, and ulLlmaLely, Lhe 1ruLh ls noL ln me or lnslde me or egolcally locked up ln me, buL ls raLher beyond me alLogeLher: Lhe ground of lnLlmaLe presence opens up beyond me Lo Lhe Llmeless and eLernal 8elng of all belngs. Colng wltblo me, l am flnally ftee of me: and LhaL ls a Llmeless llberaLlon from Lhe feLLers of belng ooly me. 1aylor calls Lhls new empbosls oo tbe wltblo radlcal reflexlvlLy." And, he says, lL ls hardly an exaggeraLlon Lo say LhaL lL was AugusLlne who lnLroduced Lhe lnwardness of radlcal reflexlvlLy and bequeaLhed lL Lo Lhe WesL." 21 lndeed, 1aylor Lraces Lhree maln aspecLs of Lhe lnwardness" or radlcal reflexlvlLy" characLerlsLlc of WesLern clvlllzaLlon up Lhrough modernlLy and posLmodernlLy (namely, self-conLrol, self-expresslon, and self-commlLmenL), and flnds all Lhree of Lhose roads lead Lo . . . AugusLlne (wlLh rooLs ln loLlnus). 1hls radlcal reflexlvlLy would play a profound role ln Lhe WesL (as lL dld ln Lhe LasL) because even ln lLs dlsLorLed forms lL spoke a cerLaln LruLh-Lhe superlor lles Lhrough Lhe lnLerlor, Lhe beyond lles Lhrough Lhe wlLhln. 1he LnllghLenmenL would conLlnue Lo Lake Lhe Lurn wlLhln" . . . and Lhen forgeL Lhe beyond. 1he dlsengaged ego of Lhe LnllghLenmenL Lurned wlLhln . . . and goL sLuck Lhere, dangllng haplessly over a hollsLlc flaLland LhaL had no room for lL: noL wlLhln and beyond, buL wlLhln and wlLhdrawn. knowledge closed ln on lLself," as loucaulL puL lL, and Lhere was no way Lo acLually reconnecL Lhe self wlLh a hollsLlc cosmos," slnce tbot cosmos of lnLerlocklng exLerlors excluded Lhe lnLerlor on lLs own Lerms (collapse of Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe cosmos, or subLle reducLlonlsm). 8uL Lhls encloslng of knowledge, wlLhln and wlLhdrawn-golng wlLhln, geLLlng sLuck Lhere, and Lhen descrlblng Lhe exLernal world ln lnLerlocklng sysLem Lerms LhaL lefL ouL Lhe sub[ecL alLogeLher-Lhls ls noL ttotb for AugusLlne, Lhls ls preclsely evll. Lvll ls when Lhls reflexlvlLy ls enclosed on lLself" 22 -wlLhln and wlLhdrawn. 1here was no way Lo geL Lo Lhe sopetlot because Lhe lotetlot was excluded from Lhe lnLerlocklng order of extetlots, and Lhus all LhaL remalned was a sysLem of harmonlous shadows and a wonderful web LhaL ground up all depLh ln lnLerwoven surfaces. 8uL AugusLlne's lmmedlaLe lmpacL was ln preclsely Lhe opposlLe dlrecLlon. lf Lhe LnllghLenmenL goL losL ln Lhe lnLerlor and was Lhus sLuck wlLh noLhlng buL exLerlors, Lhe lnfluence of AugusLlne up Lo Lhe 8enalssance was on reachlng Lhe superlor and downplaylng, forgeLLlng, lgnorlng Lhe exLerlors alLogeLher. Slnce LruLh ls someLhlng whlch we can flnd only ln Lhe lnLerlor of Lhe human soul, physlcs ls useless for ulLlmaLe LruLh."23 lndeed so, ln a sense, buL here creeps ln AugusLlne's duallsLlc legacy. lor loLlnus Lhe uescended world of physlcs and Lhe Ascended world of Lhe Soul were boLh lnLegral componenLs of Lhe Cne World. 1rue, we could never reach Lhe Soul or SplrlL Lhrough a sLudy of physlcs (ln facL, LhaL would bllnd us Lo Lhe Soul), buL noneLheless physlcs was parL of Lhe vlslble, senslble Cod. AugusLlne ls no onLologlcal duallsL, buL he does sLarL Lo offer us a bruLal cholce: Lveryone becomes llke whaL he loves. uosL Lhou love Lhe earLh? 1hou shalL be earLh. uosL Lhou love Cod? 1hen l say, Lhou shalL be Cod." And ls Lhere no way Lo be botb? lor Lhe 8boqovoJ Clto, as for loLlnus, Lven on earLh Lhe world ls Lransformed by Lhose whose mlnds are esLabllshed ln Lhe vlslon of Cneness," as Lhe Clto has lL. lor loLlnus (and mosL of Lhe nondual LasLern LradlLlons), one stotts lmmersed ln Lhe LarLh, lmmersed ln Cala, lnLer-locked ln exLerlors (egocenLrlc, blocenLrlc, geocenLrlc), one Lhen flnds Lhe lnLerlor, Lranscends Cala, and ls lmmersed ln Peaven (Soul, SplrlL), whlch Lhen dlssolves Lhe separaLe self alLogeLher and embraces equally boLh Peaven and LarLh as Lhe glorlous radlance of Lhe ulvlne (Lhls would be Lhe LanLrlc and Mahayana revoluLlon LhaL would overLhrow Lhe excluslvely Ascendlng ldeal of Lhe yoglc and 1heravadln gnosLlcs). 8uL Lhls road AugusLlne cannoL Lake. 1he dogmaLlc bellef ln Lhe fuLure resurrecLlon of Lhe body puL an effecLlve end Lo LhaL vlslon. 1he fuLure resurrecLlon of Lhe body, and Lhe radlcally unlque (and nonrepeaLable, nonreproduclble) reallzaLlon of Lhe nazarene blocks Lhe flnal llberaLlon of Lhe soul ln Lhls body, ln Lhls llfe, on Lhls earLh. no longer can Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng aLhs be held LogeLher ln Lhe lmmedlacy of Lhls momenL. 1here ls a fracLure ln Lhe face of Love, and a perplexed Cod now sLares blankly ln Lwo dlameLrlcally opposed dlrecLlons. 1he neL effecL was: plck one-Lhe way up or Lhe way down. 1he Lwo could no longer be unlLed, and hlsLorlcally Lhe Ascenders and Lhe uescenders wenL vlrLually Lhelr separaLe ways. ln shorL, wlLh AugusLlne Lhe Lenslon beLween Lhe Lwo Cods" ls becomlng unbearable. arLly because of hls Len years wlLh Lhe duallsLlc Manlchaeans, parLly because of hls own CnosLlclsm, and overwhelmlngly because of hls unfllnchlng embrace of Lhe Church dogma of Lhe one and only begoLLen," AugusLlne feels LhaL no Lrue AscenL can occur ln Lhls llfe, ln Lhls body, on Lhls earLh-Lhe mysLlcal awareness of Cod, yes, flnal llberaLlon ln Lhls body, on Lhls earLh, no. lor loLlnus, AscenL" does noL mean a change of place or a change ln locaLlon or a change from Lhls world" Lo an oLher world." lL means a change ln percepLlon so LhaL more and more of Lhls world ls percelved os Lhe oLher world-more and more of Lhls world ls percelved as erfecLly ulvlne, unLll Lhere ls ooly Lhe erfecLly ulvlne ln oll percepLlon, Lhls world" and LhaL world" belng uLLerly lrrelevanL, and Lhe way up and Lhe way down meeLlng lo evety sloqle oct of lovlng and cholceless and non-dual awareness. lor all of AugusLlne's undoubLed brllllance-for all of LhaL, he cannoL shake hls duallsLlc dogma LhaL Lhls world ls merely a preparaLlon for Lhe nexL world, he ls locked lnLo Lhe myLh of Lhe fotote resurrecLlon of Lhe body, noL lLs presenL dlvlnlzaLlon by a change ln percepLlon, and Lhus even such an ardenL devoLee of AugusLlne as aul 1llllch can summarlze hls vlew as: Cn Lhe one hand, Lhere ls Lhe clLy of Cod, on Lhe oLher Lhe clLy of earLh or Lhe devll." 24 1hls ls no splrlLual onLology, Lhls ls myLhlc dlssoclaLlon. l do noL mean Lo pln Lhls duallsm solely on AugusLlne, lL ls a myLhlc dlssoclaLlon lnherenL ln Lhe worldvlew whlch, for oLher reasons, he felL compelled Lo embrace. AugusLlne, l am LempLed Lo say, ls acLually Lhe very besL one can posslbly do wlLh Lhe loLlnlan sysLem lf lL musL be sLralned lnLo a myLhlc worldvlew. 8uL boLh AugusLlne's fans and deLracLors have polnLed Lo Lhls unsLable duallsm ln Lhls sysLem, and Lo hls oLherworldly" benL, Lhe sLamp of ftosttoteJ AscenL (and Lherefore crlppled uescenL). And lf AugusLlne ls Lhe foundaLlon of everyLhlng Lhe WesL had Lo say," well Lhen, everyLhlng Lhe WesL had Lo say was: frusLraLed AscenL, splrlLus lnLerrupLus. And Lhus no Lrue uescenL, no Lrue dlvlnlzaLlon of Lhls LarLh, of Lhls body, or of Lhls llfe. 1PL SCPlZClu CCu Love[oy, who does noL undersLand Lhe conLemplaLlve and experlenLlal naLure of Lhls spllL (beLween uescended Lhls- worldly and Ascended oLherworldly), noneLheless ls agaln Lhe perfecL reporLer of whaL dld ln facL happen, whlch ls LhaL Lhe WesL was saddled wlLh Lwo absoluLely lncompaLlble Cods: 1he one Cod was Lhe goal of Lhe way up," of LhaL ascendlng process by whlch Lhe flnlLe soul, Lurnlng from all creaLed Lhlngs, Look lLs way back Lo Lhe lmmuLable erfecLlon ln whlch alone lL could flnd resL. 1he oLher Cod was Lhe source and Lhe lnformlng energy of LhaL descendlng process by whlch 8elng flows Lhrough all levels of posslblllLy down Lo Lhe very lowesL. . . . 1here was no way ln whlch Lhe fllghL from Lhe Many Lo Lhe Cne, Lhe quesL of a perfecLlon deflned wholly ln Lerms of conLrasL wlLh Lhe creaLed world, could be effecLlvely harmonlzed wlLh Lhe lmlLaLlon of a Coodness LhaL dellghLs ln dlverslLy and manlfesLs lLself ln Lhe emanaLlon of Lhe Many ouL of Lhe Cne. 23 Cnce Lrue AscenL was denled, Lrue uescenL was llkewlse losL, and Lhelr secreL marrlage remalned deeply a secreL. 1he pesslmlsLlc Ascenders dourly pursued an oLherworldly Coal Lhey were assured of never reachlng, and Lhe opLlmlsLlc uescenders glddlly embraced a Lhls-worldly creaLlon whose Source Lhey celebraLed buL never experlenced. And Lhls produced, as l sald, Lwo Cods and Lwo World SLances LhaL were dlfferenL ln every concelvable way. lL was noL [usL a dlfference ln LheoreLlcal" orlenLaLlons (alLhough LhaL was consLanLly debaLed), lL was Lhrough and Lhrough a dlfference ln paradlgmaLlc ln[uncLlons and exemplars, ln pracLlcal llfesLyles, ln Lhe very goal of whaL lL meanL Lo be human and Lo lead Lhe good llfe." 1he Ascendlng program demanded a wlLhdrawal from all aLLachmenL Lo creaLures." lL recommended asceLlc, someLlmes harsh dlsclpllne, always orlenLed Loward a wlLhdrawal of aLLenLlon from Lhe senses, from Lhe body, from Lhe earLh, and above all from sexuallLy (and Lherefore woman)-all of whlch were looked upon as LempLaLlons or much worse (even Lhough all were LheoreLlcally" creaLlons of Lhe Cood). 1haL ls, Lhey all became ob[ecLs of hobos, noL Lros. 1hls oneness sLraLegy" was lnLrospecLlve and hlghly lottovetteJ, and wherever lL appeared lL broughL a Lhoroughgolng worldly pesslmlsm (one of lLs key feaLures, wheLher ln rellglon or phllosophy) and a cootemptos mooJl. My klngdom ls noL of Lhls world" and Lay noL your forLune upon Lhls earLh" were lLs earmarks. Worldly pursulLs were ulLlmaLely for Lhe deluded, who could parLlclpaLe" ln Lhe Cood Lhrough Lhe sacramenLs, buL were oLherwlse losL ln Lhe Cave of Shadows. 1he clolsLered llfe" was Lhe only good llfe, and Lhe only llfe LhaL could lead Lo a Lrue lmltotlo uel. 1he uescendlng program led ln preclsely Lhe opposlLe dlrecLlon, followlng preclsely Lhe opposlLe Cod. lL summoned men and women Lo parLlclpaLe, ln some flnlLe measure, ln Lhe creaLlve passlon of Cod, and Lo collaboraLe consclously ln Lhe processes by whlch Lhe Jlvetslty of Lhlngs, Lhe lenlLude and lullness of Lhe unlverse, ls achleved. lL found lts beaLlflc vlslon ln Lhe [oy of beholdlng Lhe splendor of creaLlon, or ln exclLedly Lraclng ouL Lhe deLall of lLs lnflnlLe varleLy. lL placed Lhe acLlve llfe above conLemplaLlon. lL was alLogeLher exttovetteJ, and broughL always ln lLs wake an optlmlsm LhaL would over and over agaln be codlfled ln Lhe phrase 1hls ls Lhe besL of all posslble worlds" (meanlng LhaL lL all comes sLralghL from Cod and expresses Coodness). 26 And as for lLs lmltotlo uel, lL ofLen vlewed Lhe acLlvlLy of Lhe creaLlve arLlsL (ln lLs many forms) as Lhe mode of human llfe most llke tbe ulvloe, because Lhe arLlsL parLlclpaLes ln Lhe creaLlve process, a process LhaL ls slmllar Lo, or even one wlLh, Lhe Superabundance and Lffulgence of SplrlL LhaL brlngs forLh Lhe glorles of Lhe Many from Lhe Cne. And yeL, so drlven was Lhls paLh Lo go ouLward and ouLward LhaL lL fell consLanLly lnLo Lhe cluLches of downward and downward: noL Agape, buL 1hanaLos, noL an embrace of Lhe lower by Lhe hlgher, buL a slmple embrace of Lhe lower, perlod-wlLh all helghL and all depLh reduced, flaLLened, leveled, exLlngulshed. 1hese Lwo Cods wresLled for Lhe soul of WesLern humanlLy for Lhe nexL Lhousand years (and, ln facL, have done so rlghL up Lo Loday, as we wlll see). Slnce Lhese Cods were, aL Lhls polnL, uLLerly lncompaLlble, Lhe Church offlclally had Lo choose one. under sway of Lhe unearLhly 1rlnlLy, lL chose, of course, Lhe former, Lhe paLh of (frusLraLed) AscenL. lL was Lhe ldea of Lhe Cood [Ascendlng], noL Lhe concepLlon of a generaLlve Coodness [uescendlng], LhaL deLermlned Lhe eLhlcal Leachlng of Lhe Church (aL leasL ln her counsels of perfecLlon) and shaped Lhe assumpLlons concernlng man's chlef end whlch domlnaLed Luropean LhoughL down Lo Lhe 8enalssance, and ln orLhodox Lheology, roLesLanL as well as CaLhollc, beyond lL. 1he way up" alone was Lhe dlrecLlon ln whlch man was Lo look for Lhe good. . . . 27 Such was Lhe Lhousand-year relgn of Lhe myLhlcally Ascended Cod, abouL whlch, ln Lhls shorL survey, we need say noL much more. l have wlshed only Lo suggesL lLs orlgln and lLs lnLernal sLrucLure, whaL lL accompllshed (whlch was much Lo Lhe good), and whaL lL Lore asunder (whlch was equally far-reachlng). 8ecause Lhen, mosL lnLeresLlng of all: sLarLlng wlLh Lhe 8enalssance and runnlng Lhrough Lhe LnllghLenmenL, Lhere occurred whaL we mlghL call Lhe greaL reversal." Suddenly, very suddenly, Lhe Ascenders were ouL, Lhe uescenders were ln-and Lhe LranslLlon was bloody, arguably Lhe bloodlesL cognlLlve LransformaLlon ln Luropean hlsLory. 1PL C8LA1 LLnl1uuL ln order Lo undersLand Lhe comlng domlnance of Lhe uescenders, lL ls necessary Lo undersLand how Lhe nondual sysLem of laLo/loLlnus vlewed Lhe uescendlng aLh of Lfflux or lenlLude, whlch was only bolf of Lhe equaLlon, buL whlch may be summarlzed ln Lhe modern phrase 8lodlverslLy ls good." And noL [usL blodlverslLy. ulverslLy per se was Lhe dlrecL evldence of Lhe exLraordlnary Superabundance and Coodness of Lhe Cne, and Lherefore tbe mote Jlvetslty, tbe qteotet tbe CooJoess. l emphaslze LhaL phrase because lL ls, we wlll abundanLly see, Lhe key Lo Lhe Cod of Lhe uescenders (whlch lLself was half" of Lhe Cod of loLlnus, very cruclal buL very parLlal). ln Lhe 1lmoeos (Lhe lnLellecLual WesL's 8lble of Lffulgence), laLo had already malnLalned LhaL we musL oot suppose LhaL Lhe world was made ln Lhe llkeness of any ldea LhaL ls merely parLlal, for noLhlng lncompleLe ls beauLlful. We musL suppose raLher LhaL lL ls Lhe perfecL lmage of Lhe whole of whlch all anlmals-boLh lndlvlduals and specles-are parLs. lor Lhe paLLern of Lhe unlverse conLalns wlLhln lLself Lhe lnLelllglble forms of all belngs [usL as Lhls world comprehends us and all oLher vlslble creaLures." 1hus, creaLlve Lffulgence resulLed ln tbls wotlJ llke Lhe mosL falresL and mosL perfecL of lnLelllglble belngs-one vlslble llvlng belng conLalnlng wlLhln lLself all oLher llvlng belngs of llke naLure"-whlch ls exacLly why laLo referred Lo Lhe enLlre manlfesL unlverse as a vlslble, senslble Cod" and a superorganlsm." ln order, he says, LhaL Lhe Whole may be really All, Lhe unlverse was fllled compleLely" and Lhereby became a vlslble Cod-Lhe greaLesL, Lhe besL, Lhe falresL, Lhe mosL perfecL." 28 1hus, ln Lhls vlew, Lhe exlsLence of oll posslble kloJs of belngs, no maLLer wheLher we [udge Lhem Lo be good or bad, hlgher or lower, beLLer or worse-all are an lnLegral and necessary parL of Lhe kosmos, and Lhus each has lottloslc worLh [usL as lL ls. uL blunLly, Lhe world ls beLLer, Lhe more Lhlngs lL conLalns. loLlnus, carrylng on Lhls nondual vlslon, says LhaL we are llke people who do noL undersLand arL and would Lhus llke Lo ellmlnaLe cerLaln colors from a palnLlng slmply because we [udge Lhem Lhe less beauLlful," noL reallzlng LhaL LhaL would desLroy Lhe whole palnLlng aL Lhe same Llme. 1o ellmlnaLe any characLers," says loLlnus, would be Lo spoll Lhe beauLy of Lhe whole, and lL ls by means of Lhem LhaL lL becomes compleLe." 1hus, he says, Lhose who would ellmlnaLe from Lhe unlverse" whaL Lhey Lhlnk of as lnferlor belngs" would slmply ellmlnaLe rovldence lLself," whose naLure lL ls Lo produce all Lhlngs and Lo dlverslfy all ln Lhe manner of Lhelr exlsLence." 29 Love[oy demonsLraLes LhaL wherever Lhe uescendlng currenL was acknowledged-under Lhe general name of Lhe prlnclple of lenlLude-lL was always of Lhe form: Lhe Coodness of Lhe Cne ls reflecLed ln Lhe varleLy of lLs parLs", Lhe qteotet tbe Jlvetslty, tbe qteotet tbe CooJoess. MaxlmlzaLlon of dlverslLy ls, so Lo speak, whaL lenlLude seeks. We wlll see, ln Lhe nexL chapLer, whaL an exLraordlnary lnfluence Lhls docLrlne of lenlLude had ln Lhe rlse of modernlLy, from lLs sclences Lo lLs pollLlcs Lo lLs eLhlcs (and, of course, lL ls sLlll loudly echoed by LheorlsLs from mulLlculLurallsLs Lo ecophllosophers, mosL of whom evldence no ldea of lLs orlglnal source). Agaln, Lhe easlesL way Lo summarlze lenlLude (or Lfflux) ls Lo say, noL [usL LhaL dlverslLy ls good for os humans-a very geocenLrlc, anLhropocenLrlc, egocenLrlc sLance-buL LhaL dlverslLy ls Lhe very Coodness of Lhe Cne lLself, qulLe aparL from whaL lL may or may noL have Lo do wlLh humans. 1hls was parL of loLlnus's devasLaLlng aLLack on Lhe CnosLlcs, who, vlewlng humans as Lhe Lop of Lhe scale of belng, ln effecL lgnored and devalued Lhe resL of Lhe scale lLself, and Lhus could noL see LhaL Lhe sun ls ulvlne, and Lhe earLh ulvlne, and all manner of belngs ulvlne." 1hls reallzaLlon came, as l sald, dlrecLly from loLlnus's radlcally JeceoteteJ and nonanLhropocenLrlc sLance. Pe does noL develop blodlverslLy because lL ls good for humans, or because human exlsLence depends upon lL (alLhough he recognlzes LhaL), or because lL's nlce Lo go ouL and have a wllderness experlence"-all of Lhose, for loLlnus, are anLhropocenLrlc Lo Lhe core, and serve only Lhe ego ln men and women, noL Lhe ulvlne ln each and all. Cn Lhe Ascendlng slde, accordlng Lo loLlnus: as long as we are sLlll Ascendlng and have noL yeL acLually JlscoveteJ Lhe formless Cne, whlch ls epoolly presenL ln all belngs-tbeo Lhe world lndeed oppeots as a greaL hlerarchy of belngs, from Lhe lowesL Lo Lhe hlghesL, a scale kepL ln place by oot owo lqootooce, buL a scale or ladder LhaL musL fltst be compleLely cllmbed before we can Lhrow lL away, Lhose who Lhrow lL away wlLhouL cllmblng lL are merely Lhe uescenders, Lhe LroglodyLes who worshlp Lhe Shadows wlLhouL seelng Lhe LlghL. And Lhe cenLral polnL of Lhls CreaL Polarchy or CreaL Chaln of (ApparenL) 8elng was summarlzed ln Lhe phrase: tbete ote oo qops lo ootote. AlLhough Lhere were lndeed (apparenL) grades of exlsLence, from Lhe lowesL Lo Lhe hlghesL, each shaded lnLo Lhe oLher wlLh Lhe leasL degree of posslble dlfference" (ArlsLoLle). no llnks" ln Lhe CreaL Chaln could be lefL empLy, or Lhe unlverse would noL be lull," would noL express Lhe pleoom fotmotom LhaL dellghLs ln dlverslLy. And Lhus, preclsely because Lhe unlverse was a greaL holarchy, compleLely lull" as an expresslon of Lhe Coodness of SplrlL, each level" or grade" was perfecLly conLlnuous wlLh boLh lLs senlor and [unlor dlmenslons (ArlsLoLle: 1hlngs are sald Lo be conLlnuous whenever Lhere ls one and Lhe same llmlL of boLh whereln Lhey overlap and whlch Lhey possess ln common")-Lhere were no gaps, no holes, no mlsslng llnks ln Lhe unlverse: Lhe kosmos was one LlghLly woven fabrlc of Coodness. lf Lhere ls beLween Lwo glven naLural specles a LheoreLlcally posslble lnLermedlaLe Lype, LhaL Lype musL be reallzed-and so on oJ loJefloltom, oLherwlse, Lhere would be gaps ln Lhe unlverse, Lhe creaLlon would noL be as 'full' as lL mlghL be, and Lhls would lmply LhaL lLs Source was noL 'good,' ln Lhe sense of Lhe 1lmoeos." 30 1hls was noL prlmarlly a loglcal deducLlon, as Love[oy supposes, buL a conLemplaLlve experlence of a superabundance LhaL, llke waLer, would overflow lnLo any and every nook and cranny, leavlng noLhlng dry-hence, Lhere are no gaps ln naLure." AL Lhe same Llme, Lhls dld noL prevenL loLlnus (and hls nondual descendenLs) from also seelng LhaL naLure makes leaps everywhere." A hlgher level, recall, was deflned (by ArlsLoLle) as one LhaL had Lhe essenLlals of Lhe lower plos an exLra someLhlng (an emergenL) LhaL deflned Lhe new level and was noL presenL ln Lhe [unlor dlmenslon. 8uL Lhe ldea was LhaL, aL some polnL, Lhey shared a common boundary, so LhaL noLhlng was radlcally dls[olnLed ln Lhe unlverse, even Lhough lL was everywhere shaded or graded. LlLher polnL Laken alone-no gaps" versus leaps everywhere"-would lead Lo an unbalanced vlew. 31 1he upshoL of all Lhls was LhaL Lhe manlfesL unlverse was vlewed as a huge organlc 1oLallLy, graded ln Lerms of levels of dlverslLy, buL wlLh each and all an lnLegral llnk ln Lhe kosmos, and Lhe perfecLlon of Lhe unlverse ls aLLalned essenLlally ln proporLlon Lo Lhe dlverslLy of naLures ln lL" (SalnL 1homas). reclsely because of Lhe CreaL Polarchy, Lhe manlfesL world was one and unbroken. nlcholas Cusanus (one of Lhe greaL represenLaLlves of Lhe nondual durlng Lhe laLe Mlddle Ages): All Lhlngs, however dlfferenL, are llnked LogeLher. 1here ls ln Lhe genera of Lhlngs such a connecLlon beLween Lhe hlgher and Lhe lower LhaL Lhey meeL ln a common polnL, such an order obLalns among specles LhaL Lhe hlghesL specles of one genus colncldes wlLh Lhe lowesL of Lhe nexL hlgher genus, ln order LhaL Lhe unlverse may be one, perfecL, conLlnuous. 32 lenlLude expresses lLself ln apparenL gradaLlon-everyLhlng can'L bursL on Lhe scene all aL once!-buL a gradaLlon LhaL ls full" and conLlnuous and unbroken, wlLh humans occupylng one sloL among an lnflnlLe number of sloLs. lar from placlng men and women aL Lhe cenLer of Lhe kosmos-as ls obnoxlously supposed by many ecologlcal crlLlcs-Lhls concepLlon made Lhem acuLely aware of how lnslgnlflcanL Lhelr acLual poslLlon was. Already Malmonldes ln Lhe LwelfLh cenLury had wrlLLen (ln 1be ColJe fot tbe letplexeJ, Lhe same LlLle LhaL Schumacher dellberaLely used ln hls book exLolllng Lhe CreaL Polarchy): 33 And lf Lhe earLh ls Lhus no blgger Lhan a polnL relaLlvely Lo Lhe sphere of Lhe flxed sLars, whaL musL be Lhe raLlo of Lhe human specles Lo Lhe creaLed unlverse as a whole? And how Lhen can any of us Lhlnk LhaL Lhese Lhlngs exlsL for hls sake, and LhaL Lhey are meanL Lo serve hls uses? All of Lhls toJlcol nonanLhropocenLrlsm came, as we saw, preclsely because of Lhe radlcally JeceoteteJ naLure of nondual mysLlclsm. 1hus Clordano 8runo would sLaLe flaL ouL, 1hou cansL noL more nearly approach Lo a llkeness of Lhe lnflnlLe by belng a man Lhan by belng an anL, noL more nearly by belng a sLar Lhan by belng a man." 34 1hls would llkewlse allow 8runo Lo reallze LhaL because of Lhe counLless grades of perfecLlon ln whlch Lhe lncorporeal dlvlne Lxcellence musL needs manlfesL lLself ln a corporeal manner, Lhere musL be counLless lndlvlduals such as are Lhose greaL llvlng belngs of whlch our dlvlne moLher, Lhe LarLh, ls one." 33 1hls dld noL slL well wlLh Lhe Church, whlch dld noL Lake klndly Lo a Cod who was equldlsLanL from an anL and a man, and who had already slLuaLed MoLherhood qulLe elsewhere. 8uL Lhe cruclal polnL, as Love[oy experLly summarlzes lL, was LhaL: no creaLure's exlsLence was merely lnsLrumenLal Lo Lhe well-belng of Lhose above lL ln Lhe scale [Lhe greaL holarchy]. Lach had lLs own loJepeoJeot reason for belng, ln Lhe flnal accounL, none was more lmporLanL Lhan any oLher [ulLlmaLely, as loLlnus sald, each was fully Lhe Cne, gradaLlon ls apparenL], and each, Lherefore, had lLs own clalm Lo respecL and conslderaLlon, lLs own rlghL Lo llve lLs own llfe and Lo possess all LhaL mlghL be needful Lo enable lL Lo fulflll Lhe funcLlons and en[oy Lhe prlvlleges and perqulslLes" of lLs sLaLlon. Lach llnk ln Lhe Chaln of 8elng exlsLs, noL merely and noL prlmarlly for Lhe beneflL of any oLher llnk, buL fot lts owo soke, and Lherefore Lhe Lrue tolsoo Jette of one specles of belng was never Lo be soughL ln lLs uLlllLy Lo any oLher. 36 And Lhus, oll of tbe followloq wete pteseot lo tbe uesceoJloq 5lJe of Lhe laLo/loLlnus sysLem (balanced and lnLegraLed, of course, wlLh lLs counLerparL on Lhe Ascendlng Slde): a radlcally decenLered vlslon, nonanLhropocenLrlc Lo Lhe core, an apparenL gradaLlon of belng wlLh no mlsslng llnks, no gaps, buL emergenLs aL a common boundary, a necesslLy for blodlverslLy and a dellghL ln Lhe manlfold naLure of Lhe creaLlve process, a deslre Lo parLlclpaLe fully ln Lhe passlon of SplrlL's creaLlve Coodness, an exuberanL embrace of dlverslLy as Lhe Coodness of Lhe Cne", and a celebraLlon of Lhe earLh and all lLs creaLures as a vlslble, senslble Cod" and our dlvlne MoLher." 1haL ls Lhe half of Lhe equaLlon LhaL had been downplayed, even repressed, under Lhe rule of Lhe unearLhly 1rlnlLy-from Lhe Llme, roughly, of AugusLlne Lo Copernlcus. All of Lhose ldeas were Lhus presenL, slmmerlng, hldden under Lhe welghL of Lhe raLher excluslvely Ascendlng ldeal of Lhe age. And whereas Lhe Ascenders had domlnaLed Lhe scene up Lo Lhe 8enalssance, all lL Look was a declslve shlfL ln consclousness Lo unleash Lhe uescendlng aLh, a paLh whlch, bursLlng forLh from lLs Lhousand-year conflnemenL, exploded on Lhe scene wlLh a creaLlve fury LhaL would, ln Lhe span of a mere few cenLurles, remake Lhe enLlre WesLern world-and ln Lhe process subsLlLuLe, more or less permanenLly, one broken Cod for Lhe oLher. 11 8tove New wotlJ All flxeJ, fost-ftozeo telotloos, wltb tbelt ttolo of oocleot ooJ veoetoble ptejoJlces ooJ oploloos, ote swept owoy, oll oew-fotmeJ ooes become ootlpooteJ befote tbey coo osslfy. All tbot ls sollJ melts loto olt, oll tbot ls boly ls ptofooeJ, ooJ moo ls ot lost compelleJ to foce wltb sobet seoses bls teol cooJltloos of llfe, ooJ bls telotloos wltb bls kloJ. -kA8L MA8x, on modernlLy BMCuL8nl1?": ALL 1PA1 ls solld melLs lnLo alr. We are sLlll llvlng ln lLs shadow, sLlll under Lhe sway of powerful currenLs unleashed Lhree cenLurles ago, sLlll Lrylng Lo slLuaLe ourselves ln a kosmos profoundly shaken by Lhe evenLs of Lhe LnllghLenmenL, sLlll wonderlng exacLly whaL lL all meanL. 8uL Lhls much seems cerLaln: from Lhe 8enalssance Lo Lhe LnllghLenmenL (Lo Loday): Lhe Ascenders were ouL, Lhe uescenders were ln. And Lhe caLalysL was Lhe wldespread emergence of 8eason (formal operaLlonal), noL [usL ln a few lndlvlduals (whlch had ofLen happened ln Lhe pasL), buL as a baslc organlzlng prlnclple of socleLy lLself (whlch had never happened ln Lhe pasL)-a 8eason LhaL was ln facL an acLual ascendlng or Lranscendlng of myLh, buL a 8eason LhaL, fed up wlLh a mlllennlum of (frusLraLed) upward-looklng, Lurned lLs eyes lnsLead Lo Lhe glorles of Lhls manlfesL world, and followed LhaL descendlng Cod who flnds lLs passlon and dellghL-and lLs perfecL consummaLlon-ln Lhe marvels and Lhe wonders of dlverslLy. MCuL8nl1?: CCCu nLWS, 8Au nLWS 1he movemenL of modernlLy (from Lhe LnllghLenmenL Lo Loday) conLalned, and conLalns, Lwo very dlfferenL Lrends. And ln Lrylng Lo slLuaLe ourselves ln relaLlon Lo modernlLy-and ln Lrylng Lo declde wheLher modernlLy was good news" or bad news"-boLh of Lhese Lrends, l belleve, need Lo be kepL flrmly ln mlnd. 1he flrsL Lrend LhaL deflned modernlLy was no more myLhs!" (and Lhe LnllghLenmenL phllosophers would use exacLly LhaL phrase ln descrlblng Lhelr own endeavors). 1he LnllghLenmenL menLallLy, wlLh lLs raLlonal demand for evlJeoce, bursL asunder Lhe closed clrcle of Lhe myLhologlcal world and deconsLrucLed lLs culLural worldspace ln no uncerLaln Lerms-and dld so by asklng, ln each and every case, Pow do you know Moses parLed Lhe 8ed Sea?" 8ecause lL says so ln Lhe 8lble"-where for a Lhousand years LhaL would have been an lrrefuLable and unchallengeable answer, lL now lmpressed no one (no one ln Lhe know," LhaL ls). And so some Lwo Lhousand years afLer a myLhlc-membershlp socleLy had forced Lhe flrsL greaL proponenL of 8eason Lo drlnk hemlock, Lhe flrsL 8eason-orlenLed socleLles now Lurned on Lhelr myLhlc predecessors wlLh a vengeance. 1he myLhlc domlnaLor hlerarchles (Cod and ope and klng on Lop, wlLh shades and grades of servlLude sLreLchlng ouL beneaLh), and Lhe pollLlco-rellglous forms of soclal organlzaLlon LhaL wenL wlLh Lhem, were dlsmanLled wlLh frlghLenlng and ofLen bloody speed. 8emember Lhe cruelLles!" crled volLalre-LlberLy or deaLh!" Lhe Amerlcan revoluLlonarles screamed-as Lhe domlnaLor hlerarchles, ofLen vlclous and cruel, everywhere began Lo Lopple, preclsely because Lhey were Lop-heavy wlLh a depLh Lhey dld noL earn or deserve or ln facL possess (however much Lhey dld lndeed serve Lhelr phase-speclflc Lask of soclal lnLegraLlon). As we puL lL earller, Lhe relaLlvely wldespread emergence of an eqo ldenLlLy from a tole ldenLlLy (and Lhe swlLch from a convenLlonal/soclocenLrlc Lo a posLconvenLlonal/worldcenLrlc morallLy) was a ma[or evoluLlonary LransformaLlon and Lranscendence (drlven by Lros, or Lhe self-Lranscendlng drlve of Lhe kosmos). 1hls broughL wlLh lL an evenLual demand for (1) free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, (2) morally free sub[ecLs, and (3) pollLlcally free sub[ecLs as clLlzens of Lhe democraLlc sLaLe. And Lo say free sub[ecLs" means only LhaL Lhe raLlonal-ego possessed more telotlve auLonomy (LeneL 12d) compoteJ wltb Lhe LlghLly bound myLhlc-membershlp roles ln domlnaLor hlerarchles (even lf Lhe raLlonal-ego lmaglned lLs auLonomy" Lo be much more absoluLe). 8uL all of LhaL, wlLh lLs own ups and downs, was parL of Lhe overall good news" of modernlLy: a genulne LransformaLlon ln Lhe average mode of consclousness. 8uL no more myLhs!" came olso Lo mean-and here ls Lhe second ma[or Lrend LhaL deflnes modernlLy-no more AscenL!" Slnce Lhe myLhs were all upward-yearnlng, no more myLhs!" seemed Lo demand no more upward- yearnlng of any sorL (frusLraLed or genulne or anyLhlng ln beLween). undersLandably fed up wlLh a mlllennlum or Lwo of (frusLraLed) upward-yearnlng and ple ln Lhe sky" asplraLlons, 8eason Lhrew ouL Lhe LranscendenLal baby wlLh Lhe myLhlc baLhwaLer. 1hls [eLLlsonlng of hlgher AscenL was allowed, even demanded, by Lhe posltlvlsm of Lhe evldence now recognlzed by raLlonallLy. Slnce raLlonal sclence could represenL every evenL ln Lhe kosmos as a 8lghL-Pand emplrlcal, observable, naLural phenomenon, no hlgher or meLaphyslcal" sLaLes were needed (and Lhus, Cckhamly, none were allowed). Slnce every holon ln Lhe kosmos does lndeed possess a 8lghL-Pand componenL, emplrlcal sclence could honesLly, even decenLly, buL noneLheless mlsLakenly, lmaglne LhaL ln reglsLerlng Lhe emplrlcal componenL lL had covered all Lhe bases. 1hus Lhe kosmos was collapsed lnLo Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, and a flaLland emplrlcal hollsm (wlLh a few flaLland aLomlsLlc cranks) replaced a mulLldlmenslonal holarchy as Lhe guldlng paradlgm (Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, as we puL lL earller). 1he same 8eason LhaL allowed Lhe deconsLrucLlon of Lhe domlnaLor hlerarchles lnherenL ln Lhe myLhlc sLrucLure could also, wlLh Lhe same Lools, collapse Lhe kosmos ln favor of Lhe cosmos. 1hls flaLland," l wlll argue, was Lhe essence of Lhe bad news." And Lhese are Lhe Lwo ma[or Lrends (no more myLhs!" and no more AscenL!") LhaL gave modernlLy lLs good news, bad news" characLer (or so l wlll Lry Lo show). lrom Lhe very beglnnlng of modernlLy-from Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe changes wroughL from uescarLes Lo kanL-Lhere have been lLs many vocal crlLlcs (none more percepLlve and bruLal Lhan Pegel, for whom Lhe LnllghLenmenL ln general, and kanL ln parLlcular, was a vanlLy of Lhe undersLandlng" and a monsLer of arresLed developmenL"). lrom nleLzsche Lo 8aLallle Lo loucaulL, from Peldegger Lo uerrlda Lo LyoLard, Lhe crlLlcs have conLlnued Lhelr assaulL, wlLh Lhe posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs belng merely Lhe mosL recenL, alLhough posslbly Lhe loudesL, of Lhe long llne of anLlmodernlsLs. 8uL lL's Lhe good news, bad news" naLure of modernlLy LhaL mosL of Lhese crlLlcs all Loo ofLen seem Lo mlss, and Lhey especlally mlss (or lgnore) anyLhlng resembllng good news." 8uL afLer all, Lhe sLudenLs ln 1lananmen Square were screamlng Lhe names of Locke and !efferson, Lhey were noL screamlng Lhe names of loucaulL and uerrlda. Charles 1aylor surely capLures Lhe essence of Lhe slLuaLlon when he says, l flnd myself dlssaLlsfled wlLh Lhe vlews on Lhls sub[ecL [Lhe naLure of modernlLy] whlch are now currenL. Some are upbeaL, and see us as havlng cllmbed Lo a hlgher plaLeau, oLhers show a plcLure of decllne, of loss, of forgeLfulness. nelLher sorL seems Lo me rlghL, boLh lgnore masslvely lmporLanL feaLures of our slLuaLlon. We have yeL Lo capLure, l Lhlnk, Lhe unlque comblnaLlon of greaLness and danger, of qtooJeot et mlste, whlch characLerlzes Lhe modern age. 1o see Lhe full complexlLy and rlchness of Lhe modern ldenLlLy ls Lo see, flrsL, how much we are all caughL up ln lL, for all our aLLempLs Lo repudlaLe lL, and second, how shallow and parLlal are Lhe one-slded [udgemenLs we bandy around abouL lL." 1 1hls ls, as 1aylor lndlcaLes, an enormously rlch and complex Loplc, so much so LhaL Lhe enLlre Lhlrd volume of Lhls serles (1be 5pltlt of lost/MoJetolty) ls devoLed enLlrely Lo lL. WhaL l am dolng ln Lhls chapLer and Lhe nexL ls slmply summarlzlng and condenslng an enormous number of facLors lnLo Lhese Lwo broad Lrends, no more myLhs!" (Lhe good news), and no more AscenL!" (Lhe bad news). 2 1he former was, so Lo speak, a sLep up, a shlfL ln Lhe cenLer of gravlLy of socleLy from myLhlc-membershlp Lo raLlonal-egolc, lL was a ma[or sLep ln AscenL, drlven by Lros. MosL lmporLanL of all, lL broughL a dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree (sclence, arL, and morallLy), wlLh Lhe now-dlsclosed posslblllLy of acLually advanclng each of Lhelr LruLh clalms ln a worldcenLrlc and unlversal plurallsm of Lolerance and muLual recognlLlon. And even Lhough LhaL was collecLlvely an evoluLlonary advance, a movlng forward of Lros, llke every sLage ln developmenL lL noneLheless broughL lLs own problems LhaL could noL be solved on lLs own level (Lhe dlalecLlc of progress). 8uL qulLe aparL from all LhaL, as a separaLe llne of analysls, Lhere was no more AscenL!"-LhaL ls, Ascend Lo 8eason, buL no furLher!"-and Lhls broughL ootbloq bot bad news. lL noL only flaLLened Lhe kosmos Lo a one- dlmenslonal, monologlcal affalr, lL sealed ouL Lhe posslblllLy of deeper and wlder developmenLs LhaL alone could defuse lLs own lnsoluble dllemmas. lf, for example, raLlonallLy had flnally JlffeteotloteJ Lhe 8lg 1hree, so LhaL arL and sclence and morallLy could forLlfy and enrlch Lhelr own pursulLs wlLhouL dogmaLlc lnLerference, noneLheless, wlLhouL a furLher ascenL Lo vlslon-loglc, Lhere was no way LhaL Lhe 8lg 1hree could be loteqtoteJ (as Schelllng and Pegel would boLh polnL ouL). 1he Jlffeteotlotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree Lhus degeneraLed, by Lhe end of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, lnLo Lhe Jlssoclotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree (a polnL made by Pabermas)-whlch lo toto allowed Lhe 8lg 1hree Lo be rudely reduced Lo Lhe 8lg Cne of lL-language: Lhe flaLland, one-dlmenslonal, monologlcal sysLems Lheory of Lhe represenLaLlonal and producLlon paradlgms, nlghLmares Lhrough and Lhrough, wlLh all lnLerlor depLh, wheLher ln humans or anlmals or any senLlenL belng, reduced Lo belng merely a sLrand ln Lhe endlessly flaL and faded sysLem. 1hus, reason ltself was an lncrease ln lnLerlor depLh compared Lo myLh (formop Lranscends and lncludes conop). 8uL reason coofloeJ to flotlooJ (reason recognlzlng only 8lghL-Pand, emplrlcal, sensorlmoLor ob[ecLs) ls a consclousness conflned Lo a lesser reallLy Lhan mosL myLh acknowledged (e.g., a ulvlne domaln). 1hus, under Lhe no more AscenL!" agenda, reason abandoned hlgher, oLher worlds alLogeLher, and scrunched lLself down Lo whaL lL could grasp wlLh lLs senses-scrunched lLself down, LhaL ls Lo say, Lo some of Lhe mosL fundamenLal, leasL slgnlflcanL holons ln exlsLence: exLerlor, sensorlmoLor, emplrlcal ob[ecLs, and lLs. 1o puL lL all ln a senLence, modernlLy broughL a Jeepet sub[ecL ln a sbollowet world: and Lhus, l have some good news, and some bad news. 1PL ACL Cl 8LASCn ln Lhls chapLer, Lhe good news. lrom Lhe 8enalssance Lo Lhe LnllghLenmenL, Lhe names say lL all: Copernlcus, kepler, Callleo, Leonardo da vlncl, 8oLLlcelll, Mlchelangelo, 8aphael, Machlavelll, Alexander ope, Lrasmus, lrancls 8acon, !an van Lyck, CloLLo, Shakespeare, lsaac newLon, !ohn Locke, C. L. Lesslng, uescarLes, Splnoza, volLalre, Lelbnlz, 8ousseau, ulderoL, Pume, kanL, 1homas alne, 1homas !efferson. WhaL Lhey all had ln common (oLher Lhan Lhe facL LhaL Lhey were all men-LhaL ls parL of Lhe nexL, bad news" chapLer) was LhaL Lhey shared, ln varlous degrees and ln dlfferenL ways, Lhe space of posslblllLles dlsclosed and creaLed by raLlonallLy. (8eason," wlLh a caplLal k, Lechnlcally refers Lo vlslon-loglc or dlalecLlcal-neLwork reason, as opposed Lo slmple formal-operaLlonal reasonlng, or Lhe undersLandlng." 8uL when hlsLorlans refer Lo Lhe Age of 8eason," Lhey mean formal operaLlonal as we have deflned lL. 1he conLexL wlll make clear whlch usage ls lnLended.) 1he emergence of 8eason" and Lhe Age of 8eason" do noL mean LhaL lndlvlduals prlor Lo Lhls Llme had no access Lo raLlonallLy. We saw LhaL Lhe space of raLlonallLy was accesslble, Lo Lhe few, even when Lhe average or Lyplcal mode was maglcal, and some lndlvlduals-Lhe LckharLs and 1eresas and laLos-had access noL only Lo raLlonallLy buL beyond lL Lo subLle and causal occaslons. 3 8aLher, Lhe Age of 8eason" slmply means LhaL access Lo Lhe space of reason was now common enough LhaL Lhe cenLer of soclal gravlLy"-Lhe baslc organlzlng prlnclples of socleLy-shlfLed from myLhlc-raLlonal Lo raLlonal sLrucLures (as evldenced legally, pollLlcally, lnsLlLuLlonally), wlLh, agaln, some people falllng below Lhe norm, oLhers above lL. 8eason became boLh a baslc prlnclple of soclal organlzaLlon and Lhe hlghesL expecLable poLenLlal for Lhe average lndlvldual. And whlle we evenLually wanL Lo move beyond raLlonallLy (and lLs own lnherenL llmlLaLlons and grave problems), lL ls cruclal Lo acknowledge whaL lL JlJ manage Lo accompllsh, and whaL lLs evoluLlonarlly phase-speclflc Lask was. l belleve lL ls a profound LruLh of human developmenL LhaL one can fully Lranscend any level only lf one fully honors lL flrsL (Lhus allowlng embrace/Agape). CLherwlse one's developmenL" ls slmply a reacLlon Lo, a reacLlon agalnsL, Lhe precedlng level, and Lhus one remalns sLuck Lo lL wlLh Lhe energy of dlsapproval-hobos, noL Lros. LeL us come Lo bury Caesar, leL us come Lo pralse hlm flrsL. lf we look aL Lhe above-menLloned llsL of names, vlrLually all of Lhelr works, and all of Lhelr accompllshmenLs, can be read dlrecLly off Lhe llsL of Lhe characLerlsLlcs of formal operaLlonal awareness LhaL we have already dlscussed: 1. kotlooollty ls bypotbetlco-JeJoctlve ot expetlmeotol-1ycho 8rahe, kepler, Callleo, newLon, uarwln, CharcoL, kelvln. 8aLlonallLy demands evldence and reasons, noL dogmas and myLhs, whlch ls preclsely why (as WhlLehead polnLed ouL for Lhe WesL and needham for Lhe LasL) Lhe mysLlcs and Lhe newly rlslng sclenLlsLs ofLen [olned hands agalnsL Lhe Church (or exoLerlc rellglons), slnce boLh mysLlclsm and sclence are experlmenLal and evldenLlal. lL was Lhe demand for evldence LhaL, more Lhan any oLher componenL of Lhe Age of 8eason, would shaLLer Lhe closed world of myLhology ln an lrreverslble and lrrevocable way: LhaL LooLhpasLe could never be puL back ln Lhe Lube. 8uL leL us noLe Lhe lnLrlcacy of whaL was acLually lnvolved: lL wasn'L slmply LhaL Lhe myLhlc worldvlew had no recourse Lo evldence of any sorL, lLs evldence, raLher, was grounded ln Lhe obvlousness (and unchallengeableness") of lLs own worldspace, and was ttoe eoooqb ln LhaL worldspace. 4 wltblo LhaL myLhlc worldspace, Lhere was evldence aplenLy: Lhe gods and goddesses exlsL (Pow do you know Lhey exlsL?" Are you crazy? Where do you Lhlnk Lhe raln comes from? Look aL Lhe creaLlon all around you! Can'L you see? Are you bllnd?"). And Lhe gods and goddesses have glven us Lhelr words, Lhe pharaoh/klng/emperor ls Lhe descendanL of Lhe gods, and Lhus we owe our alleglance Lo Lhls Lemporal represenLaLlve of Lhe gods/goddesses, Lhe evldence for Lhls ls everywhere, you have slmply Lo look! 1hus, Lo say LhaL Lhe myLhlc worldspace was noL falllblllsL mlsses Lhe polnL. Any glven lnLerpreLaLlon wltblo Lhe myLhlc worldspace could lndeed be tejecteJ by a communlLy of lnLerpreLers, and Lhls happened oll tbe tlme. lL ls Lrue LhaL Lhe myLhlc worldspace was noL falllblllsL from Lhe depLh of raLlonallLy (l.e., was noL falllblllsL Lo Lhe types of evldence LhaL raLlonallLy would Jlsclose): buL tbot evldence slmply could noL be seen ln Lhe flrsL place, and so dldn'L (and couldn'L) enLer Lhe plcLure Lo dlslodge any parLlcular lnLerpreLaLlons. 8uL Lhe boJ lnLerpreLaLlons wltblo Lhe myLhlc worldspace were lndeed rebuffed by a communlLy of compeLenL lnLerpreLers ln Lune wlLh Lhe nuances of Lhe myLhlc worldspace (and Lhey were rlghL more ofLen Lhan noL, ln LhaL space). 1hese sLrucLures weren'L stoplJ (no sLrucLure ls, and Lhey all produced Lhelr own bona flde genluses). 8aLher, each sLrucLure welghs carefully Lhe evldence LhaL lL coo see. ln oLher words, Lhe hermeneuLlcs of any worldspace ls closed and perfecLly evldenLlal for LhaL worldspace. no new lnLerpreLaLlon wlll sLep ouLslde Lhe worldspace. 8aLher, a developmenLal supersesslon wlll suddenly, vla emergence, dlsclose new depLhs and wlder percepLlons LhaL Lhemselves pass [udgmenL on yesLerday's relaLlve bllndness. lL ls LransformaLlon LhaL negaLes Lhe old LranslaLlons, and noL anyLhlng Lhe LranslaLlons Lhemselves could see from wlLhln Lhelr own horlzons (and bad lnLerpreLaLlons wltblo Lhose relaLlvely Lrue horlzons can be, and are, soundly re[ecLed by Lhe evldence LhaL Lhe eyes of LhaL sLrucLure coo see, and see qulLe clearly, as far as lL goes). Llkewlse, 8eason also lmaglnes LhaL lts evldence ls slmply tbe evldence, obvlous and lnconLroverLlble per se (l.e., lLs type of evldence ls llkewlse sLamped wlLh unchallengeableness"). 8ad lnLerpreLaLlons wltblo lLs raLlonal horlzon (whlch also means wlLhln lLs sLrucLural worldspace) wlll be soundly rebuffed from wlLhln LhaL horlzon by Lhe communlLy of Lhose whose eyes can see Lhe depLhs dlsclosed by raLlonallLy. lnLerpreLaLlons from Lhe LransraLlonal sLrucLures wlll noL be rebuffed: Lhey wlll slmply noL be seeo ln Lhe flrsL place, and Lhus wlll be meL wlLh Lhe sLandard WhaL, are you crazy?" (whlch ls noL a rebuff buL a reLreaL). 8uL Lhe evldence dlsclosed by raLlonallLy wlll lndeed be able Lo ouLconLexLuallze, and Lhus ouLLrump, Lhe evldence dlsclosed wlLhln Lhe horlzons and Lhe sLrucLures of myLhlc awareness ([usL as myLhlc masLerfully ouL-Lrumped and ouLconLexLuallzed maglc). lL ls noL LhaL a greaLer and absoluLe LruLh overLhrows a falsehood, so much as LhaL a greaL LruLh supersedes a lesser LruLh (no epoch llves, or can llve, slmply on falsehoods). And Lhls ls whaL Lhe Age of LnllghLenmenL broughL Lo bear upon Lhe Age of MyLh: a new horlzon of evldence LhaL ouLconLexLuallzed Lhe old. And ouLconLexLuallze, lL dld lndeed. We Lend Lo forgeL Lhe evldence LhaL Lhe myLhlc worldspace Look Lo be perfecLly obvlous. Pere ls one of Lhe wldely accepLed refuLaLlons" of Callleo's dlscovery of Lhe moons of !uplLer: 1here are seven wlndows glven Lo anlmals ln Lhe domlclle of Lhe head, Lhrough whlch Lhe alr ls admlLLed Lo Lhe Labernacle of Lhe body, Lo enllghLen, Lo warm and Lo nourlsh lL. WhaL are Lhese parLs of Lhe mlctocosm? 1wo nosLrlls, Lwo eyes, Lwo ears, and a mouLh. So ln Lhe heavens, as ln a moctocosmos, Lhere are Lwo favorable sLars, Lwo unproplLlous, Lwo lumlnarles, and Mercury undeclded and lndlfferenL. lrom Lhls and many oLher slmllarlLles ln naLure, such as Lhe seven meLals, eLc., whlch lL were Ledlous Lo enumeraLe, we gaLher LhaL Lhe number of planeLs ls necessarlly seven." 3 1haL ls an excellenL and very occotote descrlpLlon of Lhe lnsldes of Lhe myLhologlcal worldspace, where syncreLlc wholes deflne Lhe naLure of lnLerconnecLlvlLy ln Lhe kosmos os JlscloseJ ot tbot Jeptb. 8aLlonallLy can explaln Lhe lnLerconnecLlvlLy from a deeper dlmenslon, and Lhus marshal more types of evldence, buL raLlonallLy ls noL lLself operaLlng from Lhe flnal Archlmedlan polnL of all posslble worlds. A Lhousand years from now, when aLoms are undersLood Lo be plnpolnL enLrles of a masslve lnLelllgence from Lhe elghLh dlmenslon (or whaLever Lhe dlscoverles are LhaL wlll shock and shake our presenL vlews, as shock Lhey mosL cerLalnly shall), we wlll look noL so brlghL and glfLed ln our flrm assurances of whaL Lhe kosmos ls acLually" llke. ALoms wlll sLlll be aLoms (no LruLhs wlll be losL), buL Lhey wlll be seL ln deeper conLexLs LhaL wlll render our narrower perspecLlves and lnLerpreLaLlons as sllly-soundlng as Lhe poor soul who llL lnLo Callleo all self-assured and confldenL. 8uL my presenL polnL ls slmple enough: Lhe Lypes of evldence raLlonallLy could dlsclose had lL all over Lhe myLhlc sLrucLure, a shallower conLexL gave way Lo a deeper dlsclosure, and Lhe deaLh raLLle of an old and honorable worldspace released lLs lasL breaLh lnLo Lhe rlslng wlnd blowlng now across a sLrange new landscape. 2. kotlooollty ls blqbly teflexlve ooJ lottospectlve-as wlLness Lhe consLanL lnLrospecLlve analyses of uescarLes, Locke, 8erkeley, Pume, kanL (descendanLs each and all of AugusLlne's raLlonal and radlcal reflexlvlLy). 1ake, as an example, Lhe sLudy of psychology, Lhe sLudy of an loJlvlJool psyche. 1he word psychology" lLself wasn'L even used unLll lrelglus ln 1373, buL by Lhe closlng decade of Lhe slxLeenLh cenLury, lL was common Lo LreaL ootbtopoloqlo-Lhe sLudy of human naLure-as composed of Lwo parLs: psycboloqlo and somotoloqlo, reflecLlng Lhe ever-clearer dlfferenLlaLlon of mlnd and body (Lyplcal of formop). 1he flrsL wldespread use of Lhe Lerm psycboloqy was by ChrlsLlan von Wolff, successor of Lelbnlz and predecessor of kanL, ln such works as lsycboloqlo mpltlco (1731) and lsycboloqlo kotlooolls (1734). 1he Lerm was plcked up by ParLley ln Lngland (1748) and 8onneL ln lrance (1733), and by Lhe end of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury lL was ln wldespread use, reflecLlng, lL appears, a newly emergenL enLlLy Lo be sLudled: Lhe lndlvldual ego. 1he flrsL modern school" of psychology was Lhe assoclaLlonlsL school of uavld ParLley, !ohn SLuarL Mlll, and Alexander 8aln (ln Lngland), and Lhe flrsL experlmenLal approach was Lhe greaL laboraLory work of Weber, lechner, WundL (ln Cermany) and 1lLchener (ln Lngland)-Lhe polnL belng LhaL all of Lhls was made posslble, ln large measure, by Lhe sLrucLural worldspace of raLlonallLy and lLs reflexlve/lnLrospecLlve modes. 3. kotlooollty qtosps moltlple petspectlves (or ls unlversal as plurallsm). 1hls perspecLlvlsm/plurallsm showed up ln everyLhlng from pollLlcal Lheory Lo arL. !ohn Locke wroLe Lhree separaLe essays on Lolerance (or Lhe accepLance of dlfferenL perspecLlves and polnLs of vlew, excepL Lhose LhaL condemn oLhers), concludlng, among oLher Lhlngs, LhaL no one had a rlghL Lo harm anoLher ln llfe, healLh, llberLy, or possesslons"-Lhe lnfluence of whlch on subsequenL hlsLory was slmply lncalculable. ln arL, Lo glve a very dlfferenL buL very relaLed example, perspecLlvlsm began Lo be acLually deplcLed, for Lhe flrsL Llme ever, ln palnLlng, beglnnlng ln flfLeenLh-cenLury llorence and evenLually assoclaLed wlLh Lhe names of 8runelleschl, AlberLl, uonaLello, Leonardo, CloLLo. As !ean Cebser puL lL, An enLlrely new spaLlal consclousness was beglnnlng Lo break ouL of Lhe soul lnLo Lhe world. 8y vlrLue of Lhe petspectlve, noL only ls space made vlslble and broughL ouL lnLo Lhe dayllghL of waklng consclousness, man hlmself Lhereby aLLalns vlslblllLy. 1he gradual possesslon of Lhe perspecLlve, whlch became Lhe prlnclpal concern of 8enalssance man, had Lhe effecL of expandlng Lhe world lmage. . . ." 6 And Lhls vlslblllLy of man" ls dlrecLly relaLed Lo: 4. kotlooollty btloqs fottb oo eqo lJeotlty ftom tbe ptevloos tole lJeotlty. MorallLy ls, or can now be, posLconvenLlonal and wotlJceottlc, noL merely convenLlonal and eLhnocenLrlc and soclocenLrlc (or myLhlc- membershlp). Moral declslons Lhus resL wlLh Lhe loJlvlJool, who musL assume responslblllLy for hls or her own relaLlvely auLonomous cholces (and who may or may noL choose Lo llve up Lo raLlonallLy and acL from a worldcenLrlc space of unlversal plurallsm-buL Lhe relaLlvely auLonomous cholce ls noneLheless presenL). And, lndeed, ootooomy became one of Lhe greaL and endurlng Lhemes of Lhe LnllghLenmenL. kanL would deflne lL as Lhe courage Lo Lhlnk for oneself and noL rely on soclally glven rules and dogmas. (1haL Lhls would play lnLo Lhe dlsengaged sub[ecL of flaLland hollsm ls a polnL we wlll pursue ln Lhe nexL chapLer.) ln pollLlcal Lheory (and pracLlce), Lhls resulLed, as we have seen, ln Lhe concepLlon of men (and soon women) as auLonomous agenLs, whlch meanL free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, morally free sub[ecLs, and pollLlcally free sub[ecLs or democraLlc clLlzens of Lhe sLaLe. ln arL, Lhls meanL, for Lhe flrsL Llme, LhaL Lhere was an acLual person (ego-bearer) Lo palnL: Lhe beglnnlng of porLralLure (such as by !an van Lyck). And lf Lhere was now an ego Lo be palnLed, Lhere was llkewlse a sLory Lo be Lold, a narraLlve of, by, and abouL egos: Lhe novel was born. 3. kotlooollty ls ecoloqlcol ot telotloool. Along wlLh auLonomy, Lhe greaL Lheme of Lhe LnllghLenmenL was systems botmooy, whlch dld noL mean peaceful" or wlLhouL confllcL," buL raLher LhaL Lhe whole sysLem" of reallLy would balance lLself ouL lo splte of Lhe parLlcular confllcLs and dlscords LhaL lndlvldual componenLs mlghL undergo. As we have seen (and wlll see agaln ln Lhe nexL chapLer), lL was a Lhoroughgolng sysLems vlew of reallLy, where Lhe LoLallLy self-regulaLed lLself" desplLe all Lhe ups and downs of lndlvlduals. And Lhls sysLems vlew, desplLe whaL mlsuses lL mlghL suffer, was noneLheless a greaL advance over myLhology ln undersLandlng Lhe lnLerconnecLlvlLy of Lhe kosmos, for lL replaced bellef ln syncreLlc wholes (seven orlflces mean seven planeLs) wlLh an undersLandlng of holons, or whole/parLs LhaL are conLexLually slLuaLed ln a way LhaL does noL do vlolence Lo lndlvldual wholes or parLs. (1haL Lhls sysLems vlew would also lnvolve Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo Lhe emplrlcal hollsLlc cosmos of monologlcal flaLland-Lhls ls a separaLe lssue, parL of Lhe bad news" of Lhe nexL chapLer, and LhaL Lhls hollsLlc worldvlew would paradoxlcally be one of Lhe greaLesL conLrlbuLors Lo an ecologlcal crlsls: LhaL, Loo, Lhe Loplc of Lhe nexL chapLer.) ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe relaLlonal mode of sysLems Lhlnklng was all Lhe rage. lL was llLerally everywhere, and was greeLed wlLh crles of Lureka across Lhe ConLlnenL and Lhe lsles. We see lL ln, for example, Adam SmlLh's lnvlslble hand," where, ln splLe of Lhe facL LhaL each lndlvldual mlghL acL ln a greedy fashlon, Lhe overall resulL was good and beneflclal for Lhe whole (lL was belleved). We see lL ln Lelbnlz's preesLabllshed" harmony of all monads. We see lL powerfully ln !ohn Locke's noLlon of lnLerlocklng orders." ln pollLlcs, lL shows up mosL lnfluenLlally ln 8ousseau's ldea of Lhe general wlll" of Lhe people, whlch supposed LhaL lf each lndlvldual follows hls or her own reasons, a ma[orlLy or consensus wlll emerge LhaL wlll be Lo Lhe beneflL of all. 1hls voloote qeoetole was a dlrecL precursor Lo Lhe Amerlcan and lrench revoluLlons. 8uL Lhe polnL ls LhaL all Lhe phllosophers of Lhe LnllghLenmenL use Lhls concepL of harmony dlrecLly or lndlrecLly, expllclLly or lmpllclLly," 7 and all were glven Lo exalLaLlons of Lhe perfecLlon of Lhe greaL unlversal SysLem." 6. kotlooollty ls oooootbtopoceottlc. 1he shocklng decenLerlng LhaL raLlonallLy/sclence broughL ls now noLorlous: Copernlcus, uarwln, lreud-men and women are merely llnks ln LhaL vasL, vasL chaln of exlsLence. (1hls had always been obvlous Lo Lhe llkes of Cusanus or 8runo or loLlnus, we are now dlscusslng whaL raLlonallLy broughL Lo Lhe average-mode and whaL Lhus came Lo be very commonly accepLed vlews ouLslde of Lhe myLhlc holdovers.) As we wlll see ln Lhe nexL chapLer, Lhls anLl-anLhropocenLrlc sLance became so lnLense aL Llmes LhaL eLhlcs vlrLually sLalled alLogeLher, so paralyzed were people wlLh Lhe LhoughL of Lhelr uLLer lnslgnlflcance. 1o sLep ouLslde of one's lmperfecLlon was vlewed as prlde, Lhe greaL sln of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, and Lhere emerged a moral aLmosphere LhaL may be descrlbed as a counsel of lmperfecLlon-an eLhlcs of prudenL medlocrlLy." 8 8uL all of Lhls was a dlrecL resulL of Lhe facL LhaL reason could seL aslde lLs own vlewpolnL, lLs own egocenLrlclLles, and see Lhe world Lhrough Lhe eyes of Lhe oLher, and Lhus begln Lo honor Lhe oLher ln unprecedenLed ways, and, for beLLer or worse, Lo profoundly quesLlon lLs own rlghL Lo exlsLence. 7. kotlooollty btloqs o oew spoce of Jeepet feelloq ooJ qteotet possloo-Lhe exploslve ldeallsm of Lhe Lrue dreamer who can cognlLlvely lmaglne all Lhe posslblllLles. 1hls new passlon-coupled wlLh reason's capaclLy for posLconvenLlonal morallLy and lLs capaclLy Lo crlLlclze Lhe glven sLaLe of affalrs ln llghL of a posslble fotote-meanL LhaL Lhls was noL [usL Lhe Age of 8eason, lL was Lhe Age of 8evoluLlon. We musL undersLand whaL Lhls reason was. lL was noL [[usL] a calculaLlng reason whlch decldes wheLher Lo do Lhls or LhaL, dependlng on whlch ls more advanLageous. 8aLher, lL was a full, passlonaLe, revoluLlonary emphasls on man's essenLlal goodness ln Lhe name of Lhe prlnclple of [usLlce [posLconvenLlonal morallLy]. 1he revoluLlonary foughL agalnsL feudallsm and Lhe auLhorlLarlan churches. Pe had a passlonaLe bellef ln Lhe [goodness or harmony] of reallLy and was convlnced LhaL Lhe human mlnd ls able Lo re-esLabllsh Lhls sLrucLure by Lransformlng socleLy. We could Lherefore call lL revoluLlonary reason as well as crlLlcal reason. 8ecause of lLs Jeptbs Lhls crlLlcal revoluLlonary reason overcame Lhe pre[udlces of Lhe feudal order, Lhe heLeronomous [soclocenLrlc] sub[ecLlon of people boLh by Lhe sLaLe and Lhe church. lL could do so because lL spoke ln Lhe name of [plurallsLlc or posLconvenLlonal] LruLh and [usLlce. 1he phllosophers of Lhe LnllghLenmenL were exLremely passlonaLe. 1hey were noL poslLlvlsLs [merely one of Lhe posslblllLles of reason], Lhey were noL lnLeresLed ln merely collecLlng facLs. 1hey became marLyrs for Lhe passlon. . . . 9 1hls was parLlcularly a passlon, we mlghL say, for Lhe equallLy found only ln Lhe noospherlc space of reason. 1he resulL, of course, ls Lhe exlsLence of Loday's plurallsLlc democracles, forged by a passlon for Lolerance-a Lolerance LhaL, slnce noL all of lLs clLlzens can always llve up Lo lL, ls Lherefore flrmly embedded ln legal lnsLlLuLlons, and a Lolerance LhaL, from lLs lncepLlon, has always been drlvlng Loward Lhe emergence of planeLary vlslon-loglc wlLh lLs genulnely world-class clLlzens. And one can only sLand ln uLLer awe and admlraLlon for Lhe many men and women who foughL and dled, from Amerlca Lo lrance, under Lhe slogan l dlsagree wlLh whaL you say buL wlll defend Lo Lhe deaLh your rlghL Lo say lL." 1PL Ll8L8A1lCn MCvLMLn1S 1he wldespread emergence of reason meanL, as always, a new dlfferenLlaLlon demandlng a new lnLegraLlon. We have already seen LhaL some of Lhe new and lmporLanL dlfferenLlaLlons lncluded a separaLlon of church and sLaLe, Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree (an lmporLanL polnL we wlll reLurn Lo ln a momenL), and Lhe lncreaslngly clearer dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere. MosL slgnlflcanLly, Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon of noosphere and blosphere meanL, of course, LhaL Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon could go Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon, and Lhls dlssoclaLlon would show up ln an exLraordlnary number of gulses. llrsL and foremosL, Lhe sLage was seL for a posslble ecologlcal crlsls, a posslblllLy LhaL of laLe has become an lncreaslngly gruesome acLuallLy. 1he ecologlcal crlsls, as we earller puL lL, ls a worldwlde, collecLlve psychoneurosls-a denlal, allenaLlon, dlssoclaLlon of Lhe blosphere by Lhe noosphere. 1he ecophllosophers malnLaln LhaL Lhe ecologlcal crlsls ls Lhe resulL of human belngs noL reallzlng LhaL Lhey are merely a parL of a larger blosphere. 8uL LhaL, as we have seen, geLs Lhe plcLure exacLly backward, and cannoL even explaln how a parL can domlnaLe Lhe whole. no, we have seen qulLe clearly LhaL Lhe human compound lndlvldual ls noL a parL of Lhe blosphere. 8aLher, a pott of Lhe human compound lndlvldual ls a pott of Lhe blosphere, and Lhe blosphere lLself ls a pott of Lhe noosphere (because Lhe noosphere Lranscends and lncludes Lhe blosphere). And for [usL LhaL reason, represslon can seL ln, for [usL LhaL reason, Lhe noosphere can dlssoclaLe Lhe blosphere, and for [usL LhaL reason, Lhe polsonlng of our rooLs means Lhe deaLh of our branches as well. 8uL LhaL ls more of Lhe bad news" (nexL chapLer). AL Lhls polnL, we should noLe lnsLead LhaL ln Lhe lmmedlaLe wake of Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, blologlcal deLermlnanLs were no longer Lhe sLrong (and ofLen overwhelmlng) facLor Lhey had been up Lo LhaL polnL ln hlsLory. ln Lhe blosphere, mlghL makes rlghL. ln Lhe blosphere, blg flshes eaL llLLle flshes. ln Lhe blosphere, muscle rules. And ln Lhe blosphere, men domlnaLe oLher men, and men domlnaLe women. lemlnlsL and orLhodox researchers boLh agree LhaL, ln vlrLually all known socleLles Lo daLe, power beLween Lhe sexes has been asymmeLrlcal ln a very speclflc and very wldespread (vlrLually unlversal) fashlon. 1haL ls, all known socleLles can be arranged along a conLlnuum from relaLlvely equallLarlan" (males and females share power ln Lhe publlc sphere roughly equally) Lo male-domlnanL (males alone govern Lhe publlc sphere), buL oevet Lhe oLher way around, never Lendlng Loward socleLles of female domlnance of Lhe publlc/producLlve domaln. ln oLher words, Lhe most femlnlne socleLles (such as early hoe/horLlculLural socleLles) were noL ones domlnaLed by females, buL ones where females shared publlc/producLlve power roughly 30-30 wlLh men, whereas Lhe mosL mascullne" socleLles (such as Lhe plow/agrarlan) were ones where men possessed vlrLually 100 percenL of publlc/producLlve power (wlLh women relegaLed Lo Lhe prlvaLe/reproducLlve sphere). As researchers from !aneL ChafeLz Lo 8lane Llsler Lo 8ae 8lumberg Lo !oyce nlelsen have polnLed ouL, Lhere are vlrLually no known excepLlons Lo Lhls scheme-lL goes from 30-30 male/female Lo 100 percenL male, buL never Loward 100 percenL female. 1here ls obvlously a seL of very sLrong, unlversal facLors LhaL are LllLlng Lhe scheme ln one dlrecLlon only (from balance Lo male domlnance, never from balance Lo female domlnance). WhaL are Lhese vlrLually unlversal facLors? 1o answer Lhe quesLlon 'Why are women nowhere superlor Lo men ln Lhelr access Lo scarce and valued socleLal resources?' one musL look Lo Lhe key seLs of lnLervenlng varlables," says !aneL ChafeLz. 10 As a caLegory, men nowhere [ln no known socleLles] speclallze solely ln Lhe reproducLlve/prlvaLe sphere acLlvlLles, nor do women as a group speclallze solely ln Lhe producLlve/publlc sphere. SLaLed oLherwlse, women's acLlvlLles are elLher speclallzed ln nonproducLlve roles, whlch leads Lo lnferlor sLaLus, or dlvlded beLween Lhe Lwo realms, whlch may afford Lhem relaLlvely equal sLaLus"-ln oLher words, aL besL 30-30, and LhaL agalnsL Lhe odds. 1hls pushes Lhe quesLlon back one sLep: why do women as a caLegory never speclallze solely ln producLlve/publlc secLor roles? Slnce Lhls ls a consLanL [no known excepLlons], loglcally lL musL be explalned ln Lerms of one or more consLanLs. ln Lhls case, o set of bloloqlcol coostoots helps Lo answer Lhe quesLlon ralsed: Lhe women carry bables ln Lhelr bodles and lacLaLe, whlch clrcumscrlbes Lhelr physlcal moblllLy. Whlle Lhls can be mlolmlzeJ [Lhrough low blrLh raLes, eLc.], lL cannoL be ellmlooteJ and, ln facL, for mosL human socleLles LhroughouL mosL of human hlsLory, such resLrlcLlon due Lo pregnancy and nurslng has been far from mlnlmal." 1hls has far-reachlng, even masslve, consequences. Clven Lhese blologlcal facLs, mosL socleLles flnd lL more efflcleot lf women also do Lhe bulk of Lhe careLaklng of young chlldren who are no longer nurslng. 1haL ls, on Lhe basls of expeJleocy, Lhe nurLurance role ls Lyplcally exLended beyond Lhe blologlcally based phenomenon of breasL- feedlng. And Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL Lhese facLors keep women ln Lhe proxlmlLy of Lhe domlclle more Lhan men, lL becomes more efflclenL Lo exLend Lhelr domesLlc role Lo encompass oLher household Lasks, such as food preparaLlon and malnLenance of famlly possesslons. Slnce many socleLles have had a large share of Lhelr producLlve acLlvlLles moved away from Lhe homeslLe, Lhese feLLers on female moblllLy resLrlcL women's opporLunlLy Lo speclallze ln producLlve roles." Accordlng Lo ChafeLz, Lhese blologlcal glvens, unlversal ln naLure, are parL of Lhe reason LhaL socleLles unlversally do oot drlfL Loward 100 percenL female domlnance of Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere, buL, aL besL, allow a 30-30 sharlng, and, aL worsL, allow a drlfL Loward 100 percenL male advanLage. And Lhls drlfL Loward male domlnance of Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere ls aggravaLed by a unlversal or consLanL blologlcal facLor on Lhe parL of Lhe males as well. An addlLlonal blologlcal consLanL ls probably ln force: male superlorlLy ln physlcal sLrengLh. ln many socleLles, especlally pre-lndusLrlal, some or many producLlve acLlvlLles requlre-or aL leasL are handled more efflclenLly by-greaLer sLrengLh. Agaln, females as a caLegory flnd Lhemselves somewhaL dlsadvanLaged ln compeLlng for such roles." 1he concluslon, Lhen, ls raLher sLralghLforward: ln shorL, females are noL found Lo have superlor sLaLus Lo males because Lhelr relaLlve dlsadvanLage ln moblllLy and/or sLrengLh makes lL more efflclenL for men Lo monopollze some, many, or all producLlve roles and for women Lo assume aL leasL some of Lhe household labor. 1hus, women as a caLegory are never free Lo speclallze ln or monopollze producLlve/publlc secLor roles. Where men do speclallze ln or monopollze such roles, Lhey are vasLly superlor Lo women ln sLaLus [100 percenL male advanLage]. Where Lhe sexes more equally dlvlde Lhe Lwo realms, Lhelr sLaLuses approach equallLy [roughly 30-30]. lemales as a group do noL have vasLly superlor sLaLus Lo males [lL never drlfLs ln Lhe oLher dlrecLlon] because, ln all Lhe hlsLory of our specles, women have never been able Lo dlvesL Lhemselves of some lnvolvemenL ln Lhe reproducLlve/prlvaLe sphere of acLlvlLy." now, ChafeLz's overall Lheory (whlch ls very comprehenslve, and whlch ls examlned ln deLall ln volume 2) does noL slmply resL wlLh Lhese blologlcal consLanLs (or sLrong unlversals ln Lhe sexual scheme"). 1hese blologlcal glvens are slmply Lhe background consLanLs agalnsL whlch numerous oLher facLors play Lhemselves ouL, varlables such as modes of Lechnology, envlronmenLal LhreaLs, famlly sLrucLures, Lypes of producLlve acLlvlLy, populaLlon denslLy, naLure of work organlzaLlon, degree of separaLlon of work- and homeslLes. ln all, ChafeLz lsolaLes a dozen facLors LhaL are lnvolved ln Lhe overall gender sLaLus" of men and women ln varlous socleLles. 8uL glven Lhe blologlcal consLanLs, all of Lhese oLher facLors affecL wheLher Lhe glven socleLy wlll be relaLlvely equallLarlan (30-30), or wheLher, for reasons of expedlency and efflclency, lL wlll drlfL Loward a male domlnance of Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere (buL never drlfL ln Lhe oLher dlrecLlon). And Lhe concluslon, backed by exLenslve emplrlcal daLa, ls LhaL whenever Lhese oLher varlables do lndeed shlfL-whenever Lhere are envlronmenLal LhreaLs or dlsasLers, food scarclLles, warfare, soclal LhreaLs, and lnLense sLresses-whenever Lhese facLors occur, Lhen Lhe 30-30 balance ls lnevlLably dlsrupLed, a premlum ls placed on male physlcal sLrengLh/moblllLy, and tbe sexes polotlze Jtomotlcolly (wlLh males domlnaLlng Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere and females domlnaLlng Lhe prlvaLe/reproducLlve, buL never Lhe reverse). And, mosL lmporLanL, when Lhe sexes polarlze dramaLlcally, a horrlble sLress ls placed on botb men and women. (ln facL, accordlng Lo ChafeLz, men have lL worse ln male-domlnanL" socleLles Lhan do women, sLarLlng wlLh Lhe facL LhaL Lhey alone are conscrlpLed for defense). Opptessloo as a causal explanaLlon ls deflclenL and lnadequaLe ln almosL every respecL, slnce, among oLher Lhlngs, lL slmply does noL flL Lhe daLa curve. 1hese oppresslon Lheorles," says ChafeLz, are based on vaguely deflned concepLs ofLen lll sulLed Lo operaLlonallzaLlon, such as 'paLrlarchy,' 'female subordlnaLlon,' and 'sexlsm.' 1he use of such emoLlon-laden buL unclear Lerms, comblned Lyplcally wlLh a heavlly normaLlve approach Lo Lhe Loplc of sex lnequallLy, resulLs ln a maxlmum of rheLorlc buL a mlnlmum of clear lnslghL." no, Lhls polarlzaLlon of Lhe sexes-wlLh males domlnaLlng Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere and females domlnaLlng Lhe prlvaLe/reproducLlve, Lo Lhe deLrlmenL of boLh-has vlrLually noLhlng Lo do wlLh male oppresslon and female sheepdom/sub[ugaLlon. lL has everyLhlng Lo do wlLh llfe ln Lhe blosphere. 1hus, wlLh Lhe Jlffeteotlotloo of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, Lhese blologlcal consLanLs are noL ellmlnaLed, buL Lhey are sobotJlooteJ (preserved and negaLed). 1hey are no longer necessarlly Lhe ma[or deLermlnanLs of Lhe form of soclal organlzaLlon. 8lology ls no longer necessarlly desLlny. Lven ln Lhe relaLlvely equallLarlan" socleLles of Lhe pasL (such as early horLlculLural and some foraglng), Lhe equallLy" was kepL ln place, noL by legal and moral (or noospherlc) deLermlnanLs, buL by luck. 1he hoe placed publlc/producLlve power ln women's hands, noL by consclous and lnLenLlonal deslgn, buL by sheer happensLance. lL Lurns ouL LhaL a slmple hoe or dlgglng sLlck can be physlcally handled as easlly by a woman as by a man, and furLher, ln hoe socleLles, Lhe workslLe ls ofLen rlghL nexL Lo Lhe homeslLe, so LhaL pregnanL women are noL dlsadvanLaged when lL comes Lo physlcal moblllLy (Lhey, llke Lhe men, can walk Lo work). And, lndeed, ln such socleLles, women produced abouL 80 percenL of Lhe foodsLuff (Lhe men sLlll ofLen hunLed), and consequenLly Lhe socleLles remalned relaLlvely close Lo LhaL ldeal 30-30 balance-buL a balance enLlrely aL Lhe mercy of clrcumsLances. And Lhus, [usL as Lhe hoe had placed power ln women's hands, noL by consclous deslgn buL by happensLance, so Lhe plow would yank LhaL power away, noL by oppresslon or oppresslve deslgn, buL by Lhe same blologlcal glvens sub[ecLed now Lo enLlrely dlfferenL (and equally nonlnLenLlonal) clrcumsLances. (Women who operaLed plows suffered lncreased raLes of mlscarrlage, as polnLed ouL by ChafeLz, so lL ls Lo Lhelr uarwlnlan advanLage oot Lo plow, furLher, Lhe plowed flelds were always aL a conslderable dlsLance from Lhe homeslLe, dlscouraglng a pregnanL woman from geLLlng Lo work, as polnLed ouL by nlelsen and oLhers). 11 1he same blologlcal consLanLs LhaL under one seL of clrcumsLances slmply happened Lo advanLage women, under dlfferenL clrcumsLances slmply happened Lo dlsadvanLage Lhem. 1here ls nelLher oppresslon on Lhe one hand, nor vlrLue on Lhe oLher, operaLlng here. WlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, Lhese blologlcal consLanLs, alLhough noL ellmlnaLed, are no longer necessarlly Lhe ma[or deLermlnanLs ln Lhe pobllc sLaLus of men and women. ln Lhe blosphere, mlghL makes rlghL, and sLaLus follows physlcal funcLlon. ln Lhe noosphere, rlghL makes mlghL, and sLaLus follows Lhe rlghLs of free agenLs ln Lhe worldcenLrlc space of unlversal perspecLlvlsm. WheLher or noL a woman ls produclng foodsLuffs ln Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere ls lttelevoot Lo her tlqbts ln LhaL domaln-and tbot ldea was revoluLlonary and absoluLely unprecedenLed on any sorL of large scale. WlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, women could secure rlghLs as culLural-noospherlc oqeots, teqotJless of blospherlc facLors or funcLlons or consLanLs, whlch were [udged, for Lhe flrsL Llme ln hlsLory, Lo be lttelevoot Lo one's publlc sLaLus as a clLlzen and a bearer, noL [usL of chlldren, buL of rlghLs. 1he noosphere, noL Lhe blosphere, would deLermlne rlghLs and responslblllLles. And Lhese rlghLs were noL prevlously teptesseJ, Lhey were prevlously meooloqless (Lhey were noL oppressed, Lhey had slmply oot yet emerged). 1o repeaL whaL was sald ln chapLer 3 (for now l Lhlnk lL wlll make more sense): ln Lhls way, and Lhls way only, can we malnLaln Lhe oLherwlse paradoxlcal and confuslng LruLh-a paradoxlcal LruLh LhaL has crlppled femlnlsm vls-a-vls female llberaLlon"-LhaL women now sLand open Lo and ln need of llberaLlon, buL prevlously were oot acLlng ln an unllberaLed (or duped) fashlon. 1he wldespread emergence of Lhe women's movemenL ln Lhe elghLeenLh and nlneLeenLh cenLurles occurred preclsely because Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere were flnally dlfferenLlaLed. 12 And Lhls lnescapably means LhaL Lhe wldespread emergence of Lhe women's movemenL was noL prlmarlly Lhe ooJoloq of a nasLy sLaLe of affalrs LhaL easlly could have been dlfferenL, buL raLher lL marked Lhe emetqeoce of an alLogeLher oew sLaLe of affalrs LhaL was ln slgnlflcanL ways oopteceJeoteJ. WhaL had grounded botb men and women ln narrowly based blologlcal roles was an evoluLlonary process LhaL was lLself, unLll falrly recenLly, grounded ln Lhe blosphere, and LhaL only recenLly ls now ln Lhe process of llberaLlng botb men and women from conflnemenL Lo Lhose parLlcular roles-necessary aL Lhe Llme buL now ouLmoded. PlsLorlcally, wlLh Lhe emergence of plurallsLlc raLlonallLy-wlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere-rlghL slowly began Lo replace mlghL. Wherever plurallsLlc raLlonallLy emerged, soclal relaLlons based on physlcal power-parLlcularly slavery and Lhe polarlzaLlon or dlssoclaLlon of Lhe sexes-were found lnLolerable Lo reason, Lo plurallsm and perspecLlvlsm-puL yourself ln Lhe slave's shoes (or lack of Lhem) and see how lL feels! 1hls was all radlcally new. . . . And Lhus, ln Lhe WesL and ln Lhe LasL, wherever raLlonallLy emerged, femlnlsL movemenLs and anLlslavery movemenLs flrsL emerged as well. As only one example from Lhe LasL, Lhe real revoluLlon LhaL CauLama 8uddha broughL Lo lndla lay noL so much ln hls acLual splrlLual pracLlces-hls yoga was already afooL ln lndla-as ln Lhe facL LhaL he denled Lhe casLe sysLem. Much more Lhan a rellglous ploneer, he was a soclal revoluLlonary, and Lhls rocked lndla profoundly-yeL anoLher example of Lhe revoluLlonary passlon" broughL by reason. Lven Lhough CauLama was LransraLlonal as well, hls rellglon-one of Lhe flrsL raLlonal rellglons" ln Lhe world-was oot based on myLhlc gods and goddesses. Pe denled oll of LhaL, and Lhus he slmulLaneously denled Lhe domlnaLor hlerarchles, Lhe casLe sysLem, lnherenL ln Lhe myLhologlcal worldvlew: Lhls ls whaL was so revoluLlonary abouL hls sysLem. And my polnL ls LhaL lL wasn'L so much LhaL Lhese varlous llbetotloo movemeots (of slaves, of women, of Lhe unLouchables) had Lrled Lo surface ln Lhe pasL buL were rudely oppressed, lL was mosLly LhaL Lhey prevlously made no sense whaLsoever, Lo men or women or slaves or masLers, and so were for all lnLenLs and purposes nonexlsLenL. ower was earned or Laken, Lo sbote lL was lnsanlLy, accordlng Lo Lhe evldence LhaL Lhese sLrucLures coolJ see. Cnly where Lhe noosphere began Lo emerge and dlfferenLlaLe lLself from Lhe blosphere-only where rlghL began Lo bear down on mlghL-dld Lhese slave slLuaLlons" come Lo be percelved as ptoblems. CLherwlse, Lhe problem was how Lo exetclse power sLraLeglcally, noL how Lo sbote lL. lor Lhe warrlor eLhlc, for Lhe duLy eLhlc, and for Lhe eLhnocenLrlc eLhlc, unlversal compasslon was a slgn of weokoess. 1he voloe of compasslon was oot suppressed or oppressed, lL slmply was oot seeo ln Lhe flrsL place. 8uL wlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, Lhere coolJ-and Lherefore woolJ-arlse a Mary WollsLonecrafL, a !ohn SLuarL Mlll, a ParrleL 1aylor ([usL as slmllar volces, alLhough lsolaLed, had arlsen ln Creece and 8ome and lndla and Chlna, wherever plurallsLlc reason had llfLed up lLs unlversal head). AfLer Lhe deaLh of her flrsL husband, ParrleL 1aylor marrled !ohn SLuarL Mlll (he reporLs he had been ln love wlLh her for LwenLy years), and LogeLher Lhey collaboraLed on Lhe famous Oo llbetty (1839). 1he year lL was publlshed was Lhe hundredLh annlversary of Lhe blrLh daLe of Mary WollsLonecrafL, whose vloJlcotloo of tbe klqbts of womeo (1792) ls generally regarded as Lhe flrsL ma[or femlnlsL LreaLlse anywhere ln hlsLory. lemlnlsm as a modern ldeology dld noL emerge unLll Lhe mlddle of Lhe nlneLeenLh cenLury," polnLs ouL 8lane Llsler. AlLhough many of Lhe phllosophlcal foundaLlons for femlnlsm had been arLlculaLed earller by women llke Mary WollsLonecrafL, lrances WrlghL, LrnesLlne 8ose, Ceorge Sand, Sarah and Angellna Crlmke, and MargareL luller, lLs formal blrLhday ls !uly 19, 1848, aL Seneca lalls, new ?ork. Pere, aL Lhe flrsL convenLlon ln recorded hlsLory held for Lhe express purpose of launchlng women's collecLlve sLruggle, LllzabeLh Cady SLanLon made a plvoLal sLaLemenL. 'Among Lhe many lmporLanL quesLlons whlch have been broughL before Lhe publlc,' SLanLon sald, 'Lhere ls none LhaL more vlLally affecLs Lhe human famlly Lhan LhaL whlch ls Lechnlcally called womeos klqbts.'" 13 ln Lhe noosphere, rlghL makes mlghL. Wllllam Wllberforce, ln a campalgn forged wlLh hls llfelong frlend Wllllam lLL, spearheaded a movemenL LhaL resulLed, ln 1807, ln Lhe abollLlon of Lhe slave Lrade ln Lhe 8rlLlsh emplre. ln Lhe SLaLes, a war foughL ln parL for anLlslavery moLlves would grlnd up as many men ln slngle baLLles as were losL ln all of vleLnam: 31,000 were kllled ln Lhree days aL CeLLysburg alone. 1he presldenL aL Lhe Llme would remlnd Lhe world, ln an address aL LhaL slLe, and ln a mere 269 words, LhaL Lhls baLLle was foughL because Lhe naLlon was dedlcaLed Lo Lhe proposlLlon LhaL all men are creaLed equal," a proposlLlon scorned by naLure and by all socleLles embedded ln lL. 1haL ptoposltloo-LhaL raLlonal ldea-very soon deLached lLself from remnanLs of blospherlc power and exLended Lo women as well. ln less Lhan a cenLury from ParrleL 1aylor's deaLh, women ln democraLlc socleLles had secured Lhe legal proLecLlon, lostltotlooollzeJ, of (1) free and equal sub[ecLs of clvll law, (2) morally free sub[ecLs, and (3) pollLlcally free sub[ecLs as clLlzens of Lhe democraLlc sLaLe. 1haL Lhese freedoms and proLecLlons sLlll need Lo be exLended and forLlfled does noL denlgraLe Lhe facL LhaL Lhey are sLrucLurally lo ploce. 14 WlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, women could sLlll clalm a rlch herlLage ln Lhe blospherlc quallLles (mosLly, embodled communlon) LhaL dlfferenLlaLe Lhem from men (mosLly, hyperagency)-Lhls ls Lhe clalm of radlcal femlnlsLs. 8uL llkewlse, Lhey could also clalm ooospbetlc epoollty and demand LhaL lL be proLecLed by law-Lhls ls Lhe clalm of llberal femlnlsLs. l belleve boLh are Lrue, and coo be Lrue, now LhaL Lhe noosphere and blosphere have been dlfferenLlaLed and enfolded, embraced, ln Lhe same human compound lndlvldual. And Lhls ls parL of Lhe rlch herlLage of Lhe varlous llberaLlon movemenLs" (of women, of slaves, of unLouchables) LhaL emerged around Lhe globe wlLh Lhe emergence of raLlonal perspecLlvlsm and unlversal plurallsm. ln Lhe same way, Lhe female value sphere, freed by evoluLlon from lLs conflnemenL vla Lhe blosphere, could now begln more readlly Lo lnfuse Lhe publlc domaln wlLh lLs own care and concerns. lor lL was Lhrough Lhe lmpacL of Lhe 'female eLhos' embodled by women llke llorence nlghLlngale, !ane Addams, So[ourner 1ruLh, and uoroLhea ulx, who were now beglnnlng Lo enLer Lhe 'publlc world' en masse, LhaL new professlons llke organlzed nurslng and soclal work emerged, LhaL Lhe abollLlonlsL movemenL Lo free slaves galned masslve grass rooLs supporL, LhaL Lhe LreaLmenL of Lhe lnsane and menLally deflclenL became more humane." 13 noL Lo menLlon LhaL lL was ln Lhe salons"-ln Lhe otmospbete-creaLed by women such as nlnon de Lenclos, Madame Ceoffrln, Madame 8amboullleL, and Madame du ChaLeleL, LhaL so many of Lhe ldeas LhaL we would recognlze as humanlsL" and LnllghLenmenL" arose and were nurLured, an aLmosphere LhaL can only be called llberaLlonal." 16 All of whlch polnLs unmlsLakably, as 8lane Llsler puLs lL (and as Pabermas has ofLen argued): WhaL becomes evldenL ls LhaL Lhe greaL LransformaLlon of WesLern socleLy LhaL began wlLh Lhe elghLeenLh-cenLury LnllghLenmenL dld noL fall buL ls merely lncompleLe." 17 (And Lhe nexL llberaLlon movemenL"? undersLandlng LhaL Lhe real urgency ls sLlll Lo lmplemenL more fully Lhe llberaLlons broughL by raLlonallLy and Lhe ego/cenLaur, Lhen nexL up ls: Lhe Lco-noeLlc Self, Lhe Cver-Soul LhaL ls Lhe World Soul, whlch demands a llberaLlon noL [usL of peoples buL of llfe, of all senLlenL belngs, noL as havlng equal rlghLs, buL as worLhy of care and respecL and honor, cherlshed as manlfesLaLlons of SplrlL. We wlll reLurn Lo Lhls Loplc of envlronmenLal eLhlcs" ln Lhe lasL chapLer. My polnL for now ls slmply LhaL every Lros or AscenL brlngs a llberaLlng force whlch can Lhen, barrlng flxaLlon or represslon, be embodled ln a wlder Agape or compasslon.) 1PL 8lC 1P8LL l would llke Lo polnL ln parLlcular Lo lmmanuel kanL's Lhree crlLlques (ctltlpoe of lote keosoo, ctltlpoe of ltoctlcol keosoo, and ctltlpoe of IoJqmeot), because Lhey demonsLraLe more clearly Lhan anyLhlng else LhaL Lhe Lhree spheres of sclence, morallLy, and arL were now lrrevocably dlfferenLlaLed. ln myLhlc and myLhlc-raLlonal syncreLlsm, sclence and morallLy and arL are sLlll ln slgnlflcanL ways globally fused, and far from belng hollsLlc," Lhls lndlcaLes, as ln all syncreLlsms, LhaL Lhe lndlvldual whole/parLs are dlsLorLed, or noL Laken aL face value, ln order LhaL Lhey may be bound and forced lnLo Lhe syncreLlc whole." A sclenLlflc LruLh" ls Lrue only lf lL flLs Lhe rellglous dogma, and all Lrue arL deplcLs some aspecL of LhaL myLhlc organlzaLlon. WlLh kanL, each of Lhese spheres ls dlfferenLlaLed and seL free Lo develop lLs own poLenLlals wlLhouL vlolence from a forced flL" ln a global lndlssoclaLlon. 1hese Lhree spheres, we have seen, refer ln general Lo Lhe dlmenslons of lL," of we," and of l." (1hese are Lhe four quadranLs-Lhe exLerlor and Lhe lnLerlor of Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe collecLlve-wlLh Lhe Lwo 8lghL-Pand quadranLs LreaLed as one slnce boLh of Lhem are descrlbed ln slmllar lL- language, boLh deal wlLh seen exLerlors.) 1he sphere of emplrlcal sclence deals wlLh Lhose aspecLs of reallLy LhaL can be lnvesLlgaLed ln a relaLlvely ob[ecLlve" fashlon and descrlbed ln an lL" language (descrlpLlve, monologlcal, proposlLlonal LruLh, a sLaLe of affalrs, Lhe 8lghL half), Lhls lnvolves Lhe exLerlors or Lhe surfaces of holons, slnce Lhese can be seen wlLh Lhe senses or Lhelr lnsLrumenLal exLenslons. racLlcal reason or moral reason refers Lo Lhe sphere of we," of how you and l can pragmaLlcally lnLeracL and lnLerrelaLe ln Lerms of someLhlng common LhaL we can flnd beLween us, noL as shared surfaces buL as a common depLh of muLual undersLandlng (we," [usLlce, Lhe good, Lhe Lower LefL). And Lhe sphere of arL or aesLheLlc [udgmenL refers, ln Lhe broadesL sense, Lo how l express myself and whaL l express of myself, Lhe depLh ln Lhe lndlvldual (l," slncerlLy, expresslvlLy, Lhe upper LefL). 1haL kanL dlfferenLlaLes Lhese realms means LhaL l" and we" are dlfferenLlaLed (l need no longer auLomaLlcally go along wlLh socleLy's rules and norms, l can norm Lhe norms, whaL Lhe church and sLaLe say are noL necessarlly Lhe Lrue or Lhe good). lL means LhaL l" and lL" are clearly dlfferenLlaLed (my sub[ecLlve wlshes do noL consLlLuLe reallLy or lLs sclenLlflc sLudy). lL means LhaL we" and lL" are clearly dlfferenLlaLed (Lhe sLaLe or church does noL have Lhe rlghL Lo dlcLaLe whaL reallLy ls). Lach of Lhese Lhree realms, Lhen, can be joJqeJ sepototely Lo see lf lL ls Lelllng lLs klnd of LruLh." ln Lhe realm of lLness" or emplrlc-sclenLlflc LruLhs, we wanL Lo know lf proposlLlons more or less accuraLely maLch Lhe facLs as dlsclosed (ls Lhere llfe on !uplLer or noL?"). ln Lhe realm of l-ness," Lhe crlLerlon ls slocetlty: you wanL Lo know lf l am Lelllng Lhe LruLh, lf l am belng slncere abouL how l feel, lf l am belng LruLhful abouL expresslng my lnner sLaLe (lf l am reporLlng my depLh slncerely). And ln Lhe realm of we-ness," Lhe crlLerlon ls goodness, or [usLness, or relaLlonal care and concern: we wanL Lo know lf our acLlons wlLh each oLher show klndness and non-egocenLrlc carlng, or aL Lhe very leasL, muLual undersLandlng, we wanL Lo acL wlLh a worldcenLrlc falrness (acL as lf Lhe maxlm of one's acLlons mlghL be unlversal-Lhe caLegorlcal lmperaLlve). 1hese dlfferenLlaLlons of modernlLy are lrreverslble, lrrevocable. Lven Lhose who lnLensely crlLlclze Lhem do so from wlLhln Lhelr space, seven human orlflces wlll slmply never agaln auLomaLlcally mean Lhere musL be only seven planeLs: LhaL doesn'L even make any sense Lo someone ln Lhe modern worldspace. 1he dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree can be crlLlclzed, buL Lhe crlLlclsm lLself presupposes Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon. WhaL ls requlred, of course, ls noL a reLreaL Lo a predlfferenLlaLed sLaLe (LhaL's noL even posslble, alLhough reLro- 8omanLlcs ofLen make Lhe recommendaLlon), whaL ls requlred ls Lhe loteqtotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree. And LhaL, lndeed, ls whaL mlghL be called Lhe ceottol ptoblem of postmoJetolty: now LhaL sclence, arL, and morallLy have been lrreverslbly JlffeteotloteJ, how does one loteqtote Lhem? ln Lhe 1hlrd CrlLlque, kanL aLLempLs Lo lnLegraLe proposlLlonal and pragmaLlc LruLh vla Lelos/organlsm and vla Lhe aesLheLlc dlmenslon (by whlch he meanL, ln Lhls case, Lhe sensory-aesLheLlc apprehenslon). 1hls aLLempL was lmmensely rlch and suggesLlve, and LheorlsLs from Schlller Lo Schelllng would, dlrecLly under kanL's lnfluence, look Lo Lhe aesLheLlc dlmenslon for Lhelr aLLempLed lnLegraLlon, and, lndeed, modernlLy and posLmodernlLy would henceforLh flnd someLhlng lmmensely heallng" abouL Lhe aesLheLlc/arLlsLlc dlmenslon. And yeL, ln Lhe end, Lhls aLLempL would fall. 1he sensory-aesLheLlc dlmenslon ls lndeed a Lype of connecLlng llnk" beLween Lhe emplrlcal phenomena of sensorlmoLor cognlLlon (sclence") and pracLlcal eLhlcs (morallLy"), ln Lhe developmenLal specLrum, as a maLLer of facL, Lhls aesLheLlc or endocepLual" cognlLlon lles beLween sensorlmoLor cognlLlon and convenLlonal moral sLrucLures. 18 lL ls lndeed Lhelr mlsslng llnk" or connecLlng llnk", buL a connecLlng llnk ls oot an lnLegraLlon. lL's llke saylng LhaL Lhe fourLh grade lles beLween Lhe Lhlrd grade and Lhe flfLh grade and connecLs Lhem, whlch lL does, buL Lhe loteqtotloo of Lhe knowledge ln Lhose Lhree grades ls Lo be found ln Lhe slxLh grade, noL ln Lhe Lhlrd. 1he merely lotetmeJlote or connecLlng llnk cannoL be an loteqtotloq llnk, slnce LhaL connecLlng llnk ls a llnk betweeo Lhe lower and Lhe hlgher, and ls noL lLself Lhe super-hlgher whlch would lnLegraLe Lhem all. ln oLher words, Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree would awalL (and ls sLlll awalLlng) Lhe emergence of vlslon-loglc. kanL would polnL ouL one of Lhe connecLlng llnks beLween moral reason (we") and reason Lled Lo ob[ecLlve sensorlmoLor phenomena (lL"), namely, aesLheLlc apprehenslon (a lower porLlon of Lhe l" dlmenslon). 1haL would lndeed show some of Lhe connecLlons beLween Lhe 8lg 1hree, buL LhaL could noL flnally lnLegraLe Lhem, an lnLegraLlon LhaL would demand noL an lnLermedlaLe buL a yeL-hlgher level. WhaL raLlonallLy had puL asunder, vlslon-loglc would unlLe. 1haL, aL any raLe, ls Lhe poLenLlal and Lhe promlse and Lhe sLruggle of posLmodernlLy. wbot moJetolty JlffeteotloteJ, postmoJetolty most loteqtote. And lf raLlonallLy dld Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon, Lhen posLraLlonallLy musL do Lhe heallng (and posLraLlonallLy, l have been malnLalnlng, ls preemlnenLly vlslon-loglc). 1hls ls Lhe posLmodern loteqtotlve vlsloo we have menLloned ofLen before, ln connecLlon wlLh Cebser (lnLegral-aperspecLlval"), Pabermas (whose Lheory of communlcaLlve acLlon ls speclflcally deslgned Lo lnLegraLe Lhe 8lg 1hree), and Peldegger's cenLaurlc belng-ln-Lhe-world (also an aLLempL Lo reweave Lhe fragmenLs), we see lL ln loucaulL's sysLemaLlc use of vlslon-loglc Lo map Lhe exLerlors of eplsLemes (and Lhen hls lncludlng Lhe lnLerlors as well ln dlsposlLlfs, looklng aL Lhe dlmenslons of LruLh, of power, of eLhlcs, and of self, even loucaulL, a nleLzschean," reLurned Lo kanL agaln and agaln, and, ln a surprlse move, flnally ldenLlfled hlmself broadly wlLh kanL's llneage). We have menLloned Lhls lnLegraLlon ln Lerms of mlnd and body are boLh experlences of an lnLegraLed self", and we menLloned lL ln Lerms of Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe noosphere, Lhe blosphere, and Lhe physlosphere. We have seen lL ln connecLlon wlLh lnLegraLlng male and female ln Lhe noosphere. And now we see lL as an lnLegraLlon of sclence, morallLy, and arL. 1hose are all slmply dlfferenL aspecLs of Lhe overall aLLempLs Lo lnLegraLe Lhe now lrreverslble dlfferenLlaLlons of Lhe 8lg 1hree. And whaLever we mlghL Lhlnk of any of Lhose LheorlsLs and Lhelr proposed soluLlons (or my proposed soluLlons), Lhe polnL ls LhaL oll of Lhem came ln Lhe wake of Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, and all were (and are) respondlng ln varlous ways Lo LhaL dlfferenLlaLlon-lL was an epochal developmenL, a world-shaklng, world- maklng emergence. kanL was well aware of Lhls (parLlcularly ln hls essay WhaL ls LnllghLenmenL?"), and hls lmmedlaLe successors, and crlLlcs, are all loescopobly orlenLed now Lo a worldspace ln whlch arL, sclence, and morallLy are noL only dlfferenLlaLed, buL are ln danger of flylng aparL compleLely. lL was Schelllng, we wlll see ln Lhe nexL chapLer, who flrsL responded mosL vlgorously Lo Lhls new world LhaL was noL only dlfferenLlaLlng buL rapldly dlssoclaLlng. And Schelllng was slmply Lhe flrsL of many docLors of modernlLy"-from Pegel Lo Marx Lo Schlller Lo lreud Lo Weber Lo Peldegger-who would Lry desperaLely, ln Lhelr varlous ways, Lo heal Lhe fragmenLs LhaL began Lo cascade around Lhem. lor noL only does modernlLy (and posLmodernlLy) have Lo worry abouL how Lo lnLegraLe whaL are now lrrevocable dlfferenLlaLlons ln Lhe growLh process, lL has Lo deal LherapeuLlcally" wlLh Lhose dlfferenLlaLlons LhaL qo too fot lnLo acLual dlssoclaLlon. We already saw, as only one example, LhaL Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of mlnd and body can go Loo far lnLo a represslon of Lhe body by Lhe mlnd, a represslon LhaL spews neuroLlc sympLoms everywhere ln lLs wake. 1hus, aL Lhls parLlcular polnL ln hlsLory, lf lreud dld noL exlsL, evoluLlon would have had Lo lnvenL hlm ln order Lo docLor some of Lhe paLhologlcal dlssoclaLlons ln lLs own processes of new and emergenL growLh. 8uL l am agaln drlfLlng lnLo Lhe bad news." All l would llke Lo emphaslze, aL Lhls polnL, ls LhaL l personally belleve LhaL Lhe new lnLegraLlons soughL by modernlLy (and posLmodernlLy)-Lhe lnLegraLlons parLlcularly of l, we, and lL, of self, culLure, and naLure, of arL, morals, and sclence, of consclousness, values, and facLs-are already belng slowly effecLed by vlslon-loglc. Sclence, values, and sub[ecLlvlLy are belng approached as so many aspecLs of Lhe cenLaurlc belng-ln-Lhe-world. volume 3 ls devoLed Lo [usL Lhls Loplc, buL aL Lhls polnL we mlghL slmply noLe LhaL evoluLlon has never produced a dlfferenLlaLlon LhaL lL could noL evenLually lnLegraLe (unless Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon goes uLLerly Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon, aL whlch polnL slmple exLlncLlon ensues). LxLlncLlon seems Lo be a genulne posslblllLy for humans, parLlcularly wlLh reference Lo Lhe LhreaLenlng dlssoclaLlon of Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere, Lhe body and Lhe mlnd. 8uL assumlng, as l do, LhaL exLlncLlon ls noL alLogeLher a foregone concluslon, lL follows LhaL loteqtotloo ls posslble, and LhaL posslblllLy lles, l belleve, ln cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc, Lhe sLep beyond Lhe raLlonal-ego, Lhe posLmodern counLerLhrusL Lo modernlLy (and, as l sald, Lhe burden of volume 3 ls Lo render Lhls Lhesls plauslble). 19 l menLlon all of Lhls now only Lo polnL ouL LhaL, wlLh reference Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlons LhaL have deflned modernlLy, Lhe soluLlon, lf Lhere ls one, lles ln Lhe marrlages of Lomorrow, noL ln Lhe syncreLlsms of yesLerday. 1PL uLA1P Cl CCu 2u5. CresLes, l creaLed you, and l creaLed all Lhlngs. now see! lmpudenL spawn! So l am noL your klng? Who, Lhen, made you? Ok515. ?ou. 8uL you blundered, you should noL have made me free. ?ou are Cod and l am free, each of us ls alone, and angulsh ls akln. Puman llfe beglns on Lhe far slde of despalr. 2u5. Well, CresLes, all Lhls was foreknown. ln Lhe fullness of Llme a man was Lo come, Lo announce my decllne. And you're LhaL man, lL seems. -!LAn-AuL SA818L, 1be llles 8efore we look more closely aL exacLly why a uescendlng Cod replaced an Ascendlng Cod (and Lhen Cod" dropped alLogeLher or, flnally, reduced Lo moooloqlcol ootote), lL ls necessary, l Lhlnk, Lo undersLand as clearly as posslble Lhe hlsLorlcal relaLlon of Lhe Age of 8eason Lo Lhe precedlng Age of MyLhology, for LhaL ls exacLly how Lhe phllosophers of Lhe LnllghLenmenL vlewed Lhe slLuaLlon. no more myLhs!" was Lhe phllosophlcal baLLle cry of an enLlre age, and lL soon came Lo be summarlzed ln nleLzsche's famous dlcLum, Cod ls dead." And my concluslon wlll be LhaL ln Lhrowlng ouL a preraLlonal, anLhropomorphlc, myLhlc Cod flgure, Lhe modern WesL" also Lossed ouL any LransraLlonal, nonanLhropomorphlc, superconsclenL Codhead. Cone was a mass of baLhwaLer, gone Loo a preclous baby. 1he problem, for Lhe Church, from lLs lncepLlon, was how Lo deal wlLh a complex of llLeral-concreLe myLhs LhaL lL had lnherlLed and Lo whlch lL owed a cerLaln alleglance. And ln Lhe llfe and flgure of Crlgen (183-234 CL)-Lhe Church's greaLesL Lheologlan 20 -we see encapsulaLed Lhe enLlre problem of myLhology" and lLs subsequenL lnfluence on an enLlre clvlllzaLlon. Crlgen, recall, was a fellow Lownsman of loLlnus ln Alexandrla, where he had aLLended lecLures by loLlnus's Leacher, Ammonlus Saccas. Pe was sLeeped ln a causal/nondual worldvlew and clearly soughL Lo brlng Lhls worldvlew lnLo llne wlLh Lhe causal reallzaLlon of Lhe nazarene, whlch would noL be hard ln Lhe leasL-were lL noL for a seL of concreLe-llLeral myLhologles ln whlch Lhe nazarene's reallzaLlon was qulckly belng cloLhed. 8ecall also LhaL Lhls was durlng Lhe early flowerlng of Lhe raLlonal sLrucLure (wldespread gllmmerlngs of whlch had begun, accordlng Lo LheorlsLs from Cebser Lo Campbell, around Lhe slxLh cenLury 8CL ln Creece, alLhough, as Pabermas polnLs ouL, formop was occaslonally avallable Lo rare lndlvlduals much earller). And even Lhough Lhe conLemplaLlve sages of Lhe Llme had, ln Lhelr own cases, explored even furLher lnLo Lhe LransraLlonal domaln, Lhere was a concerLed efforL Lo sLaLe Lhe dlscoverles ln totloool Lerms. (1hls can be seen ln a parLlcularly clear case wlLh CauLama 8uddha, c. slxLh-cenLury-8CL lndla. Where mosL prevlous sysLems of lndlan rellglon would beqlo wlLh Lhe gods and goddesses, and Lhen prescrlbe tltools and locoototloos Lo appease and persuade Lhem, CauLama radlcally dlspenses wlLh oll of LhaL, and recommends lnsLead a dlrecL and lnLenslve lnLrospecLlon lnLo Lhe mlnd sLream, lnLo Lhe sobject, and he expresses Lhls ln emlnenLly raLlonal Lerms, even lf Lhe resulL of hls ln[uncLlons and paradlgms was Lhe deconsLrucLlon of Lhe raLlonal sLream and lLs supersesslon by Lranspersonal awareness.) And wherever Lhe conLemplaLlve phllosopher-sages meL mytboloqy, elLher Lhey dlsmlssed lL dlrecLly (whlch was an exLremely dellcaLe procedure, as SocraLes dlscovered, Lhe gods are noL so easlly Lossed aslde, especlally when Lhey serve Lhe funcLlon of culLural gluons"), or Lhey began a long and slow process of totlooolly telotetptetloq Lhe myLhs. 1hls allowed Lhem Lo ptesetve Lhe myLh whlle oeqotloq lLs orlglnal meanlng. 1hls ls surely one of Lhe mosL fasclnaLlng feaLures of Lhls enLlre era, wheLher lL was Lhe CnosLlcs (When you read Lhe sysLems of Lhe CnosLlcs, you have Lhe feellng LhaL Lhey have raLlonallzed myLhology. And Lhls feellng ls accuraLe"), 21 hllo (Pe ls an upholder of Lhe verbal lnsplraLlon of Lhe Cld 1esLamenL, whlch neverLheless he Lurns lnLo a moral and meLaphyslcal romance by hls Lheory of . . . raLlonal allegorlsm"), 22 or laLo and ArlsLoLle (laLo had malnLalned sLrongly LhaL rellglon musL be myLhologlcal lo lts eotllet stoqes . . . a 'medlclnal lle', he warns us never Lo Lake Lhem llLerally"). 23 Crlgen was of Lhe same mlnd. Pe openly derldes Lhe llLeral myLhs ln Lhe harshesL of Lerms. Crlgen speaks wlLh conLempL of Lhose ChrlsLlans who Lake llLerally Lhe Lemporal promlses and LhreaLs of Lhe Cld 1esLamenL." 24 Crlgen does noL belleve ln Lhe survlval of Lhe lndlvldual soul or ego, or LhaL salvaLlon conslsLs of anyLhlng llke egolc perpeLulLy aL all (LhaL would ln facL be hell, salvaLlon, for Crlgen, conslsLs ln dlscoverlng LhaL Cod ls all ln all": Crlgen ls, Lhrough and Lhrough, of a neoplaLonlc mlnd). 8oldesL of all, he does noL belleve ln Lhe fuLure resurrecLlon of Lhe body. Pe cannoL resLraln hls lmpaLlence aL Lhe crude bellefs of LradlLlonallsLs abouL Lhe lasL day and Lhe resurrecLlon of Lhe dead. 1he Cospels cannoL [be Laken] llLerally. Pow can maLerlal bodles be recompounded, every parLlcle of whlch has passed lnLo many oLher bodles? 1o whlch body do Lhese molecules belong? So, he says scornfully, men fall lnLo Lhe lowesL depLhs of absurdlLy, and Lake refuge ln Lhe plous assurance LhaL 'everyLhlng ls posslble wlLh Cod.'" 23 And yeL, Crlgen was a ChrlsLlan (by Lhe age of elghLeen he was already head of Lhe CaLecheLlcal School ln Alexandrla), and Lhus consLralned Lo some degree by ScrlpLure. And so he hlL upon a brllllanL soluLlon, a soluLlon for whlch he ls [usLly famous (wlLh hllo) and [usLly regarded a genlus, and a soluLlon LhaL would henceforLh be used whenever myLhology needed Lo be boLh negaLed and preserved: Lhe allegorlcal meLhod. Any myLh, he says (referrlng Lo Lhe Cld 1esLamenL) can be lnLerpreLed on Lhree levels: llLeral, eLhlcal, and allegorlcal, each successlve readlng belng hlgher." 1he llLeral ls [usL whaL Lhe myLh says, Lhe eLhlcal ls Laklng Lhe myLh and raLlonally reworklng lL Lo apply Lo a presenL eLhlcal slLuaLlon, Lhe allegorlcal ls uslng Lhe myLh Lo mean (vlrLually any) mysLlcal or splrlLual or LransraLlonal Lhlng we wanL lL Lo. 1he brllllance of Lhls scheme ls LhaL lL Lakes a preraLlonal myLh (llLeral) and reworks lL aL boLh a raLlonal (eLhlcal) and a LransraLlonal (mysLlcal) level, so LhaL Lhe myLh" can be made Lo say whaLever lL ls necessary Lo make lL say, qulLe regardless of how lLs orlglnaLors acLually meanL lL. ln oLher words, Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon Lakes Lhe myLh qulLe beyond lLself-flrsL lnLo Lhe space of reason, and Lhen lnLo Lhe space of splrlL. 1he myLh ls Lhoroughly preserved-and uLLerly negaLed. 1hls allows Crlgen Lo puL lnLo Lhe myLhs whaLever meanlngs from a hlgher level he wlshes Lo puL lnLo Lhem, so LhaL he can boLh clalm scrlpLural auLhorlLy and baslcally lgnore lL aL Lhe same Llme. And every subsequenL myLhologlzer" ln hlsLory, from Lhe CaLhollc Church Lo !oseph Campbell, would use exacLly Lhls meLhod whenever lL was necessary Lo make Lhe myLhs mean someLhlng oLher Lhan whaL Lhe myLhs Lhemselves plalnly sald Lhey meanL. Lven Lhough Lhe Church would adopL Lhls meLhod wlLhouL fall-whaL posslble cholce dld lL have?-lL neverLheless found Crlgen's emphasls on Lhe hlgher" meanlngs Lo be very dangerous (Crlgen was busy pourlng lnLo Lhe myLhs Lhe enLlre corpus of Lhe neoplaLonlc ouLlook, SalnL !erome says he wroLe elghL hundred works). lL was one Lhlng Lo say LhaL Lhe myLhs olso had hlgher meanlngs, qulLe anoLher Lo baslcally Jeoy any subsLanLlal reallLy Lo Lhe lower or llLeral meanlngs. 1he Church suspecLed, rlghLly, LhaL Crlgen had [usL blown a hole ln Lhelr myLhs below Lhe waLerllne. uurlng Lhe persecuLlon of ueclus (c. 230 CL), Crlgen was lmprlsoned, LorLured, and plllorled, he was evenLually condemned as a hereLlc by !usLlnlan. Crlgen referred Lo Lhose who Look Lhe myLhs llLerally" as possesslng mere falLh," Lhe slmple ones." And as harsh as he could be on Lhe phllosophers who belleved ln Lhe sllllness," noneLheless Crlgen exLends Lo Lhe popular, half myLhologlcal bellefs of Lhe uneducaLed ChrlsLlan [a greaL deal of] Lolerance. 1he Logos Leaches men ln varlous manners, accordlng Lo Lhelr capaclLles, some musL be fed wlLh mllk, oLhers wlLh sLrong meaL." 26 Pls ldea was Lo sLarL people aL one level of developmenL and, uslng Lhe LranscendenL or allegorlcal meLhod, work Lhem up Lo gnosls. AL (causal) gnosls, boLh Lhe myLhs (llLeral) and Lhe raLlonallLy (eLhlcal) would be Lranscended, havlng Lhus served Lhelr purpose. 1he Church, ln generally denylng a pure AscenL Lo causal gnosls, denled LhaL Lhe myLhs could be Lranscended (for all Lhe reasons LhaL we dlscussed). CLher meanlngs could be oJJeJ to Lhe llLeral myLhs, buL Lhe myLhs Lhemselves could never be negaLed. lL was a vlcLory for Lhe slmple ones." 1ransraLlonal gnosls was, once agaln, caughL and frozen ln preraLlonal forms-Lhe llLeral myLhs. And lL ls Lhe llLeral myLhs LhaL Lhe phllosophers of Lhe LnllghLenmenL ralled agalnsL, as had Crlgen. vlrLually every slngle sclenLlflc clalm" of Lhe 8lble (and Lhus Lhe Church) could be demonsLraLed, by dlsclosed evldence aL a deeper depLh, Lo be woefully lnadequaLe (whlch was Laken Lo mean: slmply and plalnly wrong). 1he chlef affronL of Copernlcanlsm Lo Lheologlcal orLhodoxy lay, noL ln any fundamenLal dlscrepancy beLween lL and Lhe more phllosophlcal parLs of Lhe LradlLlonal scheme of Lhe unlverse, buL ln lLs apparenL lrreconcllablllLy wlLh cerLaln deLalls of LhaL body of purely hlsLorlcal proposlLlons [myLhs Laken llLerally] whlch ChrlsLlanlLy had, Lo an exLenL maLched ln no oLher rellglon, lncorporaLed ln lLs creed." 27 Church rellglon, across Lhe board, became Lhe laughlngsLock of Lhe phllosophers of Lhe Age of 8eason, lL was meL everywhere wlLh scorn and derlslon. Are we, qulpped 1homas alne, Lo suppose LhaL every world ln Lhe boundless creaLlon had an Lve, an apple, a serpenL, and a 8edeemer?" 1he upshoL of all Lhls ls LhaL vlrLually Lhe enLlre corpus of myLhologlcal bellef was Lhrown overboard. And slnce, addlLlonally, Lhe greaL phllosopher-sages (from loLlnus Lo LckharL), who had Lhemselves slgnlflcanLly Lranscended boLh myLh and reason, were neverLheless speokloq oot ftom mytblcolly sltooteJ coltotes, vlrLually evetytbloq Lhe greaL conLemplaLlves had Lo say was [eLLlsoned as well. 1he baby wlLh Lhe baLhwaLer. 8eason could (and can) [usL as easlly look up as lL can look down. 8eason-for laLo, for Lhe neoplaLonlsLs, and for Lhe all-lmporLanL SLolcs-meanL seeloq ooes ploce lo tbe kosmos, Lo be raLlonal" meanL Lo see Lhe greaL holarchy of exlsLence and [oyfully Lake one's proper place ln lL (qulLe aparL from any furLher or LransraLlonal or mysLlcal developmenLs, where one dlrecLly ldenLlfled wlLh Lhe kosmos ln LoLo). 1o be raLlonal meanL ottooemeot wltb tbe kosmos (as a preparaLlon for ldenLlLy wlLh Lhe kosmos, wlLh Lhe All lLself). 8uL wlLh Lhe re[ecLlon by modernlLy of Lhe AscendenL Cod ln vlrLually ooy form, Lhere was only Lhe uescended Cod lefL, Lhe Cod of a marvelous and creaLlve naLure, a naLure LhaL was everywhere noL Lo be denled, buL a naLure ln whlch olooe could salvaLlon now be found. 1he docLrlne of lenlLude and Lhe Many compleLely ecllpsed LhaL of Lhe Cood and Lhe Cne: Cod ln any form was pronounced dead, and naLure alone allve. 8eason, ln reacLlon Lo myLh, Lhus chose Lo look almosL excluslvely downward, and ln LhaL wlLherlng glance, Lhe modern WesLern world was born. LLnl1uuL AS A 8LSLA8CP 8CC8AM lL ls common knowledge LhaL Lhe early 8enalssance sclenLlsLs belleved sLrongly LhaL Lhey were looklng for Lhe laws of Cod"-LhaL ls, for Lhe Logos (or archeLypes) of a CreaLlve and Lffluxlng and uescendlng Cod, archeLypes LhaL expressed Lhemselves ln Lhe teqolot pottetos of a harmonlous naLure. 1he laws of naLure" were ln Lhe mlnd of Cod" (or Lhe ldeas of Cod), and slnce LhaL same Mlnd creaLed us as well, we oughL Lo be able Lo see and undersLand and formulaLe Lhose laws. 1haL Lhey belleved LhaL ls Lrue enough, buL lL ls much more speclflc Lhan LhaL. Love[oy demonsLraLes, qulLe convlnclngly l Lhlnk, LhaL many of Lhe sclenLlflc dlscoverles" from Lhe 8enalssance Lo Lhe LnllghLenmenL were noL orlglnally emplrlcal and surprlslng" dlscoverles, buL were ln facL o ptlotl assumpLlons derlved dlrecLly (and consclously) from Lhe Lwo maln LeneLs of Lhe laLonlc/loLlnlan docLrlne of lenlLude: naLure ls graded ln a holarchy of belng, and Lhere are no mlsslng llnks ooywbete. ln oLher words, Lhe uescendlng or lenlLude slde of Lhe orlglnally non-dual sysLem-Lhe slde LhaL had been prevlously suppressed ln Lhe Mlddle Ages-was now lsolaLed and emphaslzed and pressed lnLo servlce as an acLual teseotcb oqeoJo, and lL was Lhls agenda LhaL Lhen sobsepoeotly began Lo produce Lhe sclenLlflc dlscoverles for whlch Lhe age ls now famous, and ln whose modern shadow" we all now sLand. ln brlnglng abouL Lhe change from Lhe medleval Lo Lhe modern concepLlon, lL was noL Lhe Copernlcan hypoLhesls, nor even Lhe splendld achlevemenLs of sclenLlflc asLronomy durlng Lhe followlng Lwo cenLurles, LhaL played Lhe mosL slgnlflcanL and declslve parL. ln Lhe cosmography LhaL by Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury had come Lo be commonly held among educaLed men, Lhe feaLures whlch dlfferenLlaLed Lhe new from Lhe old world-plcLure mosL wldely-Lhese feaLures owed Lhelr lnLroducLlon and, for Lhe mosL parL, Lhelr evenLual general accepLance, noL Lo Lhe acLual dlscoverles or Lhe Lechnlcal reasonlngs of asLronomers, buL Lo Lhe lnfluence of Lhose orlglnally laLonlsLlc [concepLlons] whlch had, Lhough poLenL and perslsLenL, been always repressed and aborLlve ln medleval LhoughL. 1he more lmporLanL feaLures of Lhe new concepLlon of Lhe world, Lhen, owed llLLle Lo any new hypoLheses based upon Lhe sorL of observaLlonal grounds whlch we should nowadays call sclenLlflc. 1hey were chlefly derlvaLlve from laLonlsLlc premlses [from Lhe uescendlng slde]. 1hey were, ln shorL, manlfesL corollarles of Lhe prlnclple of lenlLude. 28 lf we look flrsL aL asLronomy, Lhe docLrlne of lenlLude-Lhe lnflnlLe creaLlvlLy of an lnflnlLe Source-seemed Lo demand noL [usL Lhe exlsLence of Lhls LarLh and Lhls lnhablLed world, buL a vlrLual lnflnlLy or plurallLy of oLher worlds (ln Lhe concreLe sense of oLher solar sysLems, for example), and Lhere was no reason Lhose oLher worlds shouldn'L be lnhablLed by consclous belngs, some perhaps as or more lnLelllgenL Lhan we. 1hls noLlon of an lnflnlLy or plurallLy of oLher worlds profoundly shook Lhe medleval mlnd, and shook lL much more caLasLrophlcally Lhan Lhe slmpler Copernlcan revoluLlon. ln facL, Lhe hellocenLrlc Lheory of Copernlcus/kepler had been Laken raLher easlly ln sLrlde. AfLer all, even lf LhaL Lheory dlsplaced Lhe LarLh from Lhe cenLer of Lhe unlverse, Lhe LarLh was sLlll held Lo be unlque, and sLlll held Lo be Lhe sole arena of raLlonal belngs waLched over by a lovlng Cod, and Lhe sole LheaLer of Lhe descenL and ascenslon of Lhe Cne and Cnly 8egoLLen. 1he hellocenLrlc Lheory, Lo Lhe laLe medleval mlnd, mlghL have dlsplaced Cala from Lhe cenLer of Lhe solar sysLem, buL lL dld noL dlsplace Cala from Lhe cenLer of aLLenLlon, and, as we would say Loday, lL barely made Lhe headllnes. 8uL a plurallLy of oLher lnhablLed worlds, wlLh Lhe LarLh buL one of many? 1hls moved Cala (and Lhe nazarene) ouL of Lhe plcLure almosL LoLally, and lL was Lhls oceottlc noLlon, derlved noL from any sclenLlflc evldence aL all (we sLlll don'L have any sclenLlflc evldence for llfe on oLher planeLs) buL derlved raLher from Lhe docLrlne of lnflnlLe lenlLude, LhaL more Lhan any oLher concepLlon [olLed Lhe medleval mlnd ouL of Lhe Mlddle Ages and lnLo Lhe 8enalssance. 1he change from a geocenLrlc Lo a hellocenLrlc sysLem was far less momenLous Lhan Lhe change from a hellocenLrlc Lo an acenLrlc one." 29 And lLs chlef proponenL? lL ls no surprlse: Clordano 8runo. 1he noLlon of a plurallLy of worlds was lmpllclL (and occaslonally expllclL) ln Lhe loLlnlan sysLem, and lL had recelved lLs flrsL modern" expresslon by-agaln, no surprlse-nlcolas Cusanus. 8uL lL ls Clordano 8runo who musL be regarded as Lhe prlnclpal represenLaLlve of Lhe docLrlne of Lhe decenLrallzed, lnflnlLe, and lnflnlLely populous unlverse." 30 1he Cala-aggrandlzlng sysLems, wheLher geo- or hellocenLrlc, were shaLLered (and wlLh Lhem, Lhe always correlaLlve egocenLrlc, anLhropocenLrlc sLance). Cusanus and 8runo were Lhus Lhe flrsL Lo brlng Lhe lenlLude or uescendlng slde (prevlously suppressed) lnLo promlnence ln asLronomy, 31 and Lhe asLronomers of 8runo's own and succeedlng generaLlon-1ycho 8rahe, kepler, Callleo-Lhen duLlfully began looklng for LhaL whlch was already assumed Lo be Lhe case. And lL was Lhe 8runonlan revoluLlon, noL Lhe Copernlcan, LhaL [olLed Lurope lnLo Lhe modern age (and LhaL, noL lncldenLally, broughL 8runo Lo Lhe aLLenLlon of Lhe lnqulslLlon, and he was evenLually burned aL Lhe sLake). lrom 8runo Lhe concepLlon passed mosL noLably Lo uescarLes, and by Lhe end of Lhe sevenLeenLh cenLury, Lhe bellef ln a plurallLy of lnhablLed worlds was accepLed by mosL educaLed men and women, and Lhe Cala-cenLrlc myLhology of Lhe Church never recovered (Lhough lL would ofLen be reacLlvaLed, rlghL down Lo Loday). 1he polnL ls LhaL Lhese ldeas long anLedaLed Lhe dlscovery of Lhe sclenLlflc evldence for any of Lhem, Lhey were becomlng famlllar ln very wldely read wrlLlngs before Lhe mlddle of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, and Lhelr developmenL seems Lo have been chlefly due Lo Lhe lnfluence of Lhe prlnclples of lenlLude and conLlnulLy." 32 lf Lhere could be no gaps" or mlsslng llnks" ln Lhe heavens or macro-world, Lhe same held for Lhe mlcro-world. CulLe before van Leeuwenhoek acLually began peerlng down hls mlcroscopes, represenLaLlves of lenlLude were wrlLlng, as Lelbnlz dld, LhaL l am convlnced LhaL Lhere musL be such creaLures, and LhaL naLural hlsLory wlll perhaps some day become acqualnLed wlLh Lhem, when lL has furLher sLudled LhaL lnflnlLy of llvlng Lhlngs whose small slze conceals Lhem from ordlnary observaLlon and whlch are hldden ln Lhe bowels of Lhe earLh and Lhe depLhs of Lhe sea." Leeuwenhoek's dlscoverles came afLer Lhe facL, so Lo speak, and were of llLLle surprlse Lo mosL, leasL of all Lo Lelbnlz. 8uL by far Lhe mosL momenLous, and cerLalnly Lhe mosL comlcal, search for mlsslng llnks" occurred ln Lhe mlddle realm" of humans Lhemselves: Lhe search for Lhe mlsslng llnks beLween specles, and parLlcularly beLween humans and apes. 1hls search was of cruclal lmporLance ln Lhe beglnnlngs of Lhe sclence of anLhropology. Locke and Lelbnlz had already made lL qulLe clear LhaL whaL appeared Lo be gaps or mlsslng llnks ln naLure were due solely Lo our lgnorance, and Lhus yeL anoLher research agenda was seL for Lhe naLurallsL by Lhe docLrlne of lenlLude. As Lhe greaL 8onneL would puL lL, lL ls here above all LhaL lL ls lmposslble Lo fall Lo recognlze Lhe graduaLed progresslon of belngs, lL ls here above all LhaL ls verlfled Lhe famous axlom of Lhe Cerman laLo [Lelbnlz], naLure makes no leaps. . . ." noL only speclallsLs buL Lhe general publlc was enLhralled by Lhe search, whlch looked for ever-earller forms of human llfe and Lhelr llnkages Lo hlgher forms of apes. 8ousseau asserLed (ln 1733) LhaL humans and hlgher apes were ln facL members of Lhe same specles, slnce language was probably noL orlglnally naLural Lo humans-a noLlon LhaL closed Lhe gap geneLlcally. 8uL who oLher Lhan Lhe noLorlous . 1. 8arnum could puL hls flnger on Lhe pulse of an enLlre generaLlon so accuraLely? ln 1842 he adverLlsed LhaL among Lhe exhlblLs ln hls museum were Lhe CrnlLhorhlncus, or Lhe connecLlng llnk beLween Lhe seal and Lhe duck, Lwo dlsLlncL specles of flylng flsh, whlch undoubLedly connecL Lhe blrd and Lhe flsh, Lhe Mud lguana, a connecLlng llnk beLween repLlles and flsh-wlLh oLher anlmals formlng connecLlng llnks ln Lhe greaL chaln of AnlmaLed naLure. And Lhls was nearly Lwo decades before Lhe publlcaLlon of Lhe Otlqlo of 5pecles! 1he docLrlne of lenlLude as a research agenda: Lhere was Lhe uescendlng Cod of lnflnlLe Lfflux released from lLs conflnemenL ln Lhe Mlddle Ages and seL loose wlLh all lLs dellghL ln glorlous dlverslLy. Lvery dlscovery of a new form could be regarded, noL as Lhe dlsclosure of an addlLlonal unrelaLed facL ln naLure, buL as a sLep Loward Lhe compleLlon of a sysLemaLlc sLrucLure of whlch Lhe general plan was known ln advance." 33 AlLhough Lhls sysLems-Lheory research agenda had sLarLed, ln Lhe hands of Cusanus and 8runo, as buL one half of Lhe LoLal plcLure of Lhe Many Lo Lhe Cne and Lhe Cne Lo Lhe Many, lL soon became Lhe enLlre plcLure (as we wlll see), and aLLenLlon cenLered solely on Lhe Many, Lhe All, Lhe manlfesL Whole as a harmonlous sysLem qulLe aparL from lLs Source and Cround. 1he guldlng agenda for tbls wotlJ was sLlll Lhe same-flll ln Lhe gaps ln Lhe Whole SysLem-buL wlLh no menLlon of Lhe Source, Lhe Cood, Lhe Cne. lL was Lo Lhe manlfesL Whole, Lhe CreaL SysLem of naLure, LhaL research was conflned, and Lhe research was lndeed, Lhrough and Lhrough, a sysLems Lheory approach (overall harmony of Lhe whole"), wheLher ln economlcs, pollLlcal Lheory, or sclence. LveryLhlng ln naLure ls llnked LogeLher," began Lhe ocyclopJle enLry under Lhe advancemenL of knowledge, and Lhe arL of Lhe phllosopher conslsLs ln addlng new llnks Lo Lhe separaLed parLs." 34 SclenLlsLs and phllosophers allke were wonL, when Lhey reached Lhe helghL of Lhelr argumenL, Lo dlscourse wlLh eloquence on Lhe perfecLlon of Lhe unlversal SysLem as a whole." 33 As ascal would puL lL, lLs parLs all are so relaLed and lnLerllnked wlLh one anoLher LhaL lL ls lmposslble Lo know Lhe parLs wlLhouL knowlng Lhe whole or Lhe whole wlLhouL knowlng all Lhe parLs." And ope would memorlallze Lhe LemperamenL of an enLlre age ln search of sLrong connecLlons, nlce dependencles": Pe who Lhrough vasL lmmenslLy can plerce, See worlds on worlds compose one unlverse, Cbserve how sysLem lnLo sysLem runs, WhaL oLher planeLs clrcle oLher suns, WhaL vary'd belng peoples every sLar, May Lell why Peaven has made us as we are. 8uL of Lhls frame, Lhe bearlng and Lhe Lles, 1he sLrong connecLlons, nlce dependencles, CradaLlons [usL, has Lhy pervadlng soul Look'd Lhro? 8uL ln all of Lhls, someLhlng very, very sLrange was occurrlng, and had ln many cases already occurred. ln Lhe mulLldlmenslonal loLlnlan kosmos, Lhe Cne glves blrLh Lo Lhe Many-Lo Lhe All-and Lhe All reLurn Lo Lhe Cne, wlLh Lach lndlvldual a perfecL embodlmenL of Lhe lnflnlLe Cne lLself. 1he Cne underlles boLh Lach and All. Powever, ln Lhe new and LruncaLed concepLlon, slnce Lhe lnflnlLe Cne was no longer admlLLed (no more AscenL!"), Lhen Lhe uescendlng or flnlLe or manlfesL All or Whole was Lhe sole resldence of rovldence and Parmony. lL was no longer Lhe relaLlon of Lach and All Lo Lhe Cne, buL merely Lhe relaLlon of Lach Lo Lhe All. SysLems Lheory was born. uL blunLly, Lhe som totol of Lhe shadows ln Lhe Cave was now confused wlLh Lhe LlghL beyond Lhe Cave. And lL was dearly felL and flrmly belleved LhaL solvotloo-boLh lndlvldual and soclal-could be secured lf only we could demonsLraLe wlLh ever greaLer clarlLy LhaL Lhe shadows are noL aLomlsLlc buL raLher hollsLlc-LhaL Lhey hang LogeLher as a greaL harmonlous sysLem, LhaL Lhe unlversal lnvlslble hand of hollsm draws Lach Lo Lhe All ln funcLlonal perfecLlon. SalvaLlon was no longer Lach dlscoverlng LhaL lL ls Lhe Cne (and Lhus capable of embraclng Lhe All). 8aLher, salvaLlon now demanded LhaL Lach somehow ldenLlfy merely wlLh Lhe All (bypasslng Lhe Cne)-LhaL Lach would fooctlooolly flt wlLh Lhe All, LhaL Lach would Lake lLs lnsLrumenLal place ln Lhe greaL and glorlous web, wheLher LhaL web be naLure, Lhe sLaLe, or Lhe cosmos, Lhe ldea belng LhaL lf shadows snuggle LogeLher LlghLly enough, LlghL wlll somehow be produced. 1he research agenda was Lhus Lo Jemoosttote tbe lotetlockloq otJet and hollsLlc naLure of Lhe shadows (as lf LhaL would do anyLhlng Lo help one ouL of Lhe Cave). lL emphaslzed, as l sald, Lhe descendlng sysLems Lheory of lenlLude, whlch ls correcL as far as lL goes, buL ls only half Lhe sLory. 8uL lL was LhaL half-sLory LhaL would soon clalm Lo be Lhe alpha and omega of Lhe unlverse (and LhaL ls Lhe bad news" of Lhe nexL chapLer). ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe CreaL Polarchy, ln lLs Lffluxlng slde, was Lhe teseotcb oqeoJo for Lhe new and rlslng culLure of modernlLy. And Lhe lenlLude of Lfflux would come Lo deflne, as lL does Lo Lhls day, Lhe wondrous new world LhaL had [usL unfolded, and whose Cod would be deflned solely by Lhe maxlm: 1he greaLer Lhe dlverslLy, Lhe greaLer Lhe Coodness. A nLW LACL ln nA1u8L noLhlng shows more clearly LhaL Lhe CreaL Polarchy of 8elng was noL a producL of Lhe medleval mlnd Lhan Lhe facL LhaL, by Lhe mlddle of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, alLhough vlrLually every slngle aspecL of myLhlc and myLhlc-bound ScholasLlc rellglon had been derlslvely re[ecLed by Lhe phllosophers of Lhe LnllghLenmenL, vlrLually every slngle one of Lhem embraced Lhe CreaL Polarchy. lL qulLe obvlously, Lo Lhem, had noLhlng Lo do wlLh myLhlc rellglon or Lhe medleval mlnd aL all, or lL would have been as Lhoroughly and as qulckly abandoned. 1here has been no perlod ln whlch wrlLers of all sorLs-men of sclence and phllosophers, poeLs and popular essaylsLs, delsLs and orLhodox dlvlnes-Lalked so much abouL Lhe Chaln of 8elng, or accepLed more lmpllclLly Lhe general scheme of ldeas connecLed wlLh lL, or more boldly drew from Lhese Lhelr laLenL lmpllcaLlons. Addlson, klng, 8ollngbroke, ope, Paller, 1homson, Akenslde, 8uffon, 8onneL, ColdsmlLh, ulderoL, kanL, LamberL, Perder, Schlller-all Lhese and a hosL of lesser wrlLers noL only expaLlaLed upon Lhe Lheme buL drew from lL new consequences. nexL Lo Lhe word naLure," Lhe CreaL Chaln of 8elng" was Lhe sacred phrase of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury. 36 1he CreaL Chaln of 8elng was palaLable Lo Lhe Age of LnllghLenmenL, noL [usL because lL apparenLly expressed cerLaln profound LruLhs, buL preclsely because lL was noL a myLhlc-level producLlon (even lf lL also, ln varlous forms, was presenL Lhere as well). 1he Church had approprlaLed Lhe CreaL Chaln sLralghL from loLlnus vla Crlgen and ulonyslus, buL had, as we saw, preclsely by myLhologlzlng lL, puL a llmlL on Lhe upper reaches of AscenL and generally repressed uescenL alLogeLher. And Lhe Lheme of Lhls (and Lhe nexL) chapLer ls LhaL Lhe LnllghLenmenL would also approprlaLe Lhe CreaL Chaln, ln an equally lopslded buL reverse fashlon. lL ls fasclnaLlng, Lhough, LhaL boLh Lhe myLhlc and Lhe raLlonal mlnd, and Lhe comlng vlslon-loglc, would all embrace Lhe CreaL Polarchy, lL clearly was one of Lhe very few concepLlons LhaL could wlLhsLand Lhe complalnLs of each. Cf course, Lhe LnllghLenmenL would noL accepL Lhe compleLe Clrcle of AscenL and uescenL, as we wlll furLher see ln [usL a momenL. 8uL Lhe neL effecL of Lhe vlrLually unanlmous" accepLance of Lhe CreaL Chaln lLself was a radlcally alLered vlew of Lhe place of men and women ln Lhe unlverse, a vlew almosL dlameLrlcally opposed Lo LhaL of Lhe Mlddle Ages (where lLs myLhologlzed verslon was ln soclocenLrlc servlce). ln Lhls parLlcular regard, Lhe new" and modern" vlew was preclsely LhaL held by loLlnus or 8runo or Cusanus or any oLher upholder of Lhe docLrlne of a radlcally decenLered unlverse, and a vlew we have menLloned before: a radlcal oooootbtopoceottlsm. lL ls necessary Lo menLlon Lhls polnL one lasL Llme, slmply because of Lhe mlslnformaLlon dlsplayed by mosL ecologlcal crlLlcs of Lhe CreaL Polarchy. LeL Love[oy say lL for us one lasL Llme: lL was lmplled by Lhe prlnclple of lenlLude LhaL every llnk ln Lhe Chaln of 8elng exlsLs, noL merely and noL prlmarlly for Lhe beneflL of any oLher llnk, buL for lLs own sake, Lhey all had an equal clalm Lo exlsLence, and Lherefore Lhe Lrue tolsoo Jtte of one specles of belng was never Lo be soughL ln lLs uLlllLy Lo any oLher." 37 lL ls Lrue LhaL all belngs were held Lo be dlfferenL degrees of manlfesLaLlon, and could Lherefore be ranked accordlng Lo degree, wlLh Lhe hlgher embraclng Lhe lower buL noL vlce versa. 8uL Lhe reason LhaL all belngs were held Lo have ulLlmaLely equal clalm Lo exlsLence was LhaL Lhe ranklng was apparenL only, lL was Lhe producL of a noL-fully- awakened awareness. lor, ln Lhe purely nondual Cround, oll polots on Lhe CreaL Clrcle, wheLher hlgh or low, ascendlng or descendlng, were equldlsLanL from Lhe CenLer-equldlsLanL from an anL, a sLar, or a human, as 8runo puL lL. Whlle Lhls vlew sLlll accepLed a telotlve or apparenL-only ranklng, and Lhus allowed for pragmaLlc value [udgmenLs ln Lhe relaLlve world (beLLer Lo klll an apple Lhan an ape), Lhls was profoundly dlfferenL from a mete ranklng or an absoluLe ranklng, whlch would heslLaLe noL aL all ln maklng all lower grades" ooly and always lnsLrumenLal means. And lL was exacLly Lhe medleval vlew-anLhropocenLrlc, geocenLrlc-and lLs sLubbornly perslsLenL remnanLs LhaL Lhe phllosophers of Lhe CreaL Chaln were so lnLenL on flghLlng. A prlnclpal LexL of ScholasLlc rellglon/phllosophy had sLaLed: As man ls made for Lhe sake of Cod, namely, LhaL he may serve Plm, so ls Lhe world made for Lhe sake of man, LhaL lL may serve hlm. lrom a roLesLanL Lheologlcal LexL much admlred aL Lhe Llme: lf we conslder closely whaL consLlLuLes Lhe excellence of Lhe falresL parLs of Lhe unlverse, we shall flnd LhaL Lhey have value only ln Lhelr relaLlon Lo us, only ln so far as our soul aLLaches value Lo Lhem, LhaL Lhe esLeem of men ls whaL consLlLuLes Lhe chlef dlgnlLy of rocks and meLals, LhaL man's use and pleasure glves Lhelr value Lo planLs, Lrees and frulLs. lL was preclsely oqolost Lhls worldvlew LhaL Lhe loglc of Lhe concepLlon of Lhe Chaln of 8elng worked poLenLly." 38 And Lhe chlef opponenL of anLhropocenLrlsm ln all lLs forms was . . . uescarLes. Lelbnlz and Splnoza (a dedlcaLed CarLeslan) plcked up Lhe flghL, and CoeLhe represenLed Lhem all ln hls poem Atbtolsmos: Lvery anlmal ls an end ln lLself." Cr, as Schlller would so clearly puL lL, every belng has an unchallengeable rlghL of clLlzenshlp ln Lhls larger undersLandlng of creaLlon." 8uL perhaps, once agaln, ope sald lL besL: Man walk'd wlLh beasL, [olnL LenanL of Lhe shade, 1he same hls Lable, and Lhe same hls bed, no murder cloaLh'd hlm and no murder fed. ln Lhe same Lemple, Lhe resoundlng wood, All vocal belngs hymn'd Lhelr equal Cod! 1haL, lndeed, was good news. And so lL was LhaL 8eason rose up Lo greeL Lhe new dawn, unaware LhaL lLs very sLrengLhs would soon Lurn on lL. 1he sheer power of lLs capaclLy Lo represenL Lhe kosmos emplrlcally-a power unleashed by Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree-would allow lL lnadverLenLly Lo collapse Lhe kosmos merely Lo lLs monologlcal, emplrlcal, 8lghL-Pand aspecLs, a collapse LhaL would lock men and women lnLo a purely uescended world, flaLland Lo Lhe core. And sLrangesL of all, Lhe new 8eason would approprlaLe even lLs own worsL crlLlcs, Lake Lhem up and hlde Lhem ln lLself, and Lhus ensure LhaL even Lhe newly rlslng proponenLs of Cala would harbor Lhe flaLland onLology LhaL ls sLlll desLroylng Cala Lo Lhls day. lor lL would soon become obvlous LhaL Lhe uescenders were desLroylng Lhls world, because Lhls world was Lhe only world Lhey had. 12 1be collopse of tbe kosmos vetytbloq tbot ftom etetolty bos boppeoeJ lo beoveo ooJ eottb, tbe llfe of CoJ ooJ oll tbe JeeJs of tlme slmply ote tbe sttoqqles fot 5pltlt to koow ltself, to floJ ltself, be fot ltself, ooJ floolly oolte ltself to ltself, lt ls olleooteJ ooJ JlvlJeJ, bot ooly so os to be oble tbos to floJ ltself ooJ tetoto to ltself. . . . As exlstloq lo oo loJlvlJool fotm, tbls llbetotloo ls colleJ l, os JevelopeJ to lts totollty, lt ls ftee 5pltlt, os feelloq, lt ls love, ooJ os eojoymeot, lt ls 8lesseJoess. -PLCLL ln 1PL WLS1, from Lhe Llme roughly of AugusLlne Lo Copernlcus, Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal sLrucLure, for reasons l Lrled Lo suggesL ln Lhe lasL Lwo chapLers, emphaslzed qulLe heavlly Lhe Ascendlng currenL, and LheoreLlcally held ouL Lhe Coal of perfecL AscenL ln ChrlsL (whlle aL Lhe same Llme offlclally prohlblLlng lL). 1 1hls comblnaLlon locked Lhe WesL lnLo an almosL excluslvely Ascendlng ldeal for over a Lhousand years. WlLh rare lndlvldual excepLlons, Lhe greaL omega polnL was promlsed always, dellvered never: AsceoJos lotettoptos aL Lhe hearL of lL all, leavlng Lhe WesL wlLh a Lruly pecollot splrlLual hunger, a hunger found nowhere else, really, wlLh qulLe Lhe same sorL of desperaLe face. . . . WlLh Lhe wldespread emergence of 8eason as Lhe cenLer of gravlLy of soclal organlzlng forces, Lhe myLhlc-raLlonal sLrucLure was lLself Lranscended (ln all Lhe ways we dlscussed ln chapLer 3), whlch broughL a sLep up ln AscenL (Lros), wlLh a correlaLlve lncrease ln Lhe capaclLy for Lmbrace (Agape, evldenced, for example, ln unlversal benevolence, worldcenLrlc perspecLlvlsm, and Lhe many llberaLlon movemenLs). 1he raLlonal sLrucLure lLself could Lhen, dependlng on conLlngenL and culLural facLors, emphaslze, as an ldeal, Lhe Ascendlng currenL, Lhe uescendlng currenL, or boLh (preferably). And l have suggesLed LhaL-largely as a teoctloo Lo a mlllennlum of (frusLraLed) Ascendlng ldeal-Lhe Age of 8eason, qulLe aparL from Lhe facL LhaL lL was lLself a new sLep of AscenL, almosL wholehearLedly Lhrew lLself over Lo Lhe aLh of uescenL and Lhe glorles of CreaLlon and Lfflux, Lurned lLs back on lLs own Source and Crlgln, and pledged alleglance Lo a vlslble, senslble Cod. unllke Lhe Ascendlng Cod, tbot Cod could be bedded. 1haL Cod could be had. 1haL lLch, scraLched . . . lndeflnlLely. lnsLead of an lnflnlLe obove, Lhe WesL plLched lLs aLLenLlon Lo an lnflnlLe obeoJ. 1he verLlcal dlmenslon of depLh/helghL was dlLched ln favor of a horlzonLal expanslon, an emphasls noL on Jeptb buL on spoo-and Lhe sLandard Cod of Lhe modern WesLern world was seL. lL would become Lhe Cod of Lhe bourgeols as well as of Lhe dedlcaLed sclenLlsL, Lhe Cod of Lhe maLerlallsL as well as of Lhe soclal reformer, Lhe Cod of Lhe Creens and Lhe back Lo naLure" movemenL wherever lL appeared, Lhe Cod of democracy as well as Lhe Cod of Lhe MarxlsLs and MaolsLs-whaL Lhey all had ln common ls Lhe Cod of all LhaL ls vlslble, and all LhaL can be seen, and all LhaL can be grasped wlLh Lhe hands (grasped, LhaL ls, wlLh Lhe 8lghL Pand). An oLher world" of ooy sorL was Lhrown over, and Lhe eyes of men and women seLLled sLeely on Lhe horlzons noL above buL ln fronL of Lhem, seLLled coldly on Lhls world, and Lhls world, and Lhls world agaln. lf salvaLlon could noL be found on Lhls small LarLh, lL could noL be found aL all. 1PL CCLLASL Cl 1PL kCSMCS Lven Lhough vlrLually all of Lhe 8enalssance and LnllghLenmenL phllosophers (and Lhe 8omanLlc phllosophers, Loo, as we wlll see) subscrlbed Lo Lhe CreaL Chaln, someLhlng profound had happened Lo lL, and especlally Lo lLs upper reaches." MosL educaLed men and women assumed LhaL humans were somewhere ln Lhe mlddle of Lhe CreaL Chaln, assumed LhaL Lhere were as many (or more) dlmenslons of hlgher developmenL" above Lhem as Lhere were below Lhem. We have reason Lo be persuaded," sald !ohn Locke, LhaL Lhere are far more specles of creaLures above us, Lhan Lhere are beneaLh, we belng ln degrees of perfecLlon much more remoLe from Lhe lnflnlLe 8elng of Cod, Lhan we are from Lhe lowesL sLaLe of belng, and LhaL whlch approaches nearesL Lo noLhlng." 1hls nonanLhropocenLrlc arrangemenL conLrlbuLed Lo a noL alLogeLher unhealLhy dlmlnuLlon of human prlde. lormey's lamenL was Lyplcal of Lhe Llme: Pow llLLle cause have l Lo exalL myself above oLhers, and whence can l derlve moLlves for prlde? PereLofore l used Lo concelL myself one of Lhe mosL excellenL of Cod's creaLures, buL l now percelve how greaL my deluslon was. l flnd myself Loward Lhe lowesL parL of Lhe Scale [of 8elng], and all l can boasL of ls, LhaL l have a small pre-emlnence above lrraLlonal creaLures, and Lhls ls noL always so, Lhere belng many Lhlngs ln whlch Lhey possess advanLages whlch l have noL. Cn Lhe conLrary l see above me a mulLlLude of superlor lnLelllgences. 2 As Love[oy noLes, vlrLually every 8enalssance and LnllghLenmenL phllosopher made LhaL assumpLlon. 8uL qulLe aparL from whaLever saluLary humlllLy Lhe whole noLlon mlghL have lmbued ln men and women, lL ls qulLe apparenL LhaL, for Lhem, Lhe upper reaches" of Lhe CreaL Chaln were slmply belng postoloteJ Lo exlsL (reason Lo belleve"). 1he hlgher or deeper dlmenslons were ossomeJ Lo exlsL, Lhey were a raLlonal hypoLhesls puL forward Lo flll ln Lhe gaps" beLween humans and uelLy. Slnce, accordlng Lo Lhe prlnclple of lenlLude, Lhere could be no gaps ln exlsLence, and slnce Lhere was deflnlLely a gap beLween humans and Lhe lnflnlLe Source, Lhen LhaL gap slmply had Lo be fllled by an almosL lnflnlLe number of superlor grades of lnLelllgence, grades LhaL, lf Lhey weren'L exacLly creaLures," were aL leasL a serles of lnflnlLely recedlng hlgher ldeas and forever unaLLalnable erfecLlons uLLerly beyond human reach. ln Lhe Mlddle Ages, Lhe average mode had mytboloqlzeJ Lhese hlgher grades" as angels, archangels, and varlous heavenly agenLs sLreLchlng from humans Lo Lhe ulLlmaLe ulvlne. And now Lhese superlor creaLures" were lnsLead belng totlooollzeJ as superlor grades of lnLelllgence and vlrLue and wlsdom, buL none of whlch could be reached by Lhe flnlLe human mlnd. And however Lrue LhaL mlghL be ln a cerLaln sense (Lhey cannoL be reached by Lhe convenLlonal mlnd), Lhls ls noL aL all Lhe way Lhese hlgher grades were vlewed by Lhe orlglnaLors of Lhe sysLem lLself. lor loLlnus, ulonyslus, LckharL, and company, Lhese hlgher dlmenslons of exlsLence are, above all else, poteotlols lnherenL or presenL ln each and every belng (slnce each and every belng lssues forLh from Lhem), and Lhus Lhese hlgher poLenLlals can be teollzeJ or consclously octoollzeJ for any belng who can flnd Lhe requlslLe helghL/depLh ln hls or her own soul. 1hese hlgher levels are oot angels ouL Lhere, or meLaphyslcal noLlons merely posLulaLed Lo exlsL somewhere, or phllosophlcal and loglcal assumpLlons used Lo flll ln any gaps" ln Lhe world. 1hey are poLenLlals LhaL can be Jltectly expetleoceJ and Jltectly teollzeJ. 1here ls absoluLely noLhlng otbet abouL Lhem, excepL Lhe oLherness creaLed by our own lack of lnner awareness. lor a chlld who has noL yeL learned language, Lhe world of symbols and concepLs seems Lo floaL around all abouL lL and above lL, language ls over lLs head", language ls an oLher world," full of powerful maglc and populaLed wlLh belngs who seem Lo undersLand Lhlngs LhaL Lhe chlld does noL, belngs who seem Lo possess a greaL deal of power lncomprehenslble Lo Lhe chlld-Lhere are gods and goddesses ouL Lhere, angels ouL Lhere, creaLures" ouL Lhere, agalnsL whlch Lhe chlld can feel only lLs own mlserable lmpoLence. 8uL once language emerges as a developmenLal componenL of Lhe chlld's own belng: voll! Lhe llngulsLlc powers, Lhe concepLual angels, are all wlLhln. lor loLlnus (and slmllar nondual sages everywhere), Lhe hlgher grades of consclousness are noL oLherworldly or meLaphyslcal ln Lhe leasL, Lhey are oot phllosophlcal posLulaLes, Lhere ls noLhlng abouL Lhem LhaL cannoL be dlrecLly experlenced and dlrecLly reallzed ln one's own case, glven Lhe proper growLh and developmenL (followlng Lhe proper paradlgms, ln[uncLlons, and exemplars ln a communlLy of shared soclal pracLlce). And whlle Lhe myLhlc mlnd and Lhe raLlonal mlnd wlll consLrue Lhese hlgher dlmenslons-Lhelr owo hlgher poLenLlals-ln Lerms LhaL reflecL Lhelr own sLage of developmenL (l have no quarrel wlLh LhaL), noneLheless Lo even LheoreLlcally Lurn Lhese hlgher sLages lnLo merely meLaphyslcal posLulaLes ls a dlsasLer. lL denles Lhe very essence of Lhese hlgher sLages: Lhey are all experlmenLal, conLemplaLlve, experlenLlal reallLles LhaL are dlrecLly dlsclosed Lo lmmedlaLe awareness under Lhe proper laboraLory condlLlons. 1he LnllghLenmenL mlnd was, l have suggesLed, followlng Lwo very dlfferenL buL fused agendas. Cne was no more myLhs!," whlch was phase-speclflcally approprlaLe enough. 8uL slnce Lhe myLhs were almosL excluslvely upward-looklng (alLhough frusLraLed), Lhe second agenda, qulLe unnecessary, was no more AscenL!" 1he upper reaches of Lhe CreaL Chaln were Lhus converLed lnLo mere metopbyslcol postolotes-and subsequenLly dropped alLogeLher. 1he resulL was LhaL AscenL-Lranscendence-of ooy hlgher sorL was looked upon wlLh gravesL susplclon (no more AscenL!" meanL Ascend Lo 8eason, buL no furLher!"). lncredlbly, Lhe hlgher sLages of Lhe CreaL Chaln became exacLly Lhose vlrLues and powers LhaL one coolJ oot teocb and sboolJ oot eveo tty. 1he very ottempt Lo reach Lhem, ln facL, was equaLed wlLh ptlJe, whlch, we wlll see, was Lhe dreaded sln of Lhe cenLury. 1he CreaL Chaln, whlch was olwoys supposed Lo be a map of one's own hlghesL poLenLlals-a map of Lhe course LhaL Lros would follow ln Lhe blossomlng of a love LhaL would embrace Lhe enLlre kosmos wlLh Agape and carlLas-LhaL exLraordlnary map of llberaLlon became lnsLead a cage lnLo whlch humans were locked wlLh no posslblllLy of hlgher/deeper developmenL. As 8ousseau (ln mlle) would exhorL an enLlre generaLlon: C Man! conflne Lhlne exlsLence wlLhln Lhyself, and Lhou wllL no longer be mlserable. kemolo lo tbe ploce wblcb Notote bos osslqoeJ to tbee lo tbe cbolo of beloqs, and noLhlng can compel Lhee Lo deparL from lL . . ." (my lLallcs). rlde Lhus became any aLLempL Lo rlse above one's sLaLlon," Lo counLerwork Lhe unlversal Cause," Lo dlsLurb Lhe very sysLem of Lhe unlverse." 1he way up, ln any form, ln any varleLy, ln any gulse, was Lhe arch-sln, Lhe sln of horrld prlde. Any hlnL of oLherworldllness" was openly scorned, severely derlded-noL Lo menLlon compleLely dlsLorLed and mlsundersLood. ope agaln: Co soar wlLh laLo Lo Lhe empyreal sphere, 1o Lhe flrsL good, flrsL perfecL, and flrsL falr, Cr Lo Lread Lhe mazy round hls follow'rs Lrod, And qulLLlng sense call lmlLaLlng Cod, As LasLern prlesLs ln glddy clrcles run, And Lurn Lhelr heads Lo lmlLaLe Lhe sun. So Lhe way up-any form of AscenL beyond 8eason-was vlewed as noL [usL a bad ldea, buL as a llLeral crlme agalnsL naLure, a crlme oqolost Lhe CreaL Chaln and lLs alloLLed spoL for men and women. ln prlde, ln reas'nlng prlde, our error lles, All qulL Lhelr sphere and rush lnLo Lhe skles. rlde sLlll ls almlng aL Lhe blesL abodes. . . . 1he Lheme of Lhe modern age Lhus became, as ope agaln would have lL: 1race Sclence Lhen wlLh modesLy Lhy gulde." uo noL soar, do noL look up, do noL Lransform, buL follow downward-looklng Sclence wlLh modesLy Lhy gulde. 1he uelsLs-1oland, 1lndal, volLalre, 8ousseau, !efferson, lranklln-would Lry Lo salvage whaL Lhey could of some sorL of a Cod-a Cod LhaL orlglnally creaLed Lhe world, wound lL up," and Lhen reLlred from Lhe scene enLlrely. unllke ArlsLoLle's ure Cmega Cod, from whlch noLhlng lssues buL Lo whlch all asplres, Lhe uelsLs' Cod was Lhe pure Alpha Source, from whlch all lssued buL Loward whlch noLhlng moves. 1he Lwo paLhs of AscenL and uescenL aL Lhls polnL had uLLerly and LoLally separaLed, dlssoclaLed, dlvorced, anemlc and fracLured, wlLh no polnL of conLacL, no polnL even of dlscourse, leL alone lnLegraLlon. And Lhe uelsLs' Cod, lL soon became obvlous, served preclsely no funcLlon whaLsoever, elLher morally, pracLlcally, or even LheoreLlcally-and was undersLandably dropped alLogeLher. 1he wonderful world of lenlLude was no longer from Cod, lenlLude lLself was Cod, Lhe only Cod. ln all dlrecLlons Lhere was only uescenL. ln all dlrecLlons, only Shadows. ln all dlrecLlons, only llaLland. And Lhe only real sln? 1o Lry Lo leave, Lo Lry Lo escape from Lhe Cave, Lo Lry Lo see some reallLy more Lhan Lhe eye of flesh mlghL manage Lo Lake ln, Lo Lry Lo Lransform lnsLead of merely LranslaLe. All of LhaL was . . . prlde. 1he realm of Lhe senses, gulded by 8eason: Lhere was Lhe foundaLlonal reallLy. 1he wonders of creaLlon-who needs a source for Lhem? 1he blgness of creaLlon!-who could ask for more? LeL me bask ln Lhe rlches of Lhe sensory world, and reason upon lL where necessary, buL why ask behlnd Lhe scenes for more Lhan Lhls dlsplay? LeL cosmlc emoLlon and pleLy carry Lhe day, and leL me weep wlLh [oy aL any passlng slghL ln naLure LhaL sLrlkes Lhe sllghLesL chord of egolc senLlmenL, and leL me spend my days and nlghLs suckllng shadows LhaL are dear enough Lo me. And leL me never, never, never sln by asklng beyond Lhe shaded nooks and crannles. LeL me always be known for savlng and defendlng Lhe wonderful appearances, and wlLh eyes so modesLly reverLed from LhaL all-embraclng Source, leL me never look up and never sLep ouL of my alloLLed spoL on LhaL greaL, greaL Chaln. And so, afLer more Lhan Lwo mlllennla, lt boJ floolly come to tbls: Lhe paLh of llberaLlon ended up Lhe sln of prlde. 1he CreaL Chaln, Lhe map of whaL we could become, became a map of whaL we should noL even Lry. 1he CreaL Chaln was used Lo deny Lhe CreaL Chaln. 1he way ouL of Lhe Cave was used Lo lmprlson men and women ln lL. 1he CreaL Chaln was no longer Lhe map of escape, buL Lhe plan of Lhe prlson cell wlLh a senLence of llfe. 1PL C8LA1 ln1L8LCCklnC C8uL8 WlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo Lhe merely and purely uescended world, all LhaL was lefL of Lhe CreaL Polarchy showed up as an emplrlcal, flaLland lotetlockloq otJet of surfaces, or exLerlors, or 8lghL-Pand componenLs. ln place of Lhe kosmos, flaLland sysLems Lheory. l would llke, ln Lhls secLlon, Lo explore carefully Lhls greaL lnLerlocklng order" (as !ohn Locke would have lL)-how and why lL arose, whaL lL accompllshed, and whaL lL aggresslvely vlolaLed. 8ecause, one way or anoLher, ln one gulse or anoLher, Lhe only Cod Lhe modern world would henceforLh acknowledge, lf lL chose Lo acknowledge a Cod aL all, would be Lhe Cod of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order. And so leL me say lL one lasL Llme: for loLlnus or Auroblndo or LckharL or Shankara, Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order was Lrue buL parLlal, lL was only half Lhe sLory (Lhe no gaps ln lenlLude" half, Lhe uescendlng or Lffluxlng aspecL). lL represenLed Lhe muLual lnLerpeneLraLlon of Lhe Lach and Lhe All. 8uL Lhe ground of boLh Lhe Lach and Lhe All was Lhe nondual Cne, found noL merely ln Lhe uescenL of Coodness buL ln AscenL Lo Lhe Cood. 8uL when Lhls half-sLory became Lhe whole" sLory, Lhere preclsely was Lhe blrLh of Lhe nlghLmare known as modernlLy. And modernlLy's collapse of Lhe kosmos occurred rlghL alongslde lLs genulne accompllshmenLs, whlch, l belleve, are noL Lo be denled (Lhe good news / bad news naLure of modernlLy). We have seen LhaL one of Lhe greaL deflnlng marks of modernlLy-whaL has been called lLs genulne Jlqolty-was Lhe clear dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of sclence (lL), morals (we), and arL (l), so LhaL each could pursue lLs own course and esLabllsh lLs own LruLhs wlLhouL domlnaLlon by Lhe oLhers. CulLural modernlLy's speclflc dlgnlLy ls consLlLuLed by whaL Max Weber called Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe value spheres ln accord wlLh Lhelr own loglcs." 3 And by Lhe end of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, sclence, morallLy, and arL were even lnsLlLuLlonally JlffeteotloteJ as realms of acLlvlLy ln whlch quesLlons of LruLh [sclence], of [usLlce [morals], and of LasLe [arL] were auLonomously elaboraLed, LhaL ls, each of Lhese spbetes of koowloq [was pursued] under lLs own speclflc aspecL of valldlLy." 4 8uL lf Lhe Jlqolty of modernlLy was Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, Lhe Jlsostet of modernlLy would be LhaL lL had oot yet found a way Lo loteqtote Lhem. lndeed, wlLh no unlfylng cenLer, Lhe 8lg 1hree had already begun Lo move lnLo Jlssoclotloo-Lo exlsL as radlcally separaLe, hyper-auLonomous" realms, wlLh noLhlng Lo say Lo each oLher, bound only by a Lhoroughgolng and ofLen muLual dlsdaln. 1hls separaLlon and self-sufflclency, whlch, consldered from Lhe sLandpolnL of phllosophy of hlsLory, paved Lhe way for emanclpaLlon from age-old dependencles [myLhlc-membershlp syncreLlsms], were experlenced aL Lhe same Llme as absLracLlon, as olleootloo [dlssoclaLlon] from Lhe LoLallLy of an eLhlcal conLexL of llfe. Cnce rellglon had been Lhe unbreakable seal upon Lhls LoLallLy, lL ls noL by chance LhaL Lhls seal has been broken." 3 ln Lhe absence of Lhe as-yeL-undlsclosed lnLegraLlon, Lhe Lhree spheres wenL vlrLually Lhelr separaLe and lonely ways. ln parLlcular, Lhe sub[ecLlve and moral spheres-Lhe LefL-Pand paLh, Lhe lnLerlor paLh-pursued lLs own loglcs rlgorously, and Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, LhaL of Lhe sLudy of Lhe ob[ecLlve and emplrlcal exLerlors, pursued lLs own course ln lsolaLlon as well. 8oLh paLhs were maklng absoluLely world-shaklng dlscoverles, buL dlscoverles LhaL spoke Lo each oLher vlrLually noL aL all. lL was Lhls Jlssoclotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree LhaL, more Lhan anyLhlng else, allowed Lhe sweeplng advances of Lhe naLural sclences (Lhe lL-domaln) Lo overwhelm Lhe lnLerlor, sub[ecLlve, moral, and culLural domalns (l and we), and Lhls ls whaL l mean when l say Lhe 8lg 1hree were reduced Lo Lhe 8lg Cne, or reduced Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh alone, Lhe paLh of ob[ecLlve lL-language (Lhe represenLaLlon/reflecLlon paradlgm, and lLs converse, Lhe producLlon paradlgm, and Lhe overall valldlLy clalms only of proposlLlonal LruLh and/or funcLlonal flL). 1he very powet of monologlcal reason (ever so lmporLanL and ever so parLlal), whlch was teleoseJ from myLhlc syncreLlsm preclsely by Lhe Jlffeteotlotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree, was allowed an overwhelmlng domlnance because of Lhe Jlssoclotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree, and Lhus Lhelr subsequenL reducLlon Lo Lhe unlvocal Cne, Lhe flaLland world of monologlcal, emplrlcal- analyLlc, poslLlvlsLlc lLs," where only Lhe enLlLles sLudled by emplrlcal-naLural sclences are real." ln subsequenL volumes, l Lrace a large parL of Lhls dlssoclaLlon and resulLanL emphasls on flaLland Lo Lhe sLrong lnfluence of Lhe Lechno-economlc base of loJosttlollzotloo and Lhe machlne menLallLy (whlch ls slmllar Lo, buL noL qulLe Lhe same as, Lhe more common analysls LhaL Lraces lL Lo caplLallsm): Lhe Lechno-economlc base supporLed lnsLrumenLal-purposlve acLlvlLles, and ln a way all ouL of proporLlon Lo Lhe lnsLrumenLal-purposlve raLlonallLy LhaL dld ln facL bulld lL: a poslLlve feedback loop LhaL senL calculaLlve raLlonallLy splnnlng ouL of conLrol, preclsely ln Lhe avowed purpose of galnlng conLrol. ln Lhe meanLlme, uonald 8oLhberg glves an excellenL summary of Lhese broad Lrends, whlch ls qulLe conslsLenL wlLh my presenLaLlon: lor a varleLy of reasons, Lhese emergenL poLenLlals of modernlLy, Lhese Lhree modes of knowlng and acLlng [arL, sclence, morallLy: Lhe 8lg 1hree], were noL evenly developed. 8aLher, as many of Lhe maln crlLlcal analysLs of modernlLy have suggesLed, modernlLy as lL acLually unfolded (and sLlll unfolds) was (and ls) heavlly welghLed Loward Lhe knowlng and manlpulaLlon of Lhe flrsL world [Lhe lL-world, 8lghL Pand, ob[ecLlvlsLlc], of a 'dlsen- chanLed' and ob[ecLlfled world domlnaLed by an 'lnsLrumenLal' or 'Lechnlcal' raLlonallLy (8erman, Pabermas, Peldegger, Porkhelmer, Marcuse, MerchanL, MaclnLyre)." 1hus, 8oLhberg polnLs ouL, 1he conLenL of Lhe oLher Lwo worlds (Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve [we] and sub[ecLlve [l] worlds) was lncreaslngly organlzed accordlng Lo Lhe sLrucLures of Lhe emplrlcal sclences and lnsLrumenLal or calculaLlve raLlonallLy, Pabermas llnks Lhls unbalanced developmenL especlally wlLh Lhe powerful lnfluences of Lhe forces of caplLallsm. under Lhe 'sclenLlsLlc' lnfluence of poslLlvlsm and emplrlclsm, Lhere were clalms of a unlfled emplrlcal sclence LhaL encompasses all 'real' knowledge, excludlng Lhe varlous aLLempLs Lo clalm an auLonomous sLaLus for Lhe emerglng human sclences of culLural and sub[ecLlve reallLy" 6 -Lhe 8lg 1hree reduced Lo Lhe 8lg Cne. 1he flaLLenlng, Lhe levellng, Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos. 1he unlverse was pushed Lhrough a sLralner of ob[ecLlflcaLlon, and Lhe resulL was Lhln soup lndeed. All LhaL was lefL of a rlchly mulLldlmenslonal kosmos was slmply Lhe sensory/emplrlcal exLerlors and ouLllnes and flaLland forms, much as lf a sphere had been pro[ecLed onLo a plane surface, produclng only a serles of flaL clrcles-all span, no depLh-aL whlch polnL we say, WhaL sphere?" 1he verLlcal ooJ horlzonLal holarchles-Lhe lnLerlor ooJ exLerlor dlmenslons-whlch, we mlghL say, lnLerlock" ln a rlch neLwork of values, degrees of consclousness, and quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, none of whlch can be measured ln Lerms of pbyslcol slze or emplrlcal lnches or maLerlal span: Lhese were reduced Lo Lhelr sensory/emplrlcal and physlcal correlaLes, Lo Lhe physlcal forms and poslLlvlsLlc exLerlors LhaL coolJ be seen (Lhe LefL reduced Lo lLs correlaLes ln Lhe 8lghL), and Lhese lndeed could be measured prlmarlly by physlcal slze or oLher exLenslonal aLLrlbuLes (mass, veloclLy, momenLum, number, span). And where quallLles and values are measured ln Lerms of beLLer and worse (compasslon ls usually beLLer Lhan murder), emplrlcal slzes are oot beLLer or worse, only blgger or smaller (a sLar ls noL beLLer Lhan a planeL, only blgger). And Lhus Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of sensory surfaces and exLerlor forms-Lhe flnal resulL of pushlng Lhe unlverse Lhrough Lhe sLralner of ob[ecLlflcaLlon-was lnexorably Lhe JlspoollfleJ oolvetse. 7 1he kosmos, llLerally, was a shadow of lLs former self. 1he verLlcal and lnLerlor holarchles (of l and we) were dlLched ln favor of Lhe merely horlzonLal and exLerlor holarchles (of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of valueless lLs). 8 Ooolltotlve dlsLlncLlons were replaced merely wlLh poootltotlve dlsLlncLlons and Lechnlcal measuremenLs. WhaL does lL mean?" was fundamenLally replaced wlLh WhaL does lL do?" lnLrlnslc value dlsappeared lnLo emplrlcal acLlon Lerms. WhaL worLh?" was replaced wlLh Pow much?" Cteotet was replaced wlLh blqqet. CulLural meanlng drlfLed lnLo funcLlonal flL and hollsLlc lnLeracLlon of surfaces. Morals melLed lnLo sysLems Lheorles. Lros was converLed Lo lnsLrumenLal-funcLlonal efflcocy, and Agape melLed down lnLo an afflrmaLlon of otJlooty uescended llfe. ln shorL, Jeptbs LhaL requlred lotetptetotloo were largely lgnored ln favor of Lhe lnLerlocklng sotfoces LhaL can slmply be seeo (emplrlc-analyLlc)-valueless surfaces LhaL could be paLlenLly, perslsLenLly, accuraLely mapped: on Lhe oLher slde of Lhe ob[ecLlve sLralner, Lhe world appeared ooly as a greaL lnLerlocklng order of sensory surfaces, emplrlcal forms, process lLs. 1he masslve emplrlcal mapplng game-Lhe eplsLemologlcal game of modernlLy-was afooL. We heard 1aylor summarlze Lhls whole shlfL as: 1he unlverse as a meanlngful order of quallLaLlvely dlfferenLlaLed levels [verLlcal holarchy] gave way flrsL Lo a vlslon of maLhemaLlcal order, and Lhen flnally Lo Lhe 'modern' vlew of a world of ulLlmaLely conLlngenL correlaLlons, Lo be paLlenLly mapped by emplrlcal observaLlon." 9 And, as we saw ln chapLer 1, lL wasn'L [usL LhaL Lhls emplrlcal mapplng game was parLlal: Laken ln and by lLself, lL was perfecLly self-conLradlcLory. Cn Lhe oLher slde of Lhe ob[ecLlve sLralner, Lhere was slmply no evldence whaLsoever LhaL Lhls Lhln ob[ecLlve soup was Lhe ooly evldence worLh knowlng. no, tbot asserLlon (8lghL-Pand daLa alone are real) was a LefL-Pand [udgmenL LhaL denled all LefL-Pand [udgmenLs. 1he ob[ecLlvlsLlc worldvlew could noL accounL for lLs owo stotos (Lhe vlew from nowhere"): lL could prove ob[ecLs buL could noL prove Lhe excluslveness of ob[ecLs-could noL prove lLself-buL raLher was Laken, llLerally, on bllnd falLh, a falLh blloJ Lo Lhe enLlre LefL half of Lhe kosmos, even as lL surrepLlLlously dlpped lnLo LhaL dlmenslon for lLs own hldden [udgmenLs, [udgmenLs whlch lL forcefully and vehemenLly made and Lhen flaL-ouL denled maklng. Lmplrlcal knowledge alone ls Lrue knowledge"-and where ls Lhe empltlcol proof for tbot? 1he neL effecL was LhaL Lhe CreaL Chaln was Llpped on lLs slde, so Lo speak-an lnflnlLe wlLhln and beyond was dlLched ln favor of an lnflnlLe ln fronL of and ahead, and Lhe WesL began Lo scraLch LhaL lLch ln earnesL. l wanL Lo brlefly lnLerrupL Lhe narraLlve aL Lhls polnL Lo menLlon a slmple buL cruclal lLem. 1hls wlll Lake us ahead of our sLory, buL lL's lmporLanL, so leL us aL leasL brlefly noLe Lhe followlng before reLurnlng Lo Lhe maln narraLlve. WlLh Lhe posLmodern overLhrow of Lhe unlvocal Cne-LhaL ls, wlLh Lhe reLurn of an lnvesLlgaLlon of Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslons, lncludlng mulLlculLural lnLerpreLaLlon and deep hermeneuLlcs, lnLrospecLlon and lnLerlor dlsclosures, Lhe exlsLence of lnLersub[ecLlve dlscurslve formaLlons and cognlLlve paradlgms, chalns of slgnlflcaLlon and depLhs of communlcaLlon, Lhe demand for quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons and Lhe search for worLh and meanlng-wlLh, ln shorL, Lhe beglnnlng reLurn of Lhe 8lg 1hree as opposed Lo monollLhlc flaLland, lnLeresL can once agaln Lurn (and has Lurned) Lo Lhe depLhs of Lhe sub[ecLlve l and Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve we: depLhs LhaL range from Peldegger's clearlng or openlng (Lhe pure ttoosceoJeos), Lo hermeneuLlcs' resLless search for Lhe depLhs, Lo Lhe mysLlcal openlngs found even ln nleLzsche and 8aLallle and uerrlda and, yes, ln loucaulL's lnLense search for llmlL experlences and Lhe mad mysLlcal" poeLs. uepLhs LhaL have sparked an exploslon of lnLeresL ln everyLhlng from humanlsLlc and Lranspersonal psychology Lo LasLern mysLlclsm and yoga. uepLhs LhaL call ouL even Lo Lhe posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs, who, lf noLhlng else, are qulLe cerLaln LhaL LruLh ls noL merely a clean game of poslLlvlsLlc and emplrlcal mapplng. lor all posLmodern currenLs have aL leasL one Lhlng ln common: mere emplrlclsm ls dead. 1he surfaces are shoL. 1he flaL and faded sysLem ls anemlc Lo Lhe core. 1he Lhln soup ls causlng malnuLrlLlon: eplsLemologlcal, onLologlcal, moLlvaLlonal. 1he whole polnL ls LhaL once Lhe welghL of Lhe unlvocal Cne ls llfLed from Lhe shoulders of awareness, Lhe 8lg 1hree [ump lnsLanLly back lnLo focus, and lnLerlor depLhs once fotblJJeo to setloos Jlscootse-depLhs forbldden wlLh Lhe shudderlng collapse of Lhe kosmos-now unfurl before Lhe mlnd's lnward eye: Lhe surfaces are noL all, Lhe shadows hlde someLhlng else. 1he appearances don'L [usL reveal, Lhey conceal: someLhlng oLher ls golng on. 1here are nuLrlLlonal supplemenLs LhaL Lhls Lhln soup of shlny surfaces does noL conLaln, secreLs noL apparenL Lo Lhe senses, lLems LhaL are more . . . lnLeresLlng. And among Lhose woltloq fot os ln Lhls renewed lnvesLlgaLlon of lnLerlor sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve depLhs are preclsely Lhe orlglnal ploneers ln LhaL endeavor: Lhe greaL mysLlc phllosopher/sages from loLlnus Lo ulonyslus Lo AugusLlne Lo 1eresa Lo LckharL Lo Lmerson, ploneers LhaL sLruck ouL Lo lnvesLlgaLe a vasL and uncharLered conLlnenL of consclousness, a voyage of lnLerlor dlscovery LhaL conLlnued rlghL up Lo Lhe hlsLorlcal polnL-tbls polnL ln our narraLlve-where LhaL parLlcular conLlnenL was proclalmed nonexlsLenL and all explorers were banned (by culLural marglnallzaLlon") from even dlscusslng Lhelr flndlngs. 1he lnLerlor dlmenslons were no longer consldered setloos Jlscootse: all of LhaL was parL of Lhe merely myLhlc" pasL (no more myLhs, no more AscenL). As loucaulL would puL lL of Lhls enLlre perlod (of collapse), lf someLhlng couldn'L be lald ouL on a flot toble of tepteseototloo, Lhen lL JlJot exlst (and, sald loucaulL, lL seemed noL Lo boLher Lhe classlcal LnllghLenmenL LhaL Lhe drawer of Lhe Lable-sub[ecLlve consclousness lLself-could noL lLself be lald ouL on Lhe Lable). So much for Lhe exLraordlnary ploneers of Lhe lnLerlor (from loLlnus Lo llclno Lo LckharL . . .). 8ot tbey left os tbelt eotly mops, maps of Lhe lnLerlors of whaL now amounLed Lo a new World awalLlng (re)dlscovery. And mosL of Lhese maps were of Lhe general form: Lurn lefL aL mlnd, cuL sLralghL lnLo Lhe formless, resL ln SplrlL, embrace Lhe world, and all of Lhe sLeps requlred for LhaL exLraordlnary [ourney (maps such as flgure 9-1). 8uL, lndeed, many of Lhe speclflc deLalls of Lhese maps are less Lhan accuraLely drawn. 1hese early maps are ln many ways llke Lhe early maps of Lhe Amerlcas: Cuba ls Lhe slze of 1exas, Creenland exLends forever, llorlda ls a huge conLlnenL. 8uL Lhe facL LhaL some of Lhese maps are crude or lnlLlal or ouLdaLed does noL mean LhaL Cuba and llorlda and Creenland don'L exlsL. 1hus, lL ls noL necessary LhaL we embrace every deLall of Lhelr maps. noL only are some of Lhem hasLlly drawn, Lhe whole polnL of consclousness developmenL ls LhaL lL also cteotes tettltotles as lL goes, and doesn'L slmply dlscover totolly preglven landscapes. 1he facL LhaL cerLaln broad domalns of lnLerlor consclousness are avallable Lo us (as deep sLrucLures) does noL mean LhaL Lhe surface sLrucLures are glven once and for all (whlch ls why even excellenL lnLerlor maps, such as loLlnus's, have Lo be reflned and updaLed). Lven lf Columbus had drawn a perfecLly accuraLe geographlcal map of llorlda, lL would sLlll be woefully lnadequaLe for mosL of Loday's uses (lL wouldn'L show Lhe new clLles, roads, Lowns, developmenLs, eLc. Where are all Lhe subsequenLly cteoteJ surface sLrucLures?). Lach level of consclousness ls acLually a foot-pooJtoot offolt, molded equally by lnLenLlonal, behavloral, culLural, and soclal facLors, all of whlch have conLlnued Lo evolve and develop slnce Lhe Llme of Lhe greaL ploneers. 8aLher, Lhese early maps are much along Lhe llnes of whaL loucaulL suggesLed: Among Lhe culLural lnvenLlons of manklnd Lhere ls a Lreasury of devlces, Lechnlques, ldeas, procedures, and so on, LhaL cannoL exacLly be reacLlvaLed, buL aL leasL consLlLuLe, or help consLlLuLe, a cerLaln polnL of vlew whlch can be very useful as a Lool for analyzlng whaL's golng on now-and Lo change lL." 10 1hus, as we wlll see shorLly, when Lhe ldeallsLs began Lhe overLhrow of flaLland, Lhe overLhrow of Lhe collapsed and dlsquallfled unlverse, Lhey had recourse Lo preclsely Lhese early maps of Lhe lnLerlor Worlds. And, as we wlll also see, lf Lhere was one person who could be sald Lo be semlnal Lo Lhls enLlre movemenL, LhaL person was . . . loLlnus. 8uL LhaL, lndeed, ls qulLe ahead of our sLory. All l wlsh Lo emphaslze here ls LhaL, wlLh Lhe posLmodern posslblllty of Lhe reLurn of Lhe 8lg 1hree, we do lndeed have Lhe early maps of Lhe lnLerlor new World lefL by Lhese exLraordlnary ploneers. And relylng on Lhose maps-aL leasL lnlLlally-ls noL a regresslve yearnlng for yesLeryear, nor a myLhlc devoluLlon, buL raLher Lhe only senslble course of acLlon for a new breed of ploneers Lrylng once agaln Lo plumb Lhe depLhs LhaL were uLLerly dlsquallfled wlLh Lhe modern collapse. 8eflne Lhe maps, yes, redraw many of Lhelr ouLllnes, surely, buL Lhank Lhe sLars for Lhe guLs and glory of Lhose who wenL before, and lefL a Lrall, clearly marked, for all Lhose souls senslLlve enough Lo follow. A CALCuLuS Cl LLASu8L 1o reLurn Lo our narraLlve. WlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe 8lg 1hree Lo Lhe 8lg Cne: Lhe collapsed and dlsquallfled world was stlll o bletotcby, sLlll a bolotcby, buL now played ouL sLrlcLly and only ln Lhe botlzootol plane (any verLlcal move was Lhe sln of prlde). So of course Lhe unlverse was sLlll vlewed as a masslve lnLerlocklng order, a greaL neL of sysLems Lheory, buL a neL LhaL was now merely emplrlcal and physlcal, LhaL could be seen wlLh senses or Lhelr exLenslons, a neL of Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh. 1hus, noL also depLhs Lo be lnLerpreLed and lnLerlors Lo be accessed, buL slmply exLerlor surfaces Lo be seen and paLlenLly mapped by emplrlcal observaLlon"-Lhe so-called reflecLlon" or represenLaLlon paradlgm," where a preglven, unproblemaLlc sub[ecL slmply teflects oo or tepteseots Lhe ob[ecLs ln Lhe preglven, sensory, emplrlcal world. 11 1he upper-8lghL quadranL, for example, was sLlll a holarchy-aLoms Lo molecules Lo cells Lo organlsms, and so on. 1bls wosot JeoleJ. WhaL wos denled was LhaL Lhe left-nooJ Jlmeosloos needed Lo be explalned ln any Lerms otbet Lhan Lhose found ln Lhe klqbt nooJ. 1hls ls subLle reducLlonlsm. (A few lngenlous cranks Lhen wenL furLher-lnLo gross reducLlonlsm-and clalmed everyLhlng ln Lhe 8lghL Pand could acLually be reduced Lo aLoms, Lhe old Lplcurean move.) 8uL ln boLh gross and subLle reducLlonlsm, reallLy ls merely monologlcal and emplrlcal and represenLaLlonal (reflecLlon on Lhe emplrlcally avallable), and Lhus oo looet ttoosfotmotloo (no lnLerlor AscenL or verLlcal developmenL) ls requlred ln order Lo have access Lo all Lhe LruLh LhaL ls flL Lo know." And Lhls flL perfecLly buL petfectly wlLh Lhe arch-sln of Lhe age. 1o aLLempL Lo rlse above one's sLaLlon-LhaL was, of course, Lhe dreaded prlde. Well, Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh doesn'L requlre anybody Lo rlse above anyLhlng: [usL look more carefully aL Lhe emplrlcal world LhaL ls more or less avallable. noL arduous ttoosfotmotloo, buL slmply more preclse ttooslotloo (mapplng of Lhe emplrlcally accesslble). 12 1he CreaL Chaln LoLLered off lnLo emplrlcal observables, degrees of depLh collapsed lnLo degrees of span, lnLerpreLlve dlmenslons dlsappeared lnLo emplrlcal acLlon Lerms, and quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons melLed down lnLo funcLlonal lnLerrelaLlons: Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of emplrlcal lLs. And afLer all, every evenL ln Lhe real kosmos does lndeed have lLs 8lghL-Pand correlaLe, lLs emplrlcal or sensorlmaLerlal fooLprlnL (lLs exLerlor form), and so some sorL of evlJeoce for Lhe emplrlcal and poslLlvlsLlc course could olwoys be supplled. 1houghLs have Lhelr correlaLes ln braln physlology. lnLenLlons have Lhelr behavloral aspecLs. CulLure has maLerlal soclal componenLs. 1he 8lghL-Pand paLh ls never [usL slmply wrong. !usL very parLlal. lenlLude wlLhouL SplrlL ls sysLems Lheory. And sysLems Lheory, ln lLs varlous gulses, was now all Lhe rage (from Lhe LnllghLenmenL down Lo Loday, ln lLs varlous forms, Lhe subLle reducLlonlsm of sysLems Lheory ls Lhe arch-paradlgm of Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, where lL does blLLer baLLle wlLh Lhe gross reducLlonlsLs-aLomlsLs, mechanlsLs-nelLher of Lhem formally acknowledglng Lhe LefL half of Lhe kosmos). ln Lhe greaL sysLems paradlgm, whlch swepL Lhrough Lhe LnllghLenmenL llke wlldflre (based, as boLh were, on monologlcal raLlonallLy): lnsLead of Lhe relaLlon of Lach Lo Lhe Cne (and Lhus Lo Lhe All), one's salvaLlon depended upon how Lhe Lach flL funcLlonally and lnsLrumenLally lnLo Lhe All, lnLo Lhe whole funcLlonal sysLem. 1he bollstlc world was an losttomeotol world, Lo Lhe core. Slnce all Lhlngs were merely sLrands ln Lhe greaL emplrlcal web, all Lhlngs had merely exLrlnslc and lnsLrumenLal value ln Lhe overall sysLem. Accordlngly, poollty (lnLerlor depLh) was measured ln Lerms of poootltotlve flt wlLh Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order (exLerlor span), and Lhls was, lncredlbly, Lrue for boLh Lhe naLural scleoces and Lhe tellqloos of Lhe Llme. 1he greaL lnsLrumenLallzaLlon" was ln moLlon. 13 lL ls lnLeresLlng Lo noLe," says 1aylor of Lhls collapse, LhaL Lhls concepLlon lLself had undergone Lhe LransformaLlon whlch made Lhe losttomeotol cenLral. Cur grasp of Lhls [hollsLlc] order was referred Lo by Lhe Lerm 'tecbooloqlo,' and Lhe unlLy of Cod's order was seen noL as a sLrucLure Lo be conLemplaLed buL as an lnLerlocklng seL of Lhlngs calllng for acLlons whlch formed a harmonlous whole." 14 1aylor ls dlscusslng Lhe cenLral sLrands ln rellglon from Lhe 8eformaLlon Lo Lhe urlLans Lo Lhe uelsLs. Pow one's octloos flL lnLo Lhe harmonlous whole: Lhls was cruclal Lo salvaLlon. 1he harmony beLween Lhe parLs [of Lhe harmonlous whole] was capLured ln Lhe Lerm 'eoptoxlo', lL was more a maLLer of Lhe coherence of Lhe occaslons for acLlon Lhan of Lhe muLual reflecLlon of Lhlngs ln an order of slgns." ln oLher words, a harmonlous whole of surfaces and exLerlors lnvolved ln acLlon (WhaL does lL Jo?") and noL olso lnLerlor conLemplaLlon and an order of slgns (WhaL does lL meoo?"). 1hls converslon of quallLaLlve value Lo lnsLrumenLal acLlon, 1aylor shows, marked Lhe enLlre era. 1hls means LhaL Lhe lnsLrumenLal sLance Loward Lhe world has been glven a new and lmporLanL splrlLual meanlng. . . . losttomeotollzloq Lhlngs ls Lhe splrlLually essenLlal sLep. . . ." 13 1he losttomeotollzloq conslsLed preclsely ln converLlng all Lhlngs lnLo sttooJs ln Lhe web of a now purely descended lenlLude, Lhereln Lo Lake Lhelr lnsLrumenLal place ln Lhe greaL unlversal sysLem of sensory surfaces (reflecLed on" by lnsLrumenLal raLlonallLy). no less Lhan !ohn Locke-Lhe Leacher of Lhe LnllghLenmenL"-would sLamp Lhls hollsLlc lnsLrumenLallzlng wlLh hls seal of approval. lnsLrumenLal raLlonallLy, properly conducLed, ls of Lhe essence of our servlce Lo Cod. 1hls ls how we parLlclpaLe ln Cod's purposes. noL Lhrough lnsLlncL, llke Lhe anlmals, buL Lhrough consclous calculaLlon, we toke oot ploce lo tbe wbole." 16 As 1aylor summarlzes lL, Locke helped Lo deflne and glve currency Lo Lhe growlng uelsL plcLure, whlch wlll emerge fully ln Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, of Lhe unlverse as a vost lotetlockloq otJet of beloqs, motoolly sobsetvloq eocb otbets flootlsbloq. . . ." And losttomeotol awareness was Lhus our avenue of parLlclpaLlon ln Cod's wlll." (lL should be obvlous by now LhaL lf we subsLlLuLe Cala" for Cod's wlll," we have Lhe new paradlgm" of many of Lhe ecophllosophers of Loday, who exLend ln an unbroken llneage Lo Lhe orlglnaLors of Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos. lar from belng a new paradlgm, lL ls sLlll coverLly followlng Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, sLlll aLLempLlng Lo lnsLrumenLallze Lhe world subservlenL Lo a web-of-llfe ldeology, sLlll caughL ln loucaulL's blopower, sLlll dolng blLLer baLLle wlLh Lhe qtoss reducLlonlsLs, whlch ls flne, buL sLlll mlsslng Lhe larger vlolence Lhey have perpeLraLed on Lhe kosmos ln Lhe process of Lhelr own sobtle reducLlonlsm-all Loplcs we wlll lnvesLlgaLe furLher below.) 1hus, Lhe CreaL Polarchy (wlLh no more AscenL!" allowed) was converLed, by a flaLland monologlcal and lnsLrumenLal reasonlng (Lechnologla), lnLo muLually lnLerlocklng and lnLerpeneLraLlng surfaces and exLerlors, lnLo a coherenL and harmonlous whole of muLually subservlng sLrands ln Lhe greaL unlversal and ob[ecLlve sysLem, a sLrucLural-funcLlonal sysLem deflned ln procedural and acLlon Lerms (WhaL does lL Jo?")-ln shorL, lnLo a flaLland web of llfe LhaL lacked all lnLerlorlLy and degrees of depLh-lacked, as 1aylor puLs lL, all quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons: l and we reduced Lo lnLerwoven lLs. lL was Lhus a shorL sLep Lo Lhe greaLesL good for Lhe greaLesL numbers"-a colcolos of lnLerlocklng exLerlors descrlbed ln acLlon Lerms (Lhe greaL hallmark of Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh). WlLh no depLhs Lo be accessed, Lhere are only surfaces Lo calculaLe: Lhe more, Lhe merrler. ln a dlsquallfled unlverse, quallLy" ls found by addlLlon. And who can doubL, ln such an aLmosphere, LhaL blgger musL be beLLer? Cn Lhe one hand, we can appreclaLe, l Lhlnk, LhaL Lhe greaLesL good for Lhe greaLesL numbers" was a genulnely wotlJceottlc noLlon (lL ofLen even lncluded anlmals). And all of LhaL was due ln large measure Lo Lhe poslLlve emergence of posLconvenLlonal and worldcenLrlc raLlonallLy. So far, so good. 8uL wlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos from boLh LefL and 8lghL dlmenslons Lo merely 8lghL-Pand emplrlcal and sensory markers, Lhere was no room lefL for, Lhere was no way Lo reglsLer, dlfferences ln Lhe types or poolltles of Lhe good" LhaL ls supposed Lo be exLended Lo all belngs. 1here ls ooly Lhe funcLlonal flL of surfaces, and more or less of ooly LhaL. ln oLher words, Lhe flotlooJ world means a bomoqeolzotloo of motlves for all belngs, and Lhe eLhlcal lmperaLlve Lhen becomes Lo exLend Lhls homogenlzed mess Lo as many belngs as posslble. And Lhls means as well LhaL Lhe homogenlzed moLlve would have Lo be Lhe lowest commoo Jeoomlootot for all belngs: namely, sensory pleasure/paln, hedonlc happlness. Already, by 1742, PuLcheson would declare LhaL LhaL acLlon ls besL whlch accompllshes Lhe greaLesL Papplness for Lhe greaLesL numbers." And never mlnd LhaL Lhere mlghL be dlfferenL Lypes or levels of happlness. ln a flaLland cosmos, all happlness ls Lhe same, all happlness ls monohapplness, sensory happlness, hedonlc happlness, and Lhus a flaLland calculus slmply says Lo exteoJ tbe spoo of monohapplness ln all dlrecLlons, ln accord wlLh Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order: noL also degrees of depLh buL slmply endless addlLlon of sensory span, a Lruly bad lnflnlLy ln an expandlng nlghLmare of Lhe qteot lotetlockloq otJet. 1he mosL lmporLanL noLlon PuLcheson and Locke share ls LhaL of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng unlverse, ln whlch Lhe parLs are so deslgned as Lo conduce Lo Lhelr muLual preservaLlon and flourlshlng." 17 PuLcheson hlmself would clearly explaln LhaL our AffecLlons were conLrlved for Lhe whole, by Lhem each AgenL ls made, ln greaL measure, subservlenL Lo Lhe good of Lhe whole. [All] are Lhus llnked LogeLher, and make one greaL SysLem, by an lnvlslble unlon. Pe who volunLarlly conLlnues ln Lhls unlon, makes hlmself happy: Pe who does noL conLlnue Lhls unlon freely, buL affecLs Lo break lL, makes hlmself wreLched, nor yeL can he break Lhe 8onds of naLure." 18 8ecome anyLhlng oLher Lhan an lnsLrumenLal sLrand ln Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order and SysLem of naLure-look beneaLh Lhe surfaces, look lnLo Lhe depLhs or helghLs-and you are noL only gullLy of prlde buL doomed Lo wreLched unhapplness. ?ou have broken Lhe hedonlc calculus, have sobttocteJ from Lhe Sum 1oLal of whaL should be unlformly happy Lgos flLLlng snug as a bug lnLo sensory flaLland: you have dlsrupLed Lhe cavalcade of smlley-faced Shadows. lor Lhe Cambrldge laLonlsLs, who aL Lhe Llme were flghLlng a loslng baLLle, Lhe key Lo salvaLlon was tbelosls-one becomes Lhe ulvlne, and Lhus parLlclpaLes ln Lhe depLhs of Lhe All, embraclng Lach as a perfecL manlfesLaLlon of Lhe Cne. noL [usL flLLlng lnLo Lhe SysLem as a parL, buL dlscoverlng Lhe Source of Lhe SysLem as Lhe Cne. Cn Lhe oLher hand, for Lhe purely uescended worldvlew LhaL was now developlng, Cod's Coodness was found solely ln Lhe plenlLude of benevolence shown ln Lhe lnLerlocklng order of belngs-ln Lhe greaL SysLem-each parL of whlch was assumed Lo be pursulng essenLlally Lhe some monohapplness of sensory pleasure. 1hls ls why, as 1aylor polnLs ouL, Lhe lnsLrumenLal and lnLerlocklng-order LheorlsLs (from Locke Lo 8enLham) always had recourse Lo a beJoolstlc tbeoty of motlvotloo. ln an emplrlcal-sensory world, Lhere ls only emplrlcal-sensory moLlvaLlon (whaL else coolJ Lhere be?). Slnce we are all sLrands ln Lhe greaL emplrlcal web, we musL all share someLhlng ln common, and whaL all llvlng belngs have ln common-Lhe lowesL common denomlnaLor, ln facL-ls Lhe pursulL of physlcal pleasure and Lhe avoldance of physlcal paln. 19 1he homogenlzaLlon of moLlves, Lhe reducLlon of all moLlves Lo Lhe lowesL common denomlnaLor. (Closely relaLed Lo physlcal pleasure/paln, ln Lerms of moLlvaLlon, ls slmple survlval or self-ptesetvotloo, and subsequenL sysLems LheorlsLs would ofLen make self-preservaLlon of Lhe sysLem-auLopolesls-Lhe mono- moLlvaLlon LhaL all holons possess. 1hls ls parLlally Lrue ln an absLracL fashlon-lL's LeneL 2a-buL lL ls lncapable of dlfferenLlaLlng LefL-Pand quallLles, slnce any LhaL exlsL are equally auLopoleLlc. AuLopolesls would Lhus become anoLher common mono-moLlvaLlon ln flaLland.) ln oLher words, Lhe dlsquallfled unlverse sLlll needed some sorL of quallLy Lo move lL lnLo acLlon, lL needed some sorL of push for lLs acLlon Lerms-lL sLlll needed some Lype of moLlvaLlon Lo Lurn Lhe gears, [lggle Lhe web-and Lhe lowesL common denomlnaLor was all LhaL remalned. Pedonlc pleasure, so Lo speak, was Lhe furLhesL lnLo Lhe lnLerlor LhaL would be venLured, and Lhls sole" quallLy-because lL was essenLlally Lhe same" for all-could Lhen be easlly quanLlLlzed" and Lhus calculaLed." (ulfferenL quallLles cannoL easlly be oJJeJ preclsely because Lhey are dlfferenL Lypes of enLlLles-we say, lL's apples and oranges." 8uL lf you can geL rld of Lhe dlfferences ln quallLy, lf you can dlsquallfy Lhe unlverse by converLlng lL lnLo more or less of only one quallLy, converL lL lnLo noLhlng buL apples-well, apples can be added.) Cf course, lL ls one Lhlng Lo say LhaL we are all llnked aL LhaL fooJomeotol level of pleasure/paln (for lndeed we are, aL Lhe sensorlmoLor level, and for all holons LhaL possess LhaL level). lL ls qulLe anoLher Lhlng Lo say LhaL we all have ooly LhaL level of moLlvaLlon. 8uL already PelveLlus would announce LhaL hyslcal paln and pleasure are Lhe unknown prlnclples of all human acLlons." 20 Slgnlflcance ls here compleLely collapsed Lo fundamenLalness, and Lhe lnLerlocklng-uLlllLarlans Lhus arrlve aL Lhe common weakesL-noodle moLlvaLlon, and Lhls weakesL-noodle moLlvaLlon Lhen Jefloes Lhe slngle, sole, mono-happlness LhaL we are supposed Lo exteoJ LhroughouL Lhe flaLland order as an etblcol lmperaLlve: Lhe mote hedonlc happlness for each, Lhe bettet for all. 1he ldea seemed Lo be LhaL lf l can [usL exLend my medlocrlLy Lo more and more belngs, Lhen a collecLlve good and a greaL happlness would somehow resulL. 8uL lL was exacLly Lhe expanslon of Lhls weakesL-noodle moLlvaLlon, colcoloteJ by a monologlcal and lnsLrumenLal reason, LhaL would allow me Lo Lake my rlghLful place ln Lhe greaL lnsLrumenLal whole. Slnce lL ls only ln reason LhaL l can comprehend Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order, and slnce we are all sLrands ln LhaL order, Lhen reason demands LhaL l exLend Lhe same monohapplness LhroughouL Lhe enLlre monochrome sysLem. Lven ArlsLoLle had ranked moLlvaLlons ln a holarchy of deepenlng slgnlflcance. noL everyLhlng we do ls epoolly valuable, or equally good, or equally [usL. ln ArlsLoLle's verslon, Lhere are several goods" ln llfe, buL some of Lhem are more good" Lhan oLhers. LeasL slgnlflcanL was sensual pleasure, or hedonlsLlc lnvolvemenL. 1hls was sLlll a good," and noL Lo be condemned per se, buL Lhere were also oLher and more slgnlflcanL pursulLs. ueeper and wlder Lhan sensual pleasure was Lhe llfe of ordlnary producLlon and consumpLlon of maLerlal goods. ueeper and wlder Lhan producLlon and consumpLlon was Lhe clLlzen llfe, Lhe llfe of lnLersub[ecLlve relaLlonshlp and lnLerpersonal frlendshlp. And deepesL/hlghesL of all, was Lhe conLemplaLlon of Lhe Llmeless (we approach Lhe ulvlne mosL closely by conLemplaLlng Lhe unchanglng). 21 1hls ls, of course, [usL anoLher verslon of Lhe CreaL Polarchy. lor ArlsLoLle and Lhe SLolcs, Lhls hlerarchy was an order of goals, and an order of moLlvaLlon. lor laLo and loLlnus, lL was also Lhe sLrucLure of Lhe kosmos (whlch ls why laLo's sclence" and hls eLhlcs" are of a plece). 8uL ln all cases, lL meanL LhaL Lhe eLhlcal llfe lnvolved slgnlflcanL ttoosfotmotloos ln consclousness (or ln one's belng). 1he deeper or hlgher moLlvaLlons are noL slmply qlveo from Lhe sLarL, one has Lo grow, develop, and unfold Lo effecL Lhese changes ([usL as ln Maslow's needs hlerarchy, whlch ls preclsely Lhe same CreaL Polarchy ln modern form). Above all, one had Lo cbooqe ooes petceptloos, because Lhe deeper and wlder and more encompasslng moLlvaLlons are noL [usL lylng around walLlng Lo be seen by Lhe senses or Lhelr exLenslons. 1toosfotmotloo was mandaLory for a Lruly etblcol llfe. 8uL wlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe emplrlcal 8lghL-Pand paLh and Lo Lhe weakesL-noodle moLlvaLlon of pleasure/paln (Lhe very shallowesL moLlvaLlon on ArlsLoLle's and laLo's holarchy), a profound and alLogeLher far-reachlng shlfL has occurred: slnce Lhe weakesL-noodle moLlvaLlon ls olteoJy presenL ln mosL adulLs (lL ls presenL, ln facL, ln mosL senLlenL belngs, a Lrue fundamenLal)-slnce lL ls olteoJy presenL ln awareness, Lhen one Joes oot bove to ttoosfotm ln order Lo llve tbls eLhlcal" llfe: one slmply exLends one's presenL sLaLe Lo as many oLhers as posslble. Cne ttooslotes more wldely, one does noL have Lo ttoosfotm more deeply. (lL ls lnLeresLlng LhaL, when loucaulL swlLched hls sLudles Lo eLhlcs, Lhe ma[or crlLlclsm he had of modern eLhlcal Lheorles compared wlLh Lhe premodern ones was LhaL, as he puL lL, Lhe modern Lheorles by and large had no oscesls, no LransformaLlve pracLlce: one merely LhoughL dlfferenLly, one dldn'L have Lo Lransform.) ln facL, almlng for any deeper and LransformaLlve moLlvaLlon (whlch ls also acLually much wlder and more encompasslng)-Lhls ls our old frlend prlde." Seeklng a deeper meanlng and moLlvaLlon musL now be vlewed as sLepplng ouLslde of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of weakesL-noodle moLlvaLlon. lL was llLerally labeled, as we saw, a crlme agalnsL naLure" and a crlme agalnsL Lhe greaL unlversal SysLem." 22 And Lhus, Lo come full clrcle, lL was Lhrough weakesL-noodle moLlvaLlon, calculaLed by an lnsLrumenLal-hollsLlc raLlonallLy, LhaL we coolJ embtoce tbe flotlooJ wbole. 1he lmporLance of lnsLrumenLal reason Lhen comes from lLs belng Lhe way LhaL we are lnLended Lo play our parL ln Lhe deslgn . . . of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of Lhe unlverse." 23 lL ls a concord of lnLerlocklng exLerlors descrlbed ln acLlon Lerms, noL an embrace of botb lnLerlors and exLerlors demandlng an lnner ttoosfotmotloo. ln Lhls wlLherlng monologlcal gaze, Agape ls fasL becomlng 1hanaLos-noL [usL a hlgher embraclng a lower, buL a hlgher regresslng, belng reduced Lo, a lower: Lhe drlve Lo dlsmanLle Lhe hlgher lnLo lLs lowesL common denomlnaLor parLs (Lhus kllllng Lhe hlgher ln Lhe process: 1hanaLos). 1here ls no longer a deeper or hlgher happlness, only a wlder happlness. no longer a verLlcal happlness LhaL would embrace all belngs as Lhe Cne, buL merely a horlzonLal happlness LhaL would teJoce Lach Lo a sensory componenL ln Lhe All, and Lhen aLLempL Lo amelloraLe Lhe devasLaLlng damage by an endless addlLlon of broken parLs, Lhls bad lnflnlLy belng Lhe sole happlness" of Lach ln Lhe flaLLened All. An old CaLskllls [oke: 1wo elderly women, vacaLlonlng ln Lhe CaLskllls, are havlng dlnner ln Lhe resorL dlnlng room. 1he food arrlves, and one woman says, 1hls food ls [usL awful." 1he oLher says, ?es, and such small porLlons!" 1he uLlllLarlan eLhlc of Lhls age was devoLed Lo Lhe proposlLlon LhaL blgger porLlons of bad food would somehow consLlLuLe Lhe soclal good. 1he lnsLrumenLal-hollsLlc and uLlllLarlan aLmosphere LhaL domlnaLed Lhe age would slmply level moral dlsLlncLlons, and make lL lmposslble Lo see LhaL Lhere are alLogeLher dlfferenL degrees of moral vlrLue, make lL lmposslble Lo see why lL ls beLLer Lo be an unhappy SocraLes Lhan a conLenLed plg." 8ousseau and kanL would Lear lnLo Lhls homogenlzaLlon of moLlves wlLh a vengeance, and Pegel would Lear lnLo Lhem for noL belng nearly nasLy enough. 8uL ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe mono-moLlves of flaLland would make lL lmposslble Lo see LhaL deeper human happlness mlghL reslde ln a profound LransformaLlon of consclousness, and noL [usL ln an expandlng LranslaLlon of one's presenL sLaLe. 24 1he greaL advanLage of Lhe uescended Cod: l can already see tbot Cod clunklng around ln my vlsual fleld. leasure and paln already govern LhaL world. 1hey are glven Lo me. 1haL Cod ls obvlous, presenL, demands no work, no ascesls, Lhe pleasure ls Lhere wlLh each sunrlse. And l shall exLend Lhe pleasure-and ooly LhaL-lndeflnlLely, Lhus never sLepplng ouL of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng sysLem. Accordlngly, sensuallLy was glven a new value. Sensual fulflllmenL . . . seems Lo be one of Lhe lrreverslble changes broughL abouL by Lhe radlcal LnllghLenmenL. 1he promoLlon of ordlnary llfe [nonLranscendenLal], already Lransposed by uelsLs lnLo an afflrmaLlon of Lhe pursulL of happlness, now beglns Lo Lurn lnLo an exalLaLlon of Lhe sensual. 5eosoollsm wos wbot moJe ollqbteomeot oototollsm toJlcol." 23 ArlsLoLle's lowesL good ls here Lhe only good!-because lL ls Lhe only good LhaL flLs Lhe weakesL-noodle neL. lot o metely empltlcol-seosoty wotlJ, o metely empltlcol-seosoty motlvotloo. no deeper sLages of growLh, LransformaLlon, or developmenL are necessary, and cerLalnly none were allowed. Peaps of sensual mono-happlness, noL wholes of hlgher LransformaLlon: Lhls would be a cruclal lngredlenL ln Lhe newly formlng uescended worldvlew-a world where Lhere are no depLhs Lo be lnLerpreLed, only surfaces Lo be seen. 1hus no lnner LransformaLlon requlred, only exLerlor and emplrlcal mapplng. no quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons Lo be forged, only quanLaLlve exLenslons Lo be measured. no beLLer or worse lnherenL ln Lhe kosmos, only blgger and smaller found ln Lhe cosmos. noL also an lnLerlocklng order of lnLerpreLlve depLh, buL only a greaL lnLerlocklng order of emplrlcal span. noL also degrees of value and moLlvaLlon, buL merely degrees of funcLlonal flL, drlven by pleasure and survlval. noL also WhaL does lL mean?" buL baslcally WhaL does lL do?" A uescended worldvlew where, Lo summarlze blunLly, an expanslon of span replaced a deepenlng of depLh. 1PL LCC Anu 1PL LCC We earller noLed Lhe alLogeLher exLraordlnary paradox of Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm: Lhe hollsm of naLure produced Lhe aLomlsm of Lhe self. 1haL ls, so hollsLlc was Lhls greaL emplrlcal lnLerlocklng order and lnLerwoven neL, so perfecL was Lhe greaL unlversal SysLem," LhaL Lhe sobject percelvlng Lhls neL, Lhe raLlonal-ego, was lefL JlseoqoqeJ and Jooqlloq as lLs own auLonomous" and self-deflnlng" agency, wlLh no way, ln parLlclpaLory Lerms, LhaL Lhe sobject could acLually flL lnLo Lhe lnLerlocklng world of objects lL had so seamlessly descrlbed. 1he l and we could flnd no room ln Lhe lnn of lnLerwoven lLs. 26 1hls masslve rlfL ln Lhe hollsLlc world, ln Lhe 5ystme Je lo Notote, was rapldly becomlng all Loo apparenL. 1he LnllghLenmenL developed a concepLlon of naLure, lncludlng human naLure, . . . as a harmonlous whole whose parLs meshed perfecLly. 8uL Lhe rlfL was sLlll Lhere beLween naLure, wheLher as plan or lnsLrumenL, and Lhe wlll whlch acLed on Lhls plan" 27 -Lhe wlll or agency whlch could noL be descrlbed ln Lhe same Lerms as Lhe neL of lLs ln whlch lL found lLself, a sub[ecL LhaL could noL flL lnLo Lhe world of emplrlcal ob[ecLs. 1hus, Lhe newly emergenL raLlonal-ego mlghL slmply soy lL was merely a sLrand ln Lhe greaL emplrlcal web of naLure, buL LhaL was Lo reduce Lhe sub[ecLlve sphere Lo an emplrlcal dlmenslon (reduce Lhe upper LefL Lo a merely 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon: Lhls ls preclsely whaL sysLems LheorlsLs conLlnue Lo do Lo Lhls day). 8uL LhaL dld noL explaln Lhe flL of Lhe sub[ecL lnLo Lhe emplrlcally hollsLlc neL, raLher, LhaL explalned away Lhe sub[ecL as belng merely anoLher ob[ecL. lL erased Lhe very Lerms lL was supposed Lo explaln. 1he hollsLlc flaLland world lefL no polnL of lnserLlon for Lhe sobject wltb Jeptb (no room for lnLerlors, for l's or we's, for genulne depLh ln any holons anywhere, anlmal, human, dlvlne, or oLherwlse). And Lhus arose whaL has been called Lhe ceottol ptoblem of moJetolty: human sub[ecLlvlLy and lLs relaLlon Lo Lhe world. noL only was lL Lhe cenLral problem of Lhe LnllghLenmenL and Lhe 8omanLlc-ldeallsL rebelllon, lL has conLlnued Lo be a cenLral, ofLen tbe cenLral, Loplc ln LheorlsLs from Pabermas Lo loucaulL Lo 1aylor. (loucaulL, for example, sald, 1he goal of my work durlng Lhe lasL LwenLy years . . . has noL been Lo analyze Lhe phenomena of power, nor Lo elaboraLe Lhe foundaLlons of such an analysls. lL ls noL power, buL Lhe sub[ecL, whlch ls Lhe general Lheme of my research.") 28 WhaL ls of mosL lnLeresL Lo us now ls LhaL Lhe Lwo poles of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm-namely, Lhe auLonomous sub[ecL (or Lhe raLlonal-ego) and Lhe hollsLlc world-were a muLual dlscord ln essenLlally Lhe some flaLland onLology. 29 8oLh poles accepLed Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo fundamenLally emplrlcal and naLurallsLlc Lerms. lL was no longer a baLLle beLween Lhe Ascenders and Lhe uescenders. 1he uescenders had fundamenLally Lrlumphed-ln re[ecLlng Lhe baLhwaLer of myLh Lhey had Lossed ouL Lhe baby of AscenL: no deeper or hlgher sLages Lhan Lhe raLlonal-ego and lLs emplrlcal world were acknowledged. Cn Lhls, all sldes were ln vlrLual agreemenL. no, lL was now a baLLle beLween whaL was lefL over: lL was a baLLle, aL Lhe egolc-raLlonal level, beLween Lhe oqeocy and Lhe commooloo of LhaL parLlcular level: a baLLle of Lhe ego-sub[ecL LhaL was supposed Lo be self- deflnlng, self-generaLlng, and self-auLonomous versus Lhe ob[ecLlve/emplrlcal world LhaL was supposed Lo encompass and govern Lhe ego-sub[ecL as well (as pott of Lhe greaL unlversal web)-and boLh of Lhose asserLlons obvlously cannoL be unadulLeraLedly Lrue. 1hus, Lhls was oot a baLLle of hlgher ttoosfotmotloo (boLh sldes had ruled LhaL ouL), buL a baLLle of ttooslotloos, ln Lhe form: qlveo Lhe raLlonal ego-sub[ecL, does Lhe good llfe conslsL ln (1) followlng Lhe auLonomous oqeocy of Lhe raLlonal-ego ln order Lo generaLe lLs own self-assured morals and asplraLlons, or ln (2) connecLlng Lhe ego wlLh Lhe wlder ground of lLs shared commooloos ln Lhe naLural world and Lhus flndlng someLhlng larger" Lhan Lhe lsolaLed ego? 1hls baLLle-lL ls sLlll wlLh us Loday-l wlll call Lhe baLLle beLween Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco. 8oLh were flaLland Lo Lhe core, whlch prevenLed Lhelr ever belng synLheslzed ln a hlgher unlon (Lhey cannoL be verLlcally lnLegraLed lf boLh sldes deny verLlcal holarchy). 8aLher, ln a flaLland world, Lhe mote Lhere ls of one, Lhe less Lhere musL be of Lhe oLher, and so Lhe Lgo camps and Lhe Lco camps llned up as morLal enemles, each accuslng Lhe oLher, once agaln, of belng Lhe essence of Lvll. 1he baLLle: uld Lhe good llfe reslde ln Lhe Lgo's oqeocy or ln lLs commooloos? ln Lhe Lgo or Lhe Lco? loLlnus, of course, had a coherenL way Lo say botb (namely, Lhe sub[ecLlve agency of Lach and Lhe ob[ecLlve communlons of Lhe All are Lranscended and lncluded ln Lhe nondual Cne). 8uL slnce boLh sldes had now Lhoroughly re[ecLed holarchlc AscenL Lo Lhe nondual Cne, Lhere was only Lhe Lhorny quesLlon of how Lo relaLe Lhe flnlLe and supposedly auLonomous sub[ecL (Lhe Lach) wlLh flnlLe and supposedly all-lncluslve neL of ob[ecLs (Lhe All), wlLhouL reduclng one Lo Lhe oLher and Lhus vlolenLly and syncreLlcally saboLaglng Lhe hard-won lnLegrlLy of each. 1he Lwo camps, ln oLher words, were compleLely and muLually lncompaLlble (Lhls Lhey boLh happlly-and aggresslvely-acknowledged). 1he mote Lhe Lgo was emphaslzed as Lhe Lrue ground of a raLlonal morallLy and an eLhlcal wlll noL found ln naLure, Lhen Lhe more Lhe Lco was devalued, Lhe more lL came Lo be percelved as a source of betetooomy (oLher-dlrecLlon") opposed Lo Lhe raLlonal auLonomy of Lhe ego-sub[ecL. noLhlng ln Lhe sysLem of naLure seeks unlversal compasslon or muLual undersLandlng or eLhlcal resLralnL, Lhe argumenL ran, and Lhus Lhe Lask of Lhe Lgo ls Lo free lLself from Lhe nasLy, shorL, and bruLlsh neL of naLure. 1he Lask of Lhe Lgo was Lo Jlseoqoqe ftom tbe co. 1o esLabllsh lLs agency over Lhe communlons of Lhe greaL and grlndlng sysLem. ln shorL, and ln all ways: Lhe less Lco, and Lhe more Lgo, Lhe beLLer. 1he Lco camp waLched all of Lhls wlLh absoluLe alarm. 1he Lgo wasn'L [usL esLabllshlng lLs agency, Lhls camp malnLalned, lL was severlng and represslng lLs connecLlons and communlons wlLh naLure-boLh exLernal naLure and, more lmporLanL, lnLernal naLure (sensual, deslrous, sexual, vlLal). And Lhe more Lhe Lgo succeeded ln lLs goal of devalulng Lhe Lco, Lhen Lhe more absLracL, arld, dry, and deslccaLed lL became. 1he very emergence of Lhe Lgo, Lhey malnLalned, was now desLroylng Lhe rlch fabrlc of communlons on whlch Lhe Lgo lLself depended. And Lhe soluLlon seemed equally obvlous: Lhe more Lco, and Lhe less Lgo, Lhe beLLer for all. WlLhouL a genulne holarchy, Lhe Lwo parLlal vlews could noL be superseded: Lhey boLh clolmeJ Lo encompass Lhe oLher camp, buL Lhey boLh dld so only Lhrough aggresslve subLracLlon. 1hey were ln facL locked lnLo a baLLle royale LhaL, ln many ways, was Lhe archbaLLle, and remalns Lhe archbaLLle, of modernlLy and posLmodernlLy. 30 ln tbls world, Lhls uescended world, Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco baLLle for Lhe good llfe, doomed as Lhey are Lo muLual repugnance. lL would be useful, Lhen, Lo look more closely aL Lhe flaLland Lgo and Lhe flaLland Lco-boLh whaL Lhey accompllshed (whlch was much) and whaL Lhey muLllaLed (whlch was much more), slnce, as l lndlcaLed, Lhls frulLless baLLle, whlch cannoL be solved ln a flaLland onLology, ls sLlll wlLh us Loday, and sLlll conLrlbuLlng equally Lo Lhe despollaLlon of Lhe real world, Lhe world Lhey boLh clalm Lo be savlng. A ulAC8AMMA1lC CvL8vlLW 8ecause Lhls Loplc ls so cruclal, and also somewhaL lnLrlcaLe, l would llke ln Lhls secLlon Lo glve a very slmpllfled overvlew uslng a handful of dlagrams. As ls always Lhe case wlLh dlagrams, Lhey can cause more problems Lhan Lhey solve, buL as long as we keep ln mlnd Lhe very schemaLlc naLure of Lhese flgures, Lhey mlghL hlghllghL several of Lhe cenLral lssues. llgure 12-1 ls a summary of Lhe LradlLlonal CreaL Chaln of 8elng, ln a slmpllfled form, maLLer Lo body Lo mlnd Lo soul Lo splrlL. Slnce each level Lranscends and lncludes, l have drawn lL more accuraLely as Lhe CreaL nesL (or CreaL Polarchy) of 8elng. Movlng upward from Lhe cenLer (maLLer, Lhe mosL fundamenLal) ls Lhe process of evoluLlon (8eflux or AscenL, drlven by Lros), and movlng downward from splrlL (Lhe mosL slgnlflcanL) ls lnvoluLlon (Lfflux or uescenL, drlven by Agape). Lach senlor level ls an emergenL, marked by properLles noL found ln lLs [unlors. SplrlL ls boLh Lhe hlghesL level (whlch Lranscends all, lncludes all), and Lhe equally presenL Cround of each level (equldlsLanL from a sLar, an anL, a man). 8uL whaL Lhe LradlLlonal CreaL nesL falled Lo do, on any sorL of slgnlflcanL scale, was Lo clearly dlfferenLlaLe Lhe four quadranLs. 1he maLerlal braln, for example, was slmply placed, wlLh all maLLer, on Lhe boLLom rung of exlsLence, lnsLead of seelng LhaL Lhe maLerlal braln ls Lhe exLerlor correlaLe of lnLerlor sLaLes of consclousness (so LhaL Lhe braln ls noL slmply parL of Lhe lowesL of all levels, buL raLher ls Lhe exLerlor correlaLe of some very hlgh levels). lnsLead of seelng LhaL consclousness ls lnLlmaLely assoclaLed wlLh Lhe maLerlal braln, consclousness seemed Lo hover above all maLLer, LranscendenLal and meLaphyslcal and compleLely oLher-worldly. (1he dlscovery LhaL sLaLes of consclousness have correlaLes ln braln sLaLes-LhaL all LefL-Pand evenLs have 8lghL-Pand correlaLes-was a devasLaLlng blow Lo Lhe CreaL Chaln and all meLaphyslcs as LradlLlonally concelved, and rlghLly so, even Lhough lL wenL Loo far and conLrlbuLed Lo Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo noLhlng buL sclenLlflc maLerlallsm.) llqote 12-1. 1be Cteot Nest of 8eloq. 5pltlt ls botb tbe blqbest level (coosol) ooJ tbe oooJool CtoooJ of oll levels. Llkewlse, Lhe LradlLlonal CreaeL nesL embodled llLLle undersLandlng of Lhe profound ways LhaL culLural conLexLs (LL) mold all percepLlon, of Lhe ways LhaL Lhe Lechno-economlc base (L8) sLrongly lnfluences lndlvldual consclousness, of Lhe evoluLlon of worldvlews, lndlvldual consclousness, modes of producLlon, and so on. ln all Lhese ways and more, Lhe CreaL Chaln was severely llmlLed. (1hls dld noL sLop lndlvlduals from uslng Lhe CreaL Chaln as a perfecLly adequaLe map for lndlvldual splrlLual developmenL ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, whlch ls whaL many dld. 8uL lL dld severely llmlL Lhe senslLlvlLy of Lhe CreaL nesL Lo Lhose aspecLs of reallLy LhaL we are calllng Lhe four quadranLs, because Lhey were noL dlfferenLlaLed on a large scale by Lhe average mode.) All of Lhls would change wlLh modernlLy and Lhe wldespread dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree. 1hls can be represenLed as ln flgure 12-2 (and slmpllfled as ln flg. 12-3), whlch ls Lhe CreaL nesL dlfferenLlaLed lnLo Lhe four quadranLs (or Lhe 8lg 1hree). 1hls loteqtol vlslon ls whaL coolJ have emerged, and whaL mlghL yeL sLlll emerge, buL whaL ln facL dld oot emerge ln any endurlng fashlon. lnsLead, Lhe quadranLs were dlfferenLlaLed [usL flne, buL Lhen evenLually collapsed lnLo Lhelr maLerlal (or emplrlcal or ob[ecLlve) correlaLes, Lo resulL, soon enough, ln flaLland, ln sclenLlflc maLerlallsm, ln sensory mononaLure, ln Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order. 1raclng Lhls collapse of Lhe kosmos ls Lhe crux of our sLory ln Lhls chapLer. 1hls collapse could occur, l have suggesLed, because every LefL-Pand evenL does lndeed have a 8lghL-Pand or emplrlcal correlaLe ln Lhe maLerlal (or ob[ecLlve) world-and Lhus lL ls always LempLlng Lo reduce Lhe former (depLhs LhaL requlre arduous lnLerpreLaLlon) Lo Lhe laLLer (surfaces LhaL can be easlly seen). 1hls ls shown more expllclLly ln flgure 12-4. Lach lnLerlor sLaLe of consclousness (from bodlly consclousness Lo menLal consclousness Lo splrlLual consclousness) has some sorL of correlaLe ln Lhe maLerlal/ob[ecLlve braln and organlsm (upper 8lghL). 1hus, for example, even somebody who ls havlng a splrlLual experlence (uL) wlll show changes ln ob[ecLlve bralnwaves LhaL can be measured on an LLC machlne (u8). llqote 12-2. 1be Cteot Nest wltb tbe loot OooJtoots llqote 12-J. 1be 8lq 1btee llqote 12-4. cottelotloos of lotetlot (cooscloosoess) 5totes wltb xtetlot (Motetlol) 5totes 8uL consclous sLaLes, values, depLh, and lnLenLlons cannoL be teJoceJ Lo maLerlal bralnwaves because, alLhough one value ls beLLer Lhan anoLher, one bralnwave ls noL. ?ou experlence compasslon and you know lL ls beLLer Lhan murder, whlle you are Lhlnklng LhaL, your braln wlll be produclng bralnwaves LhaL can be reglsLered on an LLC. 8uL alLhough you know LhaL compasslon ls beLLer Lhan murder, Lhere ls noLhlng on Lhe LLC machlne LhaL says, 1hls bralnwave ls more valuable, Lhls bralnwave ls more moral, Lhls bralnwave ls more beauLlful." 1he LLC machlne can ooly show LhaL one braln sLaLe ls Jlffeteot Lhan anoLher, lL cannoL say LhaL one sLaLe ls bettet Lhan anoLher. 1o make LhaL [udgmenL, you have Lo rely on lnLerlor consclousness, depLh, and value recognlLlon-holarchles of poollty-whlle Lhe LLC machlne can only reglsLer holarchles of poootlty. 1o reduce Lhe LefL Lo Lhe 8lghL ls Lo reduce all quallLy Lo quanLlLy and Lhus, as we have seen, land dlrecLly ln Lhe dlsquallfled unlverse, also known as flaLland. Whlch ls preclsely whaL happened. And wlLhln flaLland, as we were saylng, Lhere arose Lwo camps: Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco. 8oLh were fundamenLally orlenLed Lo flaLland, Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand world of emplrlcal, sensory, ob[ecLlve naLure, whlch was Lhe really real" world. 8oLh, LhaL ls, were lnvolved ln subLle reducLlonlsm Lo some degree or anoLher. 8uL wlLh a dlfference: Lhe Lgo camps held on Lo Lhe LefL-Pand raLlonal Lgo and lLs agency, and Lhe Lco camps wanLed Lo go all Lhe way and lnserL Lhe Lgo lnLo Lhe greaL web of naLure and lLs communlons alLogeLher. 1hls sLaLe of affalrs can be represenLed as ln flgures 12-3 and 12-6. ln flgure 12-3, we see Lhe baslc sLory as we have Lold lL Lhus far, up Lo and befote Lhe collapse lnLo flaLland. CulLural evoluLlon (LL) has moved from archalc Lo maglc Lo myLhlc Lo raLlonal (ln Lhe lndlvldual or uL: body/sensorlmoLor Lo preop Lo conop Lo formop), wlLh a correlaLlve moral evoluLlon from egocenLrlc Lo eLhnocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc, and a soclal evoluLlon (L8) from foraglng Lo horLlculLural Lo agrarlan Lo lndusLrlal, accompanled by a soclal organlzaLlon from Lrlbes Lo vlllages Lo emplres Lo naLlons (l.e., soclal sysLems). 1he four quadranLs (or slmply Lhe 8lg 1hree of l, we, and lL) have been dlfferenLlaLed, and alLhough Lhey are noL yeL genulnely lnLegraLed, noneLheless Lhey are noL yeL dlssoclaLed, aL Lhls polnL ln Llme each ls pursulng lLs own LruLh unhampered by domlnaLlon from Lhe oLhers. (llg. 12-3 ls also a map of whaL Lhe 8lg 1hree, when lnLegraLed, mlghL look llke, wlLh each quadranL glven lLs own respecLed and honored place: a Lask of vlslon-loglc Lo whlch we wlll reLurn.) 8uL Lhen beglns Lhe one-cenLury or so sllde lnLo flaLland, lnLo Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of emplrlcal reallLles, lnLo subLle reducLlonlsm, lnLo Lhe hollsLlc web of lnLerwoven lLs, Lhe greaL 5ystme Je lo Notote. 1hls ls represenLed ln flgure 12-6, whlch ls a general map of flaLland lLself. 1he mosL consplcuous lLem abouL LhaL map ls LhaL vlrLually evetytbloq ls mlsslng ln Lhe LefL-Pand domalns excepL Lhe raLlonal Lgo. 1haL ls a sLark and graphlc represenLaLlon of Lhe dangllng, dlsengaged, allenaLed, hyper- auLonomous sub[ecL LhaL was Lhe LnllghLenmenL ego. ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, Lhe raLlonal Lgo was cuL off from lLs own lower levels (lnLerlor naLure), and lL was cuL off from Lhe hlgher levels of lLs own SplrlL, lLs own hlgher Self (no more AscenL!"). ln Lhe Lower-LefL quadranL, lL was lgnoranL of Lhe vasL role played by culLural conLexLs ln dlscloslng LruLhs and moldlng values, and Lhus lL Lended Lo mlsLake lLs own culLural glvens as unlversal LruLhs (when Lhey were ofLen merely Lhe preferences of properLled whlLe bourgeols males). And alLhough Lhe raLlonal Lgo would, for Lhe mosL parL, conslder Lhe 8lghL-Pand world of emplrlcal naLure and Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order Lo be Lhe fundamenLal reallLy, Lhe Lgo had cuL lLself off from communlon or unlon wlLh LhaL naLure because lL lmaglned LhaL lLs [ob was lmparLlally and ln deLached manner Lo teflect oo naLure (Lhe represenLaLlon paradlgm, Lhe mlrror of naLure"). All of Lhls ls qulLe accuraLely represenLed by Lhe Lgo dangllng ln mldalr ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL. llqote 12-5. 1be qo ooJ tbe co befote tbe collopse 1hls pllghL of Lhe raLlonal Lgo was parLly lnnocenL. lL was noL connecLed Lo lLs own lnLerlor rooLs (Lhe developmenLal sLages leadlng up Lo Lhe raLlonal Lgo) because, ln many ways, Lhese slmply had noL yeL been dlscovered. MosL people of Loday use reason wlLhouL really knowlng Lhe onLogeneLlc sLages LhaL produced lL-namely, Lhe sLages of sensorlmoLor, preop, conop, and Lhen formop. lL ls slmply noL lmmedlaLely obvlous Lo reason LhaL reason lLself developed or evolved. And yeL reason ls Lhe flrsL sLrucLure LhaL can lmparLlally reflecL on Lhe world. 1hus, Lhe naLural sLance of reason ls Lo slmply assume LhaL lL ls aparL from Lhe world and can lnnocenLly reflecL on lL. 1hls parL of Lhe CarLeslan duallsm ls compleLely undersLandable, lf mlsLaken. And mosL of Lhe LnllghLenmenL phllosophers, from Locke Lo kanL, made Lhls assumpLlon by falllng Lo grasp Lhe acLual developmenLal sLages LhaL lead up Lo reason. ln facL, one of Pegel's maln crlLlclsms of kanL was LhaL consclousness ls noL slmply glven, buL raLher can only be concelved as one tbot bos JevelopeJ"-and Lraclng LhaL developmenL was one of Lhe exLraordlnary glfLs of ldeallsm. SLlll, lL was only ln Lhe lasL half of Lhls cenLury LhaL Lhe sLages of consclousness developmenL were ouLllned ln any sorL of rlgorous fashlon backed by research-8aldwln, Werner, Craves, Maslow, lageL, Loevlnger, and so on. 1hus, whaL l have drawn ln flgure 12-3 ls how we of Loday can undersLand Lhe quadranLs, wlLh all of Lhe research LhaL has gone lnLo Lhem. AlLhough Lhe LnllghLenmenL phllosophers had full access Lo Lhe quadranLs, research ln each was [usL beglnnlng, and Lhls slmple and lnnocenL lgnorance ls parLly responslble for Lhe world looklng llke flgure 12-6, whlch ls how Lhe LnllghLenmenL generally vlewed Lhe world. llqote 12-6. llotlooJ 1he sLages beyond Lhe raLlonal Lgo were also denled (or lgnored)-Lhe hlgher LransraLlonal sLages of subLle soul and causal splrlL-preclsely because, as we have seen, Lhe LnllghLenmenL screamed no more AscenL!" 1hls was parL of Lhe noble aLLempL Lo move beyond eLhnocenLrlc rellglous myLhology lnLo Lhe worldcenLrlc rlghLs of man (and soon woman)-no more myLhs!" 8uL Lhe LransraLlonal baby was Lossed wlLh Lhe preraLlonal baLhwaLer, and Lhus Lhe Lgo was cuL off from boLh lLs rooLs ln earLh and lLs branches ln heaven. 8uL noL all of Lhe Lgo's lsolaLlon was lnnocenL or noble. AfLer all, loLlnus fully possessed reason and he dld noL guL Lhe lnLerlors. SomeLhlng else was afooL ln Lhls game of collapslng Lhe kosmos, and, as we wlll conLlnue Lo see, LhaL game was Lhe reducLlon of all LefL-Pand evenLs Lo Lhelr 8lghL-Pand correlaLes, Lhe reducLlon of all reallLles Lo Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of Lhe sysLem of naLure. And once LhaL reducLlon was compleLe, Lhe Lgo as sub[ecL had no room Lo flL lnLo Lhe world of hollsLlc lLs-and Lhus once agaln, as shown ln flgure 12-6, Lhe raLlonal Lgo was lefL dangllng. 1he Lco camps agreed wlLh Lhe Lgo camps LhaL Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order and Lhe sysLem of naLure was Lhe really real" world (boLh camps subscrlbed Lo uescended flaLland), buL Lhe Lco camps were alarmed aL Lhe Lgo's deLachmenL and lLs raLlonal dlsLanclng (Lhe dlsenchanLmenL of Lhe world"), and deslred lnsLead a sympaLheLlc unlon wlLh Lhe greaL Web of Llfe: lL deslred unlon wlLh flaLland, noL a reflecLlon on flaLland. And ln Lhls deslre for unlon wlLh naLure," we see Lhe archeLypal phllosophlcal problem of modernlLy (whlch ls Lo say, of flaLland), namely, Lhe mlnd/body problem, whlch ls anoLher name for whaL we called Lhe cenLral problem of modernlLy," or how Lhe sub[ecL (mlnd") flLs lnLo Lhe world (body"). 1PL Mlnu/8Cu? 8C8LLM 1he mlnd/body problem ls a producL of flaLland. lL has proven so lnLracLable because, ln Lhe wake of Lhe modern collapse, boLh mlnd" and body" have aL leasL Lwo compleLely dlfferenL meanlngs, glvlng us four problems hldden ln one. 8uL lL's noL as bad as lL sounds, and you can easlly follow all of Lhls uslng flgure 12-3. 1o begln wlLh, body" can mean Lhe blologlcal organlsm as a whole, lncludlng Lhe braln (Lhe neocorLex, Lhe llmblc sysLem, Lhe braln sLem, eLc.)-ln oLher words, body" can mean Lhe enLlre upper-8lghL quadranL, whlch l wlll call Lhe organlsm." 8uL body" can also mean, and for Lhe average person does mean, Lhe sub[ecLlve feellngs, emoLlons, and sensaLlons of Lhe felL body. When Lhe Lyplcal person says, My mlnd ls flghLlng my body," he means hls wlll ls flghLlng some bodlly deslre or lncllnaLlon (such as for sex or food). ln oLher words, ln Lhls common usage, body" means Lhe lower levels of one's own lnLerlor. Cn flgure 12-3, l have numbered Lhe levels 1 Lhrough 4, so ln Lhls usage body" ls level 1 ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, and Lhe oLher meanlng of body" ls all of Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL (Lhe LoLal organlsm). Movlng from body Lo mlnd, many sclenLlflc researchers slmply ldenLlfy mlnd" wlLh braln," and Lhey prefer Lo speak only of braln sLaLes, neuroLransmlLLers, cognlLlve sclence, and so on. l wlll use Lhe Lerm braln" Lo cover LhaL meanlng, whlch refers Lo Lhe upper levels of Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL (e.g., Lhe neocorLex). Cn Lhe oLher hand, when Lhe average person says, My mlnd ls flghLlng my body," he does noL mean LhaL hls neocorLex ls flghLlng hls llmblc sysLem. 8y mlnd" he means Lhe upper levels of hls own lnLerlor, Lhe upper levels of Lhe upper-LefL quadranL (alLhough he mlghL noL use exacLly Lhose Lerms)-ln oLher words, hls raLlonal wlll ls flghLlng hls feellngs or deslres (level 4 ls flghLlng level 1). 1he mlnd ls descrlbed ln flrsL-person phenomenal accounLs and l- language, whereas Lhe braln ls descrlbed ln Lhlrd-person ob[ecLlve accounLs and lL-language. (1here ls anoLher general meanlng for mlnd/body: mlnd" can mean Lhe lnLerlor dlmenslon ln general-or Lhe LefL Pand-and body" Lhe exLerlor dlmenslon ln general-or Lhe 8lghL Pand, l wlll speclflcally lndlcaLe LhaL usage when lL comes up.) 1hose varlous deflnlLlons of mlnd and body have been used ln [uxLaposlLlon Lo boLh creaLe and solve Lhe mlnd/body problem. 1he reducLlonlsL slmply reduces Lhe mlnd Lo Lhe braln, and slnce Lhe braln ls lndeed parL of Lhe organlsm, Lhere ls no duallsm: Lhe mlnd/body problem ls solved! And LhaL ls correcL-Lhe braln ls parL of Lhe organlsm, parL of Lhe greaL web of llfe and Lhe emplrlcal lnLerlocklng order, so Lhere ls no duallsm, nor are Lhere any values, consclousness, depLh, or dlvlnlLy anywhere ln Lhe resulLanL unlverse. And LhaL reducLlonlsm ls exacLly Lhe soluLlon" LhaL Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm would lmpose on reallLy, a soluLlon" sLlll rampanL ln mosL forms of cognlLlve sclence, neurosclence, sysLems Lheory, and so on: reduce Lhe LefL Lo Lhe 8lghL and Lhen clalm you have solved Lhe problem. 8uL Lhe reason mosL people, even mosL sclenLlsLs, are uneasy wlLh LhaL soluLlon"-and Lhe reason Lhe problem remalns a problem-ls LhaL, even Lhough maLerlallsLlc monlsm announces LhaL Lhere ls no duallsm, mosL people know oLherwlse, because Lhey feel Lhe dlfference beLween Lhelr mlnd and Lhelr body-Lhey feel lL every Llme Lhey consclously declde Lo move Lhelr arm, Lhey feel lL ln every exerclse of wlll. And Lhe average person ls rlghL, ln a general sense: Lhere ls a dlfferenLlaLlon of mlnd and body, noosphere and blosphere, and Lhls can be felL ln Lhe lnLerlor or LefL-Pand domalns. lL ls noL a rlgld duallsm, as some phllosophers have posLulaLed, buL raLher a case of Lranscend and lnclude," and almosL every raLlonal adulL has a sense of Lhe Lranscend parL, ln LhaL Lhe mlnd can, on a good day, conLrol Lhe body and lLs deslres. And all of LhaL ls phenomenologlcally Lrue for Lhe LefL-Pand domalns (ln more preclse language, formop ls lndeed dlfferenL from sensorlmoLor: formop Lranscends and lncludes sensorlmoLor, and Lhus can operaLe on lL). 8uL oooe of Lhose lotetlot sLages of developmenL are capLured when body" means 8lghL-Pand organlsm and mlnd" means 8lghL-Pand braln-all of Lhose lmporLanL dlsLlncLlons are compleLely losL ln maLerlal monlsm, whlch does noL solve Lhe problem buL obllLeraLes lL. Cn Lhe oLher hand, an all-quadranL, all-level" approach allows a place for each of Lhose deflnlLlons of mlnd and body and braln and organlsm, because each of Lhem represenL genulne and nonreduclble reallLles. 1hls lnLegraLlon of Lhe four quadranLs (and Lhe levels ln each)-a Lask of vlslon-loglc-helps Lo defuse Lhe many forms of Lhe mlnd/body problem. lL allows (and demands) an equal lncluslon of fltst-petsoo phenomenal accounLs (l"), secooJ-petsoo sLrucLures (we"), and tbltJ-petsoo organlsmlc sysLems (lL"). [See loteqtol lsycboloqy, 1he 1-2-3 of Consclousness SLudles."] Moreover, Lhe ulLlmaLe mlnd/body problem-Lhe relaLlon of lnLerlor-sub[ecLlve Lo exLerlor-ob[ecLlve-ls solved only ln nondual awakenlng, whlch Lranscends and lncludes Lhe quadranLs. My clalm, Lhen, ls LhaL an all-level, all-quadranL" vlew subsLanLlally handles Lhe mlnd/body problem ln lLs ma[or forms. 1he deLalls of LhaL clalm would obvlously requlre a large book ln lLself, l menLlon lL now only because lL dlrecLly relaLes Lo Lhe Loplc aL hand, namely, Lhe relaLlon of Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco. lor Lhe Lco camps, ln clalmlng LhaL Lhe greaL Web of Llfe covered all of reallLy, sllpped lnLo Lhe sLandard flaLland noLlon of reallLy" (namely, Lhe 8lghL-Pand world), and Lhls was reflecLed ln Lhelr use of Lhe Lerm naLure" and consequenLly ln Lhelr recommendaLlons for reenchanLlng" Lhe world, recommendaLlons LhaL are sLlll wlLh us. nA1u8L 1he word naLure" has aL leasL Lhree meanlngs (parallellng Lhose of mlnd/body"). lL can mean Lhe enLlre kosmos, or Lhe CreaL Polarchy of 8elng, lncludlng boLh 8lghL- and LefL-Pand dlmenslons. Call LhaL nA1u8L." lL can mean Lhe enLlre sensory and emplrlcal world, Lhe world dlsclosed Lo Lhe senses-ln oLher words, Lhe enLlre 8lghL-Pand world. Call LhaL naLure," whlch ls so llsLed on Lhe 8lghL Pand ln flgure 12-3. And lL can mean naLure as opposed Lo culLure, or naLure as opposed Lo hlsLory, or Lhe blosphere as opposed Lo Lhe noosphere (a meanlng whlch ls slmllar Lo sensory body versus raLlonal mlnd). Call LhaL naLure," whlch ls llsLed as level 1 ln flgure 12-3. All Lhree of Lhose deflnlLlons tepteseot octool teolltles, and Lhus all Lhree of Lhem are accepLable. 8uL Lhe problems sLarL when one does noL speclfy whlch ls meanL. (PenceforLh l wlll generally lndlcaLe whlch usage ls meanL, buL Lhe conLexL should also be Lhe gulde.) WhaL we wlll see happenlng ls Lhls: slnce Lhe lnLerlor dlmenslons-and especlally Lhe hlgher, LranscendenLal dlmenslons-were denled fundamenLal reallLy ln flaLland, nA1u8L was ruled ouL of Lhe plcLure alLogeLher (by boLh Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco camps). lnsLead, reallLy came Lo be naLure," or Lhe eotlte seosoty ooJ empltlcol wotlJ-Lhls was Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order and sysLem of naLure. And slnce all lnLerlors have correlaLes ln exLerlors, and slnce Lhe som totol of exLerlors was called naLure, Lhen lf you reduce all lnLerlors Lo exLerlors, lL appears LhaL Notote locloJes evetytbloq (whereas lL slmply lncludes Lhe 8lghL-Pand world). Cnce we focus on naLure (or Lhe enLlre sensory and emplrlcal world), lL becomes very hard Lo grasp how Lhe noosphere Lranscends Lhe blosphere, whlch Lranscends Lhe physlosphere. lor Lhose dlsLlncLlons resL ln parL on lotetlot domalns (see flg. 12-4). ln Lhe world of maLerlal monlsm or sclenLlflc maLerlallsm, Lhere ls no reason Lo make any of Lhose dlsLlncLlons. 1hey are all [usL varlaLlons on complex maLLer/energy sysLems. noosphere, blosphere, and physlosphere are all vlewed as slmply complex forms of Lhe physlosphere lLself. WhaL we call Lhe noosphere, for example, ls slmply reduced by sclenLlflc maLerlallsm Lo Lhe funcLlons of Lhe neocorLex, lLself a complex sysLem of maLLer/energy and lnformaLlon flucLuaLlons. And slnce Lhe braln ls parL of Lhe organlsm, whlch ls parL of naLure, Lhen obvlously Lhe noosphere ls [usL a parL of naLure (or [usL a parL of Lhe blosphere" ln Lhe broad sense of naLure"). And so obvlously Lhe noosphere does noL Lranscend and lnclude Lhe blosphere-Lhe noosphere ls parL of Lhe blosphere, or so lL seems Lo flaLland. wbeo oll lotetlots ote teJoceJ to extetlots, one can no longer recognlze degrees of lnLerlor depLh, and Lhus everyLhlng becomes epoolly a sLrand ln Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng web of valueless lLs. vetytbloq ls parL of naLure. . . . Cn Lhe lnLerlor dlmenslons, on Lhe oLher hand, Lhe dlsLlncLlons beLween blosphere, noosphere, and Lheosphere show up, for example, as Lhe dlsLlncLlons beLween bodlly feellngs and deslres (preraLlonal), Lhe reasonlng mlnd (raLlonal), and soul and splrlL (LransraLlonal)-all of whlch can be known dlrecLly and lmmedlaLely ln consclousness, and all of whlch have ob[ecLlve correlaLes ln Lhe world of naLure (as shown ln flg. 12-4), buL oooe of wblcb coo be teJoceJ to Notote wlLhouL endlng up preclsely wlLh Lhe flaLland shown ln flgure 12-6. Whlch ls, of course, whaL happened. 1here, ln Lhe world of flaLland, Lranscend and lnclude" ls sLlll Lhe general rule (Lhe LwenLy LeneLs are Lrue ln all four quadranLs), and Lhus Lhe neocorLex sLlll Lranscends and lncludes Lhe llmblc sysLem, whlch Lranscends and lncludes Lhe repLlllan sLem, [usL as lLs cells Lranscend and lnclude molecules, whlch Lranscend and lnclude aLoms, and so on. uesLroy Lhe lower, and Lhe hlgher ls also desLroyed (buL noL vlce versa, LeneL 9). 1haL ls already enough Lo show us LhaL Lhe hlgher Lranscends and lncludes Lhe lower. 8uL as we have repeaLedly seen, ln LhaL 8lghL-Pand scheme Lhere are no quallLaLlve ranklngs, only quanLlLaLlve: Lhere ls no beLLer or worse, only blgger or smaller, and Lhus Lo reduce nA1u8L Lo naLure ls Lo land squarely ln flaLland. Whlch ls exacLly whaL boLh camps dld. 1hus, boLh Lhe Lgo camps and Lhe Lco camps ended up embraclng Lhe general reallLy deplcLed ln flgure 12-6. And wlLh LhaL, we can plck up Lhe sLory. 1PL LCC ln Lhls and Lhe nexL secLlon, we wlll look more carefully aL Lhe sLrengLhs and Lhe weaknesses of boLh Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco camps. As l lndlcaLed, Lhls was a baLLle LhaL was foughL fundamenLally wltblo Lhe uescended and flaLland world, wlLh Lhe lnLernal dlsengaged Lgo aLLempLlng Lo flgure ouL lLs relaLlon Lo Lhe exLernal hollsLlc Lco, boLh monologlcal Lo Lhe core. As we wlll see, however, Lhe Lgo camps were consLanLly breaklng ln Lhe dlrecLlon of a pure Ascendlng aLh, aLLempLlng Lo dlsengage Lhe Lgo alLogeLher ln Lhe dlrecLlon of a ure Self, and Lhls would culmlnaLe ln llchLe's loflolte 5object as Lhe LranscendenLal Cne. And Lhe Lco camps were consLanLly breaklng Loward a pure and radlcal uescenL, embraclng flercely Lhe purely uescended world of Lhe dlverse and lmmanenL Many, eplLomlzed ln Splnoza's pote 5obstooce (whlch was ofLen Laken Lo mean pure lmmooeoce or uescenL, as llchLe's lnflnlLe Sub[ecL was Laken Lo mean pure ttoosceoJeoce or AscenL). And by Lhe end of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, Lhls Lenslon-beLween Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco, and ln lLs exLreme forms, beLween pure AscenL and pure uescenL-Lhls Lenslon had become exLremely and even unbearably acuLe, and Lhe waLchwords of Lhe age became unlLe llchLe and Splnoza!"-unlLe Lgo and Lco, unlLe AscenL and uescenL, and Lhus heal Lhe Lwo-Lhousand-year-old schlzold Cod LhaL had domlnaLed WesLern culLure vlrLually from lLs lncepLlon. And a very speclal lndlvldual would rlse Lo LhaL occaslon and aLLempL Lhe long-soughL lnLegraLlon. . . . 8uL ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco squared off as morLal enemles, and Lhe baLLle, as l sald, was: uld Lhe good llfe reslde ln Lhe Lgo's oqeocy or ln lLs commooloos? ln Lhe Lgo or Lhe Lco? l wlll dlvlde each secLlon lnLo poslLlve" and negaLlve." ln Lhe poslLlve, l wlll sympaLheLlcally sLaLe Lhe case for each camp, and lnclude whaL seem Lo be Lhe genulnely endurlng LruLhs of each. ln Lhe negaLlve, l wlll glve Lhe crlLlclsms LhaL each camp falled Lo answer saLlsfacLorlly, crlLlclsms LhaL exposed Lhe real weaknesses ln each camp, weaknesses LhaL would hlsLorlcally drlve ldeallsm Lo aLLempL Lhe long-awalLed lnLegraLlon. qo-posltlve. lteeJom We can correcLly slLuaLe Lhe Lgo camp(s) only lf we remember Lhe genulnely beneflclal galns LhaL Lhe raLlonal-ego had lndeed accompllshed ln lLs emergence from Lhe role ldenLlLy of myLhlc domlnaLor hlerarchles. (And recall Lhe confuslng Lermlnology: Lhe raLlonal-ego was noL, per se, egoLlsLlcal," buL someLhlng of Lhe opposlte: Lhe self had developed from egocenLrlc Lo eLhnocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc capaclLles-Lo Lhe posLconvenLlonal worldvlew of unlversal plurallsm, Lolerance, and perspecLlvlsm, as shown ln flg. 12-3. 1o Lhe exLenL Lhe ego llved up Lo lLs raLlonal poLenLlal, LhaL maLure ego was worldcenLrlc-a decenLered vlew of unlversal plurallsm. lL ls Lhls maLure ego" LhaL l mean by Lhe Lgo" camp, and lL was Lhls maLure ego of worldcenLrlc reason LhaL lLs proponenLs had ln mlnd.) 1hls was lndeed parL of Lhe Jlqolty of modernlLy, parL of Lhe llberaLlng and enllghLenlng move LhaL sLrove, ldeally, Lo free lLself from eLhnocenLrlc pre[udlce and myLhlc lmperlallsm, and Lhe vlolence lnherenL ln Lhose shallower engagemenLs. no more myLhs! ln Lhe LradlLlon of Lhe LnllghLenmenL," Pabermas remlnds us, enllghLened Lhlnklng has been undersLood as an opposlLlon and counLerforce Lo myLh. As opposltloo, because lL opposes Lhe unforced force of Lhe beLLer argumenL Lo Lhe auLhorlLarlan normaLlvlLy [domlnaLor hlerarchy] of a LradlLlon lnLerllnked wlLh Lhe chaln of generaLlons, as coootetfotce, because lL . . . breaks Lhe spell of collecLlve powers. LnllghLenmenL conLradlcLs myLh and Lhereby escapes lLs vlolence." 31 1he power-and vlolence-of myLhology ls due ln large measure Lo Lhe facL LhaL lL ls maklng clalms LhaL cannoL be exposed Lo deeper evldence . . . wlLhouL desLroylng Lhe auLhorlLy of Lhe clalm lLself. 1haL ls Lhe deflnlLlon of ldeology: hldden lnLeresLs, hldden power clalms, paradlng as LruLh, a LruLh LhaL cannoL be exposeJ to evlJeoce wlLhouL robblng lL of lLs powet. 1haL behlnd Lhe back of Lhe Lheory Lhere lles hldden an lnadmlsslble mlxLure of power and valldlLy, and LhaL lL sLlll owes lLs repuLaLlon Lo Lhls-Lhey are confused because valldlLy clalms are deLermlned by relaLlonshlps of power." 32 And aL lLs besL, Lhe LnllghLenmenL commlLLed lLself Lo exposlng Lhese power relaLlons and Lo dlsmanLllng Lhe domlnaLor hlerarchles LhaL had formed Lhe core of Lhe soclal, culLural, and rellglous lnsLlLuLlons of Lhe enLlre myLhlc and myLhlc-raLlonal epochs. LlberLy, equallLy, fraLernlLy: no more myLhs!" meanL no more domlnaLor hlerarchles!," and Lhe Age of 8eason and 8evoluLlon seL ouL Lo prove [usL LhaL. uesplLe all Lhe efforLs of Lyranny, desplLe Lhe vlolence and Lrlckery of Lhe prlesLhood, desplLe Lhe vlgllanL efforLs of all Lhe enemles of manklnd," crled an lmpassloned Polbach, Lhe human race wlll aLLaln enllghLenmenL, naLlons wlll know Lhelr Lrue lnLeresLs, a mulLlLude of rays, assembled, wlll form one day a boundless mass of llghL LhaL wlll warm all hearLs, LhaL wlll lllumlnaLe all mlnds" (ssol sot les ptejoqes). ctosez llofome! 1he uLlllLarlans may have been operaLlng wlLhln a purely flaLland onLology (whlch now goes wlLhouL saylng), buL even Lhey were drlven by a goal of unlversal benevolence exLended Lo all humans (and ofLen anlmals), regardless of race, creed, color (and soon gender). 8enLham: ls Lhere one of Lhese my pages ln whlch Lhe love of humanklnd has for a momenL been forgoLLen? Show lL me, and Lhls hand shall be Lhe flrsL Lo Lear lL ouL." All of Lhls, lndeed, was radlcally new, on any sorL of collecLlve scale. 1haL reason could rlse above Lhe narrow lnLeresLs of an egocenLrlc or eLhnocenLrlc sLance, and aLLempL Lo dlscover and afflrm whaL was good and falr for all belngs, and noL merely for me or my Lrlbe or my naLlon-Lhls was one of Lhe endurlng drlves of Lhe raLlonal Lgo. And ln order Lo rlse Lo Lhls worldcenLrlc plurallsm, l, as Lgo, musL flghL, ln myself, any Lendencles Lo acL ln egocenLrlc or eLhnocenLrlc ways. l musL flghL my own lncllnaLlons, my own deslres, my own naLural lmpulses, Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL Lhey deLer me from a worldcenLrlc falrness. 1he raLlonal Lgo, Lhen, has Lo bottle Lhose currenLs boLh ln naLure and ln culLure LhaL pull lL away from lLs worldcenLrlc moral sLance. 8eason, and reason alone, dellvers Lhls moral vlslon Lo me, and Lhus l, as Lgo, musL dlsLance myself from Lhose powers and pulls LhaL do noL llve up Lo Lhls raLlonal eLhlcs of unlversal care. And, Lhe Lgo camp would argue, lf Lhe raLlonal-ego were really [usL anoLher sLrand ln Lhe greaL naLural web, Lhen all of lLs acLlons would already be deLermlned by Lhe web lLself. We would Lhen be drlven merely by pleasure and paln and self-preservaLlon, and Lhus we would have no resources ln ourselves LhaL could deny our own egocenLrlc drlves ln Lhe name of a deeper and wlder compasslon for oLhers. lL ls cerLaln Lhe fox never goes ouL of lLs way Lo help a sLranded chlcken (unless lL's on Lhe menu), and why should lL? 8uL ls tbot Lhe ldeal model of my eLhlcal response? 33 no, Lhe greaL web of naLure, Lhe Lco-world, can offer me noLhlng for a worldcenLrlc moral response. 8aLher lL ls reason, and reason alone, LhaL allows me Lo sLep ouLslde of my own naLural lncllnaLlons and acL for Lhe beneflL of oLhers, and Lo LreaL oLhers as l would myself be LreaLed. 1he cenLral flgure ln all of Lhls ls, of course, lmmanuel kanL. 1he moral sub[ecL, Lhe raLlonal-ego, ls ftee preclsely Lo Lhe degree LhaL lL can Jlseoqoqe lLself from Lhe lesset pulls of egocenLrlc deslre, merely naLural self- preservaLlon, and dlspersed lncllnaLlons, and reslde as moral freedom. Cne of kanL's cenLral alms was Lo vlndlcaLe Lhls moral freedom and lndependence of Lhe ego-sub[ecL-Lo esLabllsh lLs ootooomy as agalnsL Lhe pull of betetooomy, or oLher-dlrecLedness," by whlch he meanL especlally Lhe oLher- dlrecLedness of eLhnocenLrlc culLure, of myLhlc (meLaphyslcal) rellglon, and of lower naLural lncllnaLlons and deslres. 1he Lruly moral wlll draws lLs worldcenLrlc perspecLlve from wltblo, from lLs own reason, and noL from any exLernal source whaLsoever, wheLher LhaL source be church or sLaLe or naLure. 1hus, for kanL, a person ls Lruly ftee-LhaL ls Lo say, Lruly self-JetetmloeJ, and noL pushed by some exLernal oLher-when, and only when, Lhe person acLs from a deLermlnaLlon lmposed by hls or her own raLlonal wlll. When l acL from a worldcenLrlc perspecLlve, Lhen l am Lruly ftee, free of Lhe lesser and meaner sLances LhaL wound me ln Lhelr shallowness. When l acL from a worldcenLrlc sLance, l am Lruly free-and LhaL worldcenLrlc sLance ls lLself generaLed and undersLood only by raLlonallLy (by unlversal perspecLlvlsm). And Lhus, l am Lruly free ooly when l am acLlng ln accord wlLh my own moral wlll ln lLs worldcenLrlc capaclLy. When l acL from LhaL raLlonal sLance, tbeo l am acLlng ln Lhe pure freedom of Lhe raLlonal wlll, slnce LhaL ls my owo deepesL and LruesL self (so Lo speak). l am noL belng forced by some oLher Lo acL ln Lhls way (heLeronomy), because Lhe worldcenLrlc sLance ls generaLed only by my own raLlonallLy: l am fully self-deLermlned and Lhus free ln Lhe LruesL sense. 1hus, l am noL really free when l am acLlng egocenLrlcally-LhaL ls slmply belng a slave Lo my deslres. nor am l free when l am a slave Lo Lhe herd menLallLy and mass oplnlon (of Lhe eLhnocenLrlc and conformlsL mode). lurLher, kanL would say, nelLher am l free ln amoral naLure-Lhere, l am merely a cog ln Lhe lnLerlocklng web. 8aLher, l am free only when l acL from Lhe worldcenLrlc sLance glven by my own raLlonallLy, free because l Lranscend Lhese lesser and shallower engagemenLs, engagemenLs LhaL proceed wlLhouL beneflL of unlversal compasslon and caLegorlcal care, and Lhus engagemenLs LhaL hurL me as well. ln moral freedom, l declare my lndependence from naLure and lLs amoral ways. Such lndependence," says kanL, ls called fteeJom ln a sLrlcL, l.e. LranscendenLal sense." And conversely, Lo be bound by exLernal auLhorlLles, LradlLlonal cusLoms, Church dogma, or naLure and naLure's neL: all of LhaL drags me down from a worldcenLrlc sLance and lnLo one or anoLher parLlallLy, meanness, narrowness, LhefL. 1hls ls Lhe cenLral, exhllaraLlng noLlon of kanL's eLhlcs. Moral llfe ls equlvalenL Lo freedom, ln Lhls radlcal sense of self-deLermlnaLlon by [one's own] moral wlll. 1hls ls called 'auLonomy.' Any devlaLlon from lL, any deLermlnaLlon of Lhe wlll by some exLernal conslderaLlon, some lncllnaLlon, some auLhorlLy, even as hlgh as Cod hlmself, ls condemned as heLeronomy. 1he numlnous whlch lnsplred awe was noL Cod as much as Lhe moral law lLself, Lhe self- glven [buL worldcenLrlc] command of 8eason . . . Lhe moral law whlch he glves Lo hlmself as raLlonal wlll. So LhaL men were LhoughL Lo come closesL Lo Lhe dlvlne, Lo whaL commands uncondlLlonal respecL, noL when Lhey worshlp buL when Lhey acL ln moral freedom." 34 1here ls much LruLh ln kanL's poslLlon, l belleve, and cerLalnly ln Lhe general Lerms as l skeLched lL. noL only has kanL carefully dlfferenLlaLed Lhe 8lg 1hree, he ls flghLlng mlghLlly Lhe reducLlonlsLlc flaLland Lrend of Lhe Age. 33 kanL would polnL ouL (Lo use our Lerms) LhaL Lhe noosphere ls noL lo Lhe blosphere, Lherefore Lhe noospherlc moral lmperaLlve coooot be foooJ empltlcolly (buL only lnLerpersonally or pracLlcally). And he ls clearly flghLlng Lhe homogenlzaLlon of moLlves so prevalenL wlLh Lhe uLlllLarlans, for kanL, expandlng sensual lncllnaLlons and deslres ls [usL expandlng heLeronomy, expandlng slavery, expandlng addlcLlons. 8uL kanL's vlew ls also hobbled by hls lnablllLy Lo flnally lnLegraLe Lhe 8lg 1hree (desplLe hls efforLs ln Lhe 1bltJ ctltlpoe vla arL and organlsm, and lndeed, Lhls lnLegraLlon or reconclllaLlon" ls whaL Schelllng and Pegel Look upon Lhemselves Lo provlde, as we wlll see shorLly). lor among oLher Lhlngs, Lhls deflclency lefL Lhe lnLracLable problem: how are Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco relaLed? 8uL ln Lhe meanLlme, some of Lhe obvlous LruLhs ln Lhls Lype of poslLlon were Lhe drlvlng force behlnd Lhe Lgo camps ln Lhelr many forms. 1he greaLer Lhe agency of Lhe Lgo-LhaL ls, Lhe more Lhe Lgo can dlsengage from Lhe Lco (and heLeronomy ln general)-Lhe greaLer Lhe knowledge and freedom of Lhe self. And Lhus arose Lhe sub[ecLlve pole of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, varlously referred Lo as Lhe self- deflnlng sub[ecL," Lhe auLonomous ego," Lhe dlsengaged self," Lhe puncLual self," Lhe phllosophy of Lhe sub[ecL," self-sufflclenL sub[ecLlvlLy." 36 1aylor refers Lo Lhls overall emergence as a revoluLlon ln moral consclousness." loucaulL calls lL a sudden, radlcal resLrucLurlng" and a profound upheaval, an archaeologlcal muLaLlon." lL ls, ln essence, Lhe emergence of modernlLy. lL ls Lhe emergence of Lhe Lgo. We could say, on Lhe poslLlve slde, LhaL lL ls an eLhlc of self-responslblllLy and self-esLeem needs (Maslow) arlslng ouL of conformlsL and belonglngness needs. 8uL lLs general Lrend ls clear: from uescarLes Lo Locke Lo kanL Lo llchLe: Lhe more Lgo, and Lhe less Lco, Lhe beLLer. And here Lhe Lgo camps began Lo veer lnLo Lhe negaLlve. qo-oeqotlve. keptessloo lor each of Lhose LheorlsLs (and for a hosL of oLhers ln Lhe raLlonal-egolc camp), Lhe dlsengaged sub[ecL does lndeed Jlseocboot Lhe world, and so much Lhe beLLer! lL ls preclsely by dlsenchanLlng Lhe world LhaL Lhe knowlng sub[ecL llberaLes lLself! (AparL from a deflnlLe LruLh ln LhaL sLance-namely, reason does lndeed Jlseocboot mere myLh: grownups no longer need Lo belleve ln SanLa Claus-noneLheless, Lhls ls Lhe polnL where Lhe Lco camps would generally begln Lhelr crlLlques. Lven lf a large dose of dlsenchanLmenL was called for, Lhe Lco camps would malnLaln, lL had goLLen qulLe ouL of hand, even wreckless and vlclous, and dlsenchanLed was fasL becomlng dlsemboweled.) ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe dlsengaged Lgo-sub[ecL, ln lLs cruder forms, slmply seL abouL Lo unamblguously reflecL on Lhe world ln purely ob[ecLlve Lerms (slnce Lhe Lwo were radlcally dlvorced, Lhls dld noL seem Lo presenL any problem: one slmply looks). 1he dlsengaged sub[ecL sLares aL Lhe world, ob[ecLlfles lL, and descrlbes Lhe resulLs-Lhe so-called reflecLlon paradlgm"-a represenLaLlonal eplsLemology LhaL has been one of Lhe cenLral LeneLs of modernlLy from uescarLes and Pobbes and Locke down Lo Culne-whaL Pabermas calls Lhe LnllghLenmenL's proud culLure of reflecLlon" and 1aylor summarlzes as 1o know reallLy ls Lo have a correcL represenLaLlon of Lhlngs." And lf lL wasn'L merely Lhe Lgo teflectloq on Lhe Lco, Lhen lL was Lhe Lgo wotkloq on Lhe Lco-Lhe so-called producLlon paradlgm" (Marx). As shown ln flgure 12-6, all reallLy ls 8lghL-Pand, and Lhe Lgo slmply teflects oo Lhose emplrlcal ob[ecLs: Lhe mlrror of naLure. ln Lhls scheme, language ls LhoughL Lo be very slmple: lL ls a seL of convenLlonal slgns LhaL sLralghLforwardly represenL concreLe Lhlngs (and we see Lhls from Pobbes and Condlllac Lo Loday's emplrlclsL llngulsLlcs, all of whlch overlook Lhe facL LhaL slgns Lhemselves possess meanlng only by vlrLue of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve sysLem of oLher slgns, and, furLher, only Lhe leasL lnLeresLlng slgns polnL" Lo Lhlngs, mosL slgns polnL Lo oLher slgns: language creaLes worlds, lL doesn'L [usL reflecL preglven worlds). ln all of Lhese accounLs, and ln Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm ln general, whaL we see ls Lhe world reduced unamblguously Lo monologlcal Lerms, Lo lL-language, Lo ob[ecLlve surfaces wlLh no depLh requlrlng lotetptetotloo and no dlalogue requlrlng motool ooJetstooJloq. (As shown ln flg. 12-6, Lhere ls no Lower LefL as an lrreduclble reallLy.) 1he world ls slmply a collecLlon of ob[ecLlvely lnLerlocklng evenLs, and knowledge conslsLs ln correcLly represenLlng Lhose evenLs. knowledge ls of Lhose ob[ecLs, and noL also Lhe muLual undersLandlng beLween sub[ecLs (and cerLalnly noL Lhe Lranscendence of boLh sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs ln Lhe nondual Cne). 1hls knowledge ls noL Lransloglcal, lL ls noL dlaloglcal, lL ls monologlcal. Agaln, lL ls noL LhaL represenLaLlonal and ob[ecLlve (or emplrlcal) knowledge ls slmply wrong, buL raLher ls exLremely parLlal. lL reduces all dlmenslons Lo Lhelr 8lghL-Pand correlaLes (whlch ls subLle reducLlonlsm, ln gross reducLlonlsm, Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon ls lLself furLher reduced Lo lLs aLomlsLlc elemenLs, boLh are monologlcal). And slnce all dlmenslons do have some sorL of 8lghL-Pand correlaLe, Lhe pro[ecL can always seem Lo be maklng headway-Lhere ls always some sorL of evldence one can polnL Lo (even Lhough lL lnvolves a reducLlon). lL genulnely appears, wlLhln Lhls pre[udlce, LhaL Lhe enLlre world can be capLured ln lL-language. 1hus ls Lhe kosmos reduced Lo Lhe neuLral flaLland cosmos. And whereas Lhe kosmos possesses lnLerlor depLh-and Lhus lottloslc voloe lnheres ln Lhe Jeptb of each and every holon (anlmal, human, dlvlne)-Lhe flaLland cosmos lLself (or so lL appears Lo lL-language) ls compleLely devold of meanlng, value, awareness, prehenslon, consclousness-Lhere are no LefL-Pand componenLs aL all! As WhlLehead's famous summary has lL, Lhe cosmos ls now a dull affalr, soundless, scenLless, colourless, merely Lhe hurrylng of maLerlal, endlessly, meanlnglessly." (1o whlch he added, 1hereby, modern phllosophy has been rulned.") 8uL LhaL ls how all surfaces cottectly appear anyway, and Lhus lf Lhe ooly knowledge one allows ls ob[ecLlfylng knowledge-knowledge of surfaces LhaL can be seen wlLh Lhe senses or Lhelr exLenslons-Lhen Lhe resulLs of LhaL Lype of lnvesLlgaLlon are pre-deLermlned: look aL any value ln an ob[ecLlfylng fashlon, and you flnd no value, [usL neuLral surfaces, aL whlch polnL you say, WhaL value?" As we have seen, Lhls emplrlcal, ob[ecLlve, muLually lnLerlocklng and hollsLlc world of lLs" lefL no room for Lhe sub[ecL (l's and we's). And so, ln Lhe sLrangesL LwlsL ln Lhls already sLrange Lale, beglnnlng around Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury (wlLh a few earller efforLs), Lhe sub[ecL aLLempLed Lo geL aL lLself, Lo know lLself, by totoloq tbls moooloqlcol qoze lowotJ opoo ltself. lL tettoflecteJ Lhe monologlcal gaze. 1haL ls, Lhe sub[ecL aLLempLed Lo caLegorlze, descrlbe, and explaln lLself ln ob[ecLlve Lerms, ln lL-language. noL ln lnLersub[ecLlve Lerms of muLual undersLandlng and muLual recognlLlon, buL ln Lhe neuLral, naLurallsLlc, sclenLlflc" Lerms of lL-language. And Lhus was born whaL loucaulL called Lhe Age of Man"-Lhe merely ob[ecLlve" sLudy of humans. And ln a beauLlful phrase LhaL would summarlze Lhe neL effecL of Lhe enLlre LnllghLenmenL paradlgm (rlghL down Lo Loday's sysLems Lheory), loucaulL polnLs ouL LhaL wlLh Lhe Age of Man," humans became Lhe ob[ecL of lnformaLlon, never Lhe sub[ecL ln communlcaLlon." 37 Much of loucaulL's work ls a caLalogulng of Lhe nlghLmares LhaL descended on clLlzens as Lhey became merely ob[ecLs (and Lhus sub[ugaLed sub[ecLs") ln Lhe hollsLlc neL of monologlcal knowledge (parLlcularly ln Lhe blologlzed form of blopower"). 1hls ls llkewlse whaL Pabermas refers Lo as Lhe LoLallLarlan characLerlsLlcs of an lnsLrumenLal reason LhaL objectlfles everyLhlng around lL, ltself locloJeJ." 38 ln Lhls respecL, Pabermas ls ln compleLe agreemenL wlLh loucaulL. lL ls an ldea LhaL aLLalns domlnance aL Lhe same Llme as sub[ecL-cenLered reason: LhaL kllllng off dlaloglcal relaLlonshlps Lransforms sub[ecLs, who are monologlcally Lurned ln upon Lhemselves, lnLo ob[ecLs for one anoLher, and ooly objects." 39 lurLher, says Pabermas, 1he same sLrucLure [reLroflecLed monologlcal gaze] ls Lo be found aL Lhe cradle of Lhe human sclences"-Lhe so-called dehumanlzlng humanlsm" and Lhe sclences of man" (Loward whlch so much of Lhe posLmodern aLLack has rlghLly been focused). Pabermas, noLlng hls polnL of agreemenL wlLh loucaulL, ls speclflc: A qoze LhaL ob[ecLlfles and examlnes, LhaL Lakes Lhlngs aparL analyLlcally, LhaL monlLors and peneLraLes everyLhlng, galns a power LhaL ls sLrucLurally formaLlve for Lhese lnsLlLuLlons. lL ls Lhe gaze of Lhe raLlonal sub[ecL who has losL all merely lnLulLlve bonds wlLh hls envlronmenL and Lorn down all Lhe brldges bullL up of lnLersub[ecLlve [and dlaloglcal] agreemenL, and for whom ln hls monologlcal lsolaLlon, oLher sub[ecLs are only accesslble as Lhe objects of ooopottlclpoot obsetvotloo." 40 Pabermas makes clear LhaL Lhls ls yeL anoLher verslon of . . . monologlcal sysLems Lheory, where Lhe greaL monologlcal sysLems neL descended on clLlzens for Lhelr own beneflL and welfare." 1he bad news conLlnues. 1hese ob[ecLlfylng and sysLemaLlc sclences of man" are ln facL pseudo-sclences, accordlng Lo boLh loucaulL and Pabermas, and pseudo-sclences drlven by self-aggrandlzlng powet. 41 8ecause Lhe human sclences wlLh Lhelr borrowed models and allen ldeals of [excluslve] ob[ecLlvlLy, became lnvolved wlLh a human belng LhaL was for Lhe flrsL Llme Lurned lnLo an ob[ecL of sclenLlflc lnvesLlgaLlon by Lhe modern form of knowledge, an lmpulse could prevall ln Lhem unawares, whlch Lhey could noL admlL wlLhouL rlsklng Lhelr clalm Lo LruLh: [usL LhaL resLless pressure for knowledge, self-masLery, and self-aggrandlzemenL. . . ." 42 ln oLher words, Lhe sclences of man" and Lhe new dehumanlzlng humanlsm" dld noL [usL sLudy Lhe ob[ecLlve (and monologlcal) aspecLs of human belngs (whlch would be flne), Lhey teJoceJ human belngs Lo Lhelr merely ob[ecLlve and emplrlcal componenLs (whlch was Lhe crlme). Pumans were noL sub[ecLs ln communlcaLlon" buL merely ob[ecLs of lnformaLlon." And because LhaL teJoctloo ls noL supporLed by Lhe kosmos, because LhaL reducLlon ls a vlolaLlon of Lhe rlchness of Lhe unlverse, Lhen lL musL be drlven by someLhlng oLher Lhan LruLh: lL musL be drlven ln large measure by self-aggrandlzlng powet, accordlng Lo boLh loucaulL and Pabermas. And wlLh Lhls, Lhe whole dark slde of Lhe LnllghLenmenL comes lurchlng Lo Lhe fore. 1he caLasLrophe was noL Lhe emergence of reason, buL reason coofloeJ Lo and lnlLlally coptoteJ by emplrlc-analyLlc modes-ob[ecLlfylng, monologlcal, poslLlvlsLlc-modes whlch see ooly Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons and never Lhe LefL-Pand (even Lhough Lhelr own operaLlon depends lnLlmaLely on Lhem). lL was a reason LhaL dlfferenLlaLed Lhe 8lg 1hree only Lo leL Lhem fall lnLo dlssoclaLlon, wlLh Lhe resulLanL emphasls solely on Lhe 8lghL-Pand (Lhe 8lg 1hree reduced Lo Lhe 8lg Cne of lL-language). Cr agaln, lL was a reason LhaL wenL from an alLogeLher commendable worldcenLrlc undersLandlng, Lo a vlrLual teptessloo of anyLhlng noL auLomaLlcally of lLs llk. lL was a hlgher emergence used for alLogeLher rude purposes, Lurnlng everyLhlng lnLo ob[ecLs of Lhe monologlcal gaze, and severlng, allenaLlng, represslng Lhe rlch communlons LhaL allowed lLs agency Lo funcLlon ln Lhe flrsL place. 43 lf ooly Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons are acknowledged, Lhen Lhe enLlre LefL half of Lhe kosmos has Lo be repressed, denled, reduced, dlsLorLed. lL was Lhe teptesslve slde of Lhe LnllghLenmenL LhaL lLs crlLlcs have especlally focused on (ln varlous forms, Lhelr names would soon be leglon: Schelllng, Pegel, nleLzsche, Peldegger, 8aLallle, loucaulL, uerrlda). 8uL few of Lhe LnllghLenmenL's crlLlcs have been more acuLe Lhan Pegel. We have already heard hlm brand Lhe LnllghLenmenL as a vanlLy of Lhe undersLandlng"-Lhe undersLandlng" belng emplrlcal-caLegorlcal, reflecLlve, and monologlcal reason, as opposed Lo (or raLher subsumed ln) maLure 8eason (vlslon-loglc), whlch ls dlalecLlcal, dlaloglcal, and process- orlenLed. Pegel felL LhaL ln Lhe modern world emanclpaLlon became ttoosfotmeJ loto oofteeJom because Lhe unshackllng power of [monologlcal] reflecLlon had become auLonomous and now achleved unlflcaLlon only Lhrough Lhe vlolence of a sub[ugaLlng sub[ecLlvlLy . . . lL poslLed as absoluLe LhaL whlch ls condlLloned." 44 ln shorL, reason LhaL has become monologlcal holds all nonreason aL arm's lengLh, marglnallzes lL, excludes lL, domlnaLes lL, ob[ecLlfles lL, dlslnfecLs lL wlLh dlsgusL. uL a flnal way: lL was reason shoL Lhrough wlLh hobos. 1he greaL LnllghLenmenL raLlonallLy dld noL [usL Lranscend and lnclude, and meeL Lhe world wlLh an Agape Lo balance lLs Lros. lnsLead of embrace, Lhere was all Loo ofLen a dlsLanclng gone mad, dlsengagemenL gone exLreme, allenaLlon and represslon and dlssoclaLlon-all ouL of an undersLandable buL ulLlmaLely lnsane averslon Lo anyLhlng LhaL looked llke heLeronomy." noL [usL commendable Lros buL a prlckly hobos was aL work ln Lhe Lgo's cherlshed auLonomy, an auLonomy and an agency LhaL Lherefore all Loo ofLen seveteJ lts commooloos wlLh naLure, body, sensuallLy, communlLy-and senL scaLLered fragmenLs runnlng Lo Lhe wlnds where unlon and lnLegraLlon were supposed Lo be glorlously forLhcomlng. (1he Lgo's lsolaLlon-from lLs own lnner depLhs, lLs culLure, and naLure-ls well lllusLraLed ln flg. 12-6. noLlce LhaL Lhls ls a preclse example of a holarchy gone paLhologlcal, whlch we dlscussed ln chapLer 1-an arroganL holon usurps lLs place ln Lhe normal holarchy, Lhus domlnaLlng/represslng Lhose holons upon whlch lLs own exlsLence lnLlmaLely depends. noL holarchy, buL potboloqlcol holarchy, wlLh hyper-agency severlng and domlnaLlng-preclsely because fearlng-lLs communlons: Lhere was raLlonallLy run amok, and Lhere was hobos drlvlng Lhe represslon.) 1hus, even Pabermas, proponenL of reconsLrucLed modernlLy, could recognlze LhaL ob[ecLlfylng reason denounces and undermlnes all unconcealed forms of suppresslon and explolLaLlon, of degradaLlon and allenaLlon, only Lo seL up ln Lhelr place Lhe unassallable Jomlootloo of totlooollty. 8ecause Lhls reglme of a sub[ecLlvlLy puffed up lnLo a false absoluLe Lransforms Lhe means of consclousness-ralslng and emanclpaLlon lnLo [usL so many lnsLrumenLs of ob[ecLlflcaLlon and conLrol, lL fashlons for lLself an uncanny lmmunlLy ln Lhe form of a Lhoroughly concealed Jomlootloo." 43 And Lhus, 1he permanenL slgn of enllghLenmenL ls domlnaLlon over an objectlfleJ exLernal naLure and a teptesseJ lnLernal naLure. 8eason lLself desLroys Lhe humanlLy lL flrsL made posslble." 46 1he teptesslve slde of Lhe LnllghLenmenL, Lhe Lendency of monologlcal reason Lo marglnallze everyLhlng LhaL ls noL of lLs llk, Lros gone caLasLrophlcally lnLo rampanL hobos-Lhls cancer was eaLlng lLs way lnLo Lhe Age of 8eason even whlle lLs nobler ldeals were remaklng Lurope. Polbach could lndeed slng-and who would noL [oln hlm?-Pow Lhls porLralL of manklnd, free of all Lhese chalns, no longer under Lhe enemles of progress, and walklng wlLh a sure and cerLaln sLep on Lhe paLh of LruLh, of vlrLue and happlness, presenLs Lo Lhe phllosopher a slghL whlch consoles hlm for Lhe errors, Lhe crlmes, Lhe ln[usLlces whlch sLlll sully Lhe earLh. . . . Pe Lhen dares Lo blnd Lhese efforLs Lo Lhe chaln of human desLlny: Lhere he flnds vlrLue's Lrue reward, Lhe pleasure of havlng creaLed an endurlng good, whlch faLe wlll no longer desLroy wlLh a deadly compensaLlon by brlnglng back pre[udlce and slavery. Llvlng ln LhoughL wlLh a humanlLy re-esLabllshed ln Lhe rlghLs and dlgnlLy of lLs naLure, he forgeLs Lhe one whlch ls corrupLed and LormenLed by greed, fear, or envy, lL ls Lhere LhaL he llves . . . , whlch hls love for humanlLy has embelllshed wlLh Lhe puresL en[oymenLs." 47 1here, Lruly, Lhe noble asplraLlons of Lhe Age, and never so nobly expressed. WhaL Polbach could noL know, as he wroLe Lhose words, was LhaL he had buL a few monLhs Lo llve. Pe was hldlng ln arls, 1793, where a warranL for hls arresL had been lssued by Lhe !acoblns, whose maln leader, 8obesplerre-by all accounLs a man of greaL lnLegrlLy, courage, and devouL republlcanlsm-would soon oversee Lhe 8elgn of 1error, ln whlch many Lhousands would be drowned or gullloLlned for Lhe revoluLlonary cause of a reason rlslng up Lo bulld Lhe radlanL fuLure-only Lo succumb Lo lLs own llmlLaLlons mlsLaken for Lhe absoluLe, and seL hobos loose wlLh Lerror and reLallaLlon ln lLs hardened hearL. 1PL LCC 1he Lco camps would selze mosL lmmedlaLely upon Lhe represslons and excluslonary pracLlces LhaL reason could, and ofLen dld, brlng ln lLs wake. 1he represenLaLlonal/reflecLlon paradlgm lefL Lhe sub[ecL sLarlng ouL aL an allen world, wlLh an unbrldgeable gap, hlaLus, rlfL runnlng rlghL down Lhe mlddle of Lhe kosmos. 1he Lco camps found Lhls rlfL lnLolerable and seL ouL Lo heal Lhe spllL beLween Lhe ego and Lhe eco, beLween Lhe self and naLure, whlch was Lhen-and ls now-as noble a goal as one can lmaglne. co-posltlve. wboleoess 1he lnLenLlons, as always, were honorable (as were Lhose of Lhe Lgo camps), and Lhe approach conLalned much LhaL was (and ls) undoubLedly Lrue. llrsL and foremosL was Lhe aLLack on Lhe absoluLe sLaLus of Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm, where a dlsengaged and dangllng sub[ecL sLared ouL muLely, dumbly, aL a monochrome world. 1he LnllghLenmenL, Lhe Lco camps felL, had lnLroduced a false world of represenLaLlon whlch cuLs man off from Lhe real llvlng sources." 48 And lL was only ln a reLurn Lo naLure, Lo Lhe rlch fabrlc of Lhe greaL organlc llfe sLream, LhaL Lhe llvlng sources" could be resurrecLed, reconLacLed, celebraLed, renewed. (ln Lhls secLlon, naLure" means boLh naLure and naLure, or Lhe emplrlcal-sensory world wlLhln and wlLhouL. ln Lhe nexL secLlon we wlll use our more preclse deflnlLlons for an overall summary.) As 1aylor summarlzes Lhe slLuaLlon, lf Lhe LnllghLenmenL anLhropology recommended lLself Lhrough Lhe sense of freedom, even exhllaraLlon, of self-deflnlLlon, Lhe reacLlon Lo lL [Lhe Lco camp] experlenced Lhls plcLure of man as dry, dead, as desLroylng llfe. lor Lhe sense of freedom as a self-deflnlng, reasonlng sub[ecL was won by ob[ecLlfylng naLure, and even our own naLure ln so far as we are ob[ecLs for ourselves [reLroflecLed monologlcal gaze]. lL was won aL Lhe expense of a rlfL beLween Lhe sub[ecL who knows and wllls, and Lhe glven: Lhlngs as Lhey are ln naLure." 49 1he orlglnaLors of Lhe broad Lco movemenL-8ousseau (1712-1778), Perder (1744-1803), Lhe varlous 8omanLlcs (Lhe Schlegels, Schlller, novalls, Colerldge, WordsworLh, WhlLman)-Look lL upon Lhemselves Lo heal Lhls rlfL. Perder: See Lhe whole of naLure, behold Lhe greaL analogy of creaLlon. LveryLhlng feels lLself and lLs llke, llfe reverberaLes wlLh llfe." 1he mode of knowlng mosL approprlaLe Lo Lhls Lype of vlslon was noL dlslnLeresLed LhoughL or represenLaLlon, buL raLher a Lype of ecsLaLlc feellng, whaL WordsworLh called Lhe sponLaneous overflow of powerful feellngs." As Perder puL lL, lmpulse ls Lhe drlvlng force of our exlsLence, and lL musL remaln Lhls even ln our noblesL knowlngs. Love ls Lhe noblesL form of knowlng, as lL ls Lhe noblesL feellng." And as for Lhose who belleve deLached represenLaLlon ls Lhe LruesL form of knowledge, Lhey musL be, says Perder, elLher llars or enervaLed belngs." 1hus, Lhe LruesL and puresL use of language, Lhe Lco camp malnLalned, was noL merely Lo reflecL or represenL an ob[ecLlfled and sLulLlfled reallLy, buL raLher Lo exptess Lhe wondrous currenLs of llfe-and for Lhls poeLry and arL were mosL ldeally sulLed. (1hls was an lmporLanL move, wlLh far-reachlng repercusslons, Lo relnLroduce Lhe upper- LefL dlmenslon of slncerlLy and ttotbfoloess ln expresslon, and noL [usL Lhe 8lghL-half dlmenslon of Lhe ttotb of proposlLlons, Lhls was a Lruly profound conLrlbuLlon, even lf lL was ofLen overblown Lo sllly proporLlons.) 1he ldea wasn'L Lo sLand back and lmparLlally and dlslnLeresLedly teflect on naLure, Lhe ldea was Lo pottlclpote wlLh naLure and exptess naLure, Lo [oln ln Lhe greaL currenLs of commooloo LhaL nourlsh each and all, and noL merely glorlfy one's own self-generaLed, self-lndependenL oqeocy. 1hls feellng cannoL sLop aL Lhe boundary of my self, lL has Lo be open Lo Lhe greaL currenL of llfe LhaL flows across lL. lL ls Lhls greaLer currenL, and noL [usL Lhe currenL of my own body, whlch has Lo be unlLed wlLh hlgher asplraLlon . . . lf Lhere ls Lo be unlLy ln Lhe self. 1hus our self-feellng musL be conLlnuous wlLh our feellng for Lhls larger currenL of llfe whlch flows Lhrough us and of whlch we are a parL, Lhls currenL musL nourlsh us noL only physlcally buL splrlLually as well. Pence lL musL be more Lhan a useful lnLerchange of maLLer. lL musL be experlenced as a communlon." 30 1hus, whaL Lhe Lgo camp had Laken as proof of self-freedom and self-deLermlnaLlon-namely, Lhe ob[ecLlflcaLlon and dlsenchanLmenL of naLure-Lhe Lco camp Look as a slgn of a deep lnner cleavage, a profound allenaLlon wltblo Lhe sub[ecL LhaL expressed lLself as a cleavage or rlfL betweeo Lhe sub[ecL and naLure as well. Where Lhe Lgo camps had developed a passlon for whaL Lhey saw as self-deLermlnaLlon, lndependence, and self-responslblllLy, Lhe Lco camps dlsplayed an equal passlon for whaL Lhey saw as unlLy, wholeness, harmony. lor Lhe one, self-responslble oqeocy, for Lhe oLher, self-abnegaLlng commooloo. 1here was a passlonaLe demand for unlLy and wholeness. 1he [Lco] vlew blLLerly reproached Lhe LnllghLenmenL Lhlnkers for havlng dlssecLed man and hence dlsLorLed Lhe Lrue lmage of human llfe ln ob[ecLlfylng human naLure. All Lhese dlchoLomles dlsLorLed Lhe Lrue naLure of man whlch had raLher Lo be seen as a slngle sLream of llfe, or on Lhe model of a work of arL, ln whlch no parL could be deflned ln absLracLlon from Lhe oLhers. 1hese dlsLlncLlons Lhus were seen as absLracLlons from reallLy. 8uL Lhey were more Lhan LhaL, Lhey were muLllaLlons of man. . . . lL was a denlal of Lhe llfe of Lhe sub[ecL, hls communlon wlLh naLure and hls self-expresslon ln hls own naLural belng." 31 And Lhus, as 1aylor summarlzes Lhe asplraLlons of an enLlre age of Lco-Lhlnkers, WhaL Lhey Lhemselves yearned for was unlLy wlLh self and communlon wlLh naLure-LhaL man be oolteJ lo commooloo wltb ootote." And Lhls was Lo be accompllshed by a sympaLheLlc lnserLlon lnLo Lhe greaL sLream of llfe of whlch Lhey are a parL." 32 co-oeqotlve. keqtessloo And [usL Lhere was Lhe problem. CtooteJ LhaL Lhls lnserLlon was deslrable, [usL how does Lhe ego lnserL lLself lnLo someLhlng larger wlLhouL loslng Lhe poslLlve slde of Lhe beneflclal galns LhaL lL had [usL made, and for whlch lL had so vallanLly foughL? 8y glvlng up ego, Lhe Lgo camps asked, do you mean glvlng up auLonomy and golng back Lo heLeronomy? 8ack Lo conformlsL deLermlnaLlon by Lhe church or sLaLe, slnce Lhey are deflnlLely larger"? 8ack Lo personal lmpulse and lncllnaLlon and naLural feellng, no maLLer how self-servlng or self-absorbed Lhey mlghL be? 8ack Lo Lhe amoral currenLs of naLure LhaL, however llvely and vlLal, sLlll do noL have Lo consLrucL lnLersub[ecLlve culLures and do noL Lherefore provlde a model for human lnLeracLlon? 8ack Lo fox eaLs chlcken-whlch ls supposed Lo be good slmply because lL ls oototol? 1he problem was LhaL we cannoL slmply soy Lhe sub[ecL and Lhe ob[ecL are one ln Lhe greaL sLream of llfe. We have Lo show how Lhls ls so, and how lL can be so, wlLhouL resorLlng Lo faclle verbal flourlshes. 1he Lgo camps were qulLe persuaslve ln Lhls parLlcular regard. lf we are supposed Lo lnserL ourselves lnLo Lhe greaL sLream of naLure, Lhey asked, Lhen you-Lhe Lco camps-musL Lell us how we can do Lhls wlLhouL loslng Lhe moral sLance of worldcenLrlc benevolence and posLconvenLlonal compasslon. Slnce Lhe worldcenLrlc sLance ls achleved only ln Lhe space of raLlonallLy-lL ls found nowhere ln naLure-Lhen you musL Lell us how Lo dlssolve reason lnLo llfe-feellng wlLhouL desLroylng Lhe very sLance LhaL ollows tbot sympotby to exlst lo tbe fltst ploce. 1he Lgo camp, from kanL Lo llchLe Lo Pegel, raLher bruLally Lore lnLo Lhe Lco-mlnded mushlness." SLandlng ln naLure and egocenLrlcally emoLlng, Lhey malnLalned, and selzlng any senLlmenL LhaL makes me weep aL my wonder-LhaL hardly consLlLuLes Lhe noblesL knowlng, noblesL feellng." 1o be more preclse, uslng our Lhree deflnlLlons (nA1u8L, or Lhe enLlre kosmos, Lhe CreaL nesL of 8elng, naLure, or Lhe 8lghL-Pand world and greaL Web of Llfe, naLure, or bodlly feellngs and preraLlonal awareness). AL Lhelr besL, Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs deslred a unlon wlLh nA1u8L, a unlon wlLh Lhe kosmos (an Lco-noeLlc Self or hlgher, Lhe Cver-Soul LhaL ls Lhe World Soul). 8uL for all Lhe reasons we have dlscussed, Lhe Lco camps drlfLed lnLo an equaLlon of nA1u8L wlLh Lhe greaL Web of Llfe, wlLh Lhe vasL sensory-emplrlcal world ln all lLs organlc rlchness and vlLallLy. under Lhe lnLense gravlLaLlonal pull of flaLland, Lhey reduced nA1u8L Lo naLure. And Lo naLure Lhey pledged Lhelr undylng alleglance. 1he besL of Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs undersLood, qulLe correcLly, LhaL nA1u8L (or SplrlL) can only be grasped by an awareness LhaL moves beyooJ tbe totloool-eqo. 8uL ln Lhelr undersLandable passlon Lo go ttoosraLlonal, Lhey ofLen ended up recommendlng anyLhlng oooraLlonal, lncludlng much LhaL was frankly pteraLlonal, noL posLconvenLlonal, buL preconvenLlonal, noL Lranspersonal, buL prepersonal, noL ascendlng above Lhe ego, buL descendlng-regresslng-below lL. noL beyond reason, buL beneaLh lL. ln oLher words, ln order Lo embrace naLure, Lhe greaL Web of Llfe, Lhey ofLen recommended a slmple reLurn Lo naLure (or preconvenLlonal sensory awareness). noL a Lranscendence from blosphere Lo noosphere Lo Lheosphere (or preraLlonal Lo raLlonal Lo LransraLlonal, or naLure Lo mlnd Lo splrlL), buL a movemenL ln exacLly Lhe opposlLe dlrecLlon. under a pre/Lrans fallacy and Lhe pull of flaLland, Lhey confused posLconvenLlonal splrlL wlLh preconvenLlonal naLure. 1hey Lhus ended up wlLh Lhe same general flaLland as shown ln flgure 12-6, buL lnsLead of sLandlng back from naLure wlLh raLlonallLy, Lhey would lnserL Lhemselves lnLo naLure wlLh feellng. 1he greaL Web of Llfe, whlch ln any evenL ls Lhe world as known Lo Lhe senses, ls Lo be grasped noL by a raLlonallLy LhaL dlsLances lLself from naLure, buL by an lnLense feellng or communlon LhaL lnserLs lLself lnLo naLure, LhaL ls close Lo naLure, LhaL geLs back Lo naLure, back Lo Lhe lmmedlaLe rlchness of Lhe sensory-emplrlcal world and Lhe preconvenLlonal awareness LhaL more lmmedlaLely dlscloses lL. ln shorL, Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs soughL Lo become one wlLh naLure by Lrylng Lo geL back Lo naLure. (8ack Lo naLure" and 8ack Lo naLure" Lhus came Lo mean essenLlally Lhe same Lhlng, because naLure" ls Lhe enLlre 8lghL-Pand, emplrlcal-sensory world, and naLure" ls Lhe emplrlcal-sensory awareness LhaL knows LhaL world. 1o reconLacL my own lnLerlor naLure ls Lhus Lo become closer Lo naLure, slnce Lhey are boLh essenLlally Lhe same emplrlcal-sensory world.) And Lhus, Lhe Lco camps malnLalned, Lhe [ob of Lhe raLlonal-ego ls Lo lnserL lLself lnLo Lhe seamless web of naLure/naLure, Lo become one wlLh Lhe greaL, hollsLlc, emplrlcal Web of Llfe. 1he [ob of Lhe raLlonal-ego ls Lo geL back Lo naLure/naLure, Lhe [ob of Lhe noosphere ls Lo geL back Lo Lhe blosphere. ln any evenL, Lo geL back Lo" was Lhe operaLlve phrase. 1he greaL 8omanLlc regresslve sllde was abouL Lo begln. Confuslng posLconvenLlonal splrlL wlLh preconvenLlonal naLure, Lhe 8omanLlcs seL ouL on Lhelr search for a vlslble, senslble Cod. 1hey would noL sLand back and reflecL on flaLland, Lhey would become one wlLh lL. ln Lhls move Lhere was an almosL compleLe confuslon of Jlffeteotlotloo and Jlssoclotloo. Slnce Lhe Lco- 8omanLlcs were seeklng Wholeness, any sorL of dlfferenLlaLlon was looked upon wlLh susplclon. lnsLead of seelng LhaL dlfferenLlaLlon ls Lhe necessary prerequlslLe for a new and hlgher lnLegraLlon (and Lhus a deeper and wlder Wholeness), Lhe 8omanLlcs Look any dlfferenLlaLlon as a slgn of dlssoclaLlon and fracLure, a slgn LhaL a prlor unlon" had been Lorn asunder, a slgn of a lost potoJlse. And Lhus, lnsLead of golng fotwotJ Lo a hlgher buL noL-yeL-emerged lnLegraLlon, we are supposed Lo go back Lo naLure ptlot Lo Lhe alleged crlme-back Lo a Llme before Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere from Lhe blosphere, back Lo Lhose culLures LhaL do noL dlfferenLlaLe Lhe 8lg 1hree, back Lo Lhose ldylllc Llmes of Lhe noble savage and Lhe prlsLlne communlon wlLh naLure, back ln any case Lo some sorL of Lden LhaL most have exlsLed because dlfferenLlaLlon ls now Lhoroughly mlsLaken for allenaLlon. ln oLher words, lnsLead of seelng LhaL dlfferenLlaLlon ls Lhe necessary prelude Lo a deeper or hlgher and emetqeot lnLegraLlon, lL was seen, ln all cases, as a dlsrupLlon, a dlvlslon and desLrucLlon, of a prlor harmonlous sLaLe. 1he oak was somehow a vlolaLlon of Lhe acorn. And ln Lhls confuslon-Lhls pre/Lrans confuslon-all Lrue crlLlcal edge was losL, because Lhe cure for Lhe acLual Jlssoclotloos LhaL had lndeed beseL modernlLy was mlsLakenly LhoughL Lo be a teqtessloo Lo a sLaLe prlor Lo all Jlffeteotlotloo whaLsoever. ln oLher words, where Lhe Lgo camps were marked by teptessloo, Lhe Lco camps were shoL Lhrough wlLh teqtessloo. 8oLh camps would Lear aggresslvely, ofLen bruLally, lnLo Lhe fabrlc of Lhe kosmos wlLh Lhelr preferred ldeology, preclsely because, as we wlll conLlnue Lo see, Lhey were (and are) boLh locked lnLo Lhe same flaLland paradlgm, where Lhe more of Lgo means Lhe less of Lco, and vlce versa-wlLh no way Lo consolldaLe Lhelr equally lmporLanL clalms ln a new and emergenL and lnLegraLlve growLh. ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe Lco-8omanLlc aLmosphere was all aglow wlLh yesLerday. CenLral Lo mosL of Lhe Lco-LheorlsLs was Lhe noLlon LhaL someLhlng had gone horrlbly wrong, LhaL somebody or someLhlng had made a Lerrlble mlsLake, LhaL hlsLory was prlmarlly Lhe shadow of a greaL and helnous Crlme, and LhaL salvaLlon, above all, was Lhe resurrecLlon of Lhe dead and dlsmembered aradlse LosL. varlous LheorlsLs would seL Lhelr Way 8ack machlne Lo dlfferenL daLes, dependlng prlmarlly, lL seemed, on whaL Lhey personally dlsllked mosL abouL modernlLy. 8ecause dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon are now confused, coltote lLself becomes, noL also a mode of emergenL LransformaLlon LhaL dlscloses deeper and wlder worlds, buL prlmarlly a Jlstottloq force LhaL conceals and conLorLs boLh a pote naLure and my Lruly ptlstloe self. CulLure ls noL a LransformaLlve emergence of greaLer dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon LhaL coo go Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon/allenaLlon. no, culLure ls prlmarlly an allenaLlng force LhaL necessarlly and nasLlly separaLes humans from naLure and me from myself. And so above all, l musL geL away from culLure and geL back Lo naLure, back Lo a wllderness LhaL expresses a pure naLure and my own mosL auLhenLlc lmpulses. CulLure ls fundamenLally a crlme of dlsLorLlon, and l musL seek behlnd Lhls dlsLorLlon for Lhe LruLh of pure naLure and Lhe LruLh of my pure self. (1haL back Lo naLure" mlghL be headed ln a preconvenLlonal and noL posLconvenLlonal dlrecLlon dld noL seem Lo dawn on Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs, or aL any raLe dld noL deLer Lhem ln Lhe leasL. When dlfferenLlaLlon ls confused wlLh dlssoclaLlon, regresslon ls confused wlLh salvaLlon.)33 And so Lhe search for aradlse LosL commenced. llrsL sLop on Lhe Way 8ack was Lhe medleval age, whlch was euloglzed by many 8omanLlcs (Lhen and now) as an organlcally seamless socleLy" whose members were LlghLly woven LogeLher ln a neL of meanlng LhaL dld noL yeL sever culLure and naLure. 1hls socleLy cerLalnly dld noL dlfferenLlaLe Lhe 8lg 1hree-seven body orlflces demandlng seven planeLs ls lndeed a LlghL organlzaLlon. Cn Lhe oLher hand, Lhere was LhaL nasLlness of Lhe domlnaLor hlerarchles of klng and ope and hypermascullne Cod: perhaps, afLer all, 'Lls noL Lhe aradlse soughL. 1he nexL, and by far Lhe mosL popular sLop on Lhe 8egress Lxpress, was classlcal Creece, Lhe admlraLlon for, even worshlp of whlch, reached fevered proporLlons. lor Lhe anclenL Creeks represenLed Lo Lhls Age a mode of llfe ln whlch Lhe hlghesL ln man, hls asplraLlon Lo form and clarlLy was aL one wlLh hls naLure and wlLh all of naLure. lL was an era of unlLy and harmony wlLhln man, ln whlch LhoughL and feellng, morallLy and senslblllLy were one, ln whlch Lhe form whlch man sLamped on hls llfe wheLher moral, pollLlcal or splrlLual flowed from hls own naLural belng, and was noL lmposed on lL by Lhe force of raw wlll." 34 never mlnd LhaL Lhe force of raw wlll had ln facL made approxlmaLely one ouL of every Lhree people lnLo slaves, and assured a vlrLually ldenLlcal faLe for all women. 1hls, of course, dld noL sLop Schlller from slnglng: When poeLry's maglc cloak SLlll wlLh dellghL enfolded LruLh Llfe's fulness flowed Lhrough creaLlon And Lhere felL whaL never more wlll feel. Man acknowledged a hlgher noblllLy ln naLure 1o press her Lo love's breasL. . . . 1he Lco camp conLlnued unabaLed (and vlrLually unchanged) lnLo many of Loday's ecophllosophles and new paradlgm" movemenLs, whlch have Laken up Lhe 8egress Lxpress buL ln even more enLhuslasLlc forms. 1he ecofemlnlsLs do noL aL all approve of anclenL Creece (paLrlarchal), buL raLher prefer Lhe lmmedlaLely precedlng perlod of horLlculLural socleLy, ruled by Lhe CreaL MoLher, where women, who dld mosL of Lhe producLlve work (women produced abouL 80 percenL of Lhe food ln such socleLles), aL leasL shared ln many of Lhe publlc pollcy declslons. 1hls ofLen produced whaL has been called equallLarlan" socleLles, or whaL 8lane Llsler calls parLnershlp" culLure. 8uL LhaL parLnershlp, we have seen, was noL esLabllshed by consclous cholce ln Lhe noosphere, buL raLher by luck and happensLance ln Lhe blosphere: lL was Lhe producL of a hoe, noL a muLual recognlLlon. Such predlfferenLlaLed socleLles are no model for an lnLegraLlve parLnershlp culLure, Lhey are models for blologlcal slavery. And Lhus Lhe acLual sLaLlsLlcs Lell Lhe real sLory: as Lenskl's masslve daLa makes obvlous, an asLonlshlng 44 percenL of Lhese socleLles engaged ln frequenL warfare and over 30 percenL ln lnLermlLLenL warfare (whlch effecLlvely challenges Lhe noLlon LhaL Lhe CreaL MoLher socleLles were peace-lovlng"), 61 percenL had prlvaLe properLy rlghLs, 14 percenL had slavery, and 43 percenL had brlde prlce. And leL us dellcaLely lgnore Lhe facL LhaL many horLlculLural socleLles pracLlced rlLual human sacrlflce, whlch was requlred, among oLher Lhlngs, Lo lnsure crop ferLlllLy (one such slLe revealed elghLy one-year-old glrls sacrlflced Lo Lhe CreaL MoLher). 1hese horLlculLural socleLles were anyLhlng buL pure and prlsLlne," as Lhe ecomascullnlsLs Lhemselves have aggresslvely polnLed ouL. Cn Lhe oLher hand, Loday's ecomascullnlsLs have pushed Lhe Way 8ack machlne Lo lLs human llmlLs. 1hey do noL aL all approve of horLlculLural socleLles (Lhe heaven of Lhe ecofemlnlsLs)-ln facL, Lhe beglnnlng of fotmloq ls for Lhem Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe greaL Crlme of PumanlLy, of whlch lndusLrlallzaLlon ls merely Lhe lnevlLable endgame of planLlng seeds and Lhus lnLerferlng" wlLh pure" naLure. (1hls ls one of Lhe reasons LhaL ecomascullnlsLs and ecofemlnlsLs ofLen do noL geL along well-one's pure and prlsLlne naLure" ls Lhe oLher's prlmal crlme agalnsL pure and prlsLlne naLure"-Lhe reason ls LhaL pure and prlsLlne naLure" ls pure ldeology Lo whlch boLh camps equally succumb, and Lhus each ls lrrlLaLed LhaL Lhe oLher ls lnfrlnglng on lLs LerrlLory.) 8alph MeLzner, represenLlng a long llne of ecomascullnlsLs, explalns LhaL ln Lraclng back Lhe hlsLorlcal orlglns of Lhe spllL beLween human consclousness and naLure"-and noLlce already LhaL ln speaklng only of a spllL," he ls noL dlsLlngulshlng beLween dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, and so he ls golng Lo have Lo push back Lo Lhe vety beqlooloq ln order Lo geL beneaLh Lhe Crlme, because every dlfferenLlaLlon ls golng Lo be lnLerpreLed as a dlsLorLlon-lL ls posslble Lo dlscern furLher layers of dlsLorLlon, furLher cholce-polnLs and culLural LransformaLlons LhaL lead Lo deeper dlssoclaLlon and allenaLlon. 1he flrsL movemenL Loward a conLrolllng, alLerlng aLLlLude Loward naLure came wlLh Lhe neollLhlc [horLlculLural] domesLlcaLlon, Len Lhousand Lo Lwelve Lhousand years ago, when Lhe hunLlng-gaLherlng way of llfe LhaL we had pracLlced for hundreds of Lhousands of years, aLLuned Lo Lhe changlng seasons and rhyLhms of llfe, gave way Lo herdlng and farmlng economles, seLLlemenL ln small vlllages and Lowns, Lhe accumulaLlon and hoardlng of surpluses, raldlng and warrlng upon nelghborlng Lrlbes, and so forLh." 33 And so Lhere we have lL. 1he 8egress Lxpress crashes lnLo ground zero, beyond whlch lL cannoL go and sLlll call lLself human. 1here ls Lhe ulLlmaLe LosL aradlse: prlor even Lo Lhe lnvenLlon of Lhe wheel, Lhe prlsLlne and pure sLaLe ls Lo be found ln an updaLed verslon of Lhe noble savage ln small foraglng Lrlbes. All of Lhls ls Lold ln Lhe mosL ldylllc Lerms. 1he Lyplcal day was a nlce naLure hlke, Lhen a llLLle male bondlng ln Lhe greaL hunL, Lhen home Lo Lhe women, barefooL, pregnanL, around Lhe campflre, smoke some herb, a llLLle slnglng (naLure loves me, Lhls l know, for Lhe ralndrops Lell me so . . ."). And leL us convenlenLly forgeL LhaL, as Lenskl reporLs, Lhe average llfe expecLancy was 22.3 years, one ouL of Lhree lnfanLs were Lhrown away" for populaLlon conLrol, 10 percenL of Lhese socleLles had slavery, 37 percenL had brlde prlce, and 38 percenL engaged ln frequenL or lnLermlLLenL warfare. . . . And so Lhe search would go, scraplng more and more layers of depLh off Lhe kosmos ln search of a prlsLlne and foooJotloool paradlse, beyond whlch all evoluLlon was Lhen LhoughL Lo be a groLesque mlsLake. 1he represenLaLlves of Lhls aradlse were Lhen ln possesslon of a ctltlpoe of coltote, Lhey belleved, LhaL gave Lhem lmmense power ln condemnaLory rheLorlc for all Lhlngs modern, or raLher, all Lhlngs pasL Lhe chosen paradlsalcal epoch. noL only dld Lhls condemnaLory rheLorlc ploL Lhe course of humanlLy's horrlflc lall, lL gave Lhese crlLlcs Lhe key Lo SalvaLlon, because Lhe aradlse LosL, from whlch we had egreglously devlaLed, would also be Lhe romlsed Land, Lo whlch we musL all reLurn (followlng Lhe dlrecLlons of Lhose who possessed Lhe chosen crlLlque). ln all of Lhese parLlcular Lco camps (from Lhe 8omanLlc era Lo Loday), Lhe resulL of Lhe regresslve sllde-of Lhe fallure Lo undersLand Lhe dlfference beLween dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon-resulLs usually ln a raLher duallsLlc, Manlchaean, almosL ZoroasLrlan, worldvlew. 1here ls Lhe qooJ splrlL (prlsLlne naLure) and Lhe boJ splrlL (human lnLervenLlon lnLerpreLed as any devlaLlon from harmony wlLh naLure"). 8uL harmony wlLh naLure" ls lmposslble Lo deflne or even lndlcaLe. We already saw Lhe ecofemlnlsLs euloglze farmlng socleLles as belng most ln harmony wlLh Lhe seasonal currenLs of naLure and Lhe CreaL MoLher, whlle ecomascullnlsLs damn farmlng alLogeLher as tbe prlmordlal Crlme agalnsL naLure. 1he ecomascullnlsLs, of course, Lhen clalm LhaL Lhe even earller Lrlbal and foraglng llfe represenLed pure and prlsLlne harmony wlLh naLure. 8uL Lhese Lrlbes cooked, bullL shelLers, creaLed cloLhlng, enLered lnLo rlLuals Lo lnfluence Lhe ouLcome of Lhe hunL, and so forLh. 1hese are all lnLerferences wlLh naLure" of one sorL or anoLher. lL soon becomes obvlous LhaL, slnce harmony wlLh naLure" ls lmposslble Lo deflne ln any way LhaL allows humans Lo be anyLhlng oLher Lhan prlmaLes, Lhen each Lco-LheorlsL slmply and arblLrarlly decldes whaL he or she doesn'L llke abouL Lhe currenL of humanlLy's necessary dlfferenLlaLlons. Llke lLs Lgo cousln, Lhls Lco-sLance has lLs own sad paLhos and absoluLe lrony. 1he Lgo-LnllghLenmenL seL ouL Lo free Lros from lLs heLeronomy, lLs lmmerslon ln conformlsL and herd menLallLles, and lL soughL Lhls auLonomy wlLh such force LhaL lL wenL Loo far lnLo allenaLlon, and ended up wlLh Lros degeneraLlng lnLo hobos: seeklng freedom, lL found only fear and allenaLlon, whlch bound lL even more LlghLly Lo LhaL whlch lL wlshed Lo Lranscend. And Lhe Lco camps, so lnLensely deslrlng lnserLlon lnLo a Larger Llfe, an Agape LhaL embraced Lhe depLh of Lhe kosmos wlLh [oyful Love and Care, ended up scrapplng layers and layers of depLh off Lhe unlverse ln search of Lhe prlmal ground where Lhls lnserLlon could occur: lL reduced Lhe deeper and hlgher Lo Lhe lower and shallower, a reducLlon and regresslon and levellng LhaL, by any oLher name, ls 1hanaLos. ln search of a larger llfe, Lhey found only a morbld deaLh (l.e., a lesser depLh), a rancld levellng of [usL Lhose dlfferenLlaLlons LhaL allowed Lhelr search ln Lhe flrsL place. 1hls levellng," says Pabermas, can also be seen ln Lhe dlachronlc comparlson of modern form of llfe wlLh pre- modern ones. 1he hlgh prlce earller exacLed from Lhe mass of Lhe populaLlon (ln Lhe dlmenslons of bodlly labor, maLerlal condlLlons, posslblllLles of lndlvldual cholce, securlLy of law and punlshmenL, pollLlcal parLlclpaLlon, and schoollng) ls barely even noLlced."36 WhaL ls noLlced, ln Lhese Lco-schools, ls LhaL Loday's world ls Cod-forsaken. AL some polnL ln Lhe hlsLorlcal (or prehlsLorlcal) post-aL some polnL ln yesLerday's tlme-we have acLually JevloteJ from Lhe CreaL SplrlL, we have dlssoclaLed from Lhe CreaL Coddess. And lL ls Lhls duallsLlc noLlon-Lhe noLlon LhaL we coo profoundly devlaLe from Lhe acLual CurrenL of Lhe kosmos-LhaL ofLen seLs up a regresslve ZoroasLrlan worldvlew, a worldvlew LhaL overlooks Lhe facL LhaL Lhe CreaL SplrlL, lf lL really ls CreaL, musL be behlnd even Lhose moves LhaL look Lo us llke devlaLlons. All of whlch overlooks, as Zen would have lL, LhaL LhaL whlch one can devlaLe from ls noL Lhe Lrue 1ao." 37 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco: Lhe flaLland Lwlns locked ln Lhe dance of lronlc self-desLrucLlon, boLh conLrlbuLlng equally Lo Lhe follote of lnLegraLlon. 1he one absoluLlzes Lhe noosphere, Lhe oLher absoluLlzes Lhe blosphere, nelLher of whlch alone can lnLegraLe Lhe oLher. And LhaL whlch does noL conLrlbuLe Lo Lhe lnLegraLlon of boLh conLrlbuLes dlrecLly Lo Lhe desLrucLlon of each. lL was ln Lhls cllmaLe of muLual repugnance-Lgo versus Lco-LhaL Lwo evenLs would emerge LhaL alLered Lhe course of hlsLory lrrevocably. Cne was Lhe dlscovery of evoluLlon. 13 1be uomloooce of tbe uesceoJets lt ls tbe tlme of tbe qoJs tbot bove fleJ ooJ of tbe qoJ tbot ls comloq. lt ls tbe tlme of oeeJ, becoose lt lles ooJet o Jooble lock ooJ o Jooble Not. tbe No-mote of tbe qoJs tbot bove fleJ ooJ tbe Not-yet of tbe qoJ tbot ls comloq. -MA81ln PLluLCCL8 8C1P 1PL LCC camps and Lhe Lco camps, sLarLlng ouL wlLh Lhe besL and even noblesL of lnLenLlons, had paradoxlcally broughL abouL preclsely whaL Lhey had seL ouL Lo eradlcaLe. 1he reason was falrly slmple: slnce boLh camps were (and sLlll are) playlng on Lhe same flaLland fleld, Lhen Lhe more one pole succeeds, Lhe more Lhe excluded pole reLurns ln paradoxlcal forms-Lhe more Lhe reLurn of Lhe repressed (or regressed)" comes Lo haunL Lhe house of lLs orlglnaLor. Lacklng a holarchlcal AscenL Lo (and uescenL from) Lhe nondual Cne-whlch negaLes and preserves boLh Lgo and Lco ln a nondual Lranscendence and embrace-Lhere was only a muLual oeqotloo, and muLual tepoqoooce, of one camp for Lhe oLher. 1he loteqtotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree (person, culLure, naLure), now LhaL Lhey had been flnally JlffeteotloteJ: Lhls was (and ls) Lhe slngle greaLesL Lask faclng modernlLy (and posLmodernlLy). ln slmpllfled form, whaL was demanded was Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe lnLerlor or sub[ecLlve worlds (l and we) wlLh Lhe exLerlor or ob[ecLlve (naLure), or agaln, Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lgo and Lco. 1he greaL dlfferenLlaLlon had already, lrreverslbly, lrrevocably occurred. WhaL Lhe world awalLed, anxlously, was a volce slgnallng lnLegraLlon. 1PL A8AuCx Cl uAMACL 8oLh Lhe Lgo camps and Lhe Lco camps had responded wlLh Lhelr own heallng agenda, only Lo flnd LhaL boLh agendas aggravaLed whaL Lhey were meanL Lo sooLhe and lnflamed whaL Lhey were meanL Lo cure. 8oLh camps were Lhelr own worsL enemy, and boLh camps conLrlbuLed Lo a vlolenL fracLurlng of Lhe world Lhey were supposed Lo heal. We already saw LhaL Lhe raLlonal Lgo Look as lLs goal Lhe LransformaLlon from egocenLrlc lncllnaLlons and eLhnocenLrlc domlnaLor hlerarchles Lo a worldcenLrlc sLance of unlversal plurallsm, alLrulsm, benevolence, and freedom. lL was a declaraLlon of lndependence" ln more ways Lhan one: lndependence from rellglous and myLhlc domlnaLlon, from sLaLe-lmposed lnLerference ln personal llfe, from conformlsL modes of Lhe herd menLallLy, and from naLure concelved as a source of noL-yeL-moral drlves and lncllnaLlons. 1he auLonomy of Lhe raLlonal Lgo had Lo be foughL for, had Lo be acLlvely secured agalnsL all Lhose forces of heLeronomy LhaL consLanLly were aL work Lo pull lL down from lLs worldcenLrlc sLance of unlversal Lolerance and benevolence. 1hese values-ln parLlcular, unlversal plurallsm, alLrulsm, and freedom-are whaL 1aylor calls Lhe Lhree hypergoods" (goods LhaL are felL Lo be beLLer Lhan oLher goods) LhaL have mosL deeply characLerlzed modernlLy (and posLmodernlLy), and Lhey are values LhaL no doubL consLlLuLe much of Lhe Lrue dlgnlLy of modernlLy. 8uL no sooner had Lhe raLlonal Lgo secured some noLlon of Lhese hypergoods Lhan lL began noL [usL Lo dlfferenLlaLe from oLher goods, buL Lo allenaLe Lhem, dlssoclaLe Lhem, repress Lhem, seal Lhem off. And ln all dlrecLlons: 1. 1he raLlonal Lgo LoLally refused LransraLlonal and ttoospetsoool occaslons-no more AscenL!" ln undersLandably wanLlng Lo preserve Lhe auLonomy lL had foughL so hard Lo secure, lL laLched onLo lL wlLh a deaLh grlp, and pressed lLs own auLonomous agency ln an exLreme and exorblLanL form-whaL we wlll call hyperagency"-and Lhls meanL, above all else, noL handlng lLs newly won freedom over Lo anyLhlng LhaL looked even remoLely llke a Cod or SplrlL. 2. lL compleLely lgnored, almosL LoLally forgoL, lLs own lotetpetsoool dlmenslon, Lhe dlmenslon of dlaloglcal and lnLersub[ecLlve communlcaLlon, ln favor of Lhe merely monologlcal and ob[ecLlfylng mode, whlch ls also a very bypetoqeotlc mode, ln LhaL Lhe commooloos of lnLersub[ecLlvlLy are dlLched ln favor of Lhe monologues of lndlvldual power and agency. 1he Age of Man: Lhe dlsengaged (hyperagenLlc) sub[ecL sLarlng aL oLher humans as ob[ecLs of lnformaLlon" and noL sub[ecLs ln communlcaLlon" or communlon. 3. And where lL could have Lranscended and lncluded Lhe ptepetsoool dlmenslon of elan vlLal, bloLlc rooLs, organlc rlchness, lL all Loo ofLen slmply dlssoclaLed and repressed Lhem (ln a hyperagenLlc fashlon: noLhlng would Louch lLs freedom"). 1he dlsenchanLmenL of Lhe naLural world, boLh wlLhouL and wlLhln. (See flg. 12-6.) Lach of Lhose dlssoclaLlons and allenaLlons-of Lhe Lranspersonal, Lhe lnLerpersonal, and Lhe prepersonal-would severely curLall lLs cherlshed freedom. And Lhus Lhe paradox of damage: ln aggresslvely pursulng lnLense freedom, lL manufacLured masslve unfreedom. ln seeklng freedom-auLonomy noL bound by any sorL of heLeronomy-lL ended up cuL off from splrlL, cuL off from naLure, cuL off from lLs own body, cuL off from lLs fellows. And Lhe worse lL felL, Lhe more lL lnLenslfled lLs hyperagenLlc wlLhdrawal and dlsenchanLmenL: Lhe unfreer lL became. noL wlLhln and beyond, buL wlLhln and wlLhdrawn. ln shorL, ln all Lhose domalns (splrlL, naLure, body, clvlcs), corpses lay sLrewn everywhere on Lhe road Lo a reckless lndependence. 1he raLlonal-ego, hyperagenLlc and hyperlndependenL, Look lLs own relaLlve auLonomy (whlch had lndeed lncreased slgnlflcanLly), and blew lL up Lo absoluLe proporLlons. ln undersLandably wlshlng Lo lncrease freedom and llberLy, lL paradoxlcally lefL masslve road klll everywhere on Lhe hlghway Lo raLlonal heaven. 8uL Lhe same paradox of damage beseL Lhe Lco camps. ln sLarLlng ouL wlLh Lhe express lnLenLlon of Jeceotetloq Lhe Lgo, of lnserLlng lL back lnLo Lhe larger currenLs of Llfe and Love, Lhe Lco camps ended up-lnadverLenLly, paradoxlcally-champlonlng modes of knowlng and feellng LhaL were ofLen egocenLrlc and flagranLly narclsslsLlc. ln wlshlng Lo overLhrow Lhe Lgo-and sLlll belng sLuck, wlLh Lhelr opponenLs, ln monologlcal flaLland-Lhe Lco camps lnLroduced Lhe modern world Lo a glorlflcaLlon of Jlvloe eqolsm: Lhe ouLrageous reLurn and exalLaLlon of LhaL whlch lL expressly seL ouL Lo overcome. lL sLarLed lnnocenLly enough. lL stotteJ, as all modern and posLmodern currenLs do, wlLh a worldcenLrlc sLance secured ln raLlonal space-a sLance of unlversal plurallsm. 1PL LCC SLluL ln1C ulvlnL LCClSM 8aLlonallLy, or worldcenLrlc and unlversal perspecLlvlsm, operaLes ln a worldspace LhaL allows, as all sLrucLures do, several dlfferenL and apparenLly conLradlcLory sLances, whlch can be confuslng lf we don'L look carefully aL whaL ls acLually occurrlng. 1hus, on Lhe one hand, raLlonallLy can Lend Loward a raLher rlgld verslon of unlversal" LruLh, operaLlng ln a very absLracL and mechanlcal and formulalc fashlon, lgnorlng all lndlvlduallLy and all parLlculars and all dlfferences. unlversal" comes Lo mean rlgldly unlform," and an oLherwlse admlrably worldcenLrlc perspecLlve comes Lo mean musL be Lhe same for everybody everywhere." And, we mlghL say, raLlonallLy Lends flrsL Lo emerge ln Lhls fashlon, ln a monologlcal and ob[ecLlfylng unlversallsm LhaL ls, ln facL, a oolfotmltotloolsm (and LhaL ls cerLalnly Lhe way lL flrsL emerged ln Lhe Age of 8eason). lL undersLands nlcely Lhe worldcenLrlc perspecLlve, buL ln lLs exclLemenL lL goes much Loo far and lmaglnes LhaL Lhe worldcenLrlc perspecLlve ls, ln all lLs parLlculars, necessarlly Lhe same for everybody everywhere, wlLh all colorful dlfferences lroned ouL of Lhe absLracLlon. 1hus, ln Lhe Age of 8eason and Lhe LnllghLenmenL-wlLh Lhe exhllaraLlng exclLemenL of newly emergenL reason, buL reason capLured almosL excluslvely by Lhe monologlcal and ob[ecLlfylng mode-oolfotmltotloolsm was all Lhe rage. 1he cenLral and by far Lhe domlnanL reason LhaL myLhlc-rellglons were re[ecLed by Lhe Age of LnllghLenmenL was LhaL Lhese rellglons were everywhere Jlffeteot from each oLher-Lhls god here, LhaL goddess Lhere, one creaLlon sLory here, anoLher Lhere. Slnce Lhey all dlsagreed wlLh each oLher, how could Lhey posslbly all be Lrue? WhaL concelvable use could Lhey have excepL Lo dlvlde and fragmenL humanlLy? reclsely because Lhey all lacked a Lrue unlversallLy, a Lrue worldcenLrlc perspecLlve, Lhen Lhey musL be re[ecLed: no more myLhs!" meanL no more lsolaLed and conLradlcLory LruLhs!" 1here Lhus arose a poslLlve manla for Lhe unlversal and common LruLhs" of humanklnd, LruLhs LhaL could speak Lo everybody, and Lhus LruLhs LhaL musL be Lruly Lrue," deeply Lrue, for all peoples. All merely lndlvldual preferences and LasLes, all pecullarlLles, all local dlfferences, were dlsmlssed as noL belng parL of a common and unlversal humanlLy. La rellglon naLurelle," proclalmed volLalre, can only lnclude les prlnclpes de morale communs au genre humaln." And ur. Samuel Clarke spoke for an enLlre age when he sald, WhaL ls noL unlversally made known Lo all men ls noL needful for any." 1hls search for a unlversal and unvarylng seL of codes and naLural law" (meanlng unlversal law) swepL Lhrough every branch of learnlng, sclence, pollLlcal and soclal Lheory-and reached rlghL down lnLo Lhe arLs, lnLo poeLry, lnLo palnLlng, lnLo archlLecLure. ur. !ohnson's pronouncemenLs on unlformlLarlanlsm ln aesLheLlc Lheory are well known, lL ls, he says, a general rule of poeLry LhaL all approprlaLed Lerms of arL should be sunk ln general expresslons," whlch meanL, as he puL lL, poeLry ls Lo speak a unlversal language." A unlversal language, a common humanlLy. 1homas WharLon, Lhe Lngllsh poeL and llLerary hlsLorlan, came Lo vlew hls youLhful embrace of CoLhlc archlLecLure as a devlaLlon" lnLo a merely parLlcular sLyle, and recanLed hls grlevous error wlLh Lhls exclamaLlon, offered ln 1782: 1hy powerful hand has broke Lhe CoLhlc chaln, And broughL my bosom back Lo LruLh agaln. 1o LruLh, by no pecullar LasLe conflned, Whose unlversal paLLern sLrlkes manklnd. And Lhus, fot oeotly two ceototles, Lhe efforLs made for lmprovemenL and correcLlon ln bellefs, ln lnsLlLuLlons, and ln arL had been, ln Lhe maln, conLrolled by Lhe assumpLlon LhaL, ln each phase of hls acLlvlLy, man should conform as nearly as posslble Lo a sLandard concelved as unlversal, uncompllcaLed, lmmuLable, oolfotm fot evety totloool beloq." 1 Splnoza, no doubL, summed lL up besL: 1he purpose of naLure ls Lo make men unlform, as chlldren of a common moLher." A unlversal language, a common humanlLy, a unlform paLLern. lL was a noble enough cause, and Lhere are some lmporLanL LruLhs ln lL. lor we all, all of us, share Lhe capaclLy for lmages and symbols, for concepLs and deslres, for asplraLlons and hopes, we are all born from a womb and flnd our way Lo a Lomb, we all eaL and labor and love and learn. And Lhus, durlng lLs flrsL large-scale emergence, Lhe admlrably worldcenLrlc sLance of raLlonallLy Look all Lhe varlous perspecLlves of dlfferenL peoples, places, races, and creeds, and aLLempLed Lo absLracL Lhose lLems LhaL Lhey all agreed upon, LhaL were noL merely ldlosyncraLlc or egocenLrlc or eLhnocenLrlc. 8uL ln lLs franLlc rush Lo flnd and speak a unlversal language"-wheLher ln sclence, pollLlcs, arL, or rellglon (uelsm)-lL slmply sLeamrollered over every slngle Lrace of lndlvlduallLy wherever lL appeared. Pumans were monologlcally ob[ecLlfled, and only ob[ecLlfled, Lo flnd Lhelr commonallLles (and Lhls, we have seen, was a cenLral pro[ecL of Lhe Lgo-LnllghLenmenL camps). 8uL raLlonallLy can rlse Lo lLs fullesL poLenLlal and flnd lLs falresL expresslon when lL olso pursues more even- handedly Lhe acLual space of unlversal perspecLlvlsm. 1he whole polnL of raLlonallLy and lLs capaclLy for mulLlple perspecLlves ls noL slmply Lo absLracL Lhe commonallLles (lmporLanL as LhaL mlghL be, for example, ln medlclne), buL Lo puL oneself ln Lhe shoes of oLhers and Lhus flnd a muLual enrlchmenL and appreclaLlon of dlfferences. 1hls ls Lhe some worldcenLrlc raLlonallLy, buL now celebraLlng all Lhe mulLlple perspecLlves and noL merely sLeamrollerlng Lhem lnLo monoLonous unlformlLy. And lL was preclsely Lhls celebtotloo of Jlvetslty LhaL was behlnd so much of Lhe Lco-8omanLlc rebelllon agalnsL Lhe Lgo-LnllghLenmenL. Lco-8omanLlclsm ofLen called lLself anLlraLlonal," buL ln Lhls parLlcular regard lL was acLually anLl-unlformlLarlan." lL sLarLed from Lhe some totloool stooce of unlversal perspecLlvlsm, buL lL emphaslzed Lhe perspecLlves" lnsLead of Lhe unlversal." 1hls Lrend ls alLogeLher unmlsLakable ln Lhe early 8omanLlcs. noLlce how Schlegel moves from Lhe raLlonal- unlversal perspecLlve seamlessly lnLo Lhe cherlshlng of culLural dlfferences: Cne cannoL become a connolsseur wlLhouL unlversallLy of mlnd, LhaL ls, wlLhouL Lhe flexlblllLy whlch enables us, Lhrough Lhe renunclaLlon of personal llklngs and bllnd preference for whaL we are accusLomed Lo, Lo Lranspose ourselves lnLo LhaL whlch ls pecullar Lo oLher peoples and Llmes, and, so Lo say, Lo feel Lhls from lLs cenLre ouLwards." lL was preclsely Lhe decenLerlng or worldcenLerlng capaclLy of raLlonallLy LhaL allowed culLural dlfferences Lo be cherlshed and even glorlfled, someLhlng LhaL had oevet happened on a large scale anywhere before ln hlsLory (lL ls slmply lnconcelvable, for example, LhaL one horLlculLural socleLy would celebraLe Lhe speclflc values of anoLher). eople, wroLe Wackenroder aL Lhe Llme, always Lhlnk of Lhe polnL aL whlch Lhey sLand as Lhe cenLre of gravlLy of Lhe unlverse, and slmllarly Lhey regard Lhelr own feellng as Lhe cenLre of all LhaL ls beauLlful ln arL, pronounclng, as from Lhe [udge's seaL, Lhe flnal verdlcL upon all Lhlngs, wlLhouL rememberlng LhaL no one has appolnLed Lhem Lo be [udges. lf you are unable Lo enLer dlrecLly lnLo Lhe feellngs of so many belngs dlfferenL from yourself and, by peneLraLlng Lo Lhelr hearLs, feel Lhelr works, [Lhen] sLrlve aL leasL, by uslng Lhe lnLellecL as a connecLlng bond, Lo aLLaln such an undersLandlng of Lhem lndlrecLly." 1hls was noL slmply a Lolerance for dlfferenL polnLs of vlew, alLhough LhaL was cerLalnly parL of expanslve raLlonallLy's worldcenLrlc pro[ecL (even Lhe Lgo camps would champlon Lolerance). 1he 8omanLlc move was LhaL and much more: lL was raLher a dlrecL aLLempL Lo culLlvaLe an undersLandlng and a sympaLheLlc valuaLlon of dlfferenL polnLs of vlew, botb as a means of enrlchlng one's own lnner llfe ooJ as a way Lo glve ob[ecLlve valldlLy Lo dlfferenL culLures and valuaLlons. 1hus, where kanL would search for Lhe unlversal ln all humans, Lhe 8omanLlcs, sLandlng ln Lhe some open space of worldcenLrlc raLlonallLy, would search ouL all Lhe dlfferences. Accordlngly, an eLhlc of lndlvlduallLy, of dlverslLy, of ldlosyncrasles, of Lhe exoLlc, of Lhe deeply personal, even of Lhe sLrange and welrd, of Lhe anyLhlng-ouL-of-Lhe-ordlnary, rushed ln Lo dlsplace Lhe prevlous unlformlLarlanlsm. lL ls preclsely lndlvlduallLy," as lrledrlch Schlegel would puL lL, LhaL ls Lhe orlglnal and eLernal Lhlng ln men. 1he culLlvaLlon and developmenL of Lhls lndlvlduallLy [ls] one's hlghesL vocaLlon." Cr novalls on arL: 1he more personal, local, pecullar, of lLs own Llme, a poem ls, Lhe nearer lL sLands Lo Lhe cenLer of poeLry." Schlegel on llLeraLure: lrom Lhe romanLlc polnL of vlew, Lhe abnormal specles of llLeraLure also have Lhelr value-even Lhe eccenLrlc and monsLrous-as maLerlals and preparaLory exerclses for unlversallLy"-unlversallLy ln Lhe sense LhaL evetytbloq ls Lo be honored. As he puLs lL, uoes admlraLlon for one really requlre of us depreclaLlon of Lhe oLher? Can we noL granL LhaL each ls ln lLs own way greaL and admlrable, even Lhough Lhe one ls uLLerly unllke Lhe oLher? 1he world ls wlde, and many Lhlngs can coexlsL ln lL slde by slde." 1he ldeallzaLlon of dlverslLy. 1hls was, ln very large measure, Lhe dlrecL lnfluence of Lhe CreaL Chaln LheorlsLs, who, we have amply seen, saw dlverslLy and lenlLude as marks of Lhe superabundanL Lfflux and Coodness of Lhe ulvlne-Lhe vlslble, senslble Cod: Lhe greaLer Lhe varleLy, Lhe greaLer Lhe Coodness. 1he early 8omanLlcs, [usL llke Lhe LnllghLenmenL phllosophers, were Lhemselves dedlcaLed LheorlsLs of Lhe CreaL Chaln, and Lraced much of Lhelr herlLage Lo loLlnus (as we wlll see), so lL ls noL surprlslng ln Lhe leasL LhaL Lhey would euloglze and celebraLe, as Akenslde puL lL, Lhe falr varleLy of Lhlngs." MosL of Lhe pollLlcally correcL mulLlculLurallsLs" of Loday would, no doubL, be shocked and horrlfled Lo learn LhaL Lhelr ldeas come dlrecLly ln an unbroken llneage from laLo and loLlnus (Lhe dreaded LurocenLrlc, logocenLrlc laLo, noL Lo menLlon dead, whlLe, and male). 8uL Love[oy ls surely accuraLe ln hls appralsal: 1he dlscovery of Lhe lnLrlnslc worLh of dlverslLy, wlLh all of Lhe perlls laLenL ln lL, was one of Lhe greaL dlscoverles of Lhe human mlnd, and Lhe facL LhaL lL, llke so many oLher dlscoverles, has been Lurned by man Lo rulnous uses, ls no evldence LhaL lL ls ln lLself wlLhouL value. ln so far as lL was hlsLorlcally due Lo Lhe age-long lnfluence, culmlnaLlng ln Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, of Lhe [CreaL Chaln] prlnclple of lenlLude, we may seL lL down among Lhe mosL lmporLanL and poLenLlally Lhe mosL benlgn of Lhe manlfold consequences of LhaL lnfluence." 2 AL lLs very besL, Lhen, Lhe 8omanLlc ldeallzaLlon of dlverslLy Lended Lo noLhlng less Lhan an enlargemenL of human naLure lLself-Lo an lncrease of men's, and naLlons', undersLandlng and appreclaLlon of one anoLher, noL as mulLlple samples of an ldenLlcal model, buL as represenLaLlves of a leglLlmaLe and welcome dlverslLy of culLures and of lndlvldual reacLlons Lo Lhe world whlch we have ln common." 3 1he falr varleLy of Lhlngs." And Lhus, lL ls only a sllghL exaggeraLlon Lo say LhaL where Lhe Lgo-LnllghLenmenL pro[ecL of modernlLy would emphaslze oolvetsol oolfotmltotloolsm, Lhe Lco-8omanLlc pro[ecL, searchlng for a larger Llfe and Love beyond Lhe self-deflnlng Lgo, would emphaslze oolvetsol Jlvetsltotloolsm. 8oLh were oolvetsol sLances, because boLh sLood ln Lhe same posLconvenLlonal, worldcenLrlc space of reason. 8uL Lhelr alms were dlameLrlcally opposed, and Lhelr meLhods as well. 1he Lgo camp was sLlll lnLenL upon securlng lLs self-deflnlng freedom, auLonomy, and oqeocy ln an absoluLe and monologlcally aggresslve enLerprlse, Lhe Lco camp, on Lhe oLher hand, was desperaLely reachlng ouL for a larger and more varlegaLed Llfe and Love, enrlched wlLh Lhe commooloos of all lmaglnable varleLy-ln naLure and ln oLher culLures-and promoLlng dlverslLy and egallLarlanlsm wlLh a passlon. 1hls dlverslLarlanlsm would conLlnue unabaLed rlghL down Lo Loday's posLmodern" and mulLlculLural" movemenLs. And as much as posL-modern posLsLrucLurallsLs" llke Lo clalm wlld orlglnallLy for Lhelr muslngs, lL ls all rlghL Lhere ln Lhe orlglnal Lco-8omanLlc agenda (lncludlng, of course, Lhe emphasls on lndlvldual unlqueness and wlld orlglnallLy"). 8ead carefully Love[oy's summary of Lhe Lco-8omanLlc pro[ecL (and remember, Love[oy wroLe Lhls ln 1932, he could noL posslbly have had Lhe posLsLrucLurallsLs" and mulLlculLurallsLs" ln mlnd, even Lhough hls summary reads wlLh frlghLenlng accuracy Lhelr sLandard agenda, and noL lL alone, moreover, Love[oy ls descrlblng Lhe agenda as lL flrsL developed o ceototy ooJ o bolf ago): 1he lmmense mulLlpllcaLlon of genres and of verse-forms, Lhe admlsslon of Lhe aesLheLlc leglLlmacy of Lhe qeote mlxte, Lhe qot Je lo ooooce [rellshlng of dlfferences], Lhe naLurallzaLlon ln arL of Lhe groLesque", Lhe quesL for local color, Lhe endeavor Lo reconsLrucL ln lmaglnaLlon Lhe dlsLlncLlve lnner llfe of peoples remoLe ln Llme or space or ln culLural condlLlon, Lhe toloqe Jo mol [dlsplay of self], Lhe demand for parLlcularlzed fldellLy ln landscape-descrlpLlon, Lhe revulslon agalnsL slmpllclLy, Lhe dlsLrusL of unlversal formulas ln pollLlcs [or soclal Lheory], Lhe feellng of Lhe glory of Lhe lmperfecL", Lhe culLlvaLlon of lndlvldual, naLlonal, and raclal pecullarlLles, Lhe depreclaLlon of Lhe obvlous and Lhe general hlgh valuaLlon (wholly forelgn Lo mosL earller perlods) of orlglnallLy, and Lhe usually fuLlle and absurd self-consclous pursulL of LhaL aLLrlbuLe. 4 Where Lhe Lgo-LnllghLenmenL counseled each and all Lo be unlformly unlversal, Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs' deepesL deslre was Lo be absoluLely and even radlcally dlfferenL, LhaL ls, uLLerly and radlcally unlque. lL ls preclsely lndlvlduallLy," we heard lrledrlch Schlegel announce, LhaL ls Lhe orlglnal and eLernal Lhlng ln men." 1o whlch he adds, 1he culLlvaLlon and developmenL of Lhls lndlvlduallLy, as one's hlghesL vocaLlon, would be a dlvlne egolsm." lmaglne one's blqbest vocotloo belng, noL Lhe allevlaLlon of human sufferlng, noL Lhe promoLlon of unlversal Lolerance, noL selfless servlce, noL duLy or devoLlon Lo famlly or kln or naLlon or globe, noL compasslon and noL care: buL Lhe culLlvaLlon of dlvlne egolsm! 1here ls a worldcenLrlc cherlshlng gone caLasLrophlcally egocenLrlc. 1here ls Lhe Lco-8omanLlc sllde lnLo forms of ego-absorpLlon LhaL no Lgo camp would even dream of! ln facL, Lhls dlvlne egolsm was preclsely Lhe betetooomy LhaL Lhe Lgo camps were flghLlng!-and flghLlng because Lhls self-absorbed and self-glorlfylng sLance acLually pulls me down from Lhe hlgher and wlder sLance of worldcenLrlc embrace and compasslon-pulls me from worldcenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo egocenLrlc-pulls me away from Lhe fteeJom of a deeper and wlder self Lo Lhe conflnes of a shallower and narrower engagemenL, an engagemenL LhaL hurLs me as well as oLhers, because lL ls so much less Lhan whaL ls avallable, and Lhe lesser always Lears aL Lhe seams, and leaves an agony where [oy oughL Lo slng. And LhaL lndeed ls betetooomy-oLher-dlrecLedness-because Lhe egocenLrlc self ls noL my Lrue self, noL my hlgher and deeper worldcenLrlc self, buL raLher an addlcLlon Lo a lower lmpulse, renderlng me a slave of my own me- ness. ulvlne egolsm ls a slckly oLher wlLhln my own deeper posslblllLles. And Lhus, ln dlvlne egolsm, l am oLher- dlrecLed, off-cenLered, ouL of my Lrue self and ouL of my rlghL mlnd. 1he Lco-sllde lnLo an absoluLe anarchy of Lhe parLlcular, a rloL of lndlvldual dlfferences, a heap of Lhe necessarlly lsolaLed and fragmenLed, wlLh no commonallLles aL all, save a muLual dlvlne egolsm, whlch, aL boLLom, desplses Lhe exlsLence of all oLher egolsLs as well-Lhls fanaLlcal dlverslLarlanlsm promoLed a greaL deal of slckly and sLerlle lnLroverslon ln llLeraLure-a Llresome exhlblLlon of Lhe eccenLrlclLles of Lhe lndlvldual Lgo, Lhese eccenLrlclLles belng ofLen, as ls now noLorlous, merely convenLlons palnfully Lurned lnslde ouL. 1hus Lhe wheel came full clrcle, whaL may be called a pottlcolotlstlc oolfotmltotloolsm, a Lendency Lo seek Lo unlversallze Lhlngs orlglnally valued because Lhey were noL unlversal, found expresslon ln poeLry, ln a sorL of phllosophy, ln Lhe pollcles of greaL sLaLes and Lhe enLhuslasms of Lhelr populaLlons. lL has lenL lLself all Loo easlly Lo Lhe servlce of egoLlsm, and especlally-ln Lhe pollLlcal and soclal sphere-of Lhe klnd of collecLlve vanlLy whlch ls naLlonallsm or raclallsm. 1he bellef ln Lhe sooctlty of ooes lJlosyoctosy-especlally lf lL be a group ldlosyncrasy, and Lherefore susLalned and lnLenslfled by muLual flaLLery-ls rapldly converLed lnLo a bellef ln lLs superlorlLy. More Lhan one greaL people, ln Lhe course of Lhe pasL cenLury and a half, havlng flrsL made a god of lLs own pecullarlLles, good or bad or boLh, presenLly began Lo suspecL LhaL Lhere was no oLher god." 3 1he Lco-dlverslLarlan sllde lnLo egocenLrlc glorlflcaLlon. reclsely whaL lL had seL ouL Lo avold, lL now preemlnenLly embodled. And nowhere could Lhls be more clearly seen Lhan ln Lhe Lco-8omanLlc approach Lo whaL lL now called naLure." A uLnA1u8Lu nA1u8L ln Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, Lhe whole approach Lo naLure lLself underwenL a monumenLal shlfL (and by naLure" ln Lhls secLlon, l mean boLh naLure and naLure, or Lhe emplrlcal-sensory world wlLhouL and wlLhln. We wlll, ln Lhe nexL secLlon, use our more preclse deflnlLlons for an overall summary). naLure was no longer a syncreLlc lndlssoclaLlon, as ln maglc and also, Lo a lesser buL sLlll lmporLanL degree, ln myLhlc-membershlp (and Lhls newly emergenL dlfferenLlaLlon was lLself a sLep up, so Lo speak: lL was parL of Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, parL of Lhe dlgnlLy of modernlLy). 8ot oeltbet was naLure an embodlmenL of SplrlL or an expresslon of Lhe Cne (as ln laLo or loLlnus or LckharL-or Lao 1zu or Puang o or admasambhava). 8aLher, naLure became, flrsL and foremosL, Lhe source of egolc senLlmenL. naLure became naLure as lL makes me feel." AlLhough Lhls was of course called splrlLual"-Lhe pure and prlsLlne" encounLer wlLh a splrlLual naLure away from Lhe conflnes of culLure-lL was ln many cases, as we wlll see, Lhe slmple blosphere as reflecLed ln dlvlne egolsm-naLure as narclsslsLlc reflecLlng pond-a monologlcal naLure LhaL was, ln all respecLs, Lhe phoLographlc negaLlve of Lhe monologlcal ego. 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco were sLlll baLLllng lL ouL on Lhe flaL and faded landscape of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order-boLh of Lhem monologlcal Lo Lhe core. We have already Lraced Lhls general developmenL-Lhe collapse of nA1u8L (or SplrlL) Lo naLure (or Lhe emplrlcal Web of Llfe). 8uL Charles 1aylor comes Lo a slmllar concluslon based on a meLlculous readlng of LexLs of Lhe Llme, and Lhus lL ls lmporLanL Lo Louch bases wlLh hls presenLaLlon. lndeed, parL of 1aylor's Lask, ln 5ootces of tbe 5elf, ls Lo Lrace Lhls exLraordlnary shlfL ln our encounLer wlLh naLure, and he ls noL alone ln hls concluslons. l have been Lraclng a movemenL, lndeed, a masslve shlfL ln Lhe noLlon of naLure." 6 Cne aspecL of Lhls shlfL, he polnLs ouL, ls whaL we have been calllng Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos"-Lhe CreaL Polarchy of 8elng was collapsed lnLo a monologlcal and flaLland hollsm of observable exLerlors, namely, Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order. ln flaLland hollsm, as we have seen, naLure and reallLy are sLlll concelved as hlerarchlcal or holarchlcal (or composed of lnLerlocklng wholes), buL Lhese wholes are now all empltlcol (Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order, or Lhe unlversal sysLem, ls slmply how Lhe CreaL Polarchy looks when emplrlcally and monologlcally collapsed, lL ls Lhe resulL of sobtle reducLlonlsm). Slnce Lhe wholes and Lhe holarchles are now all emplrlcal, Lhen looet ttoosfotmotloo ls no longer needed Lo see a Lruer reallLy. Cne slmply pokes around, wlLh more sophlsLlcaLed lnsLrumenLs, ln one's already glven emplrlcal fleld. no ascesls, no yoga, no shlkLan-Laza, no personal ln[uncLlons or LransformaLlons are requlred Lo geL aL Lhe LruLh-one slmply opens one's eyes and sharpens one's monologlcal gaze. 1he radlcal LnllghLenmenL had offered lnsLrumenLal or calculaLlve reason as a way Lo orlenL Lhe Lgo Lo Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order, Lhe Lco-8omanLlc rebelllon chaffed aL Lhe Loo-ofLen excluslonary reason, and offered lnsLead seotlmeots as a way Lo feel" ourselves lnLo Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng whole. lL offered, we mlghL say, noL lnsLrumenLal reason buL lnsLrumenLal feellngs, feellngs LhaL allowed us Lo flL lnLo Lhe Web of Llfe as a parL and noL Lry Lo domlnaLe on Lhe whole. naLure-Lhe Lrue" or real" naLure-was Lhus dlsclosed Lo me prlmarlly ln feellngs, naLure was Lhe sum LoLal of whaL lL evoked or awakened ln me, as my own lnner naLure, and as my own pure and undlsLorLed feellngs. 1hls ls whaL 1aylor means when he says LhaL Lhls new orlenLaLlon Lo naLure was . . . concerned wlLh Lhe senLlmenLs whlch naLure awakens ln us. We reLurn Lo naLure, because lL brlngs ouL sLrong and noble feellngs ln us: feellngs of awe before Lhe greaLness of creaLlon, of peace before a pasLoral scene, of subllmlLy before sLorms and deserLed vasLnesses, of melancholy ln some lonely woodland spoL. naLure draws us because lL ls ln some way aLLuned Lo our feellngs, so LhaL lL can reflecL and lnLenslfy Lhose we already feel or else awaken Lhose whlch are dormanL. We Lurn Lo naLure, as we mlghL Lurn Lo muslc, Lo evoke and sLrengLhen Lhe besL ln us. 8uL always Lhe polnL lay ln Lhe feelloqs" (hls lLallcs). 7 1aylor's acuLe lnslghL ls LhaL Lhls naLure as senLlmenL" presupposes a profound denlal of Lhe laLonlc/loLlnlan noLlon of naLure as Lhe emboJlmeot of 5pltlt (or whaL 1aylor calls an onLlc logos"-anoLher way of saylng LhaL Lhls new" naLure was noL pott of Lhe kosmos buL was ltself Lhe eotlte cosmos of whlch we are now slmply a pott: we are merely a sLrand ln Lhe greaL Web, lnsLead of seelng LhaL Lhe Web ls merely a sLrand ln Lhe kosmos, whose Self l-l can become: Lhe Web lLself ls noL SplrlL, buL ls slmply a manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL). Accordlng Lo Lhls new undersLandlng, he says, Lhe meanlng LhaL Lhe naLural phenomena bear ls no longer deflned by Lhe . . . ldeas [or SplrlL] whlch Lhey embody. lL ls deflned Lhrough Lhe effecL of Lhe phenomena on us, ln Lhe reacLlons Lhey awaken. 1he afflnlLy beLween naLure and ourselves ls now medlaLed noL by an [onLlc or kosmlc] order buL by Lhe way LhaL naLure resonaLes ln us. Cur aLLunemenL wlLh naLure no longer conslsLs ln a recognlLlon of onLlc hlerarchy [Lhe CreaL Polarchy], buL ln belng able Lo release Lhe echo wlLhln ourselves." 8 1be eqolc ecbo . . . lL ls Lhe some flaLland Web of Llfe, Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng whole, buL now approached ln egolc senLlmenL and noL egolc loglc. 1aylor's well-argued polnL ls LhaL Lhey (Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco) are, ln essence, Lhe phoLographlc negaLlves of each oLher. ln Lhe laLonlc/loLlnlan vlew, says 1aylor, our belng ls ldenLlfled wlLh our belng aLLuned Lo Lhe order of Lhlngs"-LhaL ls, aLLuned Lo Lhe mulLldlmenslonal kosmos, Lo Lhe CreaL Polarchy LhaL lnLerlocks" noL only horlzonLally ln emplrlcal wholes, buL also verLlcally ln lnner LransformaLlons asplrlng Lo Lhe nondual Cne. 8uL ln Lhe feellng for naLure whlch we see emerglng ln Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury and slnce, Lhls [order] ls fundamenLally broken and Lhen forgoLLen" 9 -Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo Lhe flaLland lnLerlocklng order, lnLo a monologlcal reason and an epoolly moooloqlcol ootote-a mononaLure, lLself concelved as absoluLe ([usL as Lhe Lgo consldered lLs reason" Lo be absoluLe). ln oLher words," summarlzes 1aylor, tbls moJeto feelloq fot ootote whlch sLarLs ln Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury ptesopposes Lhe Lrlumph of Lhe new ldenLlLy of dlsengaged reason over Lhe premodern one embedded ln an onLlc logos." 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco as fllp sldes of Lhe same flaL and faded coln, boLh orlenLed Loward Lhe same greaL lnLerlocklng order, however much Lhelr responses Lo lL lndeed varled (Lhe Lgo Lrylng Lo geL ouL of lL, Lhe Lco Lrylng Lo geL lnLo lL). 1hls ls why 1aylor can polnL ouL LhaL, for Lhe Lco camps, our naLure ls no longer deflned by a subsLanLlve order of purposes [onLlc kosmos], buL by our own lnner lmpulses and our place ln Lhe lnLerlocklng whole" 10 -Lhe same lnLerlocklng whole of Lhe Lgo camps! 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco: Lhe 1weedledum and 1weedledee of lnLerlocklng flaLland. We mlghL summarlze Lhe overall shlfL ln Lhls way: 1he dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, whlch released Lhe raLlonal-ego from lLs conflnemenL Lo syncreLlc myLhlc- membershlp, fell lnLo Jlssoclotloo wlLh Lhe capLure of reason by lLs ob[ecLlfylng, monologlcal, and lnsLrumenLal forms (a capLure concomlLanL wlLh lndusLrlallzaLlon). 1he 8lg 1hree were reduced Lo Lhe 8lg Cne of mononaLure: Lhe emplrlcal flaLland world, Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of Lhe sysLeme de la naLure. 1he Lgo camps approached Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of naLure wlLh an ob[ecLlfylng and monologlcal analysls (emplrlc-analyLlc)-a dry and absLracL" approach agalnsL whlch Lhe Lco-8omanLlc camps aggresslvely rebelled, preferrlng lnsLead Lo flnd a unlLy wlLh self and communlon wlLh naLure vla a more feellng-orlenLed awareness. 8uL 1aylor's polnL ls LhaL ln boLh cases, Lhe naLure LhaL ls approached ls essenLlally Lhe same naLure, and Lhls naLure" ls a denaLured naLure ln comparlson wlLh Lhe laLonlc/loLlnlan vlew, where naLure ls a dlrecL expresslon and embodlmenL of SplrlL. ln Lhe Lgo camps, naLure ls Lhe flnal and ulLlmaLe reflecLed reallLy, and ln Lhe Lco camps naLure lLself geLs elevaLed Lo SplrlL, slmply because real SplrlL can no longer be found. ln boLh cases Lhe same flaLland naLure ls Lhe ob[ecL of awareness, ln boLh cases, an onLlc Crder has been broken and forgoLLen", ln boLh cases, mononaLure ls servlng a purpose lL cannoL ulLlmaLely susLaln, and boLh cases absoluLely presuppose Lhe same collapse of Lhe kosmos. 1P8LL nA1u8LS ln shorL, and uslng our more preclse deflnlLlons: wlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos, nA1u8L (or Lhe greaL nesL of 8elng) was reduced Lo naLure, or Lhe greaL Web of Llfe. 1he Lgo approached naLure wlLh reason, Lhe Lco approached naLure wlLh naLure (or preconvenLlonal feellngs). ln boLh cases, naLure relgned. We have already seen LhaL Lhe Lgo camps would approach Lhls mononaLure ln an ob[ecLlfylng and analyLlcal fashlon: naLure was Lhe fundamenLal reallLy Lo be known by reflecLlon (Lhe mlrror of naLure", naLure was Lhe ulLlmaLe reflecLee"). 1he Lco camps would approach Lhe same mononaLure ln an aLLempL Lo unlLe wlLh lL, commune wlLh lL, reLurn Lo lL, splrlLuallze lL. Communlng wlLh or even unlLlng wlLh flaLland became Lhe ulLlmaLe splrlLual occaslon. 1he way you embrace naLure ls by reLurnlng Lo naLure, reLurnlng Lo wllderness feellngs. We have seen LhaL ln Lhe modern world, naLure has Lwo relaLed buL sllghLly dlfferenL meanlngs, whlch we have called naLure" and naLure." 8oLh refer ln general Lo Lhe emplrlcal-sensory world. 8uL, due Lo Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos, Lhe emplrlcal-sensory world appears ln Lwo paradoxlcal gulses (boLh of whlch can be seen ln flg. 12-3). ln Lhe greaL evoluLlon from physlosphere Lo blosphere Lo noosphere, Lhere are Lhe lotetlots of Lhose domalns, and Lhe extetlots. naLure, ln common usage, refers botb Lo Lhe sum LoLal of Lhose exLerlors (naLure")-or Lhe enLlre 8lghL- Pand emplrlcal world-and Lo Lhose aspecLs, wheLher lnLerlor or exLerlor, LhaL are [usL Lhe blospbete (naLure") and oot Lhe noosphere (mlnd or culLure). ln Lhe laLLer usage, naLure" as blosphere means Lhe body as opposed Lo Lhe mlnd, or naLure as opposed Lo culLure, or emplrlcal as opposed Lo raLlonal, or sensory as opposed Lo concepLual. 8oLh naLure and naLure are dlfferenL vlews of Lhe same emplrlcal-sensory domaln: Lhey are boLh Lhe world as dlsclosed Lo Lhe senses (boLh wlLhouL and wlLhln). 8uL Lhe masslvely confuslng lLem ls LhaL aspecLs of Lhe noosphere exlsL ln naLure, buL noL ln naLure. (1hls ls ldenLlcal Lo Lhe mlnd/body problem, whlch ls Lhe same problem creaLed by flaLland.) We can follow Lhls easlly on flgure 12-3. (lnsLead of maLLer, body, and mlnd, l wlll LreaL Lhe physlosphere as a parL of Lhe blosphere, whlch lL ls, so we wlll slmply be deallng wlLh Lhe general relaLlon of blosphere and noosphere, or body and mlnd.) ln flgure 12-3, Lhe blosphere ls level 1 (ln boLh lnLerlors and exLerlors), Lhe noosphere ls level 4 (ln boLh lnLerlors and exLerlors), and levels 2 and 3 represenL sLages where Lhe noosphere and blosphere are dlfferenLlaLlng (and posslbly dlssoclaLlng). Level 1 ls Lhe blosphere or naLure, and Lhe enLlre 8lghL Pand ls naLure. ln Lhe lnLerlor or LefL-Pand domalns, Lhe blosphere exlsLs as preraLlonal feellngs, emoLlonal-sexual lmpulses, llfe vlLallLy, sensory rlchness, and all Lhose lLems LhaL people generally mean by Lhe body" as opposed Lo Lhe mlnd." Llkewlse, ln Lhe lnLerlor, Lhe noosphere refers Lo all of Lhose menLal" lLems as conLrasLed wlLh bodlly ones, such as raLlonallLy, symbollc culLure, language and llngulsLlc communlcaLlon, and so forLh. 1he lnLerlor noosphere also houses a moral developmenL LhaL moves from egocenLrlc (preconvenLlonal) Lo eLhnocenLrlc (convenLlonal) Lo worldcenLrlc (posLconvenLlonal), none of whlch are found ln Lhe sensory body or Lhe blosphere or naLure. And, of course, Lhe noosphere Lranscends and lncludes Lhe blosphere (formop Lranscends buL lncludes sensorlmoLor). 1haL ls, tbe blospbete ls o pott of tbe ooospbete, because lf you desLroy Lhe blosphere, you desLroy Lhe noosphere, buL noL vlce versa. ln oLher words, naLure (noL naLure, buL naLure) ls a parL of mlnd (ln Lhe sense shown ln flg. 12-3). 1he dlfference beLween noosphere and blosphere-or mlnd and body, or culLure and naLure-shows up ln common speech when we say LhaL humans are desLroylng naLure or rulnlng Lhe blosphere. And when we look aL Lhe emplrlcal world ouL Lhere, we Lend Lo Lhlnk of Lrees as belng parL of naLure, buL we do noL Lhlnk of auLomoblles as belng parL of naLure. ln oLher words, we make a dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe producLs of Lhe blosphere and Lhe producLs of Lhe noosphere. So far, so good. 1he confuslng parL ls LhaL Lhe extetlot of Lhe noosphere exlsLs ln naLure, buL oot ln naLure. And Lhus, Lhe relaLlon of Lhe mlnd Lo Lhe naLural world depends upon wheLher you mean naLure or naLure. lor all of naLure ls ln Lhe noosphere, buL Lhe exLerlor of Lhe noosphere ls ln naLure (as shown ln flg. 12-3). 1hus, lf you reduce all lnLerlors Lo exLerlors, lf you reduce Lhe kosmos Lo naLure, lL Lhen appears LhaL Notote locloJes evetytbloq, so of course Lhe mlnd ls [usL parL of naLure! (for LhaL reduces mlnd Lo braln-Lhe mlnd/body problem ls lsomorphlc Lo Lhe kosmos/naLure problem). 1he lotetlot of Lhe noosphere ls Lhe mlnd, or your own consclousness rlghL now, buL Lhe extetlot of Lhe noosphere ls Lhe neocorLex, and Lhe neocorLex exlsLs ln naLure. 1he neocorLex ls an ob[ecLlve sysLem of sLrucLures and funcLlons LhaL can be seen wlLh Lhe senses or Lhelr exLenslons, lL possesses slmple locaLlon and ls bullL of holarchles of spaLlal exLenslon. 1he braln exlsLs ln naLure. 8uL Lhe mlnd does noL exlsL ln naLure. 1he mlnd ls noL a sensory ob[ecL buL an lnLerlor awareness. As we have seen, concepLs and ldeas and meanlngs and values do noL have slmple locaLlon, Lhey are noL runnlng around ouL Lhere ln Lhe sensory world, Lhey cannoL be seen anywhere ln Lhe emplrlcal Web of Llfe. 1hey are lnLerlor values known by Lhe eye of mlnd, noL exLerlor ob[ecLs seen wlLh Lhe eye of flesh. 1hus, ln an lndlvldual, naLure (Lhe blosphere or Lhe body) ls lo Lhe noosphere or Lhe mlnd (reason Lranscends buL lncludes feellngs): ootote ls lo tbe mloJ, bot tbe btolo ls lo Notote-and Lhe laLLer makes Lhe former almosL lmposslble Lo see. 1here ls Lhe paradox of flaLland and anoLher verslon of Lhe world-knoL of Lhe mlnd/body problem (whose unravellng we dlscussed ln Lhe prevlous chapLer). ln naLure, or Lhe 8lghL-Pand world, Lhe noosphere sLlll Lranscends Lhe blosphere, ln Lhe sense LhaL more complex forms of evoluLlon (e.g., neocorLex) Lranscend and lnclude Lhe less complex (e.g., repLlllan sLem). And oll of Lhose exLerlors exlsL ln Lhe world of naLure. 1he braln, Lhe organlsm, Lhe llmblc sysLem, cells, molecules-all of Lhose exlsL ln Lhe vasLness of naLure. 1hey are all exLerlors appearlng ln Lhe world of Lhe senses. 1hus, even Lhough mlnd and feellngs and lnLerlors cannoL be found ln naLure, all of Lhelr exLerlors can. And Lhus, as l sald, lf you reduce Lhe kosmos Lo emplrlcal flaLland, lL appeard LhaL Notote locloJes evetytbloq, whereas lL ls [usL Lhe 8lghL-Pand world, or Lhe greaL emplrlcal Web. lL Lhen appears LhaL, lf we wanL Lo achleve Wholeness wlLh Lhe kosmos, we musL become one wlLh naLure! (8ecause naLure ls now all LhaL ls lefL of Lhe kosmos.) 8uL-and here ls where Lhe confuslng parL abouL naLure/naLure reenLers Lhe 8omanLlc agenda: noL all of naLure ls pure and prlsLlne. lf we look around ln Lhe emplrlcal-sensory world (naLure), we can see noL only Lhe exLerlors of Lhe blosphere (Lrees and lakes and naLure), buL also Lhe exLerlors of Lhe noosphere (such as alrplanes and auLomoblles), and Lhose exLerlors are ofLen problemaLlc. 1he exLerlors of Lhe noosphere lnclude Lhlngs llke lndusLrlallzaLlon, polluLlon, ozone depleLlon, and so on, whlch we do noL counL as parL of naLure. Lven Lhough Lhose are parL of naLure, Lhey are oot parL of naLure. Already you can see LhaL Lhe 8omanLlc recommendaLlon Lo become ooe wltb tbe oototol wotlJ has an lnherenL dllemma: do we become one wlLh naLure, or one wlLh naLure? And, of course, Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs generally recommended LhaL we musL geL back Lo naLure. 1hus, wlLh Lhe modern collapse of Lhe kosmos Lo naLure, Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs dld noL embrace all of naLure, because Lhose aspecLs of naLure LhaL were produced by Lhe noosphere (and especlally by Lhe noospherlc lLems as lndusLrlallzaLlon) were shunned. 1he 8omanLlcs embraced naLure ln general, buL naLure ln parLlcular. 1hey almed for nA1u8L, goL naLure, and ended up glorlfylng naLure. 8ack Lo naLure" was Lhus Lhe calllng card of every good Lco-8omanLlc. 8oLh naLure and naLure are Lhe sensory- emplrlcal world, buL naLure (or Lhe blosphere) ls LhaL parL of naLure unLouched by culLure (or Lhe noosphere). And Lhus, when Lhe modern era had ensconced naLure (Lhe descended, monologlcal, 8lghL-Pand, emplrlcal Web of Llfe and greaL lnLerlocklng order) as Lhe only Cod, Lhe Lco-8omanLlcs aLLempLed Lo embrace Lhe purer aspecLs of naLure by reLurnlng Lo naLure. 8oLh naLure and naLure l wlll ofLen refer Lo as moooootote, because boLh were equally monologlcal. 1aylor's concluslon can Lhus be sLaLed very slmply: Lhere was no longer nA1u8L (or SplrlL), buL only naLure as dlsclosed ln naLure. no longer SplrlL, buL slmply an emplrlcal Web of Llfe dlsclosed ln feellngs and senLlmenL: naLure as lL makes me feel. 1he Lheosphere and Lhe noosphere reduced Lo Lhe blosphere, posLconvenLlonal splrlL confused wlLh preconvenLlonal naLure. We already heard Lmerson sLrenuously argulng agalnsL Lhls flaLland Lco-vlew (whlch equaLed mononaLure wlLh ''splrlL"): 8eauLy ln naLure ls noL ulLlmaLe. lL ls Lhe herald of lnward and eLernal beauLy, and ls noL alone a solld and saLlsfacLory good." 8aLher, he says, naLure ls a symbol [or expresslon] of SplrlL. 8efore Lhe revelaLlons of Lhe Soul, Llme, space and naLure shrlnk away. vasL spaces of naLure, Lhe ALlanLlc Ccean, Lhe SouLh Sea, long lnLervals of Llme, years, cenLurles, are of no accounL. LeL us sLun and asLonlsh Lhe lnLrudlng rabble of men and books and lnsLlLuLlons by a slmple declaraLlon of Lhe dlvlne facL. 8ld Lhe lnLruders Lake Lhe shoes from off Lhelr feeL, for Cod ls here wlLhln. LeL our slmpllclLy [udge Lhem, and our doclllLy Lo our own law demonsLraLe Lhe poverLy of naLure beslde our naLlve rlches." 11 8uL now, wlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos, naLure wos ltself splrlL, was Lhe ulLlmaLe sootce of splrlLual senLlmenL and Lhe ulLlmaLe foooJotloo of a salvaLlon Lo be found away from Lhe dlsLorLlons and crlmes of culLure. 12 1he Lgo was Lo lmmerse lLself ln naLure, ln Lhe slmple blosphere, and Lhereln was Lo be found lLs llberaLlon from Lhe sLulLlfylng grlp of raLlonallLy. 1hus, ln Lhls new and flaLLened orlenLaLlon, durlng a pure encounLer wlLh naLure, splrlL would flow ftom naLure and loto me, lnsLead of flowlng tbtooqb me and loto naLure. no longer dld SplrlL or Lhe Cver-Soul shlne Lhrough me and lllumlnaLe naLure wlLh a splrlLual radlance, dlscloslng naLure as a perfecL manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL. 8aLher, now l am flooded by feellngs released ln my self by and from a mononaLure. And Lhe more lmmersed ln Lhls sensory mononaLure l can become, Lhe closer Lo splrlL" l wlll be. l am no longer an openlng or clearlng tbtooqb wblcb Lhe ulvlne can flow, bapLlzlng naLure and all manlfesLaLlon wlLh Lhe Coodness of Lhe ulvlne, l am now Lhe recepLacle of feellngs comlng ftom naLure and loto me, carrylng me away ln floods of senLlmenL and communlons of sensory drenchlng. Whlch ls why Lmerson would conLlnue and say, 1o Lhe senses and Lhe unrenewed undersLandlng, belongs a sorL of lnsLlncLlve bellef ln Lhe absoluLe exlsLence of naLure. ln Lhelr vlew [Lhe Lco camp's vlew] man and naLure are lndlssolubly [olned. 1hlngs are ulLlmaLes, and Lhey never look beyond Lhelr sphere. Pls mlnd ls lmbruLed, and he ls a selflsh savage." 8uL Lrue lnLulLlon breaks Lhls dlvlne egolsm, says Lmerson, because Lhe besL momenLs of llfe are Lhese dellclous awakenlngs of Lhe hlgher powers, and Lhe reverenLlal wlLhdrawlng of naLure before lLs Cod." 8uL naLure would noL now wlLhdraw before lLs Cod, because ootote wos oow tbe ooly CoJ. Monologlcal LhoughL (by collapslng Lhe kosmos) had converLed naLure lnLo Cod (for Lhe Lco camps), and Lhus Cod" was Lo be known by Lhe lmpacL LhaL ootote released lo me. naLure was valued because of Lhe Lhrlll lL senL swlshlng Lhrough Lhe ego ln prlsLlne" wllderness encounLers. noL a Lransparency Lo Lhe ulvlne, buL Lhe dlvlne ego reflecLed Lo lLself ln monologlcal feellng. 1hls new naLure was noL ttoosloqlcol, and cerLalnly lL was noL Lhe dreaded Jloloqlcol lnLersub[ecLlvlLy of culLure-lnsLead lL was away from all of LhaL and back Lo prlsLlne and unadulLeraLed naLure: Lhe same moooloqlcol gaze, seLLled now on Lhe slmple blosphere. ln place of nA1u8L (or SplrlL as Lhe nondual Cne), Lhere was now only sensory naLure, and sln ls Lherefore anyLhlng LhaL separaLes me noL from nA1u8L buL from naLure. 1hus reLurn Lo bloceottlc lmpulse and feellng ls and musL be my salvaLlon, wlLh raLlonallLy and culLure belng fundamenLally Lhe forces LhaL sLlfle and conLorL Lhls naLure, boLh wlLhln me and wlLhouL. And ln lmmerslng myself ln Lhls naLure, l wlll flnd my Lrue self. (CulLure ls Lhus noL a developmenL oo tbe woy Lo consclous reallzaLlon of SplrlL, raLher, culLure ls Lhe crlme LhaL hldes and dlsLorLs and negaLes naLure, LhaL negaLes splrlL." Cf course, whaL culLure ls acLually negaLlng ls blocenLrlc and egocenLrlc percepLlon, and Lhls Lhe dlvlne ego wlll noL counLenance.) ln mononaLure, away from dlaloglcal culLure, l can do as l please. ln mononaLure, my prlsLlne self reemerges. ln mononaLure, l expand my glory and freedom wlLhouL Lhe sLulLlfylng presence of culLural demands, a culLure LhaL anyway embodles Lhe greaL Crlme of PumanlLy agalnsL Lhe sysLeme de la naLure. ln Lhls naLure, l flnd my Cod or Coddess ln Lhe muLe purlLy of Lhe monologlcal gaze. And l can flnd my release and my salvaLlon by an lmmerslon ln and unlon wlLh Lhe world so dlsclosed. 1o oolte wlLh Lhe Shadows: LhaL would be Lhe LlghL. 1o become one wlLh a denaLured naLure: Lhere would be salvaLlon. 1o unlLe wlLh flaLland: Lhere would be Lhe glory. 1o reLurn ln feellngs so as Lo be closet Lo Lhe Shadows: Lhere would be my Lrue self. lL wasn'L LhaL Lrue splrlLual lnslghLs weren'L avallable ln Lhls new encounLer wlLh naLure. 8uL even WordsworLh knew Lhe Lrue source of Lhe splrlLual lnLulLlons and lllumlnaLlons LhaL mlghL be evoked ln naLure: An auxlllar llghL, Came from my mlnd, whlch on Lhe seLLlng sun, 8esLowed new splendour." 8uL ln Lhe new flaL and faded cosmos, LhaL splendor would lmmedlaLely be lotetpteteJ as flowlng ftom Lhe sunseL and loto me, and l would Lhen lmaglne LhaL Lhe sunseL, LhaL naLure, ls Lhe sootce of Lhe splrlLual lllumlnaLlon. 8uL LhaL splendor" ls noL lylng around ouL Lhere" walLlng Lo be percelved by Lhe senses. 8abblLs and weasels and foxes and company do noL sLare for hours aL Lhe splendor and beauLy of Lhe sunseL, even Lhough ln many cases Lhelr senses are sharper. no, naLure ls noL Lhe sootce of Lhls splrlLual splendor buL raLher lLs Jestlootloo. When l can relax my egolc conLracLlon (and many people approprlaLely flnd naLure a flL and lnvlLlng space for Lhls more easlly Lo happen), Lhen l can relax lnLo LhaL greaL Cver-Soul, and Lhen tbtooqb me comes rushlng Lhe splrlLual splendor of Lhe Cne whlch ouLshlnes even Lhe seLLlng sun and besLows on lL new glory. 8uL as long as l am locked lnLo Lhe flaLland world of emplrlcal mononaLure, as long as l lotetptet naLure as Lhe sootce of Lhe ulvlne, Lhen Lo [usL LhaL exLenL l am locked ouL of any deeper or Lruer splrlLual lllumlnaLlons and lnLulLlons: ln glorlfylng merely Lhe golden eggs, l am lgnorlng Lo deaLh Lhe goose LhaL lald Lhem. Moreover, l am Lhus compleLely locked ouL of any sorL of lnLegraLlve vlslon. lf Lhe blosphere ls Lhe ulvlne, Lhen Lhe noosphere musL be Lhe Crlme. l cannoL lnLegraLe naLure and culLure ln SplrlL (or Lrue nA1u8L), l can only recommend bock to ootote. l musL recommend, LhaL ls, teqtessloo. Away from Lhe Lranspersonal, away from Lhe lnLerpersonal-and back Lo Lhe prepersonal, back Lo blocenLrlc lmmerslon-perfecLly geocenLrlc and perfecLly egocenLrlc-back Lo Lhe preraLlonal dlvlne egolsm LhaL mlsLakes unconflned sensory lmmerslon for Lranspersonal release. 8ack Lo a sensory naLure LhaL, as 1aylor puLs lL, all Loo ofLen confuses self-lndulgence wlLh self-Lranscendence. And Lhus Lhe horrlble reallzaLlon dawns: back Lo naLure ls away from nA1u8L. And Lhe Lco camps, llke Lhe Lgo camps, end up brlnglng abouL preclsely LhaL whlch Lhey wlshed mosL Lo avold: Lhe glorlflcaLlon of Lhe ego and Lhe denlal of Lrue nA1u8L. 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco wlll never be lnLegraLed ln Lhls scheme, wlLh Lhe one absoluLlzlng Lhe noosphere and Lhe oLher absoluLlzlng Lhe blosphere. nelLher of Lhem wlll allow a Lrue lnLegraLlon because boLh are rabld abouL prlvlleglng Lhelr chosen fragmenLs. 8oLh lnslsL on converLlng Lhe oLher by sharlng Lhelr dlsease. under Lhese clrcumsLances, we wlll never be able Lo Lake monologlcal naLure up and lnLo dlaloglcal culLure, and Lhen Lake boLh naLure and culLure up and lnLo Lransloglcal SplrlL. 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco, Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, wlll never be lnLegraLed ln Lhls scheme. Lach wlll remaln forever Lhe greaL uevll ln Lhe oLher's eyes. And so Lhe paradox of damage. laylng on Lhe same flaLland fleld, locked ln muLual lncompaLlblllLy and muLual repugnance, boLh camps would brlng abouL preclsely LhaL whlch Lhey mosL wanLed Lo avold. 1he Lgo camps, seeklng flrsL and foremosL auLonomy and lndependence, soughL Lhls as a freedom from Lhe heLeronomy of naLure and conformlsL modes, only Lo flnd LhaL lLs own lnLense demand for a hlgher freedom choked off lLs rooLs ln naLure and ln culLural communlons, and Lhese represslons would reLurn Lo saboLage and dramaLlcally curLall lLs own freedom, a rancld Lranscendence (allenaLlon and represslon) drlven by a hobos bound ever more LlghLly Lo Lhe ob[ecLs of lLs dlsgusL. And Lhe Lco camps, seeklng flrsL and foremosL a freedom from Lhe Lgo, embraced Lhe world of Lco-naLure wlLh such exuberance, and moved so lnLensely Lo do away wlLh Lhe raLlonal Lgo, LhaL Lhey ended up wlLh preraLlonal lmpulses ln naLure's dlsplay, and were alarmed Lo flnd LhaL Lhe preraLlonal modes are preclsely Lhe mosL egocenLrlc. 1be closet yoo qet to ootote, tbe mote eqoceottlc yoo become. ln seLLlng ouL Lo do away wlLh Lgo, Lhey ended up locked lnLo Lhelr own senLlmenLs, Lhe echo wlLhln of a mononaLure wlLhouL, boLh glorlfled as ulvlne. lrom worldcenLrlc plurallsm Lo dlvlne egolsm and blocenLrlc sensory lmmerslon-aL one wlLh senLlmenLal naLure ln my own self-reverberaLlng feellngs-Lhls was Lhe oLher endgame of flaLland hollsm, a morbld embrace drlven by a 1hanaLos LhaL, ln Lhe way of all decepLlon, whlspered always of Lhe wonders of ever-shallower engagemenLs. SLxuALl1? Anu MCuL8nl1? Small wonder LhaL boLh Lhe Lgo's vlew of naLure as Lhe fundamenLal reflecLed reallLy and Lhe Lco's aLLempL Lo glorlfy naLure as splrlL would boLh meeL ln an absoluLe obsesslon wlLh: sexuallLy. (PenceforLh, unless necessary, l wlll noL dlsLlngulsh naLure and naLure, slnce boLh refer essenLlally Lo Lhe emplrlcal-sensory domaln. ln any evenL, conLexL wlll lndlcaLe.) As loucaulL ably demonsLraLes, 13 Lhe rlse of modernlLy was marked, noL so much by a represslon of sexuallLy (alLhough he does noL deny LhaL happened) as by an obsessloo wlLh sexuallLy. 1he enLlre era (beglnnlng a cenLury before lreud) saw an exploslon of lnLeresL ln all Lhlngs sexual, from medlclne Lo psychlaLry Lo llLeraLure Lo educaLlon. never, says loucaulL, had an epoch's dlscourse been so domlnaLed by sexuallLy ln so many domalns. never, lL seems, had so much aLLenLlon been focused on every aspecL of Lhe body and every dlmenslon of lLs sexuallLy. Sex became Lhe ob[ecL of a ma[or lnvesLmenL of slgnlflcaLlon, of power, and of knowledge." 14 We needn'L go lnLo loucaulL's explanaLlon (or raLher, descrlpLlon) of Lhls obsesslve sexuallLy, or how l would reconsLrucL lL, Lhls ls dealL wlLh ln volume 3. ln Lhe meanLlme, l have a slmple Lake on Lhe whole slLuaLlon: lf naLure ls Lhe fundamenLal and ln many respecLs Lhe flnal reallLy (accordlng Lo Lhe reflecLlve Lgo) and naLure ls Lhe source of deep, ulLlmaLe, and ofLen hldden LruLhs (accordlng Lo Lhe Lco), Lhen how beLLer Lo unlLe Lhem Lhan ln Lhe bellef LhaL sexoollty bolJs tbe sectet to bomoo petsooollty? When naLure alone ls Lhe flnal reallLy, whaL oLher secreLs are Lhere? 1here was someLhlng (and sLlll ls someLhlng) ln Lhe obsesslon wlLh sexuallLy LhaL saLlsfled nearly all parLles ln Lhe flaLland world: hedonlc happlness for Lhe uLlllLarlans, a source of hldden lnLerpreLaLlons for Lhe psychologlsLs, lnLerpreLaLlons LhaL neverLheless safely remalned qulLe shallow and flaLland, very emplrlcal-sensory (a hermeneuLlcs LhaL hugs Lhe surface), a flndlng lo ootote (ln Lhe blosphere) Lhe oltlmote and most ptofoooJ lmpulses of human llfe, whlch dellghLed Lhe 8omanLlcs. ln general, Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree (and Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and blosphere) meanL LhaL now Lhere was lndeed a dlfferenLlaLed body/naLure/llbldo to be obsesseJ wltb (and llkewlse repressed ln novel ways). And slnce, wlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe 8lg 1hree Lo Lhe 8lg Cne-Lo Lhe ob[ecLlve and emplrlcal lnLerlocklng order of mononaLure-sexuallLy came very close Lo belng oll tbloqs to oll people: Lhe ulLlmaLe hldden secreL of human personallLy, Lhe ulLlmaLe moLlvaLlon LhaL pushed all human belngs, Lhe greaL Llfe lorce lnLo whlch we can lmmerse ourselves for llberaLlon and freedom (sexual freedom," llberaLlon from represslon," sexuallLy as culLural anarchy," free love"), a greaL Llfe lorce LhaL ls, ln and by lLself, Lhe ulLlmaLe splrlL of Lhe unlverse: sex as Cod, sex as Coddess, naLure alone can rule supreme: Lhe push of Lhe blos ls Lhe only push around. Ceorg Croddeck's 1be 8ook of tbe lt (whlch was based ln parL on LasLern mysLlclsm, Lhe greaL lL" belng essenLlally Lhe greaL 1ao LhaL moves us all) was expllclLly acknowledged by lreud Lo be Lhe source of whaL he also sLarLed calllng Lhe lL" (LranslaLed as Lhe ld"). 1he ld ls whaL moves all psychlc llfe, and dlsrupLlng Lhe ld ls Lhe source of mosL paLhology (and unhapplness). And Lhe ld ls blospherlc sex and aggresslon, Lhe greaL organlc and vlLal-somaLlc llfe of naLure, Lhe ptooomoyokosbo. noL SplrlL buL sex ls Lhe qteot sectet, and dlgglng down lnLo Lhe depLhs of Lhe human soul we wlll ulLlmaLely flnd Lhe hldden, deepesL, darkesL and profoundesL secreL of all: noL ur-CelsL, buL orgasm. 1he 1ao reduced Lo Lhe ld: Lhere ls only Lhe mosL noLorlous example of Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo a flaLland mononaLure, wlLh sexuallLy Lhe new and vlrLually sole (or cerLalnly mosL lmporLanL") drlve of Lhe flaLland world. lL's noL [usL LhaL loLlnus or Shankara or Carab uor[e would have found LhaL noLlon preposLerous, lL was a perfecL example of Lhe greaL collapse, where Lhe mosL superflclal (Lhe shallowesL, Lhe leasL-depLhed) holons were proclalmed tbe most ptofoooJ, preclsely because Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lefL no place else Lo slLuaLe profundlLy. Llke so many oLher feaLures of Lhls collapse, mosL fundamenLal was confused wlLh mosL slgnlflcanL. Approaches such as Lhe lreudlan were called depLh psychology" preclsely as a mlsoomet: lL was acLually shallow psychology." (AlLhough noL, of course, as shallow as behavlorlsm, ln conLrasL Lo whlch psychoanalysls dld lndeed seem deep." ln Lhe nlne-layered onlon of Lhe self-Lhe nlne lulcrums-where maLLer ls Lhe flrsL skln or sheaLh, llbldo or prana ls Lhe second layer or sheaLh, and Lhls appears deep" only lo compotlsoo wlLh behavlorlsm- poslLlvlsm-emplrlclsm, whlch refused Lo peel beneaLh even Lhe flrsL skln. sychoanalysls was Lhus a bold and darlng plunge lnLo Lhe depLhs" for Lhe flaLland world! And never mlnd Lhe seven deeper/hlgher sheaLhs beyond psychoanalysls!) And Lhus, ln dlgglng down" lnLo Lhe llbldo, one was noL acLually dlgglng Loward any greaL depLhs, buL more or less Lhe opposlLe: one was sospeoJloq tbe Jeepet ot blqbet coqoltlve focoltles ln order Lo Lemporarlly teqtess Lo a lower and sbollowet and more onLologlcally surface level. Cne lnLenLlonally surrendered Lhe deeper/hlgher cognlLlve faculLles of lnLersub[ecLlve and worldcenLrlc reason (secondary processes") and moved Lo shallower and more narclsslsLlc feellng-Loned and lmaglnary processes (prlmary process"), Lhus reconLacLlng Lhese shallower occaslons, whlch, preclsely because Lhey were more fundamenLal (and less slgnlflcanL), could cause so much sobsepoeot Jevelopmeotol Jomoqe. 1he polnL belng (Lrue enough) LhaL when Lhese lower/shallower levels are LraumaLlzed, Lhen deeper/hlgher developmenLs are ofLen hobbled. 1hus, geLLlng ln Louch wlLh Lhese earller, shallower occaslons was (and ls) qulLe Jlfflcolt, noL only because Lhey were lald down ln earller developmenL, buL mosLly because Lhey are lndeed so alLogeLher sbollow. SLaylng wlLh Lhe llbldo ls llke havlng Lo sLay afloaL on Lhe surface of Lhe ocean, lnsLead of relaxlng and slnklng lnLo Lhe real depLhs (of hlgher consclousness). Cne has Lo Lhrash around lncessanLly Lo temolo oo tbe sotfoce: as everybody knows, hedonlsm ls absoluLely exhausLlng. (Cne of Lhe ofLen mlsundersLood alms of 1anLra ls Lo Lake sexual orgasmlc Lhrlll and release lL from lLs exhausLlon ln surface forms by openlng lL Lo deeper and hlgher splrlLual occaslons, where Lhrlll ls converLed Lo bllss and exhausLlon Lo re[uvenaLlon. Sex ls noL aparL from or agalnsL SplrlL, buL ls slmply one of Lhe lowesL or mosL fundamenLal of SplrlL's exptessloos, and so a person's sexual naLure ls one of Lhe easlesL of Lhe many Lhreads LhaL can be used Lo reLurn Lo SplrlL. 1here ls lndeed Llfe lorce or prana or cosmlc llbldo," as lL were, buL lL ls only one of Lhe lower of several sheaLhs of SplrlL: Lhe sheaLh found ln naLure, ln Lhe blosphere.) 8uL for a reallLy LhaL ls ooly ootote, and ls Lhus only moved by sex, pleasure, paln-and wonderfully sLrange Marquls-de-Sadean comblnaLlons Lhereof-Lhen a Lhrashlng exhausLlon LhaL demanded consLanL obsesslon was Lhe only baslc course (and curse) avallable Lo Lhe collecLlve mlnd: mononaLure ls Lhe ulLlmaLe reallLy, Lhe surface ls supreme, and Lhe deepesL deep" of Lhose surfaces ls sexuallLy-and LhaL exhausLs Lhe secreL moLlvaLlons of naLure and capLures Lhe key Lo human personallLy. And Lhus capLures Lhe key Lo human llberaLlon. When monologlcal LhoughL Lurns naLure lnLo Cod, Lhen splrlLual llberaLlon conslsLs noL ln Lhe developmenLal emergence of a LranscendenLal SplrlL, buL ln dlgglng up a repressed sexuallLy. WhaL oLher hldden god ls Lhere? Where else could llberaLlon be found? ln lLs 8omanLlc verslon: when naLure ls Lhe ulLlmaLe reallLy, whaL oLher klnd of llberaLlon could Lhere be, excepL a llberaLlon from anyLhlng (such as culLure) LhaL obsLrucLs" naLure and sexuallLy from lLs free play? noL progresslon Lo superconsclous SplrlL buL regresslon Lo lnfraconsclous naLure, noL recollecLlng a SplrlL prlor Lo manlfesLaLlon buL dlgglng up an lmpulse prlor Lo culLure, noL posLconvenLlonal Lranscendence buL preconvenLlonal lmmerslon: sexuallLy ls Lhe greaL ueos obscooJos, Lhe greaL repressed and absenL Cod, a Cod burled and suppressed by Lhe Crlme of CulLure, by Lhe wreLched smoLherlng" of Lhe llfe force LhaL ls known as clvlllzaLlon, a smoLherlng LhaL brlngs only Lhe wlnLer of our dlsconLenL. And Lhus Lhe llbldlnal Cod musL be resurrecLed, a resurrecLlon LhaL wlll confer salvaLlon, ln Lhe form of llberaLlon from represslon, on all who parLlclpaLe ln Lhe CreaL Llbldlnal 8ody as lL rlses from Lhe dead nlghL of represslon and confers free orgasmlc release on all who eaL of LhaL body and drlnk of LhaL blood. noL SplrlL, buL sexuallLy, ls Lhe gaLeway Lo Lhe klngdom, and Lhe llberaLlon offered ls noL a freedom from flnlLude and morLallLy and Lemporal sufferlng, buL a freedom from sLulLlfylng culLure by flndlng orgasmlc poLency. WhaL's wrong wlLh Lhls plcLure? lL's noL LhaL sexuallLy wasn'L belng repressed and couldn'L use a llLLle loosenlng up." nobody (lncludlng loucaulL) ls denylng LhaL culLure can go Loo far" and repress sexuallLy, and LhaL a cerLaln amounL of de-represslon" ls called for. reclsely because Lhe noosphere and blosphere had been dlfferenLlaLed, Lhey could lndeed be dlssoclaLed (represslon), and Lhls no doubL accounLed for a good deal of Lhe exploslon of lnLeresL ln sexuallLy LhaL marked modernlLy. 8uL someLhlng else was golng on. SexuallLy was lnvesLed wlLh a force, a power, a mysLlque, an aura, an auLhorlLy, all ouL of proporLlon Lo anyLhlng LhaL could acLually be dug up from Lhe llbldo lLself. 1he acLual ueus abscondus-auLhenLlc splrlLual reallzaLlon of Lhe Lruly deeper or hlgher dlsclosures-was belng dramaLlcally soughL ln Lhe hldden and oppressed Lhrlll of orgasmlc release, because, agaln, whaL oLher klnd of release can be found ln a flaLland world where mononaLure alone ls real? 1hus Lhe baslc and oLherwlse qulLe dlfferenL lnLeresLs of Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco came LogeLher ln a proclalmlng of Lhe fundamenLal and even ulLlmaLe reallLy of mononaLure (Lhe flaLland lnLerlocklng order), and consequenLly boLh Lhelr lnLeresLs lnLersecLed ln an obsesslon wlLh sexuallLy, whlch ls, afLer all, Lhe greaL mover of Lhe naLural world. uL dlfferenLly, when monologlcal LhoughL became Lhe Cod of Lhe Lgo-an Lgo whlch confldenLly and supremely reflecLed on reallLy-Lhen emplrlcal naLure (Lhe reflecLee) became equally absoluLe (lL was Lhe flnal and ulLlmaLe reallLy reflecLed on" by Lhe Lgo): Lhe monologlcal LhoughL of Lhe Lgo absoluLlzed" emplrlcal naLure (Lhe 8lg Cne). And ln slmllar fashlon, Lhe some moooloqlcol tbooqbt, absoluLlzlng naLure, would, ln Lhe hands of Lhe Lco- 8omanLlcs, slmply proclalm Lhls new and absoluLe mononaLure Lo be Lhe ulLlmaLe Cod/Coddess/SplrlL (Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco as Lhe Lwln poles of Lhe monoworld, boLh creaLed by Lhe same collapse, boLh orlenLed Lo Lhe same denaLured naLure: Lhls was 1aylor's polnL). 1hus boLh camps were unlLed by Lhelr worshlp, ln very dlfferenL ways, of monologlcal naLure. And Lhe greaL secreL of naLure ls sex. And so began Lhe fabulous search of modernlLy for sexual release, upon whlch so many hopes were plnned. 1he Marquls de Sade became an endurlng (and qulLe lnfluenLlal) polnL of reference, and lreud became Lvery-person's docLor. As modernlLy unfolded, free sexuallLy" would spread lnLo 8elchlan forms (where culLure was converLed lnLo muscular armor and llberaLlon ldenLlfled wlLh orgasmlc poLency), lnLo pollLlcal forms (where sexual de-represslon" [olned forces wlLh MarxlsL de-oppresslon": free love" would noL only undo represslon, lL would brlng down caplLallsm: fasclsm supporLs genlLal represslon, and orgasmlc poLency would end dlcLaLorshlps, wheLher dlcLaLorshlps of caplLal or of auLhorlLy), lL would drlve sLudenL rebelllons (arls, May 1968: freneLlc shouLs of Marx, Mao, Marcuse"), lL would revlLallze Lhe reLro-8omanLlc movemenLs and lnvade llLerary Lheory (norman C. 8rown's salvaLlon Lhrough llbldlnal polymorphous perverslLy," all Lhe way Lo 8oland 8arLhes's le llolslt Jo texte and 8aLallle's shock-value orgasmlc release and even loucaulL's sadomasochlsLlc pursulLs, a new economy of bodles and pleasure"). When an auLhenLlc splrlLual reallzaLlon ls no longer parL of setloos Jlscootse, Lhen endless dlgglng lnLo Lhe personal llbldo ls one of Lhe only and lonely subsLlLuLes. 1he orgasmlc well would be dlpped lnLo Llme and Llme agaln, sLrange LhaL Lhe release obLalned never seemed Lo measure up Lo Lhe llberaLlon promlsed. And yeL Lhese llberaLors" would sLlll keep looklng ln Lhe same dlrecLlon, Lhe hldden llbldlnal and blospherlc god, Lhe lunar goddess of sexuallLy, whlch had, lL was fervenLly belleved, been so bruLally suppressed by modernlLy (compleLely overlooklng Lhe oLher slde of Lhe coln: Lhe obsesslon wlLh sexuallLy was noL an escape from modernlLy buL a mark of modernlLy. 1hls obsessloo was noL slmply and solely due Lo Lhe facL LhaL real sexuallLy had been repressed, buL was ln parL a subsLlLuLe for a release no longer recognlzed, and Lhus ln pursulng Lhelr lnLense sexual llberaLlon as an escape from modernlLy, Lhe llberaLors" were pursulng someLhlng qulnLessenLlally modern-anoLher verslon of Lhe paradox of damage: Lhey were once agaln presupposlng and pursulng exacLly LhaL whlch Lhey clalmed Lo be overLhrowlng). And when Lhe llberaLlon was noL ln facL forLhcomlng, when orgasm afLer orgasm lefL Lhe parLlclpanLs noL enllghLened buL exhausLed, whaL was Lhe recommendaLlon? 1ry harder, fuck longer, come wllder, scream louder: Lhe llberaLlon has Lo be ln Lhere somewbete. All Lhese movemenLs, and so many more, bound by Lhe noLlon: Lhe secreL Lo human llberaLlon ls Lhe llberaLlon of sexuallLy. Scholars have puzzled for decades over Lhe facL LhaL lreud was boLh a supreme raLlonallsL (Lgo camp) and a profound 8omanLlc (Lco camp). Pe was sald Lo possess Lhe mlnd of a morallsL" and yeL also called Lhe lasL greaL 8omanLlc." Pe has been seen as prlmarlly vlcLorlan, represslve, and harshly purlLanlcal, and yeL he ls also Lhe faLher of vlrLually every 8elchlan, free love, anLlrepresslon movemenL of modernlLy. Pe has been seen as Lhe reacLlonary upholder of culLure and Lhe sLaLus quo, and yeL he has lnsplred vlrLually every progresslve sexual anarchy" movemenL of Lhe lasL cenLury. Pe has been proclalmed as Lhe greaL propheL of Lhe pleasure prlnclple, and yeL also as Lhe flrm and rlgld upholder of Lhe reallLy prlnclple. My polnL ls LhaL Lhls ls noL surprlslng ln Lhe leasL. lreud was a prlme example of Lhe perfecL lnLersecLlon of Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco ln an obsesslon wlLh sexuallLy, Lhe only real [ulce" lefL ln Lhe flaLland world. Slnce developmenL now moved only from preraLlonal llbldo Lo raLlonal culLure (and no genulnely LransraLlonal SplrlL was offlclally acknowledged), Lhen a profound and agonlzlng amblvalence developed around llbldo lLself: lf naLure ls Lhe absoluLe (ls even Cod"), and lf llbldo ls Lhe prlmary and paradlsalcal" sLaLe free of represslon, noneLheless an excluslve alleglance Lo LhaL Cod has Lo be surrendered for culLure Lo develop aL all. Llbldo mlghL be Cod (Lhe 8omanLlc poslLlon), buL LhaL Cod has Lo be broken (Lhe Lgo-raLlonallsL poslLlon), and Lhls leaves everybody, lreud lncluded, ln an alLogeLher depresslng dllemma: we wanL our Cod, buL we really can'L have lL. 1he Lco-8omanLlcs would forever lamenL Lhe loss and wall aL modernlLy for kllllng Lhelr Cod, and Lake from lreud Lhe urgenL necesslLy" Lo de-repress sexuallLy and free naLure from Lhe suffocaLlon of culLure (Lhey would Lhus remaln forever fasclnaLed wlLh sexuallLy as Lhe greaL llberaLlng force LhaL would ooJo moJetolty, a way for Lhe de-repressed blosphere Lo Lhrow Lhe noosphere off lLs back once and for all). 1he Lgo-raLlonallsLs, on Lhe oLher hand, would remaln [usL as fasclnaLed and obsessed wlLh sexuallLy, buL Lake from lreud Lhe necesslLy" Lo bulld agalnsL Lhe llbldo Lhe bulwark of clvlllzaLlon (whlle meanwhlle produclng an endless sclenLlflc and medlcal llLeraLure on Lhe sub[ecL of sexuallLy, whlch assured Lhe sclenLlflc communlLy of lLs own rlghL Lo lnvesLlgaLe every nook and cranny of lndlvlduals' sexual llves, raLher llke Lhe anLlpornographer who noneLheless carrles wlLh hlm always Lhe x-raLed phoLographs Lo demonsLraLe Lhe dangerous force LhaL he ls nobly Lrylng Lo conLrol. loucaulL's work on blopower"-Lhe modern raLlonal Lgo's obsesslon wlLh sexual and bodlly lnformaLlon as a way Lo conLrol lL-ls merely one of numerous lndlcaLors). ln shorL, when monologlcal LhoughL became Cod, sex became Cod's obsesslon. And when monologlcal LhoughL llkewlse converLed naLure lnLo Cod, sex became Lhe key Lo human llberaLlon and salvaLlon. ln boLh cases, monologlcal LhoughL collapsed Lhe kosmos lnLo flaLland naLure, whlch was Lhe one, flnal, ulLlmaLe reallLy reflecLed on" by Lhe Lgo and exalLed Lo SplrlL by Lhe Lco, whlch lefL Lhem boLh obsessed wlLh a naLure whose prlme mover ls sex. And ln Lhls obsesslon Lgo and Lco were secreLly unlLed-mononaLure was all, sex was Lhe secreL. 1he Lgo would conLrol lL, Lhe Lco would llberaLe lL. 8uL Lhe lL," ln boLh cases, was sex. And so lL came abouL LhaL modernlLy" and sexual obsesslon" would be anoLher Lwo names for Lhe same headache. And modernlLy rarely answered, noL LonlghL, dear. . . . LvCLu1lCn we coolJ, loJeeJ, embtoce tbe wbole lo tbe sloqle ptloclple of Jevelopmeot, lf tbls wete cleot, oll else woolJ tesolt ooJ follow of lts owo occotJ. -PLCLL 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco-aparL from Lhelr shared obsesslon wlLh sexuallLy and Lhelr worshlp, ln very dlfferenL ways, of mononaLure-remalned neverLheless ln a LheoreLlcal sLandoff, locked oLherwlse ln muLual conLempL: approach naLure by dlsengaglng from lL versus unlLlng wlLh lL. And here Lhe sLalemaLe mlghL have remalned, were lL noL for Lhe dlscovery of evoluLlon. 1here were many forerunners Lo Lhe docLrlne of evoluLlon-1hales, Lmpedocles, Anaxlmander, ArlsLoLle, SalnL Cregory. ?eL for flfLeen cenLurles any susLalned lnqulry lnLo evoluLlon was effecLlvely halLed by Lhe llLeral Cenesls myLh. 8uL by Lhe slxLeenLh and sevenLeenLh cenLury, upholders of Lhe CreaL Chaln began Lo reallze LhaL Lhe Polarchy lLself, exacLly as presenLed by loLlnus, could ln facL be noL [usL a map of lndlvldual growLh and developmenL, buL a map of Lhe growLh and developmenL of Lhe kosmos aL large. lf Lhe CreaL Polarchy was a general map of Lhe dlmenslons of 8eallLy, whaL dlfference would lL make wbeo Lhey unfolded? And, lndeed, phllosopher-sages such as Crlgen had long ago proposed LhaL loLlnus's hlerarchy was acLually played ouL over cosmlc epochs, one epoch afLer anoLher, sLage by unfoldlng sLage. 1hus, a cenLury before uarwln, Lheorles of cosmlc and human evoluLlon were sprlnglng up everywhere, Lheorles LhaL, as we saw, were looklng for mlsslng llnks," buL mlsslng llnks LhaL were now belleved Lo have unfolded ln Llme and hlsLory. Lelbnlz malnLalned LhaL Lhe specles of anlmals have many Llmes been Lransformed," and LhaL, for example, aL some prevlous Llme many specles whlch have ln Lhem someLhlng of Lhe caL, such as Lhe llon, Lhe Llger, Lhe lynx, may have been of Lhe same race, and may now be regarded as new sub-varleLles of Lhe orlglnal caL- specles." 1he enLlre unlverse, he suggesLed, may have been one LhaL JevelopeJ, because we see everywhere Lhe creaLlve advance of naLure-whaL he called LranscreaLlon" (LransformaLlon). Agaln, long before any sclenLlflc evldence had been marshaled for any of Lhese ldeas, Lhe concluslon had been qulLe flrmly reached LhaL, as Love[oy puLs lL, Lhe world ls as yeL lncompleLe, and Lhe Chaln of 8elng musL be consLrued as a process ln whlch all forms are gradually reallzed ln Lhe order of Llme." 13 Already by 1693 Lelbnlz was deduclng from Lhls Lhe necesslLy for Lhe pasL exLlncLlon of cerLaln specles and Lhe LranscreaLlon" of oLhers. 8y 1743, Lhe presldenL of Lhe 8erlln Academy of Sclences, MauperLuls, had advanced Lhe Lhesls LhaL all specles allve Loday had derlved from a very small number, perhaps a slngle palr, of orlglnal ancesLors, and Lhls Lhesls was echoed by ulderoL, Lhe ma[or edlLor of Lhe ocyclopJle, ln 1749. (1hls was one hundred and Len years before Lhe publlcaLlon of Otlqlo of 5pecles.) kanL, as ls well known, soon produced a raLher profound Lheory of cosmlc evoluLlon. 1he unlverse began relaLlvely slmple and undlfferenLlaLed, he says, and became progresslvely more varlous, complex, organlzed. Lven mottet, he says, has even ln lLs slmplesL sLaLe a Lendency Lo organlze lLself by a naLural evoluLlon lnLo a more perfecL consLlLuLlon"-surely one of Lhe clearesL descrlpLlons of Lhe self-organlzlng properLy of evoluLlon (reachlng lnLo even Lhe physlosphere). 1hus evoluLlon, he says, ls forever busy achlevlng new ascenLs of naLure, brlnglng lnLo exlsLence new Lhlngs and new worlds." And Lhe lecundlLy (lenlLude) of naLure has one law, he malnLalns: ptoqtesslve Jlvetslflcotloo (whaL we would call progresslve complexlflcaLlon or dlfferenLlaLlon). naLure's unfoldlng, ln shorL, has a Jltectloo-greaLer and greaLer creaLlve dlverslflcaLlon. lrom 8oblneL Lo 8onneL Lo Schelllng Lo 8ergson, Lhe pageanL of evoluLlon ls Lhe progresslve manlfesLaLlon of Lhe expanslve, self- dlfferenLlaLlng energy, Lhe creaLlve urge. . . ." 16 8uL noL [usL dlfferenLlaLlon, each ascenL, lL was malnLalned, also brlngs a new and hlgher unlon or lnLegraLlon. As kanL puL lL, Lhe creaLlon, or raLher Lhe developmenL, of naLure spreads by degrees wlLh a conLlnuous advance Lo an ever greaLer breadLh. . . ." Schelllng, wrlLlng ln 1800, was speclflc: Successlon lLself ls gradual, l.e., lL cannoL ln any slngle momenL be glven ln lLs enLlreLy. 8uL Lhe farLher successlon proceeds, Lhe more fully Lhe unlverse ls unfolded. ConsequenLly, Lhe organlc world also, ln proporLlon as successlon advances, wlll aLLaln Lo a fuller exLenslon and represenL a greaLer parL of Lhe unlverse. And on Lhe oLher hand Lhe farLher we go back ln Lhe world of organlsms, Lhe smaller becomes Lhe parL of Lhe unlverse whlch Lhe organlsm embraces wlLhln lLself [noLlce Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween slgnlflcanL and fundamenLal]. 17 1he greaLer Lhe advance and dlfferenLlaLlon, Lhe greaLer Lhe embrace and lnLegraLlon. As wlLh loLlnus, developmenL locloJeJ dlverslLy, Look dlverslLy wlLh lL, lnLo hlgher unlons, hlgher embraces-lL ls noL Lhe Cne versus Lhe Many, lL ls Lhe Cne-ln-Lhe-Many, played ouL ln successlve dlfferenLlaLlons and lnLegraLlons, each unfoldlng more of Lhe unlverse and Lherefore enfoldlng more of Lhe unlverse. And here we have our old frlend Lros, ever sLrlvlng for greaLer unlons, greaLer lnLegraLlons, Lhe blndlng love LhaL unfolds more, enfolds more (Lros/Agape), Lhe omega force hldden even ln maLLer, drlvlng lL lnLo hlgher levels of self- organlzaLlon and self-Lranscendence, Lhe omega force LhaL wlll noL leL even maLLer slL around ln unorganlzed heaps. We wlll reLurn, ln a momenL, Lo Lhls parL of Lhe sLory, and Lo uarwln's drudglng and duLlful accumulaLlon of evldence for a concepLlon LhaL was ln Lhe maln already known ln advance. 8uL how Lhe new evoluLlonary undersLandlng would flL lnLo Lhe prevalllng flaLland worldvlew was noL aL all obvlous. Lgo and Lco were sLlll sLarlng aL each oLher across an unbrldgeable gulf, and Lhe Lwo absoluLlsms were alLogeLher lncompaLlble. 1PL ACCn? Cl MCuL8nl1?: llCP1L vL8SuS SlnCZA 1he Lgo camp had developed lnLo Lhe end llmlL of llchLe's ure Lgo or lnflnlLe Sub[ecL, and however much Lhe ure Lgo was lndeed parLly a genulne lnLulLlon of Lhe Cver-Soul (and even Lhe WlLness), 18 and however much Lhe ure Lgo or lnflnlLe Sub[ecL was sald Lo have poslLed naLure ouL of lLself, noneLheless Lhe pragmaLlc and eLhlcal polnL was clear enough: Lhe more of Lhe Lgo, and Lhe less of Lhe Lco, Lhe beLLer for all. 1hls was lndeed a genulne aLLempL Lo escape flaLland and lnLroduce SplrlL, buL a SplrlL found by radlcallzlng Lhe Sub[ecL or Lgo (and Lhus a paLh breaklng Loward pure AscenL, free of any descended naLure, free of any ob[ecLs). 19 And lndeed, Lo an enLlre age llchLe sLood for SplrlL as pure freedom ln Lhe LranscedenLal and AbsoluLe Sub[ecL. lL was Lhe helghL of Lhe asplraLlons of everyLhlng LhaL Lhe Lgo camps had sLood for: a radlcal auLonomy LhaL found pure freedom ln Lhe ure Sub[ecL. 1he Lco camps, on Lhe oLher hand, all had recourse Lo Splnoza, sulLably lnLerpreLed for Lhelr purposes (Lhls recourse Lo Splnoza ls sLlll qulLe common ln ecomascullnlsL clrcles).20 SplrlL was here vlewed as Lhe absoluLe and LoLal Objectlve 5ystem, lnLo whlch Lhe ego was Lo lnserL lLself seamlessly, and so Lhe eLhlcal lmperaLlve was [usL as clear: Lhe more of Lhe Lco, and Lhe less of Lhe Lgo, Lhe beLLer for all. 1hls, Loo, was ln essence an alLogeLher noble aLLempL Lo lnLroduce SplrlL, buL a SplrlL found by radlcallzlng Lhe Lco (and Lhus a paLh embodylng pure uescenL, pure lmmanence). 21 1o Lhe same age, Splnoza sLood for SplrlL as eLernal and LoLal ob[ecLlve 5obstooce (or lnflnlLe and AbsoluLe Cb[ecL, as llchLe sLood for lnflnlLe and AbsoluLe Sub[ecL). lL was Lhe essence of everyLhlng Lhe Lco camps had sLood for: a dlssoluLlon of Lhe ego lnLo Lhe CreaLer Crder of lnflnlLe Llfe and Love, SplrlL presenL os Lhe LoLal dlverslLy of Lhe manlfesL world. 1he greaL lnLerlocklng order of naLure: Lhe Lgo camps wanLed ouL of lL (Lendlng Loward Lhe ure Ascendlng Sub[ecL, drlven, aL lLs besL, by Lros), and Lhe Lco camps wanLed lnLo lL (as pure uescended unlon, drlven, aL lLs besL, by Agape). lor Lhe Lgo, Lhe more lL could dlsenchanL and dlsengage from naLure and communlons, Lhe greaLer Lhe knowledge and freedom of Lhe self. 1he more agency, and Lhe less communlon, Lhe freer and more llberaLed lL would be. And Lhe puresL freedom would be Lhe ure Lgo, Lhe pure Sub[ecL, ttoosceoJloq naLure and ob[ecLs alLogeLher, and flndlng ulLlmaLe eLhlcal clarlLy. And aparL from Lhe paradox of damage (Lhe Lgo's reckless represslons), Lhere was much LruLh ln Lhls sLance of maLure self-responslblllLy and self-deLermlnaLlon. lor Lhe Lco camp, self-lsolaLed agency, however lmporLanL, had sealed off Lhe rlch neLworks of unlons and communlons wlLh naLure and oLher culLures, and Lhus Lhe more reenchanLed Lhe world, Lhe beLLer. 1he more communlon, and Lhe less agency, Lhe freer and Lhe more whole lL would be. And Lhe puresL wholeness would be Lhe ure Lco, free of separaLe egos alLogeLher. And Lhls was Splnoza's greaL sysLem as an Cb[ecLlve and LLernal SubsLance, purely lmmanenL (uescended). And aparL from Lhe paradox of damage (Lhe Lco's reckless regresslons), Lhere was much profound LruLh ln Lhe Lco's lnslsLence on reengaglng wlLh Lhe world of culLural and naLural communlons. As lrederlck CoplesLon, 1aylor, and numerous oLher scholars have polnLed ouL, an enLlre lnLellecLual age was devoLed Lo, or aL leasL obsessed wlLh, Lhe lnLegraLlon of AbsoluLe Sub[ecL and AbsoluLe Cb[ecL, of llchLe and Splnoza (or kanL and Splnoza, or llchLe and CoeLhe)-lL came Lo Lhe same Lhlng: how can you posslbly unlLe Sub[ecLlve lreedom wlLh Cb[ecLlve unlon? 22 1haL ls: how can you unlLe a paLh of radlcal freedom and deLachmenL headlng ln Lhe dlrecLlon of Lhe ascendlng Cne, versus a paLh dedlcaLed Lo descendlng unlon and communlon wlLh Lhe dlverse Many? Pow Lo heal Lhls deepesL of duallsms LhaL had cruelly carved Lhe landscape of WesLern culLure for Lwo Lhousand years? Pow Lo end Lhe schlzold fracLure ln Lhe masslve fooLnoLes Lo laLo? Pow Lo [oln Lhe Lwo broken Cods LhaL had domlnaLed WesLern hlsLory from lLs lncepLlon? And LhaL had flnally found Lhelr endpolnL champlons ln llchLe and Splnoza? And LhaL showed up ln lndlvlduals as Sub[ecLlve lreedom versus Cb[ecLlve unlon? We can'L slmply add Lhem LogeLher wlLh gllb plaLlLudes abouL sub[ecL and ob[ecL belng one, because sub[ecLlve auLonomy and ob[ecLlve heLeronomy are absoluLely lncompaLlble, whlch ls why, lf conslsLenLly pursued, Lhese poslLlons lead lnevlLably Lo llchLe ot Splnoza. Slnce Lhe galn of one ls Lhe loss of Lhe oLher, lL's a wln-lose slLuaLlon, never a wln-wln. 8y Lhe end of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury, Lhe spllL beLween Lhe ascendlng Lgo and Lhe descendlng Lco, alLhough fundamenLally Lhe same baslc spllL, showed up ln an exLraordlnary number of duallsms, of whlch 1aylor summarlzes some of Lhe more perLlnenL: 1he opposlLlon beLween LhoughL, reason, morallLy, on one slde [Lgo], and deslre and senslblllLy on Lhe oLher [Lco], Lhe opposlLlon beLween Lhe fullesL self-consclous freedom [auLonomy/agency], on one slde, and llfe ln Lhe communlLy [clvlc communlons], on Lhe oLher, Lhe opposlLlon beLween self-consclousness [Lgo] and communlon wlLh naLure [Lco], and beyond Lhls Lhe separaLlon [and] Lhe barrler beLween Lhe kanLlan sub[ecL and Lhe SplnozlsL subsLance. . . ." 23 noLlce LhaL Lhe duallsms 1aylor menLlons lnclude Lhe spllL beLween mlnd and body, human and human, human and naLure, and naLure and splrlL. 8oLh camps clalmed Lo have handled Lhese masslve duallsms, boLh camps lled. 1he 8lg 1hree had lndeed been dlfferenLlaLed, buL Lhere was no apparenL way Lo fashlon Lhelr lnLegraLlon wlLhouL prlvlleglng one or anoLher domaln. 1he l" spllL from Lhe we," and Lhe l" and we" spllL from Lhe lL" . . . . . . and ln parLlcular, Lhere was LhaL Soverelgn l (kanL/llchLe) and LhaL hollsLlc lL (Splnoza), Lhe LoLal l and Lhe LoLal lL, Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco. And Lhe amblLlon becomes general ln Lhe 1790's: auLonomy musL be reconclled wlLh unlLy wlLh naLure, kanL and Splnoza musL be unlLed, Lhese were Lhe waLchwords."24 ln order Lo honor Lhe poslLlve and Lrue conLrlbuLlons of boLh Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco camps, we would have Lo slmoltooeoosly separaLe from Lhe kosmos (Lo preserve auLonomy) and unlLe wlLh Lhe kosmos (for wholeness), and nelLher camp had Lhe sllghLesL clue as Lo how Lo acLually proceed wlLh LhaL necessary buL seemlngly conLradlcLory pro[ecL. Pow Lo reconclle Lgo-agency wlLh Lco-communlon, reconclle a paLh Lendlng Loward pure AscenL cuL off from all, and a paLh Lendlng Loward pure uescenL lmmersed ln all: lL was an agony for Lhe enLlre era, and lL was noL aL all obvlous how Lo proceed. And lndeed, lL mlghL have remalned a mysLery Lo Lhls day, were lL noL for an alLogeLher exLraordlnary lndlvldual. Sl8l1-ln-AC1lCn 5cbellloq ls lectotloq to oo omozloq ooJleoce, bot omlJst so mocb oolse ooJ bostle, wblstlloq, ooJ koockloq oo tbe wloJows by tbose wbo coooot qet lo tbe Joot, lo socb oo ovetctowJeJ lectote boll, tbot ooe ls olmost tempteJ to qlve op llsteoloq to blm lf tbls ls to cootlooe. uotloq tbe fltst lectotes lt wos olmost o mottet of tlskloq ooes llfe to beot blm. nowevet, l bove pot my ttost lo 5cbellloq ooJ ot tbe tlsk of my llfe l bove tbe cootoqe to beot blm ooce mote. lt moy vety well blossom Jotloq tbe lectotes, ooJ lf so ooe mlqbt qloJly tlsk ooes llfe-wbot woolJ ooe oot Jo to be oble to beot 5cbellloq? l om so boppy to bove beotJ 5cbellloqs secooJ lectote-loJesctlbobly. 1be embtyoolc cbllJ of tbooqbt leopt fot joy wltblo me wbeo be meotlooeJ tbe wotlJ octoollty lo coooectloo wltb tbe telotloo of pbllosopby to octoollty. l temembet olmost evety wotJ be solJ oftet tbot. nete, petbops, clotlty coo be ocbleveJ. 1bls ooe wotJ tecolleJ oll my pbllosopblcol polos ooJ soffetloqs.-AoJ so tbot sbe, too, mlqbt sbote my joy, bow wlllloqly l woolJ tetoto to bet, bow eoqetly l woolJ coox myself to belleve tbot tbls ls tbe tlqbt cootse-Ob, lf ooly l coolJ!-oow l bove pot oll my bope lo 5cbellloq. . . . -SC8Ln klL8kLCAA8u, leLLers from Schelllng's 8erlln lecLures (1841) 23 lrledrlch Wllhelm !oseph von Schelllng (1773-1834) was born aL Leonberg ln WurLLemberg, and, always someLhlng of a boy wonder, was aL age flfLeen admlLLed Lo Lhe unlverslLy aL 1ublngen, where he became frlends wlLh Plderlln and Pegel (boLh were flve years older). Pe began publlshlng ln hls laLe Leens and, Lhough younger Lhan Pegel, was Lhe senlor parLner ln Lhelr perlod of collaboraLlon aL !ena (where, ln 1798, he was appolnLed Lo a chalr aL Lhe age of LwenLy-Lhree, hls wrlLlngs had already won commendaLlon from llchLe and CoeLhe, he had Pegel called Lhere ln 1800). unforLunaLely, Schelllng ls usually LreaLed summarlly as Lhe LranslLlon from llchLe Lo Pegel (LhaL ls, from kanL's crlLlcal phllosophy Lo absoluLe ldeallsm). 1hls ls a greaL mlsLake, l belleve, because ln many ways he was evenLually more lnfluenLlal, ln my oplnlon, Lhan even Pegel (Peldegger, for one, felL Schelllng was always Lhe mosL ptofoooJ of Lhe ldeallsLs). Pegel's sysLem was so masslve and so coherenL LhaL when lL began Lo unravel, whlch lL dld, lL raLher LoLally collapsed, whereas Schelllng ended up planLlng numerous small Llme bombs LhaL are sLlll golng off. Schelllng began, ln a sense, by reacLlng Lo Lhe LnllghLenmenL noLlon LhaL raLlonallLy alone ls Lhe hlghesL AscenL Lo whlch we can asplre. lor lf lL ls Lrue LhaL Lhe LnllghLenmenL had succeeded ln dlfferenLlaLlng mlnd and naLure, Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, lL had also Lended Lo forgeL Lhe LranscendenLal and unlfylng Cround of boLh, and Lhus lL Lended Lo Jlssoclote mlnd and naLure (Lhe greaL poLenLlal paLhology of reason). 1hls dlssoclaLlon of mlnd and naLure, Lgo and Lco, wlLh mlnd mlrrorlng" naLure ln sclenLlflc lnqulry (Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm) was, of course, well under way, buL reflecLlon had, Schelllng polnLed ouL, lnLroduced a rlfL or cleavage beLween naLure as exLernal ob[ecL and Lhe reflecLlng self as sub[ecL (whlch also, he sald, made humans ob[ecLs Lo Lhemselves-Lhe reLroflecLed monologlcal gaze, as we earller puL lL). And when reflecLlon ls made an end lL lLself, lL becomes a splrlLual malady." AL Lhe same Llme, Schelllng reallzed LhaL Lhe dlssoclaLlon could noL be overcome by a reLurn Lo Lhe lmmedlacy of feellng, Lo Lhe chlldhood, as lL were, of Lhe human race." 26 1here was no golng back Lo Lco-naLure, and Schelllng knew lL. 8aLher, he malnLalned, we have Lo go forward beyooJ reason ln order Lo dlscover LhaL mlnd and naLure are boLh slmply dlfferenL movemenLs of one absoluLe SplrlL, a SplrlL LhaL manlfesLs lLself ln lLs own successlve sLages of unfoldmenL and enfoldmenL. As Pegel would soon puL lL, SplrlL ls noL Cne aparL from Many, buL Lhe vety ptocess of Lhe Cne expresslng lLself ln successlve unfoldlngs ln and Lhrough Lhe Many-lL ls lnflnlLe acLlvlLy expresslng lLself ln and as Lhe flnlLe process of developmenL lLself (or evoluLlon). 1he AbsoluLe ls Lhus boLh Lhe Alpha and Lhe Cmega of developmenL. Schelllng: l poslL Cod as boLh Lhe flrsL and Lhe lasL, as Lhe Alpha and Lhe Cmega, as Lhe unevolved, ueos lmpllcltos, and Lhe fully evolved, ueos expllcltos"-ln oLher words, boLh Source and SummlL-and pteseot LhroughouL Lhe enLlre ascendlng or developmenLal process as Lelos (Lros), as Lhe self-organlzlng and self-Lranscendlng drlve of Lhe wbole ptocess. And, as Schelllng puL lL, lL ls Lhls otqoolzloq ptloclple whlch makes Lhe world a sysLem . . . a self-organlzlng LoLallLy." WhaLever else we mlghL say, Lhe world does hang LogeLher, and evoluLlon does have a dlrecLlon: Lros as SplrlL-ln- acLlon. 1hus, boLh Schelllng and Pegel would malnLaln LhaL evoluLlon ls noL slmply Lhe drlve towotJ SplrlL, lL ls Lhe drlve of SplrlL Loward SplrlL, manlfesLed ln a serles of lncreaslng wholes and lnLegraLlons (holons) LhaL express lncreaslng degrees of SplrlL's own self-teollzotloo or self-octoollzotloo. Lros ls fully presenL aL each and every sLage of Lhe process, os tbe vety ptocess ltself. As llchLe had puL lL, 8elng ls one endlessly self-developlng llfe whlch always advances Loward a hlgher self-reallzaLlon ln a never-endlng sLream of Llme." Cr Pegel: Lhe AbsoluLe ls Lhe process of lLs own becomlng, lL becomes concreLe or acLual only by lLs developmenL." As Pegel explalned ln hls lectotes oo tbe lbllosopby of nlstoty: 1haL Lhe hlsLory of Lhe world, wlLh all Lhe changlng scenes whlch lLs annals presenL, ls Lhls process of developmenL and Lhe reallzaLlon of SplrlL-only tbls lnslghL can reconclle SplrlL wlLh Lhe hlsLory of Lhe world-LhaL whaL has happened, and ls happenlng every day, ls noL only noL 'wlLhouL Cod,' buL ls essenLlally Cod's work" (whlch ls preclsely why LhaL whlch one can devlaLe from ls noL Lhe Lrue 1ao"). Lach sLage of developmenL (or evoluLlon) ls Lhus SplrlL's koowleJqe of ltself Lhrough Lhe sLrucLures (and llmlLaLlons) of tbot stoqe. Lach sLage ls Lherefore a Lhesls (llchLe, Pegel) LhaL evenLually runs lnLo lLs own llmltotloos (llchLe: anLlLhesls, Pegel: conLradlcLlons, Schelllng: checklng forces), whlch Lrlggers a self-ttoosceoJeoce Lo a new syotbesls (llchLe, Pegel, Schelllng: organlc unlLy), whlch boLh oeqotes and ptesetves lLs predecessor (Schelllng, Pegel). 1hls dlalecLlc, of course, ls Lros, or SplrlL-lnacLlon, Lhe drlve of SplrlL Lo unfold lLself more fully and Lhus unlfy lLself more fully. 1hus, SplrlL Lrles Lo know lLself flrsL Lhrough sensaLlon, Lhen percepLlon, Lhen lmpulse. 27 AL Lhls polnL SplrlL ls sLlll un-self-consclous. 8oLh llchLe and Schelllng make much of Lhe noLlon of Lhe unconsclous, qulLe along Lhe llnes used by loLlnus: Lhe hlgher sLages are lmpllclL ln Lhe lower, Lhey are unconsclous poLenLlals of Lhe lower, and as Lhey develop Lhey envelop. 1hus Lhe whole of naLure Schelllng refers Lo as slumberlng SplrlL." Moreover, naLure ls noL a mere lnerL and lnsLrumenLal backdrop for mlnd. 8aLher, naLure ls a self-organlzlng dynamlc sysLem" LhaL ls Lhe ob[ecLlve manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL"-naLure as a unlfled, self-developlng super-organlsm" 28 -preclsely laLo's vlslble Cod," buL now seL developmenLally or evoluLlonarlly afloaL. 1hus naLure ls mosL deflnlLely noL a sLaLlc or deLermlnlsLlc machlne, lL ls Cod-ln-Lhe-maklng." All llfe processes are manlfesLaLlons of Lhe ulvlne Llfe, unfoldlng ln space and Llme. 8uL lL ls, says Schelllng, SplrlL slombetloq because SplrlL has noL yeL become self-consclous, Lhe kosmos has noL yeL begun Lo consclously reflecL on lLself. WlLh Lhe emergence of mlnd, SplrlL becomes self-consclous. SplrlL seeks Lo know lLself Lhrough symbols and concepLs and reason, and Lhe resulL ls LhaL Lhe unlverse beglns Lo Lhlnk abouL Lhe unlverse-whlch produces Lhe world of reason and, ln parLlcular, Lhe world of consclous morals. 1hus, says Schelllng, where naLure was ob[ecLlve SplrlL, mlnd ls sub[ecLlve SplrlL. 29 And lL ls here, he says, LhaL mlnd and naLure can seem Lo drlfL aparL, Lo be LoLally unrelaLed, Lo sLare blankly and uncomprehendlngly across Lhe sub[ecL/ob[ecL duallsm aL Lhe allen belngs on each slde of Lhe dlvlde. 1he Lgo and Lhe Lco. 1hese Lwo apparenL absoluLes," as he calls Lhem, are syotbeslzeJ ln Lhe Lhlrd greaL movemenL of SplrlL, whlch ls Lhe Lranscendence of botb naLure and mlnd and Lhus Lhelr radlcal synLhesls or unlon ln whlch Lhese Lwo absoluLenesses (absoluLe ob[ecLlvlLy and absoluLe sub[ecLlvlLy) are agaln one absoluLeness," as he puLs lL (wlLh llchLe and Splnoza ln mlnd). 1hls ls also Lhe ldenLlLy of sub[ecL and ob[ecL ln one Llmeless acL of self-knowledge, of SplrlL Jltectly koowloq ltself os SplrlL, a dlrecL mysLlcal (or conLemplaLlve) lnLulLlon, says Schelllng, LhaL ls oot meJloteJ Lhrough ooy fotms, wheLher Lhose forms be Lhe feelloqs of ob[ecLlve naLure or Lhe tbooqbts of sub[ecLlve mlnd. 1here ls an unmlsLakable and profound gllmpse of Lhe formless and nondual groundless Cround, Schelllng would ofLen have recourse Lo Lhe lndlfference" and Lhe Abyss," preclsely ln Lhe llneage of LckharL and 8oehme (and ulonyslus). ln Lhe ulLlmaLe dark Abyss of Lhe dlvlne 8elng, Lhe prlmal ground or urgrund, Lhere ls no dlfferenLlaLlon buL only pure ldenLlLy." 30 reclsely whaL Lhe Sufls would call Lhe Supreme ldenLlLy. And, as Schelllng says, A dlvlslon, a dlfference musL be poslLed, lf we wlsh Lo pass from essence Lo exlsLence" (and Lhus sLarL Lhe whole process of whaL we have called lnvoluLlon or Lfflux). 1hus, for boLh Schelllng and Pegel, SplrlL goes ouL of lLself Lo produce ob[ecLlve naLure, awakens Lo lLself ln sub[ecLlve mlnd, and Lhen recovers lLself ln pure nondual percepLlon, where sub[ecL and ob[ecL are one pure acL of nondual awareness LhaL unlfles boLh naLure and mlnd ln reallzed SplrlL. SplrlL koows ltself objectlvely as naLure, koows ltself sobjectlvely as mlnd, and koows ltself obsolotely as SplrlL-Lhe Source, Lhe SummlL, and Lhe Lros of Lhe whole sequence. (We would also recognlze Lhese Lhree large movemenLs as subconsclous, self-consclous, and superconsclous, or blosphere, noosphere, and Lheosphere, or prepersonal, personal, and Lranspersonal-Lhe Lhree large domalns LhaL we have meL many Llmes ln Lhe prevlous chapLers.) 1he whole evoluLlonary sequence ls Lhus holonlc Lhrough and Lhrough. Lach sLage (of AscenL) bullds upon and lncorporaLes lLs predecessors-Lhe lasL ls Lhe resulL of all earller: noLhlng ls losL, all prlnclples are preserved" (Pegel). WhaL ls losL ls Lhe narrowness of Lhe predecessor, or lLs clalm Lo be Lhe Whole (Pegel calls Lhls Lhe negaLlon of Lhe negaLlon"). Lach sLage lncorporaLes lLs predecessor buL negaLes lLs parLlallLy. Says Pegel: 1o supersede ls aL once Lo negaLe and Lo preserve." Schelllng's vlew ls llkewlse a preclse and perfecL summary of developmenL or evoluLlon as emergenL holons wlLhln emergenL holons: 1he lower ls Lhe necessary foundaLlon for Lhe hlgher, and Lhe laLLer subsumes Lhe former ln lLself. 8uL Lhere ls also Lhe emergence of someLhlng new, and Lhls new level explalns Lhe level whlch lL presupposes." 31 1hls ls a Lruly sLunnlng vlslon, a profound lnLegraLlon of Lgo-mlnd and Lco-naLure, of SplrlL descendlng lnLo even Lhe lowesL sLaLe and ascendlng back Lo lLself, wlLh SplrlL noneLheless folly pteseot ot eocb ooJ evety stoqe as Lhe ptocess of lLs own self-reallzaLlon and self-acLuallzaLlon, lLs own self-unfoldlng and self-enfoldlng developmenL, a dlvlne play of SplrlL presenL ln every slngle movemenL of Lhe kosmos, yeL flndlng more and more of lLself as lLs own lay proceeds, danclng fully and dlvlne ln every gesLure of Lhe unlverse, never really losL and never really found, buL presenL from Lhe sLarL and all along, a wlnk and a nod from Lhe radlanL Abyss. We wlll reLurn Lo Schelllng's vlslon ln Lhe nexL chapLer, and polnL ouL more clearly [usL how lL managed Lo unlLe Lgo and Lco, Ascendlng and uescendlng, wlLhouL sacrlflclng Lhe galns of elLher. 32 8uL for Lhe momenL, we should noLe LhaL lf all of Lhls sounds llke llotloos tempotollzeJ, LhaL would noL be far wrong. As one hlsLorlan of Lhe perlod puL lL: lf we are Lo speak of a key" Lo early 8omanLlclsm, lL ls Lo be found ln one of Lhe Lhlnkers of anLlqulLy, loLlnus. lor Lhls neoplaLonlc phllosopher noL only lnsplred Lhe enLlre sysLem of novalls, and many of Lhe ldeas of Schelllng ln hls mlddle perlod, hls arm reached furLher: Lhrough novalls and Schelllng he exerclsed an lnfluence upon boLh Schlegels, and wlLhouL a knowledge of Lhls facL many a passage ln Lhe ulalogue Concernlng oeLry" and ln Lhe 8erlln lecLures [of W. Schlegel] remalns an enlgma. 33 1he genlus novalls," as he ls usually referred Lo, wroLe ln a leLLer Lo lrledrlch Schlegel, l do noL know lf l have already spoken Lo you of my beloved loLlnus. 1hrough 1ledemann l have been lnlLlaLed lnLo Lhls phllosopher, born expressly for me, and l have almosL been frlghLened by hls resemblance Lo kanL and llchLe. Pe pleases me more Lhan elLher of Lhem." Pe cerLalnly pleased Schelllng, and Schelllng's lnfluence was enormous, and noL only as Lhe sLarLlng polnL for Pegel's sysLem. Schelllng was frlends wlLh Plderlln, CoeLhe, Schlller, Lhe Schlegels. Pe dlrecLly lnfluenced lrledrlch Schlelermacher, who revoluLlonlzed Lhe concepL of rellglon by suggesLlng LhaL all genulne splrlLuallLy ls a resulL of dlrecL experlence, noL bellefs. Schelllng's noLlon of organlc unlLy, and hls bellef LhaL percepLlon ls noL mlrrorlng" buL acLlonlng," anLlclpaLed much of CesLalL psychology (and auLopoleLlc cognlLlve Lheory). ln hls ldea of Lros as unllmlLed acLlvlLy, he seL off a whole llne of wlll" LheorlsLs, from Schopenhauer Lo 8ergson Lo nleLzsche. aul 1llllch Lraces Lhls llne of lnfluence: 1he mosL lmporLanL pupll of Schopenhauer was nleLzsche. 1he llne Lhen runs from nleLzsche Lo 8ergson, Lhe lrench volunLarlsL, Peldegger and SarLre, and Lo WhlLehead, Lhe greaL meLaphyslclan of our cenLury-all of Lhls came from Schelllng." 34 WlLh hls Lheory of arL and aesLheLlc percepLlon-namely, LhaL ln greaL arL we have a chance Lo Lranscend Lhe sub[ecL/ob[ecL duallLy-he became, wlLh Schlller, Lhe faLher of vlrLually all 8omanLlc aesLheLlc movemenLs. And hls Lheory of symbollc forms was a forerunner, as Casslrer polnLed ouL, of hls own work and much of !ung's analyLlc psychology. Schelllng's (loLlnlan) noLlon of Lhe unconsclous passed Lo Carus, whose book lsycbe (1846) malnLalned LhaL Lhe key Lo consclous menLal llfe ls Lo be found ln Lhe unconsclous. lrom Lhere lL reappears ln Schopenhauer, one of whose sLudenLs, Lduard von ParLmann, wroLe Lhe enormously successful and lnfluenLlal lbllosopby of tbe uocooscloos (1869)-lL wenL lnLo Len edlLlons, and appeared Lwo decades before lreud and 8reuer's 5toJles lo nystetlo (1893). ConnecLed wlLh Lhe noLlon of Lhe unconsclous was Schelllng's lnLroducLlon of Lhe exLremely lnfluenLlal concepL of olleootloo, whlch speclflcally meanL LhaL SplrlL loses" lLself ln manlfesLaLlon, and evoluLlon or developmenL ls Lhe overcomlng of Lhls self-esLrangemenL, an overcomlng of allenaLlon by Lhe reLurn of SplrlL Lo SplrlL, or a dlrecL redlscovery of Lhe non-dual (whaL we called dls-membermenL re-membered). Men and women, caughL ln Lhe sub[ecL/ob[ecL duallLy, are Lhus olleooteJ from Source and SummlL-and Lhus allenaLed from Lhe All-and lL ls only ln overcomlng duallLy and exlsLenLlal allenaLlon LhaL men and women can flnd genulne happlness. Among Lhose aLLendlng Lhese 8erlln lecLures were Sren klerkegaard, !akob 8urkhardL, Mlchael 8akunln, and lrledrlch Lngels, collaboraLor wlLh karl Marx. 8uL Lhe lmmedlaLe effecL of Lhls developmenLal phllosophy" (or Lhe phllosophy of Lros) was LhaL Lhe noLlon of evoluLlon was everywhere ln Lhe alr"-and Lhls was sLlll slx decades before uarwln. 33 A Lheory of emergenL evoluLlon [was] demanded by Schelllng's vlew of Lhe world as a self-developlng organlc unlLy. lndeed, he expllclLly refers Lo Lhe posslblllLy of evoluLlon. Pe observes, for lnsLance, LhaL even lf man's experlence does noL reveal any case of Lhe LransformaLlon of one specles lnLo anoLher, lack of emplrlcal evldence does noL prove LhaL such a LransformaLlon ls lmposslble. lor lL may well be LhaL such changes can Lake place only ln a much longer perlod of Llme Lhan LhaL covered by man's experlence." 36 1hus, by 1810, Schelllng's frlend and sLudenL, Lhe naLurallsL Lorenz Cken, malnLalned LhaL Lhe phllosophy of naLure ls Lhe sclence of Lhe eLernal LransformaLlon of Cod lnLo Lhe world," and ouLllned Lhe research agenda: lL has Lhe Lask of showlng Lhe phases of Lhe world's evoluLlon from Lhe prlmal noLhlngness [doesn'L sound qulLe so sllly anymore, does lL?]: how Lhe heavenly bodles and Lhe elemenLs arose, how Lhese advanced Lo hlgher forms, how organlsms flnally appeared. . . . 1hese phases consLlLuLe Lhe hlsLory of Lhe generaLlon of Lhe unlverse. 37 loLlnus Lemporallzed = evoluLlon. Love[oy, ever on Lhe scene wlLh a percepLlve reporL, polnLs ouL LhaL Lhe appearance of Lhe general noLlon of an evoluLlonary advance long anLedaLed Lhe dlscovery of mosL of Lhe sclenLlflc evldence for LhaL hypoLhesls, lL was becomlng famlllar ln very wldely read wrlLlngs before Lhe mlddle of Lhe elghLeenLh cenLury. 1hus one of Lhe effecLs ofLen aLLrlbuLed Lo Lhe lnfluence of blologlcal evoluLlonlsm had ln facL come abouL long before Lhe esLabllshmenL and general dlffuslon of LhaL docLrlne, and qulLe lndependenLly of lL." 38 When uarwln came along and duLlfully supplled some of Lhe emplrlcal evldence for blologlcal evoluLlon, lL shocked nobody excepL Lhe remnanLs of Lhe myLhlc bellevers ln Lhe llLeral Cenesls myLh, buL Lhey were already shocked by whaL Schelllng and oLher developmenLallsLs were dolng anyway. lor Lhe pasL cenLury or so, lL has been sclenLlflc dogma LhaL uarwln's greaL and endurlng conLrlbuLlon was Lhe dlscovery, noL LhaL evoluLlon occurred (Lhls, as we have seen, was an almosL cenLury-old hypoLhesls by Lhen), buL bow lL occurred: namely, Lhrough naLural selecLlon (codlscovered by Wallace). ln an updaLed verslon: chance muLaLlon leads Lo geneLlc alLeraLlons, Lhe vasL ma[orlLy of whlch are maladapLlve, buL a few of whlch conLrlbuLe Lo a greaLer (or aL leasL dlfferenL) capaclLy for adapLaLlon and survlval, and Lhus Lhese muLaLlons are selecLed and geneLlcally carrled forward ln Lhe gene pool. WhaLever else Lhls Lheory dld or dld noL accompllsh, lL preemlnenLly allowed sclence Lo lgnore any sorL of Lros, any sorL of genLle persuaslon" or LranscendenL/emergenL drlve, and Lhus men and women could Lrace sclence Lhen wlLh modesLy Lhy gulde." 8uL lL ls now almosL unlversally recognlzed by sclenLlsLs LhaL, alLhough naLural selecLlon can accounL qulLe well for mlcroevoluLlon" (or varlaLlon wlLhln a glven range of posslblllLles), lL can accounL noL aL all for macroevoluLlon (or Lhe emergence of new ranges of posslblllLy). 39 Add Lo LhaL Lhe facL LhaL Lhe 8lg 8ang has made ldeallsLs ouL of vlrLually anybody who Lhlnks abouL lL, and Lhe resulL ls LhaL mosL phllosophers of sclence now openly admlL-and even champlon-Lhe facL LhaL evoluLlon has some sorL of self-Lranscendlng drlve Lucked wlLhln lLs own processes-whaL we called LeneL 2c, Lhe self-Lranscendlng capaclLles of all holons. ln oLher words, Lros. 1he lasLlng conLrlbuLlon of uarwln's Lheory, Lhen, was noL LhaL lL dlscovered a mechanlsm for macroevoluLlon, for lL dld noL, raLher, lL obscured for over a cenLury Lhe facL LhaL a genulne Lheory of evoluLlon demands someLhlng resembllng Lros. uarwln's lostloq conLrlbuLlon was prlmarlly a masslve obscuraLanlsm. SclenLlsLs all cheery and self- conLenL began Lo scrub Lhe unlverse clean of anyLhlng resembllng love and lLs all-encompasslng embrace, and all congraLulaLed Lhemselves on yeL anoLher vlcLory for LruLh (Wallace, as ls well known, dld oot Lhlnk naLural selecLlon could replace Lros, evoluLlon was lLself, he LhoughL, Lhe mode and manner of SplrlL's creaLlon," and uarwln hlmself noLorlously wavered). 8uL Lhe world dld noL waver. As we wlll see ln Lhe nexL chapLer, wlLh Lhe collapse of vlrLually any form of ldeallsm, Lhe WesLern world nesLled comforLably lnLo Lhe uescended domaln of Lhe naLurallsLlc flaLland, wlLh lLs alLogeLher low cenLer of onLologlcal gravlLy, llke a beanbag chalr already seLLled. And wlLhln Lhls cozlly low and snug-some would say cowardly-sLance, Lhe mono-Lgo and mono-Lco baLLled lL ouL ln morLal combaL, flghLlng for Lhe royal rlghL Lo domlnaLe a cardboard cosmos. And Lhere Lhe WesLern world would remaln unLll only Lhe mosL recenL of Llmes. lL ls Lhe Llme of Lhe gods LhaL have fled ooJ of Lhe god LhaL ls comlng. lL ls Lhe Llme of oeeJ, because lL lles under a double lack and a double noL: Lhe no-more of Lhe gods LhaL have fled and Lhe noL-yeL of Lhe god LhaL ls comlng. 14 1be uopockloq of CoJ 1bls owoteoess, ftee ftom oo loslJe ot oo ootslJe, ls opeo llke tbe sky. lt ls peoettotloq wokefoloess ftee ftom llmltotloos ooJ pottlollty. wltblo tbe vost ooJ opeo spoce of tbls oll-embtocloq mloJ, All pbeoomeoo of somsoto ooJ oltvooo moolfest llke tolobows lo tbe sky. wltblo tbls stote of oowovetloq owoteoess, All tbot oppeots ooJ exlsts, llke o teflectloo, Appeots bot ls empty, tesoooJs bot ls empty, lts ootote ls mptloess ftom tbe vety beqlooloq. -1SCCu8uk 8AnCu8CL, 1be lllqbt of tbe CotoJo 1PL CCu 1PA1 was Lo come. 1he uescenL of Lhe all-pervadlng World Soul. 1he comlng of Lhe Cver-human, Lhe Cver- Soul, Lhe Lranspersonal dawn, nomo oolvetsolls. And noL merely ln rare, lndlvldual, lsolaLed cases, buL as a ceotet of soclol otqoolzloq fotces-[usL as maglc and myLhlc and menLal had prevlously emerged aL large and organlzed culLures around Lhe world accordlng Lo Lhelr baslc paLLerns. 1he comlng of Lhe World Soul, blesslng each and all wlLh lnLulLlons of Lhe Cver-Soul, [olned each and all ln Lhe councll and communlon of all senLlenL belngs, Lhe communlLy of all souls, llkewlse lnsLlLuLlonallzed ln sLrucLures LhaL guard lLs preclousness Lhe way Lhe worldcenLrlc raLlonallLy ls now lnsLlLuLlonallzed and guarded ln law and educaLlon and governmenL and communlLy. 1he lnLegraLlon of Lhe physlosphere and blosphere and noosphere ln each and every compound lndlvldual, noL as a Lheory buL as a ceottol lJeotlty lo cooscloosoess ([usL as Lhe ego or person ls Lhe cenLral ldenLlLy lnsLlLuLlonallzed ln raLlonal culLures of Loday). 1he comlng of Lhe Cver-Soul LhaL ls Lhe World Soul, Louchlng each and all wlLh lLs Coodness and lLs Clory, bapLlzlng each wlLh lLs 8rllllance and lLs 8lesslng. 1he comlng of Lhe World Soul, Lralllng clouds of wondermenL, slnglng songs of llberaLlon, danclng madly and dlvlne ln splendor and salvaLlon. 1he long-soughL comlng of Lhe World Soul, changlng every lL" and every we" and every l" lL Louches: ln a momenL, ln Lhe Lwlnkllng of an eye, we wlll be changed, we all wlll be changed. 1he loveless, beaLen, baLLered self wlll leL go Lhe LormenL and Lhe LorLure of lLs self-embraclng ways, Llre of LhaL marrlage Lo a speclal mlsery LhaL lL had chosen over lonellness, Lo nurse lL Lhrough Lhe long bruLallLy of a llfe LhaL doesn'L care, surrender Lhe murderous love affalr wlLh lLs own perplexed reflecLlon, whlch had lLself preLended Lo Lhe Lhrone of Lhe ulvlne, and flnd lnsLead lLs soul ln Crace and drenched LhroughouL wlLh a lumlnous Cod LhaL ls lLs own Lrue 8elng-lLs always and only Crlglnal lace, smlllng now from Lhe radlanL Abyss, unreasonably happy ln Lhe face of every slghL, seL helplessly afloaL on Lhe Sea of lnLlmacy, adrlfL ln currenLs of Compasslon and caressed ln unrelenLlng Care, one wlLh each and one wlLh all ln muLual Self-recognlLlon, danclng ln Lhe dawn LhaL heralds now Lhe Self of all LhaL Lruly ls, and Lhe CommunlLy of all LhaL well mlghL be, and Lhe SLaLe of all LhaL ls Lo come. And every l wlll slng of Lhe Self, and every We wlll resonaLe wlLh worshlp of Lhe ulvlne, and every lL wlll radlaLe Lhe llghL of a SplrlL happy Lo be seen, wlLh dlalogue Lhe abode of Lhe Cods and percepLlon Lhe home of Crace, and gone Lhe lonely loveless self, Lhe god of lLs own percepLlon, and gone Lhe Codless desLlny of Llme and separaLlon. 1he blessed, blessed uescenL of Lhe World Soul: ln a momenL, ln Lhe Lwlnkllng of an eye, we wlll be changed, we all wlll be changed. erhaps lL wlll happen afLer all. And perhaps lL wlll noL. l belleve LhaL Lhe lnLulLlon of Lhe Cver-Soul, Lhe World Soul, ls lndeed lncreaslng ln frequency and ln lnLenslLy ln more and more lndlvlduals around Lhe globe, and ln Lhe nexL Lwo volumes ln Lhls serles we wlll look more closely aL Lhe evldence, qulLe lmpresslve, l belleve, LhaL Lhls ls lndeed happenlng. 8uL as always, we have Lo moke Lhe fuLure LhaL ls qlveo Lo us. And lL ls my sLrongesL convlcLlon LhaL Lhe uescenL of Lhe all-pervadlng World Soul ls faclllLaLed, or hlndered, Lo preclsely Lhe degree LhaL we unpack lLs lnLulLlon adequaLely. As we have seen, all Jeptb musL be lotetpteteJ. And how we lnLerpreL depLh ls cruclally lmporLanL for Lhe blrLh of LhaL depLh lLself. new depLh allows us new lnLerpreLaLlons, Lhe new lnLerpreLaLlons cocreaLe and glve blrLh Lo LhaL depLh, help unpack LhaL depLh. unpacklng Lhe depLh ls Lhe emergence of LhaL depLh. And Lhus, leL us oh-so-carefully unpack Lhls preclous ClfL of splrlLual lnLulLlon. Many lndlvlduals lnLulL Lhe Cver-Soul (or hlgher) and yeL unpack LhaL lnLulLlon, lnLerpreL LhaL lnLulLlon, ln Lerms merely or solely of Lhe Plgher Self, Lhe lnner volce, Lhe care of Lhe Soul, lnLerlor WlLnesslng, Lhe unlversal Mlnd, pure Awareness, LranscendenLal Consclousness, or slmllar such upper-LefL quadranL Lerms. And however Lrue LhaL aspecL of Lhe lnLulLlon ls, Lhls unpacklng leaves ouL, or serlously dlmlnlshes, Lhe we" and Lhe lL" dlmenslons. lL leaves ouL Lhe soclal and culLural and ob[ecLlve manlfesLaLlons: lL falls Lo glve a seamless accounL of Lhe Lypes of communlLy and soclal servlce and culLural acLlvlLy LhaL are lobeteotly demanded by a hlgher Self, lL lgnores or neglecLs Lhe changes ln Lhe Lechno-economlc lnfrasLrucLures LhaL supporL each and every Lype of embodled self (wheLher hlgher or lower or anyLhlng ln beLween), lL lgnores Lhe overall ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs or ob[ecLlve reallLy LhaL does noL Jettoct from Lhe Self buL ls an unavoldable ospect of LhaL Self's very manlfesLaLlon. 1he ldea seems Lo be LhaL lf l can [usL conLacL my hlgher Self, Lhen everyLhlng else wlll Lake care of lLself. 8uL Lhls falls mlserably Lo see LhaL SplrlL manlfesLs always and slmulLaneously os Lhe four quadranLs of Lhe kosmos. SplrlL (aL any level) manlfesLs as a self ln a communlLy wlLh soclal and culLural foundaLlons and ob[ecLlve correlaLes, and Lhus any blqbet Self wlll lnexLrlcably lnvolve a wlJet communlLy exlsLlng ln a Jeepet ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs. ConLacLlng Lhe hlgher Self ls noL Lhe end of all problems buL Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe lmmense and dlfflculL new work Lo be done. 1hus, lnLulLlng SplrlL buL lnLerpreLlng lL merely ln l" Lerms as a Plgher Self or whaLnoL (upper-LefL quadranL)-Lhls ends up belng a merely Ascendlng aLh, wlLh no slncere and well-concelved lnLerpreLaLlons of exacLly how Lo go abouL embraclng Lhe manlfesL world ln all lLs dlmenslons. lL ls Lhe old llchLean move. lL ls sLlll caughL ln one pole of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm: Lhe pure Lgo, Lhe pure Self, wlll solve all problems. And Lhus Lhe llngerlng susplclon LhaL soaks Lhese approaches: lf you really care abouL Lhe world, or worry abouL Lhe world, Lhen you can'L acLually be conLacLlng Lhe Plgher Self (because Lhe Plgher Self would Lake care of LhaL: your concern" or worry" for Lhe world shows you haven'L found Lhe Lrue Self). Whereas ln facL, lL ls [usL Lhe opposlLe: Lhe more you conLacL Lhe Plgher Self, Lhe mote you worry abouL Lhe world, as a componenL of your very Self, Lhe Self of each and all. LmpLlness ls lorm. 8rahman ls Lhe World. 1o floolly conLacL 8rahman ls Lo oltlmotely engage Lhe World. 1hus, a Lrue and profound lnLulLlon ls corrupLed, or dlsLorLed, or LllLed, by a well-meanlng buL noL very adequaLe lnLerpreLaLlon. 1he lnLulLlon of SplrlL ls unpacked poorly, hasLlly, and Lhe ClfL ls damaged ln Lhe process. Conversely, a more graceful unpacklng faclllLaLes furLher and deeper lnLulLlons, lnLulLlons Louchlng Lhe l and Lhe We and Lhe lL domalns: noL [usL how Lo conLacL Lhe hlgher Self, buL how Lo see lL embraced ln culLure, embodled ln naLure, and embedded ln soclal lnsLlLuLlons. 8eallzed, embraced, embodled, embedded: a more graceful lnLerpreLaLlon coverlng all four quadranLs (because SplrlL lLself manlfesLs as all four quadranLs) faclllLaLes Lhe blrLh of LhaL SplrlL whlch ls demandlng Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon. Craceful lnLerpreLaLlon mldwlfes SplrlL's blrLh, SplrlL's descenL. 1he more adequaLely l can lnLerpreL Lhe lnLulLlon of SplrlL, Lhe more LhaL SplrlL can speak Lo me, Lhe more Lhe channels of communlcaLlon are open, leadlng from communlcaLlon Lo communlon Lo unlon Lo ldenLlLy. And SplrlL's lnLerpreLaLlon merely as a Plgher Self ls noL very graceful, l don'L Lhlnk. 1 Llkewlse, Lhere are many good souls who have a profound lnLulLlon of SplrlL buL unpack LhaL lnLulLlon ln merely lL" Lerms, descrlblng SplrlL as Lhe sum LoLal of all phenomena or processes lnLerwoven LogeLher ln a greaL unlfled sysLem or neL or web or lmpllcaLe order or unlfled fleld (Lower-8lghL quadranL). All of whlch ls Lrue enough, buL all of whlch leaves ouL enLlrely Lhe lnLerlor dlmenslons of l" and we." 1hls less-Lhan-adequaLe lnLerpreLaLlon ls moooloqlcol Lo Lhe core, flaLland Lhrough and Lhrough. lL ls Lhe old SplnozlsL move, Lhe oLher pole-Lhe Lco pole-of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm (ln Lhe form of Lhe 8omanLlc rebelllon). lL Lhlnks LhaL Lhe enemy ls aLomlsm, and LhaL Lhe cenLral problem ls slmply Lo be able Lo ptove or demonsLraLe once and for all LhaL Lhe unlverse ls a greaL and unlfled hollsLlc SysLem or Crder or Web. lL marshals a vasL amounL of sclenLlflc evldence, from physlcs Lo blology, and offers exLenslve argumenLs, all geared Lo ob[ecLlvely provlng Lhe hollsLlc naLure of Lhe unlverse. lL falls Lo see LhaL lf we Lake a bunch of egos wlLh aLomlsLlc concepLs and Leach Lhem LhaL Lhe unlverse ls hollsLlc, all we wlll acLually geL ls a bunch of egos wlLh hollsLlc concepLs. reclsely because Lhls monologlcal approach, wlLh lLs unsklllful lnLerpreLaLlon of an oLherwlse genulne lnLulLlon, lgnores or neglecLs Lhe l" and Lhe we" dlmenslons, lL doesn'L undersLand very well Lhe exacL naLure of Lhe looet ttoosfotmotloos LhaL are necessary ln Lhe flrsL place ln order Lo be able Lo flnd an ldenLlLy LhaL embraces Lhe manlfesL All. 1olk abouL Lhe All as much as we wanL, noLhlng fundamenLally changes. And noLhlng changes because Lhe proof" or Lhe new paradlgm" or greaL sysLem" ls sLlll belng puL ln monologlcal lL-language. 1hls doesn'L engage Lhe process of lnner LransformaLlon. 1he profoundly LransformaLlve quesLlon ls oot: ls Lhe world hollsLlc or aLomlsLlc? 1he LransformaLlve quesLlon ls: who or whaL ls aware of boLh hollsLlc and aLomlsLlc concepLs? (1he move from Lhe exLerlor Lo Lhe lnLerlor.) And tbeo: havlng resLed ln Lhe WlLness of Lhose concepLs, a WlLness LhaL lLself ls nelLher hollsLlc nor aLomlsLlc, see here Lhe WlLness dlssolve ln an LmpLlness LhaL embraces Lhe enLlre kosmos. (1he move from Lhe lnLerlor Lo Lhe superlor.) 1o remaln argulng abouL Lhe exLerlors ls Lo effecLlvely seal ouL Lhe lnLerlor and Lhus Lhe superlor. locuslng on Lhe exLerlor world belng hollsLlc Lhus mlsses Lhe cenLral LransformaLlve occaslon. Long ago nagar[una devasLaLed such approaches, polnLlng ouL LhaL hollsLlc or aLomlsLlc, or boLh or nelLher, are all beslde Lhe polnL (and, he added, Lhey're all false anyway). lL ls Lhe radlcal deconsLrucLlon of all concepLuallzaLlons whaLsoever LhaL paves Lhe way for pure lnLulLlon (pra[na) of ShunyaLa (LmpLlness or Cpenness). lf we meeL even Lhe 8uddha and are supposed Lo klll hlm, guess how hollsm wlll fare. 1hus, however Lrue Lhe orlglnal lnLulLlon of SplrlL ls (and l do noL doubL LhaL lL ls Lrue), lL ls noL faclllLaLed by an lnLerpreLaLlon LhaL reduces all of SplrlL's dlmenslons merely Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, merely Lo descrlpLlons of Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order (even lf Lhose descrlpLlons are Lrue enough). 2 1hose lnLerpreLaLlons, Laken ln and by Lhemselves, block Lhe LransformaLlve evenL, Lhose lnLerpreLaLlons, drlven orlglnally by a Lrue lnLulLlon of Lhe very ulvlne, do noL faclllLaLe Lhe furLher descenL of LhaL ulvlne, Lhose lnLerpreLaLlons are unsklllful Lo mldwlfe Lhe blrLh of SplrlL (whlch ls noneLheless Lhe orlglnal source of whaL Lurns ouL Lo be less-Lhan-adequaLe lnLerpreLaLlons). And worse: when Lhe lnLulLlon of SplrlL ls unpacked merely or solely ln lL-Lerms, ln monologlcal Lerms, Lhe approach ends up belng a purely uescended worldvlew. SplrlL ls slmply ldenLlfled wlLh Lhe Sum 1oLal of exLerlors, Lhe Sum 1oLal of Lhe shadows ln Lhe Cave. So lnLenL are we on provlng LhaL Lhe shadows are one greaL lnLerlocklng order LhaL we never move from Lhese exLerlors Lo Lhe real lnLerlor, and Lhus we never flnd Lhe genulne superlor. 1hls less-Lhan-adequaLe lnLerpreLaLlon makes lL appear LhaL Lhe mosL urgenL problem ln Lhe modern world ls Lo Leach everybody sysLems Lheory (or some verslon of Cala's web-of-llfe noLlons, or some verslon of Lhe new physlcs"), lnsLead of seelng LhaL whaL ls requlred ls an undersLandlng of Lhe lotetlot stoqes of consclousness developmenL. Cala's maln problem ls noL Loxlc wasLe dumps, ozone depleLlon, or blospherlc polluLlon. 1hese global problems can ooly be recognlzed and responded Lo from a global, worldcenLrlc awareness, and Lhus Cala's maln problem ls LhaL noL enough human belngs have developed and evolved from egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc, Lhere Lo reallze-and acL on-Lhe ecologlcal crlsls. Cala's maln problem ls noL exLerlor polluLlon buL lnLerlor developmenL, whlch alone coo end exLerlor polluLlon. reconvenLlonal/egocenLrlc and convenLlonal/eLhnocenLrlc could care less abouL Lhe global commons, only posLconvenLlonal/worldcenLrlc can fully see, and effecLlvely respond Lo, Lhe oolvetsol dlmenslons of Lhe problem (only formop and vlslon-loglc can grasp unlversal perspecLlves). 1hus, Lhe more we emphaslze Leachlng a merely 8lghL-Pand map of sysLems Lheory or a Cala Web of Llfe, lnsLead of equally emphaslzlng Lhe lmporLance of lotetlot Jevelopmeot from egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc, Lhen Lhe more we are conLrlbuLlng Lo Cala's demlse. Clobal problems demand global awareness, and only lnLerlor and LefL-Pand sLages of developmenL-preclsely Lhe domaln lgnored by flaLland Lco approaches-can even begln Lo handle Lhe problem. 1he pure Lco approach, llke lLs cousln Lhe pure Lgo (or pure Self) approach, slmply reduces all of SplrlL's dlmenslons Lo one prlvlleged domaln, crlppllng Lhe full emergence and descenL of SplrlL lLself. !usL as Lhe ldea ln Lhe pure Self camp ls LhaL lf we slmply conLacL Lhe Plgher Self, all our problems wlll be solved, so Lhe ldea ln Lhe pure Lco approach ls LhaL lf we can [usL demonsLraLe, once and for all, Lhe unlfled and hollsLlc naLure of Lhe pure Lco, Lhen LhaL wlll solve all our problems. 1haL forceful demonsLraLlon (LhaL SplnozlsL ptoof ln ob[ecLlve Lerms) wlll lLself compel all lndlvlduals Lo Lransform Lo ulLlmaLe unlLy, or so lL ls malnLalned. 1hus, Lhe only lnLerlor" change Lhls camp recognlzes ls Lhe sloqle change from holdlng an aLomlsLlc concepLlon Lo holdlng a hollsLlc concepLlon. 8ecause Lhls camp cenLers on exLerlors, lL has an lncredlbly nalve and anemlc concepLlon of all Lhe lnner and lnLerlor developmenLs necessary ln order Lo be able Lo embrace Lhe All. lurLher, ln recognlzlng only Lhls slngle" change from aLomlsLlc Lo hollsLlc concepLs, lL mlsses Lhe cruclal facL LhaL change of bellefs does noL mean change of consclousness. lL means slmply a new LranslaLlon, noL necessarlly a new LransformaLlon. 1he sLandard response from Lhe Lco camps ls LhaL lf people Lruly learned and really undersLood Lhe hollsLlc oneness of reallLy and Lhe greaL web, LhaL would force Lhem Lo glve up Lhelr egos and Lhey would lndeed Lruly Lransform. 8uL, as we have seen, lL ls acLually qulLe Lhe conLrary: embraclng a monologlcal worldvlew ln flaLland Lerms resulLs preclsely ln dlvlne egolsm. (8ecause Lhe 8lghL-Pand-only vlew of sysLems Lheory lacks an undersLandlng of Lhe lnLerlor sLages of consclousness developmenL-from preconvenLlonal/egocenLrlc Lo convenLlonal/soclocenLrlc Lo posLconvenLlonal/worldcenLrlc-or more preclsely, because lL lacks an undersLandlng of all nlne fulcrums of lnLerlor unfoldlng, lL has no way Lo carefully gauge consclousness evoluLlon and developmenL. lor Lhls reason, flaLland cannoL spoL Lhe dlfference beLween lnfraraLlonal consclousness and supraraLlonal consclousness-because lL cannoL spoL lnLerlor consclousness aL all-and Lhus lL consLanLly falls prey Lo masslve pre/Lrans fallacles. 1hls allows lLs proponenLs Lo embrace preconvenLlonal lnLerlors as lf Lhey were posLconvenLlonal reallLles: allows Lhem Lo fall lnLo preconvenLlonal/egocenLrlc enLhuslasms, even as Lhey champlon exLerlor hollsm and Lhe greaL Web of Llfe, preclsely as we saw wlLh Lhe 8omanLlcs.) 1hls approach, Lhen, focuses almosL excluslvely on uharma, or Lhe ob[ecLlve 1ruLh, and noL enough on 8uddha (sub[ecLlve) and Sangha (lnLersub[ecLlve), or how LhaL 1ruLh refracLs as well Lhrough Lhe psychologlcal and culLural domalns (how LhaL SplrlL manlfesLs as all four quadranLs of Lhe kosmos). And when ob[ecLlve LruLh ls made Lhe LoLal LruLh"-when lL ls really LhoughL Lo be uLLerly hollsLlc" and all-encompasslng"-Lhen 8uddha and Sangha are vlolenLly reduced Lo flaLland ob[ecLlvlsL Lerms, and an approach LhaL orlglnally wlshes us Lo Lranscend and lnclude, ends up belng a merely and purely uescended worldvlew LhaL effecLlvely blocks Lranscendence alLogeLher. My polnL ls LhaL less-Lhan-sklllful lnLerpreLaLlons of oLherwlse genulne SplrlLual lnLulLlons do noL faclllLaLe Lhe blrLhlng of furLher lnLulLlons, and Lhus a speclal care and Lhoroughness ls requlred ln Lhe unpacklng of Lhls ClfL of Cod, Lhls preclous splrlLual lnLulLlon. l would llke Lo spend Lhe resL of Lhls chapLer explorlng Lhls ldea, and end wlLh a brlef revlew and summary of Lhe dlfflculLles ln boLh Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco vlews. And we wlll flnlsh our accounL of Lhe ldeallsLs and Lhelr endurlng legacy. 8uL l would llke Lo sLarL wlLh one lasL reason LhaL an approach Lo SplrlL based on monologlcal exLerlors ls a loslng proposlLlon. lnCCMLL1L C8 unCL81Aln AJJltloo 2. vety boloo lssoes oo lOu to tbe kosmos. A general Lheme runnlng LhroughouL Lhe ldeallsL wrlLers-and lndeed, a Lheme found ln vlrLually all of Lhe mysLlcally or conLemplaLlvely orlenLed phllosopher-sages Lhe world over-ls LhaL flnlLe Lhlngs, flnlLe holons, are somehow profoundly lockloq, or even profoundly coottoJlctoty, ln and of Lhemselves. All flnlLe Lhlngs are conLradlcLory," as Pegel puL lL. nagar[una would malnLaln Lhe same for all flnlLe phenomena (boLh LhoughL and Lhlngs are self-conLradlcLory). lrom LckharL Lo 8radley, from Shankara Lo 8amana, from AblnavagupLa Lo Caudapada-Lhe general noLlon ls LhaL, as Pegel puL lL, All Lhlngs ln Lhemselves are conLradlcLory." 1hese Lypes of sLaLemenLs have ofLen sLlrred much conLroversy ln phllosophlcal clrcles, and many phllosophers are elLher annoyed or puzzled by whaL Lhey mean (or even can mean). 8uL Lhe reason Lhese Lypes of sLaLemenLs (All holons are self-conLradlcLory") come from mysLlcally orlenLed phllosopher-sages ls LhaL Lhey have gllmpsed Lhe eLernal, LasLed lnflnlLy, and Lhus all flnlLe Lhlngs by compotlsoo are pale, lncompleLe, uncerLaln, shlfLlng, shadowy. And Lhus Lo be metely flnlLe ls noL only a consLrlcLlon, lL ls ulLlmaLely self-defeaLlng: Lo be merely flnlLe ls Lo deny lnflnlLy, and Lhls ls self-conLradlcLory ln Lhe deepesL sense because lL denles one's deepesL reallLy. 1hls ls why, l Lhlnk, Pegel says, lor anyLhlng Lo be flnlLe, ls [usL Lo sopptess ltself and pot ltself oslJe." And Lhus, all LhaL ls deLermlnaLe and flnlLe ls oostoble." And lL ls Lhls lncompleLeness, Lhls lnsLablllLy, LhaL drlves Lhe aglLaLed movemenL of Lhe enLlre flnlLe and manlfesL unlverse: Cnly lnsofar," he says, as someLhlng has conLradlcLlon ln lLself does lL move, have lmpulse, or acLlvlLy." (And Lros, as we saw, ls Lhls aglLaLed movemenL Lo flnd hlgher unlons and Lhus overcome or escape Lhe lnsLablllLy, and Lros Lherefore flnally resLs only ln Lhe lnflnlLe, whlch lLself has no conLradlcLlon and Lhus ls Lhe Llmeless," Lhe changeless," Lhe lndesLrucLlble Abyss, Lhe va[ra or ulamond naLure-alLhough all of Lhose Lerms are noL descrlpLlve per se, buL only developmenLal slgnlflers.) l menLlon all of Lhls because, as l sald, vlrLually every mysLlcally orlenLed phllosopher ends up maklng some sorL of Lhese Lypes of sLaLemenLs-none, perhaps, wlLh more exuberance Lhan lrancls 8radley: 8elaLlon, cause, space, Llme, Lhlng, and self are self-conLradlcLory." And nagar[una's powerful dlalecLlc ls an lnLense and unrelenLlng bearlng-down on every slngle caLegory of LhoughL lmaglnable, all wlLh Lhe same resulL: Lhey are LoLally self- conLradlcLory and, lf conslsLenLly pressed, Lhey LoLally self-desLrucL (leavlng LmpLlness, leavlng Lhe formless lnflnlLe, Lhe deconsLrucLlon of Lhe phenomenal leaves pra[na). 1he deconsLrucLlonlsLs have plcked up cerLaln of Lhese llnes of LhoughL (mosLly from Pegel, whom uerrlda uncharacLerlsLlcally LreaLs wlLh much respecL), buL afLer 8radley and nagar[una, Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs are very Lhln soup lndeed, and, depresslngly, Lhey almosL always mlss Lhe punch llne: lf you don'L wanL Lo be a compleLe self- conLradlcLlon, Lhen you musL resL ln lnflnlLy. 8uL admlLLedly, Lhe phllosopher-sages' explanaLlons of why all holons are self-conLradlcLory" are noL very clear, and have caused a greaL deal of confuslon. l Lhlnk Lhe slLuaLlon can be explalned more easlly and a blL more clearly. 1he polnL, as l would puL lL, ls LhaL every holon ls a whole/parL. 1here are no wholes and no parLs anywhere ln Lhe manlfesL unlverse, Lhere are only whole/parLs. lf acLual wholes or acLual parLs really exlsLed somewhere, Lhen Lhey could resL, Lhey would slmply be whaL Lhey were, Lhere would be no masslve lnsLablllLy, no lnLernal self- conLradlcLlon." 8uL every holon ls slmoltooeoosly a whole/parL. lL has a dual Lenslon lnherenL ln lLs very consLlLuLlon. As a wboleoess, lL musL achleve a degree of cobeteoce and cooslsteocy ln order Lo endure aL all as Lhe same enLlLy across Llme (Lhls ls lLs reglme, code, agency, relaLlve auLonomy, and so on). 8uL as a pottoess, as a parL of some oLher holon, lL musL embrace lLs parLlalness, embrace lLs lncompleLeness, or else lL wlll slmply noL flL ln, wlll noL be a parL buL wlll always drlfL off lnLo lLs own lsolaLed wholeness. ln order Lo be compleLe, or Lo compleLe lLself, lL musL [oln wlLh forces larger Lhan lLself. As a whole/parL, Lhere ls Lhus a consLanL Lenslon beLween coherency or cooslsteocy, on Lhe one hand, and completeoess, on Lhe oLher. And Lhe more of Lhe one, Lhe less of Lhe oLher-nelLher force" can wln wlLhouL desLroylng Lhe holon, and so Lhe holon remalns ln consLanL lnsLablllLy. 1he more conslsLenL (self-conLalned), Lhen Lhe less compleLe (Lhe less ln communlon). And Lhus Lhe second AddlLlon: All boloos lssoe oo lOu to tbe kosmos, where lOu means lncompleLe Cr uncerLaln," and whlch speclflcally means, Lhe more compleLe or encompasslng a holon, Lhe less conslsLenL or cerLaln, and vlce versa. 1o say a holon can be compleLe or conslsLenL, buL noL boLh, ls also Lo say LhaL every holon ls Lherefore lncompleLe or lnconslsLenL (uncerLaln), and Lhus: every holon lssues an lCu Lo Lhe kosmos. uL more slmply, slnce every holon ls lncompleLe or lnconslsLenL, every holon lssues a promlssory noLe Lo Lhe unlverse, whlch says, ln effecL: l can'L pay you now, l can'L achleve cerLalnLy and sLablllLy and compleLeness and conslsLency Loday, buL l wlll gladly pay you Lomorrow. And no holon evet dellvers, or coo dellver, on LhaL promlse. 1hls lCu prlnclple has, of course, sLarLed Lo become very obvlous (and very famous) ln cerLaln branches of knowledge, parLlcularly maLhemaLlcs, physlcs, and soclology (Lo name a few). ln maLhemaLlcs, lL shows up as 1arskl's 1heorem and Cdel's lncompleLeness 1heorem, boLh of whlch are Laken Lo mean LhaL ln any sufflclenLly developed maLhemaLlcal sysLem (maLhemaLlcal holon), Lhe holon can be eltbet compleLe ot conslsLenL, bot oot botb. 1haL ls, lf Lhe maLhemaLlcal sysLem ls made Lo be cooslsteot (or self-cerLaln), Lhere remaln fundamenLal LruLhs LhaL coooot be derlved from Lhe sysLem lLself (lL ls locomplete), buL lf Lhe sysLem ls made Lo locloJe Lhese LruLhs and Lhus aLLempLs Lo become complete, Lhen lL lnevlLably (and lnherenLly) conLradlcLs lLself aL cruclal polnLs-lL becomes locooslsteot. erhaps a slmple example from soclology wlll lllusLraLe whaL ls lnvolved. 1he unlLed SLaLes and !apan are ofLen Laken as examples of Lwo very dlfferenL Lypes of soclal organlzaLlons. !apan ls an exLremely coherenL or very LlghLly woven socleLy (lL ls conslsLenL), buL lL achleves Lhls conslsLency only by excludlng forelgn races (!apan's xenophobla belng raLher noLorlous). ln oLher words, lL ls very cooslsteot buL very locomplete (very parLlal or very excluslonary). 1he unlLed SLaLes, on Lhe oLher hand, aLLempLs Lo be as complete as posslble, aLLempLs Lo open lLs doors Lo any and all (Lhe melLlng poL"), buL lL does so aL Lhe cosL of belng raLher lncoherenL and unsLable: aL Llmes, Lhe u.S. seems so wllllng Lo embrace varlous culLures LhaL lL ls ln danger of flylng aparL aL Lhe seams. lL achleves a greaL deal of completeoess aL Lhe cosL of belng locooslsteot or lncoherenL or uncerLaln, of havlng no LlghLly knlL unlfylng reglme or common prlnclple. 3 ln oLher words: compleLe ot coherenL, and Lhe more of one, Lhe less of Lhe oLher-lCu. ln maLhemaLlcs, Lhe lnLroducLlon of Lhe lCu prlnclple (ln varlous ways, by 8ussell, 1arskl, Cdel), Lhe lnLroducLlon of Lhe paradoxes" ln seL Lheory, lnlLlally caused an uproar, almosL panlc, because lL meanL LhaL seL Lheory and arlLhmeLlc (and by lmpllcaLlon, Lhe whole of maLhemaLlcs) were on very shaky ground-LhaL ls Lo say, on self- conLradlcLory ground. And ln a sense LhaL ls Lrue, buL maLhemaLlcs escaped" Lhe paradoxes by posLulaLlng unendlngly expandlng seLs (LransflnlLe"). We saw, ln chapLer 2, LhaL Lhls was [usL anoLher example of holons all Lhe way up, all Lhe way down." And we can see now LhaL Lhls also means LhaL maLhemaLlcs slmply lssued a LransflnlLe lCu Lo Lhe kosmos. uL raLher slmpllsLlcally, Lhe only way for maLhemaLlcs Lo avold profound self-conLradlcLlon ls Lo posLulaLe a yeL hlgher level of lncluslon, whlch avolds Lhe paradoxes of one level-buL Lhen faces Lhe same paradoxes on lLs own level. AnoLher yeL-hlgher level ls Lhus posLulaLed, and Lhls conLlnues eoJlessly (LransflnlLely"). 1hus, Lhe maLhemaLlcal paradoxes and lCus of one level can be sopetseJeJ aL Lhe nexL hlgher level (Lhe nexL more-encompasslng seL), buL LhaL seL Lhen faces lLs own lCu (lL ls elLher lncompleLe or lnconslsLenL), and LhaL conLlnues . . . fotevet. 1he seLs musL be posLulaLed Lo expand forever, because Lhe momenL Lhey sLop, maLhemaLlcs becomes self-conLradlcLory. nobody ever acLually sees all of Lhese LransflnlLe seLs: Lhey are [usL a promlssory noLe LhaL allows maLhemaLlcs boLh Lo keep golng and Lo geL golng ln Lhe flrsL place. 1hus Lhe lCu: lL says, l cannoL pay you now, buL l wlll gladly pay you Lomorrow. lL wlll even gladly pay wlLh loLs of lnLeresL, because Lhe polnL ls: lL can never octoolly pay. 1he debL ls oevet seLLled. MaLhemaLlcs, llke all holons, lurches forward forever ln an aLLempL Lo geL over lLs lnherenL llmlLaLlons, lLs self-conLradlcLlons." (8ecall Pegel: Cnly lnsofar as someLhlng has conLradlcLlon ln lLself does lL move, have lmpulse, or acLlvlLy.") 1he polnL: oll holons lssue an lCu Lo Lhe kosmos, and Lhe debL ls oevet redeemed. lCus, Lhen, represenL Lhe Lenslon or lnsLablllLy (lncompleLe or lnconslsLenL) lobeteot ln oll manlfesL holons by vlrLue of Lhe facL LhaL Lhey are all whole/parLs. AnoLher way Lo say exoctly Lhe same Lhlng ls Lo say LhaL all holons are agency-ln-communlon (wholes LhaL are parLs of oLher wholes). As oqeocy (as wholeness), a holon musL seek conslsLency ln order Lo endure. 8uL as commooloo (as parLness), lL musL seek unlon wlLh oLher holons ln order Lo be more compleLe. And Lhe more of one, Lhe less of Lhe oLher (on Lhe same level, a supersesslon embraces boLh, buL Lhen Lhe new level faces lLs own lCu). ln oLher words, Lhe more agency, Lhe less communlon, and vlce versa (anoLher verslon of Lhe lCu), and nelLher slde can flnally wln wlLhouL desLroylng Lhe oLher. 1hey are muLual anLagonlsLs LhaL depend on each oLher for exlsLence (whlch, we mlghL say, makes samsara an unpleasanL place Lo be caughL). ln volume 3, l aLLempL Lo explaln Lhls lCu prlnclple ln much greaLer deLall, and Lhls ls meanL only as a very brlef lnLroducLlon. l aLLempL Lo show LhaL agency across Llme and communlon across space, as Lhe Lwo fundamenLal drlves" of all holons (on a glven level), show up ln varlous flelds as, respecLlvely: Llme and space, coherence and correspondence, rlghLs and responslblllLles, meLaphor and meLonym, lnLrlnslc value and exLrlnslc value, deLermlned and probablllsLlc, necesslLy and chance, conslsLency and compleLeness, consclousness and communlcaLlon-Lhe llsL ls vlrLually endless. 8uL Lhe cenLral polnL ls LhaL Lhese Lyplcal duallsms (such as coherence versus correspondence ln eplsLemology) are dual parLners forever faLed Lo baLLle lL ouL wlLh each oLher . . . and never, never wln. 1he flnal example l wlll menLlon of an lCu prlnclple LhaL has become qulLe famous ls Lhe Pelsenberg uncerLalnLy rlnclple, whose many forms all sLaLe Lhe same Lhlng: Lhe more we can know of Lhe Llme-componenL of a wavlcle (agency), Lhe less we can know of Lhe space-componenL (communlon)-momenLum and poslLlon, for example-wlLh Lhe cruclal polnL belng: Lhe wavlcle doesn'L know elLher. 1he wavlcle lssues an lCu Lo Lhe kosmos. 1he more one aspecL ls plnned down, Lhe more Lhe oLher fades lnLo obscurlLy. LM1lnLSS now Lhe real reason l menLlon all Lhese examples of Lhe lCu prlnclple, and Lhe real reason Lhe mysLlcally orlenLed phllosopher-sages are always brlnglng lL up (Pegel Lo 8radley Lo nagar[una Lo Shankara), ls very slmple: AJJltloo J. All lOus ote teJeemeJ lo mptloess. LmpLlness ls nelLher a Whole nor a arL nor a Whole/arL. LmpLlness ls Lhe reallLy of whlch all wholes and all parLs are slmply manlfesLaLlons. ln LmpLlness l do noL become Whole, nor do l reallze LhaL l am merely a arL of some CreaL 8lg Whole. 8aLher, ln LmpLlness l become Lhe openlng or clearlng ln whlch all wholes and all parLs arlse eLernally. l-l am Lhe groundless Cround, Lhe empLy Abyss, LhaL never enLers Lhe sLream of endless lCus, LhaL never llves Lhe LransflnlLe nlghLmare of ceaseless self-conLradlcLlon, Lhe perpeLual agony of samsara's cascadlng wholes and parLs, Lhe empLy Cround LhaL never bows Lo Lhe Lerrors of Llme and Lhe perpeLual moLlon slckness known as space, LhaL sLeps off Lhe relenLless LormenL of unendlng lCus-only Lo embrace Lhem all, Lo embrace Lhe All, as a mlrror one wlLh lLs many reflecLlons, and noLhlng comes Lo resL excepL Lhe lnsane LhoughL LhaL l ever could have found llberaLlon ln endless lCus, or LhaL salvaLlon had anyLhlng Lo do wlLh Lhe unendlng debLs and promlssory noLes LhaL samsara calls reallLy," Lhe slckness-lnduclng self-conLradlcLlon ln Lhe very hearL of every flnlLe Lhlng. And Lhere ls Lhe message of Lhe mysLlcs, ever so slmply puL: LmpLlness, and LmpLlness alone, redeems all lCus. ln LmpLlness alone, my debL ls pald Lo Lhe kosmos, because ln LmpLlness, l-l am Lhe kosmos. 8edempLlon of debL, erasure of gullL, a balanclng of Lhe kosmlc books, a release from LransflnlLe lnsanlLy. 4 noL ln LmpLlness, buL as LmpLlness, l am released from Lhe faLe of a never-endlng addlLlon of parLs, and l sLand free as Lhe Source and Suchness of Lhe glorlous dlsplay. l LasLe Lhe sky and swallow whole Lhe kosmos, and noLhlng ls added Lo me, l dlsappear ln a mllllon forms and noLhlng ls subLracLed, l rlse as Lhe sun Lo greeL my own day, and noLhlng moves aL all. 1PL LLCAC? Cl 1PL luLALlS1S 1he ldeallsL movemenL was, ln Lhe WesL, Lhe lasL greaL aLLempL Lo lnLroduce Lrue AscenL and, mosL lmporLanL, Lo lnLegraLe lL bellevably wlLh Lrue uescenL-Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco boLh Laken up, preserved and negaLed, honored and released, ln all-encompasslng SplrlL. 1he Lrue helrs of loLlnus. And alLhough Lhe greaL ldeallsL movemenL flnally falled, lLs endurlng conLrlbuLlons wlll, l belleve, be parL of any graceful unpacklng of splrlLual lnLulLlon for Lhe modern and posLmodern world. lLs endurlng conLrlbuLlons wlll, l Lhlnk, be a necessary componenL ln any sorL of Lruly comprehenslve worldvlew, a worldvlew sLlll begglng Lo emerge, a World Soul sLlll sLruggllng Lo break lnLo collecLlve consclousness and heal Lhe fragmenLs of a modernlLy gone sllghLly mad. 1he deLalls of Lhe ldeallsL sysLem are explored ln volume 3. lor Lhe momenL, l Lhlnk we could falrly summarlze Lhe LhrusL of Lhe ldeallsL movemenL as: oo lotoltloo of tbe ttoospetsoool Jomolo exptesseJ lo vlsloo-loqlc. And Lhere was boLh lLs greaL sLrengLh and lLs faLal weakness. As vlsloo-loqlc, lL was a developmenLal evoluLlon beyond slmple formal operaLlonal raLlonallLy, a move beyond lnsLrumenLal and ego-cenLered raLlonallLy (vetstooJ) lnLo dlaloglcal, dlalecLlcal, lnLersub[ecLlve reason (vetoooft), carrylng wlLh lL a unlfylng of opposlLes and a reconclllaLlon of fragmenLs. As bolotcblc vlslon-loglc, lL saw nelLher lsolaLed wholes nor abandoned parLs: each sLage of developmenL was a whole/parL LhaL preserved and negaLed lLs predecessors. ldeallsm polnLed ouL, ln effecL, LhaL slnce every holon ls slmulLaneously boLh a subholon and a superholon, Lhen all agency ls olwoys agency-ln-communlon (tbe lnslghL uLLerly lacklng ln Lhe LnllghLenmenL's proud culLure of reflecLlon," LhaL monsLer of arresLed developmenL"). 1hus no duallsm has a flnal place Lo resL, no whole, and no parL, can ever repose LrlumphanL, SplrlL speaks LhroughouL Lhe evoluLlonary process, as Lhe process lLself-self-unfoldlng, self-enfoldlng, self-reallzlng: noLhlng ls losL, all ls preserved." As vlslon-loglc, Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree could be serlously conLemplaLed and ln many ways compleLed: naLure ls noL [usL a collecLlon of phenomenal lnLerlocklng processes or lLs," buL of poLenLlal l's, and l's exlsL only ln an lnLersub[ecLlve space of we. Accordlngly, sclence, morallLy, and arL are all lnLegral expresslons and momenLs of SplrlL, none can clalm lsolaLed auLhorlLy, each ls Lo be honored ln lLs respecLlve Lask. And l can loteqtote Lhem because l am vehlcle of SplrlL, and noL any pottlcolot manlfesLaLlon. MosL lmporLanL, Lhese lnLegraLlons were noL [usL verbal formulas, up Lo a cerLaln polnL, Lhe ldeallsLs genulnely managed Lo square Lhe clrcle," as 1aylor summarlzes Lhe seemlngly lmposslble Lask of reconclllng Lgo and Lco, llchLe and Splnoza, Mlnd and naLure, AscenL and uescenL, Sub[ecLlve lreedom and Cb[ecLlve unlon. 1he requlremenLs were lnordlnaLely lnLense: lf Lhe asplraLlons Lo radlcal freedom [Lgo] and Lo lnLegral expresslve unlLy wlLh naLure [Lco] are Lo be totolly folfllleJ toqetbet, lf man ls Lo be aL one wlLh naLure ln hlmself and ln Lhe cosmos whlle also belng mosL fully a self-deLermlnlng sub[ecL, Lhen lL ls necessary flrsL, LhaL my baslc naLural lncllnaLlon sponLaneously be Lo morallLy and freedom, and more Lhan Lhls, slnce l am a dependenL parL of a larger order of naLure, lL ls necessary LhaL Lhls whole order wlLhln me and wlLhouL Lend of lLself towotJ spltltool qools, Lend Lo reallze a form ln whlch lL can oolte wltb sobjectlve fteeJom. lf l am Lo remaln a splrlLual belng and yeL noL be opposed Lo naLure ln my lnLerchange wlLh lL, Lhen Lhls lnLerchange musL be a commooloo ln whlch l enLer lnLo relaLlon wlLh some splrlLual belng or force. 8uL Lhls ls Lo say LhaL splrlLuallLy, Lendlng Lo reallze splrlLual goals, ls of Lhe essence of naLure. underlylng naLural reallLy ls a splrlLual prlnclple sLrlvlng Lo reallze lLself." 3 And Lhose were preclsely Lhe requlremenLs meL by Schelllng and hammered ouL by Pegel. naLure and Mlnd are boLh Laken up and lnLegraLed ln SplrlL, an lnLegraLlon LhaL can occur preclsely because Lhe SplrlL LhaL ls owokeoeJ ln Lhe loteqtotloo ls Lhe some SplrlL LhaL was pteseot tbtooqboot Lhe enLlre process of unfoldlng and enfoldlng lLself. So LhaL whlle naLure Lends Lo reallze splrlL, LhaL ls, self-consclousness, men and women as consclous belngs Lend Loward a grasp of naLure ln whlch Lhey wlll see lL as splrlL and one wlLh Lhelr own splrlL. ln Lhls process men and women come Lo a new undersLandlng of self: Lhey see Lhemselves noL [usL as lndlvldual fragmenLs of Lhe unlverse, buL raLher as vehlcles of splrlL. And hence men and women can achleve aL once tbe qteotest oolty wltb ootote, l.e., wlLh Lhe splrlL whlch unfolds lLself ln naLure, ooJ Lhe fullesL ootooomoos self-exptessloo. 1he Lwo come LogeLher slnce man's baslc ldenLlLy ls as vehlcle of splrlL. [1hls] provldes Lhe basls of a unlon beLween flnlLe and cosmlc splrlL whlch meeLs Lhe requlremenL LhaL men and women be unlLed Lo Lhe whole and yeL noL sacrlflce Lhelr own self- consclousness and auLonomous wlll." 6 8ecall LhaL Lhe dllemma-and Lhe agony-was how Lo unlLe llchLe and Splnoza"-LhaL ls, how Lo be boLh ootooomoos (or self-deflnlng) and wbole (or one wlLh naLure and Lherefore deflned and deLermlned by naLure, whlch means surrenderlng auLonomy): how can you posslbly do botb, slnce Lhey are muLually excluslve? Cn Lhe one hand, Lhere was Lhe deslre Lo preserve Lhe worldcenLrlc moral auLonomy and capaclLy for compasslon for whlch Lhe Lgo had foughL so long: Lo merely become one wlLh naLure" would be Lo lose LhaL auLonomy and be governed by naLural laws such as fox eaLs chlcken-and Lhere goes moral compasslon. Cn Lhe oLher hand, Lhere was an lnLense deslre for wholeness and compleLlon, a deslre Lo be parL of someLhlng blgger Lhan my ego, a deslre Lo flL lnLo Lhe greaL Lco. Pow Lo unlLe Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco? Lhe self and ootote? lL cerLalnly appears LhaL Lhe more of Lhe one, Lhe less of Lhe oLher-Lhe lCu prlnclple haunLlng all manlfesL holons! 1he greaL ldeallsL reallzaLlon was LhaL boLh Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco are manlfesLaLlons of SplrlL, and SplrlL redeems all lCus. Cn Lhe one hand, Lhe SplrlL (or hlghesL Self or pure Lgo or l-l) of Lhe kosmos ls petfectly ootooomoos, because lL ls Lhe pure Self (whlch ls self-poslLlng and self-deflnlng and Lhus completely ftee or auLonomous), and, on Lhe oLher, lL ls petfect wboleoess aL Lhe same Llme, because Lhere ls ootbloq ootslJe of lt. boLh Mlnd and naLure are expresslons of lLs own 8elng and 8ecomlng. And Lhus, Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL l rlse Lo a lnLulLlon and ldenLlLy wlLh SplrlL, Lhen botb Lhe free wlll of Mlnd and Lhe unlon wlLh naLure are glven Lo me slmoltooeoosly. l-l am evetytbloq LhaL ls arlslng, and Lhus l am auLonomous ooJ whole, free ooJ deLermlned, ascended and descended, one and many, wlsdom and compasslon, eros and agape. 1hus, SplrlL redeems all lCus, because ln SplrlL l am noL a whole/parL, buL Lhe loflolty ln whlch all whole/parLs arlse, remaln a blL, and pass. And Lhus, by Jeveloploq from naLure Lo mlnd Lo SplrlL, l can embrace Lhe enLlre kosmos ln a free and compleLe fashlon, for l-l am LhaL kosmos for all eLernlLy: whlch ls Lo say: tlqbt oow, when seen ln Lhe eye of SplrlL, for whlch boLh mlnd and naLure are slmply lnLegral chapLers ln my own conLlnulng sLory. unlLed ln SplrlL wlLhouL eraslng dlfferences-Lhere ls Lhe Cne-ln-Lhe-Many as my LruesL Self (Lhe ulLlmaLe l or 8uddha), and as Lhe hlghesL 1ruLh (Lhe ulLlmaLe lL or uharma), and as Lhe all-encompasslng CommunlLy of all senLlenL belngs (Lhe ulLlmaLe We or Sangha). lurLher, accordlng Lo Lhe ldeallsLs (and nondual sages everywhere), Lhe exLraordlnary and alLogeLher paradoxlcal secreL ls LhaL Lhe llnal 8elease ls always already accompllshed. 1he lasL sLep" ls Lo sLep off Lhe cycle of Llme alLogeLher and flnd Lhe 1lmeless Lhere ftom tbe stott, ever-presenL from Lhe very beglnnlng and aL evety polot along Lhe way. 1he greaL far-off specLacular cllmax . . . ls rlghL now. 1he Cood," says Pegel, Lhe absoluLely Cood, ls eLernally accompllshlng lLself ln Lhe world, and Lhe resulL ls LhaL lL need noL walL upon us, buL ls olteoJy lo foll octoollty occompllsbeJ." As !. n. llndlay, one of Pegel's greaLesL lnLerpreLers, puLs lL: lL ls by Lhe capaclLy Lo undersLand Lhls LhaL Lhe Lrue Pegellan ls marked off from hls ofLen dlllgenL and scholarly, buL sLlll profoundly mlsgulded mlslnLerpreLer, who sLlll yearns afLer Lhe showy specLacular cllmax, Lhe AbsoluLe comlng down . . . accompanled by a flock of doves, when a slmple reLurn Lo uLLer ordlnarlness ls ln place [Lhe looqooqe of otJlootloess, as we saw, always marks Lhe nondual]. llnlLe exlsLence ln Lhe here and now, wlLh every llmlLaLlon, ls, Pegel Leaches, when rlghLly regarded and accepLed, ldenLlcal wlLh Lhe lnflnlLe exlsLence whlch ls everywhere and always. 1o llve ln Maln SLreeL ls, lf one llves ln Lhe rlghL splrlL, Lo lnhablL Lhe Poly ClLy." 7 As loLlnus knew and nagar[una LaughL: always and always, Lhe oLher world ls Lhls world rlghLly seen. 1hls ls a Lruly sLaggerlng synLhesls and lnLegraLlon. (CredlL for Lhls Lype of developmenLal synLhesls ofLen goes Lo Auroblndo, wlLhouL ln any way deLracLlng from Auroblndo's magnlflcenL conLrlbuLlons, Lhe ploneerlng credlL belongs Lo Schelllng, and by a cenLury.) And yeL, ln Lhe end, Lhe ldeallsL movemenL falled Lo llve up Lo lLs brlghL promlse and huge poLenLlal. AlLhough, as l menLloned, Lhe deLalls wlll be Laken up ln volume 3, l Lhlnk we can qulckly summarlze Lhe fallure ln Lwo parLs. 1he flrsL was a fallure Lo develop any Lruly lojooctlve ptoctlces-LhaL ls, any Lrue paradlgms, any reproduclble exemplars. uL dlfferenLly: no yoga, no conLemplaLlve pracLlces, no medlLaLlve paradlgms, no experlmenLal meLhodology Lo reproduce ln consclousness Lhe Lranspersonal lnslghLs of lLs founders. 1he greaL ldeallsL sysLems were mlsLaken for meLaphyslcs-whlch ln Lhls sense, Lhey were, alas-and suffered rlghLly Lhe faLe of all mere meLaphyslcs. 1he second fallure: alLhough profound lnLulLlons and lnslghLs lnLo Lhe genulnely Lranspersonal domalns were clearly some of Lhe ma[or, l would say tbe ma[or, drlvlng forces behlnd Lhe ldeallsL movemenL, Lhese lnLulLlons and lnslghLs were expressed almosL LoLally ln and Lhrough vlsloo-loqlc, and Lhls burdened 8eason wlLh a Lask lL could never carry. 8 arLlcularly wlLh Pegel, Lhe Lranspersonal and LransraLlonal SplrlL becomes wholly lJeotlfleJ wlLh vlslon-loglc or maLure 8eason, whlch condemns 8eason Lo collapslng under a welghL lL could never carry. ln 1796, Pegel wroLe a poem for Plderlln, whlch says ln parL: lor LhoughL cannoL grasp Lhe soul whlch forgeLLlng lLself plunges ouL of space and Llme lnLo a presenLlmenL of lnflnlLy, and now reawakens. Whoever wanLed Lo speak of Lhls Lo oLhers, Lhough he spoke wlLh Lhe Longues of angels, would feel Lhe poverLy of words." Would LhaL Pegel had remalned ln poverLy (wlLh laLo: no LreaLlse by me concernlng lL exlsLs or ever wlll exlsL"). 8uL Pegel declded-ln parL ln reacLlon Lo Lhe Lco camp's calamlLous sllde lnLo regresslve feellng and dlvlne egolsm-LhaL 8eason could and should develop Lhe Longues of angels. 1hls would have been flne, lf Pegel also had more dependable paradlgms, more reproduclble ln[uncLlons, for Lhe developmenLal unfoldlng of Lhe hlgher and Lranspersonal sLages. As we sald, Zen masLers Lalk abouL LmpLlness all Lhe Llme! 8uL Lhey have a pracLlce and a meLhodology (zozeo) whlch allows Lhem Lo dlscover Lhe ttoosceoJeotol tefeteot vla Lhelr own Jevelopmeotol slqolfleJ, and Lhus Lhelr words (Lhe slgnlflers) remaln grounded ln experlenLlal, reproduclble, falllblllsL crlLerla. 1he ldeallsLs had none of Lhls. 1helr lnslghLs, noL easlly reproduclble, and Lhus noL falllblllsLlc, were dlsmlssed as mere meLaphyslcs," and gone was a prlceless opporLunlLy LhaL Lhe WesL, no doubL, wlll have Lo aLLempL yeL agaln lf lL ls ever Lo be hosplLable Lo Lhe fuLure descenL of Lhe all-embraclng World Soul. ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe collapse of ldeallsm lefL Lhe uescenders vlrLually unchallenged as Lhe molders of modernlLy. uA8k SPAuCWS uarwln's naLurallsm"-Lhls denaLured naLure-seemed, Lo Lhe domlnanL flaLland worldvlew, Lo cover all Lhe necessary bases. MononaLure alone was all Lhe splrlL" men and women needed, and all Lhe splrlL" Lhere was. 8uL lL wasn'L Lhe uarwlnlan revoluLlon" LhaL would play mosL declslvely lnLo Lhe hands of Lhe uescenders. AfLer all, Lhe uarwlnlsLs could always be seen, wheLher Lhey wlshed Lo or noL, as slmply supplylng emplrlcal evldence for a scheme already known and accepLed, namely, evoluLlon as Cod-ln-Lhe-maklng, Lros noL slmply seeklng SplrlL buL expresslng SplrlL all along vla a serles of ever-hlgher ascenLs, whlch uarwln had merely chronlcled ln a noL-very- surprlslng fashlon. uarwln was oevet Lhe problem. lL was CarnoL, Clauslus, and kelvln. AL abouL Lhe Llme LhaL uarwln was on PMS 8eoqle, Wllllam kelvln and 8udolf Clauslus were formulaLlng Lwo verslons of Lhe second law of Lhermodynamlcs, verslons laLer shown Lo be equlvalenL, and boLh of whlch were Laken Lo mean: Lhe unlverse ls runnlng down. ln all real physlcal processes, dlsorder lncreases. 1hls spllL Lhe world of sclence lnLo Lwo uLLerly lncompaLlble halves: a blology descrlblng Lhe world wlndlng up, and a physlcs descrlblng a world wlndlng down. 1he Lwo arrows" of Llme . . . WlLh Lhls, of course, we have come full clrcle, come Lo Lhe polnL where we began our accounL ln chapLer 1. 1hls wasn'L [usL subLle reducLlonlsm-Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo Lhe emplrlcal lnLerlocklng order-Lhls was qtoss reducLlonlsm-Lhe furLher collapse of Lhe lnLerlocklng order lnLo lLs aLomlsLlc componenLs, a slLuaLlon LhaL can falrly be descrlbed as compleLe psychoLlc lnsanlLy. (lf Lhe kosmos ls Lhe wondrous mulLldlmenslonal reallLy anyLhlng slmllar Lo LhaL descrlbed from loLlnus Lo Schelllng, from Mahayana 8uddhlsm Lo vedanLa Plndulsm, or even from kanL Lo 8ousseau, lmaglne Lhe bllndness and Lhe vlolence of Lhe menLallLy LhaL acknowledges only aLoms.) 1he laws of Lhermodynamlcs seemed Lo LoLally undermlne any sorL of organlc unlLy" or self-organlzlng naLure" or Lhe LoLal and unlLary process of self-manlfesLaLlon" (Schelllng, Pegel)-leL alone any sorL of Lros operaLlve even ln Lhe lowesL sLaLe of maLLer" (kanL). And lf Lhe ldeallsLs couldn'L even geL Lhe flrsL floor of evoluLlon rlghL, why should we belleve Lhem abouL any hlgher sLages"? 1here ls no Lros ln Lhe physlcal world, and lf Lhe physlcal world ls parL and parcel of SplrlL's manlfesLaLlon, Lhen Lhere ls and can be no Lros ln SplrlL. Whlch ls Lo say, Lhere ls no SplrlL, perlod. 1hls compleLely undercuL any sorL of ldeallsL or splrlLual vlew of evoluLlon or manlfesLaLlon ln general. 1he flrsL floor of Lhe magnlflcenL ldeallsL edlflce crumbled, and Lhe hlgher floors almosL lmmedlaLely followed sulL (ldeallsm would survlve ln any vlable form no more Lhan a few decades afLer Pegel's deaLh). 1he neL effecL of Lhe uLLer collapse of Lhls noble aLLempL Lo escape Lhe Cave was LhaL, once agaln, AscenL was looked upon very susplclously. Lverywhere Lhe cry 8ack Lo kanL!" arose, whlch evenLually meanL: back Lo raLlonallLy and lLs groundlng ln Lhe senses, back Lo Lraclng sclence Lhen wlLh modesLy Lhy gulde." 8ack Lo Lhe phenomena, back Lo Lhe shadows. 8ack Lo Lhls world." 1he collapse of ldeallsm lefL Lhe uescenders vlrLually unchallenged as Lhe holders and molders of modernlLy. noL only was any sorL of LranscendenLal SplrlL abandoned, vlsloo-loqlc ltself was scaled back Lo varlous forms of lnsLrumenLal, sub[ecL-cenLered raLlonallLy. As a consequence," Pabermas remlnds us, ln Lhe perlod afLer Pegel, only Lhose who grasp reason ln a more modesL fashlon have any opLlons." ModernlLy Lhen, he says, pruned reason back lnLo undersLandlng and raLlonallLy back lnLo purposlve raLlonallLy"-LhaL ls, vlslon-loglc back lnLo Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm and back lnLo sub[ecL-cenLered lnsLrumenLal-raLlonallLy. 9 Ludwlg leuerbach, a sLudenL of Pegel, would soon announce LhaL ooy sorL of splrlLuallLy, ooy sorL of AscenL, was slmply a ptojectloo of men and women's human poLenLlals onLo an oLher world" of wholly lmaglnaLlve orlgln. And, accordlng Lo leuerbach, lL ls exacLly Lhls pro[ecLlon of human poLenLlal onLo a dlvlne" sphere LhaL crlpples men and women, and ls Lhe Lrue cause of self-allenaLlon. Any real soclal progress, Lhen, ls noL splrlL's reLurn Lo splrlL, buL man's reLurn Lo hlmself. leuerbach: 8ellglon ls Lhe separaLlon of man from hlmself: he seLs Cod over agalnsL hlmself as an opposed belng. Cod ls noL whaL man ls, and man ls noL whaL Cod ls. Cod ls Lhe lnflnlLe 8elng, man Lhe flnlLe, Cod ls perfecL, man ls lmperfecL, Cod ls eLernal, man ls Lemporal, Cod ls almlghLy, man ls powerless, Cod ls holy, man ls slnful. Cod and man are exLremes." Powever well LhaL does lndeed descrlbe aspecLs of mytblc Jlssoclotloo, lL has preclsely noLhlng Lo do wlLh one's own Lranspersonal poLenLlals, vettlcol poLenLlals LhaL lf tbey aren'L acLuallzed are merely ptojecteJ botlzootolly lnLo uLLerly fuLlle schemes Lo Lurn Lhls flnlLe world lnLo a uLoplan world of lnflnlLe wondermenL: an lnflnlLe above collapses lnLo an lnflnlLe ahead, and wheLher LhaL lnflnlLe ahead be endless sclenLlflc progress or boundless maLerlal possesslons or pollLlcal uLoplanlsms as ulLlmaLe salvaLlon, Lhey are all fundamenLally ways of fusslng abouL ln Lhe flnlLe looklng for Lhe lnflnlLe, and dolng lrreparable harm Lo Lhe flnlLe world ln Lhe process by placlng demands upon lL whlch lL could never fulflll. 8uL LhaL ls exacLly whaL leuerbach would recommend: ollLlcs," he says, musL become our rellglon." karl Marx and lrledrlch Lngels were paylng very close aLLenLlon. AparL from naLure and human belngs," Lngels would wrlLe, noLhlng exlsLs, and Lhe hlgher belngs whlch our rellglous fanLasy creaLed are only Lhe fanLasLlc reflecLlon of our own essence. 1he enLhuslasm was general, we were all for Lhe momenL followers of leuerbach." And Lhe enLlre modern (and posLmodern) world ls, ln effecL, Lhe followers of leuerbach. 1PL CCn1Cu8S Cl 1PL CAvL And so lL was, l belleve, LhaL Lhe uescenders became Lhe lnherlLors of frusLraLed AscenL-Lhe ever-frusLraLed deslre Lo move up became Lhe ever-frusLraLlng deslre Lo move forward. Cne crlppled Cod replaced Lhe oLher, and AscenL plLched headlong lnLo Lhe endless world of scurrylng shadows. WlLh no more AscenL!" Lhe lnflnlLe verLlcal yearnlng Loppled forward, and LhaL correcL lnLulLlon of lnflnlLy was now mlsplaced and dlsplaced onLo Lhe horlzons of a Lemporal and aglLaLed and lnsaLlable hunger for all Lhlngs maLerlal and naLural," a hunger drlven by Lhe same power of lnflnlLe yearnlng, buL now under Lhe gaze of a dlfferenL Cod. And Lhere remalns Lhe modern-and Lhe posLmodern-mlnd. eople had, and have, Lwo baslc cholces ln Lhese modern Llmes: myLh or naLurallsm. 8emaln aL a myLhlc level of developmenL, and embrace Lhls or LhaL lmperlallsLlc fundamenLallsm wlLh lLs (promlsed and frusLraLed) AscenL, or evolve Lo raLlonallLy, shed Lhe myLhs, and embrace a world of pure uescenL, basklng ln Lhe shadows, never geLLlng meLaphyslcal sunburn of any lmaglnable varleLy, Lraclng sclence Lhen wlLh modesLy Lhy gulde," buL seeklng always Lo reform Lhe phenomena, Llnker wlLh Lhe shades, eaL Lhe shadows, endlessly. And wlLhln naLurallsm, Lhere are sLlll Lhe same Lwo-cenLurles-old paradlgms" engaged ln Lhe same shopworn argumenLs: Lhe Lgo versus Lhe Lco, boLh sLlll dragglng behlnd Lhem Lhe same plLlable paradox of damage. 1he Lgo, for all lLs oLherwlse admlrable worldcenLrlc sLance, sLlll has no ldea how Lo go abouL lnLegraLlng Lhe blosphere ln a hlgher synLhesls of lLs own lnLeresLs, sLlll leaves everywhere Lhe corpses of lLs reckless represslons, sLlll LoLally confuses LransraLlonal SplrlL wlLh preraLlonal myLh, and Lhus sLlll runs breaLhlessly away from Lhe Source of lLs own salvaLlon. lf Lhe Lgo camps sLlll absoluLlze Lhe noosphere, Lhe Lco camps are sLlll absoluLlzlng Lhe blosphere, uLLerly unaware LhaL Lhls conLrlbuLes every blL as much as Lhe Lgo camps Lo Lhe desLrucLlon of Lhe blosphere lLself. Savlng Lhe blosphere" depends flrsL and foremosL on human belngs reachlng muLual undersLandlng and unforced agreemenL as Lo common ends. And LhaL lnLersub[ecLlve accord occurs only ln Lhe noosphere. AnyLhlng shorL of LhaL noospherlc accord wlll cootlooe to Jesttoy tbe blospbete. 1hus, lf Lhe Lgo ls desLroylng Lhe blosphere by a sln of commlsslon, Lhe Lco ls desLroylng lL by a sln of omlsslon. As we saw, Cala's prlmary problems and LhreaLs are oot polluLlon, lndusLrlallzaLlon, overculLlvaLlon, soll despollaLlon, overpopulaLlon, ozone depleLlon, or whaLnoL. Cala's ma[or problem ls lack of muLual undersLandlng and muLual agreemenL lo tbe ooospbete. 1he problem ls oot how Lo demonsLraLe, ln monologlcal Lerms and wlLh sclenLlflc proofs, LhaL Cala ls ln desperaLe Lrouble. 1he general evldence of Lhls serlous Lrouble ls already and slmply and absoluLely overwhelmlng. Anybody can grasp Lhe daLa. 8uL mosL [usL don'L cote. ln oLher words, Lhe real problem ls oot exLerlor. 1he real problem ls lotetlot. 1he real problem ls how Lo geL people Lo lotetoolly ttoosfotm from egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc consclousness, whlch ls Lhe ooly sLance LhaL coo grasp Lhe global dlmenslons of Lhe problem ln Lhe flrsL place, and Lhus Lhe ooly sLance LhaL can freely, even eagerly, embrace global soluLlons. And abouL Lhese lnLerlor LransformaLlons, and all Lhe lnLrlcaLe psychologlcal changes necessary ln order Lo effecL Lhem, Lhe Lco camps have vlrLually noLhlng Lo say. 1hey are so focused on exLerlor, monologlcal, reflecLlve paradlgms" LhaL Lhelr undersLandlng of lotetlot dynamlcs and developmenL ls lncredlbly anemlc, Lhus Lhey are conLrlbuLlng llLLle Lo Lhe real changes LhaL have Lo occur ln order Lo save Cala." Pence, Lhe only LransformaLlon" mosL ecophllosophers Lalk abouL ls havlng everybody change Lhelr ob[ecLlve and monologlcal vlews of reallLy and accepL a web-of-llfe" concepLlon, as lf LhaL would effecL a genulne lnLerlor LransformaLlon. 8uL noL only ls Lhe web-of-llfe onLology regresslve (lLs end llmlL ls always blocenLrlc feellng ln dlvlne egolsm), buL, more Lelllngly-and Lhls ls Lhe only polnL l would llke Lo emphaslze-even lf Lhe web-of-llfe onLology were absoluLely Lrue, noneLheless change ln objectlve bellef ls oot Lhe prlmary drlvlng force of lotetlot Jevelopmeot. (lor example: all ecologlcal forecasLs are forms of as-lf and whaL-lf sclenLlflc pro[ecLlons, ofLen compuLerlzed. 1hese can only be grasped by formop. 1each Lhese whaL-lf scenarlos Lo preop or conop lndlvlduals, and no maLLer how much Lhey repeaL Lhe words, Lhey do noL possess Lhe developmenLal slgnlfled and Lhus Lhey have no real ldea of Lhe acLual referenL. Cenulnely global or worldcenLrlc consclousness ls noL posslble shorL of formop. ln oLher words, global consclousness ls noL an objectlve bellef LhaL can be tooqbt Lo anybody and everybody, buL a sobjectlve ttoosfotmotloo ln Lhe lnLerlor sLrucLures LhaL coo hold Lhe bellef ln Lhe flrsL place, whlch lLself ls Lhe producL of a long llne of lnner consclousness developmenL.) We have an enormous amounL of lnformaLlon abouL how and why Lhose lnLerlor psychologlcal LransformaLlons occur (egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc), buL Lhe Lco camps by and large dlsplay no awareness of, and no lnLeresL ln, Lhose lnner dynamlcs, flxaLed as Lhey are on descrlblng exLerlor mononaLure ln hollsLlc" Lerms. 1hls ls mosL nalve, and belles Lhe lnadequacy of aLLempLlng Lo change people by alLerlng Lhe ob[ecL lnsLead of growlng Lhe sub[ecL. locuslng merely on monologlcal and ob[ecLlve and exLerlor and sclenLlflc Lerms-no maLLer how ottetly ttoe-beyond a cerLaln polnL slmply deLracLs away from Lhe fundamenLal problem, hldes Lhe fundamenLal problem, whlch ls noL exLerlor polluLlon buL lnLerlor developmenL. 10 Lverywhere Lhe paradox of damage: absoluLlzlng Lhe blosphere conLrlbuLes lnexorably Lo lLs desLrucLlon. Lverywhere Lhe same old sLory: Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco as Lhe congenlLal Lwlns ln Lhe dance of Cala's demlse. 1PL LCC Anu 1PL LCC: PC8CS Anu 1PAnA1CS And Lhus, Lo reLurn Lo my polnL aL Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe chapLer: sLuck wlLh Lhese Lwo varlanLs of flaLland ldeology, any lnLulLlons of deeper and hlgher occaslons become lmmedlaLely mlslnLerpreLed ln Lerms of one or Lhe oLher of Lhese monologlcal paradlgms. eople conLlnue Lo have sLrong and powerful lnLulLlons of Lhe Cver-Soul and World Soul, buL Lhey lmmedlaLely mlslotetptet Lhese oLherwlse correcL lnLulLlons ln Lerms of elLher a dlsengaged Plgher Self" (a la llchLe) or a reengaged blospherlc unlon" (a la Splnoza). 1he Plgher Self" camp ls noLorlously lmmune Lo soclal concerns. LveryLhlng LhaL happens Lo one ls sald Lo be one's own cholce"-Lhe hyper-agenLlc Plgher Self ls responslble for evetytbloq LhaL happens-Lhls ls Lhe monologlcal and LoLally dlsengaged Lgo gone horrlbly amok ln omnlpoLenL self-only fanLasles. 1hls slmply teptesses Lhe neLworks of communlons LhaL are [usL as lmporLanL as agency ln consLlLuLlng Lhe manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL. 1hls ls noL Lros, Lhls ls hobos-a wlLhdrawal from soclal engagemenL and lnLersub[ecLlve acLlon. All of Lhls LoLally overlooks Lhe facL LhaL SplrlL manlfesLs noL only as Self (l) buL as lnLersub[ecLlve CommunlLy (We) and as an ob[ecLlve SLaLe of Affalrs (lL)-as 8uddha, Sangha, uharma-each lnseparably lnLerwoven wlLh Lhe oLhers and lnLerwoven ln Lhe Cood and Lhe Coodness of Lhe All. 1he Lco camps llkewlse Loo ofLen mlslnLerpreL Lhe lnLulLlon of Lhe World Soul, buL ln Lhe oLher dlrecLlon, as some sorL of Cala-self, buL sLlll and equally framed ln monologlcal and flaLland Lerms. noL nA1u8L, buL naLure, ls Lhelr beloved Cod/dess. AcLual hlerarchles of any sorL are denled ln Lhe name of a dlverslLarlan sLance LhaL expllclLly denles LhaL whlch lLs own sLance lmpllclLly presupposes. ln Lhelr undersLandable zeal Lo go LransraLlonal, Lhey ofLen embrace any preraLlonal occaslon slmply because lL ls nonraLlonal-any occaslon LhaL looks blocenLrlcally orlenLed, from horLlculLural planLlng myLhology Lo rampanL Lrlballsm Lo lndlssoclaLed maglc and sensual glorlflcaLlon of a senLlmenLal naLure, all ln Lhe name of savlng Cala. 1he Lco-noeLlc Self ls Lhus ofLen mlslnLerpreLed as a merely ecologlcal self (Lhe absoluLlzlng of Lhe blosphere)-compleLely overlooklng Lhe facL LhaL no ecologlcal self can Lake Lhe role of oLher. 1he resulLanL regresslve sllde ls [usL as dlshearLenlng as Lhe Lgo's aggresslve represslon. 1hls ls noL Agape, Lhls ls 1hanaLos. An aLLempL Lo save Lhe lower by kllllng Lhe hlgher. under Lhese condlLlons-Lgo versus Lco-we wlll never Lake monologlcal naLure up and lnLo dlaloglcal culLure, and Lhen Lake boLh naLure and culLure up and lnLo Lransloglcal SplrlL. And yeL LhaL, l wlll argue ln Lhe nexL Lwo volumes of Lhls serles, ls exacLly Lhe Lask whose lnlLlal sLeps wlll deflne posLmodernlLy. Lnvl8CnMLn1AL L1PlCS: PCLCnlC LCCLCC? ln my oplnlon, one of Lhe flrsL sLeps Loward an lnLegral posLmodernlLy ls Lhe developmenL and esLabllshmenL of a genulne envlronmenLal eLhlcs, or a moral and eLhlcal sLance Lo nonhuman holons. nowhere are Lhe dlfflculLles of Lhe Lco camp more obvlous Lhan ln lLs aLLempLs Lo develop an envlronmenLal eLhlcs. WlLh some noLable excepLlons (such as 8lrch and Cobb's wonderful 1be llbetotloo of llfe, Mlchael Zlmmerman's work, and a handful of oLhers), 11 mosL approaches cenLer predomlnanLly on Lhe prlnclple of bloequallLy," a reworklng of Lhe LeneLs of Lhe uescendlng paLh of lenlLude (dlvorced and dlssoclaLed from any Lrue AscenL). 1he polnL, lL ls argued, ls LhaL all holons, or cerLalnly all llfe forms, have equal value and equal worLh (anoLher quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlon LhaL denles all quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons). 1hls envlronmenLal eLhlcs-noble enough ln lLself, and ofLen drlven by a profound lnLulLlon of Lhe World Soul, Lhe Lco-noeLlc Self-ls noneLheless crlppled by operaLlng wlLhln Lhe flaLland paradlgm. ln volume 2, l wlll examlne each of Lhe ma[or ecophllosophles ln greaL deLall, and Lhen presenL an alLernaLlve-holonlc ecology-whlch may be very brlefly summarlzed as follows: 1. All Lhlngs and evenLs, of whaLever naLure, are perfecL manlfesLaLlons of SplrlL. no holon, wheLher convenLlonally consldered hlgh or low, sacred or profane, slmple or complex, prlmlLlve or advanced, ls closer or farLher from Cround, and Lhus all holons have equal ulLlmaLe value or equal CtoooJ-voloe. All lorms are epoolly pure LmpLlness, prlmordlal urlLy. 2. 8uL ln addlLlon Lo Cround-value, all holons, we have seen, are also boLh parLlcular wholes and parLlcular parLs. As o wboleoess, any holon has whole-value." lL has a value lo ltself, and noL merely for someLhlng else. lL ls an eoJ ln and for lLself, and noL merely a meoos for someLhlng oLher. lL has auLonomous value, and noL merely lnsLrumenLal value. 1hls ls usually referred Lo as lnLrlnslc value," whlch l accepL, l wlll also call ln-lLself value auLonomous value" or wholeness value." All holons, as wholes, have lottloslc voloe. lrom whlch lL follows, Lhe greaLer Lhe wholeness, Lhe greaLer Lhe lnLrlnslc value. Wholeness-value, ln oLher words, ls Lhe same as depLh-value. 1he greaLer Lhe depLh, Lhe greaLer Lhe value (and Lhe greaLer Lhe poLenLlal depLh, Lhe greaLer Lhe poLenLlal value). 1hls also means, as we have seen repeaLedly, LhaL Lhere are levels of slqolflcooce: Lhe greaLer Lhe depLh, or Lhe greaLer Lhe wholeness, Lhen Lhe more slqolflcoot LhaL wholeness ls for Lhe kosmos, because Lhe more of Lhe kosmos ls embraced ln LhaL wholeness, embraced ln LhaL depLh. (1hus, cells are more slgnlflcanL Lhan molecules, because cells conLaln molecules, Lhus embraclng and slgnlfylng more of Lhe kosmos. An ape ls more slgnlflcanL Lhan a cell, and so on.) Llkewlse, as a wholeness (as agency), all holons have tlqbts whlch express Lhe condlLlons LhaL are oecessoty for LhaL holon Lo temolo wbole. 1he greaLer Lhe wholeness, Lhe more rlghLs necessary Lo malnLaln lL (l.e., Lhe more slgnlflcanL Lhe wholeness, Lhe greaLer Lhe neLwork of rlghLs requlred Lo susLaln Lhe slgnlflcance. An ape has more rlghLs Lhan an anL). 1hese rlghLs are noL someLhlng oJJeJ Lo Lhe holon, Lhese rlghLs are a slmple sLaLemenL of Lhe cooJltloos (ob[ecLlve, lnLerob[ecLlve, sub[ecLlve, and lnLersub[ecLlve) LhaL are necessary Lo susLaln Lhe wholeness of Lhe parLlcular holon. lf Lhose rlghLs are noL meL, Lhe wholeness dlssolves or dlslnLegraLes. 3. All holons are also potts, and as a parL, all holons have losttomeotol voloe (also called exttloslc value). 1haL ls, all holons have value fot otbets. All holons have parL-value, or parLness-value (as parL of a larger whole, and LhaL whole and lLs members JepeoJ opoo each parL: each parL ls Lhus losttomeotol Lo Lhe exlsLence of Lhe whole, each parL has exLrlnslc value, value noL [usL ln and for lLself buL for oLhers). And Lhe more parLness-value a holon has-LhaL ls, Lhe greaLer Lhe number of wholes of whlch LhaL holon ls a parL-Lhe more fooJomeotol LhaL holon ls for Lhe kosmos, because Lhe more of Lhe kosmos Lhere ls LhaL conLalns LhaL parL as a necessary consLlLuenL. An aLom ls more fundamenLal Lhan an ape. (lrom whlch lL follows, as we puL lL earller, Lhe more fundamenLal, Lhe less slgnlflcanL, and vlce versa.) Llkewlse, as a parL (ln commooloo), each holon exlsLs ln a neLwork of care and responslblllLy. Llke rlghLs, tespooslbllltles are noL someLhlng oJJeJ Lo holons. neLworks of responslblllLy slmply deflne Lhe cooJltloos necessary Lo supporL Lhe whole of whlch Lhe parL ls lndeed a parL. lurLher, Lhe greaLer Lhe depLh of a holon, Lhen Lhe mote oetwotks of communlon lL ls lnvolved ln, and Lhus Lhe qteotet lts tespooslbllltles ln communlon (correlaLlve wlLh lLs greaLer rlghLs of agency). 12 1hus, each and every holon ln Lhe kosmos has equal CtoooJ-voloe as a pure manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL or LmpLlness. lurLher, as a parLlcular wboleoess, each holon possesses lottloslc voloe, depLh value, whlch ls valuable preclsely because lL lnLernally embraces aspecLs of Lhe kosmos as parL of lLs own belng (and Lhe more aspecLs lL embraces, Lhen Lhe greaLer lLs depLh and Lhe greaLer lLs lnLrlnslc value, Lhe greaLer lLs slgnlflcance). And flnally, as a pott, each holon possesses exLrlnslc or losttomeotol voloe, because oLher holons exLernal Lo lL noneLheless depend upon lL ln varlous ways for Lhelr own exlsLence and survlval (and Lhe more neLworks and wholes of whlch Lhe holon ls a parL, Lhen Lhe greaLer lLs exLrlnslc value, Lhe greaLer lLs fundamenLalness: lLs exlsLence ls lnsLrumenLal Lo Lhe exlsLence of so many oLher holons). 13 My polnL ln menLlonlng Lhls example now ls slmply LhaL Lhls Lype of mulLldlmenslonal envlronmenLal eLhlcs ls subverLed by Lhe flaLland hollsm so prevalenL ln Lhe Cala-cenLrlc approaches. 1he facL LhaL all holons have epool CtoooJ-voloe ls ofLen confused wlLh Lhe noLlon LhaL Lhey musL Lherefore all have epool lottloslc voloe (bloequallLy"), and Lhls paralyzes any sorL of pragmaLlc acLlon aL all. lL ls mocb bettet Lo klll a carroL Lhan a cow, eveo tbooqb Lhey are botb perfecL manlfesLaLlons of SplrlL. 1hey boLh have equal Cround-value, buL one has more lnLrlnslc value because one has more depLh (and Lherefore more consclousness). And Lhe Lco camp's qeoetol aLLempL Lo save Lhe blosphere" by prlvlleglng lL and levellng any dlsLlncLlons ln lL (bloequallLy) paralyzes any acLual pragmaLlc sLeps LhaL mlghL be Laken Lo reform our anLhropocenLrlc sLance. Worse, ln a flaLland world, lottloslc voloe ls ofLen glven ooly Lo Lhe web-of-llfe or Lhe sysLem as a whole (Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order)-and Lhus we are all fundamenLally noLhlng buL sLrands ln Lhe greaL web. 1hls aLLempL Lo lnLroduce wholeness" acLually losttomeotollzes all of us, lnsLrumenLallzes each and every lndlvldual llvlng belng, because now llvlng belngs only have parL value, exLrlnslc value, lnsLrumenLal value. Pollsm lnsLrumenLallzes everyLhlng! (AnoLher example of Lhe paradox of damage lnherenL ln flaLland: Lrylng Lo hollsLlclze everyLhlng converLs everyLhlng lnLo parLs, lnLo fragmenLs, wlLh no lndlvldual wholeness value, no lnLrlnslc value aparL from Lhe greaL web.) 14 ln shorL: Lhls approach confuses equal Cround-value wlLh equal lnsLrlnslc value (bloequallLy"), whlch leaves ooly Lhe blosphere as a whole wlLh lnsLrlnslc value, and Lhls converLs every lndlvldual llvlng belng lnLo merely a parL, a sLrand, an lnsLrumenLal means ln Lhe glorlous web (leaves, LhaL ls, whaL many crlLlcs have called ecofasclsm). As l sald, l belleve ln many cases Lhe orlglnal lnLulLlon ls Lrue and good, namely, all holons have equal Cround- value (l belleve LhaL ls Lhe prlmary lnLulLlon behlnd Lhe noble aLLempLs Lo deanLhropocenLrlze eLhlcs). 8uL ln unpacklng Lhls noble lnLulLlon merely ln Lerms of a flaLland hollsm (Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, whlch olwoys embodles a quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlon LhaL Jeoles all quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons: ln Lhls case, bloequallLy"), we end up lnsLrumenLallzlng everyLhlng: preclsely Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm mosL responslble for despolllng Cala ls sLlll clalmlng, ln lLs new gulse, Lo save LhaL whlch lL ls lnexorably desLroylng. 13 1hus, a correcL and ofLen noble lnLulLlon of Lhe World Soul and Lco-noeLlc Self ls mlslnLerpreLed ln Lerms of a flaLland hollsm LhaL, ln levellng quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, paralyzes acLlons LhaL would furLher Lhe descenL of LhaL World Soul. And ln Lhls case lL ls sLlll Lrue: LhaL whlch ls noL parL of Lhe soluLlon ls mosL deflnlLely parL of Lhe problem. LCC Anu LCC: 1PL ASCLnuL8S Anu 1PL uLSCLnuL8S 1bete ls ootbloq tbot coo cote tbe seoses bot tbe sool, AoJ ootbloq tbot coo cote tbe sool bot tbe seoses. -CSCA8 WlLuL My polnL, Lhen, ls LhaL Lhe World Soul ls very ofLen belng correcLly and profoundly lnLulLed buL noL very gracefully lnLerpreLed. lL Lends Lo be lnLerpreLed as elLher a Plgher Self or a Cala-self, boLh duallsLlc Lo Lhe core, and boLh Lrylng Lo converL Lhe oLher by proselyLlzlng Lhelr wounds. 1hey represenL respecLlvely noL Lros and Agape, buL hobos and 1hanaLos. lL comes Lo Lhe same Lhlng Lo say LhaL, Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL lndlvlduals ln modernlLy even aLLempL a genulne splrlLuallLy, Lhey sLlll Lend Lo fall lnLo elLher a purely Ascendlng Plgher Self, or a purely uescendlng blospherlc self. 1he Ascenders have recourse Lo varlous forms of CnosLlclsm, 1heravadln 8uddhlsm, a Lype of AdvalLa vedanLa, a hlgher lnner volce," Lhe lnner Poly SplrlL, archeLypal psychology, Lhe care of Lhe Soul, conLacLlng Lhe Plgher Self-all of whlch are Lrue enough and oltoqetbet lmpottoot, buL ln Lhelr pottlollty, ln Lhelr excluslvely Ascendlng benL, Lhey aLLempL Lo geL ouL of flaLland by denylng lL alLogeLher: hobos, Lhe fear-laden hand of earLh-denylng, communlLy-denylng, body-denylng, sensory-denylng escape. 1he uescenders, on Lhe oLher hand, have recourse Lo Lhe vlslble, senslble Cod/dess-buL LhaL ptofoooJ ttotb, cuL off from lLs complemenLary Ascendlng currenL, degeneraLes lnLo geocenLrlc, egocenLrlc, hlghly lndlvlduallsLlc and anLl-auLhorlLarlan sLances, deslrlng Lo preserve Lhemselves ln Lhe free play of uncoerced shadows. 16 8y becomlng one wlLh Lhe Shadows and seamlessly lnserLlng ourselves lnLo a denaLured naLure, salvaLlon wlll flnally be found-and lf lL doesn'L seem Lo be worklng, [usL lnserL harder. 1he ldea sLlll seems Lo be LhaL lf l can [usL klss Lhe Shadows, l wlll see Lhe LlghL. All LranscendenLal occaslons are reduced Lo Lhls-worldly embrace: 1hanaLos, Lhe dead and heavy hand of reducLlon and regresslon. And Lhese purely uescended approaches absoluLely desplse Lhe Ascendlng paLhs, and blame Lhem for vlrLually all of humanlLy's and Cala's problems. 8uL noL Lo worry, Lhe loaLhlng ls muLual: Lhe Ascenders malnLaln Lhe uescenders are slmply caughL ln self-dlspersal and ouLward-bound lgnorance, whlch ls Lhe real source of all humanlLy's Lurmolls. 1he Ascenders and Lhe uescenders, oftet two tboosooJ yeots, sLlll aL each oLher's LhroaL-each sLlll clalmlng Lo be Lhe Whole, each sLlll accuslng Lhe oLher of Lvll, each perpeLraLlng Lhe same fracLured lnsanlLy lL desplses ln Lhe oLher. 1he Ascenders and Lhe uescenders. SLlll crazy afLer all Lhese years. A1 1PL LuCL Cl PlS1C8? 1he greaL quesL of posLmodernlLy, l wlll argue, ls for Lhe bodymlnd lnLegraLlon of Lhe cenLaur anchored ln worldcenLrlc vlslon-loglc, and Lhere are slgns everywhere LhaL Lhls ls ln facL occurrlng. 8uL mosL lmporLanL, from wlLhln and beyond Lhe cenLaur are now emerglng gllmpses of Lhe Cver-Soul as Lhe World Soul (and l belleve Lhe evldence for Lhls, Loo, ls qulLe compelllng). 17 8uL SplrlL's mlslnLerpreLaLlon does noL furLher lLs descenL, lLs flaLLenlng and levellng ln monologlcal Lerms saboLages lLs very blrLh and blesslng. We cannoL lnLegraLe Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng currenLs ln Lhe emerglng World Soul, buL merely play Lhem off agalnsL each oLher ln a bruLal LormenL of chosen ldeology. 8uL Lhe cruclal componenLs have already been won Lhrough for us. 1he breakLhrough Lo nonduallLy has already been accompllshed by loLlnus ln Lhe WesL and nagar[una ln Lhe LasL (and noL Lhem alone). And Lhe evoluLlonary undersLandlng of nonduallLy has already been won by Schelllng ln Lhe WesL and Auroblndo ln Lhe LasL (and noL Lhem alone). WhaL Lhey (and Lhelr many descendanLs) have accompllshed ls already Lhe foundaLlon for a World lederaLlon and a councll of all belngs. And whereas Lhey were, ln Lhelr Llmes, Lhe rare and lsolaLed, Lhe average mode ls now caLchlng up wlLh Lhem: Lhelr paLhs can be ours, collecLlvely, now. Much work, of course, remalns Lo be done. 8uL Lhe foundaLlon ls Lhere, lL has been won Lhrough for us, Lhe baslcs are ln exlsLence. 1hese roads are open Lo us: roads presenL buL unLraveled, paLhs cuL clear buL noL chosen. Can we noL embrace Lhese rooLs? Can we noL see SplrlL as Lhe Llfe of LvoluLlon and Lhe Love of kosmos lLself? uoes noL Lhe Cood of SplrlL, lLs Lros, release boLh naLure and Mlnd from Lhe LormenLs we have lnfllcLed on Lhem ln valn aLLempLs Lo make Lhem each Lhe source of lnflnlLe value? uoes noL Lhe Coodness of SplrlL, lLs Agape, embrace boLh Mlnd and naLure ln a lovlng caress LhaL heals Lhe self-lnfllcLed wounds? uoes noL Lhe refluxlng movemenL of Cod and Lhe effluxlng movemenL of Lhe Coddess embrace Lhe enLlre Clrcle of AscenL and uescenL? Can we noL round ouL Lhe orlglnal lnslghLs and see LhaL SplrlL always manlfesLs ln all four quadranLs equally? ls noL SplrlL here and now ln all lLs radlanL glory, eLernally presenL as every l and every We and every lL? Wlll noL our more adequaLe lnLerpreLaLlons of SplrlL faclllLaLe SplrlL's rescue of us? As loLlnus knew: LeL Lhe world be quleL. LeL Lhe heavens and Lhe earLh and Lhe seas be sLlll. LeL Lhe world be walLlng. LeL Lhe self-conLracLlon relax lnLo Lhe empLy ground of lLs own awareness, and leL lL Lhere quleLly dle. See how SplrlL pours Lhrough each and every openlng ln Lhe Lurmoll, and besLows new splendor on Lhe seLLlng Sun and lLs glorlous LarLh and all lLs radlanL lnhablLanLs. See Lhe kosmos dance ln LmpLlness, see Lhe play of llghL ln all creaLures greaL and small, see flnlLe worlds slng and re[olce ln Lhe play of Lhe very ulvlne, floaLlng on a Clory LhaL renders each LransparenL, flooded by a !oy LhaL refuses Llme or Lerror, LhaL undoes Lhe madness of Lhe loveless self and burles lL ln splendor. lndeed, lndeed: leL Lhe self-conLracLlon relax lnLo Lhe empLy ground of lLs own awareness, and leL lL Lhere quleLly dle. See Lhe kosmos arlse ln lLs place, danclng madly and dlvlne, self-lumlnous and self-llberaLlng, lnLoxlcaLed by a LlghL LhaL never dawns nor ceases. See Lhe worlds arlse and fall, never caughL ln Llme or Lurmoll, LransparenL lmages shlmmerlng ln Lhe radlanL Abyss. WaLch Lhe mounLaln walk on waLer, drlnk Lhe aclflc ln a slngle gulp, bllnk and a bllllon unlverses rlse and fall, breaLhe ouL and creaLe a kosmos, breaLhe ln and waLch lL dlssolve. LeL Lhe ecsLasy overflow and ouLshlne Lhe loveless self, drlven mad wlLh Lhe LormenLs of lLs self-embraclng ways, hugglng mlghLlly samsara's spokes of endless agony, and slng lnsLead LrlumphanLly wlLh SalnL CaLherlne, My belng ls Cod, noL by slmple parLlclpaLlon, buL by a Lrue LransformaLlon of my 8elng. My me ls Cod!" And leL Lhe [oy slng wlLh uame !ullan, See! l am Cod! See! l am ln all Lhlngs! See! l do all Lhlngs!" And leL Lhe [oy shouL wlLh Pakuln, 1hls very body ls Lhe 8ody of 8uddha! and Lhls very land Lhe ure Land!" And Lhls LarLh becomes a blessed belng, and every l becomes a Cod, and every We becomes Cod's slnceresL worshlp, and every lL becomes Cod's mosL graclous Lemple. And comes Lo resL LhaL Codless search, LormenLed and LormenLlng. 1he knoL ln Lhe PearL of Lhe kosmos relaxes Lo allow lLs only Cod, and overflows Lhe SplrlL ravlshed and enrapLured by Lhe losL and found 8eloved. And gone Lhe Codless desLlny of deaLh and desperaLlon, and gone Lhe madness of a llfe commlLLed Lo uncare, and gone Lhe Lears and Lerror of Lhe bruLal days and endless nlghLs where Llme alone would rule. And l-l rlse Lo LasLe Lhe dawn, and flnd LhaL love alone wlll shlne Loday. And Lhe Shlnlng says: Lo love lL all, and love lL madly, and always endlessly, and ever flercely, Lo love wlLhouL cholce and Lhus enLer Lhe All, Lo love lL mlndlessly and Lhus be Lhe All, embraclng Lhe only and radlanL ulvlne: now as LmpLlness, now as lorm, LogeLher and forever, Lhe Codless search undone, and love alone wlll shlne Loday. 1PL CnL 1PA1 WAS 1C CCML 1oday's world of modernlLy gone sllghLly mad: MyLh for Lhe peasanLs, flaLland naLurallsm for Lhe lnLelllgenLsla. lL ls more Lhan a llLLle lronlc, Lhen, LhaL lL was sclence, uescended sclence, LhaL ln Lhe closlng decades of Lhe LwenLleLh cenLury would redlscover Lhe self-organlzlng and self-Lranscendlng naLure of evoluLlon lLself. More Lhan a llLLle lronlc LhaL ln unlLlng Lhe Lwo arrows" of Llme lL would make Lros Lhe slngle and all-pervadlng prlnclple of manlfesLaLlon. More Lhan a llLLle lronlc LhaL lL would pave Lhe way for an evolotloo beyooJ totlooollty, slnce lL has clearly demonsLraLed LhaL evoluLlon sLops for nobody, LhaL each sLage passes lnLo a larger Lomorrow. And lf Loday ls raLlonallLy, Lomorrow ls LransraLlonallLy, and Lhere ls noL a slngle sclenLlflc argumenL ln Lhe world LhaL can dlsagree wlLh LhaL, and every argumenL ln favor of lL. And so Lhere we sLand now, aL raLlonallLy, polsed on Lhe edge of LransraLlonal percepLlon, a scleotlo vlslools LhaL ls brlnglng here and Lhere, buL ever more clearly, Lo all sorLs of people ln all sorLs of places, powerful gllmmers of a Lrue uescenL of Lhe all-pervadlng World Soul. Notes CPA1L8 1. 1PL WL8 Cl LllL 1. See 8oger Walsh's percepLlve dlscusslon of Lhls ln 5toyloq ollve. 2. Warwlck lox has glven a very useful summary of Lhese hlsLorlcal developmenLs, see 1owotJ o ttoospetsoool ecoloqy. 3. Capra, 1otoloq polot, p. 16. 4. ln ulamond & CrensLeln, keweovloq tbe wotlJ, pp. 136, 161. 3. ln uevall & Sesslons, ueep ecoloqy, pp. 8, 20. 6. Laszlo, volotloo, pp. 9, 4. 7. lbld., p. 3. 8. LxacLly how Lhese domalns are relaLed, wheLher Lhey are ln facL Lhree spheres or lnsLead [usL aspecLs of one encompasslng sphere, and how Lhey mlghL relaLe lndlvldually or collecLlvely Lo Lhe Lheosphere"-Lhe ulvlne uomaln: Lhese are quesLlons we wlll wanL evenLually Lo address. ln Lhe meanLlme perhaps we can accepL Lhese Lhree domalns as provlslonally glven. 1o presenL only one example now: ln coloqy, commoolty, ooJ llfestyle, Arne naess polnLs ouL LhaL humanklnd ls Lhe flrsL specles on earLh wlLh Lhe lnLellecLual capaclLy Lo llmlL lLs numbers cooscloosly and llve ln an endurlng, dynamlc equlllbrlum wlLh oLher forms of llfe," buL LhaL a global coltote . . . ls now encroachlng upon all Lhe world's mllleux, desecraLlng llvloq cooJltloos for fuLure generaLlons" (p. 23, my lLallcs). 1hls ls surely Lrue, and Lhe facL LhaL human culLure can consclously elLher occotJ wlLh Lhe blosphere (llvlng condlLlons) or Jevlote from lL shows preclsely LhaL culLure ls oot ln all ways tbe some tbloq as Lhe blosphere-lL ls dlfferenLlaLed from lL ln some slgnlflcanL ways, even Lhough lL depends upon lL for lLs own exlsLence, and LhaL dlfferenLlaLlon we call Lhe noosphere. We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls Loplc Llme and Llme agaln LhroughouL Lhls book, each Llme reflnlng lL, so l ask my ecologlcal frlends, many of whom are profoundly susplclous of anyLhlng resembllng a noosphere," Lo bear wlLh me unLll Lhe argumenLs unfold more fully. 9. 8erLalanffy, Ceoetol system tbeoty, p. 87. 10. Love[oy, Cteot cbolo of beloq, whose Lhemes we wlll explore ln deLall ln chapLer 9. 11. lbld., p. 26. 12. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 14. 13. lbld., p. 13. 14. 1hus, for example, Lhe followlng from llya rlgoglne: AfLer quoLlng lvor Leclerc, who says, ln our cenLury we are sufferlng Lhe consequences of Lhe separaLlon of sclence and phllosophy whlch followed upon Lhe Lrlumph of WesLern physlcs ln Lhe 18Lh cenLury," rlgoglne goes on Lo say: Powever, l belleve LhaL Lhe slLuaLlon Loday ls much more favorable ln Lhe sense LhaL Lhe recenL redlscovery of Llme [l.e., lrreverslblllLy] leads Lo a new perspecLlve. now Lhe dlalogue beLween hard sclences on one slde, human sclences and phllosophy on Lhe oLher, may become agaln frulLful as lL was durlng Lhe classlc perlod of Creece or durlng Lhe 17Lh cenLury of newLon and Lelbnlz"-Lhls belng exacLly Lhe polnL afLer whlch whaL we mlghL call Lhe greaL fracLure" (beLween llfe and maLLer, or more accuraLely, lnLerlorlLy and exLerlorlLy) occurred. Nobel ltlze coovetsotloos, Saybrook, 1983, p. 121. 13. Cardner, Ooest fot mloJ, p. 172. 16. !akobson, Oo looqooqe, p. 11. 1hls ls Lhe edlLor's summary of !akobson's vlew. 17. Cardner, Ooest fot mloJ, p. 172. 18. ocyclopeJlo of pbllosopby, ed. aul Ldwards, vol. 2, p. 474. 19. koesLler, Cbost lo tbe mocbloe. 20. Llsler, cbollce ooJ tbe bloJe, p. 203. 21. 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, pp. 19, 20. 22. lbld., p. 31, my lLallcs. 23. lbld., pp. 27, 78. 24. lbld., pp. 22, 98. 23. lbld., p. 88. 26. ln 1he evoluLlon of consclousness? 1ranspersonal Lheorles ln llghL of culLural relaLlvlsm," Mlchael Wlnkelman marshals Lhe culLural relaLlvlsL argumenLs agalnsL ranklng any sorL of consclousness achlevemenL as hlgher or lower Lhan anoLher across culLures. no culLural poslLlon ls or can be superlor Lo anoLher, he says, lL has Lo be declded on lLs own merlLs, and on Lhose alone: no poslLlon ls lnLrlnslcally superlor. Pe Lhen proceeds Lo explaln why hls poslLlon ls lnLrlnslcally superlor. Senslng a conLradlcLlon, he Lhen exempts hls own global-Lheorlzlng sLance from havlng any oJoptlve value. Pe musL do Lhls, because lf he admlLs LhaL a worldcenLrlc, global perspecLlvlsm has oJoptlve advanLage over narrower perspecLlves, Lhen he musL admlL LhaL bls culLural sLance of unlversal-global perspecLlvlsm ls sopetlot Lo Lhose culLures LhaL he sLudles LhaL do oot share hls unlversal plurallsm. 1hus, Wlnkelman's performaLlve conLradlcLlon shows up mosL obvlously ln Lhe facL LhaL he ls convlnced LhaL hls overall sLance ls superlor Lo alLernaLlve and rlval approaches, buL hls own Lheory cannoL sLaLe why Lhls ls so. lnsLead, he slmply lashes ouL aL Lhose who profess any sorL of ranklng sysLem (and he does so uslng bls lmpllclL ranklng sysLem). 1hls performaLlve conLradlcLlon ls Lhen exLended Lo all of rellglon, wlLh Lhe same resulLs: nobody can say anyLhlng ls hlgher or deeper, whaLever works for one culLure ls absoluLely as good as any oLher, as long as lL ls fooctlooloq ln an oJoptlve fashlon. 8esldes belng an lncorrecL assumpLlon (are Lhe nazls as good as anybody else? We're noL allowed Lo [udge Lhem wlLh our own sLandards), Lhe poslLlon ls also secreLly blased. 1he collapse of coltotol voloes lnLo adapLlve or fooctloool flt ls, as we wlll see ln greaL deLall, slmply parL of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, and as such, ls ln lLs own way very eLhnocenLrlc (we wlll examlne Lhls ln chapLers 4, 11, 12, and 13). WhaL llLLle LheoreLlcal evldence Wlnkelman presenLs for hls poslLlon comes mosLly from synchronlc sLrucLurallsm (e.g., Levl- SLrauss), whlch ls now wldely acknowledged Lo be unable Lo accounL for developmenL (or dlachronlc sLrucLures) aL all. Levl- SLrauss (e.g., 1be sovoqe mloJ) belleved LhaL early culLures dlsplayed hldden sLrucLural paLLerns LhaL, when objectlvely tepteseoteJ, were every blL as complex as paLLerns dlsplayed by advanced culLures, and Lhus Lhe cognlLlve rlchness of early culLures was noL fundamenLally lacklng wlLh respecL Lo modern culLures. 1hls led hlm llkewlse Lo clalm LhaL Lhere was no fundamenLal dlfference ln cognlLlon beLween a flve-year-old and a sclenLlsL. 8uL Lhls ls llke saylng LhaL slnce Lhe Schroedlnger wave equaLlon, whlch represenLs Lhe probablllLy of an elecLron's behavlor, ls every blL as complex as Lhe formulas of ArlsLoLle's formal loglc, Lhen Lhere ls no fundamenLal dlfference beLween an elecLron's cognlLlve capaclLy and ArlsLoLle's. 1he clalm LhaL Lhe sclenLlsL and Lhe flve-year-old boLh possess lncredlbly complex sLrucLures ls noL enough Lo show LhaL Lhere aren'L also profound dlfferences ln capaclLy as well. And, lndeed, Levl-SLrauss subsequenLly wlLhdrew hls clalm abouL flve-year-olds and sclenLlsLs belng essenLlally equlvalenL ln capaclLy, and Lhls recanLlng of merely syocbtoolc (unchanglng) sLrucLurallsm marked Lhe end of a lack of Jevelopmeotol (dlachronlc) senslLlvlLy. CulLure ls noL as sLaLlc, synchronlc, and ahlsLorlcal as Lhe early sLrucLurallsLs lmaglned, buL raLher lnvolves deeply hlsLorlcal and developmenLal currenLs, and culLural/hlsLorlcal Jevelopmeot shows broad leotoloq Lrends, ln cognlLlve, moral, legal, and Lechnologlcal aspecLs (as we wlll see). 1hus, lf we acknowledge (wlLh Wlnkelman) LhaL unlversal perspecLlvlsm ls beLLer (ln any sense of Lhe word) Lhan narrow eLhnocenLrlsm (and Lhls ls Lhe ttoe parL of all culLural relaLlvlsLs' sLance), and slnce Lhls worldcenLrlc perspecLlvlsm ls noL slmply glven Lo culLures aL Lhe sLarL buL develops and evolves slowly over Lhe mlllennla, Lhen we are [usLlfled ln examlnlng Lhe developmenLal sLages LhaL lead Lo a capaclLy Lo Lake a worldcenLrlc sLance. 1hls leads lnexorably Lo Lheorles of communlcaLlon and Lhe evoluLlon of socleLles, and Lhls ls preclsely Lhe paLh LhaL Pabermas and oLhers have Laken. ln so dolng, Pabermas arrlves aL a serles of unlversal valldlLy clalms LhaL are cross-culLural and exLra-llngulsLlc, and open Lo falllblllsL crlLerla. 1here ls, so Lo speak, no oLher way Lo proceed lf we wanL Lo acLually acknowledge Lhe momenLs of LruLh ln culLural relaLlvlsm, momenLs of LruLh LhaL, lf pursued slncerely (and noL merely exempLed from Lhelr own clalms), lead lnexorably Lo unlversallsL valldlLy clalms (as we wlll see). 1hese clalms do noL rank so much beLween culLures, buL wlLhln culLures: Lhe culLures Lhemselves recognlze hlgher and lower, or deeper and shallower, or beLLer and worse values. And, oot Lhe values per se buL Lhe types of values can lndeed be ranked-and are ranked by Lhe socleLles Lhemselves (crlLerla we wlll be lnvesLlgaLlng as Lhe book proceeds). We wlll, ln Lhe succeedlng chapLers, be explalnlng Pabermas's vlews ln greaL deLall, and Lhelr slgnlflcance wlll, l belleve, become qulLe apparenL. (lor a crlLlque of Wlnkelman's poslLlon ln llghL of Lhese more recenL developmenLs, see noLe 26 Lo chapLer 3.) 27. 1hus, unlversal and worldcenLrlc plurallsm ls a very dlfflculL, very rare, very speclal, very ellLe sLance. ln many ways l happen Lo agree wlLh LhaL ellLe sLance. 8uL l am noL lmpressed when Lhese ellLlsLs call lL anLl-ellLlsL. 28. We wlll be golng lnLo Lhls ln deLall ln chapLers 9 and 10, so for Lhe momenL a few very brlef examples wlll sufflce. ln hls book lotqotteo 1totb, PusLon SmlLh summarlzes Lhe world's ma[or rellglons ln one phrase: a hlerarchy of belng and knowlng." Chgyam 1rungpa, 8lnpoche polnLed ouL ln 5bombbolo LhaL tbe essenLlal and background ldea pervadlng all of Lhe phllosophles of Lhe LasL, from lndla Lo 1lbeL Lo Chlna, lylng behlnd everyLhlng from ShlnLolsm Lo 1aolsm Lo shamanlsm, ls a hlerarchy of earLh, human, heaven," whlch he also polnLed ouL ls equlvalenL Lo body, mlnd, splrlL." And Coomaraswamy ln nloJolsm ooJ 8oJJblsm (new ?ork: hllosophlcal Llbrary, 1943) noLed LhaL Lhe world's greaL rellglons, bar none, ln Lhelr dlfferenL degrees represenL a hlerarchy of Lypes or levels of consclousness exLendlng from anlmal Lo delLy, and accordlng Lo whlch one and Lhe same lndlvldual may funcLlon on dlfferenL occaslons." CPA1L8 2. 1PL A11L8n 1PA1 CCnnLC1S 1. We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls Loplc LhroughouL Lhe book, l can'L sLaLe my flnal poslLlon unLll we dlscuss Lhe lCu prlnclple, ln chapLer 14. Sufflce lL Lo say, for now, LhaL Lrylng Lo declde obsolotely ln favor of unvarylng laws" or learned hablLs" lnvolves us ln varlous conLradlcLlons. 1o say LhaL Lhere are no flxed laws, only learned hablLs, ls lLself a flxed law. 8uL Lo say LhaL Lhere are only flxed laws ls Lo lgnore Lhose laws LhaL do ln facL develop. 2. PofsLadLer, CoJel, scbet, 8ocb, pp. 142, 146. Llkewlse, as !akobson polnLed ouL, An lmporLanL sLrucLural parLlcularlLy of language ls LhaL aL no sLage of resolvlng hlgher unlLs lnLo Lhelr componenL parLs does one encounLer lnformaLlonally polnLless fragmenLs." Oo looqooqe, p. 11. 3. Ldwards, ocyclopeJlo of pbllosopby, vol. 3, pp. 202-3. 4. 8aLallle, vlsloos of excess, p. 174. 3. lbld. 6. CuoLed lbld., p. xl. 7. Culler, Oo Jecoosttoctloo, p. 213. My lLallcs. 8. lbld., p. 123. 9. lbllosopblcol Jlscootse of moJetolty, p. 197. As l polnL ouL ln Lhe nexL paragraph of Lhe LexL, slldlng conLexLs do noL lnvalldaLe Lhe exlsLence of LruLh, buL slmply slLuaLe lL. And Lhere are many nonarblLrary ways LhaL conLexLs are held sLlll ln order for Lhe slLuaLlng Lo occur. Pabermas polnLs ouL LhaL ln communlcaLlon, for example, Lhe presumpLlon of ldenLlcal meanlng musL be made or else Lhe communlcaLlon does noL, and cannoL, geL sLarLed ln Lhe flrsL place: and LhaL sLops Lhe sllde. 10. varela, ln 1hompson, Colo, p. 30. 11. koesLler, Cbost lo tbe mocbloe, p. 63, my lLallcs. 12. WhlLehead's CaLegory of Lhe ulLlmaLe" lncludes Lhree concepLs: creaLlvlLy, many, and one. ln a sense, he could have reduced LhaL Lo creaLlvlLy and holon, slnce holon ls one/many (and slnce many and one never exlsL separaLely). WhlLehead's prehenslve unlflcaLlon ls Lhe presenL, sub[ecLlve holon passlng as ob[ecL lnLo Lhe succeedlng presenL, sub[ecLlve holon, so LhaL every holon prehends lLs enLlre acLual unlverse, and llves on ln Lhe prehenslve unlflcaLlon of all lLs descendanLs (causallLy")-wlLh, of course, Lhe whole serles showlng gradaLlon (hlerarchy), dependlng upon Lhe degree of creaLlvlLy ln[ecLed lnLo Lhe sLream aL any glven momenL. 1hls ls why emergence" as used ln sclence doesn'L really explolo anyLhlng, lL only Jesctlbes whaL ln facL happens. 1he exploootloo has Lo lle ln someLhlng llke WhlLehead's ulLlmaLe caLegory of creaLlvlLy, a feaLure of reallLy lLself LhaL accounLs for emergence and cannoL lLself be accounLed for. We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls Loplc LhroughouL Lhls book, each Llme reflnlng lL. 8uL lL ls clear LhaL some sorL of Lros ls lnvolved ln Lhe process, or lL could never geL golng ln Lhe flrsL place. Lros/creaLlvlLy shows up especlally ln Lhe self-Lranscendlng capaclLy of every holon. 13. ln self-LransformaLlon or self-Lranscendence, Lhe agency of Lhe subholons are subsumed ln Lhe new agency of Lhe superholon, and LhaL new agency Lhen exlsLs ln lLs own neLworks of new Lypes of communlon. 14. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 11. 13. lbld., p. 183, my lLallcs. 16. Laszlo, volotloo, pp. 76, 78, 33, 36. 17. Murphy's summary of Slmpson's vlew. Murphy, 1be fotote of tbe boJy, p. 28. 18. lbld., pp. 28-29. 19. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 49. 20. CuoLed ln Cardner, Ooest fot mloJ, p. 199-200. 21. loss and 8oLhenberg, 5ecooJ meJlcol tevolotloo, p. 131. 22. PofsLadLer, CoJel, scbet, 8ocb, p. 308. 23. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 36. 24. varela eL al., 1be emboJleJ mloJ, pp. 88, 90. We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls lmporLanL work aL several places ln Lhe followlng chapLers, drawlng on lLs conslderable sLrengLhs (and suggesLlng a few posslble weaknesses). l can'L reference Lhelr work as fully as l would llke ln Lhls chapLer because l need Lo lnLroduce several new Loplcs before Lhe slgnlflcanL conLours of Lhelr valuable conLrlbuLlon can be fully appreclaLed. 8uL l belleve Lhe general ouLllnes presenLed ln Lhls chapLer are consonanL wlLh Lhe maln Lhemes of Lhelr work on enacLlve cognlLlon and sLrucLural coupllng, and when we laLer reLurn Lo Lhelr work, Lhese parallels wlll, l belleve, be more apparenL. See noLes 49 and 32, below, chap. 4, noLes 13 and 43, chap. 14, noLe 1. 23. Mayr, Ctowtb of bloloqlcol tbooqbt, p. 63. 26. We can see wby a holon acLed ln a parLlcular way, buL noL LhaL lL would acL ln only LhaL way. 27. naLural, monologlcal sclences sLudy holons LhaL, Lhrough a relaLlvely free emergence, have seLLled lnLo hablLs so flxed, so sLable, wlLh such a mlnlmum of creaLlvlLy, LhaL Lhelr behavlor approaches (and Lhus mlsLakenly appears Lo follow) lmmuLable laws. 1hls, l Lake lL, ls Lhe essence of Sheldrake's poslLlon. 28. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 196. 29. 8erLalanffy, Ceoetol system tbeoty, pp. 74, 87. 30. ColdsmlLh, 1be woy, p. 28. 31. Sheldrake, New scleoce of llfe, p. 74. 32. varela, ltloclples of bloloqlcol ootooomy, p. 86. 33. naess, coloqy, commoolty, ooJ llfestyle, p. 38. 34. lbld. 33. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, pp. 33, 16. 36. 1hls does noL mean LhaL every Lranscendence necessarlly lncludes every predecessor ln every deLall, buL slmply LhaL each Lranscendence bullds upon some of Lhe fundamenLal feaLures of lLs predecessor(s). We wlll see numerous examples of Lhls as we proceed. 37. varela, ltloclples of bloloqlcol ootooomy, p. 86. 38. MlLchell (ed.), Nobel ltlze coovetsotloos, p. 39. 39. 1hls Lurns ouL Lo be very lmporLanL ln developmenL, where Lhe fallure Lo surrender an excluslvlLy sLrucLure resulLs ln flxaLlon, or paLhologlcally narrowed ldenLlLy. ln human developmenL Lhls ls Lhe dlfference beLween, for example, an oral drlve and an oral flxaLlon: Lhe need for food ls a baslc sLrucLure LhaL remalns ln exlsLence ln subsequenL developmenL, buL lf Lhe lnfanL excluslvely cllngs Lo lL, an oral flxaLlon resulLs, lL refuses Lo be negaLed and preserved, and wanLs only preservaLlon, hence flxaLlon-Pawall wanLs Lo be parL of Lhe unlon buL won'L surrender lLs rlghL Lo prlnL lLs own money. All developmenL ls fundamenLally Lhe converslon of excluslvlLy sLrucLures Lo baslc sLrucLures, whlch ls anoLher way of saylng LhaL one sLlll possesses Lhe funcLlon buL ls noL excluslvely ldenLlfled wlLh lL. 40. Sheldrake, New scleoce of llfe, pp. 83, 87, 88, my lLallcs. 41. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 34. 42. Sheldrake, 1be pteseoce of tbe post, pp. 120-21. 43. koesLler, Cbost lo tbe mocbloe, p. 30. 44. ln Lhe same veln, some crlLlcs ob[ecL Lo Lhe use of Lhe Lerms verLlcal" and horlzonLal" (noL Lo menLlon hlgher" and lower"), because Lhey feel LhaL Lhose noLlons are, among oLher Lhlngs, elLher anLhropocenLrlc or paLrlarchal (androcenLrlc) or old paradlgm." And Lhls goes hand ln hand wlLh Lhese crlLlcs' enLlre re[ecLlon of Lhe noLlon of holarchy lLself, whlch seems confused, ln LhaL mosL of Lhese crlLlcs also clalm Lo be hollsLlc. 8uL LhaL confuslon sLems, as l wlll Lry Lo show laLer, from mlsLaklng greaL span wlLh greaL depLh, mlsLaklng wlder" wlLh hlgher" (whlch Lhen leads Lhem Lo re[ecL Lhe concepL of hlgher" or verLlcal" alLogeLher, slnce Lhey belleve LhaL lL ls noL necessary, belng merely subsumed under Lhe concepL of wlder"). 1hls ls, l wlll suggesL, a form of reducLlonlsm, and we wlll have much Lo say abouL Lhe lnherenL problems of LhaL approach ln our dlscusslon of ecofemlnlsm and deep ecology. lor Lhe momenL, Lhen, leL me repeaL LhaL l belleve LhaL whaL Lhese crlLlcs are really (and rlghLly) ob[ecLlng Lo ls noL holarchy per se (as Laszlo sald, Lhe emplrlcal evldence for Lhls ls lndlspuLable"), buL raLher paLhologlcal holarchy wherever lL appears, and parLlcularly as lL appears ln anLhropocenLrlsm and androcenLrlsm, where agency ls drasLlcally ouL of balance wlLh communlon, and where cerLaln arroganL holons have usurped Lhelr role ln Lhe kosmos. 1hls ls one of Lhe ma[or Loplcs ln volume 2 of Lhls serles. 43. 1ranscrlpLlon ls aL work already ln Lhe models of subaLomlc parLlcles: how does whaL we recognlze as, say, an elecLron (lLs deep sLrucLure) acLually manlfesL as a glven parLlcle? 1he collapse of Lhe wave funcLlon ls an example of LranscrlpLlon (afLer all, Lhe elecLron manlfesLs as an elecLron and noL a frog). ln Lhe blosphere we see LranscrlpLlon ln an expllclL form wlLh, Lo glve only one example, nuclelc acld reproducLlon, whlch lnvolves boLh LranslaLlon and LranscrlpLlon (whlch are so named), LransformaLlon ln Lhls domaln ls called muLaLlon." ln Lhe noosphere, cognlLlve behavlorlsLs and llngulsLs, from lageL Lo Chomsky, have dealL wlLh varlous LranscrlpLlon rules, whereby Lhe poLenLlals of Lhe deep sLrucLure are unfolded ln acLual surface sLrucLures. And much of Lhe work on worldvlews"-from Cebser Lo Peldegger Lo Pabermas-lnvolves elaboraLlng Lhe pre-arLlculaLe deep sLrucLures of Lhe worldvlew (or pre-undersLandlng) LhaL Lends Lo govern Lhe acLual surface percepLlons of lLs lnhablLanLs. We wlll see many more examples as we proceed. 46. Cf course, boLh LranslaLlon and LransformaLlon acLually deal wlLh whole/parLs (Lhere are only holons), buL LransformaLlon deals wlLh emergenL holons LhaL subsume Lhose of lLs predecessors, and Lhus ls more hollsLlc." 1he wholes of Lhe prevlous level are now parLs of Lhe senlor level, so Lhe whole unlLs" of Lhe prevlous LranslaLlon are now parLs" of Lhe new: Lhe senlor has more depLh and ls Lhus more encompasslng. ulfferenLlaLlon dlvldes and produces more reglmes on a glven level, buL lnLegraLlon produces a new level, a new wholeness, a new reglme, a new deep sLrucLure-lL ls a LransformaLlon, noL a mere LranslaLlon (we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls Loplc of dlfferenLlaLlon and lnLegraLlon ln LeneL 12). We heard !anLsch explaln LhaL evoluLlon was noL slmply expandlng communlon (or self-adapLaLlon), for LhaL produces merely more of Lhe same, noL someLhlng novel. Llkewlse, Laszlo remlnds us LhaL expanded agency, even ln lLs llvlng, self-organlzlng form (as auLopolesls), cannoL accounL for evoluLlon elLher: AuLopolesls ls noL evoluLlon, however, even lf auLopoleLlc cellular auLomaLa models can slmulaLe cerLaln evoluLlonary phenomena such as Lhe convergence of cells lnLo mulLlcellular sysLems. ln order Lo undersLand evoluLlon one needs also Lo undersLand how dlsconLlnuous, nonllnear change Lakes place ln real-world dynamlc sysLems" (volotloo, p. 39). ln oLher words, one needs noL merely LranslaLlon models buL LransformaLlon models. As for LranslaLlon lLself, Lhe facL LhaL all holons are lnvolved ln LranslaLlon means, ln Lhe broadesL sense, LhaL all holons are slgns. 8orrowlng from elrce, l deflne a slgn as: any aspecL of reallLy LhaL sLands for anoLher, Lo anoLher. 1hus, even aLoms LranslaLe Lhe physlcal forces around Lhem lnLo Lerms LhaL Lhey respond Lo: an empLy orblLal shell ls a slgn, Lo an elecLron, LhaL lL may enLer Lhe shell. lL ls an aspecL of reallLy (Lhe empLy shell) LhaL sLands for anoLher aspecL (lL may be enLered), Lo anoLher aspecL (Lhe elecLron). All holons are slgns because all agenLs are always agency-ln-communlon (or agenLs-ln-conLexL), and all slgns are slldlng because conLexLs are boundless. And flnally, Lhls ls why no slgns, ln any domaln, are metely represenLaLlonal, or merely one holon represenLlng anoLher holon, slgns are always a holon represenLlng a holon Lo a holon. See !akobson's lnLeresLlng dlscusslon on Lhls ln relaLlon Lo elrce: all slgnlflcaLlon ls buL Lhe 'LranslaLlon of a slgn lnLo anoLher sysLem of slgns'"[ltomewotk of looqooqe, p. 10.]-whlch, among oLher Lhlngs, ls why llngulsLlc Lheory can never deflne a slgn wlLhouL reference Lo Lhe sysLem ln whlch Lhe slgn occurs (de Saussure), and why posLsLrucLurallsm has been able furLher Lo polnL Lo endlessly slldlng slgnlflcaLlon (alLhough LhaL ls noL so LoLally deconsLrucLlve" as Lhey lmaglne, buL slmply normal llfe ln any world). And Lhls also prevenLs knowledge from belng metely represenLaLlonal, an lnLerpreLlve momenL ls bullL lnLo cognlLlon (whlch we wlll examlne aL lengLh ln chapLer 4). [lor an lnLegral semloLlcs," see 1be ye of 5pltlt, chap. 3, noLe 12.] 47. All Lypes of holons aL Lhe same level would be desLroyed, Lhe dlfferenL Lypes LhaL are also desLroyed are hlgher, Lhe dlfferenL Lypes noL desLroyed are lower. 48. 1hls prlnclple also holds for all Lypes of human developmenLal sequences. lor example, lf we desLroyed all convenLlonal moral sLages, we would also desLroy all posLconvenLlonal sLages, buL noL preconvenLlonal sLages. uesLroy all concepLs, and all rules are gone, buL lmages sLlll remaln-and so on. 1hls prlnclple also polnLs up Lhe bankrupLcy of pure heLerarchy. lf Lhere were ooly a horlzonLal dlmenslon of pote heLerarchy, where everyLhlng exlsLs solely by vlrLue of lLs lnLernal connecLlons or relaLlons Lo evetytbloq else, Lhen lf l desLroyed all of one Lype of anyLhlng, l would slmulLaneously desLroy all Lypes of everyLhlng, slnce Lhere ls no onLologlcal gradaLlon of any sorL ln a pote heLerarchy. 1hls ls where flaLland onLologles fall aparL, Lhey lgnore evoluLlon and Lhe meanlng of emergence. 1here are aspecLs of evoluLlon LhaL are perfecLly conLlnuous, and aspecLs LhaL are quanLlzed or dlsconLlnuous, and emphaslzlng excloslvely one or Lhe oLher leads Lo paLhologlcal heLerarchy and paLhologlcal hlerarchy, respecLlvely. 49. 1haL agency ls always agency-ln-communlon ls a cenLral feaLure, as l consLrue lL, of varela's eooctlve paradlgm. As l would phrase lL, a holon's oqeocy (lnLrlnslc self-organlzlng properLles") enacLs a worldspace (brlngs forLh a domaln of dlsLlncLlons) and does so relaLlvely auLonomously, wlLh Lhe cruclal addlLlon LhaL a holon's agency ls parLly a resulL of sLrucLural coupllngs" wlLh Lhe approprlaLe worldspace (all of whlch we wlll be explalnlng ln more deLall as we proceed). Agency as agency-ln-communlon Lhus explalns boLh relaLlve ootooomy and mlcro/macro coJetetmlootloo. As varela, 1hompson, and 8osch puL lL: 1he cruclal polnL here ls LhaL we do noL reLaln Lhe noLlon of an lndependenL, preglven envlronmenL buL leL lL fade lnLo Lhe background ln favor of so-called lnLrlnslc facLors [agency]. lnsLead we emphaslze LhaL Lhe very noLlon of whaL an envlronmenL ls cannoL be separaLed from whaL organlsms are and whaL Lhey do. 1hls polnL has been made qulLe eloquenLly by 8lchard LewonLln: '1he organlsm and Lhe envlronmenL are noL acLually separaLely deLermlned. 1he envlronmenL ls noL a sLrucLure lmposed on llvlng belngs from Lhe ouLslde buL ls ln facL a creaLlon of Lhose belngs. . . .'" 1hey conLlnue: 1he key polnL, Lhen, ls LhaL Lhe specles brlngs forLh and speclfles lLs own domaln of problems Lo be solved by saLlsflclng, Lhls domaln does noL exlsL 'ouL Lhere' ln an envlronmenL LhaL acLs as a landlng pad for organlsms LhaL somehow drop or parachuLe lnLo Lhe world. lnsLead, llvlng belngs and Lhelr envlronmenLs sLand ln relaLlon Lo each oLher Lhrough motool speclflcotloo or coJetetmlootloo. 1hus whaL we descrlbe as envlronmenLal regularlLles are noL exLernal feaLures LhaL have been lnLernallzed, as represenLaLlonlsm and adapLaLlonlsm boLh assume. LnvlronmenLal regularlLles are Lhe resulL of a con[olnL hlsLory, a congruence LhaL unfolds from a long hlsLory of codeLermlnaLlon" (mboJleJ mloJ, p. 198). 1hls ls also why Lhe unlL" of evoluLlon ls, baslcally, a mlcro/macro unlL, whlch ls Lo say: almosL any holon ln exlsLence. A full llsL of unlLs looks raLher formldable: unA shorL sequences, genes, whole gene famllles, Lhe cell lLself, Lhe specles genome, Lhe lndlvldual, 'lncluslve' groups of genes LhaL are carrled by dlfferenL lndlvlduals, Lhe soclal group, Lhe acLually lnLerbreedlng populaLlon, Lhe enLlre specles, Lhe ecosysLem of acLually lnLeracLlng specles, and Lhe global blosphere. Lach unlL [holon] harbors modes of coupllng and selecLlon consLralnLs [communlon], has unlque self-organlzlng quallLles [agency], and so has lLs own emergenL sLaLus wlLh respecL Lo oLher levels . . ." (pp. 192-93). lor more on Lhe enacLlve paradlgm, see noLe 32 below, chapLer 4, noLes 13 and 43, and chapLer 14, noLe 1. 30. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 83. 31. A Lhousand years from now, quarks wlll have been found Lo conLaln as many new levels of parLlcles as lLs lnvesLlgaLors have dlscovered new levels of consclousness ln Lhemselves, buL LhaL bellef, needless Lo say, ls noL necessary for Lhls argumenL. 32. ln up ftom Jeo, l Lrled Lo demonsLraLe LhaL Lhls was Lhe only way we could really undersLand developmenLal paLhologles, namely, as dlsLurbances ln relaLlonal exchanges wlLh a soclal envlronmenL ot tbe some Jeptb, wlLh dlsLurbances on one level (physlcal, emoLlonal, llngulsLlc) reverberaLlng LhroughouL Lhe enLlre sysLem, lncllnlng oLher levels Lo reproduce Lhe dlsLorLlon developmenLally. And, as we wlll see LhroughouL Lhls book, same-level relaLlonal exchange does noL mean LhaL Lhe mlcro exchanges wlLh a preglven macro: Lhey co-creaLe each oLher ln emergenL worldspaces. WhaL Lhls means wlll become more obvlous as we proceed. lor Lhe momenL, noLe varela eL al.: 1he key polnL ls LhaL such sysLems do noL operaLe by represenLaLlon [of a preglven world]. lnsLead of tepteseotloq an lndependenL world, Lhey eooct a world as a domaln of dlsLlncLlons LhaL ls lnseparable from Lhe sLrucLure embodled by Lhe cognlLlve sysLem" (or, more generally, by Lhe deep sLrucLure or agency of Lhe holon, mboJleJ mloJ, p. 140). 33. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 73. 34. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 23. 33. Lowe, uoJetstooJloq wbltebeoJ, p. 36. Lowe's wordlng. 36. lbld., Lhe lasL phrase ls Lowe's. 37. uerrlda, losltloos, p. 101. 38. Coward, uettlJo ooJ loJloo pbllosopby, p. 40. 39. lbld., pp. 40, 133, 137, 148. 60. uerrlda, losltloos, p. 26. 61. Culler's LranslaLlon, ln SLurrock, 5ttoctotollsm ooJ sloce, p. 164. 62. Cr, as Saussure puL lL, Language ls a sysLem of lnLerdependenL Lerms ln whlch Lhe value of each Lerm resulLs solely from Lhe slmulLaneous presence of Lhe oLhers"-LhaL ls, lL ls never slmply presenL on lLs own. CuoLed ln Pawkes, 5ttoctotollsm ooJ semlotlcs, p. 26. As for Lhe dlfferenLlaLlng process of language, Saussure's famous quoLe puLs lL ln a sLrong form: ln language Lhere are only dlfferences wlLhouL poslLlve Lerms. 1helr mosL preclse characLerlsLlc ls ln belng whaL Lhe oLhers are noL. WheLher we Lake Lhe slgnlfled or Lhe slgnlfler, language has nelLher ldeas nor sounds LhaL exlsLed before Lhe llngulsLlc sysLem, buL only concepLual and phonlc dlfferences LhaL have lssued from Lhe sysLem" (p. 28). And LhaL ls where lnLegraLlon ls cruclal, as Pawkes summarlzes: Language sLands as Lhe supreme example of a self-conLalned [relaLlvely auLonomous] relaLlonal sLrucLure whose consLlLuenL parLs have no slgnlflcance unless and unLll Lhey are lnLegraLed wlLhln lLs bounds." Saussure's greaL breakLhrough was Lo LreaL language as a relaLlvely auLonomous holon, such LhaL lLs sLrucLure or reglme consLlLuLed Lhe dlfferenLlaLlng and lnLegraLlng paLLerns LhaL governed every elemenL (subholon) ln Lhe sysLem, so LhaL a heap of oLherwlse enLlrely meanlngless elemenLs come LogeLher Lo form meanlngful slgns-by vlrLue of Lhe sysLem, Lhe hlgher holon LhaL confers meanlng on Lhe subholons by holdlng Lhem ln a common relaLlonshlp. Saussure dld noL qulLe wln Lhrough Lo a LoLally holonlc vlew, buL lL was a ma[or sLep ln Lhe rlghL dlrecLlon, and had an enormous hlsLorlcal lmpacL (vlrLually all sLrucLurallsLs, and Lherefore all posLsLrucLurallsLs, and many semloLlclans, Lrace Lhelr llneage Lo Saussure). We wlll reLurn Lo hls LhoughLs on llngulsLlc slgns ln chapLer 7. llnally, LhaL noLhlng ls ever slmply presenL" has almosL noLhlng Lo do wlLh mysLlcal resence, as we wlll see laLer. nor ls lL Lo be confused wlLh 8uddhlsL LmpLlness. 63. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse of moJetolty, p. 339. 64. lbld., pp. 343-46. Pabermas makes clear LhaL he ls, ln parL, plcklng up cerLaln Pegellan Lhemes and pursulng Lhem along a road noL Laken, LhaL of reason as communlcaLlve acLlon. Pegel's enLlre phllosophy ls, ln a sense, Lhe phllosophy of holons, and Lhe dlfferenLlaLlng-and-lnLegraLlng dlalecLlc LhaL drlves all developmenL. 63. ureyfus and 8ablnow, Mlcbel loocoolt, p. 33. 66. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 33. 67. luLuyma, volotloooty bloloqy, p. 289, my lLallcs. 68. 1hls ls so for Lhe same reason, as varela polnLed ouL, LhaL a level ln a holarchy ls exLernal Lo lLs [unlors and lnLernal Lo lLs senlors. 69. 1he whole of llLerary Lheory can be seen as a raLher splrlLed aLLempL Lo declde [usL whaL we wlll ldenLlfy as a lltetoty boloo, and tbetefote where we can flnd or locaLe Lhe meooloq of a LexL. lL used Lo be LhaL meanlng" was someLhlng Lhe auLhor creaLed and slmply puL lnLo a LexL, and Lhe reader slmply pulled lL ouL. 1hls vlew ls now regarded, by all parLles, as hopelessly nalve. WlLh Lhe arrlval of psychoanalysls, whlch undermlned Lhe auLonomous ego wlLh organlc drlves (l.e., Lhere are unconsclous drlves moLlvaLlng Lhe supposedly auLonomous" ego), lL was recognlzed LhaL some meanlng could Lherefore be unconsclous, or unconsclously generaLed, and Lhls unconsclous meanlng would flnd lLs way lnLo Lhe LexL even Lhough Lhe auLhor was unconsclous of lL. lL was Lherefore Lhe [ob of Lhe psychoanalysL, and noL Lhe nalve reader, Lo pull Lhls hldden meanlng ouL. 1he hermeneuLlcs of susplclon" (8lcoeur), ln lLs many forms, Lhus came Lo vlew LexLs as reposlLorles of unconsclous meanlng LhaL could be pulled ouL only by Lhe knowlng crlLlc. Any repressed, oppressed, or oLherwlse marglnallzed conLexL would show up, dlsgulsed, ln Lhe LexL, and Lhe LexL was a LesLamenL Lo Lhe represslon, oppresslon, marglnallzaLlon. Marglnallzed conLexL was hldden subLexL. 1he MarxlsL varlaLlon was LhaL Lhe crlLlcs Lhemselves exlsLed ln Lhe conLexL of caplLallsL-lndusLrlal soclal pracLlces of coverL domlnaLlon, and Lhese hldden conLexLs (and Lherefore meanlngs) could be found ln (and Lherefore pulled ouL of) any LexL wrlLLen by any person ln tbot conLexL. Slmllarly, LexLs would be read ln Lhe conLexL of raclsm, sexlsm, ellLlsm, specleslsm, [lngolsm, lmperlallsm, logocenLrlsm, phallocenLrlsm. varlous forms of sLrucLurallsm and hermeneuLlcs foughL vlgorously Lo flnd Lhe real" conLexL whlch would, tbetefote, provlde Lhe real and flnal meooloq, whlch would undercuL (or supersede) all oLher lnLerpreLaLlons. loucaulL, ln hls archaeologlcal perlod, ouLdld Lhem boLh, slLuaLlng boLh sLrucLurallsm and hermeneuLlcs ln an eplsLeme (laLer, dlsposlLlf) LhaL lLself was Lhe cause and conLexL of Lhe Lype of people who would even wanL Lo do hermeneuLlcs and sLrucLurallsm ln Lhe flrsL place. ln parL ln reacLlon Lo some of Lhls, Lhe new CrlLlclsm (acLually many decades old now) had sald, baslcally, Lo hell wlLh all LhaL. 1he LexL, ln and by lLself, ls Lhe auLonomous llLerary holon. lgnore Lhe personallLy (consclous or unconsclous) of Lhe auLhor, Lhe Llme, Lhe place, and look solely aL Lhe sLrucLural lnLegrlLy of Lhe LexL (lLs reglme, lLs code). AffecL-response" or reader-crlLlclsm" Lheory (llsh) reacLed sLrongly Lo all LhaL and malnLalned LhaL slnce meanlng ls only generaLed ln readlng (or ln vlewlng Lhe arLwork), Lhen Lhe meooloq of Lhe LexL ls acLually found ln Lhe tespoose of Lhe reader. 1he phenomenologlsLs (e.g., lser, lngarden) had Lrled a comblnaLlon of Lhe Lwo: Lhe LexL has gaps (spoLs of lndeLermlnancy"), and Lhe meanlng of Lhe gaps can be found ln Lhe reader. And deconsLrucLlon came along and sald, baslcally, you're all wrong (lL's very hard Lo Lrump LhaL)-meanlng ls conLexL dependenL, and conLexLs are boundless. Whlle l agree wlLh LhaL laLLer sLaLemenL of deconsLrucLlon, l do so for almosL opposlLe reasons, because whaL lnLeresLs me ls noL why all of Lhose Lheorles of meanlng are wrong, buL why all of Lhem are rlghL. 1hey are all (relaLlvely) Lrue snapshoLs of a parLlcular conLexL, and Lhey can all be relaLlvely accuraLe because conLexLs are always conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs, maklng room for each and all (except where Lhey deny oLher conLexLs). 1he sLudy of holarchy, ln shorL, ls Lhe sLudy of nesLed LruLhs. ueconsLrucLlon ln lLs Amerlcan form slmply Lakes Lhe phoLographlc negaLlve of LhaL and declares any approach (oLher Lhan lLs own) Lo be Lhe sLudy of nesLed lles, whlch ls preclsely why LhaL aLLlLude lands lL squarely ln nlhlllsm, whereas Lhe sLudy of nesLed LruLhs leads noL Lo nlhlllsm buL Lo LmpLlness, Lhe creaLlve plenum of Lhe kosmos. [See 1be ye of 5pltlt, chaps. 4 and 3.] 70. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 41. 71. lbld. Compare varela eL al. WhaL all Lhese dlverse phenomena have ln common ls LhaL ln each case a neLwork glves rlse Lo new properLles, whlch researchers Lry Lo undersLand ln all Lhelr generallLy. Cne of Lhe mosL useful ways of capLurlng Lhe emergenL properLles LhaL Lhese varlous sysLems have ln common ls Lhrough Lhe noLlon of an 'aLLracLor' ln dynamlcal sysLems Lheory." varela eL al., mboJleJ mloJ, p. 88. 72. Laszlo, volotloo, p. 43. 73. lbld. 74. lbld., p. 46. 73. lbld. 76. Laszlo, 1be cbolce, p. 93. 77. Cr !onas Salk: lL ls ln Lhe naLure of Lhe organlsm Lo be orlenLed for Lhe change LhaL occurs. 1he lnLrlnslc naLure of Lhe organlsm [reglme, deep sLrucLure] lnfluences Lhe range and dlrecLlon of change LhaL can occur, Lhe change LhaL occurs becomes added Lo oLhers, all of whlch LogeLher seem Lo be 'causes' Loward whlch Lhe developlng organlsm ls drawn, and Lhe word 'cause' ln Lhls conLexL obLalns Lhe phllosophlcal meanlng of 'end or purpose'." All quoLes from !akobson, Oo looqooqe, pp. 481, 482, 483. And, of course, Sheldrake's lmmensely LhoughLful appllcaLlon of morphogeneLlc flelds (whlch he now calls slmply morphlc flelds) ls an aLLempL Lo explaln many of Lhe lnconLroverLlble facLs of Leleologlcal developmenL LhaL slmply cannoL be explalned by maLerlallsLlc reducLlonlsm. 78. Cardner, Ooest fot mloJ, pp. 187-88. l have subsLlLuLed developmenL" for genesls." 1hls also polnLs up a facL LhaL all psychologlcal growLh LheorlsLs (especlally Lhe humanlsLlc and Lranspersonal psychologlsLs) have known for a long Llme: mosL neurosls ls due noL prlmarlly Lo pasL condlLlonlng per se, buL Lo a fuLure omega prevenLed from emerglng. Lven lreud's flxaLlons, wbeo Lhey occurred, were aborLed omega polnLs: llbldo cannoL dlsLrlbuLe ln lLs normal and preferred paLLern, buL lnsLead ls LraumaLlzed ln lLs growLh, much llke sLepplng on an acorn. 1hese aborLed omega drlves tbeo become condlLloned and Lhus appear as post flxaLlons, buL LhaL ls noL how Lhey stotteJ. 8ecovery Lheraples ln general (regresslon ln servlce of Lhe ego") Lhus aLLempL Lo reLurn Lo Lhe polnL where Lhe pasL condlLlonlng was an aborLed fuLure growLh, Lhen Lake Lhe booL off Lhe acorn, and Lhus allow Lhe growLh Lo proceed forward ln a more normal paLLern, followlng lLs more naLural omega. (Cf course, lL's a llLLle more compllcaLed Lhan LhaL-Lhe acorn has conLlnued Lo grow ln sllghLly LwlsLed ways, and Lhls can'L slmply be cleanly undone, buL Lhe polnL ls clear enough.) lf Lhe pasL condlLlonlngs dldn'L have a preferred paLLern (omega), Lhey couldn'L have been aborLed ln Lhe flrsL place. 79. CuoLed ln !akobson, Oo looqooqe, p. 483. 80. lbld., pp. 481, 20. 81. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse of moJetolty, p. 347. 82. Parold Coward's wordlng, uettlJo ooJ loJloo pbllosopby, p. 92, my lLallcs. 83. 8ecause holarchy ls Lhe sLudy of nesLed LruLhs, no maLLer how much we expand our conLexLs, Lhls does noL lnvalldaLe Lhe relaLlve LruLhs of smaller conLexLs. lL oeqotes Lhelr excluslveness (or Lhelr ulLlmaLeness), buL ptesetves Lhelr momenL of LruLh, Lhelr conLexL-dependenL LruLh. Lven lf we go beyond lreud (whlch l LrusL we wlll), even lf we expand our conLexLs beyond Lhe lsolaLed ego Lo Lhe communlLarlan socleLy, or Lo Lhe whole blosphere, or even Lo Cod 1hunderous and AlmlghLy, Lhls wlll noL change Lhe facL LhaL lf l have a really vlclous oral flxaLlon, l am noL golng Lo have an alLogeLher fun Llme ln llfe. CPA1L8 3. lnulvluuAL Anu SCClAL 1 Capra, 8elooqloq to tbe oolvetse, p. xll. 2. ln ulamond & CrensLeln, keweovloq tbe wotlJ, p. 227. 3. lrom 1be self ooJ lts btolo, p. 17. 4. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 117, 118. 3. LvoluLlon ls lndlcaLed noL necessarlly by lncreaslng slze buL by lncreaslng depLh, or degree of sLrucLural organlzaLlon. ln CoJel, scbet, 8ocb, PofsLadLer makes Lhe polnL LhaL, glven LhaL evoluLlon ls Lranscendence and lncluslon (embrace"), whaL ls lncluded ln all cases ls Lhe code or canon or reglme, and noL always Lhe physlcal maLerlal, or someLlmes, Lhe physlcal maLerlal ls shrunk" whlle Lhe code ls lncluded. 1hus, for example, Lhe paleomammallan braln lncludes and envelops Lhe repLlllan braln, buL dlnosaurs are much blgger Lhan mammals. WhaL Lhe mammals lnclude ls noL Lhe slze buL Lhe capaclLles and funcLlons of Lhe repLlllan braln and lLs codons. 1hus, whlle slze ls someLlmes an lndlcaLor, LhaL facL obscures whaL ls really golng on: lncreaslng depLh of embrace, noL lncrease ln spaLlal exLenslon. lurLher-and Lhls ls really Lhe mosL lmporLanL polnL, buL a polnL l can'L make unLll Lhe concepLs of Lhe nexL chapLer are lnLroduced-Lhe slze facLor, or physlcal exLenslon, applles only Lo Lhe exLerlor or surface forms of holons, and does noL apply Lo Lhelr lnLerlors. ln cognlLlon, for example, concepLs lnclude symbols buL are noL physlcally blgger Lhan symbols. lnLerlors deal wlLh degrees of lnLenLlons, noL exLenslons, and Lrylng Lo converL all evoluLlonary changes lnLo physlcal slze ls slmply parL of Lhe flaLLenlng of Lhe kosmos, parL of Lhe bruLallzaLlon of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, LhaL has marked Lhe lnsLrumenLallsm of all flaLland onLologles. 6. ln oLher words, communlLles geL smaller beLween levels, larger wlLhln levels (up Lo eco-equlllbrlum). 7. We already heard varela polnL ouL LhaL a glven dlmenslon ln a holarchy ls lnLernal Lo lLs senlors and exLernal Lo lLs [unlors-LhaL's Lhe same as saylng Lhe cosmos ls lnLernal Lo Lhe blos and Lhe blos ls exLernal Lo Lhe cosmos: llLerally, ouL of Lhe physlcal world: Lranscends and lncludes. 8. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 137. 9. CuoLed ln koesLler, Cbost lo tbe mocbloe, pp. 277-78. 10. lbld., p. 279. 11. lbld., p. 283. 12. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 167. 13. lbld., p. 168. 14. lbld., p. 169. 13. ln !anLsch and WaddlngLon, volotloo ooJ cooscloosoess, p. 173. 16. And noLlce LhaL Lhese soclal holons become larger, noL smaller, ln physlcal slze, because once on a new level, LhaL level expands up Lo lLs susLalnable llmlLs. CPA1L8 4. A vlLW l8CM Wl1Pln 1. 1ellhard, lbeoomeooo of moo, p. 37. 2. My own clalm, however, ls LhaL Lhe dlsLlncLlon lnLerlor/exLerlor ls oot an emergenL quallLy, buL raLher exlsLs from Lhe fltst momeot a boooJoty ls drawn, exlsLs, LhaL ls, from Lhe momenL of creaLlon. WhaL mosL panpsychlsLs mean by consclousness or mlnd ls oot whaL l mean by consclousness, whlch ls depLh. 8ecause consclousness ls depLh, lL ls lLself llLerally oopoollfloble. lL ls depLh, noL any parLlcular, quallflable level of depLh (such as sensaLlon or lmpulse or percepLlon or lnLenLlon)-Lhose are all forms of consclousness, noL consclousness as such. ln oLher words, depLh lsn'L a quallLy, llke sensaLlon or lmpulse or ldea, buL a relaLlonshlp (or openlng) among holons. 1hus, l have never been saLlsfled wlLh any of Lhe panpsychlcal Lheorles, because Lhey poollfy depLh wlLh parLlcular manlfesLaLlons of depLh (such as sensaLlons or feellngs or lnLenLlons), and Lhese do oot exlsL LhroughouL Lhe holarchy of belng, buL emerge only aL pottlcolot levels of depLh, whereas depLh lLself ls presenL from Lhe sLarL (or wherever Lhere ls a boundary). l am a pan-depLhlsL, noL a pan-psychlsL, slnce Lhe psyche lLself emerges only aL a pottlcolot level of depLh. 1hls ls why l keep saylng LhaL l don'L really care how far down Lhe reader wlshes Lo push consclousness," and why l'm noL really concerned wlLh wheLher planLs have sensaLlons, eLc., because by consclousness" mosL people mean some favorlLe form of consclousness (sensaLlons or lnLenLlons or deslre, eLc.), and none of Lhose go all Lhe way down. 8uL depLh does go all Lhe way down, and depLh ls unquallflable. When l say LhaL consclousness or depLh ls unquallflable, l mean, ln a sLrong sense, Lo evoke Lhe Mahayana 8uddhlsL noLlon of sbooyoto, or pure LmpLlness, and for Lhe momenL l am furLher followlng Lhe ?ogachara 8uddhlsL noLlon LhaL pure LmpLlness and pure Consclousness are synonymous. Consclousness ls noL a Lhlng or a process-we can [usL as well, wlLh Wllllam !ames, deny LhaL lL even exlsLs, because lL ls ulLlmaLely LmpLlness, Lhe openlng or clearlng ln whlch Lhe fotm of belngs moolfest Lhemselves, and noL any pottlcolot manlfesLaLlon lLself, a Lype of Zen reconsLrucLlon of Peldegger LhaL dlspenses wlLh uaseln per se and de- anLhropocenLrlzes depLh. 1he 8elng of belngs ls depLh, whlch, belng unquallflable as such, ls flnally LmpLlness as such (consclousness as such), buL slnce uaseln does parLlclpaLe self-reflexlvely ln depLh, uaseln can reallze LmpLlness (l wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls Loplc as Lhe sLory unfolds lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal domalns). 3. 1ellhard, lbeoomeooo of moo, p. 60, noLe 1. 4. 1he lnLerlorlLy of one sLage ls Laken lnLo Lhe lnLerlorlLy of Lhe nexL and Lhus becomes an extetool form wltblo LhaL lnLerlorlLy, a Lhree-dlmenslonal-chess deLall LhaL we wlll geL Lo laLer. 3. MosL sysLems LheorlsLs, LhaL ls, absoluLlze 8"-absoluLlze llvlng sysLems (or Lhe blosphere). As Pabermas Lelllngly polnLs ouL, Lhey are lnvolved, noL ln meLaphyslcs (absoluLlzlng A), buL meLablology (absoluLlzlng 8). lL ls wlLh Lhls meLablology LhaL Lhey Lhen aLLempL Lo explaln culLural evoluLlon (Luhmann's approach belng by far Lhe mosL sophlsLlcaLed), buL Lhey leave ouL preclsely Lhose Lhlngs LhaL make culLure culLure and noL merely llfe. Many ecoLheorlsLs furLher Lake Lhls meLablologlcal absoluLlzlng and noL only aLLempL Lo explaln culLure wlLh lLs Lerms, buL also necessarlly see culLure as a lamenLable devlaLlon from Lhose Lerms: all concluslons guaranLeed by Lhe prlor absoluLlzlng. We wlll reLurn Lo Lhls Loplc ln laLer chapLers, when we Lrace Lhe rlse of Lhls meLablologlcal absoluLlzlng back Lo lLs source ln Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. 6. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 36. 7. Sheldrake, lteseoce of tbe post, p. 103. 8. Murphy, lotote of tbe boJy, p. 27. 9. See especlally 1be lbllosopblcol Jlscootse of moJetolty, commoolcotloo ooJ tbe evolotloo of soclety, and 1be tbeoty of commoolcotlve octloo. AfLer glvlng Pabermas's vlews, l wlll someLlmes LranslaLe Lhem lnLo Lhe more famlllar Lerms LhaL we have been uslng, wlLhouL, aL LhaL polnL, lmplylng LhaL Pabermas would necessarlly agree wlLh all subsequenL dlscusslon, ln any evenL, Pabermas's own vlews wlll be clearly lndlcaLed. 10. WuLhnow eL al., coltotol ooolysls, pp. 1, 3, 4, 2. 11. lbld., pp. 7, 6. 12. As we wlll see, loucaulL's archaeologlcal meLhod slmply focused on Lhe bebovlot of serlous speech acLs (dlscourse-ob[ecLs) ln a dlscurslve formaLlon. noL only dld he brackeL Lhe ttotb of Lhese sLaLemenLs (Lhe sLandard phenomenologlcal brackeLlng), he brackeLed, or aLLempLed Lo brackeL, Lhe meooloq of Lhe sLaLemenLs as well, and Lhen he slmply descrlbed, ln a dlsLanLlaLed sLance, Lhe behavlor of Lhese dlscurslve formaLlons, much as one would descrlbe Lhe behavlor of gas parLlcles or an anL colony. Pe Lhen soughL Lhe rules of rareflcaLlon (LransformaLlon) LhaL governed Lhe sysLemaLlc dlscurslve formaLlon lLself, a sorL of exlsLenLlal sLrucLurallsm. lL wasn'L LhaL Lhls approach was slmply wrong, buL LhaL lL depended upon facLors LhaL loucaulL falled Lo Lake lnLo accounL, noL Lhe leasL of whlch was LhaL serlous speech acLs could noL Lhemselves be ldenLlfled for sLudy wlLhouL aL leasL a rudlmenLary grasp of Lhelr meanlng (Lhelr lnLerlors). Some sorL of hermeneuLlcs or lnLerpreLlve measure had Lo be broughL lnLo Lhe sLudy alongslde of Lhe archaeologlcal quasl-sLrucLurallsm": Lhe deLached sLudy of exLerlor llngulsLlc formaLlons had Lo be supplemenLed wlLh an lnLerlor undersLandlng of Lhelr meanlng, and Lhus loucaulL's archaeology gave way Lo hls more balanced lnLerpreLlve analyLlcs." 1he reasons for Lhls wlll become clearer as Lhe narraLlve proceeds. 13. As l already brlefly suggesLed, Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL we recognlze LhaL holons have an lnLerlor, and Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL all holons exlsL by vlrLue of relaLlonal exchange wlLh same-depLh holons, Lhen Lo say LhaL a group of holons share a common physlcal space (whlch everybody accepLs) ls also Lo say LhaL Lhey share a common lnLerlor space. Worldvlew" ls Loo pan-psychlc and suggesLs LhaL, for example, cells share a developed cognlLlve map of Lhe exLernal world, whlch ls a blL much (alLhough varela's blologlcal cognlLlon comes close, and l am comforLable wlLh Lhe way he presenLs lL). 8uL for mosL purposes, l wlll usually adopL Lhe more general Lerm worldspace," whlch means Lhe sum LoLal of sLlmull LhaL coo be responded Lo (l.e., LhaL have acLual meanlng or lmpacL or reglsLraLlon). 1hls cannoL be deLermlned by a mere emplrlcal analysls of acLlon sysLems, because we all olteoJy exlsL ln Lhe some physlcal unlverse, so physlcal parameLers alone cannoL explaln Lhe Jlffeteoces. Worldspaces are o ptlotl Lo physlcal parameLers (buL noL ulLlmaLely o ptlotl Lo awareness, as we wlll see). ln oLher words, worldspace, as l use Lhe Lerm, does noL have Lhe ordlnary panpsychlc connoLaLlons or lmpllcaLlons. 1yplcal panpsychlsm confuses consclousness wlLh a pottlcolot level of consclousness (percepLlon or lnLenLlon or feellng) and Lhen ls fotceJ Lo push tbot consclousness" all Lhe way down. l am compleLely unlnLeresLed ln LhaL approach. uo aLoms possess an acLual prehenslon (WhlLehead) or percepLlon (Lelbnlz)? l don'L know, LhaL seems a blL much. 8uL Lhey do possess depLh, and Lherefore Lhey do share a common depLh. And a common depLh ls a worldspace, a worldspace creaLed/dlsclosed by a parLlcular degree of shared depLh. (l wlll conLlnue Lo use WhlLehead's prehenslon," buL only ln Lhls conslderably changed conLexL.) l earller noLed LhaL a slgn ls any aspecL of reallLy LhaL represenLs anoLher, Lo anoLher. So LhaL all holons, exlsLlng by vlrLue of a neLwork of relaLlonshlps wlLh oLher holons-all holons are slgns. 1haL ls, Lhe reglme of any holon ttooslotes only a parLlcular tooqe of slqos (lL teqlstets only a clrcumscrlbed band of sLlmull), Lhe band of common LranslaLable slgns ls a holon's worldspace. (l wlll ln a momenL add Lhe cruclal quallflcaLlon LhaL Lhe meanlng of reglsLerable slgns" Lherefore lmplles LhaL Lhe slgns are ln facL codeLermlned by Lhe reglsLraLlon, and LhaL codeLermlnaLlon ls whaL l mean by a worldspace proper.) Llkewlse, lf a holon ls Lo enLer a deeper worldspace, lL wlll have Lo ttoosfotm, noL merely ttooslote, and Lhls LransformaLlon opens lL Lo an enLlrely deeper and wlder range of slgns: a new world, a new worldspace, wlLhln whlch lL wlll Lhen LranslaLe accordlng Lo lLs own reglme, or baslc self-organlzlng prlnclples, ln sLrucLural coupllng (agency-ln-communlon). WlLh reference Lo varela's enacLlve problemaLlc, a holon's agency eoocts a worldspace (brlngs forLh a domaln of dlsLlncLlons), and does so relaLlvely auLonomously, wlLh Lhe added undersLandlng LhaL a holon's agency ls parLly a resulL of lLs hlsLorlcal sLrucLural coupllngs" wlLh Lhe approprlaLe mllleu. Agency as agency-ln-communlon Lhus enacLs a worldspace codeLermlned by sub[ecL and ob[ecL. varela, 1hompson, and 8osch: LmergenL sLaLes [are] consLralned by a hlsLory of coupllng wlLh an approprlaLe world. 8y enrlchlng our accounL Lo lnclude Lhls dlmenslon of sttoctotol cooplloq [codeLermlnlng communlon], we can begln Lo appreclaLe Lhe capaclLy of a complex sysLem Lo enacL a world. . . . 1he resulL ls LhaL over Llme Lhls coupllng selecLs or enacLs from a world of randomness a domaln of dlsLlncLlons. ln oLher words, on Lhe basls of lLs auLonomy Lhe sysLem selecLs or enacLs a domaln of slgnlflcance" (mboJleJ mloJ, pp. 131, 133-36). 1hus, as l earller menLloned, a worldspace ls noL slmply preglven and Lhen merely tepteseoteJ vla a cottespooJeoce of agency wlLh lLs allegedly separable communlons (oLher agencles). 8aLher, Lhe coherency of lLs agency (auLonomy), sLrucLurally coupled wlLh oLher communlng agencles, enacLs a worldspace muLually codeLermlned. uslng a cellular auLomaLa (named 8lLLorlo) as an example: We can say LhaL a mlnlmal klnd of lnLerpreLaLlon ls lnvolved, where lotetptetotloo ls undersLood wldely Lo mean Lhe enacLmenL of a domaln of dlsLlncLlons ouL of a background. 1hus 8lLLorlo, on Lhe basls of lLs auLonomy (closure), performs an lnLerpreLaLlon ln Lhe sense LhaL lL selecLs or brlngs forLh a domaln of slgnlflcance ouL of Lhe background of lLs random mllleu. . . . 1hese regularlLles consLlLuLe whaL we could call 8lLLorlo's world [worldspace]. lL should be apparenL LhaL Lhls world ls noL preglven and Lhen recovered Lhrough a represenLaLlon. . . . 8lLLorlo provldes, Lhen, a paradlgm for how closure [agency] and coupllng [communlon] sufflce Lo brlng forLh a world of relevance [a worldspace] for a sysLem [a holon]" (p. 133). (lor more on Lhe enacLlve paradlgm, see noLes 49 and 32 for chapLer 2, noLe 43 below, and noLe 1 for chapLer 14.) l wlll have much Lo say abouL Lhe represenLaLlonal paradlgm laLer ln chapLer 13 (and LhroughouL Lhe book), and lLs relaLlon Lo lnLerpreLaLlon. lndeed, much of Lhe hlsLorlcal porLlon of Lhls book ls an examlnaLlon of Lhe rlse (and evenLual domlnance) of Lhe represenLaLlon (or reflecLlon) paradlgm (e.g., chap. 12: 1he Collapse of Lhe kosmos), we wlll begln Lhls examlnaLlon laLer ln Lhls chapLer under Lhe headlng 1he lundamenLal LnllghLenmenL aradlgm." Worldspace, as l use Lhe Lerm, also has a rlch phllosophlcal background, beglnnlng mosL noLably wlLh Lelbnlz and kanL, and runnlng Lhrough Lhe hermeneuLlclsLs Lo nleLzsche, Peldegger, Cebser, loucaulL, Cadamer, lageL, Pabermas, Lhe sLrucLurallsLs, eLc. (as wlll become apparenL laLer ln Lhls chapLer). My own poslLlon can be succlncLly summarlzed: Lhe agency of each holon esLabllshes an openlng or clearlng ln whlch slmllar-depLhed holons can manlfesL Lo each oLher, for each oLher: agency-ln- communlon (all Lhe way down). 1hese polnLs wlll become clearer as we proceed. Cne lasL noLe: ln prevlous works l used Lhe Lerm pletomotlc for Lhe physlcal worldspace, or Lhe sum LoLal of sLlmull Lhe physlcal world can enacL, ptotoplosmlc for cellular worldspace, otobotlc for repLlllan, typboolc for mammallan (llmblc) . . . whlch Lhen runs lnLo maglc, myLhlc, and menLal . . . and Lhen Lhe hlgher or Lranspersonal worldspaces. l wlll conLlnue Lo use LhaL Lermlnology here. 14. See Wllber, ye to eye, chapLer 2. 13. lor loucaulL, see noLes 12, 17, 23, and 28, Lhls chapLer. 16. uonald 8oLhberg glves an excellenL shorL summary of whaL amounLs Lo Lhe 8lghL- and LefL-Pand paLhs: ConLemporary eplsLemology generally recognlzes Lwo maln lnLerrelaLed forms of knowledge: (1) naLurallsLlc and (2) lnLerpreLlve. (Some, of course, malnLaln Lhe prlorlLy or even Lhe excluslvlLy of one of Lhe Lwo forms.) naLurallsLlc lnqulry alms aL emplrlcal exploootloo, concelved of as Lhe developmenL of Lheorles LhaL ldenLlfy lawful or lawllke regularlLles and causal connecLlons beLween varlables. . . . lnLerpreLlve lnqulry alms aL Lhe ooJetstooJloq of meanlngs, wheLher sub[ecLlve or lnLersub[ecLlve. 1he goal ls Lo undersLand Lhe meanlng of an lndlvldual's acLlon (e.g., 'WhaL dld LhaL mean Lo her?' or 'WhaL dld LhaL mean ln LhaL speclflc conLexL?'), Lhe ofLen only lmpllclL rules of a group or socleLy (e.g., 'WhaL lmpllclL and expllclL rules do we follow ln soclal lnLeracLlon as sLudenLs, as co-workers, or as husband and wlfe?'), and Lhe lmpllclL or expllclL meanlngs of LexLs and oLher expresslons of human creaLlve acLlvlLles. . . . Such meanlngs cannoL be reduced Lo Lhe ldenLlflcaLlon of causal connecLlons and requlre accounLs maklng use of lnLenLlonal language raLher Lhan slmply descrlpLlve language." 8oLhberg, ConLemporary eplsLemology," ln lorman, ltoblem of pote cooscloosoess, pp. 173-77. 17. As for lLs belng almosL LhaL slmple (phenomenologlcally, LhaL ls), Lake for example Peldegger's hermeneuLlcs (LefL-Pand, or lnLerlor) and loucaulL's archaeology (8lghL-Pand, or exLerlor), Lhe laLLer belng a varlanL of Lhe sLrucLural/funcLlonal paradlgm applled Lo llngulsLlc sLrucLures, or an aLLempL Lo descrlbe dlscurslve sLrucLures purely" from Lhe ootslJe. ureyfus and 8ablnow: 1hls devoLlon Lo Lhe descrlpLlon of concreLe sLrucLures undersLood as condlLlons of exlsLence bears a sLrlklng slmllarlLy Lo whaL Peldegger, ln 8eloq ooJ 1lme, calls an exlsLenLlal analyLlc. 8uL Lhere ls an lmporLanL dlfference. lor alLhough boLh Peldegger and loucaulL aLLempL Lo . . . relaLe Lhe 'facLlcal' prlnclples whlch sLrucLure Lhe space [worldspace] governlng Lhe emergence of ob[ecLs and sub[ecLs, Peldegger's meLhod ls hermeneuLlc or lotetool, whereas loucaulL's ls archaeologlcal or extetool. loucaulL ls expllclLly re[ecLlng boLh Pusserllan phenomenology and Peldeggerlan hermeneuLlcs when he opposes Lo Lhe exegeLlcal accounL Lhe extetlotlty of Lhe archaeologlcal aLLlLude" (Mlcbel loocoolt, p. 37, my lLallcs). loucaulL hlmself sLaLed LhaL Lhe archaeologlsL lsolaLes sLaLemenLs ln order Lo analyze Lhem ln an extetlotlty. . . . erhaps we should speak of 'neuLrallLy' raLher Lhan exLerlorlLy, buL even Lhls word lmplles raLher Loo easlly a suspenslon of bellef, whereas lL ls a quesLlon of redlscoverlng LhaL ootslJe ln whlch, ln Lhelr deployed space, enunclaLlve evenLs are dlsLrlbuLed" (pp. 37, 31, my lLallcs). ln more deLall: loucaulL and Lhe hermeneuLlclsLs agree LhaL pracLlces 'free' ob[ecLs and sub[ecLs by seLLlng up whaL Peldegger calls a 'clearlng' [worldspace], ln whlch only cerLaln ob[ecLs, sub[ecLs, or posslblllLles for acLlons can be ldenLlfled and lndlvlduaLed. 1hey also agree LhaL nelLher Lhe prlmary relaLlons of physlcal and soclal causallLy, nor Lhe secondary relaLlons of lnLenLlonal menLal causallLy can accounL for Lhe way pracLlces free enLlLles. 8uL Lhey dlffer fundamenLally ln Lhelr accounL of how Lhls freelng works. Accordlng Lo Lhe hermeneuLlclsLs, who descrlbe Lhe phenomenon from Lhe loslJe [LefL-Pand], nondlscurslve pracLlces 'govern' human acLlon by seLLlng up a horlzon of lnLelllglblllLy ln whlch only cerLaln dlscurslve pracLlces and Lhelr ob[ecLs and sub[ecLs make sense. loucaulL, Lhe archaeologlsL looklng from ootslJe [8lghL-Pand], re[ecLs Lhls appeal Lo meanlng. Pe conLends LhaL, vlewed wlLh exLernal neuLrallLy, Lhe dlscurslve pracLlces Lhemselves provlde a meanlngless space of rule-governed LransformaLlons ln whlch sLaLemenLs, sub[ecLs, ob[ecLs, concepLs and so forLh are Laken by Lhose lnvolved Lo be meanlngful. . . . 1he archaeologlsL sLudles muLe sLaLemenLs and Lhus avolds becomlng lnvolved ln Lhe serlous search for LruLh and meanlng he descrlbes" (pp. 79, 83, my lLallcs). 1hese are all famlllar ploys from Lhe LefL-Pand and 8lghL-Pand paLhs. loucaulL's exLerlor approach, hls brackeLlng of LruLh and meanlng, hls conflnemenL Lo muLe" sLaLemenLs (monologlcal), hls happy poslLlvlsm"-Lhese are all maneuvers of Lhe 8lghL- Pand paLh, applled noL Lo Lhe bone-crunchlng concreLeness of physlcal-soclal reallLles buL Lo Lhe exLerlor, maLerlal, archaeologlcal remnanLs of dlscurslve pracLlces: language looked aL from Lhe ouLslde as a rule-governed sysLem. (Lven lnLo hls genealogy phase, Cenealogy avolds Lhe search for depLh. lnsLead, lL seeks Lhe surfaces of evenLs . . . ," p. 106). loucaulL's archaeology and genealogy are leglLlmaLe endeavors, buL, as he soon came Lo reallze, Lhey cannoL sLand alone. ln facL, LhaL approach, by lLself, ls perfecLly conLradlcLory: slnce lL brackeLs LruLh (LruLh ls merely someLhlng so labeled ln a dlscurslve sysLem, or so employed ln servlce of power), Lhen Lhls approach cannoL lLself clalm LhaL whaL lL ls saylng ls Lrue. lL hovers above Lhe ground wlLh no reason Lo be Laken serlously. 8aLher, loucaulL came Lo see LhaL lL has Lo be supplemenLed wlLh LefL-Pand approaches and a more balanced overvlew, lncludlng noL only nondlscurslve soclal pracLlces buL also hermeneuLlc lnLerlors (or, aL Lhe leasL, a beLLer lnLerpreLaLlon of lnLerpreLaLlon). ureyfus and 8ablnow: WhaL loucaulL offers ln 1be nlstoty of 5exoollty ls an lnclslve example of whaL a beLLer lnLerpreLaLlon looks llke." As Cllles ueleuze would remark, loucaulL came Lo Lhlnklng of Lhe pasL as lL ls condensed on Lhe loslJe." ureyfus and 8ablnow conclude LhaL loucaulL's approach mlghL be called lnLerpreLlve analyLlcs," whlch seems flne, Lhough Lhey do noLe, wlLh many crlLlcs, LhaL whlle loucaulL's work was lmmensely suggesLlve ln Lhls area, he noneLheless owes us an lnLerpreLlve descrlpLlon of hls own rlghL way Lo do lnLerpreLaLlon. Pe has noL provlded us one yeL" (p. 183). Alas, hls deaLh removed LhaL posslblllLy. 18. SubLle reducLlonlsm reduces LefL-Pand Lo 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons, lL ofLen furLher reduces Lhe upper 8lghL Lo Lhe Lower 8lghL, and emphaslzes purely Lhe hollsLlc sysLem over lndlvlduals, sysLems Lheory does lndeed ofLen do Lhls, and mosL new Age paradlgms and ecoLheorlsLs follow Lhls verslon of subLle reducLlonlsm. 19. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, pp. 363, 367. 20. 1aylor, neqel, pp. 10, 22, and 5ootces of tbe self, p. 233. 21. ssoy oo moo. 22. Love[oy, 1be qteot cbolo, p. 211. 23. As we noLed, ln loucaulL's earller work, especlally Lhe archaeology, he brackeLed botb LruLh and meanlng (double phenomenology"), and he consequenLly was hlmself dlsdalnful of anyLhlng resembllng depLh" languages (l acLually agree wlLh many of hls concluslons, buL ofLen for very dlfferenL reasons, as we wlll see). Pls double brackeLlng (a phenomenology Lo end phenomenology") Lherefore was excluded from depLh and lnLerpreLaLlon from Lhe sLarL: [usL Lhe exLerlors. noneLheless, Lhe sclences LhaL he saw as beglnnlng Lo escape Lhe Age of Man" and humanlsm" were preclsely Lhose sclences LhaL began Lo relnLroduce Lhe noLlon of depLh (psychoanalysls, eLhnology, llngulsLlcs). And when loucaulL laLer moved from archaeology and genealogy Lo eLhlcs, he hlmself began a more [udlclous use of undersLandlng from Lhe lnslde," or a reconsLrucLed hermeneuLlcs (lnLerpreLlve analyLlcs"). 8uL even when loucaulL was re[ecLlng depLh, as a meLhodologlcal 8lghL-Pand ploy, he noneLheless had hls own verslons of lL (or else he couldn'L have formed any sorL of [udgmenLs ln Lhe flrsL place). Pe hlmself descrlbes hls approach Lhus: Whereas Lhe lnLerpreLer ls obllged Lo go Lo Lhe depLhs of Lhlngs, llke an excavaLor, Lhe momenL of lnLerpreLaLlon [hls genealogy] ls llke an overvlew, from hlgher and hlgher up, whlch allows Lhe depLh Lo be lald ouL ln fronL of hlm ln more and more profound vlslblllLy, depLh ls reslLuaLed as an absoluLely superflclal secreL" (nleLzsche, lreud, Marx"). WhaL loucaulL ls here calllng helghL" ls a verslon of whaL l am calllng depLh, and whaL he derlslvely calls depLh ls lndeed raLher shallow and superflclal, [usL as he clalms. lreud's depLh psychology," for example, dlgs down" Lo Lhe llbldo: a very fundamenLal, buL noL very slgnlflcanL, aspecL of Lhe human belng-lL ls very superflclal, very shallow (chapLer 13). 1haL human belngs would spend Lhelr llves looklng lnLo Lhelr lds and feel someLhlng lncredlbly slgnlflcanL was afooL, Lhls was for loucaulL laughable, and who cannoL agree? 1here were hlgher (deeper) vlews avallable. As we wlll see laLer, Lhe languages of Lhe cenLaur level are preemlnenLly Lhe looqooqes of Jeptb (and dlalecLlcs). 1he languages of Lhe raLlonal-ego are Lhe languages of represenLaLlon, monologlcal explanaLlon, and Lhe undersLandlng (cf. vetoooft vs. vetstooJ). My Lhesls wlll be LhaL one leglLlmaLe way Lo read loucaulL's early work ls LhaL Lhe LnllghLenmenL and Lhe subsequenL Age of Man (dehumanlzlng humanlsm") was Lhe wldespread emergence of Lhe egolc-raLlonal mode ouL of Lhe myLhlc-membershlp mode, whlch broughL many genulne beneflLs, buL, capLured by whaL Pegel called a vanlLy of Lhe undersLandlng" (or emplrlc-analyLlc and monologlcal LhoughL), lL was commlLLed Lo a flaLLenlng and levellng of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons (and Lhe reLroflecLlon of LhaL flaLland mode upon Lhe sub[ecL lLself produced Lhe more bruLallzlng aspecLs of Lhe sclences of man"). 1he subsequenL emergence of Lhe cenLaur, wlLh lLs vlslon-loglc (dlalecLlcs of depLh), was Lhe more maLure reason (vetoooft) ln lnLersub[ecLlve communlcaLlve exchange (dlaloglcal, noL [usL monologlcal), and Lhls openlng of dlaloglcal and depLh-undersLandlng marked Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe end of man." 1hls also brlngs loucaulL's accounLs more lnLo llne wlLh Lhose of Pabermas and 1aylor, as we wlll see ln chapLers 12 and 13. lncldenLally, beyond Lhe cenLaur, Lhe languages of depLh have less and less appllcablllLy, glvlng way Lo languages of vlslon and vlbraLlon (psychlc), Lhen languages of archeLype and lllumlnaLlon (subLle), Lhen languages of empLlness and dream (causal), Lhen languages of exLraordlnary ordlnarlness (nondual), all of whlch we wlll examlne laLer (see noLe 38 for chap. 8 for an exLended dlscusslon). 1hls presenL volume ls lnLenLlonally wrlLLen ln Lhe cenLaur-level language of depLh. 24. lL mlghL be obvlous LhaL Lhe LefL-Pand/8lghL-Pand ls anoLher verslon of Lhe mlnd/body, or mlnd/braln, or consclousness/form dlsLlncLlon. lL ls noL a rlgld duallLy, ln my sysLem, because Lhey muLually lnLeracL, nor ls lL a flool duallLy, because ln Lhe Lranspersonal domalns, lL becomes obvlous LhaL form ls noL oLher Lhan empLlness [consclousness], empLlness ls noL oLher Lhan form." We wlll reLurn Lo Lhls lmporLanL polnL laLer and look aL varlous Lranspersonal soluLlons, from loLlnus Lo Auroblndo Lo Mahayana 8uddhlsm. Llkewlse, Lhe llngulsLlc slqolflets (or Lhe motetlol componenLs of a slgn, Lhe wrlLLen symbol or Lhe physlcal alr vlbraLlons of Lhe spoken word) are all 8lghL-Pand componenLs, whereas Lhe slqolfleJs (Lhe lnLerlor meanlngs LhaL a person assoclaLes wlLh a word) are all LefL-Pand occaslons, and deflnlLely, a la deconsLrucLlon, slgnlflers and slgnlfleds sllde all over each oLher-yeL anoLher verslon of Lhe mlnd/body lnLeracLlon" (and anoLher verslon of exLerlors belng enveloped ln developmenL). AL Lhe same Llme, posLmodernlsm's anxlous aLLempL Lo supplanL modernlLy's program does noL succeed ln preclsely Lhe area LhaL lL lmaglnes lL does. 1here ls, ln Lhe posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs, a barely dlsgulsed aLLempL Lo shlfL emphasls from Lhe lnLerlor slgnlfled Lo Lhe maLerlal slgnlfler, coupled wlLh Lhe noLlon LhaL slgnlflers are free Lo allghL preLLy much wherever Lhey wanL (sub[ecL only Lo shlfLlng paradlgms of power and dlscurslve pracLlces). We saw LhaL Lhe slgnlflcanL lnslghL of Lhe posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs was LhaL meanlng ls conLexL-dependenL and conLexLs are boundless. 8uL LhaL has qulckly degeneraLed lnLo Lhe asserLlon of Lhe prlmacy of Lhe maLerlal slgnlfler as vlewed exLerlorly. 1hls merely exLerlor, 8lghL-Pand reducLlonlsm runs from loucaulL's archaeology Lo uerrlda's grammaLology, and as such, as a sobtle teJoctloolsm, ls preclsely helr Lo Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. (Pabermas reaches Lhe same concluslon wlLh a slmllar analysls, seelng boLh of Lhem as lnfecLed wlLh remnanLs of Lhe LnllghLenmenL phllosophy of Lhe sub[ecL). ln Pabermas, Lhe LefL-Pand and Lhe 8lghL-Pand appear, among oLher places, as Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween llngulsLlcally generaLed lnLersub[ecLlvlLy (LefL) and self-referenLlally closed sysLems (8lghL), whlch, he says, are now Lhe caLchwords for a conLroversy LhaL wlll Lake Lhe place of Lhe dlscredlLed [form of] Lhe mlnd-body problemaLlc" (lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. 383). As for Lhe mlnd/body problem lLself, l wlll laLer argue LhaL lLs preclse naLure cannoL be solved, only (dls)solved ln conLemplaLlve awareness, where empLlness and form dlsclose Lhelr ulLlmaLe relaLlonshlp. ln Lhe meanLlme, l refer Lo my poslLlon as lnLeracLlonlsL," noL so much because l belleve LhaL poslLlon really solves anyLhlng, buL as a way Lo dlsavow Lhe oLher soluLlons" (ldenLlLy, parallel, duallsL, preesLabllshed) LhaL, ln my oplnlon, have even worse dlfflculLles. As noLed, my use of lnLeracLlonlsm" or codeLermlnaLlon" ls ln some ways qulLe sympaLheLlc wlLh varela's enacLlon," buL also dlffers on a few polnLs, as we wlll see (noLe 43 below, noLe 1 for chap. 14). 23. 1he collapslng of LefL Lo 8lghL means LhaL lnLerlor-and-exLerlor ls collapsed lnLo and confused wlLh physlcal lnslde-and- ouLslde (noL Lo menLlon beLLer-and-worse collapslng lnLo blgger-and-smaller). 1hls collapse falls Lo grasp Lhe facL LhaL someLhlng can be slmulLaneously lnslde" Lhe skln boundary and sLlll an exLerlor" dlmenslon. 1he wltblo or acLual lotetlot of Lhe braln ls oot loslJe Lhe braln. loslJe Lhe braln ls [usL more braln physlology. Lmplrlcally examlne Lhe braln all you wanL, wlLh mlcroscopes, LLC, eLc., and you wlll sLlll only have more of Lhe lnsldes of Lhe braln, more lnslde surfaces, and noL Lhe lnLerlor or Lhe wlLhln of Lhe braln, whlch ls depLh or consclousness (and whlch you can flnd only by tolkloq Lo me and lotetptetloq whaL l say). And Lhe braln lLself ls extetlot Lo consclousness, lL ls anoLher (poLenLlal) form ln consclousness. noL lnslde buL lnLerlor Lo Lhe braln ls consclousness, or depLh, or Lhe wlLhln, and Lhe braln ls exLerlor Lo LhaL wlLhln, Lo LhaL lnLerlor. ln oLher words, consclousness ls noL loslJe Lhe braln, and noL ootslJe lL elLher. lL cuLs aL rlghL angles Lo all LhaL, and moves ln Lhe dlmenslon of lnLerlorlLy, whlch ls noL found or measured ln Lerms of physlcal form, and Lherefore moves wherever lL llkes wlLhouL ever leavlng Lhe braln because lL was never lo Lhe braln Lo begln wlLh (and never aparL from lL elLher). Pow else explaln, for example, Lhe phenomenon of lndlvldual and group ldenLlLy? lf l (consclousness) am merely my braln, how ls lL LhaL psychologlcal developmenL of ldenLlLy moves from a bodyego Lo an egocenLrlc Lo a soclocenLrlc Lo a worldcenLrlc sLance? Pow could LhaL happen lf consclousness were slmply ln Lhe braln? lorms of ldenLlLy Lranscend Lhe skln boundary ln dozens of profoundly lmporLanL ways, whlch an accounL LhaL glves prlmacy Lo exLerlors cannoL even begln Lo adequaLely frame. CuL-of-Lhe- body experlences are some of Lhe leasL surprlslng (and leasL lnLeresLlng) Lhlngs LhaL consclousness can do, and can do preclsely because lL ls noL lnslde or ouLslde Lhe braln (Lhe lnsldes and ouLsldes of Lhe braln are lo consclousness). ln noLe 4 above l menLloned LhaL Lhe lnLerlorlLy of one sLage ls Laken lnLo Lhe lnLerlorlLy of Lhe nexL, and Lhus becomes an extetool form wltblo LhaL lnLerlorlLy, a Lhree-dlmenslonal-chess deLall LhaL we wlll geL Lo laLer." 1he Lhree-dlmenslonal parL lnvolves dlfferenLlaLlng beLween several dlfferenL axes of boLh LranslaLlon and LransformaLlon, so LhaL boLh Lhe lnsldes and ouLsldes of a lower level are, Lo a senlor level, enveloped ln lLs own lnLerlorlLy, and Lhus, conversely, Lhe senlor level appears exLernal" Lo lLs componenLs and lnLernal" Lo lLs successors. Language ls obvlously a real problem here, because we are acLually dlscusslng Lhree axes, all of whlch lnvolve belng ln" and belng ouL." Call Lhem lnslde/ouLslde, lnLernal/exLernal, and lnLerlor/exLerlor. Cn a flaLland onLology, you slmply have lnslde and ouLslde a boundary. 8uL lf several holons LransformaLlvely [oln LogeLher-say, many cells lnLo an organlsm-Lhen Lhe lnslde ooJ Lhe ouLslde of each of Lhe cells are now all lotetool Lo Lhe organlsm (all are lnslde Lhe organlsm, excepL noL on Lhe some level of lnsldes as Lhe orlglnal cells, whlch ls why l call Lhls lnLernal," and why Lhe organlsm, Lo Lhe cells, appears extetool-varela's polnL). 8uL all of LhaL ls stlll a serles of extetlot forms-noL ouLslde, and noL exLernal, buL extetlot Lo Lhe lnLerlorlLy LhaL olooqslJe all LhaL, aL each polnL, ls consclousness. And consclousness does noL enfold prevlous lnLerlors ln Lerms of slze (unllke Lhe cell whlch acLually and physlcally conLalns Lhe molecules, or Lhe organlsm whlch acLually conLalns Lhe cells), raLher, consclousness enfolds prevlous lnLerlor lnLenLlons or prehenslons, whlch exlsL olooqslJe all Lhose exLerlors. As such, Lhe varlous consclousness sLrucLures Lhemselves also have lnsldes and ouLsldes and lnLernals and exLernals-for example, someLhlng ls lnslde" a menLal sLrucLure, noL ln Lerms of spaLlal enclosure, buL ln Lerms of wheLher lL follows Lhe deep sLrucLure or Lhe reglme or Lhe codon of Lhe menLal sLrucLure (much as you are ln a checkers game, noL lf you are physlcally lnslde anyLhlng, buL lf you are followlng Lhe rules of Lhe game). When Lwo lnLerlor sLrucLures are broughL LogeLher vla LransformaLlon, Lhen Lhey are boLh lnLernal Lo Lhe new supersLrucLure, and Lhe supersLrucLure appears exLernal Lo Lhem, and so on. 1hls ls why l Lhlnk lL ls such a Lerrlble mlsLake Lo vlew consclousness as an emetqeot poollty, lnsLead of seelng lL as Jeptb, lLself oopoollfloble. lf we Lhlnk LhaL consclousness ls a speclflc poollty, Lhen we have only Lwo ma[or cholces ln how Lo slLuaLe lL: (1) deflne Lhe quallLy LhaL consclousness ls supposed Lo be (feellng, lnLenLlon, percepLlon, or whaLever) and Lhen push LhaL quallLy all Lhe way down Lo aLoms. 1hls ls Lhe sLandard panpsychlc approach, whlch l flnd unaccepLable (even Lhough, for convenlence, l someLlmes resorL Lo LhaL Lermlnology). 8uL even less accepLable ls: (2) deflne consclousness as an emetqeot poollty, and Lhen plck Lhe polnL ln evoluLlon LhaL we Lhlnk lL ls supposed Lo have [umped ouL and emerged (and haggle endlessly over Lerms: uo apes have self-consclousness or [usL rudlmenLary consclousness? uo Lhe shrlmp we boll for dlnner really have feellngs?). 8uL consclousness ls noL an emergenL quallLy, because Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslon does noL emetqe ftom Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon. 1haL ls, Lhe lnLerlor does noL emerge from Lhe exLerlor, obvlously, Lhey botb emetqe toqetbet, hand ln hand, wlLh Lhe fltst boooJoty creaLlng a unlverse, from Lhe very flrsL dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe kosmos lnLo an lnslde and an ouLslde (whlch ls, aL Lhe flrsL boundary, an lnLerlor and an exLerlor). 1he LefL-Pand dlmenslon does noL emerge from Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon, buL raLher qoes wltb lt, as Lhe wlLhln, Lhe lnLerlor of Lhe exLerlor, ot evety stoqe. lL ls Lhe lnLerlor depLh of every sLage, and noL someLhlng LhaL surprlslngly pops ouL aL some blzarre sLage down Lhe llne. lotms of cooscloosoess do lndeed emerge (as forms of maLLer do), buL consclousness lLself ls slmply olooqslJe all along, as Lhe lnLerlor of whaLever form ls Lhere (from Lhe momenL of creaLlon). 8ecause surfaces are surfaces of depLh, forms are forms of consclousness, and Lhe lnLerlor and exLerlor, as Lhe 8uddhlsLs have lL, are coemergenL from Lhe sLarL, and noL someLhlng leaplng lnLo belng somewhere down Lhe road. uL dlfferenLly, consclousness ls Lhe openness (or LmpLlness) of Lhe holon's reglme-an openness ltself LhaL ls noL an emergenL quallLy, buL whaL allows quallLles to emetqe (os Lhe varlous reglmes and worldspaces). And flnally, Lhe exLerlors can enLer consclousness: Lhe lnLerlor embraces Lhe exLerlor (and never vlce versa). Lelbnlz's vlew was qulLe slmllar Lo Lhls 3-u chess" (whlch ls whaL makes hlm such demandlng readlng), excepL he opLed ouL of Lhe acLual relaLlon beLween lnLerlor and exLerlor wlLh a preesLabllshed harmony (buL, l mlghL add, LhaL ls no worse Lhan mosL oLher alLernaLlve soluLlons). l'll reLurn Lo all Lhls when we suggesL Lhe conLemplaLlve (dls)soluLlon of Lhe mlnd-body problem. 26. l am noL saylng behavlorlsm ls wrong, l am saylng lL ls an accuraLe sLudy of only Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL, lL falLhfully reporLs everyLhlng lL sees Lhere, and whaL lL sees ls real enough. lL's [usL one-fourLh of Lhe sLory, more or less. Llkewlse, medlcal psychlaLry ls Lhe sLudy of pharmacologlcal lnLervenLlon ln Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL. WhaL Lhe psychoanalysL (uL) sees as rage aL Lhe abandonlng faLher converLed lnLo depresslon and LreaLable wlLh Lalk, medlcal psychlaLry sees as a problem wlLh seroLonln upLake aL Lhe neural synapses and LreaLable wlLh rozac. 8oLh are accuraLe enough ln Lhelr quadranL (we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls Loplc LhroughouL Lhls volume). 27. Also known as Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm or Lhe represenLaLlon paradlgm, whose hlsLorlcal rlse we wlll Lrace ln chapLers 12 and 13. roposlLlonal LruLh ls generally a 8lghL-Pand paLh, as lndlcaLed, buL ofLen lL ls conflned Lo Lhe upper 8lghL, wlLh funcLlonal flL Lhe crlLerla for Lhe Lower 8lghL (as l wlll explaln ln Lhe LexL), and Lhere lL vles wlLh Lhe producLlon paradlgm (whlch we wlll also Lrace ln chapLers 12 and 13). Also, slnce Lhe ob[ecLlve sLance can be Laken wlLh regard Lo any of Lhe quadranLs, proposlLlonal LruLh has lLs lmporLanL appllcaLlons ln Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslons, Lhe polnL ls LhaL lL does noL exhausL Lhose domalns nor capLure whaL ls essenLlal and deflnlng for Lhose LefL-Pand dlmenslons, as we wlll see. 28. And lf we look aL Lhe research ln each of Lhe four quadranLs, we flnd LhaL each of Lhem has a surface" and a deep" dlmenslon. Cr, uslng LruLh" ln Lhe broadesL sense, each quadranL has a surface LruLh and a deep LruLh (alLhough, as we wlll see, Lhe accounLs vary as Lo preclsely whaL consLlLuLes Lhe LruLh ln each). We mlghL sLarL wlLh Lhe general LefL-Pand and 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons (and subdlvlde Lhem lnLo upper and lower, or lndlvldual and soclal, as we proceed): LefL-Pand hermeneuLlcs and 8lghL-Pand sLrucLural/funcLlonallsm botb recognlze a sotfoce and a Jeep dlmenslon (or manlfesL and laLenL), Lhe former belng mosLly cooscloos and Lhe laLLer belng mosLly oocooscloos (alLhough Lhe unconsclous or hldden or laLenL dlmenslon can be broughL lnLo awareness Lhrough speclal means, as we wlll see). ln hermeneuLlcs Lhls surface" and deep" lnLerpreLaLlon was mosL carefully presenLed by Peldegger (ln ulvlslons l and ll of 8eloq ooJ tlme). A surface lnLerpreLaLlon ls an lnLerpreLaLlon LhaL culLural naLlves mlghL noL be fully consclous of ln day-Lo-day llvlng (or ln Lhelr personal llfe), buL lf you polnL lL ouL Lo Lhem, Lhey would usually recognlze lL and respond wlLh 1haL's rlghL, LhaL's [usL whaL LhaL means." 1hls hermeneuLlcs of Lhe everyday" ls somehow known (elLher consclously or preconsclously) buL noL necessarlly arLlculaLed, and Lhe surface layer of hermeneuLlcs deals wlLh arLlculaLlng Lhese common lnLerpreLaLlons (or maklng manlfesL Lhe varlous aspecLs of Lhe culLural bockqtoooJ LhaL supporL Lhe meanlng ln Lhe everyday pracLlces, Lhe background cannoL be made fully manlfesL or lnLellecLually and dlscurslvely arLlculaLed ln an exboostlve fashlon, however, because much of Lhe background ls nondlscurslve and Lherefore cannoL, a la Pusserl, be concepLually exposed). 1hls hermeneuLlcs of Lhe everyday" has been frulLfully Laken up by such LheorlsLs as Carflnkel, CeerLz, kuhn, and 1aylor. lL slmply seeks Lo arLlculaLe and explaln Lhe common meooloqs of culLural pracLlces vla a sympaLheLlc communlon or parLlclpanL-observer lnqulry. ueep betmeoeotlcs, on Lhe oLher hand, aLLempLs Lo dlg beneaLh surface lnLerpreLaLlons (beneaLh Lhe hermeneuLlcs of Lhe everyday), because deep hermeneuLlcs suspecLs LhaL our everyday undersLandlngs and lnLerpreLaLlons mlghL ln facL be qulLe dlsLorLed, parLlal, or deluded, and mlghL (as Peldegger suggesLed) acLually be moLlvaLed Lo hlde Lhe LruLh, Lo obscure or cover up deeper (and more frlghLenlng) LruLhs. 1he hermeneuLlcs of susplclon" (as 8lcoeur called Lhese varlous approaches) Lherefore seeks Lo dlg beneaLh Lhe surface and expose deeper lnLerpreLlve LruLhs and meanlngs. And varlous deep LruLhs have ln facL been offered: underneaLh Lhe surface and everyday consclousness lles lreudlan llbldo, MarxlsL class sLruggle, Peldegger's groundlessness, Cadamer's LradlLlon-carrled 8elng, nleLzsche's power, and so on. ln each of Lhese cases, our common everyday meanlngs and LruLhs and lnLerpreLaLlons (whlch are all more or less cooscloos) are noneLheless sald Lo be ofLen deslgned preclsely Lo hlde or obscure or dlsLorL Lhe deeper and more palnful LruLhs lurklng beneaLh Lhe surface (LruLhs whlch Lhus Lend Lo remaln oocooscloos or Jeeply hldden: Lhey do noL [usL fall lnLo Lhe unconsclous, Lhey are pushed Lhere. WhaL we mlghL call a dynamlc psychologlcal paln barrler-a represslon barrler of some sorL or anoLher-seals Lhese dlsLurblng LruLhs from easy awareness, and, accordlng Lo Lhese LheorlsLs, llfLlng Lhls barrler ls dlfflculL, palnful, shocklng, and deeply dlsLurblng). ln each of Lhese cases of deep hermeneuLlcs, Lhe culLural naLlve musL conflrm Lhe deeper LruLh, once lL ls dug up, by ockoowleJqloq lL, and Lhls [ourney ls oot llkely Lo happen wlLhouL Lhe help of a professlonal gulde, so Lo speak, who has made lL hls or her buslness Lo Lravel LhaL deep paLh. 1he culLural naLlve, ln facL, has a greaL deal of teslstooce Lo Lhe deeper LruLh (because of Lhe paln barrler), and much of Lhe everyday lnLerpreLaLlons and pracLlces were ln facL generaLed preclsely Lo hlde Lhls deep and ofLen palnful LruLh. Powever, deep hermeneuLlcs malnLalns LhaL once Lhe person loosens Lhe represslon barrler, exposes Lhls deeper LruLh, and acknowledges lL, Lhen a cerLaln llbetotloo ls galned, a llberaLlon from Lhe dlsLorLlons, lles, and deluslons LhaL were consLrucLed Lo hlde Lhe LruLh. ueep hermeneuLlcs ls obvlously a Lrlcky venLure: many of Lhe deep LruLhs" offered Lo humanlLy have acLually been deep ldeologles and profound pre[udlces deslgned prlmarlly Lo conLorL oLhers' awareness Lo conform Lo one's own power drlves. We have seen whaL Lhe deep LruLhs" of Marxlsm have done Lo Lhe human splrlL, and whaL lreud's deeply reducLlonlsLlc LruLhs" managed Lo desLroy. 8oLh Marx and lreud, we may granL, were on Lo some sorL of deeper and vety lmpottoot ttotbs: buL are Lhese LruLhs Lhe whole LruLh, so Lo speak? And how does one know when a deeper LruLh ls lndeed ttoe buL pottlol? And when does shovlng a parLlal LruLh down someone's LhroaL-under Lhe gulse of helplng Lhem Lo de-repress"-when does LhaL sLep over Lhe llne and become lLself a new form of represslon? When does Lhe pottloloess of Lhe cote begln Lo teptess Lhe test of reallLy? ueep hermeneuLlcs, ln oLher words, faces Lwo exLremely dellcaLe problems: llrsL, ls Lhe proposed deeper LruLh really Lrue? And second: ls Lhls deeper LruLh Lhe only LruLh? Cr ls lL lLself a parLlal LruLh hldlng yeL deeper dlsclosures? Pow do we know when Lo sLop? uslng lreud as an acknowledged example, Lhe flrsL problem ls someLhlng llke: does Lhe llbldo exlsL? ls lreud's deep LruLh really Lrue? ln very general Lerms, do culLural and consclous ldeas ofLen hlde, dlsLorL, or repress unconsclous emoLlonal-sexual drlves? MosL psychoLherapeuLlc LheorlsLs would acknowledge LhaL LhaL ls ofLen Lhe case, ln varlous ways, people can and do become ouL of Louch wlLh Lhelr deeper feellngs and drlves and Lherefore express Lhese drlves ln less Lhan sLralghLforward ways. ln oLher words, lreud's deeper LruLh ls more or less Lrue: Lhere ls someLhlng llke Lhe llbldo, and lL can be repressed/dlsLorLed ln ordlnary llfe, causlng ofLen palnful emoLlonal dlsLurbances. And llfLlng Lhe represslon barrler (however lL ls concelved) can lndeed help people geL ln Louch wlLh Lhese deeper feellngs and express Lhem more adequaLely, Lhus llberaLlng Lhem from Lhe consLrlcLlons of dlsLorLed emoLlons. 8uL Lhe second problem ls: granLed Lhere ls some sorL of unconsclous, ls Lhe llbldo all we wlll ever flnd down Lhere? ls lreud's deep LruLh-whlch, we have already acknowledged, ls lndeed a LruLh-ls lL Lhe whole LruLh? ls my psychologlcal angulsh due solely or even prlmarlly Lo represslng Lhe llbldo? MlghL Lhere noL be oLher LruLhs LhaL, when denled or repressed or obscured, would cause even greaLer psychlc angulsh? WhaL lf Lhe deeper LruLh l am dlsLorLlng lnvolves !ung's collecLlve unconsclous and noL [usL my personal ld? WhaL lf lL lnvolves Marx's soclal unconsclous, and Lhe socleLy lLself ls raLher slck and malad[usLed? LlfLlng Lhe represslon ln LhaL case would lnvolve noL psychoanalysls buL pollLlcal revoluLlon. WhaL lf Lhe deeper LruLh ls Peldegger's uLLer groundlessness, where all of Lhese oLher LruLhs are desperaLe aLLempLs Lo flx and solldlfy LhaL whlch ls shlfLlng and shapeless? lurLher yeL, whaL lf Lhe deeper LruLh ls Pegel's SplrlL, and l cannoL de-repress unLll l flnd Cod? As l suggesLed ln chapLer 2, each of Lhese LheorlsLs, aL Lhelr besL, ls Lrylng Lo polnL Lo a larger conLexL LhaL, when dlscovered and acknowledged, helps llberaLe us from a narrower and shallower lmprlsonmenL. We are all holons wlLhln holons wlLhln holons forever, and each of Lhese LheorlsLs helps orlenL us Lo deeper and larger engagemenLs, Lhereln Lo flnd deeper and wlder meanlngs and llberaLlons. 8uL each of Lhose LheorlsLs Lended Lo go from solvlng Lhe flrsL problem Lo falllng Lhe second. 1haL ls, afLer demonsLraLlng LhaL Lhelr newly dlscovered deep LruLh was ln facL Lrue (and l personally belleve each of Lhem sufflclenLly demonsLraLed LhaL), Lhey wenL on Lo clalm LhaL otbet deep LruLhs were ln facL Jlstottloos of tbelt deep LruLh: LhaL oLher deep" LruLhs were really [usL sotfoce LruLhs LhaL Lhelr analysls should have ended forever. 1hus Lhelr parLlal LruLhs, promoLed Lo Lhe whole LruLh, sLepped over Lhe llne and lnLo a new form of represslon of Lhe resL of Lhe kosmos. lL ls one Lhlng Lo say LhaL maLerlal-economlc condlLlons are formaLlve for many culLural and splrlLual endeavors, qulLe anoLher Lo say LhaL Cod ls noLhlng buL an excuse for maLerlal oppresslon. lL ls one Lhlng Lo say LhaL repressed llbldo can power a fanaLlc bellef ln SplrlL, qulLe anoLher Lo say LhaL SplrlL ls slmply repressed llbldo. 8uL lf you belleve LhaL SplrlL per se ls lndeed repressed llbldo, Lhen a cllenL's bellef ln SplrlL most be lnLerpreLed as parL of Lhe defense mechanlsms and represslon barrlers LhaL are hldlng Lhe deeper LruLh of sexual lusL. Pegel's Jeepet LruLh ls lnsLanLly lnLerpreLed as a sotfoce LruLh LhaL ls hldlng Lhe teol deep LruLh of llbldo. And so Lhe baLLle of parLlal LruLhs would go, solvlng Lhe flrsL problem buL falllng mlserably aL Lhe second. 1haL many of Lhese LheorlsLs favored Lhelr own deeper conLexL, usually Lo Lhe excluslon of oLhers', condemns Lhelr parLlallLy, buL noL Lhe deep hermeneuLlc pro[ecL lLself, nor Lhe ttotb of Lhe parLlal LruLhs. 8uL lndeed, Lhe mlsuses of deep hermeneuLlcs are leglon (l know whaL you really need"), and Lhe many successes of Lhese LheorlsLs-and Lhelr many fallures-sLand as sharp lessons on Lhls dellcaLe [ourney. Surfaces can be seeo buL depLhs musL be lotetpteteJ, and ln LhaL lnLerpreLaLlon, you and l can be mlstokeo, and Lhus some sorL of Lhe hermeneuLlcs of susplclon wlll always accompany us lnLo Lhe depLhs. 1urnlng now Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons (movlng from WhaL does lL meoo?" Lo WhaL does lL Jo?"): ln sLrucLural- funcLlonallsm (e.g., arsons), Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween surface and deep usually shows up as manlfesL" funcLlon (whaL Lhe culLural naLlves soy Lhey are dolng) and laLenL" funcLlon (whaL Lhe researcher/auLhorlLy dlscovers Lhe real" funcLlon Lo be ln Lerms of soclal sysLems and funcLlonal flL, a funcLlon unknown and unconsclous Lo Lhe naLlves). 1hls, Loo, ls a useful and leglLlmaLe (lf parLlal) lnqulry (a 8lghL-Pand approach LhaL depends upon an ob[ecLlve, dlsLanclng sLance and a relaLlvely deLached observer). And, slnce we are all holons wlLhln holons wlLhln holons forever, Lhe sLrucLural-funcLlonallsL approach runs lnLo Lhe same Lypes of llmlL" problems or boundary" problems as Lhe hermeneuLlc or LefL-Pand approach, namely, how do you know when Lo sLop? CranLed lndlvldual behavlor ls Lo some lmporLanL exLenL deLermlned by Lhe wlder soclal holon. 8uL by Lhe some loqlc, whaL abouL Lhe soclal holon lLself? lL ls seL ln numerous conLexLs wlLhln numerous oLher conLexLs . . . forever. 1hus, sLrucLural-funcLlonal accounLs are always drlfLlng lnLo wlder conLexLs: Lhe lndlvldual ls seL ln a famlly whlch seLs cerLaln broad parameLers, Lhe famlly ls seL ln a subculLure, Lhe subculLure ls seL ln a larger culLure, Lhe culLure ls seL ln a communlLy of culLures, whlch are seL ln larger geopollLlcal blocks, whlch . . . ConsequenLly (and [usL as ln Lhe hermeneuLlc approach), Lhe boooJotles LhaL are seL are ofLen slmply ptoqmotlc. l wlll arblLrarlly seL Lhe boundarles of my lnvesLlgaLlon aL Lhe border of Lhe famlly, or Lhe border of Lhe Lown, or Lhe vlllage, or Lhe naLlon . . . , and slmply plck up Lhe sLory aL LhaL polnL ([usL as Lhe hermeneuLlc LheraplsL mlghL say, CranLed socleLy ls slck. 8uL you, my cllenL, have come Lo me for help, and slnce we can'L flx socleLy rlghL now, leL's [usL work wlLh you"). AlLhough l wlll noL, ln Lhls summary endnoLe, go lnLo deLalls, we mlghL slmply noLe LhaL sLrucLural-funcLlonallsm (ln any of lLs forms) Lherefore faces Lhe same Lwo dellcaLe problems ln deallng wlLh lLs own verslons of surface and deep: flrsL, ls Lhe deep funcLlonal LruLh (Lhe laLenL LruLh of Lhe parLlcular funcLlonal flL) really Lrue? And second, ls lL Lhe whole LruLh? (Cr ls lL Lhe most lmpottoot conLexL for Lhe parLlcular problem addressed? l'll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL.) Pere, Lhen, ls a brlef summary of Lhe Lypes of unconsclous LruLhs" found ln each of Lhe four quadranLs and dealL wlLh by Lhese varlous approaches: ln Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslons (WhaL does lL mean?"), we have surface, everyday meanlngs and lnLerpreLaLlons, whlch can be undersLood and arLlculaLed by Lhe hermeneuLlcs of Lhe everyday." 1he meanlngs of my everyday reallLy depend upon a whole serles of background conLexLs: boLh unarLlculaLed foreknowledge and nondlscurslve culLural pracLlces, some of whlch are consclous and some of whlch are noL dlrecLly consclous (buL could easlly become consclous lf polnLed ouL Lo me, alLhough some of Lhe overall background slmply shades away lnLo lnaccesslblllLy). 1hls ls Lrue boLh lndlvldually (uL) and collecLlvely (LL). 8uL beneaLh Lhe everyday lnLerpreLaLlons Lhere are varlous Lypes of deeper LruLhs, deeper reallLles, deeper meanlngs, LhaL Lhe everyday lnLerpreLaLlons ofLen aLLempL Lo cover up, obscure, or dlsLorL. 1hese deeper meanlngs are dynamlcally teslsteJ, because Lhelr acknowledgmenL would lnvolve some sorL of deep paln or shocklng recognlLlon. 8oLh culLural pracLlces aL large (LL) and my own personal consclousness (uL) can conLaln represslons or obscuraLlons of Lhese deeper meanlngs (e.g., Lhere ls mass hysLerla and collecLlve colluslon [usL as ofLen as lndlvldual represslon, and lndeed, Lhe Lwo are ofLen con[olned: culLural represslon ls lnLernallzed as parL of Lhe lndlvldual superego, whlch ls ofLen Lhe brldge for varlous lreudlan/MarxlsL lnLegraLlve Lheorles). 1hese deeper buL palnful meanlngs can be broughL Lo llghL by Lhe hermeneuLlcs of susplclon," ln whlch an auLhorlLy who has Lraveled Lhe deep paLh can help Lhe lndlvldual (and posslbly Lhe socleLy) relax Lhe parLlcular represslon barrler and acknowledge Lhe deeper LruLh hldden and obscured by Lhe hermeneuLlcs of Lhe everyday. ConLacLlng Lhe deeper meanlng ls a llberaLlon from Lhe false and dlsLorLed surface meanlng, and Lhls llberaLlon ls experlenced as Lype of freedom from a prlor sufferlng or consLralnL. ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons (WhaL does lL do?," or general sLrucLural-funcLlonallsm), we have surface or moolfest meanlng, whlch ls slmply whaLever lL ls LhaL Lhe culLural naLlves say Lhey are dolng. 8uL Lhe soclal sclenLlsL flnds LhaL Lhe everyday pracLlces and meanlngs are acLually servlng a Jeepet fooctloo (Lhe loteot funcLlon), a funcLlon unknown Lo Lhe culLural naLlves, buL a funcLlon LhaL Lhe sclenLlsL can dlscover. 8uL noLlce LhaL, accordlng Lo Lhe sLrucLural-funcLlonallsL, Lhe culLural naLlves are oot teptessloq tbls Jeepet ttotb (Lhe LruLh of funcLlonal flL), Lhey are slmply ooowote of lL. 1hls funcLlonal unconsclous" ls slmply noL yeL known, lL ls noL a prlor knowledge LhaL was once ln awareness and Lhen repressed and reslsLed and rendered unconsclous. Any culLural naLlve can plck up Lhls knowledge by a slmple sLudy of soclal sysLems Lheory. All of whlch ls flne. 8uL Lhe reason LhaL Lhere are no Lheorles of represslon ln Lhe excluslve 8lghL-Pand paLhs ls LhaL Lhere ls no consclousness ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons (no lrreduclble lnLerlors), and Lhus Lhere ls noLhlng Lo lnsLlLuLe Lhe represslon ln Lhe flrsL place (Lhere ls no lnLerlor represslon because Lhere are no lnLerlors, perlod). ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, Lhere ls slmply Lhe knowledge of how ob[ecLs work or lock of LhaL knowledge (and LhaL ls whaL unconsclous" means here: you slmply lack Lhe knowledge buL you could easlly galn lL), buL Lhere are no real sobjects LhaL could teptess anyLhlng. 1he 8lghL-Pand paLh ls [usL an ob[ecLlve descrlpLlon of how ob[ecLlve exLerlors funcLlon, and Lhus no black box" problems arlse. 1he only problems" are caused, noL by a baLLle ln Lhe lnLerlor depLhs, buL by a slmple lack of Lhe ob[ecLlve knowledge LhaL Lhe naLural soclal sclenLlsL wlll be glad Lo glve you lf you slmply ask. Cn Lhls 8lghL-Pand paLh, we have Lhe dlvlslon lnLo upper and Lower (lndlvldual and collecLlve). l have [usL descrlbed Lhe Lower 8lghL, Lhe soclal sysLems Lheory wlLh lLs moolfest meanlng (anyLhlng lnLerlor: consclousness, values, represslons, eLc.) and lLs laLenL funcLlon (Lhe foundaLlonal or real reallLy of funcLlonal flL). ln Lhe upper 8lghL, we have Lhe exLerlorly observed funcLlons of Lhe lndlvldual: braln physlology, cognlLlve sclence, neurosclence, eLc. Pere, Loo, Lhere ls no real consclousness: only Lhe compuLaLlonal mlnd, or mlndless neuroLransmlLLers, or flreworks aL Lhe synapses. All of Lhls ls LoLally oocooscloos Lo Lyplcal culLural naLlves, ln Lwo senses: we can never really dlrecLly experlence neuroLransmlLLers per se (nor Lhe compuLaLlonal processes), buL we coo become aware of Lhem LheoreLlcally lf we [usL sLudy neurosclence (we can remove Lhe unconsclousness ln LhaL sense: we can galn Lhe ob[ecLlve LheoreLlcal awareness of Lhe nonconsclous processes, [usL as we can galn sclenLlflc knowledge of subcellular blochemlcal processes, and so on). And Lhus here, Loo, ln Lhe upper 8lghL, Lhere are no Lheorles of represslon, or reslsLance Lo Lhe LruLh, because Lhere ls no consclousness Lo reslsL anyLhlng. 1here are only compleLely nonconsclous processes scurrylng abouL, lnLenL on carrylng ouL Lhelr prlmary Lask, whlch ls Lo creaLe Lhe llluslon of consclousness belng aware of any of Lhls. Cnce you have swallowed LhaL foundaLlonal nonsense (consclousness ls Lhe llluslon LhaL pronounces lLself an llluslon, whlch ls an awful loL of frlsklness for a ghosL)-once you have swallowed LhaL (once you have lgnored Lhe enLlre LefL Pand of Lhe kosmos), Lhen once agaln, as wlLh any 8lghL-Pand paLh, Lhere are no more problems Lo solve, excepL Lo conLlnue Lo dlscover more ob[ecLlve facLs, more mlndless ob[ecLs, more exLerlor funcLlons. 1he only problems" here are Lhus problems of Lechnlcal know-how. lf llfe ls meanlngless, we have a seroLonln funcLlonal deflclency, and so forLh (numerous examples of Lhls are glven ln Lhe LexL). So Lhe unconsclous" ln Lhe upper 8lghL means, Lo begln wlLh, any of Lhe physlologlcal/compuLaLlonal processes of Lhe physlcal braln, processes LhaL we are normally noL aware of (and LhaL we can never dlrecLly experlence per se), buL processes and funcLlons we can know abouL Lhrough a sLudy, noL of our lnLrospecLed mlnd, buL of ob[ecLlve braln Lheory. And no doubL, Lhose processes are lndeed Lhere, and lndeed can be dlsclosed ln emplrlc-analyLlc research and formal Lheorlzlng. 8uL unconsclous" also Lakes on Lhe same general and sweeplng sense as ln any 8lghL-Pand paLh, namely, all of our lotetlot problems are caused by a lack of knowledge of extetlots. We are unconsclous" ln Lhe sense LhaL we don'L yeL know enough Lechnlcal and ob[ecLlve facLs Lo seLLle Lhe lssue and solve all Lhe problems. And as soon as we know all Lhe ob[ecLlve facLs, LhaL wlll solve all our problems. Whlle LhaL ls cerLalnly Lrue for Lhe exLerlor funcLlons of holons, lL ls sulcldal for Lhe lnLerlor dlmenslons. (noL Lo menLlon self-deconsLrucLlng: all of our problems come down Lo Lhe facL LhaL we are noL consclous of Lhe facL LhaL Lhere ls no consclousness, whlch ls all Lhe 8lghL Pand coo Lell us.) llnally, Lhere are Lhe approaches LhaL look aL Lhe LefL-Pand or lnLerlor dlmenslons uslng some of Lhe Lools and Lhe ob[ecLlve- llke sLance of Lhe 8lghL-Pand or exLerlor paLhs. And Lhey do so because Lhey are based on a careful analysls of lndlvldual and culLural lnLerlors as Lhey become manlfesL ln exLerlor behavlor or llngulsLlc form: e.g., Lhey wlll look aL Lhe sLrucLure of motetlol slqolflets, or wtltteo fotms, or spokeo bebovlot, noL wlLh a vlew Lo reduclng Lhe lnLerlor Lo Lhese exLerlors (alLhough Lhls ls someLlmes done, unforLunaLely), buL ln an aLLempL Lo reconsLrucL Lhe lnLerlor paLLern or sLrucLure LhaL glves rlse Lo, or supporLs, Lhe exLerlor behavlor. (1hus, for example, when l use fotmop, whlch ls an exLerlor descrlpLlon of Lhe form of a parLlcular menLal sLrucLure, l mean noL only LhaL sLrucLure descrlbed ln an exLerlor fashlon, buL also, and especlally, Lhe lotetlot llveJ expetleoce and octool owoteoess LhaL occurs wltblo LhaL sLrucLure, whlch ls why lL ls llsLed ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL.) lor Lhe general sLrucLural approach (lncludlng lLs much modlfled forms ln lageL, kohlberg, loucaulL, Pabermas, and aspecLs of my own work), Lhere are sotfoce sttoctotes known Lo Lhe culLural naLlves, and Jeep sttoctotes dlscovered by sysLemaLlc analysls among varlous seLs of surface sLrucLures. (l am uslng Lhese Lerms-sotfoce and Jeep-ln a general sense, and noL, for example, ln Lhe very narrow and speclflc sense glven Lhem by Chomsky, a use he now flnds Loo narrow.) 1he deep sLrucLures Lhemselves, llke any exLernal-descrlpLlve sLrucLure, are oot teptesseJ, buL are slmply oot koowo Lo mosL lndlvlduals, Lhey could easlly be recognlzed lf polnLed ouL. 1he varlous surface sLrucLures, however, can lndeed be dynamlcally repressed or oLherwlse submerged: for example, one does noL repress Lhe overall capaclLy for lmages, buL one can repress parLlcular lmages-and LhaL ls Lhe repressed or submerged unconsclous (hermeneuLlcally recovered). 8uL Lhe sttoctotol oocooscloos refers lnsLead Lo Lhe deep paLLern dlsplayed by all Lhe varlous surface sLrucLures wlLhln LhaL paLLern, and lL ls unconsclous noL because lL ls repressed buL slmply noL yeL known. 1hus, a surface sLrucLure ls whaL Lhe culLural naLlves consclously recognlze, and a deep sLrucLure ls a (usually unlversal, buL aL any raLe nonlndlvldual) paLLern LhaL ls common Lo dlfferenL surface sLrucLures (buL noL consclously known Lo Lhe lndlvldual surface sLrucLures Lhemselves, alLhough Lhls can be polnLed ouL). 8esearchers readlly acknowledge LhaL each of Lhese deep sLrucLures ls lLself seL ln conLexLs of oLher deep sLrucLures, agalnsL whlch Lhey Lhemselves mlghL be surface. 1hus, for example, !ane Loevlnger wlll sLaLe LhaL cognlLlve sLrucLures are Lhe deep sLrucLures agalnsL whlch lnLerpersonal sLrucLures are surface, lnLerpersonal sLrucLures ln Lurn are Lhe deep sLrucLures agalnsL whlch moral sLrucLures are surface, and so on. l Lend Lo avold Lhls parLlcular usage because lL can lmply LhaL moral sLrucLures are only local, buL Lhe general polnL ls slmply LhaL Lo say a sLrucLure ls deep ls noL Lo deny lLs own conLexLs. 1hls sttoctotol oocooscloos (Lhe deep paLLern followed by Lhe lndlvldual surface sLrucLures) ls lndeed normally unconsclous because lL does noL Lyplcally or dlrecLly enLer lnLo Lhe lmmedlaLe awareness of Lhe culLural naLlves, even Lhough Lhey are ln facL followlng lL ([usL as mosL naLlves can speak Lhe parLlcular language wlLhouL belng able Lo arLlculaLe Lhe acLual rules of grammar governlng Lhe usage). 1hls ls why varlous sLrucLural approaches move beyond a slmple phenomenology of lmmedlaLe experlence and also aLLempL Lo analyze, ln a 8lghL-Pand fashlon, Lhe paLLerns or forms or rules LhaL Lhe varlous lmmedlaLe experlences dlsplay (rules LhaL Lhemselves Jo oot appear Lo ordlnary experlence). 1hls, for example, was lageL's charge agalnsL Pusserl and LradlLlonal phenomenology-varlous phenomena follow paLLerns LhaL do noL Lhemselves show up as phenomena (much as Lhe rules of a card game do noL appear on any of Lhe cards). 1he sobjectlve spoce ln whlch experlenced phenomena arlse ls lLself consLrucLed and follows paLLerns LhaL do noL ordlnarlly show up ln nalve (or even brackeLed) experlence, and furLher, Lhe sub[ecLlve space lLself develops only vla lotetsobjectlve paLLerns of dlaloglcal and lnLerpreLlve cognlLlons, oooe of wblcb sbow op lo o slmple pbeoomeooloqy of lmmeJlote llveJ expetleoce. (See noLe 17 for chapLer 14.) 1he exlsLence of Lhese ordlnarlly hldden paLLerns (ln varlous forms) ls one of Lhe endurlng conLrlbuLlons of sLrucLural llngulsLlcs (de Saussure), sLrucLurallsm (Levl-SLrauss), neosLrucLurallsm or archaeology (loucaulL), geneLlc sLrucLurallsm (lageL), and hermeneuLlc and developmenLal sLrucLurallsm (Pabermas). And Lhls sLrucLural unconsclous can become consclous ln Lhe sense LhaL any naLlve can sLudy and learn Lhe paLLerns behlnd" or beneaLh" consclous experlence. 1o summarlze Lhls overall dlscusslon ln a paragraph: Lhe varlous Lypes of unconsclous" refer Lo Lhe varlous valldlLy clalms ln each of Lhe four quadranLs, and Lo Lhe presence or lack of vollJ owoteoess LhaL can lnfecL each of Lhe quadranLs ln lLs own qulLe dlfferenL ways: lack of awareness of deeper proposlLlonal LruLhs (u8), deeper funcLlonal flLs (L8), deeper culLural meanlngs (LL), deeper LruLhfulness or slncerlLy (u8). All of whlch ulLlmaLely resL on Lhe facL LhaL we are conLexLs wlLhln conLexLs, holons wlLhln holons, forever. . . . And, of course, l belleve all of Lhose approaches have someLhlng lmporLanL Lo Lell us, Lhey become rldlculous only when Lhey Lry Lo corner Lhe markeL on Lhe hldden dlmenslon. 29. And l wlll, of course, have a greaL deal of emplrlcal evldence" Lo supporL" Lhls conLenLlon LhaL consclousness slmply ls fundamenLal braln physlology. lf you challenge me, l wlll slmply say, Well Lhen, where ls yoot emplrlcal evldence?," Lhus coverLly sllpplng ln an emplrlcal or monologlcal LesL for LhaL whlch ls, by deflnlLlon, nonemplrlcal or dlaloglcal, a sneaky move LhaL converLs nonemplrlcal" Lo nonexlsLenL" (and never mlnd LhaL Lhe poslLlon lLself ls perfecLly self-conLradlcLory, as we saw ln chapLer 1-lL ls a quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlon LhaL denles Lhe exlsLence of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons. Pow can a braln LhaL doesn'L lnvolve values produce a researcher LhaL does? 1o say LhaL values emetqe from braln sLaLes ls Lo say Lhey cannoL be reduced Lo, or accounLed for, or explalned by Lhem-whlch ls Lhen prompLly denled by a demand for emplrlcal evldence). 30. 1echnlcally, Lhe lnLerlor and exLerlor holarchles of depLh and span were collapsed lnLo only Lhe exLerlor holarchles of depLh and span. ln oLher words, holarchles were sLlll recognlzed: Lhe upper-8lghL and Lower-8lghL domalns are boLh holarchlcal, and Lhls was noL denled, and Lhese 8lghL-Pand holarchles, llke all holarchles, Lechnlcally possessed boLh a depLh and a span-buL oo lotetlots (no lnLerlor depLh or span). 8aLher, Lhe only holarchles acknowledged were holarchles of emplrlcal/poslLlvlsLlc extetlots, of surfaces LhaL could be seen emplrlcally wlLh Lhe senses or Lhelr lnsLrumenLal exLenslons, and Lhus any values (any LefL-Pand correlaLes) were ootomotlcolly excloJeJ. Slnce Lhe lnLerlor dlmenslons were denled, Lhere were no holarchles of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, of value, of consclousness, of goods or hypergoods (LefL Pand or lnLerlor), no LransformaLlons of consclousness requlred Lo geL aL Lhe LruLh, and no LruLh oLher Lhan whaL could be analyLlcally formulaLed around emplrlcal, value-free daLa. 1hus, even Lhough Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh acknowledges holarchles wlLh depLh and span, Lhe Jeptbs of Lhese 8lghL-Pand holarchles all have Lhe some voloe, namely, ootbloq (LhaL ls, Lhey are value-free" surfaces). And Lhus, from Lhe vlew of Lhe lnLerlor and LefL-Pand paLh, all of Lhe emplrlcal depLh" of exLerlor holarchles are no more Lhan varlaLlons on Lhe same span (namely, emplrlcal or funcLlonal). 1hus, when lnLerlor depLhs (of l" and we") were reduced Lo Lhelr correlaLes ln exLerlor depLhs of lLs" (e.g., values reduced Lo llmblc sysLem slgnals), Lhen depLh lLself (of any sorL) was severed from lLs lnLrlnslc connecLlon Lo consclousness. CreaLer depLh no longer meanL greaLer consclousness, only greaLer physlcal complexlLy. no longer was Lhere a kosmos where concepLual values Lranscended and lncluded emoLlonal values whlch Lranscended and lncluded drlves, buL slmply a cosmos where Lhe neocorLex physlcally enwrapped a llmblc sysLem whlch physlcally enwrapped a braln sLem. uepLh no longer means deepenlng awareness, lL means more complex maLLer. PollsLlc maLLer, Lo be sure, buL lLs" none Lhe same. And maLLer does become more complex-buL only as a cottelote of lncreaslng depLh and consclousness, all of whlch was convenlenLly lgnored. When addlLlon #1 says LhaL depLh ls synonymous wlLh consclousness, lL doesn'L speclfy wheLher ln an lndlvldual LhaL ls LefL- Pand depLh or 8lghL-Pand depLh, because Lhe polnL ls LhaL Lhey are lsomorphlc: more of one ls more of Lhe oLher ln homologous ways. 8uL wlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo Lhe 8lghL-Pand cosmos, exLerlor depLh no longer had a correlaLe ln lnLerlor depLh (or consclousness), and Lhus Lhe lottloslc connecLlon beLween lncreaslng consclousness, lncreaslng depLh, and lncreaslng physlcal complexlflcaLlon became severed aL a fundamenLal level. 1he flaLland world of hollsLlc lLs" had no room for hollsLlc l's" and we's," and Lhe worldvlew of sclenLlflc maLerlallsm began lLs long and lmperlal career. (Lven Lhough all four quadranLs are holarchles wlLh depLh and span, l ofLen use depLh" Lo mean lnLerlor depLh" or consclousness preclsely because of Lhe lnLrlnslc correlaLlon beLween consclousness and depLh ln any naLural holarchy: more physlcal depLh ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand means more consclousness depLh ln Lhe LefL-Pand. WlLh Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos, depLh" ofLen came Lo mean someLhlng merely lnslde" Lhe person, assoclaLed derogaLorlly only wlLh lnLerlors and sub[ecLlvlLy, and all Lhree were denled lrreduclble reallLy.) All of Lhese dlsLlncLlons are examlned ln deLall ln chapLer 12, Lhls ls meanL as a shorL lnLroducLlon Lo Lhls general Loplc of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm." lLs more preclse dlmenslons are ouLllned ln chapLers 12 and 13. 31. Charles 1aylor: llnal causes and Lhe relaLed vlslon of Lhe unlverse as a meanlngful order of quallLaLlvely dlfferenLlaLed levels [holarchlcal kosmos] gave way flrsL Lo a . . . vlslon of maLhemaLlcal order, and Lhen flnally Lo Lhe 'modern' vlew of a world of [quanLlLaLlve] relaLlons Lo be mapped by emplrlcal observaLlon" (neqel, p. 4). As for Lhe reducLlon of Lhe LefL Pand Lo Lhe 8lghL Pand, whlch was Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, generaLlng botb a self-deflnlng dlsengaged sub[ecL ooJ a hollsLlc naLural worldvlew (or sysLems Lheory), Pabermas sees Lhls ln Lerms of Lhe phllosophy of Lhe sub[ecL" LhaL easlly slld lnLo a sysLems approach, because Lhe self-organlzlng sysLem," wlLh a few ad[usLmenLs, slmply replaced Lhe self-deflnlng sub[ecL" (Lhe Lwo poles of Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm). SysLems Lheory ls, he says, an lngenlous conLlnuaLlon of a LradlLlon LhaL has lefL a sLrong lmprlnL upon Lhe self-undersLandlng of early modernlLy ln Lurope. 1he cognlLlve-lnsLrumenLal one-sldedness of culLural and socleLal raLlonallzaLlon was expressed ln phllosophlcal aLLempLs Lo esLabllsh an ob[ecLlvlsLlc [lL-language] self-undersLandlng of human belngs and Lhelr world" (lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. 384). 1hls flaLland approach was lnlLlally, he polnLs ouL, palnLed ln pbyslcollstlc and mechanlsLlc Lerms, buL Lhese were qulckly replaced wlLh bloloqlzloq sysLems Lheory (l.e., meLablology replaced meLaphyslcs). 1o Lhe exLenL LhaL sysLems Lheory peneLraLes lnLo Lhe llfeworld, lnLroduclng lnLo lL a meLablologlcal perspecLlve from whlch lL Lhen learns Lo undersLand lLself as a sysLem ln an envlronmenL-wlLh-oLher-sysLems-ln-an-envlronmenL, Lo LhaL exLenL Lhere ls an ob[ecLlfylng effecL. ln Lhls way, sub[ecL-cenLered reason ls replaced by sysLems raLlonallLy . . ." (p. 383). 1aylor's verslon ls slmllar, ln Lhe sense LhaL Lhe mulLlleveled kosmos of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons was collapsed, by Lhe dlsengaged sub[ecL," lnLo lnLerlocklng orders of belng" poootltotlvely and empltlcolly represenLable, a grld Lhrough whlch value and consLlLuLlve goods necessarlly sllp. And he Lhen proceeds, as saw ln chapLer 1, Lo show LhaL Lhe very bellef ln Lhls sysLems vlew ls self-conLradlcLory. 32. ln shorL, Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, whlch was Lhe reducLlon of Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, had Lwo poles: Lhe dlsengaged sub[ecL and Lhe flaLland neLwork-world. 1he flaLland world lLself had Lwo warrlng camps: aLomlsm (or gross reducLlonlsm) and hollsm (subLle reducLlonlsm). lor all of lLs poslLlve conLrlbuLlons, whlch l wlll heavlly emphaslze laLer, LnllghLenmenL LhoughL was noneLheless a serles of blzarre osclllaLlons beLween Lhese Lwo poles and Lwo camps (we see a verslon of Lhese osclllaLlons ln loucaulL's aporlas). 1hls ls Lhe maln Loplc of chapLers 12 and 13. As for Lhe reducLlon of sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve Lo exLerlor funcLlonal flL, Pabermas ls a parLlcularly vocal crlLlc. lL ls a masslve reducLlonlsm, he says, LhaL collapses LruLh and meanlng lnLo funcLlonal capaclLy, and reduces lnLersub[ecLlvlLy Lo raLher crass egocenLrlsm. SysLems Lheory leLs cognlLlve acLs, even lLs own, meld lnLo Lhe sysLem's achlevemenL of masLerlng complexlLy. 8eason as speclfled ln relaLlon Lo belng, LhoughL, or proposlLlon ls replaced by Lhe self-enhanclng self-malnLenance of Lhe sysLem. . . . luncLlonallsL reason expresses lLself ln Lhe lronlc self-denlal of a reason shrunk down Lo Lhe reducLlon of complexlLy-'shrunk down' because Lhe meLablologlcal frame of reference does noL go beyond Lhe logocenLrlc llmlLaLlons of meLaphyslcs. . . . WlLh a concepL of meanlng concelved ln funcLlonallsL Lerms, Lhe lnLernal connecLlon beLween meanlng and valldlLy dlssolves. 1he same Lhlng happens wlLh loucaulL [ln hls archaeology, whlch, as we saw, was baslcally a sLrucLural- funcLlonallsm]: 1he lnLeresL ln LruLh (and valldlLy ln general) ls resLrlcLed Lo Lhe effecLs of holdlng-someLhlng-as-Lrue" (lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, pp. 371-73). 1hls ls whaL l meanL when l sald LhaL sLrucLural-funcLlonallsm collapses proposlLlonal LruLh and lnLersub[ecLlve undersLandlng Lo lnLerob[ecLlve flL or funcLlonal flL, and lronlcally dlssolves lLs own LruLh sLaLus lnLo monologlcal mesh. 1he converslon of lnLerlor depLh Lo funcLlonal flL also collapses any chance of genulne lnLersub[ecLlve undersLandlng and communlon, because wlLhouL degrees of depLh, you cannoL unlLe lsolaLed elemenLs. 1hus," says Pabermas, no common denomlnaLor can be bullL up among dlfferenL psychlc sysLems, unless lL be an auLocaLalyLlcally emergenL soclal sysLem, whlch ls lmmedlaLely locked agaln wlLhln lLs own sysLemlc perspecLlves and draws back lnLo lLs own egocenLrlc observaLlonal sLandpolnLs" (p. 381). Agaln and agaln Pabermas hlLs Lhe eqoceottlsm of Lhe sysLems perspecLlve, whlch also makes sense when we undersLand LhaL Lhe sysLems vlew was Lhe oLher pole of Lhe self-deflnlng and self-glorlfylng underslde of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, a remnanL of Lhe phllosophy of Lhe sub[ecL. 1he egocenLrlsm of Lhe sysLems approach can be seen ln some of Lhe ecologlcal/hollsLlc" Lheorles LhaL Loday call Lhemselves new paradlgm." 1hese Lheorles malnLaln LhaL (1) each of us ls an lnLegral parL of Lhe Whole SysLem, sLrands ln Lhe overall Web of Llfe, and (2) we are Lo flnd our llberaLlon by an ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh Lhe Whole SysLem LhaL would (3) slmulLaneously be a Self- reallzaLlon. 8uL accordlng Lo sysLems Lheory, no parL ls ever, or can ever be, aware of Lhe whole. 1he only Lhlng LhaL ls aware of Lhe whole ls Lhe octool teqlme of a holon, lLs regnanL nexus" (WhlLehead) or domlnanL monad" or nucleus of awareness. 1he only way for all Lhree of Lhe above-llsLed LeneLs Lo be Lrue ls lf an lndlvldual human belng were ln facL Lhe domlnanL monad of Lhe enLlre kosmos-and ouL comes Lhe egocenLrlsm (and anLhropocenLrlsm) of Lhe sysLems Lheory vlew. l belleve Lhere ls lndeed such a Lhlng as kosmlc consclousness, or mysLlcal awareness (as we wlll see ln chapLer 8), my polnL ls LhaL lL cannoL be gracefully explalned by sysLems Lheory, whlch covers only Lhe L8 quadranL. 33. 1hls ls Charlene SpreLnak's summary of 8erman's poslLlon. See SpreLnak, 5totes of qtoce, p. 298. 34. Pabermas polnLs ouL LhaL Lhe Lhree baslc modes of raLlonallLy (cognlLlve, moral, aesLheLlc) resulL from Lhe lnLersecLlon of Lhe Lhree baslc aLLlLudes (ob[ecLlvaLlng, normaLlve, expresslve) applled Lo Lhe Lhree domalns (ob[ecLlve, soclal, sub[ecLlve). ln very slmpllfled Lerms, Lhls means LhaL each of Lhe 8lg 1hree domalns can be sLudled wlLh Lhe aLLlLudes" of Lhe oLhers (e.g., Lhe sub[ecLlve domaln can be sLudled ob[ecLlvely, alLhough noL capLured ob[ecLlvely wlLhouL remalnder). l agree wlLh Lhls general poslLlon. And, lndeed, Lhls volume ls vlslon-loglc used ln lLs ob[ecLlfylng mode, presenLlng a proposlLlonal map of Lhe varlous quadranLs and domalns. 1hls ls noL merely proposlLlonal or poslLlvlsLlc, however, because parLs of Lhe map explaln Lhe parLs LhaL cannoL be merely represenLed on Lhe map lLself (e.g., lL ls proposlLlonally Lrue LhaL lnLersub[ecLlve undersLandlng ls noL merely proposlLlonal). 33. 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, p. 103. 1aylor refers Lo Lhe culLural worldspace as Lhe common space" of Lhe moral good we collecLlvely lnhablL, a concepLlon of Lhe human good as someLhlng reallzed beLween people raLher Lhan slmply wlLhln Lhem." 36. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, pp. 313-14. 37. lbld., p. 313. 38. And lLs converse, Lhe producLlon paradlgm (e.g., Marx). ln Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm, dlsengaged LhoughL reflecLs Lhe cosmos ln an aLLempL Lo consLrucL, ouL of lLs own dlsengaged devlces, a correcL map." ln Lhe producLlon paradlgm, Lhe maLerlal cosmos consLrucLs LhoughL as a supersLrucLure Lo lLs own producLlon. 39. Cf. 8orLy's lbllosopby ooJ tbe mlttot of ootote. Powever, l agree wlLh Pabermas's sharp crlLlclsm of 8orLy's overall sLance: Lhe facL LhaL culLural values and LruLhs" are noL reduclble Lo reflecLlons of unchanglng" naLure (LruLh ls noL reduclble Lo a merely represenLaLlonal correspondence wlLh an unvarylng and preglven ob[ecLlvlsLlc world) does noL mean LhaL culLural producLlons are shlfLlng conversaLlons wlLh no valldlLy clalms of Lhelr own. 1here are beLLer ways Lo sLeer a paLh beLween mlndless ob[ecLlvlsm and ob[ecLless sub[ecLlvlsm. 40. 1hls reducLlonlsm ls parLlcularly (and l Lhlnk alLogeLher aproprlaLely) excorlaLed by 1aylor ln 5ootces of tbe self. 41. 1yplcally, Lhe puresL" reflecLlon paradlgm ls poslLlvlsm, and Lhe puresL" form of funcLlonal flL ls sLrucLural-funcLlonallsm. lor pure poslLlvlsm, Lhe only Lhlngs LhaL are teol are physlcal ob[ecLs and numbers (Culne), and a pure proposlLlonal LruLh ls Lhus a maLhemaLlcal asserLlon referrlng flnally Lo lndlvldual physlcal ob[ecLs (all proposlLlons refer ulLlmaLely Lo u8 alone, numbers are allowed Lo be real ln order Lo have someLhlng wltb wblcb Lo asserL, or polnL Lo, or slgnlfy physlcal ob[ecLs). 1hls ls pure upper- 8lghL reducLlonlsm, as are Lhe more Lyplcal (buL less rlgorous) forms of emplrlclsm. ln funcLlonal flL, all reallLy ls flnally reduced Lo L8 Lerms (Lhe soclal sysLem), and so all oLher valldlLy clalms (from proposlLlonal LruLh Lo culLural meanlng Lo personal lnLegrlLy) are [udged ulLlmaLely ln Lerms of Lhelr capaclLy Lo serve Lhe auLopoleLlc funcLlonlng of Lhe soclal sysLem. ln oLher words, all oLher LruLh clalms are, aL besL, glven a manlfesL value," whlle Lhe laLenL value," Lhe teol value, ls funcLlonal flL. 1hls ls pure Lower-8lghL reducLlonlsm. All quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons are reduced Lo Lerms of expedlency and efflclency, noLhlng ls Lrue," because all LhaL enLers Lhe equaLlon ls usefulness. ln order Lo escape Lhe performaLlve conLradlcLlon LhaL resulLs when funcLlonal flL ls lLself clalmed Lo be Lrue, many funcLlonal- flL LheorlsLs have Laken Lhe only rouLe lefL open Lo Lhem: Lhey clalm Lhelr Lheorles are Lhemselves Lhe way Lhe sysLem ls preservlng lLself: Lhe LheorlsLs Lhemselves are merely manlfesL funcLlons of Lhe real laLenL drlve of Lhe sysLem Lo auLopoleLlcally self-malnLaln: Lhe Lheory of funcLlonal flL Lhus funcLlonally flLs (and here Lhey resL Lhelr argumenL). 1hls flnally leads Lo Lhe lmpllclLly reacLlonary sLance of Lhese LheorlsLs: no holon ls beLLer or worse, only efflclenL or noL. ln Lhese Lheorles, Lhere ls no reason Lo geL rld of nazls: Lhey are very efflclenL, very funcLlonally flLLlng, very expedlenL. lf SLalln's reglme ls wotkloq oJepootely, Lhen lL ls valld, and who are we Lo quesLlon Lhe murder of LwenLy mllllon ukralnlans? lL works! 8uL Lhls ls [usL Lhe endgame of descrlblng exLerlors, where no values and no quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons can ever be found. 42. 1haL medlcal psychlaLry, aLLempLlng Lo be sclenLlflc" (8lghL Pand), ofLen falls lnLo adapLaLlon" as tbe crlLerlon of menLal healLh can be seen all Lhe way back Lo Pelnz ParLmann, generally regarded as Lhe grandfaLher of boLh ob[ecL relaLlons Lheory and ego/self psychology, as was lndlcaLed ln Lhe LlLle of hls masLerplece, qo psycboloqy ooJ tbe ptoblem of oJoptotloo. We call a man well-adapLed lf hls producLlvlLy, hls ablllLy Lo en[oy llfe, and hls menLal equlllbrlum are undlsLurbed . . . and we ascrlbe fallure Lo lack of adapLaLlon." ln oLher words, behavloral and funcLlonal flL (Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh), wlLh no lnqulry as Lo wheLher Lhe soclal slLuaLlon ls worLh flLLlng lnLo or noL. lf housewlves' llves are dreary and meanlngless, Lhe prescrlpLlon ls Lhus noL more culLural rlghLs, buL more vallum. Parry CunLrlp, ln hls much-admlred lsycboooolytlc tbeoty, tbetopy, ooJ tbe self, foughL a vallanL (buL loslng) baLLle agalnsL [usL such reducLlonlsm ln psychlaLry. AdapLaLlon, says CunLrlp, ls alLogeLher lnadequaLe as a measure of menLal healLh," largely because lL ls, he polnLs ouL, based solely on blologlcal facLors, and noL on speclflcally human values (l would amend LhaL more broadly Lo say, Lhe one ls 8lghL Pand, Lhe oLher ls LefL Pand-naLurallsLlc versus hermeneuLlc-buL Lhe general polnL ls qulLe slmllar). A frog doesn'L quesLlon wheLher Lhe envlronmenL LhaL lL musL adapL Lo ls a worLhy envlronmenL: lL adapLs or dles. And Lhus, when Lhls blologlcal adapLaLlon ls made lnLo Lhe crlLerlon of human menLal healLh, Lhen llkewlse Lhe worLhlness of Lhe culLure ls noL profoundLaly quesLloned: you are happy and healLhy lf you flL ln, and slck and dlsLurbed lf you do noL. AdapLaLlon coverLly buys Lhe values lL ls supposed Lo adapL Lo, and Lhus reduces Lhe LefL-Pand Lo 8lghL-Pand funcLlonal flL. 8uL, proLesLs CunLrlp, 1he ego musL be more Lhan [usL an organ of adapLaLlon. 1hls would alm noL [[usL] aL physlcal survlval buL aL preservlng Lhe loteqtlty of Lhe person and Lhe defense of hls voloes"-boLh LefL-Pand quallLles. 1hen, ln a beauLlful phrase LhaL capLures Lhe essence of Lhe dlfference beLween exLerlor and lnLerlor approaches, CunLrlp says LhaL ln sLudylng human llvlng, 'adapLaLlon' ls replaced by a hlgher concepL, LhaL of a meooloqfol telotloosblp ln Lerms of voloes" (hls lLallcs). 1hus, accordlng Lo CunLrlp, adapLaLlon has an lmporLanL buL llmlLed use (e.g., 8lghL-Pand), buL more slgnlflcanL are boLh personal lnLegrlLy/values (upper LefL) and muLual undersLandlng ln meanlngful relaLlonshlps (Lower LefL). AdapLaLlon, sLrlcLly speaklng, can only express one-slded flttloq lo [funcLlonal flL]. 8uL personal relaLlons lnvolve muLual self-fulflllmenL ln communlcaLlon and shared experlence." And Lhe dlsasLer, he says, ls LhaL when psychoanalysls (or psychlaLry ln general) ls reduced Lo mere adapLaLlon, lLs Lrue essence ls losL: sychoanalysls ls Lhen LreaLed as belng abouL Lhe human organlsm adapLlng Lo Lhe sLrucLure of Lhe exLernal world [u8 adapLlng Lo L8], lnsLead of belng abouL Lhe human psyche reallzlng lLs lnherenL poLenLlal for unlque lndlvlduallLy as a person relaLlng Lo oLher persons [uL relaLlng Lo LL]." CunLrlp even spoLs Lhe facL LhaL Lhe dlfference beLween Lhe LefL- and 8lghL-Pand paLhs lnvolves values versus acLlon Lerms, or belng versus dolng: sychoanalysls has Lo undersLand Lhe person, Lhe unlque lndlvldual as he or she llves and grows ln complex meanlngful relaLlonshlps wlLh oLher persons who are aL Lhe same Llme growlng ln Lhelr relaLlonshlps wlLh Lhem. 1hls lnvolves LhaL belng ls more fundamenLal Lhan dolng, quallLy more fundamenLal Lhan acLlvlLy, LhaL Lhe reallLy of whaL a man does ls deLermlned by whaL he ls, as when a mlddle-aged woman on a 8rlLlsh Lelevlslon program sald, 'l plunged early lnLo marrlage and moLherhood, Lrylng Lo subsLlLuLe dolng for belng.' ln Lhls lles Lhe dlfference beLween oJoptloq and telotloq . . ." (!). Pe flnlshes wlLh a wonderful remlnder: AdapLaLlon ls one-slded [monologlcal] and ls cerLalnly a maLLer of acLlon. 8uL personal relaLlons are essenLlally Lwo-slded [dlaloglcal undersLandlng versus monologlcal acLlon], Lhey are muLual by reason of belng personal, and noL a maLLer of muLual adapLaLlon merely, buL of muLual appreclaLlon, communlcaLlon, sharlng, and of each belng for Lhe oLher" (all quoLes from pp. 103-12). LeL me repeaL LhaL l myself am noL argulng for Lhe prlmacy of any quadranL over Lhe oLhers, l am argulng agalnsL Lhe reducLlon of any quadranL Lo Lhe oLhers. Medlcal psychlaLry and braln physlology, and behavlorlsm and adapLaLlon, are cruclally lmporLanL, lL ls [usL LhaL cerLaln vlolenL forms of aggresslon resulL when one quadranL ls reduced Lo anoLher. 43. 1haL Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon wenL Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon ls a Loplc we wlll dlscuss ln chapLers 12 and 13. 1haL ls, Lhe sLory of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm (Lhe reducLlon of Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh: Lhe enLlre LefL-Pand dlmenslons were slmply Laken for granLed, and consclousness was assumed Lo be a puncLual, dlsengaged sub[ecL sLarlng ouL unproblemaLlcally and LransparenLly aL a preglven world, and Lhe [ob of Lhls dlsengaged sub[ecL was Lo reflecL, represenL, descrlbe, caLegorlze, and analyze Lhe ob[ecLlve, preglven world) could occur because Lhe noosphere had flnally dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe blosphere, a dlfferenLlaLlon LhaL wenL Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon (Pegel's vanlLy of Lhe undersLandlng," 1aylor's monsLer of arresLed developmenL"), so LhaL Lhe dlssoclaLed noosphere was merely Lhe dlsengaged and self-deflnlng sub[ecL sLarlng aL, hoverlng over, dlvorced from, Lhe hollsLlc flaLland of Lhe naLural world. 1he fundamenLal Pegellan pro[ecL was Lhe heallng of Lhls dlrempLlon" or dlvorce. And, l wlll argue, Lhe heallng of LhaL dlrempLlon ls sLlll Lhe good, and Lhe Lrue, and Lhe beauLlful aspecL of Lhe posL- LnllghLenmenL (posLmodern") endeavor. ln Lhe meanLlme, Lhe domlnanL eplsLemologlcal paradlgms (especlally ln Anglo-Saxon counLrles) remaln flrmly commlLLed Lo some form of excluslve embeddedness ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons of Lhe kosmos, sLlll followlng Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm-elLher ln Lhe form of a slmple represenLaLlon or reflecLlon paradlgm, or, aL a sllghLly more sophlsLlcaLed level, some form of connecLlonlsm, whollsm, emergenLlsm, dynamlcal sysLems Lheory-boLh Lhoroughly grounded ln 8lghL-Pand reducLlonlsm. We can Lake, as a prlme example, Lhe rlslng fleld of coqoltlve scleoce. ln Lhe hlsLory of Lhls lncreaslngly lnfluenLlal fleld, we can see Lhe move from a slmple represenLaLlonal paradlgm Lo an emergence/connecLlonlsL paradlgm (boLh noneLheless Lhoroughly 8lghL-Panded), wlLh a recenL sLruggle Lo begln lnLegraLlng Lhe 8lghL and LefL dlmenslons ln Lhe fledgllng enacLlve paradlgm. lndeed, [usL LhaL hlsLorlcal progresslon (represenLaLlonlsm Lo connecLlonlsm Lo en-acLlvlsm) ls Lraced ln 1be emboJleJ mloJ. coqoltlve scleoce ooJ bomoo expetleoce, by varela, 1hompson, and 8osch. We begln," Lhey say, wlLh Lhe cenLer or core of cognlLlve sclence, known generally as coqoltlvlsm. 1he cenLral Lool and guldlng meLaphor of cognlLlvlsm ls Lhe dlglLal compuLer. A compuLer ls a physlcal devlce bullL ln such a way LhaL a parLlcular seL of lLs physlcal changes can be lnLerpreLed as compuLaLlons. A compuLaLlon ls an operaLlon performed or carrled ouL on symbols, LhaL ls, on elemenLs LhaL tepteseot whaL Lhey sLand for. . . . Slmpllfylng for Lhe momenL, we can say LhaL cognlLlvlsm conslsLs ln Lhe hypoLhesls LhaL cognlLlon ls meotol tepteseototloo: Lhe represenLaLlon of a preglven world by a preglven mlnd" (pp. 8-9). 1hus, ln cognlLlvlsm we Lhen have a full-fledged Lheory LhaL says (1) Lhe world ls preglven, (2) our cognlLlon ls of Lhls world . . . , and (3) Lhe way ln whlch we cognlze Lhls preglven world ls Lo represenL lLs feaLures and Lhen acL on Lhe basls of Lhese represenLaLlons" (p. 133). 1haL, of course, ls Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. varela eL al. Lhus polnL ouL LhaL, conLrary Lo 8orLy's concluslon, cognlLlvlsm does lndeed conLlnue Lhe mlrror of naLure" noLlon. ConLrary [Lo 8orLy], a cruclal feaLure of Lhe [represenLaLlonal] lmage remalns allve ln conLemporary cognlLlve sclence-Lhe ldea of a world or envlronmenL wlLh exLrlnslc, preglven feaLures LhaL are recovered Lhrough a process of represenLaLlon. ln some ways coqoltlvlsm ls tbe sttooqest stotemeot yet of tbe tepteseototloool vlew of tbe mloJ lnauguraLed by uescarLes and Locke [Lhe hlsLory of whlch we wlll examlne ln deLall ln chapLers 12 and 13, my lLallcs]. !erry lodor, one of cognlLlvlsm's leadlng and mosL eloquenL exponenLs, goes so far as Lo say LhaL Lhe ooly respecL ln whlch cognlLlvlsm ls a ma[or advance over elghLeenLh- and nlneLeenLh-cenLury represenLaLlonlsm ls ln lLs use of Lhe compuLer as a model of mlnd" (p. 138). And, lndeed, Lhe same represenLaLlonlsm ls Lhe prlmary paradlgm ln neurophyslology, as l prevlously lndlcaLed, and as varela eL al. polnL ouL: 1he baslc ldea LhaL Lhe braln ls an lnformaLlon-processlng devlce LhaL responds selecLlvely Lo feaLures of Lhe envlronmenL remalns as Lhe domlnanL core of modern neurosclence and ln Lhe publlc's undersLandlng" (p. 44). AlLhough Lhe represenLaLlonal/compuLaLlonal paradlgm can handle many faceLs of cognlLlon (much of our knowledge, afLer all, ls lndeed represenLaLlonal afLer Lhe facL, even lf LhaL ls noL Lhe whole sLory-or even Lhe mosL baslc sLory), noneLheless, recalclLranL problems wlLh lLs overall adequacy has lead Lo Lwo ma[or alLernaLlve accounLs of cognlLlon. 1he flrsL alLernaLlve, whlch we call emetqeoce, ls Lyplcally referred Lo as connecLlonlsm. 1hls name ls derlved from Lhe ldea LhaL many cognlLlve Lasks (such as vlslon and memory) seem Lo be handled besL by sysLems made up of many slmple componenLs, whlch, when connecLed by Lhe approprlaLe rules, glve rlse Lo global behavlor correspondlng Lo Lhe deslred Lask. ConnecLlonlsL models generally Lrade locallzed, symbollc processlng for dlsLrlbuLed operaLlons (ones LhaL exLend over an enLlre neLwork of componenLs) and so resulL ln Lhe emergence of global properLles reslllenL Lo local malfuncLlon" (p. 8). 8elaLed Lo Lhls approach ls Lhe more sophlsLlcaLed verslon of Lhe socleLy of mlnd" (Mlnsky)-mlnd as a socleLy of agenLs and subagenLs. 1he agenL moLlfs are falrly complex processes. Lach of Lhese may be LhoughL of as composed of subagenLs, or more accuraLely as Lhemselves agencles composed of agenLs. 1he Lask, Lhen, ls Lo organlze Lhe agenLs who operaLe ln Lhese speclflc domalns lnLo effecLlve larger sysLems or 'agencles,' and Lhese agencles ln Lurn lnLo hlgher-level sysLems. ln dolng so, mlnd emerges as a klnd of socleLy" (a holonlc vlew, alLhough self" and consclousness" remaln problemaLlc, as we wlll see). 1he model of Lhe mlnd as a socleLy of numerous agenLs ls lnLended Lo encompass a mulLlpllclLy of approaches Lo Lhe sLudy of cognlLlon, ranglng from dlsLrlbuLed, self-organlzlng neLworks Lo Lhe classlcal, cognlLlvlsL concepLlon of locallzed, serlal symbollc processlng" (pp. 116, 106). 8uL Lhe cruclal polnL ls LhaL Lhese approaches (cognlLlvlsL, connecLlonlsL, socleLy of agenLs) all remaln flrmly rooLed ln 8lghL- Pand reducLlonlsm (as varela eL al. polnL ouL ln Lhelr own Lerms). 1he connecLlonlsL and socleLy models, ln facL, are prlme examples of subLle reducLlonlsm: ln champlonlng emergence, neLworks, global properLles, holarchles, and so forLh, Lhey loudly baLLle Lhe gross reducLlonlsm of slmple aLomlsLlc represenLaLlonlsm-only Lo ensconce Lhelr own subLle reducLlonlsm ln a way LhaL makes lL all Lhe harder Lo spoL (and Lhus doubly relnforces Lhe prlmary problem). 8uL varela and company are clearly on Lo Lhem: Lhe connecLlonlsL model slmply replaces symbol wlLh global sLaLe, whlch Lhen lLself represenLs Lhe preglven world: lor connecLlonlsLs a represenLaLlon conslsLs ln Lhe correspondence beLween such an emergenL global sLaLe and properLles of Lhe world" (p. 8). 1hus, noLhlng fundamenLal has changed ln Lhls bllndness deeply enLrenched ln our WesLern LradlLlon and recenLly relnforced by cognlLlvlsm. 1hus even when Lhe very ldeas of represenLaLlon and lnformaLlon processlng change conslderably, as Lhey do ln Lhe sLudy of connecLlonlsL neLworks, self-organlzaLlon, and emergenL properLles, some form of Lhe reallsL assumpLlon remalns. ln cognlLlvlsm, Lhe reallsm ls aL leasL expllclL and defended, ln Lhe emergence approach, however, lL ofLen becomes slmply LaclL and unquesLloned [always Lhe greaL problem wlLh subLle reducLlonlsm]. 1hls unreflecLlve sLance ls one of Lhe greaLesL dangers faclng Lhe fleld of cognlLlve sclence, lL llmlLs Lhe range of Lheorles and ldeas and so prevenLs a broader vlslon and fuLure for Lhe fleld" (p. 133). noL Lo menLlon Lhe socleLy aL large. nowhere can Lhe unpleasanL effecLs of Lhls subLle reducLlonlsm be beLLer seen Lhan ln Lhe cognlLlve sclence approach Lo consclousness lLself (or slmply llved experlence ln general). lrom Lhe fleld LhaL clalms Lo be Lhe flnal auLhorlLy on such maLLers, whaL we learn abouL consclousness and llved experlence ls Lhls: baslcally, lL doesn'L exlsL. Cr, as !ackendoff words lL, consclousness ls noL good for anyLhlng" (varela eL al., p. 108). !ackendoff's parLlcular cognlLlve model posLulaLes (as mosL forms of cognlLlve sclence do, alLhough ln raLher dlfferenL ways) a compuLaLlonal mlnd" embedded ln some largely unspeclfled fashlon ln Lhe braln's physlcal sLrucLure, and Lhls compuLaLlonal mlnd, whlch operaLes compleLely ooocooscloosly, performs all Lhe requlred funcLlons of cognlLlon. Consclousness or awareness or personal llved experlence ls Lhus vlewed as a puzzllng (ulLlmaLely unnecessary) eplphenomenon, pro[ecLlon, or causal resulL of Lhe nonconsclous compuLaLlonal mlnd. 1he acLual [cognlLlve] subsysLems," as uenneLL puLs lL, are deemed Lo be unproblemaLlc oooconsclous blLs of organlc machlnery, as uLLerly lacklng ln polnL of vlew or lnner llfe as a kldney or kneecap" (varela eL al., p. 30). 1he resulL ls LhaL, alLhough consclousness ls vlewed as Lhe effecL/pro[ecLlon of nonconsclous processes, noneLheless cognlLlvlsm, says !ackendoff, offers no expllcaLlon of whaL a consclous experlence ls. . . . leavlng LoLally opaque Lhe means by whlch Lhese effecLs come abouL" (varela eL al., pp. 32, 231). 8uL Lhen, whaL else ls new? 1here ls no consclousness, awareness, or llved experlence anywhere ln Lhe 8lghL-Pand, ob[ecLlvlsLlc dlmenslons-whlch reglsLer only Lhe exLerlor forms of lnLerlor consclousness-and Lhus lf you look aL Lhe kosmos only ln an ob[ecLlvaLlng, exLerlor, monologlcal/compuLaLlonal fashlon, you wlll oevet flnd a sub[ecLlve llved experlence anyway. lar from belng an emplrlcal dlscovery of no small lmporLance," lL ls a dlscovery of no blg deal: lL ls absoluLely an a prlorl folt occompll of Lhe represenLaLlonal/compuLaLlonal paradlgm. l am noL saylng Lhere lsn'L a compuLaLlonal mlnd ([usL as l am noL denylng Lhe exlsLence of neuroLransmlLLers), buL Lhe facL LhaL consclousness can'L be found ln elLher of Lhem (or ln kldneys or kneecaps) ls a forgone concluslon, noL a dramaLlc new dlscovery. Such approaches purporL Lo be consclousness explalned," whereas Lhey are consclousness explalned away": Lhey Lake a sphere, cuL lL lnLo clrcles, and say, See! no sphere." Consclousness ls noL good for anyLhlng." Such a sLrange sLance. !ackendoff's tbeoty of Lhe compuLaLlonal mlnd leads hlm Lo Lhe menLal concluslon, whlch he Jltectly expetleoces ln hls own consclousness, LhaL hls consclousness ls a puzzllng and ulLlmaLely unnecessary byproducL of hls nonconsclous compuLaLlonal mlnd. 1he Lheory may or may noL be Lrue. 8uL elLher way, does Lhe Lheory acLually change anyLhlng ln !ackendoff's real llfe? uoes he love hls frlends and maLes any Lhe less? 1reaL hls klds any dlfferenLly? Wlsh or wlll or hope any less? And whaL lf Lhe Lheory ls evenLually shown Lo be compleLely wrong? Wlll anyLhlng abouL hls own consclousness be experlenced any dlfferenLly aL all? uoes Lhe Lheory change or alLer anyLhlng ln hls llved, acLual experlence? Why, based on !ackendoff's real llfe, and lf we are fotceJ to cboose, Lhen we would have Lo come Lo Lhe real concluslon: 1he compuLaLlonal Lheory ls noL good for anyLhlng." (Slnce, abouL consclousness, lL changes noLhlng, and lL ls only ln consclousness LhaL changes counL, l.e., have value.) 1o hls credlL, !ackendoff ls qulLe senslLlve Lo Lhese lssues, and hls approach ls one aLLempL Lo wresLle wlLh Lhe lnLeracLlon" of Lhe phenomenologlcal mlnd (llved experlenced) and Lhe compuLaLlonal mlnd (nonconsclous menLal mechanlsm) and Lhe physlcal body-braln sLrucLure-buL sLlll locked wlLhln Lhe represenLaLlonal paradlgm, whlch ensures Lhe fallure of LhaL parLlcular synLhesls from Lhe ouLseL. And lL ls exacLly Lhese Lypes of dlfflculLles LhaL led varela eL al. Lo propose Lhe eooctlve paradlgm of cognlLlon. As l would word lL, Lhe enacLlve paradlgm ls a dlrecL and expllclLly sLaLed aLLempL Lo lnLegraLe LefL- and 8lghL-Pand approaches Lo cognlLlon, unlLlng llved experlence and LheoreLlcal formulaLlons. We wlsh Lo emphaslze Lhe deep Lenslon ln our presenL world beLween sclence and experlence. ln our presenL world, sclence ls so domlnanL LhaL we glve lL Lhe auLhorlLy Lo explaln even when lL denles whaL ls mosL lmmedlaLe and dlrecL-our everyday, lmmedlaLe experlence" (p. 12). And yeL, when lL ls cognlLlon or mlnd LhaL ls belng examlned, Lhe dlsmlssal of experlence becomes unLenable, even paradoxlcal"-becomes, acLually, Lhe performaLlve conLradlcLlon lnherenL ln all 8lghL-Pand reducLlonlsms, a sawlng-off of Lhe branch on whlch one ls happlly perched. Pow Lo heal Lhls rlfL beLween experlence and sclence (LefL and 8lghL) ls Lhus paramounL. 1he Lenslon comes Lo Lhe surface especlally ln cognlLlve sclence because cognlLlve sclence sLands aL Lhe crossroads where Lhe naLural sclences and Lhe human sclences meeL. CognlLlve sclence ls Lherefore !anus-faced, for lL looks down boLh roads aL once: Cne of lLs faces ls Lurned Loward naLure and sees cognlLlve processes as behavlor [sLandard 8lghL-Pand approach]. 1he oLher ls Lurned Loward Lhe human world, or whaL phenomenologlsLs call Lhe llfeworld, and sees cognlLlon as experlence [LefL Pand]" (p. 13). lL ls Lhe motool coJetetmlootloo of LefL and 8lghL, or Lhelr fundamenLal clrcularlLy," LhaL ls Lhe core of Lhe enacLlve paradlgm. ln such an approach, Lhen, percepLlon ls noL slmply embedded wlLhln and consLralned by Lhe surroundlng world, lL also conLrlbuLes Lo Lhe enacLmenL of Lhls surroundlng world. 1hus as Merleau-onLy noLes, Lhe organlsm boLh lnlLlaLes and ls shaped by Lhe envlronmenL. Merleau-onLy clearly recognlzed, Lhen, LhaL we musL see Lhe organlsm and envlronmenL as bound LogeLher ln reclprocal speclflcaLlon and selecLlon" (p. 174). AlLhough many phenomenologlcal, hermeneuLlcal, and exlsLenLlal approaches have emphaslzed Lhe lmporLance of Lhe lmmedlaLe llfeworld (uL)-and Lhe auLhors speclflcally recognlze Lhe value of Lhelr conLrlbuLlons-noneLheless Lhere ls a Lendency ln many of Lhese wrlLers Lo drlfL merely lnLo LheoreLlcal and ob[ecLlvlsL Jlscootse oboot Lhe llved llfeworld: Lhey aLLempLed Lo grasp Lhe lmmedlacy of our unreflecLlve experlence and Lrled Lo glve volce Lo lL ln consclous reflecLlon. 8uL preclsely by belng a LheoreLlcal acLlvlLy afLer Lhe facL, lL could noL recapLure Lhe rlchness of experlence, lL could be only a dlscourse abouL LhaL experlence" (p. 19). And Lhus, alLhough Lhe enacLlve paradlgm ls sympaLheLlc Lo many of Lhe llfeworld LheorlsLs, lL seeks Lo remaln much closer Lo Lhe llved experlence lLself, and leL LhaL experlence unfold ln an open-ended fashlon, especlally Lhrough such experlmenLal/lnvesLlgaLlve Lechnlques as mlndfulness/awareness Lralnlng, whlch, we mlghL say, ls noL an aLLempL Lo lnLrospecL and caLegorlze awareness (LheoreLlcal analysls), buL raLher a dlrecL approach Lo slmply experlenclng experlence (a Lype of experlenLlal analysls). 1hus, lf sclence ls Lo conLlnue Lo malnLaln lLs poslLlon of de facLo auLhorlLy ln a responslble and enllghLened manner, Lhen lL musL enlarge lLs horlzon Lo lnclude mlndful, open-ended analyses of experlence, such as Lhe one evoked here" (p. 81). l am ln subsLanLlal agreemenL wlLh Lhls lmporLanL work. Powever, slnce lL broaches Lhe Loplcs of medlLaLlon, conLemplaLlon, and mlndfulness/awareness Lralnlng, l wlll reserve my flnal commenLs (and my few dlsagreemenLs) unLll afLer Lhese Loplcs have been lnLroduced ln Lhe LexL. See noLe 1 for chap. 14. ln Lhe meanLlme, for a summary of sLrucLural coupllng, Lhe proposed process of llnkage ln clrcularlLy, see noLe 13 above. 44. We should noLe LhaL Pabermas ls dlscusslng Lhe lnLerrelaLlons beLween Lhe upper LefL (l), Lower LefL (we), and 8lghL Palf (lL), so he uses Lermlnology from all Lhree. 8uL he ls parLlcularly, aL Lhls polnL, focuslng on Lhe correlaLlons beLween Lhe lndlvldual sLrucLures of consclousness (uL)-such as lndlvldual cognlLlon, lndlvldual moral developmenL, and lndlvldual ldenLlLy-and Lhe culLural sLrucLures (LL), such as collecLlve morallLy, worldvlews, and group ldenLlLles. 8uL boLh of Lhese also become embedded ln, and lnLeracL wlLh, Lhe concreLe, maLerlal, soclal lnsLlLuLlons and physlcal forms (L8). ln Lhls secLlon, and ln Lhe nexL chapLer, we wlll parLlcularly be looklng aL Lhe correlaLlons (homologles") beLween Lhe lndlvldual sLrucLures of consclousness (uL) and Lhe culLural sLrucLures, worldvlews, and collecLlve ldenLlLles (LL). (ln volume 2 of Lhls serles, we wlll look more closely aL Lhelr lnLerrelaLlon wlLh Lhe maLerlal-lnsLlLuLlonal forms, forces of producLlon, modes of Lechnology, and so on-Lhe L8). 43. Pabermas, commoolcotloo ooJ tbe evolotloo of soclety, pp. 98-99. 46. lbld., p. 99. My lLallcs. 47. lbld. 48. lsaac Aslmov, New qolJe to scleoce (new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks, 1984), p. 771. 49. ArleLl, lottopsycblc self, p. 6. 30. !anLsch, 5elf-otqoolzloq oolvetse, p. 130. 31. up ftom Jeo and 1be Atmoo ptoject are Lwo books LhaL cover Lhe mlcro and macro branch of human evoluLlon ln, respecLlvely, phylogeny and onLogeny. 1he cenLer of boLh books ls (1) a sequence of developmenLal sLages or sLrucLures (holons) ln Lhe evoluLlon of consclousness, (2) a developmenLal loglc lnLernally explalnlng and parLlally drlvlng Lhe unfoldlng of Lhose sLages (a verslon of Lhe LwenLy LeneLs), and (3) a dynamlc of SplrlL-Lelos and SplrlL-subsLlLuLes. CulLe secondarlly Lhose sLages were asslgned acLual daLes of emergence based on avallable evldence. 1hls ls secondary" because, ln all developmenLal sequences, Lhe naLure and sequence of Lhe absLracL sLages are noL alLered by Lhe acLual Llmes LhaL Lhey appear, because Lhese Llmes may vary from person Lo person and from culLure Lo culLure. 1hus, for example, ln Lhe sequence oral-anal-phalllc, Lhe sequence lLself ls unlversal buL Lhe preclse Llme schedule can vary. 1he fourLh cenLral clalm of Lhose books ls LhaL (4) Lhere are homologous sLrucLures ln onLo and phylo developmenL (excepL, of course, for Lhe earllesL sLages, slnce Lhey are prehuman, Lhere were never any bomoo socleLles evldenclng Lhose). l have conLlnued Lo reflne and revlse Lhe acLual daLes of emergence ln boLh onLo and phylo developmenL (as well as Lhelr general correlaLlons). ln Jeo l had underesLlmaLed Lhe cognlLlve complexlLy requlred for maglc and myLhlc producLlons, and l correcLed Lhls ln ye to eye, where Lhe correlaLlons are as l am presenLlng Lhem here (e.g., preoperaLlonal/maglc, concreLe operaLlonal/myLhlc, and so on), Lhese read[usLmenLs were reflecLed ln 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess. 8uL Lhe stoqes Lhemselves, and Lhelr sepoeoce, and Lhelr Jyoomlc remaln essenLlally Lhe same, whlch ls why l sLlll sLand sLrongly behlnd Lhe maln concluslons of Lhose early books, lndeed, subsequenL research has made Lhem even more, noL less, plauslble. [See loteqtol lsycboloqy.] ln Wlnkelman's (1990) revlew of up ftom Jeo, he mlsses Lhe flrsL Lhree essenLlal polnLs and lnsLead argues abouL daLes, an argumenL LhaL, where lL ls noL slmply wrong, ls lrrelevanL, because l had already read[usLed Lhem ln ye to eye and 1toosfotmotloos. Pe furLher Lakes an essenLlally synchronlc sLrucLurallsL vlew, whlch ls now almosL unlversally acknowledged Lo be unable Lo accounL for developmenL aL all (see noLe 26 for chap. 1). Pe sLaLes LhaL Lhe use of onLo/phylo parallels ls compleLely ouLmoded and nobody ls uslng LhaL anymore, overlooklng, for example, Lhe exLenslve evldence collecLed and presenLed by Pabermas, Sheldrake, eLc. Pe collapses all valldlLy clalms Lo funcLlonal flL. And he conducLs hls overall aLLack from wlLhln a performaLlve conLradlcLlon LhaL dlssolves hls own poslLlon, he clalms a subsLanLlve sLance LhaL lLself ls merely rheLorlcal. lor a crlLlque of Wlnkelman's poslLlon as belng essenLlally a reducLlonlsLlc collapse of all valldlLy clalms Lo funcLlonal flL, see noLe 26 for chapLer 3. 32. nelLher Pabermas nor l stotteJ wlLh Lhe ossomptloo of onLo/phylo parallels. lL ls raLher our cooclosloo afLer an analysls of Lhe sLrucLures of self, morallLy, noLlons of causallLy, Lypes of cognlLlon, and so on, LhaL emerge aL varlous sLages of developmenL. As 8oLhberg (1990) polnLed ouL, boLh Pabermas and l are followlng a reconsLrucLlve sclence, whlch means a reconsLrucLlng of Lhe sLrucLures of consclousness oftet Lhey have emerged ln a populaLlon large enough Lo sLudy emplrlcally/phenomenologlcally/dlaloglcally. 1hese are our concluslons, noL our assumpLlons. And Lhe concluslon ls LhaL cerLaln homologles can be found." CPA1L8 3. 1PL LML8CLnCL Cl PuMAn nA1u8L 1. ln Lhe presenL conLexL we are naLurally lnLeresLed ln Lhe quesLlon, wheLher Lhe concepL of soclal labor adequaLely characLerlzes Lhe form of reproducLlon of human llfe. 1hus we musL speclfy more exacLly whaL we wlsh Lo undersLand by 'human mode of llfe.' ln Lhe lasL generaLlon anLhropology has galned new knowledge abouL Lhe long (more Lhan four mllllon years) phase durlng whlch Lhe developmenL from prlmaLes Lo humans, LhaL ls, Lhe process of homlnlzaLlon, Look place, beglnnlng wlLh a posLulaLed common ancesLor of chlmpanzees and humans, Lhe evoluLlon proceeded Lhrough homo erecLus Lo homo saplens. 1hls homlnlzaLlon was deLermlned by Lhe coopetotloo of otqoolc ooJ coltotol mecboolsms of Jevelopmeot [blosphere and noosphere, or blogenesls and noogenesls, hls lLallcs]. Cn Lhe one hand, durlng Lhls perlod of anLhropogenesls, Lhere were changes-based on a long serles of muLaLlons [LransformaLlons]-ln Lhe slze of Lhe braln and ln lmporLanL morphologlcal feaLures [exLerlor forms]. Cn Lhe oLher hand, Lhe envlronmenLs from whlch Lhe pressure for selecLlon proceeded were oo looqet JetetmloeJ solely by oototol ecoloqy [by Lhe blosphere], buL Lhrough Lhe acLlve, adapLlve accompllshmenLs of hunLlng bands of homlnlds [my lLallcs]. Cnly aL Lhe Lhreshold Lo homo saplens dld Lhls mlxed organlc-culLural form of evoluLlon glve way Lo an excluslvely soclol [culLural] evolotloo [Lhe all-lmporLanL dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere]. 1he naLural mechanlsm of evoluLlon came Lo a sLandsLlll. no new specles [of humans] arose. lnsLead, Lhe exogamy LhaL was Lhe basls for Lhe socleLlzaLlon of homo saplens resulLed ln a broad, lnLraspeclflc dlsperslon and mlxLure of Lhe geneLlc lnherlLance. 1hls lnLernal dlfferenLlaLlon [LeneL 12b ln lnLerlors] was Lhe naLural basls for a culLural dlverslflcaLlon evldenced ln a mulLlpllclLy of soclal learnlng processes. lL ls Lherefore advlsable Lo demarcaLe Lhe socloculLural sLage of developmenL-aL whlch alone soclal [human socloculLural] evoluLlon Lakes place (l.e., socleLy ls caughL up ln evoluLlon [LhaL ls, ln lLs own noospherlc evoluLlon])-from noL only Lhe prlmaLe sLage-aL whlch Lhere ls sLlll excluslvely naLural selecLlon (l.e., Lhe specles are caughL up ln evoluLlon [LhaL ls, blospherlc evoluLlon]-buL also from Lhe homlnld sLage-aL whlch Lhe Lwo evoluLlonary mechanlsms are worklng LogeLher, Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe braln belng Lhe mosL lmporLanL slngle varlable" (Pabermas, commoolcotloo ooJ tbe evolotloo of soclety, pp. 133-34). 2. lbld., p. 134. 3. lbld., pp. 134-33. 4. lbld., p. 133. 3. McCarLhy's wordlng, McCarLhy, ctltlcol tbeoty of Iotqeo nobetmos, p. 238, my lLallcs. 6. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, p. 133. 7. Lenskl, nomoo socletles, chap. 7. 8. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, pp. 133-36. 9. volume 2 deals wlLh Lhe varlous schools of femlnlsm (llberal, radlcal, soclal, MarxlsL), Lhe mascullne and femlnlne faces of SplrlL, ecofemlnlsm and ecomascullnlsm (deep ecology), Lranspersonal ecology, MarxlsL and Lechno-economlc facLors ln Lhe generaLlon of worldvlews, and an lnLroducLlon Lo currenLs ln posLmodern LhoughL, as seL ln Lhe conLexL of Lhe specLrum overvlew. Also: 1he Lerm sex refers Lo blologlcal glvens and qeoJet Lo socloculLural roles. Mole and femole refer Lo sex, moscolloe and femloloe Lo gender. l wlll noL usually dlsLlngulsh beLween sex and qeoJet unLll volume 2. Also, sexool osymmetty, whlch slmply means sexual dlfferenLlaLlon, ls someLlmes Laken Lo mean male domlnaLor hlerarchy," and l won'L dlfferenLlaLe LhaL unLll volume 2 elLher. 10. ln Lhose horLlculLural socleLles LhaL were maLrlfocal, Lhe 8lg 1hree had noL yeL dlfferenLlaLed, LhaL ls, Lhe noosphere had noL yeL clearly dlfferenLlaLed from Lhe blosphere, and Lhus maLrlfocallLy" dld noL loteqtote Lhose spheres buL slmply lefL Lhem ln undlfferenLlaLlon or lndlssoclaLlon, whlch ls why Lhey provlde no model for Loday's world. Women's power was sLlll blologlcally deLermlned, whlch ls no real power aL all buL Lhe faLe of clrcumsLances (all of whlch l wlll explore ln volume 2). 11. As we wlll see, Lhe hlsLorlcal forerunners of Lhe women's movemenL occurred ln preclsely Lhose places (such as Creece) where Lhe noosphere and blosphere had flrsL begun Lo dlfferenLlaLe clearly (where reason had flrsL begun Lo emerge). 1hls means LhaL femlnlsm os oo lssoe would noL arlse, and could noL arlse, as a wldespread hlsLorlcal movemenL ootll tbe ooospbete floolly JlffeteotloteJ ftom tbe blospbete-and Lhls ls, of course, whaL ln facL happened. 12. Charlene SpreLnak's 5totes of qtoce, as only one of many examples, glves an unrelenLlng hlsLory of Woman as LLernal vlcLlm, whlch ls presumably meanL Lo empower women, buL acLually and profoundly dlssolves Lhe power of women ln Lhe very flrsL sLep by deflnlng Lhem as prlmarlly molded by an CLher. lnsLead of glvlng women power by seelng how boLh men and women co-creaLed all prevlous sLages of developmenL, Lhese Lypes of approaches scan hlsLory for any response, on Lhe parL of women, LhaL does noL happen Lo flL Lhe presenL-day ldeology of Lhe parLlcular femlnlsL, whereupon LhaL response, slnce lL can'L have been whaL women really" wanLed, ls prompLly ascrlbed Lo male oppresslon, Lhus sobttoctloq lL from Lhe women. 1hus, ln all Lhese approaches, Lhe very aLLempL Lo llberaLe women dlsempowers Lhem by deflnlLlon. 1hese approaches are noL lnsulLlng Lo men, Lhey are profoundly lnsulLlng Lo women. Women do noL have Lo Lake back Lhelr power because Lhey never gave lL away, Lhey co-selecLed, wlLh men, Lhe besL posslble socleLal arrangemenLs under Lhe exLremely dlfflculL envlronmenLal and soclal condlLlons of Lhe Llme (Lhe average llfe span of lndlvlduals ln Lhe euloglzed horLlculLural socleLles, for example, was LwenLy-flve years [Lenskl]). As we wlll see ln volume 2, Lhere ls now an enLlrely new wave of femlnlsL research LhaL has relocaLed and redlscovered female power ln Lhe paLrlarchy, research LhaL demonsLraLes LhaL female power was lndeed a sLrong, consclous, lnLelllgenL co-creaLor of Lhe paLrlarchy, a co-creaLor of LhaL (and every) sLage of human developmenL. WlLh Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe noosphere and Lhe blosphere, female power could now be deployed ln compleLely novel and emergenL ways, Lhls was noL a recovery or exhumaLlon of losL power buL Lhe deploymenL of Lhe same power ln new and unprecedenLed ways. vlcLlm femlnlsLs, on Lhe oLher hand, are lndeed caughL ln unendlng rounds of dlsempowermenL, Lrylng Lo Lake back" Lhelr power by flrsL glvlng lL away. 1hls Lradlng of real power for Lhe pale subsLlLuLe of exLorLed gullL ls beglnnlng Lo boomerang badly on Lhe vlcLlm femlnlsLs, who are sLlll havlng a dlfflculL Llme assumlng co-responslblllLy for Lhelr own hlsLory and Lhelr own cholces. 8uL Lhe lesson of evoluLlon ls LhaL mosL of Loday's problems are Lhe resulL, noL of someLhlng good yesLerday LhaL has been losL, buL of someLhlng good Lomorrow sLlll sLruggllng Lo emerge. Many vlcLlm femlnlsLs don'L wanL Lo assume co-responslblllLy for Lhelr sLaLe because LhaL sLaLe ls sLlll mean" ln many ways, buL Lhe cure for Lhe meanness lles noL ln a tecovety of a yesLerday fashloned by an ldeology of blame, buL ln an oocovety of Lomorrow foughL for ln Lhe face of recalclLranL emergence. 1he enemy" ls noL someLhlng men dld Lo women yesLerday, buL someLhlng LhaL noL-yeL-enough evoluLlon has done Lo Lhem boLh. 13. lottlotcby has Lwo raLher dlfferenL meanlngs ln femlnlsL llLeraLure. (1) lor many radlcal femlnlsLs, paLrlarchy (as male domlnaLlon) has been presenL from day one, from llLerally Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe human race (Allson !aggar Lakes Lhls vlew), women who don'L feel domlnaLed have been bralnwashed Lo accepL Lhelr condlLlon. (2) lor Lhe ecofemlnlsLs, who feel LhaL horLlculLural socleLles domlnaLed by Lhe CreaL MoLher were ln many ways ldeal (ClmbuLas, Llsler), Lhe paLrlarchy refers Lo Lhe shlfL from maLrlfocal (or equlfocal) Lo paLrlfocal modes, and Lhus has been wlLh us for Lhe lasL flve Lhousand years or so. aLrlarchy 1 ls, ln effecL, Lhe famlllzaLlon of Lhe male vla Lhe role of Lhe faLher, and LhaL lndeed has been wlLh us from day one, LhaL was noL avoldable. aLrlarchy 2 occurred across Lhe globe as horLlculLure gave way Lo plow and horse socleLles, whlch selecLed for physlcal sLrengLh/moblllLy, nor was LhaL avoldable elLher, excepL by developmenLal arresL (whlch ls preclsely Lhe socleLles euloglzed by ecofemlnlsLs). ln none of Lhese socleLles were Lhe noosphere and blosphere lnLegraLed, Lhey were slmply undlfferenLlaLed, whlch ls why Lhey are no role models aL all, desplLe Lhe rheLorlcal use Lo whlch Lhey have been puL. 14. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, pp. 104, 121. 13. 1hls Lype of cognlLlon as slmple represenLaLlon" ls, of course, Lhe cognlLlon sLlll favored by emplrlclsL Lheorles of knowlng. 8elng close Lo Lhe body," or close Lo sensaLlons," lL ls a cognlLlon LhaL reglsLers mosLly surfaces and exLerlors, and so lL ls naLurally Lhe cognlLlon favored by Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm (monologlcal, represenLaLlonal). 8uL emplrlclsL tbeotles Lhemselves are acLually maklng masslve use of formal operaLlonal space, whose mechanlsms, belng noL emplrlcally obvlous, are slmply lgnored (or raLher, lmpllclLly assumed even as Lhe Lheory denles Lhelr exlsLence). 16. McCarLhy, ctltlcol tbeoty, p. 230. 17. 1hls doesn'L mean maglc doesn'L serve cruclally lmporLanL funcLlons. ln lLs coltotol capaclLy (LL) lL ls Lhe cenLer of culLural meooloq and voloe, and ln lLs soclol capaclLy (L8), Lhe locus of soclol loteqtotloo. 8adlcal egallLarlans who ob[ecL Lo Lhe Lerm maglcal" lmaglne LhaL Lhe Lerm somehow denles all Lhese lmporLanL funcLlons. 18. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, pp. 111-12. 19. Llsler, 1he Cala LradlLlon, ln ulamond & CrensLeln, keweovloq tbe wotlJ, p. 32. 20. uubos, A qoJ wltblo, quoLed ln novak, 1ao how?. novak's arLlcle ls hlghly recommended. 21. 8oszak, volce of tbe eottb, pp. 226, 69. 1hls book ls dlscussed aL lengLh ln noLe 32 for chapLer 13. 22. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, p. 162. Pabermas and hls assoclaLes are referrlng Lo Lrlbal socleLles Lhe way Lhey flrsL exlsLed, noL necessarlly how Lhey exlsL now. As 8oszak polnLs ouL, As anLhropologlsLs warn us, lL ls always rlsky Lo lnfer from conLemporary Lo prehlsLorlc Lrlbal groups. LxlsLlng Lrlbal socleLles have experlenced as much hlsLory as Lhe resL of Lhe human race . . ." (volce of tbe eottb, p. 77). 1hus, when members of Lrlbal or lndlgenous socleLles exlsLlng Loday are glven lageL's LesL of cognlLlve developmenL, Lhey show a capaclLy for formal operaLlonal Lhlnklng, [usL llke anybody else. 8uL Lhe polnL, as Pabermas demonsLraLes, ls LhaL Lhe flrsL Lrlbal socleLles os o wbole dld noL evldence formal operaLlonal cognlLlon ln any of Lhelr acLual, soclal sLrucLures: noL ln legal codes, noL ln confllcL resoluLlon, noL ln arblLraLlon, noL ln modes of group or collecLlve ldenLlLy, noL ln worldvlews, and so on. WheLher some lndlvlduals dld (or dld noL) reach formal operaLlonal ln Lhose socleLles ls beslde Lhe cenLral polnL, whlch ls LhaL Lhe baslc organlzlng prlnclples of Lhe prlmal socleLles Lhemselves dld noL evldence formal operaLlonal, buL raLher followed Lhe prlmary sLrucLures of preoperaLlonal cognlLlon (and preconvenLlonal dlspuLe arblLraLlon, eLc.). 5ome loJlvlJools JevelopeJ obove, some below, tbot ovetoqe level, buL Lhe baslc average level was clearly preoperaLlonal and preconvenLlonal ln many fundamenLal ways-such ls Lhe concluslon of Lhls llne of research puL forward by Pabermas and assoclaLes (slmllar Lypes of argumenLs are puL forward by Cebser, Campbell, lageL, kohlberg, 8ellah, Lenskl, eLc.). lL ls Lhe Lrlbal sttoctote, noL parLlcular Lrlbal members, LhaL ls belng addressed. AL Lhe same Llme, boLh Pabermas and l belleve LhaL aL leasL some lndlvlduals ln foraglng socleLles developed Lhe capaclLy for raLlonallLy, and l belleve some wenL even furLher lnLo Lhe LransraLlonal (namely, Lhe shamans), lf noL as a permanenL adapLaLlon, Lhen as a peak experlence or alLered sLaLe. We wlll dlscuss Lhese LransraLlonal realms ln chapLer 8. [See loteqtol lsycboloqy.] 23. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, p. 161. 24. lbld., p. 112. 23. lbld., p. 104. When Cary Snyder made Lhe remark, much admlred ln cerLaln ecologlcal clrcles, LhaL when humans lnvenLed gods and goddesses of an oLherworldly" naLure, all of humanlLy's Lroubles began, he beLrayed Lhe ecomascullnlsL preference for a relnLerpreLed Lrlballsm. 1here was no way for Lrlbal soclal organlzaLlon Lo move beyond lsolaLlonlsm wlLhouL flndlng a source of commonallLles beyond klnshlp, and Lhls Lhe myLhlc moLlfs provlded. Lenskl reporLs LhaL mosL foraglng Lrlbes had a carrylng capaclLy of abouL forLy people, and Lhese Lrlbal unlLs could noL be lnLegraLed lnLo larger convenLlonal soclocenLrlc collecLlves wlLhouL Lhe LranscendenLal power of a common myLhlc ancesLry and group ldenLlLy LhaL exLended beyond Lhe llmlLed bonds of klnshlp unlons. lar from belng global," Lrlbal consclousness ls conslderably fragmenLed when lL comes Lo modes of lnLersub[ecLlve bondlng and unlflcaLlon (see also noLe 26 below). 26. ueLalled evldence for Lhese correlaLlons ls presenLed ln up ftom Jeo. As for Lhe naLure of Lhe shamanlc vlslon, Lhe only book l can unreservedly recommend ls Walsh's 1be spltlt of sbomoolsm, an excellenL overvlew of Lhls Lrlcky and dlfflculL Loplc. Walsh ls one of Lhe leadlng llghLs of Lhe Lranspersonal movemenL, and hls balanced and sane overvlew, declslve ln many ways, ls a ma[or conLrlbuLlon Lo Lhe fleld. Walsh's presenLaLlon ls valuable because lL manages boLh Lo acknowledge Lhe ploneerlng splrlLual lnslghLs of shamanlsm and slmulLaneously seL lL ln a larger perspecLlve, an accompllshmenL whlch rlghLly earned lL Lhe pralse of mosL scholars. ln Lhe course of Walsh's succlncL buL comprehenslve presenLaLlon, he polnLs ouL LhaL Lhe shamanlc [ourney (a general phenomenon LhaL ls perhaps Lhe cenLral and mosL deflnlng characLerlsLlc of Lhe complex of shamanlc pracLlces) has usually been assumed Lo be slmply Lhe same general sLaLe as yoglc, 8uddhlsL, mysLlcal, or even schlzophrenlc sLaLes. Walsh flrsL presenLs a horlzonLal" analysls of varlous facLors (such as degree of consclous conLrol, awareness of envlronmenL, concenLraLlon, ablllLy Lo communlcaLe, ldenLlLy, and arousal), all of whlch, Laken LogeLher, qulLe clearly dlfferenLlaLe Lhe shamanlc [ourney from yoglc, 8uddhlsL, mysLlcal, and schlzophrenlc sLaLes (whlch are also qulLe clearly dlfferenLlaLed from each oLher). 1hls approach," he polnLs ouL, allows us Lo move from unldlmenslonal comparlsons Lo mulLldlmenslonal comparlsons and Lo dlsLlngulsh beLween sLaLes wlLh greaLer senslLlvlLy." Walsh doesn'L sLop Lhere. Pavlng clearly dlfferenLlaLed Lhe shamanlc sLaLe ln hls horlzonLal grld, he Lhen applles a verLlcal" or developmenLal grld, uslng sLandard and well-accepLed crlLerla for developmenLal sLages ln general. Pls concluslon ls LhaL of Lhe Lhree ma[or splrlLual sLages of developmenL (subLle, causal, and nondual, each of whlch we wlll lnvesLlgaLe ln chapLer 8), shamans were perhaps Lhe earllesL masLers of Lhe subLle realm." Pe acknowledges LhaL a few shamans very llkely Lranscended Lhelr own paLh and dlsclosed causal and nondual occaslons, buL Lhe cenLral and mosL deflnlng characLerlsLlcs of shamanlsm seem Lo be qulLe clearly subLle-level phenomena. Slnce many forms of yoglc and 8uddhlsL medlLaLlon-by Lhe same crlLerla-reach beyond Lhe subLle and lnLo causal and nondual sLaLes, Walsh's clear lmpllcaLlon ls LhaL Lhese conLemplaLlve endeavors (and oLhers llke Lhem) are ln some ways more advanced (or more dlscloslng of greaLer depLh) Lhan Lhe Lyplcal shamanlc [ourney, and Lhls ranklng" rlled a few culLural relaLlvlsLs, on Lhe one hand, and some shamanlc advocaLes, on Lhe oLher. 8epresenLlng Lhe culLural relaLlvlsLs, Wlnkelman (1993) advanced Lhe reasons LhaL no sLance can be lnLrlnslcally superlor Lo anoLher (excepL, of course, hls sLance, whlch ls clalmed Lo be lnLrlnslcally superlor Lo Lhe alLernaLlves). Wlnkelman Lakes Lhe sLance LhaL lL ls unlversally Lrue LhaL Lhere are no unlversally Lrue sLances. Pavlng Lhus exempLed hls own poslLlon from Lhe crlLlclsm he levels aL oLhers, Wlnkelman Lhen proceeds Lo glve Lhe sLandard fooctlooollst analysls of soclal sysLems, and concludes-as all funcLlonallsL accounLs musL-LhaL lf a socloculLural pracLlce ls oJoptlve-LhaL ls, lf lL possesses fooctloool flt-Lhen lL cannoL be [udged lnferlor Lo any oLher producLlon, because lL flLs [usL as lL ls (and Lhus, he says, Lhe yoglc sysLems would noL have worked ln shamanlc culLures, and Lherefore Lhe yoglc sysLems cannoL be sald Lo be deeper" or more advanced" or any such quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlon). 8uL nobody ls clalmlng LhaL Lhe yoglc (or 8uddhlsL or conLemplaLlve) sysLems would flL lnLo shamanlc culLures (ln facL, Lhey would noL, among numerous reasons, Lhe base of Lhe shamanlc culLures was preconvenLlonal, wlLh a scarce resource of powet, whereas Lhe base of Lhe culLures of Lhe conLemplaLlve LradlLlons was convenLlonal wlLh beglnnlng posLconvenLlonal, whose scarce resources were legal membetsblp and beglnnlng self-recognlLlon). 1hus, Wlnkelman's concluslon, when lL comes solely Lo fooctloool flt, ls qulLe rlghL (and boLh Walsh and l have long agreed wlLh LhaL concluslon, as far as lL goes), Lhe polnL ls, lL ls qulLe lrrelevanL as well for Lhe cenLral lssue. Wlnkelman's purely 8lghL- Pand approach (Lower-8lghL, Lo be speclflc) reduces all valldlLy clalms (of LruLh, LruLhfulness, culLural meanlng, and funcLlonal flL)-reduces all of Lhose Lo fooctloool flt and monologlcal sysLems markers (reduces all LefL-Pand dlmenslons Lo Lower-8lghL Lerms), and so of course hls approach cannoL spoL quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons ln Lhe flrsL place (whlch ls why he musL lmpllcltly bury bls owo value ranklng ln a sLance LhaL expllcltly denles lLs own posslblllLy-Lhe sLandard performaLlve conLradlcLlon ln all merely 8lghL-Pand paLhs). luncLlonal flL, as we have seen, recognlzes only one valldlLy clalm: does Lhe sysLem work or noL? ls lL funcLlonlng adequaLely ln lLs envlronmenL? ls lL adapLlve? ls lL pragmaLlcally funcLlonal? uoes lt wotk? And Lo Lhls slngle, monologlcal valldlLy clalm, funcLlonal flL has only one answer: yes, lL ls worklng, or no, lL ls noL. lf lt ls wotkloq (ln lLs own way, ln lLs own place), Lhen LhaL eoJs tbe Jlscossloo abouL values, abouL whlch sysLem ls hlgher or lower, deeper or shallower, beLLer or worse, more encompasslng or less encompasslng. lf lL ls worklng well, Lhen lL ls as good as any oLher sysLem, and who are we Lo go [udglng furLher? never mlnd LhaL LhaL [udgmenL of unlversal plurallsm ls lLself a joJqmeot LhaL tooks lLs own sLance as beLLer Lhan narrow eLhnocenLrlsm-and rlghLly so!, excepL LhaL, slnce Lhls funcLlonal relaLlvlsLlc sLance collapses all LefL-Pand poolltotlve Jlstloctloos (lncludlng Lhose LhaL ollow lts owo stooce) lnLo 8lghL-Pand funcLlonallsL markers, Lhen lL cannoL even accounL for Lhe LruLh or goodness of lLs own sLance, and Lhus lL Lhoroughly exempts ltself from any open dlscusslon and evaluaLlon of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, of Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslons ln general (lL makes a poorly-LhoughL-ouL LefL-Pand [udgmenL LhaL denles Lhe slgnlflcance of Lhe LefL-Pand ln LoLo). As 1aylor puL lL, Lhls sLance Lherefore burles lLs own Lracks, and Lhen spends lLs Llme denounclng all Lhose who do noL llkewlse conceal Lhelr own poslLlon. lL ls a voloe tookloq (parLly correcL ln my oplnlon) LhaL noneLheless obsLlnaLely and offlclally Jeoles all value ranklng, and Lhe only way lL can do so ls by refuslng Lo acknowledge lLs own now blJJeo value ranklng (lL clalms all values are epolvoleot lf Lhey funcLlonally flL: buL lf all values were really equlvalenL, Lhen LoleranL plurallsm could ln no way be any beLLer Lhan narrow-mlnded eLhnocenLrlsm and raclsm: Lhls poslLlon mlsses lts owo deeper and prlor value [udgmenL-correcL ln my oplnlon-upon whlch lLs plurallsLlc Lolerance necessarlly resLs), and Lhls deep obfuscaLlon Lhen allows lL Lo collopse oll voloes lnLo funcLlonal flL, whereupon lL runs smack lnLo lLs own absurdlLles: lf lL wotks for Lhe nazls, who are we Lo [udge? AuschwlLz, all agree, worked qulLe efflclenLly, and by Wlnkleman's sLaLed crlLerla, we can make no furLher [udgmenLs. 1hus, Lhe bulk of Wlnkelman's crlLlque reduces all values and all valldlLles Lo funcLlonal flL. Pls funcLlonal analysls ls accuraLe enough, as far as lL goes, lL ls [usL, as l lndlcaLed, exLremely parLlal. Pls analysls Lells us LhaL, ln Lhe Lower-8lghL quadranL, shamanlsm was perfecLly adapLed Lo (and funcLlonally flL) Lhe socleLles LhaL grounded lL, and Lhus lL cannoL, ln Lhose Lerms, be [udged lnferlor-and LhaL ls cerLalnly Lrue. 8y Lhe crlLerla of fooctloool flt (leglLlmacy), Lhe yoglc/conLemplaLlve sysLem was lndeed nelLher beLLer nor worse Lhan Lhe shamanlc (acLually, we all agree lL would have been worse: lL would noL have flL). nobody (noL Walsh, noL l) has ever clalmed oLherwlse. 8ot by vlttoolly ooy ctltetlo ftom tbe left-nooJ Jlmeosloos (developmenLal unfoldlng of sLrucLural poLenLlals LhaL dlsplay deeper and wlder quallLaLlve shlfLs), Lhe Lyplcal shamanlc [ourney was a ploneerlng engagemenL LhaL would neverLheless be deepened and wldened ln Lhe conLemplaLlve endeavors LhaL would bulld upon lL ln subsequenL splrlLual evoluLlon, an evoluLlon LhaL would lead from subLle Lo causal Lo nondual dlsclosures (all of whlch wlll be dlscussed ln chapLer 8). [See also loteqtol lsycboloqy.] Wlnkelman hlmself glves an example of whaL he conslders Lo be hls ma[or polnL. A clgareLLe llghLer, he says, may be more advanced Lhan a slmple fllnL, buL Lhere are Llmes when Lhe fllnL ls more pracLlcally useful, so LhaL nelLher llghLer nor fllnL can be lnLrlnslcally beLLer, slnce lf Lhey flL Lhelr pracLlcal/adapLlve funcLlon, Lhey are equally saLlsfacLory. 1haL, of course, ls Lhe slmple funcLlonal flL argumenL, and we have already seen LhaL Walsh (and l) have accepLed LhaL Lrulsm from Lhe sLarL. LeL us Lherefore compleLe Lhe analogy and noLe Lhe oLher (and neglecLed) facL of Wlnkelman's own analogy: as he says, Lhe llghLer ls Lechnologlcally mote oJvooceJ. 1he llghLer lncludes a fllnL, plos oLher more sophlsLlcaLed cognlLlve/Lechnlcal dlscoverles (lL lncludes, for example, a wheel, whlch early foraglng socleLles had noL dlscovered). 1hus Wlnkelman's maln analogy, wlLh whlch he ends hls crlLlque, polnLs Lo Lhese Lwo facLs: Lhere are clrcumsLances where boLh Lhe fllnL and Lhe llghLer were equally approprlaLe, or possessed equal fooctloool flt, ooJ Lhe llghLer ls noneLheless more cognlLlvely and Lechnlcally advanced. Wlnkelman's analysls covers only Lhe former, Walsh's analysls covers boLh, and Lhus Walsh's presenLaLlon supersedes Lhe raLher narrow funcLlonallsL endeavor. Wlnkelman smuggles hls own values lnLo hls analysls by clalmlng (qulLe rlghLly, l belleve) LhaL worldcenLrlc perspecLlvlsm has advanLages ln provldlng mulLlple perspecLlves whlch are mote eocompossloq ooJ complete"-an alLogeLher correcL sLance LhaL he musL noneLheless offlclally deny, slnce mosL of Lhe eLhnocenLrlc culLures he sLudles do noL possess a worldcenLrlc plurallsm, and Lhus he would have Lo admlL LhaL hls (modern, WesLern) sLance ls superlor Lo eLhnocenLrlc narrowness (and Lhls he ls noL allowed Lo do by hls offlclal sLance LhaL no cross-culLural unlversal [udgmenLs of lnLrlnslc merlL are posslble). See noLe 26 Lo chap. 1, p. 334. Many approaches Lo shamanlsm assume LhaL Lhere are, baslcally, ordlnary reallLy on Lhe one hand and mysLlclsm" (or nonordlnary reallLy) on Lhe oLher. 1hls slmpllsLlc dlsLlncLlon (ordlnary vs. nonordlnary) allowed Cary uoore, for example, Lo sLaLe LhaL shamans, yogls and 8uddhlsLs allke are accesslng Lhe same sLaLe of consclousness," and Polger kalwelL Lo sLaLe LhaL Lhe shaman experlences exlsLenLlal unlLy-Lhe samadhl of Lhe Plndus or whaL WesLern splrlLuallsLs and mysLlcs call enllghLenmenL, lllumlnaLlon, unlo mysLlca." 8uL, as Walsh polnLs ouL, 1hese clalms seem Lo be based on relaLlvely superflclal slmllarlLles." Walsh's mulLldlmenslonal grld analysls (boLh horlzonLal and verLlcal) has lrrevocably shaLLered LhaL slmpllsLlc approach. lL ls slmply lmposslble Lo look aL all of hls varlables (whlch dlffer conslderably among Lhe varlous sLaLes) and noL be lmpressed wlLh Lhe gross and subLle dlfferences among Lhese sLaLes. lurLher, armed wlLh Lhls flner analysls, lL ls lmposslble noL Lo spoL developmenLal facLors ln Lhe unfoldlng of Lhese sLaLes Lhemselves: llke everyLhlng else ln Lhe kosmos, Lhey seem Lo grow and evolve: Lhe acorn does noL show up as a fully formed oak on Lhe spoL. And Walsh's horlzonLal and verLlcal analyses, whlle prellmlnary by hls own accounLs, have noneLheless advanced Lhe fleld enormously. 1he second crlLlclsm of Walsh's analysls came from Lhose LheorlsLs who vlew shamanlsm as accesslng Lhe same quallLaLlve levels of depLh dlsclosure as Lhe subsequenL conLemplaLlve sysLems. 8uL by Lhe flner analysls LhaL Walsh glves, lL now seems llkely LhaL Lhe Lyplcal shamanlc [ourney was a ploneerlng breakLhrough lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal/splrlLual domaln, a breakLhrough LhaL dlsclosed levels of depLh undreamL of ln Lhe convenLlonal world, and a depLh LhaL subsequenL conLemplaLlve endeavors would deepen and exLend: bulldlng upon Lhe splrlLual dlsclosures of Lhe greaL shamanlc voyagers, and sLandlng Lhus on Lhe shoulders of glanLs, Lhey would subsequenLly probe even furLher lnLo Lhe exLraordlnary depLhs of Lhe greaL 8eyond. 27. 1he myLhlc-raLlonal" sLrucLure ls a speclflc Lerm for laLe concreLe operaLlonal, buL l also use lL, ln a general sense, Lo refer Lo Lhe raLlonallzaLlon of any of Lhe myLhlc sLrucLures. 28. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, pp. 112-13. 29. lbld., p. 103. 30. lbld. 31. lbld., p. 114. 32. 1he few women's movemenLs LhaL brlefly emerged ln earller socleLles, such as ln Creece, emerged ln preclsely Lhose places where raLlonallLy had also precoclously emerged, and where ego ldenLlLles were also LenLaLlvely emerglng from role ldenLlLles. 8uL slnce Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe blosphere and Lhe noosphere was noL fully compleLe, Lhe blospherlc ldenLlLles evenLually sucked Lhese movemenLs ouL of Lhe noosphere and back lnLo Lhe bodlly or blologlcal deLermlnanLs. And, as l earller menLloned, ln Lhe horLlculLural socleLles where women were a large porLlon of Lhe producLlve work force, a Lype of egallLarlan arrangemenL was lndeed aL work, buL Lhls was secured noL by sLable legal and noospherlc deLermlnanLs, buL slmply by blospherlc conLlngencles. 1he hoe placed power ln women's hands, [usL as Lhe plow would remove lL. 1he blosphere and noosphere had noL been dlfferenLlaLed ln Lhese socleLles, and Lhus Lhe soclal deLermlnanLs always reverLed Lo blospherlc selecLlon ln Llmes of sLress, defense, or Lurmoll. ln no case were Lhey models of whaL an egallLarlan and JlffeteotloteJ/loteqtoteJ socleLy would look llke. (All of Lhls ls covered ln greaL deLall ln volume 2). Also, as we wlll see ln volume 2, Lhe role of lndusLrlallzaLlon (Lhe hlsLorlcal L8 correlaLe of uL egolc-raLlonallLy) was lnsLrumenLal ln llberaLlng human labor (and Lhe female) from Lhe deLermlnanLs of Lhe blosphere (and could go Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon or eco-crlsls). l am ln no way lgnorlng lndusLrlallzaLlon or Lhe L8 quadranL, Lhey are Lhe maln focus of volume 2. As l wlll polnL ouL ln Lhe LexL, l Lhlnk many ecofemlnlsLs feel Lhey have Lo be able Lo polnL Lo a pasL socleLy where women were equal" ln order Lo show LhaL such equallLy ls a posslblllLy of Lhe human condlLlon. 8uL my polnL ls LhaL Lhe posslblllLy ls an emergence, noL a resurrecLlon. And lf we Lake Lhe resurrecLlon model-LhaL a pasL glory was losL and needs Lo be regalned-Lhen we have Lo geL lnLo Lhe blame game: Lhe nasLy men had Lo have Laken lL away, and Lhe women have Lo have been sLuplder and/or weaker Lo have leL lL happen. 1he resurrecLlon (or 8omanLlc) model necesslLaLes Lhe plglflcaLlon of males and Lhe sheeplflcaLlon of females, whereas Lhe emergence (or growLh) model porLrays boLh males and females as essenLlally co-creaLlve. 33. 1here were, of course, many forerunners Lo femlnlsm LhroughouL hlsLory (ln Lurope, Creece, lndla, norLhern Afrlca, eLc.), one mlghL parLlcularly menLlon ChrlsLlne de lsan's 8ook of tbe cltles of loJles. noneLheless, as 8lane Llsler polnLs ouL, lemlnlsm as a modern ldeology dld noL emerge unLll Lhe mlddle of Lhe nlneLeenLh cenLury" (cbollce, p. 163). We wlll reLurn Lo Lhe emergence of Lhe women's movemenL ln chapLer 11. Cf. Lllse 8ouldlng, 1be ooJetslJe of blstoty, Shella 8owboLham, womeo, teslstooce ooJ tevolotloo, Marllyn lrench, 8eyooJ powet: Oo womeo, meo, ooJ motols, Susan M. SLuard (ed.), womeo lo meJlevol soclety, nawal Ll Sadawll, 1be blJJeo foce of ve: womeo lo tbe Atob wotlJ, nancy CoLL and LllzabeLh leck (eds.), A betltoqe of bet owo, Cerda Lerner, 1be mojotlty floJs lts post: llocloq womeo lo blstoty, La lrances 8odgers-8ose (ed.), 1be block womoo, MarLha vlclnus (ed.), 5offet ooJ be stlll: womeo lo tbe vlctotloo oqe, !eanne AchLerberg, womoo os beolet. 34. 1hls clalm of a speclal connecLlon beLween woman, naLure (earLh), and body ls examlned ln deLall ln volume 2. 1he clalm lLself has been puL forward ln a sLrong and poslLlve llghL by many radlcal femlnlsLs and ecofemlnlsLs, and equally condemned by many llberal femlnlsLs. 1he dlfflculLy, as l see lL, ls LhaL lf we are golng Lo make LhaL clalm, Lhen how can lL be done wlLhouL slmulLaneously plgeonhollng" women or slmply relegaLlng Lhem Lo Lhe emoLlonal/feellng domaln? ln oLher words, a way has Lo be found Lo preserve and negaLe Lhe clalm. l belleve Lhls can be done, and volume 2 explores Lhls posslblllLy. lor Lhe momenL, we have Lhe followlng (qulLe dlfferenL) sLances Loward Lhe speclal connecLlon" beLween woman, naLure, and body: Lhe speclal connecLlon (1) acLually exlsLs, (2) was clalmed Lo exlsL by some women for poslLlve value, (3) was clalmed Lo exlsL by some men as a prelude Lo oppresslng LhaL enLlre sphere. Any of Lhose verslons of Lhe speclal connecLlon" wlll sufflce for my commenLs ln Lhe LexL, my own speclflc oplnlon, and Lhe acLual deLalls, are covered ln volume 2. 33. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, p. 114. 36. lbld., p. 197. 37. Cebser's vet-lteseot Otlqlo ls now avallable ln Lngllsh (see blbllography). l have Laken all quoLes ln Lhls secLlon from leuersLeln, 5ttoctotes of cooscloosoess, whlch ls by far Lhe besL presenLaLlon of Cebser's work. leuersLeln also correlaLes Cebser's sLages wlLh my own. 38. All quoLes from leuersLeln, 5ttoctotes of cooscloosoess. [lor Lhe preclse deLalls of vlslon-loglc and lLs posLformal subsLages, see loteqtol lsycboloqy.] 39. Several Lerms ln Lhe Lower-LefL are carrled over from up ftom Jeo and ye to eye: pleromaLlc (physlcal/maLerlal), uroborlc (repLlllan/braln sLem), and Lyphonlc (paleomammallan/llmblc), alLhough Lhese are all used ln a very general sense (boLh here and ln Jeo), Lo lndlcaLe worldvlews where Lhese elemenLs, alLhough by no means Lhe sole deLermlnanL, loom large ln lLs prlmary concerns, ofLen deflnlng lLs mosL general aLmosphere (and someLlmes lLs mosL scarce resource). And Lhe archalc," as lndlcaLed ln Lhe LexL, ls a caLchall phrase for any or all sLrucLures prlor Lhe emergence of concepLs (and someLlmes, as wlLh !ung, Lo refer Lo any of Lhe lnherlLed" or archeLypal" early concepLs, lmages, myLhlc forms, eLc.). As l have prevlously lndlcaLed, lf Lhe reader does noL feel comforLable exLendlng consclousness" (or prehenslon of any sorL) Lo any lower" holons-and consequenLly does noL belleve LhaL Lhey share any sorL of common worldspaces-Lhen one can lnLerpreL Lhe enLlre Lower-LefL quadranL metely as Lhe onLogeneLlc unfoldlng of Loday's human belng: lL sLarLs ouL as a slngle- celled zygoLe (proLoplasmlc), whlch lLself embraces and enfolds molecules, aLoms, and subaLomlc parLlcles (pleromaLlc), and lL Lhen develops Lhrough dlfferenLlaLed llfe funcLlons (vegeLaLlve) and lnLo a repLlllan braln sLem (uroborlc, compleLe wlLh glll sllLs), and a paleomammallan llmblc sysLem (Lyphonlc), and a slowly unfoldlng neocorLex/neurosysLem, wlLh lLs worldvlews Lhen developlng from archalc Lo maglc Lo myLhlc Lo raLlonal. My polnL ls LhaL Lhese Lwo lnLerpreLaLlons (human onLogeny and worldspaces of prevlous holons) are fundamenLally saylng Lhe same Lhlng. Lven blfurcaLlng dlsslpaLlve sLrucLures show sysLems memory" of Lhe paLh of Lhelr bulldup (because Lhey reLreaL along LhaL paLh when Lhey dlssolve, as we saw ln chapLer 2). 1haL human belngs would possess such sysLems memory seems noL even a llLLle surprlslng (memory sLored ln braln cells ls noL Lhe only memory Lhe kosmos has generaLed!). 1he prevlous worldspaces are enfolded ln us, preclsely as our ancesLral sysLems paLhways. l am by no means baslng my argumenL on Lhe followlng example, buL lL ls lllusLraLlve LhaL human belngs glven such convenLlonal-reallLy-blowlng drugs as LSu ofLen reporL memorles noL only of Lhelr own blrLh, buL memorles" of planL and anlmal ldenLlflcaLlon, even aLomlc resonance: Lhe worldspaces are Lhere, enfolded ln us, subholons ln our own makeup, speaklng Lo us sLlll from Lhe depLhs of our own kosmlc famlly phoLo album. 40. 1he upper-8lghL quadranL ls also meanL Lo lnclude and lmply Lhe posslblllLy of Lhe exlsLence of subLler blo-energles LhaL numerous researchers (from Wllllam 1lller Lo Plroshl MoLoyama) feel are bolotcblcolly enveloplng Lhe bodymlnd. 8uL Lhese energles are sLlll extetlot and can be moooloqlcolly percelved wlLh approprlaLe equlpmenL (or subLler senses), and Lhus belong Lo Lhls quadranL (alLhough Lhey would have varlous correlaLes ln Lhe oLher quadranLs as well, as all holons do). Llkewlse, l would llke Lo polnL Lo Lhe work of ua Avabhasa, who has ouLllned several sLages of Lhe growLh and developmenL of human consclousness (whlch we wlll explore ln chapLer 8), wlLhouL reduclng Lhese sLages Lo bodlly componenLs, he noneLheless polnLs ouL LhaL oll of Lhem have bodlly correlaLes (even Lhe supra-lndlvldual causal WlLness has lLs bodlly correlaLe ln Lhe hearL reglon on Lhe rlghL). All of Lhese bodlly correlaLes are upper-8lghL quadranL, and relnforce my cenLral polnL: every holon (no maLLer how LranscendenLal) has Lhese four quadranLs, Lhese four correlaLes. llnally, l would llke especlally Lo slngle ouL Lhe work of Mlchael Murphy, whose book 1be fotote of tbe boJy ls a magnlflcenL sLudy of Lhe bodlly correlaLes of a Lransformlng and evolvlng consclousness-yeL more evldence LhaL all manlfesL holons ooywbete possess Lhe four quadranLs. Murphy almosL slngle-handedly has been represenLlng Lhe greaL lmporLance of Lhe upper- 8lghL quadranL ln human LransformaLlon (wlLhouL merely reduclng human evoluLlon Lo Lhe upper 8lghL). ln volume 2 we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls Loplc of Lhe lnLeracLlon beLween Lhe u8 and uL quadranLs ln boLh convenLlonal and hlgher developmenL. We see Lhls lnLeracLlon noL only ln such flelds as medlcal psychlaLry (where Lhe role of neuroLransmlLLers ln normal funcLlonlng and menLal lllness ls becomlng more obvlous) buL also ln such mysLlcal" areas as psychedellcs and Lhe newly developlng braln/mlnd machlnes" capable of lnduclng a broad range of medlLaLlve" sLaLes. LxacLly whaL all Lhls means wlll be examlned ln deLall. 41. noneLheless, Marx's own wrlLlngs are noL qulLe as reducLlonlsLlc as Lhey are ofLen made ouL Lo be, nor as reducLlonlsLlc as Lhey ofLen became ln pracLlce. ln volume 2, Lhe more subLle aspecLs of hlsLorlcal maLerlallsm are examlned and seL ln Lhe conLexL of evolvlng and developlng worldvlews. 1he greaL sLrengLh of Lhe MarxlsL sysLem on Lhe whole, was LhaL lL kepL allve a Jevelopmeotol scheme of human evoluLlon, and Lhls ls why so many serlous (and nonreducLlonlsLlc) LheorlsLs, from Lenskl Lo Pabermas, have reLurned Lo lL Llme and agaln for useful lnslghLs (all of whlch, as l sald, ls examlned aL lengLh ln volume 2). 42. An example of whlch ls Pabermas's work on unresLralned communlcaLlve exchange, whlch alone can secure oofotceJ oqteemeot on ooy of Lhese lssues ln Lhe flrsL place. We wlll reLurn, ln chapLers 12, 13, and 14, Lo Lhe fallure of mosL of Lhe ecophllosophles Lo deal nonreducLlonlsLlcally wlLh Lhe noosphere and lLs dlsLrlbuLlons and dlsLorLlons. 43. 1haL ls, Lhe overall movemeot of coltotol ttoosfotmotloo ls from Lhe upper-LefL of lndlvldual cognlLlve poLenLlal Lo Lhe Lower-LefL of collecLlve worldvlew, aL flrsL marglnallzed, buL flnally embedded ln Lower-8lghL soclal lnsLlLuLlons, aL whlch polnL Lhese baslc lnsLlLuLlons auLomaLlcally help reproduce Lhe worldvlew (LL) and soclallze Lhe lndlvldual (uL and u8) ln succeedlng generaLlons, acLlng as pacers of LransformaLlon"-a LransformaLlon flrsL sLarLed or begun ln a momenL of lndlvldual creaLlve emergence and Lranscendence. 1hls process ls dlscussed ln much deLall ln volume 2. 44. 1he greaL world rellglons" (Plndulsm, 8uddhlsm, ChrlsLlanlLy, lslam, eLc.) LhaL sLlll exlsL Loday (and whlch we wlll examlne beglnnlng ln chapLer 7) all arose ln Lhe general era of mytblc-lmpetlollsm, and all of Lhem remaln cloLhed Lo some degree ln sotfoce sttoctotes (and eLhlcs) LhaL are Lwo ma[or Lechnologlcal epochs behlnd Lhe Llmes. none of Lhose rellglons (nor Lhe prevlous Lrlbal rellglons) arose from wlLhln a global culLure, and Lhus none of Lhem can (or wlll) speak Lo Lhe rlslng world culLure, however lmporLanL Lhelr speclflc splrlLual pracLlces are (and wlll remaln). 8aLher, as a global culLure ls creaLed, and as lLs surface sLrucLures begln Lo be parL of a common language, Lhen from wlLhln LhaL global culLure wlll arlse Lhe new rellglon(s), speaklng ln parL Lhls global language, worklng wlLhln Lhls common dlscourse, and polnLlng as well beyond lL. 1he era when one speclflc rellglon (say, ChrlsLlanlLy or 8uddhlsm) could move lnLo a new LerrlLory and slmply converL lL (by force of arms or force of LruLhful persuaslon) has long gone. 1haL Lhe new rellglon(s) wlll have rooLs ln Lhe prevlous rellglons l do noL doubL, LhaL Lhey wlll slmply come from any of Lhem l do noL belleve. 1he Lrlbal LarLh rellglons arose wlLhln a worldvlew of maglcal lndlssoclaLlon and upon a Lechno-economlc base of wooden club and spear (wlLh scarce resource of power), and bound LogeLher only klnshlp llneages. 1he greaL world rellglons arose wlLhln a worldvlew of myLhlc and myLhlc-raLlonal, and upon a Lechno-economlc base of horse and plow (herdlng/agrarlan)-wlLh scarce resource of membershlp and Lhus wlLh correspondlng (and very rlgld) hlerarchles of power, membershlp, wealLh, and access Lo Lhe ulvlne. 1he speclflc moral ln[uncLlons ln Lhese rellglons are Lhus ofLen (and sLlll) bound Lo surface sLrucLures LhaL slmply make llLLle (lf any) sense ln Loday's world: don'L eaL pork, don'L eaL wlLh your rlghL hand, don'L sleep on wool, don'L allow women ln Lhe Lemple. . . . Powever much Lhe esoLerlc or mysLlcal componenLs of Lhose rellglons dld lndeed peneLraLe beyond such ouLward exoLerlc forms, noneLheless Lhere are llmlLs Lo [usL how far ouL of one's skln one can [ump. Movlng from Lhe agrarlan Lo Lhe modern, and from Lhe modern Lo Lhe posLmodern: Lhere ls Loo much ground Lo make up, and Loo much dlsLance Lo Lravel, for Lhe LradlLlonal conLemplaLlve endeavors Lo cover on Lhelr own (and Loo much dross LhaL needs Lo [eLLlsoned wlLhouL belng condemned as a slnner). no, Lhe new global rellglon(s) wlll come from wlLhln Lhe new global culLure and wlll noL be anyLhlng slmply grafLed on from Lhe pasL. 1he new global rellglon(s) wlll be aL home ln conLemplaLlve awareness, buL awareness LhaL also speaks naLurally and naLlvely a dlglLal language of Lhe slllcon chlp, and sees lLself as clearly ln vlrLual reallLy as ln Lhe play of Lhe wlnd and raln, lLs global perspecLlve and unlversal plurallsm wlll be Laken for granLed, and SplrlL wlll move Lhrough clrculLs of flber opLlcs as well as Lhrough flesh and blood, and all of LhaL wlll be naLural, and normal, and allve: and from wlLhln LhaL global neLwork Lhe new volces of Lranscendence wlll begln Lo aLLracL Lhose senslLlve Lo Lhe ulvlne. lrom wlLhln Lhe lnformaLlonal neural neLwork of a global commons wlll come Lhe volces lndlcaLlng llberaLlon. 1he varlous new Age movemenLs clalm Lo herald such a worldwlde consclousness revoluLlon. 8uL, as Lhls book wlll make obvlous, l Lhlnk, Lhese movemenLs are lnsufflclenL: Lhey lack any susLalned vlslon-loglc of botb exLerlor and lnLerlor dlmenslons, Lhey lack a conslsLenL Lechnology of access Lo hlgher lnLerlor dlmenslons, Lhey lack a means (and even a Lheory) of soclal lnsLlLuLlonallzaLlon (ln oLher words, Lhey lack an all-four-quadranL analysls and engagemenL). Moreover, mosL new Age and new paradlgm approaches, desplLe Lhelr clalms Lo be posL-CarLeslan, are slmply exLendlng Lhe Lypes of phenomena descrlbed as posslble ln Lhe CarLeslan world, Lhey do noL declslvely challenge Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. (We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls Loplc frequenLly LhroughouL Lhe book.) As such, mosL of Lhese new Age movemenLs do noL engage Lhe raLlonal worldvlew ln a way LhaL can Lranscend and lnclude lL, raLher, many of Lhem end up regresslng Lo varlous forms of myLhlc-lmperlallsm (and even Lrlbal maglc). 1hese movemenLs puL a premlum on a self-acLuallzaLlon LhaL all Loo ofLen reverLs Lo maglcal egolsm, and Lhls maglcal narclsslsm ls worked lnLo a myLhology of world LransformaLlon LhaL barely conceals lLs lmperlallsLlc LhrusL. 43. Pabermas, commoolcotloo, pp. 164-63. 46. lbld., pp. 163-6. 47. lor an lnLeresLlng dlscusslon of Lhese Lhemes, see Laszlo's 1be cbolce: volotloo ot extloctloo? As usual, Laszlo's presenLaLlon ls admlrably sLralghLforward and Lo Lhe polnL, and we can all applaud when Laszlo says (p. 109) LhaL Lhe culLure of lnLerexlsLence [whlch he advocaLes] has an lncluslve loglc: lL ls you ooJ l, Lhey ooJ we. lL replaces Lhe loglc of egoLlsm and excluslon, whlch says me ot you, we ot Lhey. 1he new loglc can enable people and socleLles Lo play posLlve sum wln-wln games. . . . 1he greaL advanLage of Lhe culLure of lnLerexlsLence ls LhaL, wlLh lLs lncluslve loglc, lL could harmonlze Lhe currenL forms and faceLs of dlverslLy." lL could lndeed, Lhe lncluslve loglc" ls vlslon-loglc. 8uL Laszlo ls sllenL on Lhe lnLerlor sLages leadlng up Lo Lhls vlslon-loglc, and Lhus Lhe cruclal sLeps necessary for Lhe greaL soluLlon" remaln obscure. Laszlo ls qulLe rlghL, l belleve, when he says, 1hough Lhese facLors are sub[ecLlve and culLural [LefL Pand] raLher Lhan ob[ecLlve and physlcal [8lghL Pand], we musL noL lgnore Lhem nor underesLlmaLe Lhelr lmporL. 1he more a person ls developed (noL, of course, merely ln Lhe economlc sense, buL ln Lhe sense of belng a maLure and responslble clLlzen), Lhe more hls or her socleLy has a chance Lo develop" (pp. 140-41). 8uL abouL Lhls more developed," we hear noLhlng more. l am very sympaLheLlc wlLh Laszlo's general presenLaLlon ln 1be cbolce (ln parLlcular, hls emphasls on Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslon ls ln sharp conLrasL wlLh hls prevlous and almosL excluslve emphasls on 8lghL-Pand sysLems Lheory, even lf he conLlnues Lo frame hls LhoughLs ln ob[ecLlvlsLlc and sysLems hollsm, and l enLlrely supporL hls noLlon of modernlzaLlon, noL WesLernlzaLlon"). 8uL wlLhouL a clearer undersLandlng of Lhe acLual sLages of personal (uL) and culLural (LL) LransformaLlon LhaL resulL ln a plurallsLlc worldcenLrlc awareness capable of lnLerexlsLence," Laszlo's call for educaLlon," communlcaLlon," and more lnformaLlon" remalns unfulfllled. 48. lor a parLlcularly chllllng accounL of Lhls reLrlballzaLlon and lLs growlng lnfluence ln Lhe lmmedlaLe fuLure, see 8oberL kaplan's 1he comlng anarchy" ln Lhe lebruary 1994 Atlootlc. kaplan also sees Lhe world headlng Loward globallzaLlon, buL wlLh an exLended LranslLlon perlod of reLrlballzaLlon: Whereas Lhe dlsLanL fuLure wlll probably see Lhe emergence of a raclally hybrld, globallzed man, Lhe comlng decades wlll see us more aware of our dlfferences Lhan of our slmllarlLles." kaplan Lles hls Lhesls Lo Lhe work of van Creveld's 1toosfotmotloo of wot, Pomer-ulxon's envlronmenLal sLudles, and PunLlngLon's LhoughLs on culLure clash: under varlous lnLense envlronmenLal and demographlc sLresses, numerous sLaLe mechanlsms of governance wlll fragmenL lnLo eLhnlc Lrlbal bands. And, kaplan polnLs ouL (quoLlng van Creveld), fuLure armed confllcL wlll have more ln common wlLh Lhe sLruggles of prlmlLlve Lrlbes Lhan wlLh large-scale convenLlonal war" (l.e., regresslon Lo Lrlbal warfare prlor Lo Lhe sLaLe warfare abouL whlch von ClausewlLz Lheorlzed). 8uL wot because, unless resLralned, a large number of humans love Lhe Lhrlll of baLLle (men Lo flghL, women Lo offer up sons and husbands Lo Lhe glory of Lhe baLLle). van Creveld's book beglns by demollshlng Lhe noLlon LhaL men don'L llke Lo flghL." As van Creveld polnLs ouL, 1hroughouL hlsLory, for every person who has expressed hls horror of war Lhere ls anoLher who found ln lL Lhe mosL marvelous of all Lhe experlences LhaL are vouchsafed Lo man, even Lo Lhe polnL LhaL he laLer spenL a llfeLlme borlng hls descendenLs by recounLlng hls explolLs." And wlLh exLremely acuLe lnslghL, van Creveld knows exacLly why: 8y compelllng Lhe senses Lo focus Lhemselves on Lhe here and now, baLLle can cause a man Lo Lake hls leave of Lhem." And Lhus, kaplan polnLs ouL, As anybody who has had experlence wlLh CheLnlks ln Serbla, Lechnlcals ln Somalla, 1onLons MacouLes ln PalLl, or soldlers ln Slerra Leone can Lell you, ln places where Lhe WesLern LnllghLenmenL has noL peneLraLed and where Lhere has always been mass poverLy, people flnd llberaLlon ln vlolence." And only when people aLLaln a cerLaln economlc, educaLlonal, and culLural sLandard ls Lhls LralL Lranqulllzed." As Lrlballzed warfare lncreases: 8ecause Lhe radlus of LrusL wlLhln Lrlbal socleLles ls narrowed Lo one's lmmedlaLe famlly and guerllla comrades [largely preconvenLlonal and egocenLrlc], Lhen Lruces arranged wlLh one commander may be broken lmmedlaLely by anoLher." Llkewlse, when culLures [eLhnlclLles], raLher Lhan sLaLes, flghL, Lhen culLural and rellglous monumenLs are weapons of war, maklng Lhem falr game." l deny Lhe posslblllLy of none of LhaL, lL ls alLogeLher conslsLenL wlLh regresslon downward along Lhe same broad llnes of prevlous LransformaLlon upward. 1rlballzaLlon" ln Loday's world ls bad," where prevlously (and prehlsLorlcally) lL was Lhe norm (was good"), preclsely because lL ls oow regresslve: lL now moves below Lhe horlzon of unlversal perspecLlvlsm, whereas prevlously lL was slmply sLruggllng Lo geL up Lo lL. And LhaL teqtessloo lnfecLs noL [usL soclal movemenLs, lL ls becomlng rampanL ln many Lypes of new paradlgms," from Lrlbal eco-wlsdom" Lo maglcal and myLhlcal new Age lmperlallsms, Lo blocenLrlc and ecocenLrlc lmmerslon ln preclsely Lhe sphere LhaL cannoL lLself Lake unlversal perspecLlvlsm. All of Lhese, of course, are slncerely offered as global" salvaLlon, buL mosL of Lhem are slmply spllnLers of a wldespread, regresslve reLrlballzaLlon. CPA1L8 6. MAClC, M?1P, Anu 8L?Cnu 1. As we wlll see ln much greaLer deLall ln chapLer 8, SplrlL ls noL merely or even especlally Lhe summlL of Lhe scale of evoluLlon, or some sorL of ulvlne omega polnL (alLhough LhaL ls parL of Lhe sLory). SplrlL ls preemlnenLly Lhe empLy Cround, or groundless LmpLlness, fully presenL aL each and every sLage of evoluLlon, as Lhe openness ln whlch Lhe parLlcular sLage unfolds, as well as Lhe subsLance of LhaL whlch ls unfolded. SplrlL ttoosceoJs and locloJes Lhe world: ttoosceoJs, ln Lhe sense LhaL lL ls prlor Lo Lhe world, prlor Lo Lhe 8lg 8ang, prlor Lo any manlfesLaLlon, locloJes, ln Lhe sense LhaL Lhe world ls noL oLher Lo SplrlL, form ls noL oLher Lo LmpLlness. ManlfesLaLlon ls noL aparL from" SplrlL buL an acLlvlLy of SplrlL: Lhe evolvlng kosmos ls SplrlL-ln-acLlon. Many ecophllosophers, wlLh a preference for a Cod LhaL can be seen wlLh Lhelr emplrlcal eyes, aLLempL Lo deny any LranscendenLal aspecL Lo SplrlL and palnL lL lnsLead ln LoLally lmmanenL Lerms, and Lhus compleLely confuse flnlLe and lnflnlLe, or confuse Lhe lormless wlLh any merely passlng and flnlLe form (confuse Lhe nlrmanakaya and uharmakaya). 1hey ofLen polnL Lo Splnoza as supporLlng Lhls poslLlon, whlch ls lncredlble. Splnoza malnLalned LhaL SplrlL has lnflnlLe dlmenslons, only Lwo of whlch we can know (exLenslon and LhoughL), so LhaL SplrlL lnflnlLely ttoosceoJs yeL uLLerly locloJes Lhe manlfesL world-a verslon of Lhe poslLlon l am presenLlng here. Cn Lhe oLher hand, Lhose who emphaslze ooly Lranscendence or ooly lmmanence are exLremely duallsLlc and dlvlslve ln Lhelr onLology, whlch Lherefore ofLen degeneraLes lnLo ldeology. 1he only-lmmanence sLance ls now qulLe popular, lL flLs well wlLh Lhe common ecomascullnlsL preference for Lrlballsms and Lhe common ecofemlnlsL preference for horLlculLure: emplrlcal lndlssoclaLlon mlsLaken for Lranscendence-and-lncluslon. 2. 1echnlcally, preop and conop are one broad sLage, buL lL ls cusLomary Lo LreaL Lhem separaLely slnce many of Lhelr characLerlsLlcs are qulLe dlfferenL. 1he ages of emergence are slmply averages. 3. 8lanck and 8lanck lnLroduced Lhe Lerm folctom of Jevelopmeot Lo refer Lo Lhe separaLlon-lndlvlduaLlon of Lhe lnfanL's self from Lhe emoLlonal (m)oLher, based especlally on Lhe ploneerlng work of MargareL Mahler. ln Wllber eL al., 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess, l suggesLed LhaL Lhls fulcrum was buL one of numerous qulLe dlsLlncL fulcrums, each represenLlng a quallLaLlvely new and dlsLlncL dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon (or Lranscendence-and-lncluslon). Lach of Lhese fulcrums (and l generally ouLllne nlne or Len of Lhe mosL lmporLanL fulcrums) esLabllshes a new, lmporLanL, and very dlfferenL type of self boooJoty. A fallure Lo grasp Lhese dlfferenL boundarles (and Lhelr very dlfferenL funcLlons) leads Lo whaL l have called Lhe slngle-boundary fallacy, a fallacy LhaL has hobbled many psychologlcal Lheorles and mosL mysLlcal/psychologlcal Lheorles (as we wlll see ln subsequenL chapLers, see, for example, noLe 32 for chap. 13, and noLe 17 for chapLer 14). lor sLudenLs of Lhls approach Lhe Lechnlcal correlaLlons are as follows: 1he flrsL fulcrum (l-1) covers Lhe early sensorlmoLor perlod (0-1 yr), beglnnlng wlLh Lhe lnlLlal prlmary lndlssoclaLlon or proLoplasmlc consclousness," whose worldvlew ls archalc," and ls resolved wlLh Lhe flrsL dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe physlcal self from Lhe physlcal envlronmenL (haLchlng"), and ls flnally consolldaLed wlLh Lhe aLLalnmenL of physlcal ob[ecL consLancy (around 18 monLhs, aL whlch polnL Lhe second fulcrum ls under way). l-1 ls parLlcularly concerned wlLh Lhe esLabllshmenL of physlcal boundarles (Lhe physlcal self dlfferenLlaLed from physlcal ob[ecLs). 1he second fulcrum (l-2), Lhe phanLasmlc-emoLlonal, covers Lhe laLe sensorlmoLor perlod and Lhe beglnnlng of preop (1-3 yrs), and beglns wlLh an lnlLlal lndlssoclaLlon of emoLlonal self and emoLlonal ob[ecLs (archalc-maglc"), and ls resolved wlLh Lhe general aLLalnmenL of emoLlonal or llbldlnal ob[ecL consLancy (24-36 monLhs, dlfferenLlaLlon of emoLlonal self and oLher, Lhe esLabllshmenL of emoLlonal boundarles). 1he Lhlrd fulcrum (l-3) beglns wlLh Lhe lnlLlal lndlssoclaLlon of menLal slgns and referenLs (and mlnd-body lndlssoclaLlon), covers Lhe preop perlod (2-7 yrs), and ls resolved wlLh Lhe emergence of concepLual ob[ecL consLancy (3-7 yrs, Lhe esLabllshmenL of concepLual self boundarles). 1hls perlod ls dlvlded, wlLh lageL, lnLo early preop (2-4 yrs), governed by lmages and symbols (wlLh a worldvlew of maglc"), and laLe preop (4-7 yrs), governed by concepLs (wlLh a worldvlew of maglc-myLhlc"). 1he nexL Lhree fulcrums (l-4, l-3, and l-6) refer Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlons LhaL occur durlng conop, formop, and vlslon- loglc (whlch we wlll explore laLer ln Lhls chapLer). 1he worldvlews of conop are dlvlded lnLo myLhlc and myLhlc-raLlonal, formop lnLo raLlonal and raLlonal-exlsLenLlal, and vlslon-loglc lnLo exlsLenLlal and exlsLenLlal-psychlc, all of whlch we wlll lnvesLlgaLe laLer. Plgher or Lranspersonal fulcrums (l-7 Lhrough l-9) wlll be dealL wlLh ln chapLers 7 and 8. lolctoms, ln oLher words, refers Lo Lhe self-stoqes and Lhelr dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon as Lhey negoLlaLe Lhe boslc woves or levels of consclousness developmenL (whlch Lhemselves are unfoldlng developmenLally, and are necessary buL noL sufflclenL for self-sLages). wotlJvlews (archalc, maglc, maglc-myLhlc, myLhlc, eLc.) refers Lo Lhe cognlLlve map of Lhe world creaLed aL each baslc level or wave (boLh lndlvldually and collecLlvely). nelLher lageL nor Lhe psychoanalyLlc developmenLallsLs (such as Mahler) expllclLly dlsLlngulsh Lhe flrsL and second fulcrums, buL raLher Lhey LreaL Lhem LogeLher as one general process of dlfferenLlaLlon (separaLlon-lndlvlduaLlon). noneLheless, Lhelr own daLa clearly suggesL LhaL Lhese are Lwo very dlfferenL sLages or fulcrums of self developmenL, Lhe flrsL referrlng Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe physlcal self and physlcal envlronmenL (a physlcal boundary), Lhe second Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe emoLlonal self and emoLlonal envlronmenL (an emoLlonal boundary). 8efore lnfanLs have negoLlaLed Lhe flrsL fulcrum, Lhey are lmmersed ln proLoplasmlc lndlssoclaLlon, afLer Lhe flrsL fulcrum, Lhey can clearly dlfferenLlaLe physlcal self and oLher, and clearly ground Lhemselves ln physlcal consLancles, buL Lhey are Lhen ln Lhe lnlLlal sLages of Lhe second fulcrum, marked by emotloool loJlssoclotloo (a lack of dlfferenLlaLlon beLween emoLlons of self and emoLlons of oLher). lL ls Lhe preponderance of such lndlssoclaLlons and adherences" ln boLh fulcrums LhaL lead Lhese researchers Lo LreaL Lhe flrsL Lwo fulcrums as belng qulLe slmllar, buL Lhe sLaLemenLs of boLh of Lhese researchers make lL very clear LhaL Lhey recognlze Lwo dlfferenL movemenLs here, wlLh, among oLher Lhlngs, dlfferenL posslble paLhologles (psychoLlc and borderllne). CLher researchers, such as kernberg, expllclLly recognlze Lhese dlfferenL sLages. 8uL all orLhodox researchers sLop Lhelr research aL elLher Lhe flfLh or slxLh fulcrum, and lgnore Lhe Lranspersonal fulcrums (7-9). Llkewlse, aL Lhe oLher end of Lhe specLrum, Lhere ls a large body of (very conLroverslal) Lheory and evldence for Lhe lnLrauLerlne sLaLe and Lhe blrLh process (and blrLh Lrauma). WlLhouL enLerlng lnLo Lhe lnLrlcacles of Lhls debaLe, l have slmply allowed LhaL some of Lhls prenaLal research mlghL be genulne, and l have referred Lo Lhe whole perlod from concepLlon Lo blrLh as fulcrum-0. 1hls fulcrum follows Lhe some qeoetol feototes as any oLher fulcrum, namely: (1) an lnlLlal sLaLe of undlfferenLlaLlon or lndlssoclaLlon, (2) a perlod of lnLense and ofLen dlfflculL dlfferenLlaLlon (ln Lhls case, Lhe blrLh process/Lrauma lLself), and (3) a perlod of posLdlfferenLlaLlon consolldaLlon and lnLegraLlon (ln Lhls case, posLuLerlne), ln preparaLlon for Lhe nexL fulcrum or round of dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon (ln Lhls case, l-1). And, as always, a developmenLal malformaLlon ot ooy of tbe speclflc sobpboses of a fulcrum (subphase 1, 2, or 3, l.e., a malformaLlon or dlsrupLlon aL Lhe lndlssoclaLlon, dlfferenLlaLlon, or lnLegraLlon subphase) can resulL ln very speclflc paLhologles LhaL cottespooJ wltb tbe cbotoctetlstlcs of tbot sobpbose fotmotloo (and malformaLlon). (All of Lhese general feaLures of a fulcrum are examlned ln deLall ln 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess, chaps. 3, 4, and 3). ln Lhe case of l-0, a flxaLlon aL Lhe fuslon/lndlssoclaLlon subphase mlghL predlspose an lndlvldual Lo somaLlc mysLlcal" fuslon wlLh Lhe world, a dlsrupLlon aL Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon subphase mlghL dlspose Lhe lndlvldual Lo helllsh no-exlL" vlLal shock, lnLense sadomasochlsLlc acLlvlLy, lnvoluLlonal depresslon, and flxaLlon Lo Lhe lnLegraLlon sLage mlghL lead Lo deluslonal messlanlc complexes (Lo glve only a brlef, random sampllng of posslble paLhologles aL Lhese subphases of l-0, l wlll reLurn Lo Lhls research ln a momenL). Llkewlse, Lhe formaLlons (and malformaLlons) aL Lhls l-0 would, os ls tbe cose wltb oll sttoctototloo, lncllne (buL noL cause) sobsepoeot developmenL Lo LllL ln Lhe same dlrecLlon: Lhe blrLh Lrauma, for example, could lnfecL (and malform) subsequenL developmenL wlLh lLs own paLhologlcal scars. 1hus, a person wlLh profound no-exlL" dlfferenLlaLlon subphase malformaLlon mlghL hlL subsequenL developmenLal fulcrums wlLh a sLrong predlsposlLlon Lo LllL tbose fulcrums ln Lhe dlrecLlon of depresslon, wlLhdrawal, lnhlblLlons, eLc. So LhaL, ln general, a fulcrum formaLlon (and malformaLlon) would, raLher llke a graln of sand ln Lhe formaLlon of a pearl, dlnL or crlnkle" subsequenL developmenLal layers, formlng a complex" of slmllar, layered malformaLlons, Lhe core of whlch mlghL lndeed reach back Lo a parLlcular l-0 subphase. ln Lhls regard, Lhe research of SLanlslav Crof has led hlm Lo posLulaLe Lhree broad realms of Lhe human unconsclous," whlch he refers Lo as lreudlan or blographlcal (or Lhe lndlvldual unconsclous), 8anklan or exlsLenLlal (Lhe psychologlcal maLrlces lald down by Lhe acLual process of blrLh and Lhe blrLh Lrauma), and Lhe Lranspersonal domalns (whlch lnvolve collecLlve, supra- lndlvldual archeLypes, experlences, lnslghLs, eLc.). Crof malnLalns LhaL ln several lnsLances of lnLense sLress (especlally physlcally or drug-lnduced), Lhe lndlvldual Lends Lo regress Lhrough Lhe lreudlan or blographlcal sLages (experlenclng lndlvldual psychodynamlc maLerlal) Lo Lhe 8anklan blrLh sLages (reexperlenclng Lhe acLual blrLh Lrauma ln lLs several ma[or subsLages), Lhen occaslonally enLerlng Lhe Lranspersonal domalns (experlenclng a broad range of mysLlcal, collecLlve, archeLypal, supra-lndlvldual, Lransegolc phenomena). Crof places parLlcular emphasls on Lhe second broad realm, Lhe 8anklan/blrLh maLrlces. 1hese baslc perlnaLal maLrlces" (8Ms) follow essenLlally Lhe fulcrum-0 subphases as l brlefly ouLllned Lhem: 8M l ls subphase 1, or Lhe oceanlc lndlssoclaLlon sLaLe, boLh ln lLs undlsLurbed and dlsLurbed sLaLes. 8M ll ls Lhe beglnnlng of subphase 2, or Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon process, wlLh an lnLenslflcaLlon of cosmlc engulfmenL" and no-exlL" helllsh pressure, eLc. 8M lll ls Lhe laLLer sLage of subphase 2, wlLh Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe expulslon from Lhe womb, an lnLenslflcaLlon of volcanlc" pleasure/paln, dlsmembermenL dlsLress, ecsLaLlc/masochlsLlc, eLc. And 8M lv ls subphase 3, Lhe posLblrLh, posLparLum neonaLal sLaLe, whlch musL lnLegraLe lLs newly separaLe bodlly belng aparL from Lhe uLerus (alLhough Lhls self-sense sLlll cannoL sLably dlsLlngulsh lLs own self-boundarles from Lhe Lhose of Lhe physlcal world around lL: lL ls now beglnnlng l-1). Crof has also presenLed puLaLlve evldence (sLlll qulLe conLroverslal) LhaL Lhese baslc perlnaLal maLrlces form a laLLlcework grld upon whlch subsequenL psychologlcal developmenL wlll unfold. All l would llke Lo polnL ouL ls LhaL hls 8Ms (and Lhe subsequenL CCLx sysLems-or sysLems of condensed experlence") are noL lncompaLlble wlLh Lhe model presenLed here (Lhe subphases of l- 0 and Lhe sLandard paLLern of subsequenL developmenLal lnfluence). Should research supporL Crof's model, lLs speclflc sLages can be accommodaLed. 1heorlsLs have ofLen noLed LhaL Crof's map and my own share some common feaLures buL do noL maLch up, as lL were, on Lhe chronologlcal aspecLs (or Lhe sequence" of Lhe unconsclous dlsclosures). 8uL Lhls ls slmply because Crof's map ls recovered from a teqtesslve serles of paLLerns: under drug or sLress lnducLlon, lndlvlduals teqtess from ordlnary ego Lo lreudlan (and chlldhood) Lraumas (or recovery of blographlcal maLerlal), and from Lhere conLlnue teqtessloo lnLo blrLh Lrauma and lnLrauLerlne sLaLes, aL whlch polnL Lhey may cease ldenLlfylng wlLh Lhe physlcal bodymlnd alLogeLher and Lhus fall lnLo Lranspersonal, supra-lndlvldual sLaLes. Crof's Lyplcal sequence" ls Lhus: everyday ego, lreudlan, blrLh, Lranspersonal. My map, on Lhe oLher hand, ls based prlmarlly on broad-scale qtowtb and developmenL paLLerns, and Lhus lL runs ln Lhe oLher dlrecLlon, so Lo speak, buL covers Lhe same general LerrlLory: my sequence" ls blrLh Lrauma Lo lreudlan Lo ordlnary ego Lo Lranspersonal (slnce Lhese cover Lhe order ln whlch Lhese domalns acLually enLer awareness as a sLable adapLaLlon and noL as a Lemporary experlence). Powever, uslng my map, lf Lyplcal lndlvlduals aL Lhe ordlnary ego lndeed begln Lo teqtess, Lhls map would predlcL Lhe some qeoetol sepoeoce as Lhe Crof map: lL would predlcL ego, lreudlan, blrLh, Lranspersonal. 1here are, however, a few lmporLanL dlfferences. 8eLween Lhe ego and Lhe Lranspersonal (ln Lhe dlrecLlon of growLh, noL regresslon) l place Lhe general exlsLenLlal (cenLaur) level (l-6), and Lhls ls noL aL all Lo be confused wlLh Crof's exlsLenLlal" perlnaLal maLrlces (subphase 2 of l-0), alLhough Lhey ofLen lnLermlx," so Lo speak. ln Crof's sLandard sequence," Lhe 8M separaLe Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe Lranspersonal, whereas ln Lhe growLh and developmenL sequence, Lhe dlvldlng llne," as lL were, ls Lhe cenLaur (as we wlll see ln subsequenL chapLers). 1hls has led some LheorlsLs Lo aLLempL Lo slmply equaLe Lhe 8M and Lhe cenLaur, and Lhls wlll noL do: Lhe cenLaur ls Lhe enLrace Lo Lhe Lranspersonal Lhrough Lhe fronL door, Lhe 8M, Lhrough Lhe back door, so Lo speak. Some exlsLenLlal crlses" mlghL lndeed reacLlvaLe a perlnaLal maLrlx (or vlce versa), as Crof malnLalns, buL Lhe general exlsLenLlal crlsls of l-6 ls caused, noL by Lhe separaLlon of moLher and lnfanL, buL by Lhe separaLlon of sub[ecL and ob[ecL, whlch wlll occur afLer even Lhe mosL ldylllc of blrLh clrcumsLances, and tbls exlsLenLlal crlsls cannoL be allevlaLed by regresslon Lo blrLh experlences, buL only by Lhe undolng or Lranscendlng of Lhe gross sub[ecL/ob[ecL duallLy, and alLhough Lhls Lranscendence mlghL happen as a byproducL of Lhe experlenced blrLh regresslon, Lhe Lranscendence lLself ls noL cooseJ by LhaL regresslon nor ls LhaL regresslon oecessoty for LhaL Lranscendence. [See 1be eye of spltlt, chap. 7, for an exLenslve crlLlque of Crof's model.] l wlll reLurn Lo Lhese lssues (and Lo Crof's work) afLer Lhe Lranspersonal dlmenslons have been lnLroduced ln Lhe LexL, and plnpolnL a few more of our agreemenLs as well as our dlfferences. See noLe 17 for chap. 14. 4. l am glvlng, ln Lhls chapLer, Lhe developmenL of Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, each developmenL ln Lhls quadranL wlll have correlaLes ln Lhe oLher Lhree quadranLs. 1he oLher lndlvldual quadranL, Lhe upper 8lghL, conslsLs parLlcularly of Lhe correlaLlve changes ln braln physlology as each of Lhe lnLerlor (lageLlan, lreudlan, !unglan) sLages ls negoLlaLed, and ln some cases, Lhe physlologlcal componenL can be domlnanL. SLrong (someLlmes concluslve) evldence has been found for geneLlc predlsposlLlons ln psychoses, manlc-depresslon, obsesslve-compulslve dlsorder, and varlous phoblas (wlLh oLher dysfuncLlons, no doubL, Lo follow). ln Lheses cases, geneLlcs loads Lhe gun, developmenL pulls Lhe Lrlgger. A geneLlc predlsposlLlon LllLs Lhe ouLcome of a parLlcular fulcrum Loward paLhology, and LhaL geneLlc facLor ls ofLen Lhe ma[or facLor ln Lhe syndrome, noneLheless, slnce noL everybody wlLh Lhe gene(s) for, say, manlc-depresslon develops Lhe syndrome, developmenLal facLors sLlll come lnLo play. Llkewlse, Lhese syndromes (and many oLhers) can be LreaLed wlLh medlcaLlon. 1haL ls exacLly parL of Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh. 8uL whaL LhaL medlcal approach (ln and by lLself) does noL do ls furLher a person's self-undersLandlng: lL does noL help a person lotetptet Lhelr own depLh and Lhus come Lo some form of self-clarlLy and self-lnslghL and self-responslblllLy (all of Lhose are Lhe LefL-Pand paLh). l am a sLrong supporLer of boLh paLhs, [udlclously balanced. MosL menLal healLh workers lnLulLlvely undersLand LhaL boLh paLhs (medlcaLlon and Lherapy) are useful and lmporLanL, buL Lhere ls a consLanL Lenslon beLween Lhe Lwo as Lo whlch ls really real" and mosL lmporLanL. My polnL ls LhaL nelLher one coo be reduced Lo Lhe oLher, and a Lhus [udlclous balance ls noL [usL a pragmaLlc concesslon buL a LheoreLlcal necesslLy. Llkewlse, Lhese lndlvldual developmenLs unfold ln correlaLlon wlLh (and ln Lhe conLexL of) Lhe soclal and culLural holons of Lhe lndlvldual. CulLural meanlngs (LL) and soclal lnsLlLuLlons (L8) powerfully lnLeracL wlLh Lhe unfoldmenL of lndlvldual paLLerns (medlaLed prlnclpally Lhrough Lhe famlly sLrucLure). 1hls shows why adapLaLlon Lo convenLlonal reallLy" ls noL a very good yardsLlck of menLal healLh, because Lhe socleLy lLself mlghL be slck." CulLural meanlngs LhaL flagranLly vlolaLe Lhe fabrlc of Lhe kosmos (from nazlsm Lo Serblan eLhnlc cleanslng) are noLhlng LhaL one would parLlcularly wanL Lo adapL Lo ln Lhe flrsL place, llkewlse, allenaLed and allenaLlng Lechno-economlc lnfrasLrucLures (from acLual slavery Lo slave wages) place a severe sLraln on Lhe lndlvldual holon and lLs developmenL. 1o say LhaL ln Lhe modern world slavery dlsrupLs braln chemlsLry, devasLaLes self- esLeem, embodles slck culLural meanlngs, and ls a dehumanlzlng lnsLlLuLlon-ls Lo say Lhe same Lhlng, Lhey are four quadranLs of Lhe same holon (once Lhe world soul has reached a collecLlve level of raLlonal plurallsm, ln myLhlc sLrucLures, slavery ls Lhe normaLlve rule). 1hus, all four quadranLs are cruclally lmporLanL ln Lhe developmenL of Lhe lndlvldual." 1haL l am cenLerlng, ln Lhls chapLer, on Lhe upper-LefL quadranL does noL mean LhaL l am ln any way prlvlleglng Lhls quadranL. llnally, menLal healLh" can be deflned as adapLaLlon Lo reallLy" lf, and only lf, we have an adequaLe deflnlLlon of reallLy ln Lhe flrsL place. cooveotloool teollty wlll never do as a yardsLlck, as we sald, because adapLaLlon Lo belng a happy nazl ls no menLal healLh aL all. 1he very deflnlLlon of menLal healLh ls Lhus lnescapably phllosophlcal Lo Lhe core (whlch ls someLhlng medlcal pracLlLloners and 8lghL-Pand paLh speclallsLs slmply do noL wanL Lo geL lnvolved wlLh). 8uL pursulng Lhls lnescapable llne of LhoughL brlngs us Lo a very laLonlc concluslon: menLal healLh ls aLLunemenL wlLh Lhe kosmos-a kosmos LhaL lncludes maLLer, body, mlnd, soul, and splrlL. AnyLhlng less Lhan LhaL ottooemeot ls paLhologlcal. A culLure LhaL has less Lhan LhaL aLLunemenL ls a slck culLure. lf laLo, loLlnus, and Lhe vasL ma[orlLy of Lhe world's phllosopher- sages are rlghL, and all Lhese dlmenslons (maLLer, body, mlnd, soul, splrlL) are avallable Lo men and women, Lhen noL honorlng Lhem would be LanLamounL Lo malnuLrlLlon-whlch, by any oLher name, ls an lllness. 3. . 132. All quoLaLlons are from 1be esseotlol lloqet unless lndlcaLed oLherwlse. 6. CuoLed ln llavell, p. 283. 7. p. 132-33. 8. p. 134-33. 9. . 131. 10. p. 131-32. 11. p. 139-40. 12. 1hese Lwo flgures of speech, based on slmllar agency (meLaphor) and slmllar communlon (meLonym)-or slmply slmllarlLy (agency) and conLlgulLy (communlon)-are, as llngulsLs have polnLed ouL, Lhe mosL baslc holons of llngulsLlc communlcaLlon (along wlLh a hybrld, synecdoche, whlch subsLlLuLes parLs for wholes). lnLeresLlngly, Lhese Lwo baslc flgures of llngulsLlc cognlLlon (agency and communlon) are so fooJomeotol LhaL !akobson found, ln Lhe Lwo ma[or forms of chlldhood aphasla (loss of power Lo undersLand speech), LhaL ln one Lhe chlld looses Lhe capaclLy Lo undersLand meLaphor buL grasps meLonym qulLe well, whereas ln Lhe oLher Lhe chlld cannoL undersLand meLonym buL perfecLly grasps meLaphor. !akobson acLually called Lhem slmllarlLy dlsorder" and conLlgulLy dlsorder"-ln oLher words, agency dlsorder and communlon dlsorder. As a resulL lL becomes posslble Lo propose LhaL human language ln facL does exlsL ln Lerms of Lhe Lwo fundamenLal dlmenslons [of agency and communlon], and LhaL Lhese dlmenslons crysLalllze lnLo Lhe rheLorlcal devlces on whlch poeLry characLerlsLlcally and preemlnenLly draws. 8oLh meLaphor and meLonymy can be subdlvlded lnLo oLher flgures (slmlle ls a Lype of meLaphor, synecdoche ls a Lype of meLonymy) buL Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe Lwo modes remalns fundamenLal, because lL ls a producL of Lhe fundamenLal modes of language lLself: lL ls how language works" (Pawkes, 5ttoctotollsm ooJ semlotlcs, pp. 78-79). Clven LhaL, for lreud, Lhe prlmary-process cognlLlon operaLes prlmarlly wlLh meLaphor and meLonym, and glven LhaL neurosls ls baslcally a fallure Lo ouLgrow Lhe prlmary process ln cerLaln lmporLanL ways, lL ls a small sLep Lo Lacan's formulaLlons, under Lhe banner of sLrucLurallsm, ln whlch sympLom ls a meLaphor and deslre a meLonym. Llkewlse, Lhe exLremely fooJomeotol naLure of meLaphor and meLonym have allowed cerLaln posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs, parLlcularly Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs, Lo play fasL and loose wlLh all hlgher and more slqolflcoot cognlLlons. 1o say LhaL all hlgher LhoughL ls based on meLaphor and meLonym ls one Lhlng, Lo say lL ls noLhlng more Lhan meLaphor and meLonym ls profoundly reducLlonlsLlc, and serves malnly Lhe purpose, ln Lhese anLlLheoreLlclans, of levellng Lhe dlsLlncLlons beLween sclence and poeLry, on Lhe one hand, and phllosophy and llLeraLure, on Lhe oLher. 1hey slmply clalm Lhere are no slgnlflcanL dlfferences beLween Lhose endeavors (and parLlcularly no dlfference beLween sclence and poeLry), whlch noneLheless does noL prevenL Lhem, when Lhey become lll, from runnlng Lo a docLor and noL Lhe local poeLry readlng. More developed and more slgnlflcanL cognlLlve holons wlll place resLralnLs on conLexLs of meLaphor and meLonym ln order Lo decrease egocenLrlsm and expand Lhe neLwork of muLual undersLandlng and reclproclLy vla lnLersub[ecLlve exchange. MeLaphor and meLonym remaln Lhe rooLs, buL are noL Lhe branches. And aL Lhls polnL ln our narraLlve of onLogeneLlc developmenL, we are aL Lhe polnL where only Lhe rooLs have emerged. lncldenLally, Lhe acLual meanlngs of Lhe varlous Lerms LhaL dlfferenL auLhors use-cooJeosotloo, Jlsplocemeot, joxtoposltloo, syoctetlsm, eLc.-someLlmes vary, dependlng on Lhe LheoreLlcal perspecLlve Lhey adopL. cooJeosotloo Lhus refers someLlmes Lo meLaphor and someLlmes Lo meLonym, llkewlse syoctetlsm. 8uL Lhe Lwo maln flgures, agency and communlon, are Lhe same. 1hus, as Lacan uses Lhe words, dlsplacemenL ls a meLonymy LhaL marks Lhe naLure of Lhe sub[ecL's deslre, whlch ls prlmarlly a lack, condensaLlon ls a meLaphor LhaL Lraces Lhe repressed meanlng of deslre Lhrough slldlng chalns of slgnlflcaLlon, found ln sympLoms. Same fundamenLal flgures of speech (meLaphor and meLonym), whlch l accepL, buL Lled Lo a slngle boundary" Lheory of lack" LhaL l re[ecL enLlrely (see noLe 32 for chap. 13, for a crlLlque of Lhe slngle-boundary Lheory). 13. p. 140, 132. 14. . 146. 13. lageL descrlbes Lhls shlfL as follows: uurlng Lhe flrsL sLage [up Lhrough maglc], all Lhe explanaLlons glven are psychologlcal, phenomenlsLlc, flnallsLlc, and maglcal. uurlng Lhe second sLage [maglc-myLhlc] Lhe explanaLlons are arLlflclallsL, anlmlsLlc, and dynamlc, and Lhe maglcal forms Lends Lo dlmlnlsh" (p. 143). 16. Cowan, lloqet wltb feelloq, p. 168. 17. lreud, Ao ootlloe of psycboooolysls. 18. lbld., lrey-8ohn, ltom lteoJ to Iooq. 19. Campbell, ltlmltlve mytboloqy, pp. 86-87. 20. Slnce lmages are Lhe flrsL forms or flrsL holons ln Lhe noosphere, and slnce mammals, sLarLlng perhaps wlLh horses, also form lmages, Lhese anlmals are also sLarLlng Lo exlsL ln Lhe noosphere. !anLsch belleves Lhls beglns, lndeed, wlLh horses, and from LhaL polnL on, as he noLes, Lhe merely ecoloqlcol symmetty ls btokeo fotevet, because lmages may, or may noL, accuraLely reflecL Lhe blosphere. WlLh Lhe emergence of lmages Lhere ls a symmeLry break," a break LhaL, ln humans, ls dangerously ouL of conLrol. 8uL agaln, Lhe cure ls noL regresslon buL lnLegraLlon. 21. Slnce Lhls enLlre Lhlrd fulcrum ls sLlll close Lo maglcal cognlLlon, every neuroLlc sympLom, lreud would polnL ouL, conLalns dlsplacemenL and condensaLlon, or meLaphor and meLonym. As lerenczl puL lL, every neuroLlc sympLom ls an unconsclous bellef ln maglc. 22. Cp. clL., p. 222. 23. 1he cllenL comes ln fully aware of Lhe cognlLlve maps (l'm roLLen Lo Lhe core, l never succeed aL anyLhlng," eLc.), Lhe maps [usL happen Lo be wrong and dlsLorLed. 1hus mosL cognlLlve LheraplsLs do noL do much dlgglng lnLo acLual pasL hlsLory, buL raLher aLLack Lhe false maps head on ln Lhe presenL. 1hls head-on aLLack does noL work as well wlLh Lhe more prlmlLlve llbldlnal holons almed aL by oocovetloq tbetoples (fulcrum- 3 Lheraples, such as psychoanalysls), because ln Lhose cases Lhe cllenL ls oot already aware of Lhe maLerlal LhaL needs Lo be addressed, dlrecLly confronLlng Lhe cllenL wlLh shadow maLerlal Lends Lo lncrease Lhe reslsLance Lo lL. 1he deeper" one probes, Lhe longer and more dellcaLe Lhe process. MosL people can beneflL so lmmedlaLely and so greaLly from slmple cognlLlve and lnLerpersonal Lherapy (fulcrum-4 Lheraples), LhaL Lhese and slmllar-Lype Lheraples are rapldly replaclng Lhe more arduous uncoverlng Lechnlques. 1hls does noL lessen Lhe lmporLance of fulcrum-3 Lheraples ln Lhe leasL, buL pragmaLlcally, Lhey are loslng ground, Lhe Llme and expense make Lhem prohlblLlve for mosL people. (noL Lo menLlon Lhe facL LhaL ln Amerlca, many of Lhe Lhlngs classlcal psychoanalysls consldered paLhologles are now consldered vlrLues: narclsslsLlc self-promoLlon, lmmedlaLe graLlflcaLlon, lmpulslve acLlng ouL, eLc., wlLh cognlLlve Lherapy broughL ln Lo help one achleve Lhese sponLanelLles" wlLhouL feellng any gullL, a raLher lnLeresLlng alllance.) llnally, fulcrum-2 Lheraples are referred Lo as sLrucLure bulldlng" Lheraples (Lo dlfferenLlaLe Lhem from l-3 uncoverlng Lheraples). 1he paLhology wlLh l-2 ls noL represslon, buL Lhe facL LhaL Lhe self ls noL sLrong enough Lo repress ln Lhe flrsL place. 1here ls no uncoverlng" Lhe shadow or dlgglng lL up": because Lhere lsn'L much of a self-sLrucLure, Lhere lsn'L much of a shadow. 1herapy lnvolves lnsLead a sLrengLhenlng of Lhe ego so LhaL lL can geL up" Lo represslon!-lnvolves Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of self and ob[ecL represenLaLlons and Lhe sLrengLhenlng of boundarles. And, as l have argued ln 1toosfotmotloos, medlLaLlon ls noL prlmarlly a sLrucLure-bulldlng Lechnlque, nor an uncoverlng Lechnlque, nor a scrlpL-rewrlLlng Lechnlque, alLhough all of Lhose Lhlngs mlghL come lnLo play wlLh medlLaLlon. 8uL ln lLself, medlLaLlon ls fundamenLally a furLher growLh and unfoldlng of sLrucLural poLenLlals. lf Lhere ls any uncoverlng," lL ls an uncoverlng of Lomorrow, noL yesLerday, an uncoverlng of eLernlLy, noL lnfancy. See 1be Atmoo ltoject ln volume 1wo of Lhe collecteJ wotks. 24. Accordlngly, we could accuraLely speak of a specLrum or conLlnuum of ego" sLaLes or self" sLaLes or l" sLaLes, each of whlch ls a Lranscendence of lLs predecessor, and Lhus eocb of whlch can correcLly be deflned as belng elLher pre-egolc" or Lransegolc" dependlng on wheLher lL ls belng compared Lo lLs successor or lLs predecessor (LhaL ls, Lhe ego or self of one sLage ls Lrans" Lhe ego of Lhe prevlous sLage and pre" Lhe ego of Lhe nexL sLage), and Lhls conLlnues unLll all egos are Lranscended ln pure Lgo, or unLll ALman dlssolves ln 8rahman. AlLhough LhaL ls a Lechnlcally correcL usage, lL confuses almosL everybody, because lL counLers boLh Lhe orLhodox and Lhe new Age usages. So l wlll follow Lhe usage l ouLllne ln Lhe nexL paragraph ln Lhe LexL. 23. 1he ego as Lhe acLual organlzlng process of Lhe psyche l refer Lo as Lhe self-sysLem." lL ls presenL aL all sLages of growLh, excepL Lhe exLreme llmlLs. lL ls, for example, Lhe self-sysLem (or slmply Lhe self") LhaL navlgaLes, aL each sLage of growLh, beLween Lhe four forces" of self-preservaLlon, self-adapLaLlon, self-Lranscendence, and self-regresslon. 1hus, Lhe self-sysLem ln Lhe early sLages ls pre-egolc, ln Lhe mlddle sLages egolc, and ln Lhe Lranspersonal sLages Lrans-egolc, where lL converges on Lhe Self, whlch opens lnLo pure LmpLlness. 1he self-sysLem, ln oLher words, ls Lhe reglme or codon of Lhe lnLerlor human holon, and llke all reglmes, lL ls Lhe openlng or clearlng ln whlch correlaLlve holons can manlfesL: lL ls LmpLlness looklng ouL Lhrough a separaLe self unLll LhaL self slmply reverLs Lo LmpLlness per se. 26. 8y pure Self" l do noL mean dlsembodled or nonslLuaLed. lL ls noL a hyperagenLlc auLonomy dlsconnecLed from manlfesLaLlon, buL Lhe Source and Suchness of manlfesLaLlon, appearlng as 8uddha-uharma-Sangha (l, lL, we)-all of whlch we wlll dlscuss laLer ln deLall. 27. Cp clL., p. 270. 1he noLlon LhaL raLlonallLy ls llnear" and Lherefore anLl-ecologlcal" ls a cornersLone of many new paradlgm" noLlons, and noLhlng could be furLher from Lhe LruLh. WhaL Lhese Lheorles acLually mean by raLlonallLy" ls any Lheory LhaL dlsagrees wlLh Lhelr raLlonallLy. 28. lbld. 29. [See loteqtol psycboloqy, ln volume lour of Lhe collecteJ wotks.] 1he way kohlberg deflned posLconvenLlonal was telotlve Lo Lhe convenLlonal sLages, whlch were grounded ln laLe conop and early formop. AnyLhlng beyond Lhose sLages were Lhus posLconvenLlonal." When kohlberg added a sevenLh sLage, Lhe unlversal-splrlLual, LhaL sLage was Lhus posL- posLconvenLlonal," and even hlgher sLages would be posL-posL-posL. All of Lhese posLs" slmply come from Laklng convenLlonal/conop as Lhe reference polnL. lf we Lake formop as Lhe reference polnL, Lhen Lhe hlgher sLages are slmply posLraLlonal, or LransraLlonal, or Lranspersonal. urely a maLLer of semanLlcs. 30. Campbell, ltlmltlve mytboloqy, pp. 84-83. 31. lbld., p. 27. 32. lbld., p. 28. 33. lageL demonsLraLed, and Campbell acknowledges ln anoLher conLexL, LhaL Lhe capaclLy Lo undersLand whaL lf" and as lf" sLaLemenLs emerges only wlLh formop. ConcreLe operaLlonal, as lLs name lmplles, ls Loo concreLe-llLeral Lo frame posslble worlds and hypoLheLlcal worlds, whlch ls why, lndeed, myLhs-generaLed by cooctete operaLlons-are Laken so concreLely, so llLerally, as empltlcol LruLhs, and noL as as-lf or hypoLheLlcal posslblllLles used meLaphorlcally or symbollcally. 1hls ls why sclence (or Lhe exLenslve framlng of hypoLheLlcal posslblllLles checked agalnsL real world evldence) does noL emerge ln Lhe myLhologlcal worldvlew. 34. Campbell, cteotlve mytboloqy, p. 630. 33. lbld., p. 4. 36. Campbell, ltlmltlve mytboloqy, p. 18. 37. All quoLes from cteotlve mytboloqy, pp. 4-6, 609-23. 38. 1he maglcal worldvlew can be lnsLanLly reconsLlLuLed whenever conop falls and regresslon Lo preop occurs (slnce holons regress downward along Lhe same llnes evoluLlon progressed upwardly-LeneL 2d). lL ls noL, ln my vlew, LhaL Lhe maglcal sLrucLure ltself remalns presenL buL unconsclous, Lhls ls Lrue only lf Lhere ls flxaLlon Lo parLs of LhaL excluslvlLy sLrucLure: Lhose repressed or allenaLed pockeLs of consclousness lndeed remaln fully maglcal, and Lhls consLlLuLes parL of Lhelr paLhology (whlch ls why Lhese Lypes of neuroLlc sympLoms are an unconsclous bellef ln maglc"). 1he preop sLrucLures remaln fully presenL and acLlve, buL now as sub-holons ln conop, buL Lhe excluslvlLy sLrucLure lLself (maglc) ls, barrlng flxaLlon, teploceJ by Lhe new excluslvlLy sLrucLure (namely, myLhlc). 1hls formulaLlon, l belleve, handles some very recalclLranL problems abouL whaL one can flnd" ln Lhe unconsclous. See 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess. 39. 1he same Lhlng happens wlLh moral developmenL. ln Lhls brlefesL Lerms: preop underplns a preconvenLlonal (egocenLrlc) morallLy, conop underplns a convenLlonal (soclocenLrlc) morallLy, and formop underplns a posLconvenLlonal (worldcenLrlc) morallLy. A person aL formop has compleLe and slmulLaneous access Lo Lhe sLrucLures of conop (roles, rules) and Lhe sLrucLures of preop (lmages, symbols, and concepLs), and lndeed, formop lncludes all of Lhose as necessary componenLs ln lLs own makeup. 8uL a person aL posLconvenLlonal morallLy Joes oot have slmulLaneous access Lo all Lhe prevlous sLages of moral developmenL, because Lhese were generaLed by Lhe excluslve ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh a lower sLage, and when a hlgher ldenLlLy emerges, Lhe lower one musL be released and replaced. ?ou cannoL genulnely be acLlng wlLh a posLconvenLlonal/global perspecLlve and a preconvenLlonal/egocenLrlc perspecLlve aL Lhe same Llme. 40. ltom lteoJ to Iooq, lrey-8ohn's excellenL book conLalns several lengLhy and percepLlve dlscusslons of Lhls Lheme (loaded, on occaslon, wlLh elevaLlonlsL lnLerpreLaLlons). 41. !ung also came Lo lnclude any Lyplcal, common sLrucLures-such as Lhe shadow, Lhe persona, and Lhe ego-as belng archeLypal. 1hese sLrucLures, Lhese baslc lmprlnLs, are also collecLlvely lnherlLed. 1hls, Loo, ls flne, and Lhls, Loo, has noLhlng Lo do wlLh Lranspersonal (see noLes 44 and 43 below). 42. !ung, Atcbetypes of tbe collectlve oocooscloos, p. 173. 43. SplrlLuallLy can be expressed Lhrough Lhose-or any oLher-forms, buL Lhose forms are noL lLs sootce. [See 1be eye of spltlt for a full dlscusslon of !unglan archeLypes.] 44. ln Sheldrake's morphlc resonance Lheory, an archeLype ls vlewed as a pasL form LhaL consLanL repeLlLlon has relnforced, and whlch reaches ouL, Lherefore, Lo gulde Lhe formaLlve process of subsequenL slmllar holons. 1he more one holon ls repeaLed, Lhen Lhe more archeLypal" and powerful lL ls. 1hus, Lhe number of moLher encounLers" ls enormous slnce every human belng ever ln exlsLence had LhaL encounLer, and Lhus Lhe sum LoLal resonance from LhaL archeLype" ls lndeed profound (and so on wlLh Lhe blrLh archeLype, Lhe faLher aracheLype, Lhe shadow archeLype, eLc.). l agree wlLh all LhaL. My polnL ls LhaL, compared wlLh Lhe number of moLher or faLher encounLers, Lhe number of genulne mysLlcal encounLers ls plLlfully small. 1hese pasL mysLlcs have lndeed seL up a cerLaln holonlc resonance for all of us who follow. 8uL as probably Lhe totest and leost common experlence of humanlLy, lL would be Lhe weokest and leost powetfol archeLype of all-lf explalned ooly by LhaL Lheory (or any verslon of !unglan lnherlLance Lheory). 8uL when real SplrlL descends, lL blasLs Lo smlLhereens Lhe moLher archeLype, Lhe faLher archeLype, and every oLher lLLy blLLy flnlLe archeLype-lL ls comlng from Lhe oLher dlrecLlon wlLh Lhe force of lnflnlLy, and noL some merely pasL and flnlLe evoluLlonary hablL. 1he more anybody plugs lnLo" Lhe hlgher, LranscendenLal, and acLual archeLypes, lylng now as sLrucLural poLenLlals, Lhe easler lL ls for subsequenL lndlvlduals Lo llkewlse plug ln", and LhaL ls whaL Lhe greaL pasL heroes of Lhe Lranspersonal have done. 8uL whaL tbey were plugglng lnLo was oot more pasL common and Lyplcal and repeLlLlve paLLerns, buL fuLure and hlgher posslblllLles. 1hey lnherlLed Lhe fuLure, noL Lhe pasL. Sheldrake acknowledges Lhls by polnLlng ouL LhaL morphlc resonance does noL accounL, and ls noL meanL Lo accounL, for creaLlve emergence-buL ln Lhe creaLlve emergence ofLen lles SplrlL. 1he creaLlve emergence ls from Lhe sLrucLural poLenLlal of Lhe hlgher and fuLure, morphlc resonance ls from Lhe pasL and ls esLabllshed only oftet lL creaLlvely emerges ln Lhe flrsL place. AfLer a morphlc fleld has emerged, lL Lhen acLs as an omega polnL (up Lo lLs own level of depLh) for subsequenL and slmllar-depLh holons: lL ls a pasL acLual acLlng as a fuLure perfecL for slmllar developmenL. 43. 1here are collecLlve prepersonal, collecLlve personal, and collecLlve Lranspersonal sLrucLures, [usL as we all collecLlvely lnherlL Len Loes, Lwo lungs, eLc. CollecLlve ls noL necessarlly Lranspersonal. lurLher, as l polnLed ouL ln ye to eye, Lhe boslc sttoctotes of human consclousness are collecLlvely lnherlLed poteotlols, buL LhaL does noL mean Lhe poLenLlals were manlfesL ln Lhe pasL. 1he human neocorLex, for example, possesses Lhe poLenLlal for raLlonallLy or hypoLheLlco-deducLlve LhoughL, buL Lhe neocorLex, whlch emerged ln Loday's form abouL flfLy Lhousand years ago, dld noL emerge wlLh raLlonal LhoughL ln full blossom. When Lhe neocorLex flrsL emerged, lL carrled Lhe sttoctotol poteotlol for loglc, buL Lhe loglc lLself was noL an lnherlLance from Lhe pasL, lL was a fuLure poLenLlal acLlng as an omega polnL of muLual undersLandlng drawlng culLure forward and upward. !usL so wlLh Lhe splrlLual poLenLlals of Lhe human sLrucLure, we lnherlL Lhe poLenLlal, whlch ln any epoch has, so far, been manlfesLed ln Lhe very few, and whlch tbetefote conLlnues Lo exerL, as a hlgher and wlder conLexL, an omega pull on each of us. CPA1L8 7. 1PL lA81PL8 8LACPLS Cl PuMAn nA1u8L 1. 8lanck and 8lanck, qo psycboloqy. 2. lageL, 1be esseotlol lloqet, p. 133. 3. Cardner, Ooest fot mloJ, p. 63. 4. lbld., p. 64. 3. Cowan, lageL, p. 273. 6. lowler's emplrlcal and phenomenologlcal research, execuLed as a reconsLrucLlve sclence, found LhaL lndlvlduals moved Lhrough slx or seven ma[or sLages of Lhe developmenL of splrlLual falLh (or splrlLual orlenLaLlon), and hls flndlngs maLch very closely aspecLs of Lhe map l am here presenLlng. 8rlefly: sLage 0 ls preverbal undlfferenLlaLed" (our archalc), and sLage 1 lowler calls pro[ecLlve, maglcal" (our maglcal), whlch he also correlaLes wlLh preop. SLage 2 he calls myLhlc-llLeral," correlaLed wlLh early conop, where falLh exLends Lo Lhose llke us." SLage 3 ls convenLlonal," whlch lnvolves muLual role Laklng" and conformlLy Lo class norms and lnLeresLs," laLe conop and early formop (sLages 2 and 3 belng our myLhlc and myLhlc-raLlonal, respecLlvely, wlLh boLh sLages belng our overall myLhlc-membershlp). SLage 4 ls lndlvldual-reflexlve," as dlchoLomlzlng formop" (and Lhe ego) emerges, and lnvolves reflexlve relaLlvlsm" and self-raLlfled ldeologlcal perspecLlve". SLage 3 ls con[uncLlve falLh," as dlalecLlcal formop" emerges and beglns Lo lnclude groups, classes, and LradlLlons oLher Lhan one's own", Lhls lnvolves dlalecLlcal [olnlng of [udgemenL-experlence processes wlLh reflecLlve clalms of oLhers and of varlous expresslons of cumulaLlve human wlsdom." (osLconvenLlonal, unlversal raLlonallLy and unlversal plurallsm, maLure ego, beglnnlng of worldcenLrlc orlenLaLlon.) SLage 6 ls unlversallzlng," whlch ls lnformed by Lhe experlences and LruLhs of prevlous sLages" (cenLaurlc lnLegraLlon of prevlous sLages, whlch lowler also calls unlLlve acLuallLy" and unlflcaLlon of reallLy medlaLed by symbols and Lhe self"-LhaL ls, Lhe lnLegraLed cenLaurlc self). 1hls self ls purlfled of egolc sLrlvlng, and llnked by dlsclpllned lnLulLlon Lo Lhe prlnclple of belng," lnvolvlng a commonwealLh of belng" and a Lrans-class awareness and ldenLlflcaLlon," correlaLed wlLh synLheLlc formop" (our vlslon-loglc, Lhe frulLlon of Lhe worldcenLrlc orlenLaLlon, and Lhe beglnnlng of Lranspersonal lnLulLlon, Lhe hlgher conLemplaLlve sLages Lhemselves were noL lnvesLlgaLed by lowler, glven Lhelr rarlLy, buL Lhe flL up Lo LhaL polnL ls qulLe close, ofLen exacL). lowler, 5toqes of foltb. 7. 8roughLon's orlglnal research, a docLoral dlsserLaLlon aL Parvard, ls summarlzed ln Loevlnger's qo Jevelopmeot. All quoLes, unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, are from Loevlnger's summary. All lLallcs are mlne. 8. 1he self could LheoreLlcally be reduced Lo lLs componenLs, lL was belleved, preclsely because Lhe world was mlsLaken as a greaL lnLerlocklng emplrlcal order (flaLland hollsm), so LhaL Lhe sub[ecLlve self, as a sLrand ln Lhe wonderful web and Lhe relaLlvlsLlc sysLem, had Lo be spllced lnLo (and Lhus reduced Lo) an emplrlcally observable occaslon. MosL Anglo-Saxon psychology, sLarLlng wlLh !ohn Locke, Look Lhls cynlcal mlssLep as an acLual paradlgm of Lhe human sclences. When Lhe kosmos was reduced Lo Lhe cosmos, Lhen Lhe self, as self, was cuL ouL of Lhe plcLure. 1he self was merely a cyberneLlc cog ln Lhe dlsplay, reduclble Lo lLs presenL experlences (behavlorlsm), and Lhus ulLlmaLely lsoloteJ from any sorL of LranscendenLal bond wlLh oLher selves. no sLrand ln Lhe web ls ever aware of Lhe whole web, whlch ls why emplrlcal hollsm ends up dlvlslve, duallsLlc, and lsolaLlonlsL. 9. 1he dlfferenLlaLlon from (and lnLegraLlon of) (1) Lhe physlcal envlronmenL, (2) Lhe emoLlonal-llbldlnal blosphere, (3) Lhe (early) mlnd from Lhe body, (4) soclocenLrlsm from egocenLrlsm, (3) Lhe raLlonal-ego from soclocenLrlsm, and (6) Lhe cenLaur from Lhe ego. Lach ls a deeper ldenLlLy wlLh a wlder embrace. 10. ln A socloble CoJ, l dlsLlngulshed beLween Lhe leglLlmacy and Lhe auLhenLlclLy of a splrlLual engagemenL. LeglLlmacy ls a measure of Lhe degree LhaL a splrlLual engagemenL faclllLaLes ttooslotloo, and auLhenLlclLy ls a measure of Lhe degree LhaL lL faclllLaLes ttoosfotmotloo. MyLhlc-rellglons ofLen demonsLraLed a very hlgh degree of leglLlmacy, for reasons explalned ln Lhe lasL chapLer, buL were noL very profound on Lhe auLhenLlclLy scale. 8eason ls more auLhenLlc Lhan myLh, buL ofLen faces lLs own lnLense leglLlmaLlon crlses, especlally when conflned wlLhln Lhe borders of naLlons. 1he Lranspersonal domaln ls, ln Lurn, more auLhenLlc Lhan reason, and usually faces even more dlfflculL leglLlmaLlon, aL leasL ln Lhe modern WesLern world. 11. 8oLh Lhe LefL- and 8lghL-Pand dlmenslons sLarL from lmmedlaLe apprehenslon or lmmedlaLe experlence, and LhaL lmmedlaLe experlence, as Wllllam !ames explalned, ls properly called a daLum, wheLher lL occurs lnLernally" or exLernally." Lven lf Lhe daLa Lhemselves are medlaLed by oLher facLors (culLure, menLal seLs, lnsLrumenLs, eLc.), noneLheless aL Lhe momenL of awareness, Lhe lmmedlacy of Lhe experlence ls Lhe pure daLum ln LhaL occaslon. WheLher l am percelvlng a Lree ouL Lhere" or a deslre for food ln here," Lhey are boLh, aL Lhe momenL of awareness, conveyed Lo me ln pure lmmedlacy (even Lhough LhaL lmmedlacy may have medlaLlng facLors). 1he 8lghL-Pand paLh slmply sLlcks Lo sensory lmmedlacy, and Lles lLs Lheorlzlng Lo Lhe aspecLs of holons LhaL can be deLecLed wlLh Lhe exLernal senses or Lhelr exLenslons: lLs daLa are sensory, whlch always means exLernal senses (lL doesn'L even LrusL lnLerlor senses, slnce Lhose are prlvaLe" and supposedly noL shareable"). Monologlcal and emplrlc-analyLlc modes use an enormous amounL of lnLerlor, concepLual, o ptlotl cognlLlons, buL evenLually Lhls approach Lles all of Lhem Lo Lhe lmmedlacy of exLernally percelved exLerlors. And, as l sald, LhaL can be done, and ls an lmporLanL (lf llmlLed) mode of knowledge. 1he LefL-Pand paLh sLarLs wlLh Lhe same lmmedlacy of glven experlence, or lmmedlaLe apprehenslon (lL ls Lhe same lmmedlacy as Lhe exLernal or 8lghL-Pand dlmenslon, because ln Lhe momenL of dlrecL apprehenslon, Lhere ls nelLher sub[ecL nor ob[ecL, nelLher LefL nor 8lghL, as !ames explalned). 8uL unllke Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, whlch sLlcks Lo Lhe ob[ecLlve/exLerlors of holons as Lhe baslc lmmedlacy glves way Lo sub[ecL and ob[ecL, Lhe LefL-Pand paLh lnvesLlgaLes Lhe lnLerlor/sub[ecLlve dlmenslon of LhaL baslc lmmedlacy as lL glves way Lo sub[ecL and ob[ecL. And LhaL ls where and why lnLerpreLaLlon enLers Lhe LefL-Pand scene (and noL so much Lhe 8lghL, where Lhe blank sLare aL surfaces ls mosL valued). AlLhough ln my own lnLerlor, l know depLh dlrecLly by acqualnLance (Lhe lmmedlaLe experlence on any level ls known dlrecLly, wheLher LhaL be sensory lmpulses or archeLypal llghL), noneLheless lf you and l are golng Lo share Lhese experlences, we musL communlcaLe our depLh Lo each oLher. And whereas Lhe exLernal surfaces are ouL Lhere" for all Lo see, Lhe lnLerlor apprehenslons can only be shared by communlcaLlve exchange whlch requlres LhaL we each lnLerpreL whaL Lhe oLher ls communlcaLlng. And LhaL ls why lnLerpreLaLlon (hermeneuLlcs) ls lnescapable for Lhe LefL-Pand paLhs. 1he 8lghL-Pand paLh of course uses lnLerpreLaLlon ln lLs own Lheorlzlng-lL lnLerpreLs Lhe daLa-buL Lhe daLa are all ulLlmaLely daLa LhaL do noL respond communlcaLlvely or lnLerlorly (Lhe daLa are [usL Lhe exLerlor surfaces, wheLher LhaL be rocks, braln chemlsLry, or sulclde raLes: Lhey don'L compllcaLe Lhe scene by Lalklng back: no nasLy dlalogues here). 1hus, whaL really lrks Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh abouL Lhe LefL Pand ls noL LhaL lLs daLa aren'L lmmedlaLe (because Lhey are, lL ls Lhe same lmmedlacy LhaL ls also Lhe sLarLlng polnL for Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh), buL raLher Lhe necesslLy for lnLrospecLlon, lnLerlorlLy, and lnLerpreLaLlon, all of whlch are re[ecLed as noL publlcly shareable, whlch ls of course nonsense: whaL Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh lLself accepLs as daLa ls deLermlned only communlcaLlvely. ln shorL, boLh Lhe 8lghL- and LefL-Pand paLhs sLarL wlLh Lhe same lmmedlacy of glven experlence, buL Lhe 8lghL Pand sLlcks Lo exLernal surfaces" LhaL, as ob[ecLs of lnvesLlgaLlon, do noL have Lo respond communlcaLlvely (lL ls monologlcal), whereas Lhe LefL Pand goes a sLep furLher and lnvesLlgaLes Lhose holons LhaL do respond communlcaLlvely (dlaloglcally, hermeneuLlcally, lnLerpreLlvely). 1he one sLlcks Lo surfaces, Lhe oLher lnvesLlgaLes Lhe depLhs. And slnce surfaces can be seen, Lhe one asks, WhaL does lL do?", buL slnce depLh does noL slL on Lhe surface, Lhe oLher musL ask WhaL does lL mean?" (WhaL ls under Lhe surface?"). ln Lhe followlng dlscusslon (ln Lhe LexL), l am sLaylng prlmarlly wlLh Lhe flrsL lmmedlacy of experlence, wheLher LhaL experlence be sensory experlence, menLal experlence, or splrlLual experlence. 1he Lhree sLrands of valld knowledge accumulaLlon" LhaL are dlscussed refer prlmarlly Lo Lhe acqulslLlon of lmmedlaLe daLa ln any domaln (sensory, menLal, splrlLual). 1he furLher lnLerpreLlve sLeps Laken by Lhe LefL-Pand paLh, and Lhe acLual Lheorlzlng of Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, also follow Lhese Lhree sLrands, buL as an addlLlonal appllcaLlon, as lL were (see Wllber, ye to eye, for a fuller dlscusslon of Lhls noLlon). 12. loucaulL came Lo see LhaL boLh 8lghL-Pand and LefL-Pand approaches are necessary. Pls (early) archaeology of octool exlsLence was a neosLrucLurallsL reworklng of Lhe LradlLlonal sLrucLurallsL's analysls of posslble Lypes of experlence, buL lL sLlll placed emphasls on Lhe exLerlor surfaces and sLrucLures of dlscurslve formaLlons and Lhe LransformaLlon rules (of rareflcaLlon and excluslon) LhaL lndlvlduaLed serlous speech acLs. 1hls neosLrucLurallsm avolded-lndeed, scorned-any aLLempL Lo geL aL Lhe lnLerlor meanlng of Lhe dlscurslve formaLlons. (lndeed, loucaulL brackeLed noL only Lhe LruLh of llngulsLlc uLLerances-Lhe sLandard phenomenologlcal move-buL Lhelr meanlng as well, whlch ls Lhe ulLlmaLe exLerlor or monologlcal move: you absoluLely never have Lo Lalk Lo Lhe bearers of Lhe llngulsLlc formaLlon because you don'L even care whaL Lhelr uLLerances mean, Lhls ls slmply Lhe endgame of sLrucLurallsm: [usL Lhe exLerlors of Lhe sLrucLures, wlLh no hermeneuLlc nasLlness.) ln hls laLer and more balanced vlew, Lhe dlscurslve eplsLeme was replaced by Lhe dlsposlLlf, or overall conLexL of soclal pracLlces (encompasslng, as lL were, Lhe eplsLeme), whose meanlng could sLlll only be seen ln Lhe coherence, buL whose lnsldes" also had Lo be hermeneuLlcally enLered. 1hls new meLhod," commenL ureyfus and 8ablnow, comblnes a Lype of archaeologlcal analysls whlch preserves Lhe dlsLanclng effecL of sLrucLurallsm [Lhe exLerlor, ob[ecLlfylng approach, or Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh], and an lnLerpreLlve dlmenslon whlch develops Lhe hermeneuLlc lnslghL LhaL Lhe lnvesLlgaLor ls always slLuaLed and musL undersLand Lhe meanlng of hls culLural pracLlces from wlLhln Lhem [Lhe LefL-Pand paLh]." Mlcbel loocoolt, p. xll. 13. Lven lf words are necessary Lo sLrucLure Lhe space LhaL does capLure lL. 1haL ls, l am noL saylng LhaL Lhe llfeworld and worldspace are noL llngulsLlcally sLrucLured ln large measure, l am saylng LhaL speclflc experlences, Lhemselves llngulsLlcally sLrucLured ln many ways, are noL capLured ln slgnlflers wlLhouL a correspondlng llfeworld slgnlfled. l am cerLalnly noL drawlng a dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe map and Lhe LerrlLory," whlch ls a crude represenLaLlonal-emplrlclsL Lheory of language. Cnly Lhe leasL slgnlflcanL slgnlflers represenL physlcal Lhlngs. ln Lhe mlnd, maps are Lhe LerrlLory, and Lhey do noL slmply tepteseot Lhe exLerlor world, Lhey pteseot or creaLe new worlds alLogeLher: language ln lLs world-creaLlng, world-dlscloslng capaclLy. nor am l a drawlng a dlsLlncLlon beLween words and experlence (see also noLe 16 below). Words ote Lhe cenLral experlences ln Lhe noosphere, buL Lhose verbal experlences cannoL be represenLed wlLhouL a common llfeworld. My furLher polnL ln Lhe LexL ls LhaL Lhls also needs a developmenLal noLlon aLLached Lo lL, because language ls Lhe home of belng only lf l pack my bags and move ln. Shared llfeworlds mean a shared seL noL [usL of sLrucLural slgnlflers buL also of Jevelopmeotol slgnlfleds. As for Lhe meanlng of dlrecL experlence" and Lhe posslblllLy of such, see noLe 16 below. 14. 1hus, l can ttooslote a slgn correcLly (lnLerpreL lL correcLly or meanlngfully) only lf, among oLher Lhlngs, l have prevlously ttoosfotmeJ Lo Lhe level of depLh LhaL dlscloses and supporLs Lhe lnLerlor slgnlfled. l Lhen exlsL ln a sysLem of relaLlonal exchange of slqolflets LhaL resonaLe aL Lhe same level of slqolfleJ depLh (same-level relaLlonal exchange"). CLherwlse lL's all Creek Lo me, even Lhough l can see perfecLly all Lhe physlcal marks of Lhe wrlLLen or spoken slgnlflers. !usL so, all holons are slgns, each lnvolved ln LranslaLlng reallLy (l.e., respondlng only Lo whaL lL can reglsLer ln Lhe flrsL place) accordlng Lo lLs reglme or codon seL ln a common worldspace of slmllar-depLh holons. CuLslde of lLs worldspace lL does noL and cannoL LranslaLe: lL reglsLers noLhlng. ln oLher words, holons, as slgns, only respond Lo, and reglsLer (LranslaLe), a narrow range of slgnlflers, vla a reglme LhaL dlscloses a same-depLh slgnlfled worldspace. 13. l have wrlLLen exLenslvely on Lhls ln ye to eye [and 1be Mottloqe of 5eose ooJ 5ool]. Serlous readers wlll forglve Lhe shorLcuLs l Lake ln Lhe LexL. Also, Lhe Lhree sLrands of knowledge accumulaLlon are noL Lo be confused wlLh Pabermas's Lhree valldlLy clalms. 1he valldlLy clalms refer Lo Lhe 8lg 1hree (sub[ecLlve, ob[ecLlve, culLural, or l, lL, we). l am malnLalnlng LhaL Lhe Lhree sLrands are operaLlve ln each of Lhe 8lg 1hree valldlLy clalms (alLhough Lhey Lake qulLe dlfferenL forms), and Lhelr operaLlon helps assure us LhaL Lhe tefeteot of knowledge ls acLually ln Lhe kosmos (ln a worldspace ln Lhe kosmos), and noL [usL ln my lmaglnaLlon, or my mlspercepLlon, or whaLnoL. 16. 1here ls a greaL deal of semanLlc and phllosophlc confuslon around Lhe Loplc of dlrecL experlence," usually cenLerlng on Lhe quesLlon, does lL even exlsL? lsn'L all experlence acLually meJloteJ by concepLs, menLal seLs, culLural background values, and so forLh? Slnce all knowledge/experlence ls slLuaLed and medlaLed, Lhe besL we can hope for ls a hermeneuLlc sLudy of lndlvldual pockeLs of local knowledge," and any LranscendenLal clalms, of any sorL, are largely unwarranLed-or so Lhe argumenL goes. 1hls has, among many oLher Lhlngs, parLlcularly caused Lurmoll ln Lhe comparaLlve sLudy of mysLlcal experlences. SLeven kaLz and hls colleagues, for example, ln a serles of arLlcles and books, have made Lhe sLrong clalm LhaL slnce all experlence ls medlaLed-kaLz: 1here are nC pure (l.e., unmedlaLed) experlences"-Lhen Lhere can be no commonallLles (or cross-culLural slmllarlLles) ln mysLlcal experlences. Slnce each culLure and each bellef sysLem ls dlfferenL, and Lhese dlfferenL seLs are parLly consLlLuLlve of Lhe mysLlcal experlence, Lhen Lhere ls and can be no common mysLlcal experlence, and Lhls also, lL ls sald, undercuLs Lhe mysLlcal clalm Lo valld or unlversal knowledge. 1hls overall general approach has come loosely Lo be called consLrucLlvlsL"-we don'L recelve knowledge of lndependenL enLlLles, we consLrucL lL based on varlous freelng pracLlces, our baslc presenL experlences are Laken up and reworked ln a Lype of neo-kanLlan fashlon, so LhaL Lhe flnal dlsplay ln consclousness ls an lnseparable mlxLure of experlence and menLal-culLural moldlng. 8uL Lhls approach suffers, lronlcally, from noL belng consLrucLlvlsL enough. 1o begln wlLh, Lhe dlchoLomy beLween experlence and consLrucLlon ls a false dlchoLomy. lL ls noL LhaL Lhere ls experlence on Lhe one hand and conLexLual moldlng on Lhe oLher. vety experlence ls a conLexL, every experlence, even slmple sensory experlence, ls always already slLuaLed, ls always already a conLexL, ls always already a holon. When uerrlda says LhaL noLhlng ls ever slmply presenL," Lhls ls Lrue of every holon. As WhlLehead would have lL, every holon ls already a prehenslve unlflcaLlon of lLs enLlre acLual unlverse: noLhlng ls ever slmply presenL (Lhls ls also very slmllar Lo Lhe LasLern noLlon of karma, or Lhe pasL enfolded ln Lhe presenL). LveryLhlng ls always already o conLexL lo a conLexL. And Lhus, every holon-and Lherefore every experlence-ls always already slLuaLed, medlaLed, conLexLual. lL ls noL LhaL orlglnal experlences" arrlve Lo be reworked by menLal concepLs, Lhe orlglnal experlences are noL orlglnal, buL a conLexLual prehenslve medlaLlon of boundless conLexLs. 1haL mlnd fottbet conLexLuallzes sensory conLexLs ls nelLher new nor avoldable. LveryLhlng (every holon) ls a medlaLed conLexL, buL conLexLs Louch lmmeJlotely. lL does noL requlre mysLlcal pure consclousness" Lo be ln lmmedlaLe conLacL wlLh Lhe daLa of experlence. When any polnL ln Lhe medlaLed chaln ls known (or experlenced), LhaL knowlng or prehendlng ls an lmmeJlote evenL ln lLself, an lmmedlaLe Louchlng." 1he Louchlng ls noL a Louchlng of someLhlng merely presenL buL raLher ls lLself pure resence (or prehenslon). lf Lhere were ooly a mere medlaLlon forever, Lhen noLhlng would or could ever be known or experlenced, Lhere would be noLhlng Lo sLop Lhe slldlng chaln from splnnlng conLexLually forever (Lhere ls no polnL LhaL lL coolJ enLer consclousness). 8uL ln any momenL of prehenslon/experlence (and ln any domaln-sensory, menLal, splrlLual), Lhere ls lmmeJlote apprehenslon of whaL ls glven aL Lhe momenL, and tbot lmmedlaLe apprehenslon ls Lhe daLum (whlch Wllllam !ames correcLly deflned as Lhe glven pure experlence), and tbot experlenLlal prehenslon ls pote ln Lhe sense LhaL when conLexLs Louch, Lhey Louch wlLhouL furLher medlaLlon (even lf Lhey are always already slLuaLed ln and as medlaLed conLexLs). AL Lhe momenL of Louch, Lhere ls no medlaLlon, lf Lhere ls medlaLlon, Lhere ls no Louchlng. 1o say everyLhlng ls metely medlaLed ls slmply a fancy modern LwlsL on pure skepLlclsm, whlch ls profoundly self-conLradlcLory (lL says, l have an unshakeable foundaLlon bellef LhaL foundaLlons are noL posslble," whlch slmply allows Lhe skepLlc Lo Lrash everybody else's bellefs whlle convenlenLly leavlng hls own unexamlned). AL Lhe momenL of Louch, ln any domaln, Lhere ls no medlaLlon, only prehenslon. 1hls ls why knowledge (and experlence) of any sorL ls posslble ln Lhe flrsL place. 1haL Lhere ls a flrsL place" means LhaL medlaLlon bos stoppeJ aL some polnL (Lhe polnL of Louchlng). 1hls ls why when experlence occurs ln any domaln (sensory, menLal, splrlLual), lL ls slmply glven, lL ls slmply Lhe case, lL slmply shows up, even Lhough Lhe experlenced and Lhe experlencer are forever slLuaLed and conLexLual. l flnd myself ln lmmeJlote experlence of meJloteJ worlds. (And LhaL lmmedlacy, LhaL pure resence, LhaL Louchlng, ls, as we wlll see, one way Lo vlew SplrlL: lmmeJloteoess ls SplrlL's prehenslon of Lhe world-and whaL ls prehended ls SplrlL lo Lhe world conLexLually.) ln shorL, experlence ls lmmedlaLe prehenslon of whaLever medlaLed conLexLs are glven, and LhaL ls why all experlence ls botb pure (lmmedlaLe) and conLexLual (capable of belng reflned and reconLexLuallzed loJefloltely). As we wlll see, Lhls ls why Pabermas malnLalns LhaL all valldlLy clalms have boLh an lmmooeot (culLure-bound) and a ttoosceoJeot (pure) componenL, and lL ls Lhe LranscendenL componenL LhaL allows lnLersub[ecLlve communlcaLlon and learnlng Lo occur ln Lhe flrsL place. 1hus, even kaLz, as he ponders Lhe medlaLed naLure of all experlence" comes Lo a polnL where LhaL noLlon lLself, and hls knowlng of lL, are noL medlaLed. At some polot ln Lhe medlaLlon chaln, Lhe daLum per se enLers hls consclousness dlrecLly, he dlrecLly Louches Lhe noLlon, and he says, l know Lhls" or l belleve Lhls" or l experlence Lhls." WhaLever Lhe space ls LhaL allows kaLz Lo clalm LhaL all experlence ls medlaLed-LhaL space ls somehow free of medlaLlon or he would never be able Lo make LhaL sLaLemenL. 1o say LhaL all experlence ls medlaLed ls Lo sLand ln a space LhaL ls noL lLself medlaLed. uL dlfferenLly, lf everyLhlng ls only medlaLed, he would have no way Lo know lL. 1he medlaLlng chaln would never sLop long enough for hlm Lo Louch lL, lL would have no polnL of eotty Lo hls awareness: lf Lhe self were merely slLuaLed, lL would never know lL. Lven Lo be able Lo make Lhe mlsLake of saylng lL ls only slLuaLed demonsLraLes LhaL lL ls noL. 1hls undercuLs kaLz's whole llne of aLLack on mysLlclsm, because hls aLLack applles Lo hls own aLLack: lL ls self-defeaLlng. 1haL ls, kaLz clalms LhaL oll experlence ls medlaLed and LhaL Lhls ls Lrue for oll culLures, wlLh no excepLlons-and Lhus he ls clalmlng Lo be ln possesslon of a nonrelaLlve LruLh LhaL ls Lrue cross-culLurally and unlversally, someLhlng LhaL hls formal Lhesls denles ls posslble for anybody. Pe ls maklng unlversal/LranscendenLal clalms abouL reallLy whlch he denles Lo everybody else, Lhus hldlng Lhe real lssue of how LranscendenLal clalms are ln facL made, noL [usL ln mysLlcal" experlences buL ln evetyJoy otJlooty commoolcotloo. 1he quesLlon, Lhen, ls noL wheLher culLure medlaLes experlence ln a way LhaL dlsallows cross-culLural slmllarlLles ln mysLlcal experlence. 1he quesLlon ls wheLher Lhe unavoldably medlaLed ospect of all experlence lnvalldaLes any slmllarlLles lo ooy expetleoces ot oll (mysLlclsm ls compleLely secondary ln Lhls regard). ln oLher words, are Lhere any LranscendenLal slgnlfleds ot oll? uL dlfferenLly, ls Lhere any chance of lJeotlcol slqolflcotloo for ooyboJy? lorgeL mysLlclsm, can lndlvlduals from dlfferenL culLures (or even Lhe same culLure) even Lalk abouL ooytbloq? AL Lhls polnL ln Lhe argumenL, uerrlda ls ofLen called on Lo supporL Lhe noLlon LhaL Lhere are no LranscendenLal slgnlfleds aL all (only slldlng chalns of slgnlflers and endless culLural medlaLlon). 8uL Lhls ls a mlsreadlng of uerrlda. We already heard Culler explaln LhaL deconsLrucLlon does noL dlsavow proposlLlonal LruLh buL slmply remlnds us of lLs conLexLuallLy. uerrlda hlmself polnLs ouL LhaL even lf Lhe LranscendenLal slgnlfled ls sltooteJ, Lhls does noL prevenL lL [Lhe LranscendenLal slgnlfled] from funcLlonlng, and even from belng lndlspensable wlLhln cerLaln llmlLs. lor example, no LranslaLlon would be posslble wlLhouL lL" (losltloos, p. 20). ln oLher words, accordlng Lo uerrlda, Lhe facL LhaL we coo LranslaLe languages Lo some slgnlflcanL degree means LhaL Lhere are genulne LranscendenLal slgnlfleds, and lf Lhls holds for ordlnary experlence, Lhere ls no reason lL shouldn'L hold for oLher experlences as well (from sclence Lo mysLlclsm). We coo LranslaLe languages because, even lf all conLexLs are slLuaLed, a greaL number of conLexLs are slmllotly sltooteJ across culLures. ConLexL" does noL auLomaLlcally mean relaLlve" or lncommensurable." lt ofteo meoos commoo": hence Lhe exlsLence of real LranscendenLal slgnlfleds. Lven uerrlda concedes Lhls elemenLal facL. ln LhaL slmllarlLy-ln Lhe exlsLence of Lhose LranscendenLal slgnlfleds-lles Lhe posslblllty of commoolcotloo boLh wltblo culLure and octoss culLure, even lf medlaLed by language. 1hls ls why Pabermas's valldlLy clalms are boLh lmmooeot (conLexLual) and ttoosceoJeot (common conLexLual), as McCarLhy explalns: lf communlcaLlve acLlon ls our paradlgm, Lhe decenLered sub[ecL [Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve sub[ecL] remalns as a parLlclpanL ln soclal lnLeracLlon medlaLed by language. Cn Lhls accounL . . . language use ls orlenLed Lo valldlLy clalms, and valldlLy clalms can ln Lhe end be redeemed only Lhrough lnLersub[ecLlve recognlLlon. . . . 1he lnLernal relaLlon of meanlng Lo valldlLy means LhaL communlcaLlon ls noL only always 'lmmanenL'-LhaL ls, slLuaLed, condlLloned-buL also always 'LranscendenL'-LhaL ls, geared Lo valldlLy clalms LhaL are meanL Lo hold beyooJ ooy locol cootext and Lhus can be lndeflnlLely crlLlclzed, defended, revlsed" (lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. xvl). As Pabermas puLs lL: valldlLy clalms have a !anus face [Lhey are, of course, holons]. As clalms, Lhey ttoosceoJ any local conLexL, aL Lhe same Llme, Lhey have Lo be ralsed here and now and be de facLo recognlzed. 1he LranscendenL momenL of oolvetsol valldlLy bursLs every provlnclallLy asunder, Lhe obllgaLory momenL of accepLed valldlLy clalms renders Lhem carrlers of a cootext-boooJ everyday pracLlce" (hls lLallcs, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. xvll). 1hls ls why, even Lhough we are llngulsLlcally slLuaLed, Lhe valldlLy clalms place us ln relaLlon Lo exttolloqolstlc aspecLs of reallLy (LhaL are noL ln all ways metely slLuaLed). McCarLhy: 1he [valldlLy] clalms Lo LruLh, LruLhfulness, and rlghLness place Lhe speaker's uLLerance ln relaLlon Lo exLrallngulsLlc orders of reallLy" (lnLroducLlon Lo Pabermas, commoolcotloo ooJ tbe evolotloo of soclety, p. xlx). ln oLher words, even everyday communlcaLlon ls always slLuaLed ln aspecLs of reallLy LhaL are noL merely culLure-bound (or solely provlnclal). ln my vlew, Lhese exLrallngulsLlc orders (LhaL ls, orders LhaL are noL merely llngulsLlc, even lf llngulsLlcally slLuaLed) do lndeed refer Lo Lhe 8lg 1hree (l, we, lL), as Pabermas malnLalns, buL eocb of Lhose domalns can be dlvlded lnLo prepersonal, personal, and Lranspersonal componenLs. Cr prellngulsLlc (Lhe sensorlmoLor worldspace, or eye of flesh), parallngulsLlc (Lhe noosphere, or eye of mlnd), and LransllngulsLlc (Lhe Lheosphere, or eye of conLemplaLlon). 8uL even lf we leave aslde Lhe Lranspersonal domaln for Lhe momenL, Pabermas's polnL ls LhaL each of Lhese varlous orders ploces coosttolots on our slLuaLedness, prevenLs Lhe consLrucLlon" of Lhe world from belng metely otblttoty, and Lhus ollows leotoloq to occot ot oll (lf Lhere were only" Lhe LexL, Lhere would be noLhlng Lo surprlse Lhe LexL, and learnlng would never occur). 1hose noL-merely-arblLrary worldspaces anchor Lhe valldlLy clalms of any communlcaLlve acL, and prevenL conLexLs from splnnlng ouL of conLrol endlessly . . . and meanlnglessly. And lf Lhese exLrallngulsLlc or LranscendenL (or LranscendenLal slgnlfled) facLors fooctloo eveo lo commoo evetyJoy commoolcotloo ooJ evetyJoy expetleoce (as Pabermas malnLalns and even uerrlda concedes), Lhen we LranspersonallsLs don'L have Lo defend mysLlclsm as belng somehow excepLlonal and ln need of any speclal defense lo tbls teqotJ. 1hus, lf kaLz's clalm were Lrue, noL only would lL lnvalldaLe cross-culLural mysLlcal clalms, lL would lnvalldaLe ordlnary and everyday communlcaLlon lLself, aL whlch polnL hls poslLlon Lurns on lLself and Lhoroughly dlssolves lLs own credlblllLy. kaLz's poslLlon ls an amalgam of neo-kanLlan aphorlsms, pressed lnLo Lhe servlce of a deconsLrucLlve aLmosphere of self-conLradlcLory (and self-congraLulaLory) rheLorlc. lL ls shoL Lhrough wlLh aperspecLlval madness, Lhe domlnanL form of lnLellecLual confuslon for Lhe posLmodern mlnd. 8eyond LhaL, and looklng Lo Lhe Lranspersonal, whaL ls mosL dlsLurblng abouL kaLz's whole approach ls LhaL lL ls a group of scholars Lrylng Lo raLlonally Lhlnk Lhrough LransraLlonal concerns. 1hey are armchalr conLemplaLlves, so Lo speak, and Lhey are Lrylng Lo make sweeplng pronouncemenLs abouL splrlLual referenLs wlLhouL possesslng Lhe correspondlng developmenLal slgnlfled. lL's [usL Lalk-Lalk rellglon, noL LransformaLlve splrlLuallLy. 8y Lhelr own accounLs, Lhey [usL wanL Lo stoJy texts, Lhey do noL wanL Lo Lake up Lhe ln[uncLlons and Lhe paradlgms and do Lhe real sclence. 1hls ls llke [udglng a bakeoff by readlng Lhe reclpes. l wlll reLurn Lo kaLz's argumenL ln a noLe aL Lhe end of chapLer 8, afLer we have looked aL mysLlcal developmenL, and glve a slmpler crlLlque (see noLe 38 for chap. 8, see also noLe 32 for chap. 13). lor an excellenL dlscusslon of Lhe kaLz conLroversy, see Lhe superb volume edlLed and conLrlbuLed Lo by 8oberL lorman, 1be ptoblem of pote cooscloosoess. lorman Lakes Lhe baslc approach of cenLerlng on one of Lhe mosL common of mysLlcal experlences, LhaL of pure conLenLless consclousness (whlch l refer Lo as Lhe causal unmanlfesL), and Lhe varlous conLrlbuLors Lo Lhe volume presenL exLenslve evldence (emplrlcal, phenomenologlcal, and LheoreLlcal) LhaL lL ls lndeed a common, cross-culLural experlence, and LhaL Lhe experlence per se ls lJeotlcol wherever lL shows up, slmply because lL ls lLself formless, and Lherefore consLrucLed forms (and culLural dlfferences) do noL enLer lnLo Lhe acLual experlence" lLself (experlence" belng noL qulLe Lhe rlghL word, as mosL conLrlbuLors polnL ouL, Lhe sub[ecL/ob[ecL duallLy of experlencer/experlenced ls Lemporarlly dlssolved, furLher, pure Consclousness" or pure LmpLlness" ls noL lLself an experlence buL Lhe ulLlmaLe openness ln whlch experlences arlse and pass). l am ln compleLe agreemenL wlLh LhaL general approach, buL l would llke Lo polnL ouL LhaL Lhe ldenLlcalness" problem of experlences ls, once agaln, oot coofloeJ to mystlclsm and lLs end-llmlL" of cessaLlon or unmanlfesL LmpLlness. ln Pabermas's Lheory of communlcaLlve acLlon, for example, Lhe speaker has Lo assume lJeotlcol slqolflcotloo or else Lhe conversaLlon never geLs sLarLed. SubsequenL communlcaLlon, drlven by an omega polnL of muLual undersLandlng, keeps reflnlng, vla valldlLy clalms, Lhe ldenLlcallLy. Cnce agaln, Lhere ls noLhlng speclal abouL mysLlclsm lo tbls teqotJ. 1haL dlfferenL culLures glve mysLlcal experlences dlfferenL lnLerpreLaLlons and dlfferenL LasLes, as lL were, ls Lrue enough (kaLz blzarrely concedes LhaL Lhere ls Lhe mysLlcal reallLy" LhaL ls Lhen culLurally molded), buL, ln lLself, Lhls clalm ls Lrlvlal. 1haL charge applles Lo ooy experlence, from sunseL Lo food, and lf LhaL charge doesn'L lnvalldaLe sunseLs (lL does noL), Lhen lL doesn'L lnvalldaLe SplrlL elLher. 1haL parL of Lhe argumenL cenLers metely on Lhe lmmanenL aspecL of valldlLy clalms, and convenlenLly lgnores boLh Lhe LranscendenL componenL and Lhe ldenLlcal slgnlflcaLlon mandaLory for communlcaLlon ln Lhe flrsL place (excepL, of course, LhaL kaLz's poslLlon lmpllcltly assumes LranscendenLal/unlversal valldlLy for bls poslLlon LhaL Lhere ls no LranscendenLal/unlversal valldlLy-Lhe sLandard performaLlve conLradlcLlon ln Lhe relaLlvlsL's poslLlon). And Lhls means we don'L have Lo defend slmllarlLy of Lypes of mysLlcal experlence based solely on Lhe sLrong verslon of formlessness. MysLlcal experlences, of whaLever varleLy, slmply face no Lypes of problems LhaL aren'L also found ln ordlnary experlences and ordlnary communlcaLlon, and Lhe dlfflculLles ln Lhe laLLer slmply cannoL be selecLlvely used Lo lnvalldaLe Lhe former (wlLhouL slmulLaneously lnvalldaLlng Lhe aLLack lLself). WhaL ls speclal abouL mysLlclsm ls Lhe clalm, as l consLrue lL, LhaL developmenL can conLlnue beyond Lhe raLlonal-ego (and cenLaur) and lnLo hlgher/deeper domalns of awareness. 1hls approach ls doubly lmmune from kaLz's Lype of crlLlclsm. Lven lf Lhe cynlcal (and deeply confused) verslon of kaLz's consLrucLlvlsm were Lrue, and no worldvlews are slmllar, types of worldvlews are (and could be). 1here are levels of medlaLlon, levels of worldvlews. And Lhus Lhe approach ls Lo absLracL, aL a very deep level, Lhe deep sLrucLures of Lhe varlous worldvlews Lhemselves (Lhls approach ls already aL work ln lageL, Pabermas, Cebser, eLc.). Common deep sLrucLures wlLh culLurally slLuaLed surface sLrucLures seem Lo me Lo sLeer a course beLween no slmllarlLles aL all" and mosLly or only a common core." AL Lhe same Llme, l am noL suggesLlng LhaL all Lhe conLemplaLlve LradlLlons possess all Lhe sLages ln Lhe overall map l am presenLlng, many alm aL one sLage and make lL paradlgmaLlc. noneLheless, many of Lhe LradlLlons do possess all of Lhese sLages, and, as ls Lhe case wlLh all developmenLal sLages, Lhese sLages, when Lhey emerge, emerge ln an order Lhan cannoL be alLered by soclal condlLlonlng ([usL as lmages emerge before concepLs and no amounL of relnforcemenL, ln any culLure, can reverse LhaL order). As for Lhe Abyss lLself, or pure LmpLlness, lL ls lndeed pure ldenLlLy, and LhaL ls why l ofLen refer Lo Lhe Lheosphere" as belng LransllngulsLlc: as consclousness approaches unmanlfesL absorpLlon, all conLexLs-all holons-are Lemporarlly suspended or Lemporarlly dlssolved (Lhere ls Lhen only pure lmmedlacy or pure resence, Lhe some pure resence LhaL apprehends medlaLed conLexLs when Lhey are presenL), buL even LhaL experlence," conLenLless lLself, awakens Lo flnd lLself slLuaLed ln a culLural conLexL LhaL wlll parLlally provlde lnLerpreLaLlons, buL wlll noL LoLally deLermlne Lhe experlence, or else Lhe experlence could never surprlse anybody, and lL surprlses everybody. uonald 8oLhberg's conLrlbuLlon Lo lorman's volume ls slgnlflcanL. 8oLhberg's LreaLmenL of kaLz ls falr and falrly devasLaLlng. (1he one polnL l would lnLerpreL dlfferenLly ls hls concepLuallzaLlon, followlng 8rown, of Lhe sLages of medlLaLlon as a deconsLrucLlon of Lhe prevlous sLrucLures. WhaL ls deconsLrucLed ls noL Lhe prevlous boslc sLrucLures buL Lhe prevlous excloslvlty sLrucLures, LhaL ls, Lhe medlLaLor does noL permanenLly lose Lhe capaclLy Lo percelve space, Llme, self, or lndlvlduallLy, raLher, consclousness ls no longer ldenLlfled excloslvely wlLh Lhose sLrucLures, agaln, preserves Lhe sLrucLures, negaLes Lhe parLlallLy.) 17. 1hey become more compllcaLed ln some cases (when we form a Lheory, for example, we run Lhrough Lhe Lhree sLrands Lwlce, flrsL Lo generaLe Lhe daLa, Lhen Lo generaLe and LesL how Lhe Lheory-lLself a menLal daLum-flLs Lhe oLher daLa), and alLhough lL ls never a slmple one-sLep-aL-a-Llme process, Lhe same Lhree sLrands are lnvolved. Llkewlse, Lhe same Lhree sLrands anchor knowledge ln boLh Lhe 8lghL- and LefL-Pand paLhs. ln one we check Lhe daLa, ln Lhe oLher we check Lhe daLa ooJ Lhe lnLerpreLaLlons of Lhe wlLhln of Lhe daLa, Lhe polnL belng LhaL Lhe lnLerpreLaLlons are Lhemselves menLal daLa LhaL are Lhen sub[ecLed Lo Lhe same Lhree sLrands. Same essenLlal process, buL wlLh dlfferenL noLlons abouL whaL we wlll allow as daLa (exLerlors versus lnLerlors). ln Lhe LexL, l am cenLerlng malnly on Lhe lnlLlal daLa apprehenslon (wheLher sensory, menLal, or splrlLual). ln Lhe monologlcal approaches, Lhe daLa ls, so Lo speak, Laken aL face value. no aLLempL ls made Lo undersLand lL, only reporL lL or descrlbe lL. ln Lhe dlaloglcal approaches, Lhe lnLerlor depLhs of Lhe daLa are approached vla lnLerpreLaLlon, uslng Lhe same Lhree general sLrands (because Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon lLself ls anoLher daLum, sub[ecL Lo Lhe same Lhree sLrands). ln Lhe Lransloglcal approaches, Lhe sub[ecLlve percelver and ob[ecLlve daLa are boLh pursued Lo Lhelr common or nondual source (gulded by Lhe same Lhree sLrands). 18. Lven Lhe dog lLself exlsts only ln a pottlcolot worldspace, lL does noL exlsL ln Lhe worldspace of an aLom, a molecule, a cell, or an auLlsLlc (prlmary narclsslsm) lnfanL, Lhe dog exlsLs ln Lhe sensorlmoLor worldspace. And Lhe as-lf dog exlsLs only ln Lhe raLlonal worldspace. 19. urlven by evoluLlonary Lelos Lo muLual undersLandlng and muLual Lranscendence. 20. kuhn, 5ttoctote of scleotlflc tevolotloos, 2nd ed., p. 206. 21. Walsh and vaughan's lotbs beyooJ eqo remalns by far Lhe besL lnLroducLlon Lo, and survey of, Lhe Lranspersonal fleld, and lnLeresLed readers mlghL sLarL Lhere. 22. See, for example, ye to eye, 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess, Ctoce ooJ qtlt. CPA1L8 8. 1PL uL1PS Cl 1PL ulvlnL 1. . 99. All quoLes, unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, are from kolpb wolJo metsoo, 5electeJ ptose ooJ poetty, ed. 8. Cook. noLlce LhaL Lmerson handles Pabermas's ldenLlcal slgnlflcaLlon" ln a very dlrecL way: lL ls noL LhaL we merely assume ldenLlcal slgnlflcaLlon ln order Lo geL Lhe conversaLlon golng, lL ls LhaL on Lhe deepesL level we share a common Self or naLure, namely, Cod, and LhaL ls why Lhe conversaLlon can geL golng! Pabermas's omega polnL of muLual undersLandlng, whlle sLlll Lrue, ls ouLconLexLuallzed by Lmerson's omega polnL of muLual ldenLlLy (and ln Lhls Lmerson ls ln a long llne of descendanLs from loLlnus Lhrough Schelllng Lo Lmerson, as we wlll see). lor Pabermas, Lhe who" of uaseln ls found ln Lhe cltclloq of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve clrcle, for Lmerson, Lhe Who" ls slmply Cod. 1hus Lmerson refers Lo Lhe Cver-Soul as LhaL common hearL of whlch all slncere conversaLlon ls Lhe worshlp." Plderlln: . . . we calmly smlled, sensed our own Cod amldsL lnLlmaLe conversaLlon, ln one song of our souls." 2. . 96. 3. lbld. 4. Agaln, Lhls does noL mean LhaL Lhe Self ls noL slLuaLed, lL means lL ls noL merely slLuaLed. As SplrlL manlfesLs, lL manlfesLs ln and as Lhe four quadranLs, or slmply Lhe 8lg 1hree-l, lL, we. As SplrlL/Consclousness evolves lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal domaln, Lhe 8lg 1hree appear as 8uddha (Lhe ulLlmaLe l), uharma (Lhe ulLlmaLe lL), and Sangha (Lhe ulLlmaLe We). Many mysLlcs have an undersLandable Lendency Lo emphaslze Lhe l-sLrand, where one's mlnd and 8uddha Mlnd become, or are reallzed Lo be, one Self (whlch ls no-self lndlvldually), and Lmerson ls no excepLlon ln Lhls regard. 8uL by recognlzlng LhaL all manlfesLaLlon ls ln Lhe fotm of Lhe four quadranLs, Lhls Lendency Lo a cerLaln sollpslsm ls carefully guarded agalnsL. AL Lhe same Llme, Lhe Llmeless and eLernal naLure of SplrlL can noneLheless be lnLulLed ln (or Lhrough) any of Lhe four quadranLs (l, lL, or we), and Lmerson, llke so many mysLlcs, ls expresslng LhaL lnLulLlon here ln Lhe form of Lhe l-quadranL, as Lhe Cver-self or Cver-soul. 8uL lnseparable from LhaL, l wlll malnLaln, ls an Cver-lL" and Cver-we," or hlgher LruLh and wlder communlLy. 3. p. 73, 81-82. My lLallcs. ln Lhls and a few subsequenL quoLes l am comblnlng excerpLs because Lhey are relaLed by a common Lheme. 6. p. 93, 107, 32, 93. 7. 1he Lyplcal charge agalnsL cosmlc consclousness-LhaL lL vlolaLes Lhe physlcal boundarles of Lhe lndlvldual organlsm-applles Lo every oLher sense of selfness as well. 1he sense of self-ldenLlLy ls oevet merely body-bound, excepL aL fulcrum-2. AL every oLher sLage of developmenL, Lhe sense of cenLral self ls a seL of feellngs and preferences wltblo an ldenLlLy wlLh Lhe famlly, or Lhe Lrlbe, or Lhe culLure, or a cause, or a naLlon, or an ldeal, lL ls lnexLrlcably bound up wlLh possesslons, frlends, relaLlonshlps, [ob, a masslve seL of values-all of whlch are beyond Lhe boundarles of Lhe body. 1he very sense of l-ness ls oevet [usL Lhe slmple sensaLlons Lhls body ls feellng, buL always (pasL fulcrum-2) ls lnexLrlcably bound up wlLh ldenLlflcaLlons LhaL vlolaLe Lhe boundarles of Lhe body. Lvery moral lmpulse l have vlolaLes Lhe boundarles of Lhe body, every anLlclpaLlon of fuLure acLlon vlolaLes Lhe boundarles of Lhe body, every reflexlve awareness l have of myself vlolaLes Lhe boundarles of Lhe body. 1he facL LhaL cosmlc consclousness also vlolaLes Lhese boundarles ls noL even a vaguely [usLlflable crlLlclsm. (See Lhe Slngle-8oundary lallacy" ln noLe 3 for chap. 6, noLe 32 for chap. 13, and noLe 17 chap. 14.) 8. Lmerson rarely uses Lhe Lerm wotlJ 5ool, buL lL ls lmpllclL ln hls noLlon of Lhe Cver-Soul. l wlll ofLen use Lhe Lerm, because lL ls an lmporLanL remlnder of Lhe communlLy-componenL (Lhe we) of SplrlL's manlfesLaLlon. Llke Lhe Lerm Cver-Soul, Lhe World Soul always refers Lo Lhe psychlc-level. 8ecause l am leLLlng Lhese lndlvlduals represenL Lhe varlous Lranspersonal sLrucLure/sLages, keep ln mlnd LhaL Lhey wlll be presenLlng each sLage wlLh Lhelr own lndlvldual and culLural surface sLrucLures. 1hus, Lmerson Lends Lo speak of Lhe psychlc level ln Lerms of Lhe Cver-Soul"-LhaL does noL mean LhaL oLher persons or oLher LradlLlons wlll use Lhose Lerms (or even have LhaL experlence). 1o be more speclflc: lf for Lhe momenL we use Lhe Lerm mystlclsm ln a very general sense Lo mean any form of awareness beyond Lhe convenLlonal space-Llme cenLered on Lhe lndlvldual ego/bodymlnd, Lhen Lhe four general sLages of Lranspersonal or mysLlcal developmenL (psychlc, subLle, causal, and nondual) refer Lo mysLlcal sLaLes LhaL Lake, as a ma[or parL of Lhelr tefeteot, elemenLs ln Lhe gross/waklng realm, ln Lhe subLle/dream realm, ln Lhe causal/dreamless, and ln Lhe nondual (respecLlvely). 1hus, Lhe psychlc level, whlch ls Lhe realm of lnlLlal Lranspersonal or mysLlcal awareness, ofLen lnvolves a greaL number of seemlngly unrelaLed phenomena, from varlous Lypes of acLual paranormal cognlLlons and evenLs (e.g., asLral Lravel," ouL-of-Lhe- body experlences) Lo numerous prellmlnary medlLaLlve sLaLes, kundallnl awakenlng (especlally of Lhe flrsL flve chakras), rellvlng of blrLh and pre-blrLh sLaLes, Lemporary ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh planLs, anlmals, humans, aspecLs of naLure, or even all of naLure (naLure mysLlclsm, cosmlc consclousness)-Lo name a very few. WhaL all of Lhose have ln common ls LhaL Lhe mysLlcal experlence moves beyond ordlnary or convenLlonal reallLy (Lhe gross/waklng realm), buL sLlll Lakes as pott of lts tefeteot Lhe gross/waklng realm. 1hus, no maLLer how exLraordlnary or far- ouL," all mysLlcal experlences of Lhe psychlc level are sLlll teloteJ Lo gross/waklng reallLy-Lhe experlences sLlll refer, ln whole or parL, Lo elemenLs ln Lhe gross/waklng realm. 1hus, even Lhough cosmos" Lechnlcally refers Lo Lhe physlosphere, l wlll conLlnue Lo use cosmlc consclousness" (and naLure mysLlclsm") for Lhe psychlc level, as a remlnder of lLs gross-realm orlenLaLlon. 1hls ls why, for example, ua Avabhasa places mosL kundallnl experlences aL Lhls level. As he polnLs ouL (ln 1be potoJox of losttoctloo), Lhe kundallnl experlences are sLlll somaLlcally or boJlly felt, Lhey are sLlll predomlnanLly reglsLerlng ln Lhe gross body (or sLlll lnvolve aspecLs of Lhe gross body), Lhey are subLler energles, Lo be sure, buL energles sLlll orlenLed Lo or relaLed Lo gross deLermlnanLs. 1he same holds for cosmlc consclousness (whlch Avabhasa, Auroblndo, and loLlnus all slLuaLe aL Lhls psychlc level), however dlfferenL from kundallnl experlences lL mlghL be, Lhey boLh are mysLlcal experlences relaLed ln large measure Lo gross reallLy (and Lhe same ls Lrue for all forms of paranormal cognlLlons and acLlvlLles). 1hls ls why, ln general Lerms, all psychlc- level phenomena can be referred Lo generlcally as naLure (gross-relaLed) mysLlclsm, however much Lhelr surface sLrucLures vary dramaLlcally. SubLle-level mysLlclsm (delLy mysLlclsm), on Lhe oLher hand, has few, lf any, referenLs ln Lhe gross realm. 1he lnLerlor lumlnoslLles, sounds, archeLypal forms and paLLerns, exLremely subLle bllss currenLs and cognlLlons (sbobJ, ooJo), have no ma[or gross-realm referenLs. 1he reason ls LhaL Lhese subLle archeLypal lumlnous forms are Lhe seed syllables or seed paLLerns ftom wblcb gross-realm phenomena are derlved (lnvoluLlonally), and Lhus, aL Lhls polnL, Lhere are no gross phenomena Lo be referred Lo ln Lhe flrsL place. ure subLle-level mysLlclsm Lhus has few acLual referenLs ln Lhe gross (naLural) world. 1hls ls also why Avabhasa refers Lo psychlc-level mysLlclsm as LhaL of yoqls and subLle-level mysLlclsm as LhaL of solots. MosL yoglc phenomena are gross-relaLlng (conLrol of bodlly funcLlons, leadlng Lo bodlly awakenlng of kundallnl currenLs), whereas salnLly phenomena are lnLerlor halos of llghL and sound LhaL have less relaLlon Lo Lhe gross body. More speclflcally, accordlng Lo Lhe lotoJox of losttoctloo-as only one example-Lhe flrsL flve chakras are especlally gross-orlenLed (or yoglc), Lhe slxLh chakra, whlch conLalns numerous sublevels, ls Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe subLle (or salnLly)-lL has few gross-bodlly referenLs-and Lhe sevenLh chakra beglns Lo Lranscend Lhe psychlc-subLle dlmenslon alLogeLher and open onLo Lhe radlanL causal (whlch Avabhasa refers Lo as soqely). Causal-level mysLlclsm (or pure unmanlfesL absorpLlon) has no gross or subLle referenLs, lL has no referenLs aL all, excepL lLs own self-exlsLlng LmpLlness. And nondual mysLlclsm ls Lhe ldenLlLy of LmpLlness and all lorm, so lLs referenLs are wbotevet ls arlslng aL Lhe momenL (Lhe nondual slddha, or sponLaneously-so awakened one). 1hus, Lhe four ma[or Lypes of mysLlclsm (naLure, delLy, formless, nondual) have, as Lhelr deep sLrucLures, Lhe four ma[or levels of Lranspersonal developmenL (psychlc, subLle, causal, nondual), whlch are ldenLlfled by Lhelr pteJomlooot referenL (gross, subLle, causal, nondual). 1hese are easlly ldenLlflable deep sLrucLures, no maLLer how much Lhelr surface sLrucLures vary. 1he mosL varlaLlon occurs ln Lhe psychlc level, and Lhere ls a reason for Lhls: 1he psychlc ls on Lhe border beLween Lhe gross and Lhe subLle sLaLes. As such, noL only lL ls Lhe home of all sorLs of varlous prellmlnary and lnlLlal mysLlcal phenomena (whlch can be expecLed Lo vary conslderably from person Lo person), lL ls lLself Lhe broad LranslLlon sLaLe from gross Lo subLle. As such, lL ls mysLlclsm, buL mysLlclsm wlLh one fooL sLlll ln Lhe gross. lL ls gross- orlenLed mysLlclsm (and LhaL ls whaL oll of Lhese wlldly dlfferenL phenomena have ln common, from paranormal Lo kundallnl Lo naLure mysLlclsm Lo cosmlc consclousness: mysLlclsm, yes, buL gross-relaLed, wlLh one fooL ln each sLaLe, and LhaL ls why lLs acLual surface sLrucLures can vary so dramaLlcally buL sLlll lssue from Lhls same general realm, Lhe psychlc, Lhe border beLween gross and subLle). 1hus, Lhe psychlc ls, and can be, Lhe home of anyLhlng from lnlLlLal medlLaLlon experlences Lo paranormal phenomena, from ouL-of-Lhe-body experlences Lo kundallnl awakenlngs, from a slmple sLaLe of equanlmlLy Lo full-blown cosmlc consclousness: Lhey are oll Lhe subLle realm breaklng lnLo Lhe gross realm aL Lhe common border: Lhe psychlc. lurLher, somebody passlng Lhrough Lhe psychlc (or any oLher level, for LhaL maLLer) would noL be expecLed Lo experlence oll of Lhe phenomena LhaL are poLenLlally dlsclosed aL LhaL level, [usL as somebody passlng Lhrough Lhe verbal dlmenslons wlll noL auLomaLlcally develop an undersLandlng or experlence of every language ln exlsLence, nor ls lL oecessoty Lo learn all languages before one can Lranscend Lhe verbal. nor ls lL necessary Lo mostet even a slngle language (one does noL have Lo be Shakespeare Lo Lranscend Lhe verbal). lL ls necessary only LhaL Lhe general level be ob[ecLlfled, and Lhls can occur wlLh or wlLhouL consclous mostety ([usL as one can pass Lhrough Lhe verbal wlLhouL ever consclously learnlng and descrlblng all Lhe rules of grammar). 1hus, for example, ln Zen, whlch alms dlrecLly for Lhe causal/nondual, all sorLs of psychlc/subLle phenomena wlll arlse ln medlLaLlon (evetyboJy has some sorL of Lhese experlences, however brlef), buL mosL are qulckly dlsmlssed as mokyo, lnferlor apprehenslons, and Lhe sLudenL ls urged Lo pass qulckly Lhrough Lhem (Lhey are objectlfleJ, and Lhus generlcally Lranscended, and no more ls requlred ln LhaL regard). CLher LradlLlons value Lhese psychlc and subLle phenomena, and culLlvaLe Lhem mlghLlly, even Lo Lhe polnL of masLery and expllclL arLlculaLlon (whlch ls a wonderful conLrlbuLlon). 8uL no sLage can be merely and LoLally bypassed ln full or lnLegral adapLaLlon, a polnL sLressed by Auroblndo, loLlnus, and Avabhasa (Lo name a very few). leok expetleoces from any of Lhe hlgher realms are posslble aL vlrLually any polnL ln developmenL (slnce Lhese hlgher levels are sLrucLural poLenLlals presenL from blrLh), buL full adapLaLlon requlres solld ob[ecLlflcaLlon of Lhese levels, slnce Lhey Lhemselves acLually embody a serles of sub[ecLs (a serles of selves), and all selves have Lo dle (be made lnLo ob[ecLs) before Lhe pure WlLness sLands forLh and Lhen dles lLself ln LmpLlness. Any general sLage/level oot objectlfleJ wlll remaln as a blJJeo sobject (a hldden self-sense), obscurlng no-self or pure nondual awareness. 1hls ls why Auroblndo (and loLlnus and Avabhasa, eLc.) ls always saylng Lhlngs llke: 1he splrlLual evoluLlon obeys Lhe loglc of a successlve unfoldlng, lL can Lake a new declslve maln sLep only when Lhe prevlous maln sLep has been sufflclenLly conquered: even lf cerLaln mlnor sLages can be swallowed up or leaped over by a rapld and brusque ascenslon, Lhe consclousness has Lo Lurn back Lo assure lLself LhaL Lhe ground passed over ls securely annexed Lo Lhe new condlLlon, a greaLer or concenLraLed speed [whlch ls lndeed posslble] does noL ellmlnaLe Lhe sLeps Lhemselves or Lhe necesslLy of Lhelr successlve surmounLlng" (1be llfe Jlvloe, ll, p. 26). 9. As wlLh so much ln developmenL, Lhls ls a maLLer of degree. vety sLage of developmenL llberaLes Lhe WlLness from a prevlous ldenLlflcaLlon: symbols wlLness lmages, concepLs wlLness symbols, rules wlLness concepLs, and so forLh. 8y Lhe Llme of Lhe ego, and especlally Lhe cenLaur, Lhls WlLness as obsetvloq self emerges ln consclousness (alLhough presenL LhroughouL)-we saw Lhe emergence of Lhe observlng self wlLh 8roughLon's research, for example-and aL Lhe psychlc becomes a dlrecL and powerful experlence, Lhls process galns ln clarlLy and lnLenslLy all Lhe way Lo Lhe causal, as we wlll see (where Lhe WlLness flnally dlssolves ln and as pure LmpLlness). Llkewlse, Lmerson's own lnslghLs and awakenlngs ofLen pass lnLo Lhe causal and Lhe nondual, buL lL ls a maLLer of degree, and hls paradlgmaLlc presenLaLlon ls of Lhe psychlc-level Cver-Soul. 10. 8y an ldenLlLy wlLh all manlfesLaLlon," l mean ln Lhls secLlon all gross and gross-reflecLlng manlfesLaLlon, naLlon-naLure mysLlclsm does noL generally recognlze Lhe subLle or causal dlmenslons (see noLe 8 above). lL ls an ldenLlLy wlLh all of Lhe waklng- sLaLe (gross) realm, and noL wlLh Lhe subLle domaln nor Lhe deep-sleep (formless) domaln. 11. . 93. 12. p. 3-6. 13. p. 12-13, 97, 83, 84. 14. Lmerson uses Lhe Lerm keosoo, by whlch he means vlslon-loglc (LhaL ls, he refers Lo Lhe Cerman ldeallsL's use of vetoooft), when Lhls vlslon-loglc ls sLlmulaLed Lo more earnesL vlslon," as he puLs lL, Lhen LhaL ls pure vlslon lLself, whlch ls Lhe characLerlsLlc cognlLlve mode of Lhe psychlc level (as l suggesLed ln 1toosfotmotloos: where cenLaurlc vlsloo-loqlc adds up Lhe lnLegral, psychlc-level vlsloo slmply and dlrecLly sees Lhe lnLegral), l have used Lhe more common Lerm lotoltloo Lo cover dlrecL psychlc vlslon, and Lmerson hlmself says we denoLe Lhls prlmary wlsdom as lnLulLlon." 13. p. 24, 36, 23. 16. Many ecophllosophers wanL Lo use Notote, wlLh a caplLal N, Lo mean Lhe same Lhlng as Cod or Coddess or SplrlL, excepL wlLhouL Lhe oLherworldly" connoLaLlon. lor Lhem, naLure ls splrlL-as-Lhls-world, and we don'L need any ttoosceoJeotol aspecL Lo lL. 1hese ecophllosophers (whom l wlll dlscuss ln greaL deLall ln volume 2) malnLaln LhaL culLure ls slmply anoLher producLlon of naLure-LhaL all Lhlngs are ln some sense producLlons of naLure-and naLure ls Lhus Lhe ooe qtoooJ of oll LhaL ls. Notote ls [usL anoLher word for SplrlL, buL a Lhoroughly lmmanenL SplrlL. (ln chapLer 12, l wlll furLher dlsLlngulsh beLween naLure, or Lhe 8lghL-Pand emplrlcal world, and nA1u8L, or Lhe All. ln Lhls noLe, naLure means nA1u8L, or Lhe enLlre kosmos.) 8uL Lhls lnLroduces an lrreconcllable problem: whaL ls Lhe relaLlon beLween naLure and naLure? 1haL ls, beLween Lhe greaL lorce LhaL produces All, and Lhe merely blospherlc componenL of Lhe All? 1hese ecophllosophers sllp back and forLh beLween Lhese Lwo very dlfferenL deflnlLlons: naLure (as Lhe All) and naLure (as Lhe blosphere), preclsely because Lhey wanL Lo prlvllege Lhe blosphere and make Lhe laws of naLure lnLo Lhe laws of naLure. 1hus, on Lhe one hand, Lhey have a bruLal duallsm: naLure ls good, culLure ls (or can be) very bad (because culLure can hurL and despoll naLure), and Lhus we have Lo geL back Lo naLure and heal Lhe planeL, eLc. 8uL lf culLure can so wlldly Jevlote from naLure, Lhen culLure ls obvlously oot a producL of naLure, ls oot someLhlng naLure lLself ls dolng (unless we wlsh Lo deflne naLure as sulcldal, whlch ls raLher unbecomlng ln a god). CulLure, Lhen, ls noL slmply naLure. 8uL slnce naLure ls also supposed Lo be Lhe qteot fotce ooJetlyloq All, Lhese LheorlsLs Lhen swlLch Lo naLure wlLh a blg N, and Lhls naLure ls Lhen sald Lo underlle botb culLural producLlons (whlch are slmply a second naLure") ooJ Lhe naLural world as well. And Lhe quesLlon remalns: whaL Lhen ls Lhe relaLlon of naLure and naLure? lf naLure underlles boLh naLure and culLure, Lhen naLure cannoL slmply be naLure. 8ecause Lhey wanL Lo prlvllege Lhe blosphere (or naLure) as agalnsL culLure, buL because Lhey also wanL Lhe ecocenLrlc noLlon Lo embrace evetytbloq (and Lhus be splrlLual"), Lhey musL slmoltooeoosly concelve naLure as belng dlfferenL from culLure ooJ as Lhe all-encompasslng greaL lorce LhaL lncludes culLure as well. And Lhey slmply shlfL back and forLh beLween Lhese deflnlLlons, beLween naLure and naLure, as sulLs Lhelr purposes. 1hey refer Lo naLure Lo show how culLure ls rulnlng lL (because naLure and culLure are lndeed dlfferenL), and Lhen Lhey swlLch Lo naLure Lo lmpose Lhe blocenLrlc soluLlon LhaL musL also lnclude culLure ln lLs LoLallLarlan umbrella. lf Lhe blosphere ls really Cod/dess, how could human belngs posslbly be desLroylng lL? Pow could human belngs acLually be desLroylng Cod? 8ecause Lhese parLlcular ecophllosophers confuse fundamenLal wlLh slgnlflcanL, Lhey do noL see LhaL Lhe ever-wldenlng onLologlcal clrcle goes from naLure Lo culLure Lo SplrlL, or, lf you wlsh, naLure Lo culLure Lo naLure, where naLure as SplrlL ls here correcLly used Lo lndlcaLe Lranscends and lncludes." CulLure can lndeed desLroy segmenLs of Lhe blosphere, preclsely because Lhe blosphere ls noL naLure buL merely naLure. And culLure, ln Lranscendlng naLure, can repress and dlssoclaLe lL and lndeed harm lL (and slnce naLure ls an lnLernal compooeot of Lhe culLural compound lndlvldual, Lhen LhaL ls potely solclJol). 8uL culLure cannoL desLroy Cod or naLure or SplrlL, any more Lhan Lhe Lall can wag Lhe dog. And furLher, naLure and culLure can be healed, never ln naLure, buL only ln naLure (SplrlL). Many of Lhese ecophllosophers polnL Lo Splnoza Lo supporL Lhelr verslon of Cod = naLure," and here Lhey glve a qulLe dlsLorLed readlng. Splnoza malnLalned LhaL SplrlL ls radlcally oLher Lo Lhls world, and yeL LoLally and compleLely embraces Lhls world as a loglcal premlse embraces all lLs consequenLs (hls example). SplrlL conLalns an loflolte number of aLLrlbuLes, only Lwo of whlch show up ln Lhls world." As karl !aspers polnLs ouL, accordlng Lo Splnoza lL ls a mark of Lhe radlcal dlfference beLween Cod and Lhe world LhaL of Cod's lnflnlLely many aLLrlbuLes only Lwo are avallable Lo us." 1hls was such a radlcal cleavage beLween Cod and Lhls world LhaL Pegel, who sLudled Splnoza carefully, called Splnoza's sysLem acosmlsm": Lhe world ls vlrLually nonexlsLenL or lllusory. 8uL Pegel goes a llLLle Loo far, as Splnoza makes clear, ln Lhe Lwo aLLrlbuLes LhaL we coo know-LhoughL and exLenslon-Cod ls fully lmmanenL, and Lhus, whlle a plLlfully small porLlon of Cod ls ln Lhls world, all of Lhls world ls ln Cod (agaln, Lhe hlgher Lranscends and lncludes Lhe lower, so LhaL all of Lhe lower ls ln Lhe hlgher buL noL all Lhe hlgher ls ln Lhe lower). 1hls has led Lo Lhe popular" vlew LhaL Splnoza acLually sald LhaL Lhls flnlLe world lLself ls Cod. AL no polnL whaLsoever dld Splnoza equaLe Lhe sum LoLal of flnlLe naLure wlLh Lhe whole of SplrlL or Cod, Lhls ls uLLerly conLrary Lo whaL he was Lrylng Lo say. 1hls ls why he hlmself dlfferenLlaLes carefully beLween naLure (as Cod or SplrlL, oototo oototoos), whlch ls lnflnlLely LranscendenLal, and naLure (as Lhls world, oototo ootototo), whlch ls merely lmmanenL. And holdlng up Splnoza as someone who equaLed naLure and naLure ls susplclous Lo say Lhe leasL. lf by Notote (wlLh a blg N) Lhese ecophllosophers mean a 8eallLy wlLh lnflnlLe aLLrlbuLes LhaL lnflnlLely Lranscends Lhls world of naLure, buL LoLally pervades lL and upholds lL, Lhen l agree enLlrely. lor Splnoza, LhaL ulLlmaLe 8eallLy ls approached and known ln LhoughL, noL ln sensory exLenslon or naLure-a naLure sensory experlence ls for Splnoza an example of whaL he calls muLllaLed, confused" knowledge, Lhe lowesL of hls Lhree levels of knowlng. l dlsagree wlLh Splnoza on how LhaL 8eallLy ls known (lL ls acLually known LransraLlonally, a fourLh" level beyond Splnoza's Lhree, wlLh whlch l oLherwlse agree), buL ecophllosophers should reallze whaL Lree Lhey're barklng up. Why Splnoza feels LhaL SplrlL LoLally Lranscends Lhe world buL LoLally embraces lL wlll become clearer, l belleve, laLer ln Lhls chapLer. 17. 1hls was Plderlln's vlew as well, as one of hls ma[or LranslaLors explalns: As Lhe force of All-unlLy, naLure ls of course noL llmlLed Lo physlcal reallLy, buL ls presenL ln Lranscendence ('Peaven') and ln Lhe hlsLorlcal belng of 'naLlons'" (unger, nolJetllos mojot poetty, p. 109). 18. . 32. My lLallcs. 19. Cr, more preclsely, Lhe Cver-Soul ls a new and hlgher holon embraclng Lhe physlosphere, blosphere, and noosphere as [unlor componenLs ln lLs own compound lndlvlduallLy. 20. Schopenhauer, wotlJ os wlll ooJ tepteseototloo. 21. 1hls was also one of Pegel's crlLlclsms of kanL, LhaL ln kanL's auLonomy" Lhe exLernal LyranL of heLeronomy had been replaced by Lhe lnLernal LyranL of Lhe caLegorlcal lmpetotlve, whereas auLhenLlc morallLy, lssulng from Lhe reallzaLlon of self- poslLlng SplrlL, would be spootooeoosly expressed as one's own deepesL naLure. Warwlck lox, ln 1toospetsoool ecoloqy, aLLempLs Lo resurrecL Lhls Pegellan noLlon (followlng naess), buL he Lrles Lo flL lL lnLo a purely flaLland onLology, wlLh unpleasanL resulLs (whlch l wlll examlne ln volume 2). AlLhough Lhere ls much Lo recommend lox's approach, and cerLalnly much Lo applaud ln lLs clarlLy of expresslon and lnLegrlLy of lnLenL, lL ls crlppled by a recognlLlon of only Lhe narrower/wlder dlmenslon, and noL also Lhe deeper/hlgher dlmenslon-a legacy of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. And, Lyplcal of many ecophllosophers, lox wanLs Lo exteoJ Lhls paradlgm Lo a flaLland ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh all flaLland holons. As for Lhe supersesslon of omega polnLs from Lhe motool ooJetstooJloq of Lhe worldcenLrlc perspecLlve (of Lhe ego-cenLaur) Lo Lhe motool lJeotlty of Lhe Cver-Soul, see noLe 1 above. Also, as we wlll see ln Lhe followlng secLlon, Lhe Cver-Soul flnds lLs own omega ln Lhe subLle and causal dlmenslons. 22. 1he foundaLlon of morallLy." 23. 1he foundaLlon of morallLy." l would llke Lo propose Lhe Lhesls LhaL Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon (8Ml)-presenL aL all sLages of human growLh-ls roLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span." 1hls 8Ml represenLs (ls o Jltect tesolt of) Lhe manlfesLaLlon of SplrlL ln Lhe four quadranLs (or slmply Lhe 8lg 1hree)-Lhe depLh ln l expanded Lo lnclude oLhers (we) ln a correspondlng ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs (lL). 1haL ls, all lndlvlduals lnLulL SplrlL, and slnce SplrlL moolfests os Lhe 8lg 1hree, Lhen Lhe baslc splrlLual lnLulLlon ls felL ln all Lhree domalns, and Lhus Lhe baslc splrlLual lnLulLlon (Ponor and acLuallze SplrlL") shows up as romoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span," or so l malnLaln. My furLher clalm ls LhaL lf we Lake Lhe 8Ml and apply lL Lo Lhe varlous worldvlews (maglc, myLhlc, raLlonal, psychlc, eLc.) we can generaLe Lhe Lyplcal moral sLance of Lhose sLages, because each sLage has Lhe some 8Ml (because SplrlL ls one) buL a Jlffeteot deflnlLlon of self, oLhers, and ob[ecLs (because SplrlL unfolds dlfferenL depLhs ln Lhe course of lLs self-evoluLlon). ln Lhe egocenLrlc sLance, for example, depLh ls exLended only (or prlmarlly) Lo Lhe self, and all oLhers are merely (or usually) exLenslons of Lhe self (lLs moral sLance has a spoo of 1, and lL promoLes and proLecLs Lhe depLh ln LhaL span only, namely, lLself, Lhls ls also Lhe Lyplcal hedonlsLlc eLhlc). ln Lhe soclocenLrlc sLance, depLh ls acknowledged Lo exlsL ln oLhers, buL only Lhose of one's parLlcular culLure (spoo exLends Lo all bellevers ln Lhe myLhology, and tbelt depLh ls Lo be proLecLed and promoLed, Lhls ls Lyplcally Lhe duLy eLhlc). All oLher lndlvlduals, however, are some verslon of lnfldels, who possess no depLh, no soul, and Lhus are noL worLhy of belng proLecLed and promoLed (and, lndeed, are ofLen sacrlflces Lo Lhe glory of Lhe culLure's god). ln Lhe worldcenLrlc raLlonal sLance, depLh ls exLended Lo all human belngs, span now lncludes Lhe human race as such. (And, as a slde LwlsL, wlLh Lhe flaLLenlng of Lhe kosmos Lo Lhe ob[ecLlve naLural world or cosmos, depLh came Lo be lnLerpreLed merely as a mono-level happlness, ln whlch case Lhe 8Ml ls unpacked as romoLe Lhe greaLesL happlness for Lhe greaLesL numbers," wlLh no conslderaLlon of dlfferenL Lypes of happlness or levels of depLh LhaL should be exLended ln Lhe flrsL place. 8eLLer an unhappy SocraLes Lhan a conLenLed plg" cannoL be handled ln Lhls flaLland 8Ml.) noneLheless, Lhe raLlonal worldcenLrlc unpacklng of Lhe 8Ml exLends lLs depLh or poLenLlal depLh Lo all human belngs (lf noL ln equallLy, Lhen ln equal opporLunlLy, regardless of race, gender, creed), and may begln Lo exLend lL Lo nonhuman belngs as well. ln Lhe Lranspersonal domalns, Lhe 8Ml unfolds as 8uddha (l), uharma (lL), and Sangha (We), and Lhe ulLlmaLe Sangha ls Lhe communlLy of all senLlenL belngs as such. (8uL Lhls doesn'L prevenL us from maklng relaLlve dlsLlncLlons as well. 1he 8Ml ls Lo proLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span," and Lhus, lf we had Lo choose beLween kllllng a mosqulLo or Lhe ualal Lama, we swaL Lhe mosqulLo. Lven Lhough boLh are perfecL expresslons of Lhe same Self or 8uddha Mlnd, Lhe laLLer reallzes more depLh and Lhus ls Lo be more proLecLed.) 1here are varlaLlons on Lhls Lheme ln Lhe dlfferenL sLages of Lhe Lranspersonal domalns, and l wlll deal wlLh Lhose elsewhere (see noLe 38 below). ln oLher words, l belleve we all lnLulL SplrlL Lo one degree or anoLher, and Lhus we all possess Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon, buL we unfold LhaL lnLulLlon only aL our presenL level of developmenL. Slnce SplrlL olwoys manlfesLs slmulLaneously ln and as Lhe four quadranLs, Lhen Lhls splrlLual lnLulLlon ls (and would have Lo be) unpacked accordlng Lo how each sLage of developmenL cognlzes Lhe four quadranLs. uLLlng Lhese horlzonLal and verLlcal facLors LogeLher glves us a mulLldlmenslonal grld LhaL, as far as l can Lell, can generaLe all of Lhe ma[or eLhlcal sLances LhaL have been advanced. lurLher, even wlLhln a glven level of developmenL, Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon ls [usL LhaL, an lnLulLlon, noL an engraved LableL wlLh wrlLLen lnsLrucLlons. lL ls glven form and shape by Lhe surface sLrucLures of Lhe culLure ln whlch lL flnds lLself, and-preclsely because lL ls an lnLulLlon-lndlvlduals wlLhln a glven sLage can leqltlmotely dlsagree on preclsely whaL depLh ls, whaL span should be lncluded, and whaL measures should be Laken Lo ob[ecLlvely lmplemenL lL (l, we, lL). (A hlgher sLage would lnvolve a more ootbeotlc unpacklng of Lhe 8Ml, buL LhaL sLage would sLlll face lLs own problems of leglLlmacy on lLs own level, and so on.) 1o glve a noLorlous example from Lhe raLlonal level: Should we or should we noL exLend Lhe span of whaL we recognlze as depLh Lo lnclude Lhe feLus? uoes roLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span" mean Lhe feLus has a real depLh and Lhus should be proLecLed? Cr ls Lhe feLus baslcally [usL a poLenLlal depLh (and Lhus accorded fewer rlghLs Lhan acLual depLh)? Cr agaln, ls Lhe depLh olteoJy presenL ln Lhe moLher so much greaLer Lhan Lhe poteotlol buL ooteollzeJ depLh of Lhe feLus, LhaL lf havlng Lhe baby would severely lmpalr Lhe moLher's depLh accordlng Lo her, Lhen Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span" would acLually be focllltoteJ, noL hlndered, by aborLlon? (1he femlnlsLs unlformly Lake Lhls sLance, even lf Lhey don'L arLlculaLe lL ln Lhose Lerms.) My polnL ls LhaL reasonable men and women can leglLlmaLely dlsagree on Lhese lssues, wlLh each of Lhem aLLempLlng Lo unpack Lhe 8Ml as besL Lhey can. (SoclocenLrlc or myLhlc-membershlp lndlvlduals, on Lhe oLher hand, who belleve ln Lhe myLhogonlc orlgln of llfe, feel Lhe feLus ls already a fully fledged person and Lhus has equal depLh and needs equal proLecLlon, aborLlon ls murder. lnLeresLlngly, Lhls argumenL would exLend only Lo unborn buL poLenLlal bellevets, an unbellever has no soul, or, wlLhouL bapLlsm, ls desLlned for hell, and you are deflnlLely allowed Lo murder lnfldels, whaL really lrks Lhem abouL aborLlon ls noL Lhe loss of human llfe buL Lhe loss of a poLenLlal converL, Lhey unreflexlvely say all human llfe" because Lhey auLomaLlcally and deeply assume all human llfe belongs Lo Lhelr Cod, and Lhelrs alone. A moral dllemma aL tbls sLage ls: should l klll Lhe klllers of Cod's chlldren? And, ln facL, one physlclan has already been murdered ln Amerlca on preclsely Lhese grounds." AfLer ur. Cunn's murder, Lhe fundamenLallsL newsleLLers lndeed had a heaLed debaLe abouL hls deaLh: noL wheLher he should have been kllled-LhaL was never quesLloned-buL lf lL shouldn'L have been done lnsLead by sLonlng, Lhls belng Lhe accepLable blbllcal deaLh for such a slnner.) l wlll reLurn Lo Lhe 8Ml laLer (see noLe 13 for chapLer 14). My polnL for now-and Lhls relaLes Lo Lmerson and Schopenhauer-ls LhaL expresslng Lhe 8Ml ln Lerms of Lhe one Self" or common Cver-Soul" ls flne, as long as we remember LhaL ls only one aspecL of Lhe 8Ml (namely, Lhe sub[ecLlve sLrand) and only one componenL of a full eLhlcal Lheory (whlch would have Lo lnvolve all four quadranLs). CLherwlse we wlll very soon sllde lnLo sollpslsm and sub[ecLlve ldeallsm, whlch plays heavlly lnLo Lhe hyper-agenLlc, hyper-mascullne, dlsengaged and dangllng sub[ecL of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. 24. Pabermas does noL recognlze any sLages (ln any domaln) hlgher Lhan maLure and dlfferenLlaLed/lnLegraLed, decenLered, auLonomous communlcaLlve reason (vlslon-loglc). CommunlcaLlve reason ls Lhe flnal omega, Lhe end of hlsLory for Pabermas. 8uL Lhe whole polnL of Lhe Lranspersonal orlenLaLlon ls LhaL LhaL ls an alLogeLher premaLure closlng of Lhe hlsLory books. Llkewlse, alLhough l have made frequenL use of Pabermas's overall Lheory, we would of course dlffer on varlous aspecLs of LhaL general framework. Pabermas ls parLlcularly unclear, lL seems Lo me, on Lhe lndlvldual, sub[ecLlve domaln, LhaL of lnner naLure" (lncludlng Lhe LherapeuLlc and Lhe aesLheLlc). Cn Lhe one hand he sLaLes LhaL Lhe Lhree domalns are open Lo raLlonallzaLlon and cumulaLlve learnlng, on Lhe oLher, he sLaLes LhaL Lhe lnner domaln ls only parLlcular and noL open Lo unlversal clalms. 8oLhberg belleves LhaL Pabermas would malnLaln LhaL Lhe form (or sLrucLure) of Lhe lnner domaln evolves (and ls unlversal ln LhaL manner), buL Lhe conLenL ls lndlvlduallsLlc and parLlcular (and noL open Lo unlversallLy). lf Lhls ls so (and lL does seem Lo reflecL Pabermas's general poslLlon), lL ls noL LhaL dlfferenL from my own clalm LhaL Lhe deep sLrucLures of all domalns evolve ln a broadly unlversal form, buL Lhe surface sLrucLures are everywhere parLlcularlsLlc" and dependenL upon culLural and personal conLlngencles (Lhe lnner domaln belng no dlfferenL, ln Lhls regard, Lhan Lhe exLernal and Lhe soclal domalns, Lhe deep sLrucLures of selfhood or sub[ecLlvlLy evolve ln essenLlally Lhe same framework, and along Lhe same llnes, as Lhe lL and Lhe we, Lhe publlc" naLure of Lhe lL and we ls acLually no more publlc Lhan Lhe l: Lhe recognlLlon of each domaln ls seL ln Lhe same paLLerns of relaLlonal exchange). 1o say LhaL Lhe lnner/sub[ecLlve world has feaLures LhaL are ldlosyncraLlc ls Lrue buL Lrlvlal ln Lhls regard, whaL ls noL Lrlvlal ls LhaL Lhe types of sub[ecLlve space, and Lhe types of daLa or lnward apprehenslon, evolve ln a broad paLLern LhaL ls as cross-culLural as Lhe unfoldlng of types of moral response and types of Lechnlcal-ob[ecLlve poLenLlals, Lo say Lhe speclflc conLenLs vary ln one ls Lo slmply say Lhey vary ln all. 8esldes, prlvlleglng Lhe lL and Lhe we over Lhe l, when lL comes Lo unlversal valldlLy, ulLlmaLely undercuLs Lhe prlvlleglng lLself. Whlle l agree wlLh much of Pabermas's crlLlque of Lhe phllosophy of Lhe sub[ecL-as we wlll see ln deLall ln chapLers 12 and 13-l belleve he has Lossed Lhe baby wlLh Lhe baLhwaLer ln Lhls parLlcular lssue. When he says LhaL noLhlng can be learned ln an ob[ecLlvaLlng aLLlLude abouL lnner naLure qua sub[ecLlvlLy," l know whaL he means-Lhe sub[ecL ceases Lo be a sub[ecL preclsely aL Lhe momenL lL ls ob[ecLlfled, buL Lhe whole polnL abouL lnner developmenL ls LhaL whaL ls embedded-sub[ecLlvlLy aL one sLage becomes generally ob[ecL of awareness aL Lhe nexL, and Lhe hlgher or conLemplaLlve sLages of developmenL are exacLly ones where much ls learned abouL lnner naLure preclsely by ob[ecLlfylng lL ln lnLense lnLrospecLlve modes, an ob[ecLlfylng LhaL ls a freelng or deLachmenL from Lhe sub[ecLlve-embeddedness or ldenLlflcaLlon: much ls learned abouL lnner naLure qua sub[ecLlvlLy preclsely by ob[ecLlfylng lL and robblng lL of lLs power Lo sub[ecLlfy Lhe world-and furLher, Lhe clalm of Lhe conLemplaLlve LradlLlons ls LhaL general maps of Lhls Lranssub[ecLlfylng process of developmenL can be reconsLrucLed, maps LhaL possess a general or broadly unlversal characLer, and Lhese maps, consLrucLed wlLh Lhe warranL of Lhe Lhree sLrands of valld knowledge accumulaLlon, are every blL as publlc" as any oLher accumulaLlon. (ln chapLers 12 and 13, when l crlLlclze Lhe merely ob[ecLlfylng mode of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm-Lhe phllosophy of Lhe dlsengaged self or sub[ecL-lL ls a crlLlclsm noL of ob[ecLlfylng buL of only ob[ecLlfylng: of Lhe fallure Lo see LhaL Lhe sub[ecL sLlll exlsLs ln paLLerns of relaLlonal exchange wlLh slmllarly depLhed sub[ecLs, whlch flnally anchors noL only Lhe we buL Lhe l.) 8oLhberg dlscusses many of Lhese Loplcs ln an excellenL overvlew, 8aLlonallLy and rellglon ln Pabermas's recenL work." 8oLhberg's concluslon LhaL a reconsLrucLed" Pabermaslan framework ls noneLheless broadly compaLlble wlLh Lhe phenomenology of conLemplaLlve rellglon ls a concluslon l supporL. 1hese Loplcs are dealL wlLh ln deLall ln volume 3, ln Lhe meanLlme, crlLlcs mlghL forglve my raLher generallzed use of Pabermas's framework (llkewlse, l have based mosL of my commenLs ln Lhls volume on Pabermas's work up Lo, buL noL lncludlng, hls recenLly released magnum, 1be tbeoty of commoolcotlve octloo, of whlch Lwo volumes are now avallable. My dlscusslon of Lhese ls reserved for laLer publlcaLlons). Accordlngly, when Charles 1aylor complalns LhaL Pabermas's framework allows any Lrue splrlLual/subsLanLlve clalms Lo sllp Lhrough Lhe cracks," l belleve Lhls ls Lrue only lf Lhe Pabermaslan framework ls noL exLended lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal sLrands of each of Lhe Lhree domalns (each of Lhe four quadranLs). AL Lhe same Llme, my ma[or crlLlclsm of 1aylor ls LhaL he ls lnordlnaLely fond of maglco-myLhlc syncreLlsms. 1lme and agaln, when he comes Lo glve examples of Lhe onLlc logos he feels LhaL modernlLy losL," he reverLs Lo syncreLlc/myLhlc wholes." A llLLle more Lrans," and a llLLle less pre," would, l belleve, allow hlm Lo recognlze Lhe value of a reconsLrucLed" or exLended (Lranspersonal) Pabermaslan framework. 8uL Pabermas and 1aylor are good examples of Lhe lmpacL of an amblvalenL modernlLy on presenLday LheorlsLs. AlLhough boLh LheorlsLs are acuLely appreclaLlve of Lhe good news/bad news naLure of modernlLy, Pabermas exuberanLly celebraLes no more myLhs!," and 1aylor sadly lamenLs Lhe no more AscenL!" 23. . 99. All quoLes, unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, are from lotetlot costle, Lrans. L. eers. 26. p. 83, 86. 27. 1hls cessaLlon, whlch ls Lhe sloqle prlmary LransformaLlve sLaLe ln all of 1eresa's sLages, ls a gllmmer of oltvlkolpo somoJbl, or formless absorpLlon. 1hls cessaLlon or suspenslon (boLh her Lerms) ls hlnLed aL ln Lhe rayer of CuleL buL comes Lo Lhe fore aL Lhls sLage and conLlnues Lo be Lhe LransformaLlve evenL ln Lhe slxLh sLage as well. 1hls ls why she says Lhe experlences [of cessaLlon/absorpLlon] of Lhls [3Lh] manslon and of Lhe nexL are almosL ldenLlcal" (pp. 106-107). She Lherefore descrlbes Lhls sLaLe of suspenslon ln Lhe fourLh, Lhe flfLh, Lhe slxLh, and even Lhe sevenLh sLage. Pere are several quoLes: ln Lhls sLaLe of suspenslon Lhe faculLles are so compleLely absorbed LhaL we mlghL descrlbe Lhem as dead, and Lhe senses so as well . . ." (p. 130). Pere we are all asleep, and fasL asleep, Lo Lhe Lhlngs of Lhe world, and Lo ourselves (ln facL, for Lhe shorL Llme LhaL Lhe condlLlon lasLs, Lhe soul ls wlLhouL consclousness and has no power Lo Lhlnk, even Lhough lL may deslre Lo do so) . . ." (p. 97). 1hls ls a delecLable deaLh, lf lL sLlll breaLhes, lL does so wlLhouL reallzlng lL, even lf lL has any consclousness, nelLher hands nor feeL can move . . ." (p. 98). lor as long as Lhe soul ls ln Lhls sLaLe, lL can nelLher see nor hear nor undersLand . . ." (p. 101). SomeLlmes lL seems doubLful lf Lhere ls any breaLh ln Lhe body. 1hls lasLs only for a shorL Llme because, when Lhls profound suspenslon llfLs a llLLle, Lhe body seems Lo come parLly Lo lLself agaln, and draws breaLh, Lhough only Lo dle once more, and, ln dolng so, Lo glve fuller llfe Lo Lhe soul . . ." (p. 133). (noLe Lhe slmllarlLy Lo Lhe 1ranscendenLal MedlLaLlon phenomenon of Lranscendence and breaLh suspenslon repeaLed ln slow cycles.) 8uL as for Lhe soul belng asleep" or noL consclous" ln Lhls sLaLe of cessaLlon, 1eresa flnally polnLs ouL LhaL lL ls acLually LhaL Lhe soul ls fully awake, whlle asleep as regards all aLLachmenL" (p. 133). 1hls suspenslon, absorpLlon, cessaLlon ls referred Lo ln LasLern LexLs as condlLlonal nlrvlkalpa samadhl," or formless awareness noL yeL fully esLabllshed. Lach of 1eresa's sLages are anchored ln a LasLe of Lhls cessaLlon, and LhaL LasLe Lrlggers Lhe developmenL Lhrough Lhe psychlc and subLle sLages wlLh Lhelr varlous vlslons, rapLures, volces, lllumlnaLlons, and so forLh (sovlkolpo somoJbl). 1hls cessaLlon/absorpLlon ls, for 1eresa, pure unlon wlLh Cod (and Lhe Plndu LexLs would agree, however, Lhls cessaLlon ls lndeed condlLlonal" because Lhere remaln Lraces of duallsm ln Lhe percepLlon, lf Lhose Lraces were uprooLed, Cod and soul would boLh glve way Lo pure causal Codhead, or joooo somoJbl, whlch we wlll examlne ln Lhe nexL secLlon wlLh LckharL and 8amana). 28. . 101. 29. . 106. 30. . 133. 31. p. 129, 131. Compare Lhe 8uddhlsL pseudo-Jobkbo", see 1toosfotmotloos. 32. . 199. 33. p. 134, 160. 8uL Lhls does noL, she polnLs ouL, mean LhaL Lhey cannoL be communlcaLed, and lndeed conflrmed, Lo and wlLh Lhose who have also had slmllar experlences. nor do l Lhlnk l shall succeed ln descrlblng Lhem ln such a way as Lo be undersLood, excepL by Lhose who have experlenced lL, for Lhese are lnfluences so dellcaLe and subLle LhaL Lhey proceed from Lhe very depLh of Lhe hearL and l know no comparlson LhaL l can make whlch wlll flL Lhe case" (p. 134)-LhaL ls, no slgnlfler wlll work unless Lhere ls a developmenLal slgnlfled ln Lhe llsLener. Pence Lhese sLaLes are noL merely arblLrary ln a relaLlve-consLrucLlvlsL sense: Lhe Lrue and Lhe false sLlll obLaln: 8uL l fancy LhaL even now you wlll noL be saLlsfled, for you wlll Lhlnk LhaL you may be mlsLaken, and LhaL Lhese lnLerlor maLLers are dlfflculL Lo lnvesLlgaLe. ln reallLy, whaL has been sald wlll be sufflclenL for anyone who has experlenced, for Lhere ls a greaL dlfference beLween Lhe false and Lhe Lrue" (p. 100). Pabermas ls always wanLlng a slmple ?es or no," and 1eresa would be more Lhan glad Lo glve lL Lo hlm. 34. p. 149, 132. 33. 1he hlgh-subLle, wlLh lnLlmaLlons of low-causal. 1eresa says LhaL Lhe lesser vlslons and rapLures and lllumlnaLlons (of Lhe psychlc and low subLle) are Lhe resulL of Lhe unlon of ospects of Lhe soul wlLh Cod, or Lhe unlon of some faculLles of Lhe soul wlLh Cod, buL Lhls flnal unlon ls of Lhe Lhe whole soul and Cod." 36. . 213. 37. p. 213-14. 38. See also 1be Atmoo ptoject and 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess. 39. . 87. 40. Asceot of Mooot cotmel, chap. 3. 41. p. 216, 210. 42. llfe Jlvloe, pp. 704-703. 43. . 169. 44. p. 218, 217. unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, all quoLes are from lox's new LranslaLlons, 8teoktbtooqb. 43. . 213. 46. p. 104, 178, 242. 47. p. 190, 177, 140, 128, 236. 48. p. 277, 294, 181. 49. p. 298, 309, 301. 30. . 102. All quoLes, unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, are from 1olks wltb komooo Mobotsbl. 31. . 32. 32. . 13. 33. p. 110, 121. 34. p. 33, 93. 33. p. 182, 210, 82. 36. p. 132, 316. 37. p. 317, 316. 38. 1he nondual LradlLlons make a serles of very flne dlsLlncLlons here, whlch aL leasL should be brlefly menLloned. And we can reLurn Lo kaLz and offer a slmpler crlLlque of hls poslLlon. 1he manlfesL All as a LoLallLy, Lhe consummaLe Polon, ls soqooo 8tobmoo, flnal-Cod wlLh form (Lhe low causal). 1hls manlfesL All-unlLy Lherefore evolves as All-lorm, Lhe summlL appllcaLlon" of Lhe LwenLy LeneLs. ure unmanlfesL (or hlgh causal) SplrlL (oltqooo 8tobmoo) does noL evolve or lnvolve or ln any way enLer or leave Lhe manlfesL sLream, buL underlles" lL as a mlrror underlles" equally all lLs ob[ecLs, whaLever Lhe sLaLe of Lhose ob[ecLs, lL ls boLh Lhe Source of all oLher levels and Lhelr ulLlmaLe Coal (buL lL ls noL a summaLlon or addlLlon of manlfesLaLlon, as ls saguna, because lL ls uLLerly unmanlfesL). Codhead as nondual Suchness (as opposed Lo unmanlfesL Source and Coal) ls nelLher manlfesL nor unmanlfesL, lL ls as fully presenL ln Lhe lowesL holon as ln Lhe hlghesL holon, and ln any manlfesL or unmanlfesL sLaLe, as Lhe lsness or suchness of any phenomenon. 8oughly: WhlLehead's rlmordlal naLure of Cod refers Lo archeLypal paLLerns ln Lhe hlgh subLle prlor Lo gross lnvoluLlon (cf. concreLlon"), WhlLehead belleves Lhese paLLerns Lo be eLernal ob[ecLs," buL many LradlLlons, such as Mahayana 8uddhlsm (of Asanga and vasubandhu), see Lhese archeLypal paLLerns (vosooos ln Lhe oloyovljoooo, hlgh subLle Lo low causal), as belng cosmlc memory-hablLs, very much llke Sheldrake's vlew. WhlLehead's ConsequenL naLure of Cod ls slmllar Lo saguna 8rahman (hlgh- subLle Lo low-causal), Lhe ever-evolvlng consummaLe Polon. 8uL prlmordlal and consequenL naLure do noL cover, or even refer Lo, Lhe unmanlfesL Codhead (hlgh causal) or Codhead as Suchness (ulLlmaLe or nondual): WhlLehead seems unfamlllar wlLh Lhose domalns. Cf course, Lhese Lypes of broad slmllarlLles are Lhe Lypes of comparlsons kaLz and company do noL Lhlnk are LheoreLlcally warranLed ln any fashlon. (We dealL ln deLall wlLh kaLz's poslLlon ln noLe 16 for chap. 7, and l wlll here glve a relaLed buL slmpler crlLlque, also, see noLe 32 for chapLer 13 for a dlscusslon of kanL and experlence). kaLz's general plurallsLlc poslLlon ls LhaL mysLlcal experlence ls medlaLed by culLural/concepLs, whlch are everywhere dlfferenL, and Lhus no mysLlcal experlences are comparable. We saw LhaL lf Lhls were Lrue ln Lhe sLrong verslon LhaL he belleves, lL would apply noL only Lo mysLlcal experlences buL Lo everyday ordlnary experlences as well, aL whlch polnL slmple communlcaLlon lLself (and LranslaLlon beLween languages) would be lmposslble, and LhaL, on Lhe conLrary, LheorlsLs from Pabermas Lo uerrlda malnLaln LhaL LranscendenLal slgnlfleds anchor slgnlflcaLlon ln ways LhaL prevenL lnLerpreLlve reallLy from belng metely consLrucLed, slnce Lhey are slgnlflcanLly anchored ln exLrallngulsLlc facLors. 1he mysLlc's clalm ls LhaL, ln [usL Lhe same way, mysLlcal valldlLy clalms are anchored ln exLrallngulsLlc reallLles LhaL, however much Lhey are molded by culLural facLors, are noL merely Lhe producL of shlfLlng culLural and provlnclal-only fashlons (Lhe referenLs of Lhe LranscendenLal slgnlflers exlsL ln a worldspace LhaL ls dlsclosed Lo Lhose wlLh Lhe approprlaLe developmenLal slgnlfleds, even lf Lhese are always already culLurally slLuaLed. 1hus, culLural conLexL does noL prevenL naLural sclence from maklng and redeemlng unlversal clalms, nor llkewlse does lL prevenL mysLlcal sclence from maklng and redeemlng noL-merely- culLure-bound clalms). And lndeed, kaLz lmpllclLly (and someLlmes expllclLly) concedes Lhe exlsteoce of Lhese LranscendenLal referenLs (whlch he calls Lhe mysLlc reallLy"). kaLz: 1hus, for example, Lhe naLure of Lhe ChrlsLlan mysLlc's pre-mysLlcal consclousness lnforms Lhe mysLlcal consclousness such LhaL he experlences tbe mystlc teollty ln Lerms of !esus, Lhe 1rlnlLy, or a personal Cod, eLc., raLher Lhan ln Lerms of Lhe non-personal . . . 8uddhlsL docLrlne of nlrvana" (my lLallcs, Language, eplsLemology and mysLlclsm"). 8uL how does kaLz know LhaL Lhe mysLlc reallLy" even exlsLs, slnce supposedly nobody has access Lo lL ln anyLhlng oLher Lhan culLurally llmlLed and nonunlversal Lerms? WhaL allows hlm Lo make unlversal/LranscendenLal clalms LhaL he denles Lo everybody else? lacL ls, ln Lhe back of hls mlnd he recognlzes qulLe obvlous cross-culLural commonallLles-he recognlzes Lhe mysLlc reallLy"-whlch he tbeo Lrles Lo erase by cenLerlng merely on Lhe local culLural conLexLs, even as he conLlnues Lo ossome tbe exlsteoce of Lhe mysLlcal reallLy whlch olooe can anchor hls analysls (even Lhough by hls formal sLance he should be able Lo make no unlversal sLaLemenLs abouL lL aL all. 1he sLandard performaLlve conLradlcLlon). 1he recenL advance ln Lranspersonal sLudles ls LhaL noL only does Lhls mysLlcal reallLy exlsL and possess cerLaln noL-merely- culLural LranscendenLal referenLs (such LhaL cross-culLural commonallLles can lndeed be recognlzed, [usL as kaLz ln facL does recognlze Lhem), buL Lhe mysLlcal reallLy" lLself unfolds ln a developmenLal and holarchlcal fashlon, and llkewlse cross-culLural commonallLles can be found ln Lhe unfoldlng as well. Slnce kaLz olteoJy recognlzes Lhe exlsLence of Lhe mysLlcal reallLy," no furLher Lools are needed Lo recognlze sLages ln Lhe mysLlcal reallLy." 1haL ls, kaLz has already Laken Lhe dlfflculL, ma[or, and blg flrsL sLep: tbe mystlcol teollty ls tbete. 1he Lranspersonal advance has slmply reflned LhaL sLep: Lhere are sLages ln lLs unfoldlng, lmmooeot sLages anchored ln ttoosceoJeotol tefeteots LhaL (1) prevenL Lhe mysLlcal consclousness" from belng merely provlnclal, (2) allow leotoloq Lo occur ln Lhe unfoldlng (whlch could oot occur lf Lhe unfoldlng were merely LexLual wlLh noLhlng exLrallngulsLlc Lo ground lL and correcL lL), (3) anchor mysLlcal valldlLy clalms and make Lhem someLhlng more profound Lhan llLerary chlL-chaL and ldlosyncraLlc lnLerpreLaLlons, (4) usher one lnLo worldspaces LhaL are deeper dlsclosures of Lhe kosmlc Lerraln, and (3) alLogeLher make SplrlL a reallLy and noL slmply a poem. 1ake Lhe sequence: 1he self experlences an overpowerlng lnLerlor lumlnoslLy, self and lumlnoslLy merge, self and lumlnoslLy dlsappear lnLo cessaLlon, cessaLlon glves way Lo nondual unlLy wlLh all manlfesLaLlon. 1hose are four very dlsLlncL types of mysLlcal experlence (Lhey are, ln facL, Lyplcal of Lhe psychlc, subLle, causal, and nondual domalns). 1hose types of experlences can mosL deflnlLely be found cross-culLurally. nobody ls denylng LhaL a 8uddhlsL wlll lnLerpreL Lhe lumlnoslLy as Lhe Sambhogakaya, Lhe ChrlsLlan wlll lnLerpreL lL perhaps as an angel or as ChrlsL hlmself, a !unglan wlll lnLerpreL lL as an archeLypal emergence, and so on. 1hls ls Lrue buL uLLerly Lrlvlal wlLh regard Lo Lhe onLologlcal sLaLus (and lmpacL) of Lhe referenL lLself: lL applles Lo oll experlences (do you and l even see LhaL paLch of red color ln preclsely Lhe same way? Who can say? 8uL does Lhls lnvalldaLe redness alLogeLher, or mean LhaL we never have anyLhlng ln common and Lhus cannoL even communlcaLe our experlences?). 1o use Lhls argumenL Lo undermlne Lhe mysLlcal clalm ls slmply Lo undermlne any LranscendenLal slgnlfleds aL all, whlch ls Lo say: Lo render any communlcaLlve exchange LheoreLlcally lmposslble. !usL so, slgnlflcanL aspecLs of Lhe mysLlcal consclousness" are anchored ln referenLs (Lhe mysLlcal reallLy") LhaL, even lf always culLurally slLuaLed, are never metely culLurally slLuaLed, whlch dlfferenLlaLes Lhem from (1) personal halluclnaLlons, (2) provlnclal culLural flcLlons, (3) ldlosyncraLlc qulrks, (4) myLhlc dogmaLlsms, (3) bogus power clalms (ldeology). Llkewlse, preclsely because Lhe mysLlcal reallLy" ls Lhere, anchorlng a LranscendenLal slgnlfler, Lhls (1) allows learnlng Lo occur vls-a-vls Lhe mysLlcal reallLy, (2) ensures LhaL learnlng wlll unfold, llke all learnlng, ln a developmenLal arc, (3) allows Lhe sLages of LhaL arc Lo be ldenLlfled, (4) allows Lhe LradlLlons Lhemselves Lo spoL when a Lralnee ls maklng a mlsLake, (3) allows a raLlonal reconsLrucLlve sclence of Lhe mysLlcal unfoldlng ln absLracL Lerms (deep sLrucLures), and (6) frankly acknowledges LhaL SplrlL ls tbete prlor Lo humans and Lhelr culLural Llnkerlngs, and ls noL slmply a producL of men's and women's capaclLy Lo make symbols: uo we creaLe Cod? or ls LhaL [usL sllghLly backwards? llnally, ln Lhls regard, l menLloned ln noLe 23 for chap. 4 LhaL dlfferenL languages are ofLen used wlLh (and seem besL Lo meLaphorlcally capLure) Lhe four ma[or levels of Lranspersonal awareness. (l menLloned Lhls ln connecLlon wlLh loucaulL's Lraclng of dlfferenL dlscurslve sLrucLures). lcklng up Lhe sLory wlLh Lhe raLlonal-ego, l would LenLaLlvely (and very brlefly) ouLllne Lhese languages as follows. kotloool-eqo-tbe looqooqes of tepteseototloo ooJ teflectloo. 1hls ls Lhe Lyplcally monologlcal represenLaLlonal paradlgm LhaL deflned (and deflnes) Lhe formal operaLlonal mlnd ln lLs reflecLlon on (mosLly) exLerlors. 1hese languages descrlbe Lhe world as lf lL were slmply preglven Lo Lhe equally preglven (and dlsengaged) sub[ecL. varlous depLhs are recognlzed, buL Lhese, Loo, Lend Lo be descrlbed ln slmple monologlcal Lerms (emplrlc-analyLlc). ceotoot/vlsloo-loqlc-tbe looqooqes of Jeptb ooJ Jevelopmeot. vlslon-loglc Lends more easlly Lo recognlze LhaL beneaLh Lhe obvlous" surfaces appearlng Lo preglven" reflecLlon, Lhere lurk depLhs LhaL can be dlsclosed, boLh ln Lhelr exLerlor forms (e.g., neosLrucLurallsm) and ln lnLerlor lnLerpreLaLlons (e.g., hermeneuLlcs). 1hls ls parL of Lhe move LhaL loucaulL Lraced from Lhe languages of represenLaLlon Lo Lhe languages of depLh (e. g., psychoanalysls, llngulsLlcs). Llkewlse, depLh ls generally undersLood Lo have JevelopeJ-whereas surfaces slmply appear, depLhs Lend Lo unfold or develop or evolve: Lhey are noL slmply preglven." 1he languages of Lhe cenLaur Lhus Lend Lo be dlalecLlcal, dlaloglcal, neLwork-orlenLed, developmenLal (evoluLlonary ln Lhe broadesL sense)-ln shorL, Lhe languages of depLh and developmenL. (As l lndlcaLed, Lhls volume ls lnLenLlonally wrlLLen ln Lhese languages.) lsycblc-tbe looqooqes of vlsloo ooJ vlbtotloo. vlslon-loglc glves way Lo dlrecL vlslon, and Lhe developmenLal vlew ls supplemenLed wlLh a vlbraLory vlew, where vlbraLlon ls used Lo convey noL so much a physlcallsLlc naLure as a poollty of loteoslty of awareness. 1hese languages are mosL common ln kundallnl yoga and Lhe early sLages of LanLrlc unfoldlng, buL can be found Lo some degree ln vlrLually all beglnnlng sLages of lnLense medlLaLlon. Slnce Lhe psychlc-level, as we have seen, Lakes as parL of lLs referenL aspecLs of Lhe gross domaln, vlbraLlon (felL bodlly vlbraLlon) seems besL Lo capLure Lhe subLle energles and consclousness LhaL begln Lo Lranscend Lhe gross domaln buL can sLlll be lnLensely felL ln LhaL domaln. 8uL for whaLever reasons, Lhe languages of vlslon and vlbraLlon seem Lo be used qulLe ofLen Lo descrlbe Lhls realm (and lLs subLle archlLecLure of cboktos, ooJls, tlqles, eLc). 5obtle-tbe looqooqes of lomlooslty ooJ otcbetype. l mean archeLype" ln Lhe non-!unglan and more LradlLlonal sense (subLle kosmlc forms or paLLerns of manlfesLaLlon, upon whlch all oLher paLLerns are based ln lnvoluLlon, as we wlll see ln chapLer 9). vlslon glves way Lo lnLense lumlnoslLles (someLlmes audlble lllumlnaLlons and bllss-lumlnoslLles), and vlbraLlon ls supplemenLed wlLh a grasp of Lhe subLle forms ftom wblcb Lhe gross domalns radlaLe or vlbraLe. 1he salnLly" domalns of lnLerlor lllumlnaLlons and archeLypal delLy-forms-exLraordlnary, awe-lnduclng, supernaLural, ouL-blazlng. coosol-tbe looqooqes of emptloess ooJ Jteom. LumlnoslLy glves way Lo pure LmpLlness, and Lhe enLlre world of form (archeLypal or oLherwlse) ls seen as a dream (also expressed as a drama or play, lllo). 1hus, whenever we hear phllosopher-sages speak of Lhe Abyss, Lhe vold, Lhe urgrund, Lhe unborn, Lhe uncreaLe (eLc.), Lhey almosL always also refer Lo manlfesLaLlon as Lhe greaL dream, Lhe greaL llluslon, Lhe danclng play, Lhe greaL shlmmerlng lmage of no flnal subsLance. We are ln Lhe languages of empLlness and dream. NooJool-tbe looqooqes of tbe exttootJlooty otJlooty. LmpLlness ls lorm, lorm ls LmpLlness, and Lherefore Lhe flnal reallzaLlon ls oot otbet lo tbe sllqbtest Lo anyLhlng presenLly arlslng, and Lherefore can be dlrecLly polnLed Lo wlLh, for example, Lhls from a Zen MasLer: 1be sptloq bteeze lo o ttee nos two Jlffeteot foces. A sootbwotJ btoocb looks wotm, A oottbwotJ btoocb looks cool. 1haL ls a perfecL polnLlng Lo Lhe absoluLe LruLh: how obvlous, how ordlnary. 1hls glass of waLer ls cool, Lhe sun ls brlghL! Pear Lhe raln on Lhe roofLop? Who ls noL enllghLened? Where ls one's Crlglnal lace? ln Lhe unlverse of Cne 1asLe, where else can we polnL for Lhe absoluLe LruLh lf noL rlghL here? Where else could lL be? 1he languages of jost tbls. ln all of Lhese languages, noLlce LhaL, as l have presenLed Lhem, Lhe Lwo componenLs" (such as depLh and developmenL, or lumlnoslLy and form) refer, ln a very general way, Lo Lhe lnLerlor and exLerlor aspecLs of Lhe parLlcular level (unLll Lhese Lwo become flnally noL-Lwo or nondual). 1he lnLerlor componenLs refer Lo Lhe sub[ecL-llke slde: vlslon-loglc (or depLh) Lo vlslon Lo lumlnoslLy Lo LmpLlness (pure WlLness), and Lhe exLerlor componenLs Lo Lhe ob[ecLlve-llke or exLerlor slde: developmenL Lo vlbraLlon Lo archeLype Lo dream-unLll flnal LmpLlness and flnal uream/lorm are noL-Lwo: Lhe summer breeze ls cool, Lhe blrds are slnglng loudly. And noLlce LhaL, ln each of Lhese languages, wotJs wotk jost floe. 1he slgnlflers are petfectly oJepoote. lf you have Lhe developmenLal slgnlfled, Lhe referenL ls falrly obvlous. lf you say Lo a subLle-level pracLlLloner, l saw a llghL a Lhousand Llmes brlghLer Lhan Lhe sun," LhaL pracLlLloner wlll know preLLy much whaL you mean, as preLLy much," for example, as lf you sald, LasL nlghL l had an lnLense orgasm." 1haL ls, ln boLh cases, Lhe words work equally well (or equally poorly), dependlng upon our own llved experlence as a polnL of acLual reference. l mlghL noL know pteclsely whaL you mean by lnLense orgasm," buL LhaL applles Lo oll slgnlflers, and ln no way excluslvely dlsarms mysLlcal slgnlflers. As l sald, LhaL applles Lo dogglness" as well as 8uddha-naLure," buL Lhls epldemlc llngulsLlc sllpperlness does noL mean dogs and 8uddhas are slmply llngulsLlc falry Lales. 1he analysls of Lhe Lypes of languages of Lhe Lranspersonal domalns ls, l belleve, anoLher of Lhe cenLral pro[ecLs of posLmodernlLy. rovlded, of course, LhaL lL ls noL done as a merely academlc endeavor, where a bunch of dlsengaged dunderheads aLLempL Lo analyze Lhe slgnlflers wlLhouL havlng a clue as Lo Lhe acLual referenLs. 39. p. 67-68, 138, 96, 191, 249. LeL us noLe Lhe LransformaLlons LhaL wotlJceottlc has undergone. We have seen overall developmenL move from physlocenLrlc Lo blocenLrlc Lo egocenLrlc Lo eLhnocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc-and lL ls wlLh totlooollty LhaL Lhe varlous worldcenLrlc concepLlons flrsL begln Lo emerge. And whaL all worldcenLrlc perspecLlves have ln common ls LhaL a cerLaln fteeJom ls Lo be exLended (or made avallable) Lo all human belngs, regardless of race, color, creed, or gender. All stoqes ot ooJ beyooJ totlooollty ote fooJomeotolly wotlJceottlc lo ootote. 8uL Lhe types of worldcenLrlc freedoms LhaL are offered unfold ln a developmenLal fashlon, and Lhese types of fteeJom (and Lypes of morallLy) are parL of Lhe deflnlng characLerlsLlcs of Lhe hlgher and Lranspersonal sLages of developmenL. 1o plck up Lhe sLory wlLh raLlonallLy and lLs worldcenLrlc sLances, we already saw Pabermas, for example, polnL ouL LhaL raLlonallLy flrsL demands a legal freedom, Lhen a moral freedom, Lhen a pollLlcal freedom for all members of a world socleLy (noLe Lhe Lhree types of progresslve freedom). And LhaL Lakes us Lo Lhe global, cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc and lLs moral sLance. ConLlnulng lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal-lnLo kohlberg's sLage 7, or unlversal/splrlLual morallLy (or posL-posLconvenLlonal"), whlch acLually conLalns several sLage/levels-we sLlll see a wotlJceottlc orlenLaLlon, buL furLher freedoms are belng offered beyond Lhe legal or pollLlcal: namely, spltltool fteeJoms. 1he same worldcenLrlc spoo, buL dlscloslng even furLher Jeptbs. 1hese progresslve depLhs, we have seen, are psychlc, subLle, causal, and nondual: and each of Lhese offers a progresslvely deeper and wlder type of splrlLual freedom-a freedom LhaL resulLs from an ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh a worldspace LhaL, so Lo speak, conLalns more room. 1hey are fteeJoms ftom Lhe lesser and more conflnlng spaces, by flndlng fteeJom lo Lhe deeper and wlder. Lach of Lhese freedoms ls Lhus ofLen slmulLaneously descrlbed as a fteeJom ftom and a fteeJom lo: a freedom from Lhe prevlous, lesser domaln, and a freedom ln Lhe new and roomler" domaln (as we wlll see ln a momenL). 1he motol stooce of each of Lhese freedoms Lhus relaLes Lo Lhe type of new freedom LhaL ls Lherefore offered Lo all belngs, worldcenLrlcally (Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon lnsplres us Lo exLend Lhls new freedom, Lhls new depLh, Lo as many senLlenL belngs as posslble-greaLesL depLh for greaLesL span-and Lhls marks Lhe oew types of moral lmperaLlves LhaL lssue from Lhese new depLhs of freedom). 1hese lncreaslng splrlLual freedoms, and Lhelr correspondlng moral sLances, have been referred Lo, for example, as yoglc, salnLly, sagely, and nondual. 1hese are splrlLual freedoms lo tefeteoce to Lhe gross, subLle, causal, and nondual worldspaces, and Lhus ln each case, Lhese splrlLual freedoms are descrlbed as fteeJom ftom Lhe llmlLaLlons of Lhe lesser and fteeJom lo Lhe expanse of Lhe greaLer: freedom from Lhe gross ln Lhe subLle, freedom from Lhe subLle ln Lhe causal, and freedom from Lhe causal ln (and as) Lhe nondual. 1he lesser freedoms are noL losL ([usL as legal and pollLlcal freedoms are noL denled), Lhey are slmply subsumed ln a deeper space LhaL embraces Lhelr concerns from a greaLer perspecLlve. 1hus, Lo glve a few condensed examples: Lhe psychlc/subLle dlsposlLlon ls a fteeJom ftom Lhe ordlnary gross-level flucLuaLlons of pleasure/paln and sensual-menLal deslre and frusLraLlon (vla yoglc harnesslng of awareness away from sensory lmmerslon), lL ls a fteeJom ftom gross llmlLaLlons and fteeJom lo Lhe deeper space of psychlc and subLle awareness LhaL moves prlor Lo Lhe enLlre gross domaln of flucLuaLlng sensory-menLal deslres and averslons. Llkewlse, Lhe causal dlsposlLlon ls a fteeJom ftom Lhe llmlLaLlons of Lhe subLle domaln and manlfesLaLlon ln general (samsara), a fteeJom ftom Lhe llmlLaLlons of an awareness ldenLlfled wlLh Lhe mechanlsm of sufferlng and separaLlon, and a fteeJom lo Lhe vasL expanse of boundless, unmanlfesL, formless LmpLlness LhaL ls consclousness as such. never enLerlng manlfesLaLlon, causal freedom ls never engulfed by Lhe mechanlcs of madness and Lhe maLhemaLlcs of paln: Lhe world of duallLy and lLs lnherenL laceraLlons. 1he nondual dlsposlLlon ls a fteeJom ftom Lhe exLremely subLle llmlLaLlons of Lhe causal unmanlfesL (namely, Lhe causal Lenslon or rarefled fear of manlfesLaLlon: Lhe Lenslon around Lhe hearL of nlrvlkalpa samadhl LhaL ls Lhe flnal hobos of saha[: Lhe flnal fear of dlssolvlng Lhe boundary beLween empLlness and form and Lhus awakenlng as all lorm, endlessly)-a fteeJom ftom Lhe llmlLaLlons of Lhe causal and a fteeJom lo (and as) Lhe enLlre kosmos of LmpLlness and lorm, sponLaneously so. 1hese types of new splrlLual freedom are Lhus also frequenLly descrlbed uslng Lhe votloos looqooqes as l brlefly ouLllned Lhem. 1hus, vlslon-loglc ls a freedom from Lhe llmlLaLlons of mere represenLaLlon, subLle-level nada lllumlnaLlons are free of gross-bodlly-felL vlbraLlons, Lhe causal ls a freedom from Lhe lllusory dream of all manlfesLaLlon, Lhe nondual ls a freedom from sLone 8uddha" empLlness (Lo glve Lhe brlefesL examples). Llkewlse, Lhese four Lypes of splrlLual freedom (psychlc, subLle, causal, nondual) are ofLen correlaLed wlLh aLhs of 8enunclaLlon (yoglc/psychlc), aLhs of urlflcaLlon (subLle Lo causal), aLhs of 1ransformaLlon (causal Lo nondual), and aLhs of SponLaneous Self-LlberaLlon (nondual as such)-each wlLh a dlfferenL moral dlsposlLlon LhaL reflecLs Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon as unfolded and lnLerpreLed aL LhaL new depLh. l wlll leave Lhe deLalls of Lhose correlaLlons for laLer publlcaLlons. All l wlsh Lo emphaslze here ls LhaL Lhe wotlJceottlc stooce-whlch beqlos wlLh raLlonallLy and marks oll stoqes aL and beyond raLlonallLy, and whlch exLends freedom Lo (aL leasL) Lhe span of all human belngs: LhaL sLance of worldcenLrlc spoo lLself lncreaslngly dlscloses more Jeptbs, or deeper and deeper types of freedoms LhaL are Lo be exLended oolvetsolly vla a new moral lmperaLlve (and Lhen, noL only Lo humans buL all senLlenL belngs as well). 1hls ls yeL anoLher [usLlflcaLlon for Lhe facL LhaL reason ls Lhe greaL gaLeway Lo Lhe beyond. Some lndlvlduals (and some culLures) can lndeed Lap lnLo" Lranspersonal domalns, buL Lhey funnel Lhe lnLulLlons lnLo preraLlonal sLrucLures, lnLo egocenLrlc or soclocenLrlc/eLhnocenLrlc dlsposlLlons, whlch merely serves Lo relnforce Lhe egocenLrlclLy or eLhnocenLrlclLy: Lhey, and Lhey alone, now have Cod on Lhelr slde, aL whlch polnL Lhey begln Lo suspecL LhaL Lhere ls no oLher Cod. ShorL of wotlJceottlc totlooollty, Lhe lnLulLlon coooot be seen Lo operaLe ln oll human belngs (and evenLually, all senLlenL belngs), and Lhus, shorL of worldcenLrlc raLlonallLy, all splrlLual lnLulLlons, no maLLer how Lemporarlly auLhenLlc, become hl[acked and frozen ln sLrucLures LhaL prevenL Lhelr auLhenLlc and compasslonaLe manlfesLaLlon. lreelng Lhese oLherwlse auLhenLlc lnLulLlons from Lhelr crlppllng conflnemenL Lo preraLlonal sLrucLures and less-Lhan- worldcenLrlc embrace ls parL of Lhe posLmodern pro[ecL. 60. lor an lnLeresLlng dlscusslon of Lhls Lheme, see eLer 8ussell, 1be wblte bole lo tlme. varlous LheorlsLs have polnLed Lo an undenlable acceleraLlon of Lhe pace of evoluLlon, where ma[or LransformaLlons seem Lo be occurrlng exponenLlally. 1hls ls cerLalnly Lrue from one polnL of vlew, buL does noL affecL Lhe argumenL LhaL l wlll presenL ln Lhe LexL. 61. We wlll lnvesLlgaLe Lhe source" of such omegas ln Lhe nexL Lwo chapLers, Lhough we can already see aL Lhls polnL LhaL Lhe mysLlcs would call LhaL force Lros and LhaL Coal Cod. 62. lukuyama, 1be eoJ of blstoty ooJ tbe lost moo, p. xlll. 1he economlc reasons wlll be dlscussed ln volume 2, afLer we have looked aL Lhe Lechno-economlc base of each of Lhe ma[or worldvlews. Slnce every lnLerlor has an exLerlor, each ma[or worldvlew ls correlaLed wlLh (buL noL reduclble Lo) a ma[or force of maLerlal producLlon: maglc (foraglng), maglc-myLhlc (horLlculLure), myLhlc (agrarlan), raLlonal (lndusLrlal), vlslon-loglc (lnformaLlonal). ln volume 2, Lhe correlaLlons and characLerlsLlcs of Lhese varlous modes of producLlon wlll be examlned aL lengLh, and, mosL lmporLanL, Lhe sLaLus of Lhe sexes wlll be examlned ln each perlod, wlLh Lhe goal of declpherlng Lhe roles of Lhe sexes boLh yesLerday . . . and Lomorrow. 1he naLure of Lhe global LransformaLlon now ln progress cannoL adequaLely be dlscussed wlLhouL an undersLandlng of Lhe role of Lhe base" (Lhe Lechno-economlc lnfrasLrucLure) ln relaLlon Lo varlous worldvlews, and LhaL, as l sald, ls a ma[or Loplc of volume 2. 8uL Lhls parL of lukuyama's argumenL (Lhe economlc) ls Lhe 8lghL-Pand componenL, Lhe maLerlal componenL, and he undersLandably flnds lL relaLed Lo Lhe concluslons of naLural (8P) sclence: Modern naLural sclence [ls] a regulaLor or mechanlsm Lo explaln Lhe dlrecLlonallLy and coherence of PlsLory. Modern naLural sclence ls a useful sLarLlng polnL because lL ls Lhe only lmporLanL soclal acLlvlLy LhaL by common consensus ls boLh cumulaLlve and dlrecLlonal" (oJ of blstoty, p. xlv). 1he sLruggle for recognlLlon" ls Lhe LefL-Pand componenL of hls argumenL-Lhe Lheme LhaL motool tecoqoltloo, or Lhe free exchange of motool self-esteem among all peoples, ls an omega polnL LhaL pulls hlsLory and communlcaLlon forward, Loward lLs free emergence, whlch ls Lhen Lhe end of hlsLory ln LhaL speclal sense. 63. oJ of blstoty, p. xvlll. 64. lbld., p. xll. 63. l would llke Lo menLlon several facLors LhaL new Age LheorlsLs Lend Lo overlook ln Lhe Creenlng of Amerlca" and Age of Aquarlus" Lheorles. Lven lf we collectlvely evolve Lo, say, Lhe psychlc Cver-Soul-whlch would mean LhaL Lhe cenLer of soclal gravlLy revolved around pollLlcal, educaLlonal, and culLural lnsLlLuLlons organlzed Loward Lhe acknowledgmenL and reallzaLlon of Lhe Cver-Soul ln each and every belng, much as we now organlze around Lhe recognlLlon of raLlonal egolc self-esLeem-even lf LhaL were Lhe case, Lhree lmporLanL facLors should be kepL ln mlnd by Lhe Aquarlan uLoplanlsLs: (1) 1he average-expecLable level of psychoculLural developmenL ln any glven socleLy acLs as a pocet of Jevelopmeot up Lo LhaL level buL does noL qootootee LhaL developmenL ln all lndlvlduals wlll so proceed. very few people even ln developed" counLrles reach a flrm base ln worldcenLrlc, posLconvenLlonal awareness (one sLudy found only 4 percenL of Lhe Amerlcan populaLlon aL Lhe hlgher posLconvenLlonal sLage-and LhaL ls Lhe sLage LhaL pteceJes and ls necessary for Lhe Cver-soul descenL!). 1he same problems wlll beseL any and all Cver-Soul socleLles. Conversely, no maLLer whaL Lhe collecLlve average-expecLable level of a glven socleLy, lndlvlduals are always capable of evolvlng and developlng beyond lL Lo any of Lhe hlgher sLrucLures of consclousness, slnce Lhese are sLrucLural poLenLlals of Lhe human holon, alLhough (a) Lhey can only be exetclseJ ln mlcrocommunlLles of Lhe slmllarly depLhed (sanghas), and (b) Lhe hlgher Lhe average-expecLable level of a glven socleLy, Lhen Lhe easler (buL noL necessarlly more llkely) hlgher developmenL wlll be. (2) Lven lf socleLy collecLlvely evolves Lo Lhe average-expecLable level of Lhe Cver-Soul, every slngle person born ln LhaL socleLy wlll neverLheless sLlll stott Jevelopmeot ot spoote ooe, as a slngle-celled zygoLe: and have Lo begln Lhe arduous holoarchlc cllmb, physlocenLrlc Lo blocenLrlc Lo egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc Lo LheocenLrlc. 1he pace of Lhls cllmb can be acceleraLed, buL Lhe fundamenLal sLages cannoL be bypassed (nobody can form concepLs wlLhouL havlng lmages, and so on). And aL evety sLage ln developmenL, tbloqs coo qo wtooq. 1he more sLages, Lhe more nlghLmares of posslble developmenLal mlscarrlages. (3) As for Lhe hlgher sLages Lhemselves, Lhey brlng new and glorlous poLenLlals . . . and new and exqulslLely wreLched posslble paLhologles. 8ead agaln 1eresa's accounL of Lhe early subLle level (slmllar accounLs are found ln Plndu, 8uddhlsL, and Sufl LexLs). Won'L lL be fun when socleLy as whole ls golng Lhrough tbot sLage? 1he dlalecLlc of progress covers even Lhe face of Cod, and an ldeallzed aradlse" exlsLs nowhere ln Lhe manlfesL kosmos-for reasons we wlll furLher see. 66. 1he LoLallLy of all manlfesLaLlon aL any Llme-Lhe All-subslsLs ln Lhe low causal, as Lhe sum LoLal of Lhe consequenL and prlmordlal naLure of SplrlL (ln roughly WhlLehead's sense), and Lhls 1oLallLy ls Lhe moolfest omega pull on each lndlvldual and flnlLe Lhlng: as such, lL ls ever-recedlng: each new momenL has a new LoLal horlzon LhaL can never be reached or fulfllled, because Lhe momenL of fulflllmenL lLself creaLes a new whole of whlch Lhe prevlous whole ls now a parL: cascadlng whole/parLs all Lhe way up, holons endlessly self-Lranscendlng and Lhus never flnally self-fulfllled: rushlng forward ceaselessly ln Llme aLLempLlng Lo flnd Lhe Llmeless. And Lhe flool Cmega, Lhe oltlmote and oomoolfest Cmega, Lhe causal lormless, ls Lhe magneL oo tbe otbet slJe of Lhe horlzon, whlch never lLself enLers Lhe world of lorm as a slngularlLy or as a LoLallLy (or any oLher phenomenal evenL), and Lhus ls never found aL all ln any verslon of manlfesLaLlon, even Lhough all manlfesLaLlon wlll resL nowhere shorL of Lhls lnflnlLe LmpLlness. 1hus, from any angle, Lhere ls no ulLlmaLe Cmega Lo be found ln Lhe world of lorm. 1here ls no erfecLlon ln Lhe manlfesL world. Were Lhe world of lorm Lo flnd erfecLlon and uLLer fulflllmenL, Lhere would be noLhlng else for lL Lo do and nowhere else for lL Lo go: noLhlng furLher Lo wanL, Lo deslre, Lo seek, Lo flnd: Lhe enLlre world would cease lLs search, sLop lLs drlve, end lLs very movemenL: would become wlLhouL moLlon, Llme, or space: would become Lhe lormless. 8uL Lhe lormless ls already Lhere, on Lhe oLher slde of Lhe horlzon, whlch ls Lo say, Lhe lormless ls already Lhere as Lhe deepesL depLh of Lhls and every momenL. 1hls ueepesL uepLh ls Lhe deslre of all lorm, whlch cannoL lLself be reached ln Lhe world of lorm, buL raLher ls Lhe LmpLlness of each and every lorm: when all lorms are seen Lo be always already lormless, Lhen dawns Lhe nondual empLy Cround LhaL ls Lhe Suchness and Lhe 1husness of each and every dlsplay. 1he enLlre world of lorm ls always already erfecLly LmpLy, always already ln Lhe ever-presenL CondlLlon of all condlLlons, always already Lhe ulLlmaLe Cmega LhaL ls noL Lhe goal of each and every Lhlng buL Lhe Suchness of each and every Lhlng: jost tbls. 1he search ls always already over, and lorms conLlnue Lhelr eLernal play as a gesLure of Lhe ulvlne, noL seeklng SplrlL buL expresslng SplrlL ln Lhelr every move and moLlon. CPA1L8 9. 1PL WA? u lS 1PL WA? uCWn 1. 1he lronlc polnL ls LhaL Love[oy dlsplays no comprehenslon of Lhe unlfylng PearL LhaL lnLegraLes Lhese Lwo movemenLs (and abouL whlch, sLrlcLly speaklng, only a Lhunderous sllence" can be malnLalned), and so he ls baffled by Lhe acLual naLure of Lhe ensulng LlLanlc baLLle beLween Lhe uescenders and Lhe Ascenders, and, mosL lamenLably, passes over Lhose sysLems-such as LhaL of loLlnus-LhaL perfecLly lnLegraLe Lhe Lwo. 8uL, llke a good reporLer, he glves us all Lhe necessary lnformaLlon Lo flesh ouL Lhe plcLure for ourselves. l should also menLlon LhaL Love[oy ls noL an advocaLe of Lhe ldeas whose hlsLory he ls Lraclng, as for Lhe CreaL Chaln and lLs Lhree maln LeneLs, Love[oy hlmself re[ecLs Lwo of Lhem (as l wlll explaln), so l am noL quoLlng from an auLhorlLy predlsposed Lo supporL my poslLlon. Love[oy, we would say, ls a hosLlle wlLness, buL no maLLer. 2. . 41. All quoLes, unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, are from 1be qteot cbolo of beloq. As for Lhe pure Ascendlng Cne belng Llmeless, unchanglng, eLernal, eLc., Lhere are several reasons Lo suppose LhaL Lhls was a dlrecL splrlLual lnLulLlon whose hlsLorlcal orlgln (ln Lhe WesL) we mlghL Lrace Lo armenldes. WhaL l am abouL Lo suggesL ls raLher speculaLlve, buL l belleve fuLure research wlll Lend Lo bear lL ouL. 1he facLs are falrly sLralghLforward, Lhelr lnLerpreLaLlon ls Lrlcky. Cne day, around 460 8.C., Lhe greaL phllosopher armenldes came Lo Lown accompanled by hls pupll Zeno. armenldes lmpressed SocraLes wlLh Lhe ldea of ermanence. 8eallLy, armenldes argued, ls unchanglng. Zeno supporLed hls menLor's poslLlon by reduclng Lo absurdlLy any asserLlon LhaL moLlon and change really do exlsL" (Cavaller, lloto, p. 31). 1haL ls a popular accounL of Lhe sLory laLo glves ln Lhe dlalogue enLlLled lotmeolJes. Zeno's demonsLraLlons" have usually been Laken as an example of a cerLaln Lype of phllosophlcal argumenL (dlalecLlcal refuLaLlon), and l do noL doubL LhaL Lhey were LhaL. 8uL lf Lhey are compared wlLh, for example, slmllar dlalecLlcal argumenLs puL forLh by Lhe 8uddhlsL genlus nagar[una, lL appears Zeno (and armenldes) mlghL have been aLLempLlng someLhlng else as well: namely, a dlrecL polnLlng Lo reallLy freed of all dlfferenLlaLlng concepLuallzaLlons. 8eadlng Lhe remalnlng fragmenLs of armenldes, one geLs Lhe sLrongesL lmpresslon LhaL he had dlrecLly gllmpsed Lhe causal, formless Cne," agalnsL whlch all manlfesL ob[ecLs are fleeLlng and ulLlmaLely unreal shadows. Pe Lhus makes Lhe sLandard dlsLlncLlon (as does nagar[una) beLween Lhe Way of 1ruLh and Lhe Way of Appearance. 1o Lhe world of appearance belongs all dlfferenLlaLlon, all generaLlon and desLrucLlon, all moLlon and change, whereas Lhe 1ruLh ls as lL ls, perfecLly self-exlsLlng, and noL open Lo any dlfferenLlaLlon or dlsLlncLlons of any sorL. As many scholars have noLed, Lhe Way of 1ruLh ls seelng Lhe world sob specle oetetoltotls, and noL accordlng Lo Lhe mere bellefs of morLals or Lhe Way of Appearance. lf we Lake hls asserLlon LhaL moLlon does noL exlsL as belng llLerally Lrue, Lhen armenldes has Lo be seen as belng raLher confused. 8uL lf Lhese sLaLemenLs were ln facL parL of Lhe polnLlng ouL lnsLrucLlons" for recognlzlng prlmordlal awareness (free of dlfferenLlaLlng concepLuallzaLlon), Lhen Lhey Lake on raLher profound meanlng. lrom uzogchen 8uddhlsm Lo vedanLa Plndulsm, for example, we ofLen flnd sLaLemenLs such as LhaL whlch moves ls noL 8eal." 1hls ls noL Lo deny relaLlve moLlon, lL ls raLher an aLLempL Lo dlrecLly polnL Lo prlmordlal awareness whlch ls prlor Lo moLlon or resL, whlch doesn'L enLer Lhe sLream of Llme as a parLlcular ob[ecL (movlng or resLlng), buL raLher ls Lhe lmmedlaLeness-Lhe openlng or clearlng-ln whlch all ob[ecLs arlse and fall. 1hls prlmordlal awareness (lLself nelLher aL resL nor ln moLlon) can ln facL be raLher easlly polnLed ouL Lo somebody uslng Lhese Lypes of polnLlng ouL lnsLrucLlons" (as evldenced, for example, ln uzogchen Lralnlng [see 1be eye of spltlt, chap. 12, and Ooe toste for examples of polnLlng ouL lnsLrucLlons]). 8eadlng armenldes, l geL Lhe dlsLlncL lmpresslon LhaL Lhls was ln facL a large parL of whaL he was aLLempLlng. ln numerous places lL seems slmply unmlsLakable. armenldes Lhoroughly and conLlnuously denles ooy descrlpLlon of Lhe world LhaL presupposes LhaL Jlffeteoce ls teol: he ls dlrecLly polnLlng Lo Lhe Cne, whlch can be found ln one's own dlrecL awareness ptlot Lo dlfferenLlaLlon. 1hus, armenldes's AbsoluLe wasn'L lltetolly a round sphere, as many scholars have supposed, buL slmply Lhe compleLeness and fullness of 8elng ln lLself, prlor Lo dlfferenLlaLlon and prlor Lo Lhe Way of Appearance. And Lhe dlalecLlc was ln parL a way Lo dlrecLly polnL Lo reallLy prlor Lo lLs dlfferenLlaLlon and lllusory appearances, ln whlch morLals become losL because Lhey mlsLake Lhese appearances for Lhe undlvlded 1ruLh. lf Lhls ls so, Lhen Lo armenldes goes Lhe honor of belng Lhe flrsL lnfluenLlal WesLerner (as far as l can Lell) Lo peneLraLe Lo Lhe causal Cne, however brlefly (alLhough perhaps Lhls mlghL also be Lraced Lo armenldes's own Leacher, whom LradlLlon names as Lhe yLhagorean Amelnlas). Some scholars belleve Lhe meeLlng wlLh SocraLes acLually occurred, oLhers belleve lLs lnvenLlon was a llberLy Laken by laLo. 8uL Lhe daLes maLch up falrly well: armenldes would have been abouL slxLy-flve, Zeno abouL forLy, and SocraLes very young." l am lncllned Lo Lhe vlew LhaL Lhe meeLlng occurred, buL ln elLher case Lhe lnfluence of armenldes on subsequenL Creek LhoughL ls undenlable. Moreover, Lhe scholar 1. MurLl, whose ceottol pbllosopby of 8oJJblsm ls generally regarded as Lhe flnesL LreaLmenL of nagar[una ln Lngllsh, polnLs Lo laLo's lotmeolJes as Lhe flrsL real dlalecLlc ln Lhe WesL LhaL ls slmllar Lo nagar[una's. WheLher laLo flcLlonallzed Lhe meeLlng or noL, LhaL he chose armenldes Lo presenL Lhe dlalecLlc shows LhaL Lhe meeLlng-lf noL hlsLorlcal" Lhen cerLalnly phllosophlcal"-had profound meanlng for hlm. And lL makes all Lhe more credlble laLo's asserLlons LhaL whaL he was really up Lo could noL be puL lnLo wrlLLen words, buL had Lo be polnLed ouL dlrecLly, from Leacher Lo pupll, by a sudden lllumlnaLlon. 3. . 42. My lLallcs. 4. . 43. My lLallcs. 3. . 43. My lLallcs. 6. . 33. My lLallcs. 7. . 49. 8. . 48. My lLallcs. l belleve LhaL Lhls lnLegraLlon was grounded ln a dlrecL LasLe of causal/nondual awareness (however brlef or lnlLlal lL mlghL have been, remember 1eresa's polnL: one LasLe can be LransformaLlve). 1here can be no doubL LhaL hls neoplaLonlc descendanLs LhoughL so, and no doubL LhaL Lhey Lhemselves lnculcaLed Lhls pracLlce (as we wlll see wlLh loLlnus). 8uL aL Lhe very leasL, lL ls qulLe obvlous LhaL Lhe overall laLonlc Lheory lnvolved Lhls lnLegraLlon of AscenL and uescenL, as Love[oy makes qulLe clear. 9. 1hls negaLlon-and-afflrmaLlon (negaLe and preserve!) ls found ln all nondual conLemplaLlve schools. ln Zen, Lo glve only one example, lL ls sald, lf all Lhlngs reLurn Lo Lhe Cne, Lo whaL does Lhe Cne reLurn?" 1he answer: 1he Many" (Lhough Lhe sLudenL has Lo demonsLraLe Lhls undersLandlng and noL merely verballze lL, repeaLlng Lhe slgnlfler wlLhouL Lhe developmenLal slgnlfled earns only a whack from Lhe MasLer). So also Lhe famous: 8efore l sLudled Zen, mounLalns were mounLalns, when sLudylng Zen, mounLalns were no longer mounLalns, when l flnlshed sLudylng Zen, mounLalns were once agaln mounLalns." 1he dlvldlng llne ls Lhe reallzaLlon of LmpLlness, or pure formless awareness (mounLalns were noL mounLalns), ln whlch all Lhlngs Lhen perfecLly and freely arlse as LmpLlness [usL as Lhey are (mounLalns were once agaln mounLalns, self-llberaLlng). 8uL one has flrsL Lo reallze Lhe greaL deaLh of LmpLlness, or one remalns merely losL ln Lhe mounLalns (shadows). 10. PamllLon (Lrans.), lboeJtos, p. 32. My lLallcs. 11. lboeJtos, pp. 34-36. 12. LaLer ln Lhls chapLer, we wlll see LhaL 1hanaLos lnLegraLed ls noL Lhe deaLh lnsLlncL" buL Agape, Agape dlvorced from Lros becomes 1hanaLos, Lhe deaLh lnsLlncL. ln ye to eye l polnLed ouL LhaL Lhe llfe and deaLh lnsLlncLs" or drlves or forces have acLually been used by LheoreLlclans ln Lwo very dlfferenL ways, whlch we mlghL call verLlcal and horlzonLal. verLlcal llfe" ls AscenL or Lros, as l am uslng lL here (a move Lo hlgher and wlder lnLegraLlons), and verLlcal deaLh" ls 1hanaLos (a move Lo lower and shallower occaslons, Lhus less unlfled, resulLlng ulLlmaLely ln lnsenLlenL holons). PorlzonLal llfe," on Lhe oLher hand, refers Lo Lhe ptesetvotloo of Lhe elemenLs of any glven level, and horlzonLal deaLh" refers Lo Lhe oeqotloo or surrenderlng of Lhose elemenLs. 1hus, verLlcal Llfe (Lros) accepLs Lhe deaLh or negaLlon of a prevlous level whlle preservlng lLs elemenLs: lL negaLes and preserves: a greaLer Llfe lnvolves Lhe deaLh of Lhe lesser llfe. 1hus, horlzonLal deaLh ls parL of greaLer Llfe, whereas verLlcal ueaLh ls slmply dlssoluLlon. 1hls, of course, ls a semanLlc nlghLmare, buL fallure Lo dlsLlngulsh Lhese dlfferenL Lypes of llfe and deaLh" have led Lo numerous LheoreLlcal dlfflculLles (see ye to eye, chap. 7, for an exLenslve dlscusslon of Lhese lssues). 13. l.20-21. All quoLes, unless oLherwlse lndlcaLed, are from lnge, 1be pbllosopby of llotloos, vols. 1 & 2, lndlcaLed as l and ll. 14. l.120. 1hese are lnge's words paraphraslng orphyry. 13. Agaln, expetleoce ls Lhe wrong word, Lhe nondual ls noL an experlence, buL Lhe vasL openness ln whlch all experlences come and go, Lhe apprehenslon" of Lhe nondual carrles wlLh lL an exhausLlng of any lnLeresL ln merely experlenLlal endeavors. noneLheless, dlrecL experlence" has Lhe advanLage of conveylng Lhe facL LhaL Lhls reallzaLlon ls noL slmply LheoreLlcal or absLracL or whaLnoL (whlch ls why l wlll conLlnue Lo use dlrecL experlence" on occaslon). orphyry reporLs LhaL he had four ma[or breakLhroughs or saLorls," lf we may call Lhem LhaL, loLlnus Lells us only LhaL he hlmself had Lhe reallzaLlon ofLen," as ln ofLen Lhe case" or Lyplcal." karl !aspers commenLs, WhaL, accordlng Lo orphyry, would seem Lo have been a rare, anomalous experlence, ls, ln Lhe sLaLemenL of loLlnus, Lhe naLural reallLy." Also noLeworLhy ls LhaL, whereas Lhe mysLlcal experlences of Lhe psychlc and subLle level are ofLen qulLe dramaLlc, ecsLaLlc, and exLraordlnary (and Lhey are lndeed expetleoces), Lhe causal/nondual reallzaLlon ls usually ordlnary," noLhlng speclal," slmply because lL ls a reallzaLlon of Lhe dlvlne ln every slngle ordlnary acL. 1hus when !aspers, also known for hls exLenslve work on psychopaLhology, reporLs Lhe followlng, lL ls very Lelllng: LcsLaLlc sLaLes and mysLlcal experlences play an lmporLanL parL ln Lhe hlsLory of all culLures. 1hey are a fleld of psychologlcal observaLlon ln whlch cerLaln baslc forms of experlence always recur [whaL we call Lhe deep sLrucLures of Lhe psychlc and subLle]. loLlnus's Lranscendlng of LhoughL seems Lo dlffer from such experlence. Pls accounLs conLaln Lhe baresL mlnlmum of psychologlcal phenomena and no psychopaLhologlcal lndlcaLlons whaLever. Cne ls lmpressed by Lhe slmpllclLy of hls communlcaLlon from Lhe depLhs" (Cteot pbllosopbets, p. 33). 16. 1hls ls Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, lncludlng Lhe hlgher or Lranspersonal sLages dlscussed ln Lhe lasL chapLer. 1hls ls noL Lo lmply LhaL loLlnus or Auroblndo were necessarlly ulLlmaLe 8eallzers ln a permanenL or perfecLed sense, buL LhaL Lhey are superb represenLaLlves of a full-specLrum approach Lo human growLh and developmenL based on Lhelr own experlenLlal dlsclosures of Lhe hlgher domalns. 17. ll.134. My lLallcs. 18. ll.lx, 137. 19. ll.38-39. 20. ll.139. My lLallcs. 21. Pe refers Lo lL as Lhe wlLhln LhaL ls noL wlLhln"-l.e., Lhe wlLhln LhaL ls wlLhouL, or sub[ecL-ob[ecL nonduallLy. 22. ll.xl. !aspers emphaslzes: loLlnus's wrlLlngs are an unexcelled record of Lhls fundamenLal experlence. 1he experlence he pursues ls noL one LhaL ls en[oyed as an evenL ln Llme, lL pervades all momenLs of [Llme and] exlsLence and ls Lhe source of all meanlng. Pe acLually experlenced as a perfecL whole whaL ln Lhls lmmanenL world we can know only ln Lhe duallLy of lovlng and loved, beholdlng and beheld, LhaL ls, he experlenced Lhe goal LhaL glves our lmperfecL yearnlng lLs dlrecLlon" (p. 34). l would amend LhaL sllghLly Lo say LhaL an experlence LhaL ls noL ln Llme ls noL really an experlence ln Lhe Lyplcal sense of Lhe word, buL raLher Lhe ground or openlng ln whlch all experlences arlse (slnce experlences have a beglnnlng and an end ln Llme). 1hls nondual reallzaLlon ls Lhe lmmedlaLeness of all experlence and ls noL lLself any parLlcular experlence. 1hls, of course, could be sald for any nondual reallzer, from 8uddha Lo ChrlsL Lo krlshna Lo al-Palla[, as Lhelr own Leachlngs make qulLe clear. 8uL lL ls noL [usL Lhe hlghesL goal" LhaL loLlnus experlences" or reallzes and asks us Lo experlmenLally reproduce ln Lhe laboraLory of our own awareness, lL ls every developmenLal sLage leadlng Lo lL, and Lhen Lhe flnal" grasp of Lhe Cround LhaL ls found lo eocb ooJ evety stoqe, hlgh or low: Lhe hlerarchy, havlng served lLs purpose as a ladder, havlng been long ago abandoned. 23. ln oLher words, Lhese hlgher sLages are as real as any oLher developmenLal sLages (llngulsLlc, cognlLlve, ego, moral, eLc.). 1hey are reconsLrucLlons of Lhe characLerlsLlcs repeaLedly dlsplayed by Lhose who have developed compeLence aL Lhe parLlcular sLage, Lhey are sLrucLured wholes wlLh deflnlng paLLerns (deep sLrucLures) LhaL govern Lhe socloculLurally consLlLuLed surface sLrucLures, and Lhese deep sLrucLures sLably emerge ln an order Lhan cannoL be alLered by condlLlonlng. (See 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess.) 1hls ls slmllar Lo 1arL's noLlon of a sLaLe-speclflc sclence," excepL LhaL sLaLe" ls a very general noLlon, preop, conop, and formop, for example, all exlsL ln Lhe waklng sLaLe," and yeL Lhey are dramaLlcally dlfferenL worlds. lL ls a sLrucLure-speclflc sclence, along wlLh a sLaLe-speclflc sclence, LhaL ls requlred, and one LhaL ls addlLlonally reconsLrucLlve and noL slmply comparaLlve. 1he noLlon of sLaLes" ls an lmporLanL concepLual Lool-sLaLes do lndeed exlsL-buL Lhey cover only dlscreLe posslblllLles (hence, dlscreLe sLaLe of consclousness" has replaced alLered sLaLe of consclousness"), buL lL ls when dlscreLe sLaLes are converLed lnLo endurlng LralLs (sLrucLures) LhaL developmenL occurs. See noLe 17 for chap. 14. [See loteqtol psycboloqy.] 24. ArlsLoLle had, ln ue Aolmo, flrsL ouLllned Lhe holonlc noLlon of a hlgher grade": each hlgher grade or level possesses Lhe essenLlals of Lhe lower (buL noL all Lhe lncldenLals of Lhe lower) plus essenLlal and dlfferenLlaLlng characLerlsLlcs of lLs own LhaL are noL found ln Lhe lower, even Lhough lL shares a common boundary wlLh Lhe lower. 23. l.221. 26. 1hls ls Lhe whole Loplc of lnvoluLlon and evoluLlon, a Loplc LhaL we wlll be followlng ln all Lhree volumes of Lhls serles, each Llme addlng more perspecLlves Lo lL. lor Lhe momenL, we should noLe Lhe followlng: ln loLlnus's vlew, ln evoluLlon or 8eflux, lf we represenL Lhe lowesL level as A, Lhe nexL level up ls A + 8, Lhe nexL ls A + 8 + C, and so on. 8uL ln lnvoluLlon or efflux, lf we sLarL wlLh Lhe hlghesL and represenL lL as A, Lhe nexL level down ls A - 8, Lhe nexL ls A - 8 - C, and so forLh, slnce each lnvoluLlonary efflux ls a subLracLlon or a sLepplng- down from Lhe ground of lLs predecessor. 1hls ls why loLlnus says LhaL efflux (lnvoluLlon) ls Lo be undersLood ln mlnuses." WhaL ls lefL over afLer all subLracLlons-namely, maLLer-ls Lhus also LhaL whlch ls mosL fooJomeotol (mosL baslc) for Lhe whole sequence, and LhaL whlch ls sLlll presenL, even ln Lhe lowesL realm, l have summarlzed wlLh Lhe LwenLy LeneLs (whlch are Lherefore operaLlve ln all domalns as well, slnce Lhey are whaL even Lhe leasL possess: Lhe weakesL noodle sclence). lor loLlnus, ln efflux or onLologlcal essence, desLroy any hlgher dlmenslon and you desLroy all lower, whlch ls Lhe opposlte of evoluLlon, where manlfesLaLlon, because lL ls belng bullL back up Lo unlLy, resLs upon each prevlous lower manlfesLaLlon. loLlnus emphaslzes boLh: LhaL Lhe hlgher ls ln no way dependenL upon Lhe lower for lLs belng or essence, buL does depend upon lL for lLs manlfesLaLlon. (Pere loLlnus and Pegel would parL company, conLemplaLlve evldence supporLs loLlnus, as does Auroblndo's vlew.) lor a good lnLroducLlon Lo Lhls Loplc (wlLhouL Lhe LwenLy LeneLs), see Schumacher's ColJe fot tbe petplexeJ. 1o such quesLlons as, Where was mlnd before lL emerged? loLlnus would answer, Where was Lwo plus Lwo equals four? Lverywhere and nowhere. 1hls phenomenon-namely, Lhe presence of Lhe hlgher pre-onLologlcal worldspaces as pteseot sttoctotol poteotlols ln Lhe human bodymlnd-ls behlnd a vasL number of Lheorles aLLempLlng Lo accounL for and descrlbe Lhe lnvoluLlonal or uescendlng currenLs ln Lhe kosmos and ln Lhe human belng. MysLlcal experlences (of a psychlc, subLle, causal, or nondual naLure) are so common Lo humanklnd, and share aL leasL a broad slmllarlLy wherever Lhey occur (desplLe Lhe lnevlLable culLural colorlngs glven Lo Lhem)-and when Lhey do occur, vlrLually all of Lhem carry Lhe overwhelmlng convlcLlon LhaL one ls noL sLumbllng onLo someLhlng sol qeoetls, made up, consLrucLed aL Lhe momenL, or fabrlcaLed by Lhe lndlvldual human mlnd, raLher, one has Lhe overwhelmlng apprehenslon LhaL one ls recognlzlng someLhlng once known buL long forgoLLen, LhaL one ls belng ushered lnLo a worldspace LhaL ln some exLremely fundamenLal sense exlsLed prlor Lo lLs recognlLlon: lL was tbete all along, [usL noL seen. And one of Lhe many amazlng Lhlngs abouL mysLlcal experlences ls LhaL, however much culLure does lndeed mold Lhese apprehenslons, more ofLen Lhan noL Lhe apprehenslons do noL conflrm a person ln hls or her culLural bellefs, buL LoLally explode any culLural bellefs lmaglnable: Lhe person ls LoLally undone, llke aul on Lhe road Lo uamascus, or LoLally surprlsed, or compleLely Laken aback. ule-hard maLerlallsLs can have Lhese experlences as easlly as purebred ldeallsLs, and boLh are compleLely sLunned lnLo awesLruck sllence: Lhe depLhs of Lhe MysLery are dlscloslng Lhemselves, and a muLed mlnd musL only bend ln reverenLlal awe. 1he lnvoluLlonary Lheorles-from loLlnus Lo Pegel, from Asanga Lo Auroblndo, from Schelllng Lo Shankara, from AbhlnavagupLa Lo Lhe lookovototo 5otto-are all aLLempLs Lo Lake lnLo accounL LhaL Lhe depLhs of Lhe hlgher sLrucLural poLenLlals are already presenL buL noL seen. 1hls ls noL so dlfferenL from maLhemaLlcs (and, lndeed maLhemaLlcs ls usually lncluded ln Lhe lnvoluLlonary Lheorles): granLed LhaL maLh ls only formulaLed by Lhe human mlnd, do we really Lhlnk LhaL maLhemaLlcs applles only Lo Lhe human mlnd? Cr LhaL lLs paLLerns weren'L operaLlng prlor Lo Lhe emergence of Lhe human braln? 1he lnvoluLlonary Lheorles would raLher say LhaL Lhe formaLlve Lendencles and paLLerns of Lhe kosmos LhaL ptoJoceJ Lhe human braln are belng, Lo some degree, tecoqolzeJ by LhaL braln: ln Lhls speclal sense, Lhey are dls-coverles, un-coverles, re- cognlLlons, anamneslas, recollecLlons, apprehenslons of paLLerns and worldspaces presenL as poLenLlals buL only now belng acLuallzed or apprehended ln lndlvldual cases. 1hls ln no way denles LhaL Lhe surface sLrucLures of Lhese worldspaces have Lo be worked ouL ln culLural, hlsLorlcal, soclal, and lnLenLlonal seLLlngs. nor does lL deny or denlgraLe Lhe facL LhaL human belngs musL, ln large measure, work ouL Lhelr nondeLermlned faLe wlLh dlllgence. lL only says LhaL Lhe opptebeosloo ls ln some profound sense embeJJeJ ln Lhe sLrucLure and Lhe dynamlc process of Lhe kosmos as well-lL ls noL merely a sub[ecLlve, personal, ldlosyncraLlc fanLasy-and Lhls ls why Lhe mysLlcal experlences always carry Lhe sense of recognlLlon and redlscovery, however lnlLlally surprlslng. Many of Lhe lnvoluLlonary Lheorles are admlLLedly raLher crude by Loday's analyLlc sLandards. laLo's recollecLlon of Lhe lorms was always molded on a Lype of yLhagorean maLhemaLlcs LhaL we would now vlew as raLher llmlLed, Pegel's Loglc (preclsely Lhe aLLempL Lo arLlculaLe Lhe poLenLlal paLLerns presenL prlor Lo manlfesLaLlon buL noL aparL from manlfesLaLlon, paLLerns LhaL would Lhen unfold ln evoluLlon or developmenL)-ls Lerrlbly daLed and culLurally slLuaLed, Shankara's archeLypes are sLlll loaded wlLh myLhlc and culLurally bound lorms, loLlnus's Lfflux ls llmlLed by Lhe parLlcular knowledge of Lhe world dlsclosed aL LhaL Llme, Asanga and vasubandhu's alayavl[nana ls perhaps more sophlsLlcaLed ln LhaL Lhe supra-lndlvldual lorms are Lhe sum LoLal of kosmlc memory-hablLs, buL suffers from noL belng able Lo arLlculaLe Lhe orlglnaLlon of such memorles (Lhe Pua-yen phllosophy of causaLlon by muLual lnLerpeneLraLlon would arlse Lo address [usL LhaL lack). noneLheless, all of Lhose are slncere aLLempLs Lo ouLllne lnvoluLlon, and all of Lhem absoluLely agree on Lhe cenLral and cruclal lssue: Lhe presence of Lhe hlgher worldspaces as poteotlols glven Lo us now, buL noL yeL reallzed. And ln LhaL deep form, Lhe mysLlcs of Lhe world are ln vlrLually unanlmous and unyleldlng agreemenL, and Lhls on Lhe basls of Lhelr experlenLlal evldence dlsclosed and dlscussed ln a communlLy of lnLersub[ecLlve lnLerpreLers. lL ls Lhe only lnLerpreLaLlon LhaL makes sense of Lhe mysLlcal experlence: a kosmlc depLh dlsclosed, noL an lndlvldual sub[ecLlve fanLasy con[ured up. 27. 1he concepLs poLenLlal" and acLual" go back parLlcularly Lo ArlsLoLle, where MaLLer ls pure poLenLlal and lorm ls acLuallLy, Lhe lower ls ln Lhe hlgher poLenLlally, Lhe hlgher ls ln Lhe lower acLually, or Lhe hlgher ls Lhe acLual of whlch Lhe lower ls poLenLlal-Lhe lower Lhe level, Lhe more lL ls lnfecLed" wlLh mere poLenLlallLy, Lhe hlgher Lhe level, Lhe more acLual, less poLenLlal. loLlnus generally follows sulL. Modern usage would keep Lhe meanlng buL ofLen reverse Lhe semanLlcs, saylng LhaL Lhe hlgher ls an unreallzed poLenLlal ln (or for) Lhe lower LhaL needs Lo be reallzed or acLuallzed ln lLs own case, lL comes Lo Lhe same Lhlng, and Lhe meanlng ls as expressed ln Lhe paragraph. 28. lnge, l.248. loLlnus has a remarkable Lheory of Lhe self, whlch ls sLlll alLogeLher vlable. Aslde from Lhe noLlon LhaL we have Lwo souls" (Lhe Llmeless wlLness and Lhe Lemporal self), Lhe self (or Soul) for loLlnus has Lwo dlfferenL meanlngs. Cne, lL ls a parLlcular level or dlmenslon of exlsLence-Lhe World Soul (or psychlc level). 8uL Lwo, Lhe Soul ls whaL we moderns would call Lhe self-sysLem," Lhe acLual navlgaLor of Lhe greaL holarchy-noL a parLlcular sLage buL Lhe Lraveler" of each sLage, noL a rung ln Lhe ladder buL Lhe cllmber of Lhe ladder. As such, Lhe Soul or self-sysLem can span Lhe enLlre specLrum of developmenL (excepL Lhe hlgher llmlLs, where lL ls Lranscended or becomes Lhe AbsoluLe). lnge: lL [Lhe Soul] Louches every grade ln Lhe hlerarchles of value and exlsLence, from Lhe super-essenLlal AbsoluLe Lo Lhe lnfra-essenLlal MaLLer. lL has lLs own cenLre, a llfe proper Lo lLself, buL lL can expand lnflnlLely ln every dlrecLlon. no llmlL has been seL Lo lLs posslble expanslon" (l.203). uevelopmenL, Lhen, ls a case of Lhe Soul growlng and expandlng, Laklng more and more of Lhe exLernal world lnLo lLself, as loLlnus puLs lL. And whaL causes Lhe Soul Lo be aL a parLlcular level of developmenL? Accordlng Lo loLlnus, All souls are poLenLlally all Lhlngs. Lach of Lhem ls characLerlzed by Lhe faculLy whlch lL chlefly exerclses. 1he souls, Lhus conLemplaLlng dlfferenL ob[ecLs, are and become LhaL whlch Lhey conLemplaLe." ln oLher words, Lhe level aL whlch Lhe self places lLs aLLenLlon ls Lhe level aL whlch lL remalns: you become whaL you conLemplaLe. 1herefore, conLemplaLe Lhe Cne. 1hls beglns, loLlnus says, when lovlng-klndness burns llke a flre" and Lhe Soul lmmerses lLself ln a conLemplaLlon of SplrlL, where, as loLlnus puLs lL, lL wlll see Cod and lLself and Lhe All, lL wlll noL aL flrsL see lLself as Lhe All, buL belng unable Lo flnd a sLopplng-place, Lo flx lLs own llmlLs and deLermlne where lL ceases Lo be lLself, lL wlll glve up Lhe aLLempL Lo dlsLlngulsh lLself from unlversal 8elng, and wlll arrlve aL Lhe All wlLhouL change of place, abldlng Lhere, where Lhe All has lLs home"-Lhere belng, of course, here (l.203). llnally, for loLlnus, Lhese dlmenslons are noL [usL lylng around walLlng Lo be percelved ln a passlve fashlon by Lhe Soul. loLlnus's Lheory of percepLlon ls one of maklng and maLchlng"-percepLlon ls acLlve, noL passlve. 1hls Lheory, vla Schelllng, would lead Lo much of CesLalL psychology and auLopoleLlc Lheorles of cognlLlon. 29. 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, p. 230. 30. Llkewlse, Crace ls Agape, and ls glven freely Lo all, lL shlnes on all as Lhe omega pull of Lhe Source-Coal, urglng Lros Lo reLurn, Lo reflux, Lo LhaL Source. (1hls docLrlne of grace ls also exLenslvely found ln Lhe LasL, even-l would say especlally-ln 8uddhlsm, where lL ls behlnd all forms of guru yoga.) ln !apanese 8uddhlsm, a dlsLlncLlon ls made beLween self-power (Lros) and oLher-power (grace or Agape), as represenLed respecLlvely ln Zen and Shln, buL boLh schools agree LhaL Lhe dlsLlncLlon ls ulLlmaLely based on Lhe sub[ecL-ob[ecL duallsm, LhaL Lhere ls nelLher self nor oLher, nelLher eros nor agape-agaln, Lros and Agape unlLed only ln Lhe nondual PearL. 31. As we saw, because lreud dldn'L follow AscenL Lo lLs Lrue Coal (he sLops aL raLlonallLy), he could noL see uescenL ln lLs fullness (as Agape). When plugged lnLo lLs source," uescenL ls noL deaLh buL Coodness, Lhe creaLlve Lffulgence of Lhe ulvlne manlfesL ln and as all Lhlngs, lncludlng dead" maLLer. Lven Lhough lreud doesn'L see Lhe CreaL Clrcle of AscenL and uescenL, he of course makes use of whaL small segmenL of lL he does undersLand: ln psychoanalyLlc Lherapy, one engages ln regresslon ln servlce of ego"-LhaL ls, one descends back lnLo a lower level LhaL was allenaLed and spllL off by fear and anxleLy (by hobos), relnLegraLes LhaL level by embraclng lL wlLh love and accepLance (Agape), and Lhus releases LhaL lower level from belng a regresslve pull, releases lL from belng ln Lhe grlps of 1hanaLos, and allows lL Lo re[oln Lhe ongolng march of a hlgher ldenLlLy and a wlder love of oLhers (Lros). 8uL lreud, fracLured noLe Lo laLo, cannoL see all Lhls ln lLs larger conLexL. uescenL, for lreud, ls merely desLrucLlon, whlch ls Lrue only when lL ls dlsconnecLed from AscenL, he Lherefore cannoL see LhaL uescenL ls Lhe creaLlve movemenL of emanaLlon, of superabundance, of splrlLual overflowlng LhaL reaches even lnLo maLLer and glorlfles all LhaL lL flnds and all LhaL lL creaLes-and manlfesLs Lhen noL as deaLh buL as Coodness. 32. l.198, 203. 33. l.234. 34. 1hls ls why even laLo and loLlnus, sltooteJ ln an average-mode myLhlc worldvlew, would dramaLlcally underraLe, alLhough noL lgnore, Lhe power and lmporLance of emplrlclsm, noL even ArlsLoLle would grasp Lhe lmporLance of emplrlcal meosotemeot. loLlnus (and laLo) were slLuaLed ln an average-mode myLhologlcal background worldvlew (myLhlc-raLlonal), agalnsL whlch Lhey had Lo flghL (whlle dellcaLely and unavoldably embraclng aspecLs of lL). 1hey spoke from Lhe cenLer of a myLhlc worldvlew, even as Lhelr own subsLanLlve 8eason Lranscended lL, and even as Lhelr own conLemplaLlon Lranscended 8eason, buL myLhlcally slLuaLed Lhey could noL avold. 1he myLhlc was slmply Lhe ovetoqe level of consclousness, so of course some lndlvlduals could move beyond lL, buL of course Lhey sLlll had Lo speak Lhrough lL Lo some degree. 8aLlonallLy, as a baslc organlzlng prlnclple of average consclousness, was lndeed deeper and wlder Lhan myLhology, and LhaL was lLs poslLlve and evoluLlonary advance, whlch allowed Lhe LnllghLenmenL pbllosopbes Lo wlldly deconsLrucL so much of Lhe predecessor worldvlew: Lhey no doubL had a greaL deal of LruLh on Lhelr slde. 8uL Jlffeteotlotloq Lhe 8lg 1hree ls one Lhlng, subsequenLly collopsloq Lhe 8lg 1hree Lo Lhe 8lg Cne (flaLland hollsLlc sysLems-language, lL-language, Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh, Lhe monologlcal gaze): LhaL was someLhlng else alLogeLher. loLlnus, and laLo, were of course uslng raLlonallLy (and beyond), buL, preclsely because Lhey were noL slLuaLed ln Lhe monologlcal cllmaLe of early modernlLy (lucky ln LhaL regard!), Lhe raLlonallLy was fuller and deeper and Lruer Lo lLself, lL was, as 1aylor polnLs ouL, subsLanLlve and dlalecLlcal and dlaloglcal, noL metely lnsLrumenLal and procedural and monologlcal. 8uL wlLh Lhe shlfL ln ovetoqe-moJe worldvlew from myLhlc-raLlonal Lo raLlonal (for LhaL wos Lhe LnllghLenmenL), Lhen reason, capLured flrsL by lLs poslLlvlsLlc powers, saw Lhe enLlre kosmos ln Lerms of lLs 8lghL-Pand or exLerlor or emplrlcal componenLs, and Lhus Lhe mulLldlmenslonal kosmos collapsed lnLo Lhe flaLland hollsm of lnLerlocklng orders, wlLh everyLhlng ln Lhe cosmos lnLerlocklng so LlghLly (Lhey were wonL Lo dlscourse aL lengLh on Lhe CreaL unlversal SysLem") LhaL no LefL-Pand componenL (wheLher soul or consclousness or lnLrospecLlon or lnLerpreLaLlon) had any place aL all. All Lhlngs belng merely sLrands ln Lhe web meanL LhaL all Lhlngs were merely lnsLrumenLal, and Lhus Lhere was only a Lechnologlcal, monologlcal, lnsLrumenLal mode of reason. We wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln more speclflc deLall ln chapLers 12 and 13. CPA1L8 10. 1PlS-WC8LuL?, C1PL8WC8LuL? 1. 1he Cne," sLrlcLly speaklng, refers Lo coosol-level obsotptloo, wheLher LhaL causal level ls vlewed as Source (of lnvoluLlon) or SummlL (of evoluLlon). 8uL l wlll someLlmes use Ooe, as does loLlnus, Lo also mean Lhe AbsoluLe as nondual (ulLlmaLe) Cround. 1he same ls Lrue for Lerms such as CoJbeoJ and 5pltlt-Lhey can mean causal oneness or ulLlmaLe nonduallsm (Lhls double usage ls found ln 8amana Maharshl and many oLhers). l wlll do Lhls only when Lhe conLexL makes clear, l belleve, whlch meanlng ls lnLended. 1hls ls always dlfflculL, because Lhere are only so many words Lo go around, buL Lhe reallzaLlons and Lhe meanlngs are lndeed dlsLlncL. 2. ll.62. 3. ll.62. lf by Cne" we mean Lhe lnflnlLe, by All" we mean Lhe sum LoLal of flnlLe manlfesLaLlon, and by Lach" we mean each parLlcular manlfesLaLlon, Lhe non-dual sLance" ls: Cne-ln-Lach, Lach-ls-Cne, Lach-ln-All, All-ln-Lach, Cne-ln-All. 1he panLhelsLlc sLance as popularly advanced ls: Cne-ls-All, Lach-ln-All. 1he holographlc paradlgm" ls: Lach-ln-All, All-ln-Lach, as an overall worldvlew, Lhls ls maglcal syncreLlsm (whlch ls why lL ls ofLen hooked up wlLh foraglng worldvlews). When Lhe nondual LradlLlons speak of Lhe Cne-ln-Lhe-Many and Lhe Many-ln-Lhe-Cne, Lhey mean Lhe Cne-ln-Lach-and-All and Lach-and-All-ls-Lhe-Cne. 1he reallzaLlon of Cne-ln-Many and Many-ln-Cne, ls, of course, common and deflnlLlve for all nondual schools, wheLher of Lhe LasL or Lhe WesL. u. 1. Suzukl, for example, malnLalned LhaL Lhe essence of Zen reallzaLlon ls conLalned ln Lhe Avotomsoko 5otto, where Lhe lnLerpeneLraLlon of Lhe AbsoluLe (ll) and Lhe relaLlve (sblb)-Cne-ln-Lach (sblb ll wo ol)-allows Lhe compleLe lnLerpeneLraLlon of Lhe Lach wlLh Lach and All (sblb sblb wo ol)-preclsely loLlnus's polnL. AL Lhe same Llme, Lhe flnal" phllosophlcal poslLlon of Zen, and all of Mahayana, ls expressed ln Lhe vlmoloklttl-NltJesbo 5otto, whlch ls a dlscourse on nonduallLy. Lach of Lhe assembled sages glves hls or her deflnlLlon of nonduallLy: lL ls Lhe noL-Lwoness of nlrvana and samsara, lL ls Lhe noL-Lwoness of enllghLenmenL and passlons, lL ls Lhe noL-Lwoness of Lhe many and Lhe one, and so forLh. 1he correcL" answer ls flnally glven by vlmalaklrLl, who responds wlLh a Lhunderous sllence." 4. 1haL ls Lo say, Lo each of Lhose proposlLlons corresponds a dlrecL, repeaLable, experlenLlal dlsclosure, os lotetpteteJ ln a communlLy of Lhose who have masLered Lhe paradlgm and dlsplayed compeLence ln Lhe ln[uncLlons and exemplars. 3. Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 33. 6. lnge polnLs ouL LhaL noL only are efflux and reflux nondual ln loLlnus, buL even MaLLer and lorm-LhaL lnLracLable Creek duallsm-LogeLher are one lllumlnaLed reallLy." lnge polnLs ouL LhaL Lhls nonduallLy can be clearly Lraced back Lo laLo-lL ls cerLaln loLlnus Lhlnks so-and Lhus lnge (among oLhers) concludes flaL-ouL LhaL laLonlsm ls noL duallsLlc." 7. Larly 8uddhlsm was a pure causal-level Ascendlng endeavor: flee Lhe Many, hold only Lo Lhe unmanlfesL, samsara, Lhe world of llluslon, was Lo be alLogeLher Lranscended ln nlrvana (and Lhe pure cessaLlon of oltoJb), and Lhe Lwo (samsara and nlrvana) are dlameLrlcally opposed, lL was, ln all essenLlal respecLs, a pure CnosLlclsm. nagar[una's Mahayana (Madhyamlka) revoluLlon, on Lhe oLher hand, was non-dual (advaya) Lo Lhe core, seelng LhaL nlrvana and samsara are noL Lwo," whlch also gave rlse Lo LanLrlc or va[rayana 8uddhlsm, where even Lhe lowesL defllemenLs were seen Lo be perfecL expresslons of prlmordlal wakefulness (rlgpa). 1hls ls loLlnlan Lhrough and Lhrough. lnLeresLlngly, loLlnus and nagar[una llved around Lhe same cenLury (second-Lhlrd cenLury CL). 1hus, when nagar[una beglns hls aLLacks on Lhe schools LhaL he feels are Lhe mosL dlsLorLed and parLlal, he does noL so much aLLack Plndulsm, as mlghL be expecLed from a 8uddhlsL. Pe mosLly aLLacks early 8uddhlsm (1heravadln and Abhldharma) wlLh a vengeance, hls aLLacks are unrelenLlng and powerful and alLogeLher convlnclng. 1hls ls so slmllar Lo loLlnus's aLLack on Lhe CnosLlcs LhaL one ls LempLed ls say LhaL Lhe World Soul was, aL LhaL parLlcular Llme, deflnlLely Lrylng Lo wln Lhrough Lo a new level of splrlLual reallzaLlon (namely, nondual), and Lapped Lhese Lwo exLraordlnary lndlvlduals on Lhe shoulders Lo carry ouL Lhe Lask. 8uL whaLever Lhe cause, Lhese Lwo souls wroughL hlsLorlcally unparalleled splrlLual revoluLlons ln Lhe WesL and Lhe LasL. lL ls only a sllghL exaggeraLlon Lo say LhaL vlrLually every nondual LradlLlon ln boLh LasL and WesL Lraces lLs llneage, ln whole or parL, Lo loLlnus or nagar[una. ln Lhe WesL, ChrlsLlanlLy was llfLed ouL of lLs mere myLhlc lnvolvemenLs, and lnLo conLemplaLlve endeavors, by Lhe efforLs of such as AugusLlne and SalnL ulonyslus, boLh dlrecLly and deeply lnfluenced by loLlnus, from Lhem lL would lnfluence vlrLually every subsequenL ChrlsLlan mysLlc, lncludlng SalnL 1eresa, SalnL !ohn, uame !ullan, Cusanus, 8runo, 8lake, 8oehme, and LckharL. loLlnus would furLher be a maln lnfluence on novalls and Schelllng, and Lhus Lhe enLlre 8omanLlc-ldeallsLlc movemenLs (and from Lhere Lo Schopenhauer, nleLzsche, Lmerson, Wllllam !ames, 8oyce). neoplaLonlsm was llkewlse a ma[or lnfluence on !ewlsh mysLlclsm (kabbalah and Pasldlsm), and on lslamlc mysLlclsm (especlally Suflsm). none of Lhose movemenLs added subsLanLlally Lo Lhe overall revoluLlon wroughL by loLlnus, whlch ls exacLly why 8enn could malnLaln LhaL no oLher Lhlnker has ever accompllshed a revoluLlon so lmmedlaLe, so comprehenslve, and of such prolonged duraLlon." LxcepL nagar[una. All schools of 1lbeLan 8uddhlsm, of Chlnese Ch'an and 1len 1al, of !apanese Zen and Shln and kegon, Lrace Lhelr llneages dlrecLly Lo nagar[una (ln whole or parL). 8uL noL only Lhe exLraordlnary flowerlng of Mahayana and va[rayana resLs on nagar[una's shoulders: hls dlalecLlc was a ma[or lnfluence on Shankara, vedanLa's greaLesL phllosopher-sage (8amana Maharshl belng one of Shankara's many descendanLs), and Shankara's nondual (AdvalLa) vedanLa revoluLlonlzed all of subsequenL lndlan phllosophy/rellglon (so slmllar was lL ln many respecLs Lo nagar[una's Madhyamaka LhaL 8uddhlsm slmply dled ouL ln lndla, belng almosL, as lL were, reabsorbed ln essenLlals back lnLo Plndulsm). 1hus, around Lhe world, LasL and WesL, norLh and SouLh-lL ls only a sllghL exaggeraLlon Lo say LhaL all nondual roads lead Lo Lhese Lwo mosL exLraordlnary souls, world heroes ln Lhe LruesL sense. (lor an exLenslve dlscusslon of nagar[una, see noLe 1 for chap. 14). 8. 1llllch, A blstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt, p. 374. 8oLh 1llllch and l are referrlng Lo Lhe myLhlc componenLs of ChrlsLlanlLy, noL Lo lLs psychlc and subLle-level dlrecL reallzaLlons, many of whlch approached a pure nondual undersLandlng (as we saw wlLh 1eresa and LckharL). 8aLher, lL ls Lhe LranslaLlon downward lnLo myLhlc dlssoclaLlon" (preclsely as deflned by Campbell) LhaL l am here dlscusslng, because Lhls myLhlc dlssoclaLlon, parLlcularly ln regard Lo Lhe lncarnaLlon (uescenL) and Lhe Ascenslon (AscenL), came Lo Lhoroughly deflne essenLlal ChrlsLlanlLy, dlvorce lL from oLher rellglons, and seL an enLlre Lone for Lhe culLure lL would subsequenLly deflne. Cod creaLed Lhls world (whlch lndeed manlfesLs Coodness Lo LhaL degree), buL our flnal desLlny can be found nowhere ln Lhls world (Lhe classlcal Ascendlng ldeal of myLhlc dlssoclaLlon). 9. nlstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt, p. 393. 10. 1hey were a source of whaL eLer 8erger calls olbllotloo, whlch, as l vlew lL, ls any LhreaL Lo Lhe culLural LranslaLlon process of generaLlng meanlng and lLs correlaLlve form of soclal lnLegraLlon and sLablllLy. And, as 8erger polnLs ouL, nlhllaLlon needs Lo be counLered wlLh Lherapla, or a dlslodglng of Lhe source of nlhllaLlon. (nlhllaLlon ls Lhe LhreaLened negaLlon of a glven level of LranslaLlon, Lherapla ls Lhe preservaLlon or resLoraLlon of LhaL level. 1ransformaLlon or Lranscendence, on Lhe oLher hand, ls Lhe negaLlon ooJ preservaLlon of LhaL level: lLs nlhllaLlon ln a greaLer Lherapla or Lros LhaL embraces and preserves-Agape-lLs own accompllshmenLs.) 8uL slnce culLures generally musL preserve Lhelr own average-level mode of LranslaLlon (as Lhe source of soclal sLablllLy and culLural coheslon) and ward off all negaLlng LhreaLs, Lhen all LhreaLs are slmply and generlcally vlewed as nlhllaLlon, and masslve measures of Lherapla (lncludlng coerclon Lo Lhe culLural paradlgm) are broughL lnLo play (cf. loucaulL). ln raLlonal socleLles, we slmply label someone ouLlaw" and lock Lhem up, or mad" or lnsane" and Lhen drug Lhem ouL of our mlsery (see A socloble CoJ for a dlsLlncLlon beLween pre-law and Lrans-law, Lwo very dlfferenL forms of ouLlaw, buL boLh of whlch are noneLheless slmply vlewed as nlhllaLlon Lo Lhe average-mode culLural paradlgm, and boLh of whlch are sLrenuously marglnallzed"). 8uL ln myLhlc socleLles, Lhe nlhllaLlng offense ls much more consequenLlal, because an lnsulL Lo Lhe sLaLe ls also an lnsulL Lo Cod, and Lhus anyLhlng from excommunlcaLlon Lo burnlng aL Lhe sLake wlll be requlred for culLural Lherapla. 8ecause Lhe 8lg 1hree aren'L dlfferenLlaLed ln myLhlc culLures, a LhreaL Lo any one ls a LhreaL Lo all Lhree, and musL be LreaLed accordlngly. 11. We see Lhls already happenlng wlLh Lhe AposLollc laLhers, parLlcularly ClemenL of 8ome and lgnaLlus of AnLloch. 1he orlglnal preachers" of early ChrlsLlanlLy, aparL from Lhe aposLles, were Lhe Lravellng pneumaLlcs," Lhose ln whom splrlL was allve" as a dlrecL experlenLlal openlng. 8uL by Lhe Llme of Lhe AposLollc laLhers, Lhls pneumaLlclsm" was on Lhe wane and was, ln facL, vlewed as dangerous, because lL led Lo dlsorder." 1he AposLollc laLhers Lherefore asked, Why do we even need Lhem? LveryLhlng LhaL needed Lo be sald had already been sald, Lhey felL-flrsL ln Lhe Cld 1esLamenL, Lhen ln Lhe sLlll-belng-drawn-up new 1esLamenL, and codlfled ln Lhe Canon and Lhe AposLles' Creed, a serles of bellefs wlLhouL any reference Lo octool expetleoce. 1he Church became Lhe ekkleslo (eccleslasLlc) assembly of ChrlsL, and Lhe only governor of Lhe ekklesla was Lhe local blshop, who possessed rlghL bellef," and noL Lhe pneumaLlc or Lhe propheL, who mlghL possess splrlL buL couldn'L be conLrolled." 1he Church was no longer deflned as Lhe communlLy of salnLs, buL as Lhe assembly of blshops. WlLh 1erLulllan Lhe relaLlonshlp would become almosL purely leqol, a maLLer of proper sacramenLal rlLes (wheLher Lhe person undersLood Lhem or noL), and Lhus, for example, bapLlsm could save an lnfanL. lrom here lL was a shorL sLep Lo Cyprlan's blndlng of Lhe SplrlL Lo Lhe leqol offlce of tbe cbotcb. Cne could become a prlesL by otJlootloo and noL by owokeoloq. A prlesL was no longer holy (sancLus) lf he was personally awakened or sancLlfled, buL lf he slmply held Lhe legal offlce. Llkewlse, rlLuals became ob[ecLlvely holy" and blndlng" even lf Lhe glver of Lhem was oot sub[ecLlvely holy, and even lf Lhe recelver of Lhem dld noL have Lhe falnLesL ldea whaL was golng on-one could be saved" by rlLual sacramenL alone and noL by dlrecL experlence and evoluLlon: Pe who does noL have Lhe Church as MoLher cannoL have Cod as laLher" (Cyprlan). lor varlous complex reasons, AugusLlne slded wlLh Lhls vlew, and Lhe Church became sLrucLurally a pure myLhlc-raLlonal legallsm. llnally, slnce salvaLlon now belonged Lo Lhe lawyers, grace became Lhe forglveness of sln (SalnL Ambrose) concelved as breaklng Lhe law-?ou are forglven", gone ls Lhe concepLlon of Crace as uelflcaLlon or dlscovery of Lrue Self (SalnL ClemenL: Pe who knows hlmself knows Cod"). Much of Lhls ls unavoldable ln any organlzed reallzaLlon, buL lL obvlously can go Loo far, and Lhls Loo far" ls parL of Lhe LranslaLlon downward" whlch l am dlscusslng. 12. nlstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt. 13. !usLln MarLyr, Lhe mosL lmporLanL of Lhe ApologlsLs, was plvoLal ln Lhls regard, and ls a perfecL example of how Lhe reallzaLlon of a unlversal nous or Mlnd would be LranslaLed downward lnLo an excluslve myLhlc properLy. Pe had Lhree maln polnLs: (1) 1hose who llve accordlng Lo Lhe Logos are ChrlsLlans." 1hls ls flne, Lhe Logos ls Lhe nous or unlversal Mlnd ln each of us, and lf a ChrlsLlan ls deflned as one who llves ln Logos, Lhen Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL any of us llve ln Logos, we can all be called ChrlsLlans. 1hls ls very slmllar Lo u. 1. Suzukl saylng LhaL all Lrue rellglon has saLorl (reallzaLlon of unlversal Mlnd or no-mlnd) as lLs basls, and Lherefore all Lrue rellglon has Zen as a basls. 1here ls noLhlng ln !usLln's poslLlon so far LhaL ls dlvlslve or merely myLhlc. (2) WhaL anybody has sald abouL Lhe LruLh belongs Lo us, Lhe ChrlsLlans." 1hls ls sLlll flne, as !usLln has deflned Lhese Lerms. As SalnL Ambrose would laLer puL lL, WhaLsoever ls Lrue, by whomsoever lL ls sald, ls from Lhe Poly SplrlL." All 1ruLh lssues forLh from SplrlL, and lf a ChrlsLlan ls one who ls acLually llvlng ln Lhls 1ruLh, Lhen all 1ruLh belongs Lo ChrlsLlans, as deflned. Agaln, Lhls ls lndlsLlngulshable from Suzukl's All LruLh ls Zen." (3) lf Lhe Logos ln lLs fullness had noL appeared ln !esus, no salvaLlon would be posslble for anybody." And Lhere !usLln sLeps over Lhe llne, or down Lhe llne, and lnLo myLhlc possesslveness. lL follows only from any such llne of ChrlsLlan" reasonlng LhaL Lhe Logos needed Lo descend lnLo some parLlcular embodlmenL or lncarnaLlon. lf lL ls undersLood LhaL 8uddha or krlshna or Lao 1zu was also a compleLe embodlmenL (uescenL or lncarnaLlon) and reallzaLlon (AscenL or Ascenslon) of SplrlL, LhaL !esus ls non- unlque, Lhen we have Lhe noLlon of avaLar or world Leacher, whlch ls flne. 8uL Lhe only way Lo clalm LhaL [usL one of Lhem ls Lhe absoluLe and unlque lncarnaLlon of Cod" ls Lo ground LhaL clalm ln myLhologlcal dogma LhaL ls separaLed ouL and proLecLed from reason, from evldence, and from dlrecL splrlLual reallzaLlon, and glven a prlvlleged sLaLus LhaL ls merely soclocenLrlc, noL pneumaLocenLrlc, ln orlgln. And Lhe sad Lhlng abouL Lhls proprleLary sLance ls LhaL (1) lL separaLes and dlvldes ChrlsLlans from all oLher humans and oLher world clLlzens, (2) lL dlvldes ChrlsL from all ChrlsLlans, because ChrlsL ls, ln Lhe flnal analysls, unlque, and (3) lL ulLlmaLely dlvldes Cod from Lhls world alLogeLher, slnce Lhe lncarnaLlon and Lhe Ascenslon, for Lhls earLh, boLh happened only once, no maLLer how much Lhe flrsL Lwo genulnely unlversal polnLs of !usLln's ever-repeaLed argumenL are sLressed. ChrlsLlan apologlsLs are razor-sharp ln applylng Lhese dlsLlncLlons, and so you have Lo puL lL Lo Lhem very blunLly: ls !esus ChrlsL unlque? ls, Lo glve [usL one example, CauLama 8uddha also an absoluLe lncarnaLlon and Ascenslon of Lhe full Logos?" lf Lhey say yes, Lhen Lhey are followlng genulne or caLhollc falLh, and Lhe only Lrue concluslon of Lhelr reasonlng, lf Lhey say no, Lhey are sLlll sLuck ln Lhelr local volcano god and hls only begoLLen." lL wlll do no good, aL Lhls polnL, Lo clalm LhaL 8uddhlsLs are parLlclpaLlng ln Lhe same Logos LhaL was unlquely manlfesLed ln !esus. Many modern ChrlsLlan mysLlcs, lncldenLally, are perfecLly happy Lo answer yes. 1he 1rlnlLarlan uocLrlne (Lhree ulvlne lorms, Cne SubsLance) ls almosL ldenLlcal Lo Lhe 8uddhlsL docLrlne of Lhe 1rlkaya (Lhree 8odles of 8uddha), as worked ouL ln 1be lotos 5otto, Lhe lookovototo 5otto, eLc., and was deslgned Lo answer Lhe same quesLlon: lf 8uddha-naLure (totboqotoqotbbo) ls Llmeless and eLernal, how dld lL come Lo appear ln Lhe hlsLorlcal person CauLama Shakyamunl, and whaL ls hls relaLlon Lo lL? 1he answer was also essenLlally Lhe same: Lhe formless Cround or 1ruLh 8ody (LmpLlness, Lhe uharmakaya, laLher) appears, ln Lhe world of form, as Lhe nlrmanakaya or lorm 8ody, Lhe hlsLorlcal manlfesLaLlon (CauLama, Lhe Son), medlaLed by Lhe 1ransformaLlon 8ody (Lhe Sambhogakaya, Poly SplrlL)-all Lhree of whlch are dlfferenL buL equal aspecLs of Lhe Svabhavlkakaya (Codhead). 8uL Lhe 8uddhlsLs drew Lhe only correcL concluslon: Lhere are Lherefore poLenLlally an lnflnlLe number of equal Sons and uaughLers of uharmakaya, noL only ls !esus accepLed as a perfecL nlrmanakaya manlfesLaLlon, lL ls expecLed. 14. See up ftom Jeo. 13. lf any oLher lndlvldual fully Ascended, lL would desLroy Lhe meanlng and lnLegraLlon of socleLy on Lhe whole-pollLlcally, morally, and rellglously. 1hls ls, needless Lo say, a sLrong dlslncenLlve Lo Self-reallzaLlon. 16. As a dlrecL experlence, noL merely as a verbal clalm. lL wlll do no good, for example, Lo clalm LhaL !ehovah ls a creaLlon- cenLered Cod or Alpha Source (whlch ls cerLalnly Lhe orLhodox clalm), many maglco-myLhlc producLlons are nonduallsLlc"- or hollsLlc"-soundlng, as we have seen: Lhe gods and goddesses can be embedded ln naLure-lL ralns when Lhey cry, and so forLh. Cr Cod creaLed boLh heaven and earLh"-Lhe pure Alpha Source, lL ls sald. 8uL Lhe LesL ls always: ls Lhls merely a meLaphyslcal clalm, or ls lL grounded ln dlrecL splrlLual pracLlce and dlrecL, repeaLable, reproduclble experlence? Anybody can say All ls Cne." 1he quesLlon ls, whaL ls Lhe sLrucLure of consclousness LhaL acLually auLhors LhaL sLaLemenL? Maglc? MyLhlc? MenLal? sychlc? SubLle? Causal?-for all can and wlll clalm ulLlmacy, and all can sound, on occaslon, very nondual." Anybody famlllar wlLh my work knows my profound lndebLedness Lo Lhe many greaL ChrlsLlan (and !ewlsh and lslamlc) mysLlcs, who rose above maglc, myLhlc, and raLlonal endeavors Lo ground a reallzaLlon ln psychlc, subLle, and even causal endeavors. My polnL, raLher, ls LhaL Lhe closer Lhey goL Lo LhaL acLual Coal, Lhe more Lhey were looked upon wlLh grave susplclon and much worse, for reasons l have Lrled Lo suggesL. 17. ln Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 68. My lLallcs. 18. 1llllch's summary of AugusLlne, nlstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt, p. 112. 19. 1he maln dlfference beLween Lhe LasLern and WesLern vedanLa ls Lhe degree of peneLraLlon. 1he WlLness-sLance can be polnLed ouL Lo mosL people falrly easlly, and Lhey can begln Lo grasp and feel lLs lmpllcaLlons. 1hls ls, we mlghL say, a beglnnlng gllmpse." 1he nexL sLage ls Lo medlLaLe on Lhls undersLandlng (ln Lhe WesLern sense of Lhlnklng hard abouL lL"), whlch can lead, as lL dld for uescarLes, Lo an acLual absorpLlon ln Lhe l AM" sLaLe for several hours aL a Llme. 1hls ls, so Lo speak, Lhe second sLage of prolonged absorpLlon, and lL can so revoluLlonlze one's awareness and LhoughLs LhaL, as uescarLes puL lL, when he emerged from LhaL sLaLe hls whole phllosophy had been compleLely formed. 8uL accordlng Lo vedanLa (and Zen and va[rayana, eLc.) Lhose sLaLes have Lo be reflned and pollshed and broughL Lo a consLanL reallzaLlon, and noL merely a peak" experlence or a plaLeau" experlence, because lL ls only ln Lhe breakLhrough (Lhe dlssoluLlon) of Lhe WlLness LhaL Lhe nondual ls recognlzed. 1he Lheorles LhaL come ouL of Lemporary peak experlences are almosL always, Lo use an apL meLaphor, half-baked. We see Lhls half-bakedness ln AugusLlne and vlrLually all of hls descendanLs" (wlLh some happy excepLlons), buL aL leasL lL ls all a sLep ln Lhe rlghL dlrecLlon, and lnflnlLely preferable Lo Lhe lmposslble poslLlvlsLlc aLLempL Lo ground cerLalnLy ln Lhe exLerlorness of Lhlngs. Llkewlse, from AugusLlne on we would see Lwo radlcally dlfferenL approaches Lo Lrylng Lo demonsLraLe (or prove") Lhe exlsLence of Cod-and, no surprlse, Lhey are Lhe 8lghL- and Lhe LefL-Pand paLhs. 1he LefL-Pand paLh (AugusLlne's paLh) sLarLs wlLh Lhe lnLerlor, wlLh lmmeJlote cooscloosoess, and aLLempLs Lo plumb Lhe depLhs of LhaL lmmedlaLeness, of LhaL 8aslc Wakefulness, and flnds enllghLenmenL or SplrlL ln Lhe dlrecLlon of Lhe absoluLe lotetlot of consclousness, whlch lLself Lhen lssues ln Lhe nondual awareness Lranscendlng botb lnLerlor and exLerlor alLogeLher (Lhe move from Lhe lnLerlor Lo Lhe oooJool superlor). 1hls ls why vlrLually all ChrlsLlan mysLlcal schools would Lrace Lhelr llneage Lo AugusLlne (and ulonyslus). 1he 8lghL-Pand paLh sLarLs (and ends) wlLh extetlots, and aLLempLs Lo deduce, loglcally, Lhe AuLhor of Lhe exLerlor paLLern (argumenL from deslgn, onLologlcal argumenL, flrsL-cause argumenL, eLc.). 1hls ls preemlnenLly Lhe paLh of SalnL 1homas, and Lhls ls why tbe archbaLLle wlLhln Lhe Church has always been beLween Lhe AugusLlnlans and Lhe 1homlsLs (ln Lhelr many forms)-beLween Lhe lnLerlor-mysLlcal-consclousness approaches and Lhe exLerlor, ob[ecLlvlslLlc, legallsLlc, dogma-scrlpLural approaches (an exLerlor approach LhaL conLlnues rlghL down Lo Loday, wlLh Lhe modern physlcs proves Lhe 1ao" argumenLs, whlch are all 8lghL-Pand argumenLs). AugusLlne would reply, flrsL, LhaL Lhose 8lghL-Pand proofs" can'L be done (Lhere ls no convlnclng exLerlor proof) and, second, even lf Lhere were, lL would be worLhless, because exLerlor proof" alone does noL resulL ln lnner ttoosfotmotloo of consclousness, and lL ls Lhls lnner LransformaLlon LhaL alone dlscloses SplrlL. noL an ob[ecLlve bellef, buL a LransformaLlon of wlll-Lhls alone dlscloses Cod, accordlng Lo AugusLlne. ln Lhls, AugusLlne ls brllllanL, orlglnal, and alLogeLher compelllng. 1he dlfflculLy ls LhaL Lhls half-baked WlLness would play dlrecLly lnLo Lhe hands of Lhe dlsengaged egolc-raLlonallLy of Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. ln Lhe Mahayana and LanLrlc LradlLlons, Lhe pure Self or empLy WlLness Lranscends all, embraces all, and Lhus ls sltooteJ and emboJleJ ln Lhe enLlre manlfesL realm (Lhe uharmakaya or LmpLlness has 8upakaya or lorm 8ody). 1he dlsengaged ego of Lhe LnllghLenmenL was fueled ln parL, no doubL, by an lnLulLlon of Lhe WlLness (as we wlll see), buL lL lacked Lhe fully baked 8upakaya, lLs embodlmenL or embeddedness ln Lhe enLlre world of lorm, and Lhese merely dlssoclaLed and dlsengaged aspecLs conLrlbuLed Lo Lhe dehumanlzed humanlsm" of Lhe LnllghLenmenL. 8uL when Pusserl explalns LhaL Lhe world could end and lL wouldn'L affecL Lhe pure Self, or descrlbes Lhe spllLLlng of Lhe wlLnesslng self from emplrlcal self (e.g., ln secLlon 13 of cottesloo meJltotloos), or when llchLe descrlbes Lhe pure Cbservlng Self as belng loflolte and supra-lndlvldual SplrlL-Lhls ls WesLern vedanLa aL lLs flnesL. lL [usL needs lLs 8upakaya. As for Lhe qeoetol slmllotlty of Lhls WesLern vedanLa wlLh Lhe LasLern-8aslc Wakefulness ls lmposslble Lo doubL because doubL lLself presupposes lL-here ls only one example from uzogchen (Lhe CreaL erfecLlon") 8uddhlsm, generally regarded as Lhe hlghesL of Lhe 8uddha's Leachlngs (Lhls ls from alLrul's Self-LlberaLed Mlnd"): AL Llmes lL happens LhaL some medlLaLors say LhaL lL ls dlfflculL Lo recognlze Lhe naLure of Lhe mlnd [whlch means, ln uzogchen, Lhe absoluLe reallLy of pure LmpLlness or prlmordlal urlLy]. Some male or female pracLlLloners belleve lL Lo be lmposslble Lo recognlze Lhe naLure of mlnd. 1hey become depressed wlLh Lears sLreamlng down Lhelr cheeks. 1here ls no reason aL all Lo become sad. lL ls noL aL all lmposslble Lo recognlze. 8esL dlrecLly ln LhaL whlch Lhlnks LhaL lL ls lmposslble Lo recognlze Lhe naLure of Lhe mlnd, and LhaL ls exacLly lL." And as for Lhe WlLness lLself passlng lnLo nonduallLy beyond sub[ecL and ob[ecL, beyond lnslde and ouLslde (buL embraclng boLh): 1here are some medlLaLors who don'L leL Lhelr mlnd resL ln lLself [baslc lmmedlaLeness], as Lhey should. lnsLead Lhey leL lL waLch ouLwardly or search lnwardly. ?ou wlll nelLher see nor flnd Lhe mlnd by waLchlng ouLwardly or searchlng lnwardly. 1here ls no reason whaLsoever Lo waLch ouLwardly or search lnwardly. LeL go dlrecLly lnLo Lhls mlnd LhaL ls waLchlng ouLwardly or searchlng lnwardly, and LhaL ls exacLly lL." 20. nlstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt, p. 103. 21. 5ootces of tbe self, p. 131. 22. 1aylor's words, 5ootces of tbe self, p. 139. 23. nlstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt, p. 114. 24. lbld., p. 121. 23. Cteot cbolo of beloq, p. 84. 26. ln facL, Lhe exlsLence of evll was Laken as a Lype of proof for Lhe exlsLence of Coodness. Lvll, lL was LhoughL, was noL an acLual subsLance or a real exlsLenL, lL was slmply a shadow, buL all shadows are casL by LlghL, Lhe LlghL of descendlng Coodness, ln Lhls case. 1he polnL was much llke vedanLa: manlfesLaLlon ls duallsLlc, boLh good and evll come lnLo belng as correlaLlve polarlLles, and you can'L have one wlLhouL Lhe oLher. 1hls was Lhe basls of Lhe famous opLlmlsm" of Lhe sevenLeenLh/elghLeenLh cenLury, and lL meanL almosL Lhe opposlLe of whaL lL would mean for us Loday, where opLlmlsm means you can geL rld of evll, Lhen lL meanL, you can never geL rld of evll, and Lherefore Lhls ls Lhe besL world LhaL could acLually be consLrucLed (LhaL ls, Lhls ls Lhe best of Lhe acLually posslble worlds). WhaL Lhe uescenders lacked was Lhe oLher half of Lhe equaLlon, Lhe nondual vlew: boLh good and evll can be Lranscended. arLs of Lhls and Lhe nexL paragraph are a dlrecL paraphraslng of Love[oy. lor an exLended dlscusslon of Lhese Lwo sLraLegles," see ua Avabhasa, 1be Jowo botse testomeot, chap. 18. ua uses olpbo and omeqo ln an opposlLe semanLlc sense Lo mlne, Lhe acLual meanlngs are slmllar. 27. . 84. 1here were, of course, many happy excepLlons who saw, wlLh LckharL, 8runo, Cusanus, Lhe way of Lhe colncldenLla opposlLorum-saw LhaL Lhe way up and Lhe way down are Lo be unlLed ln every momenL of percepLlon. 1hey dld noL always suffer happy faLes for Lhls reallzaLlon. 28. Cteot cbolo of beloq, p. 31. 29. lbld., p. 63. 30. lbld., p. 38. 31. 1he uescenders would excluslvely clalm LhaL Lhere are no gaps anywhere, Lhe Ascenders would emphaslze leaps are everywhere"-Lhe former embraclng flaLland, Lhe laLLer aLLempLlng Lo leap ouL of lL. MosL presenL-day ecophllosophers, because Lhey are noL radlcally nondual ln Lhelr approach, are forced Lo argue Lhe conLlnulLy Lhesls, whlch earns for Lhem Lhe charge from crlLlcs of belng eco-fasclsLs, whlch bewllders Lhe ecophllosophers, who lmaglne LhaL a flaLland hollsm ls acLually a llberaLlng noLlon. Love[oy demonsLraLes, as l menLloned ln chapLer 1, LhaL Lhe CreaL Chaln LheorlsLs all subscrlbed Lo Lhree lnLerrelaLed noLlons: plenlLude, conLlnulLy, and gradaLlon. And, he polnLs ouL, Lhere was, and sLlll ls, a Lenslon beLween Lhe second and Lhe Lhlrd (namely, no gaps" and leaps everywhere"). 1hls ls Lhe LheoreLlcal Lenslon lnherenL ln emergence Lheorles, an unavoldable Lenslon sLlll presenL ln Loday's blologlcal, soclal, and psychologlcal developmenLal Lheorles. lor reasons LhaL Lhls Lenslon cannoL be resolved LheoreLlcally, see chapLer 14, lCu." 32. ulvloe lqootooce, lll.1. 33. Schumacher, ColJe fot tbe petplexeJ. Schumacher ls someLhlng of a hero Lo ecologlsLs and envlronmenLallsLs, and rlghLly so, l Lhlnk, buL Lhey are uLLerly perplexed by hls compleLe and enLhuslasLlc embrace of hlerarchy, preclsely because Lhey confuse hlerarchy wlLh paLhologlcal hlerarchy and Lhus fall Lo undersLand LhaL Lhe only way Lo consLrucL a genulne hollsm ls vla a genulne holarchy-flaLland hollsm ls noL hollsm aL all, buL a heaplsm and a reducLlonlsm LhaL produces noL deep ecology buL span ecology. 34. Cteot cbolo of beloq, p. 120. 33. lbld., p. 119. 36. lbld., p. 207, 186. CPA1L8 11. 88AvL nLW WC8Lu 1. 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, p. x. 2. My general clalm ls LhaL mosL of Lhe aspecLs of modernlLy LhaL many LheorlsLs have seen as poslLlve and beneflclal can ln facL be resolved lnLo varlaLlons on no more myLhs" (slnce LhaL also lncludes a LransformaLlon from conop Lo formop and Lhus a dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, Lhe speclflc dlgnlLy" of modernlLy), and llkewlse, mosL of Lhe aspecLs of modernlLy LhaL have been harshly crlLlclzed by LheorlsLs can be resolved lnLo varlaLlons on no more AscenL!" (slnce LhaL also lncludes Lhe loss of a groundlng ln a source and a conLexL LhaL provlded subsLanLlve lnLegraLlon and meanlng, and seL Lhe raLlonal-ego and lLs lnsLrumenLal-purposlve reason afloaL ln a world LhaL no longer cared). 3. 1helr relaLlonal exchange was noL merely wlLh socleLy aL large, whlch would noL comprehend Lhelr endeavors, Lhelr relaLlonal exchanges occurred ln Lhe mlcrocommunlLles or sanghas or lodges or academles of Lhe llke-mlnded, llke-splrlLed, llke- depLhed, [usL as, ln our culLure Loday, many people fall below, and a few above, Lhe Lyplcal expecLable level of consclousness, morallLy, cognlLlon, and so forLh. 4. As we saw, referenLs exlsL only ln worldspaces (a glven referenL exlsLs only ln a glven worldspace). And worldspaces are oot slmply arblLrary lnLerpreLaLlons of a preglven monologlcal cosmos, raLher, worldspaces are embedded ln Lhe kosmos, and are consLralned accuraLely by Lhe depLh LhaL Lhey coo reglsLer (or make and maLch). 3. CuoLed ln 1aylor, neqel, p. 4. 6. See leuersLeln's 5ttoctotes of cooscloosoess for a superb elucldaLlon of Cebser's work, whlch only recenLly became avallable ln Lngllsh LranslaLlon. 7. 1llllch, p. 333. Cne of Lhe reasons for all of Lhls, l am suggesLlng, oLher Lhan Lhe emergence of raLlonallLy lLself, ls LhaL slnce Lhe AscendenL Cne ls no longer admlLLed, lL becomes Lhe uescendenL or manlfesL All or Whole ln whlch now resldes rovldence or Parmony, lL ls no longer Lhe relaLlon of Lach and All Lo Lhe Cne buL merely of Lach Lo Lhe All-lL emphaslzed, as l sald, Lhe descendlng sysLems Lheory" of lenlLude, whlch ls correcL as far as lL goes, buL ls only half" Lhe sLory. ln Lhe Lerms of kegon (or Pua-yen) phllosophy of Chlnese 8uddhlsm (whlch ls ofLen mlsapproprlaLed as a sysLems Lheory), Lhere are four maln prlnclples of reallLy. 1he flrsL ls sblb, or lndlvldual phenomena. 1he second ls ll, or absoluLe noumenon. 1he Lhlrd ls sblb ll wo ol (beLween absoluLe and phenomena Lhere ls no obsLrucLlon). 1he fourLh ls sblb sblb wo ol (beLween phenomenon and phenomenon Lhere ls no obsLrucLlon-LhaL ls, all phenomena lnLerpeneLraLe). SysLems Lheory ls Lhe lasL LeneL, wlLh no undersLandlng of ll, Lhe absoluLe. 8. Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 201. 9. 1llllch, nlstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt, p. 328. 10. All ChafeLz quoLes ln Lhls secLlon are from 5ex ooJ oJvootoqe, chap. 1. All lLallcs are mlne. 11. 1hus, Lhe shlfL from Lhe hoe Lo Lhe plow-lLself drlven by Lhe vasLly superlor capaclLy of Lhe plow Lo produce foodsLuffs-meanL a masslve shlfL from a female-parLlclpaLory Lo a predomlnanLly male producLlve work force, and Lhus Lhe publlc/producLlve sphere shlfLed away from LhaL 30-30 balance Loward male speclallzaLlon and monopollzaLlon-drlven, as ChafeLz lndlcaLes, by efflclency and expedlency. 1he same shlfL from maLrlfocal" or blfocal" modes of producLlon Loward paLrlarchal modes would occur ln socleLles LhaL were based on Lhe mounLed horse, an asLonlshlng 97 percenL of such socleLles were paLrlfocal/paLrlarchal (Lenskl). 1hls general shlfL from maLrlfocal/blfocal Lo paLrlarchal-Lhe developmenL of Lhe plow and horse-began around 3000 8CL, and acceleraLed around 1000 8CL, especlally wlLh Lhe lnvenLlon of lron (swords and plows). 1he evldence (presenLed ln vol. 2) shows qulLe clearly LhaL ldeology had vlrLually noLhlng Lo do wlLh Lhls LransformaLlon, dlfferenL ldeologles were woven around Lhe same baslc LransformaLlon ln Lhe lnfrasLrucLure, and ln all cases, ldeology followed Lhe base (e.g., male delLles replaced female delLles only afLer Lhe horse and/or plow was lnLroduced, noL before). Much has been made of Lhls shlfL from maLrlfocal or blfocal modes (equallLarlan") Lo paLrlarchal modes by femlnlsLs who Lend Lo see women as powerless vlcLlms, desplLe Lhe facL LhaL such oppresslon Lheorles have conslsLenLly falled Lo maLch avallable daLa. As Pabermas polnLs ouL, Lhese lmposlLlon Lheorles" are now regarded as emplrlcally refuLed (Lhe evldence for Lhls ls presenLed ln vol. 2). 1he greaL advanLage of Lhe more recenL femlnlsL Lheorles (from ChafeLz Lo nlelsen, noL Lo menLlon Lhe popular rlse of power femlnlsLs"), oLher Lhan maLchlng Lhe evldence, ls LhaL Lhey refuse Lo palnL women as sub[ugaLed sheep, and see Lhem lnsLead as equal co-creaLors, under Lhe qlveo clrcumsLances, of Lhe varlous forms of soclal lnLeracLlon: lL ls overwhelmlngly empowerlng Lo Lhe female, and converLs her from deflned by an CLher" Lo co-deflner wlLh an CLher"-aL each and every sLage of human developmenL. MosL flrsL- and second-wave femlnlsLs were Lhrown off Lrack by Lhe facL LhaL women ln oLher Llmes and places would acLually cboose values LhaL dld oot maLch Lhelr own llberal-LnllghLenmenL herlLage, and Lhe chooslng of Lhose values was Lherefore aLLrlbuLed Lo an ootslJe fotce (and noL a dellberaLe cholce co-creaLed by Lhe female ln Lhe face of dlfflculL clrcumsLances), Lhls postolotloq of an ouLslde force lnadverdenLly buL auLomaLlcally deflned woman as prlmarlly molded by an CLher. 1hls malevolenL CLher was slmply assumed Lo be Cenerlc Male, and Cppresslon SLudles 101 was seL ln moLlon, wlLh Lhe blzarre goal of empowerlng women by flrsL deflnlng Lhem as powerless. volume 2 ls a look aL Lhe Lhlrd-wave femlnlsLs who are quleLly buL dramaLlcally rewrlLlng Lhe hlsLory books, Lelllng Lhe Lale noL of women teoctloq nobly ln Lhe face of oppresslon, buL pto-octlvely maklng Lhe very besL declslons posslble ln Lhe gruesome condlLlons known as llfe ln Lhls blosphere. 12. ln volume 2, Lhe correlaLlons beLween Lhe emergence of egolc-raLlonallLy and lndusLrlallzaLlon are Lraced. Lgolc lnsLrumenLal raLlonallLy was lnLlmaLely relaLed wlLh lnsLrumenLal machlnery/lndusLry (upper-LefL and Lower-8lghL, respecLlvely). 1hus, when ChafeLz names loJosttlollzotloo as Lhe slngle greaLesL facLor ln Lhe llberaLlon of Lhe female, she ls descrlblng Lhe Lower-8lghL aspecL of Lhls shlfL (and l agree). ln Lhe L8, lndusLrlallzaLlon made lndlvldual physlcal sLrengLh less and less lmporLanL, whlch agaln was a facLor freelng Lhe female from Lhe subservlence lnherenL ln Lhe blosphere. 1hls also explalns why hlsLorlcally, where prevlous women's movemenLs had brlefly flourlshed (wherever teosoo flrsL emerged, such as ln Creece or lndla), Lhey noneLheless could noL be sostoloeJ. 1he maLerlal base (L8) had noL Lhe lndusLry Lo susLaln Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon. 1hls applles Lo Lhe oLher llberaLlon movemenLs as well. 8aLlonallLy mlghL creaLe a menLal space for unlversal perspecLlvlsm and unlversal llberaLlon, buL lndusLrlallzaLlon allowed lL Lo manlfesL. As Amory Lovlns has polnLed ouL, lndusLrlallzaLlon ln Lurope gave every man, woman, and chlld Lhe equlvalenL power of several slaves (so LhaL Loday, Lovlns calculaLes, every person ln Lhe world has Lhe ovetoqe equlvalenL power of flfty slaves). And LhaL made lL all Lhe more llkely, and more posslble, LhaL acLual slavery could and would be ouLlawed. 1hese MarxlsL" (or 8lghL-Pand) conslderaLlons are parL of volume 2, whlch seLs a counLerwelghL Lo Lhe more ldeallsLlc" (or LefL-Pand) presenLaLlon of Lhls volume. My overall polnL, of course, ls LhaL an all-quadranL vlew would Lake boLh lnLo equal accounL. 1he facL LhaL l am noL coverlng Lhe maLerlal base ln Lhls volume cerLalnly does noL mean l am neglecLlng lL or devalulng lL, ln many ways, as we wlll see, lL was (and ls) ofLen Lhe cruclal dlmenslon (parLlcularly for Lhe average-mode consclousness). llnally, Lhe role of lndusLrlallzaLlon ln Lhe llberaLlon movemenLs puLs Lhe ecofemlolsts ln a parLlcularly dellcaLe poslLlon. 1helr exlsLence as a movemenL depends upon lndusLrlallzaLlon, Lhe same lndusLrlallzaLlon LhaL Lhey musL aggresslvely condemn as leadlng Lo Lhe despollaLlon of Cala. 1hey have Lo blLe Lhe hand LhaL feeds Lhem, so Lo speak. Cr, we mlghL say, Lhey are lndlvlduals who are noL on speaklng Lerms wlLh Lhelr parenLs. l wlll explore Lhls Lrlcky slLuaLlon ln volume 2, and polnL ouL why Lhe sLrucLures of Lhe cenLaur are Lhe only ones lnLegraLlve enough Lo address Lhls slLuaLlon. 13. Llsler, cbollce ooJ tbe bloJe, p. 163. 14. LquallLy of men and women ln Lhe noosphere-equal access Lo Lhe publlc domaln of Lhe noosphere and equal rlghLs ln LhaL domaln-does noL mean LhaL a rlgld 30-30 parlLy musL be malnLalned ln all areas. Many femlnlsLs belleve, for example, LhaL women as moLhers need speclal legal proLecLlons (pald maLernlLy leave, for example), and Lhe Loplc of women ln fronLllne combaL wlll probably always be debaLed wlLh no clearcuL wlnner (alLhough mosL counLrles LhaL have Lrled women ln fronLllne combaL poslLlons-Lhe SovleLs ln World War ll and lsrael ln Lhe Slx-uay War-almosL lmmedlaLely abandoned Lhe pracLlce, apparenLly women are more averse Lo blowlng people's bralns ouL aL close range). Llkewlse, some femlnlsL researchers belleve LhaL, glven Lhe unavoldable aspecLs of chlldbearlng, a parlLy" ln Lhe publlc/producLlve domaln would be around 60-40 male/female. arlLy, ln oLher words, can sLlll Lake lnLo accounL some of Lhe blologlcal consLanLs and dlfferences, wlLhouL leLLlng Lhem domlnaLe Lhe scene or unfalrly pre[udlce any slLuaLlon, buL a rlgld 30-30 parlLy across Lhe board ls probably a bad yardsLlck. noneLheless, whaLever we declde abouL parlLy, Lhese lssues can be consclously and ln good wlll debaLed, and ln all cases LhaL beaLs leavlng Lhe declslon up Lo a hoe. 13. Llsler, cbollce, p. 131. 16. See, for example, uale Spender, lemlolst tbeotlsts: 1btee ceototles of key womeo tblokets (new ?ork: anLheon, 1983), and Mary 8eard, womoo os o fotce lo blstoty (new ?ork: Macmlllan, 1946). As for Lhe debaLe abouL wheLher women galned ground or losL lL ln Lhe 8enalssance (compared Lo Lhe feudal perlod), Llsler ls correcL, l belleve, when she sLaLes LhaL ln oeltbet perlod do we flnd any fundamenLal alLeraLlon of women's subservlence" (p. 227). 1he subservlence, of course, was noL prlmarlly Lo men, buL of boLh men and women Lo Lhe blosphere. 17. Llsler, cbollce, p. 139. 18. Whlch ls why Lhls Lype of speclflc aesLheLlc dlmenslon" ls noL Lhe same as Lhe upper-LefL quadranL per se, aesLheLlc- sensory cognlLlon ls slmply a small parL of Lhe early developmenL of Lhe upper LefL, and when kanL uses lL ln Lhls fashlon, lL falls mlserably ln lLs asslgned Lask of lnLegraLlng Lhe 8lg 1hree. Plgher aesLheLlc developmenL, whlch kanL hlnLs aL wlLh hls noLlon of Lhe subllme, would lndeed refer Lo ospects of hlgher uL developmenLs, buL LhaL ls noL whaL kanL has ln mlnd for hls lnLegraLlng llnk. Also, l do noL slmply equaLe 8eauLy and ArL. 8eauLy ls Lhe Lransparency of any phenomenon Lo Lhe Cne, ArL ls anyLhlng wlLh a frame around lL. 1he frame ls someLlmes an acLual frame (as around a palnLlng), or an arch (around a sLage), or even alr (around a sculpLure), buL a frame LhaL always says: look aL me. AnyLhlng wlLhln LhaL frame ls ArL, wheLher lL be Lhe Mona Llsa or a LomaLo soup can. 1he Mona Llsa ls ArL and 8eauLy, Lhe LomaLo soup can ls ArL. (All of Lhese lssues, and especlally Lhe naLure of Lhe upper-LefL quadranL, are dlscusses ln greaLer deLall ln volume 3.) 19. lf we deflne modernlLy loosely as conslsLlng of any or all of Lhe followlng facLors-(1) Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree (Weber), (2) Lhe rlse of Lhe phllosophy of Lhe sub[ecL (Pabermas), (3) Lhe rlse of lnsLrumenLal raLlonallLy (Peldegger), (4) Lhe Lransparency of language (pre-Saussure), (3) Lhe wldespread Lurn wlLhln (1aylor), (6) bellef ln unlvalenL progress-Lhen posLmodernlLy may be loosely deflned as any aLLempL Lo develop beyond (or aL any raLe Lo respond Lo) Lhose facLors. loucaulL, Pabermas, 1aylor, uerrlda, LyoLard are Lhus, ln very dlfferenL ways, all posLmodern, as l use Lhe Lerm. All are especlally unlLed ln Lhe deaLh of Lhe sub[ecL," Lhe deaLh of lnsLrumenLal raLlonallLy," and Lhe deaLh of unlvalenL progress," Lhough Lhelr proposed soluLlons ofLen dlffer dramaLlcally. 1he Lhesls l defend ln volume 3 ls LhaL all of Lhem are accesslng vlslon-loglc ln varlous ways (lnLegral-aperspecLlval), and Lhus all of Lhem are parLlcularly posLmodern." As for Lhe posLmodernlsLs" who slmply and solely Lrash reason and Lhe LnllghLenmenL, Lhe world regresslon, noL lnLegraLlon, comes mosL Lo mlnd. 20. aul 1llllch's clalm, and l concur. 21. 1llllch, nlstoty, p.33. 22. lnge, lbllosopby of llotloos, l.97. 23. lbld., ll.196, l.33. CuLsy ArlsLoLle was more dlrecL and aLLrlbuLes no sclenLlflc or phllosophlcal value Lo myLhology" (ll.196). 24. ll.24. 23. ll.17. 26. l.103. 27. Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 107. 28. lbld., pp. 99, 111. 29. lbld., p. 109. 30. lbld., p. 116. 31. 1hey were boLh also Lhe flrsL Lo clearly express Lhe Lheory of telotlvlty lnherenL ln decenLerlng raLlonallLy. 8runo malnLalned LhaL our percepLlon of Lhe world ls relaLlve Lo Lhe poslLlon ln space and Llme from whlch we vlew lL, and consequenLly Lhere are as many world-percepLlons as Lhere are poslLlons, Lhls monadology had a profound effecL on Splnoza and Lelbnlz. Cusanus polnLed ouL (ln 1440!) LhaL lL ls evldenL LhaL Lhls earLh really moves, Lhough lL does noL seem Lo do so, for we apprehend moLlon only by means of a conLrasL wlLh some flxed polnL. lf a man on a boaL ln a sLream were unable Lo see Lhe banks and dld noL know LhaL Lhe sLream was flowlng, how would he comprehend LhaL Lhe boaL was movlng? 1hus lL ls LhaL, wheLher a man ls on Lhe earLh or Lhe sun or some oLher sLar, lL wlll always seem Lo hlm LhaL Lhe poslLlon he occuples ls Lhe moLlonless cenLre and LhaL all oLher Lhlngs are ln moLlon." 8aLlonal perspecLlvlsm and relaLlvlLy aL lLs besL. 32. Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 262. 33. lbld., p. 232. 34. lbld. 33. lbld., p. 211. 36. lbld., p. 184. 37. lbld., p. 186. 38. lbld., p. 188. CPA1L8 12. 1PL CCLLASL Cl 1PL kCSMCS 1. ln any of Lhe sLrucLures of consclousness developmenL, one can be aware of Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng currenLs up Lo and down from Lhe parLlcular level of one's presenL sLaLe. 1hus, for example, lf one has evolved Lo Lhe myLhlc level, one has consclous access Lo Lhe Ascendlng currenL from maLLer up Lo LhaL level (l.e., maLLer Lo sensaLlon Lo percepLlon Lo lmpulse Lo lmage Lo symbol Lo concepL Lo rule), and Lo Lhe uescendlng currenL from LhaL level down Lo maLLer (from rule Lo concepL Lo symbol Lo lmage, eLc., Lo maLLer). 1hls doesn'L mean LhaL one necessarlly can verballze Lhose ascendlng and descendlng currenLs, or consclously arLlculaLe Lhem and LheoreLlcally ob[ecLlfy Lhem, buL raLher lL means LhaL LhaL ls Lhe degree and exLenL Lo whlch one ls consclously plugged ln" Lo Lhe CreaL Clrcle of efflux and reflux. AL any level of developmenL, Lhen, one can be consclous of boLh AscenL and uescenL up Lo and down from LhaL level, and one can Lherefore emphaslze AscenL, or uescenL, or boLh (up Lo" and down from" LhaL level). 1he Lwo currenLs experlenLlally [oln, and yleld Lhelr secreL marrlage, only aL Lhe formless or causal level, prlor Lo LhaL polnL one has access only Lo Lhe arcs up Lo and down from Lhe presenL level of developmenL. l wlll reLurn Lo Lhe meanlng of Lhls when l dlscuss 1anLra (ln volume 2), or Lhe consclous unlon of Lhe ascendlng and descendlng currenLs ln Lhe con[ugal PearL. 2. ln Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 191. 3. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. 112. 4. lbld., p. 19. 3. lbld., pp. 83-84. Lach of Lhe 8lg 1hree was already lnLegraLed lo lts owo Jomolo (LhaL was Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon LhaL consLlLuLed Lhe LransformaLlon upward from myLhlc-raLlonal), buL a furLher dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon would be necessary Lo lnLegraLe Lhe Lhree domalns Lhemselves lnLo a hlgher synLhesls (Lhe lnsoluble problems of one level belng defused only aL Lhe nexL, Lhe dlfferenLlaLlng componenL of Lhe new and requlred dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon would be-and sLlll ls-Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of consclousness from a preoccupaLlon wlLh Lhe lndlvldual domalns Lo Lhe excluslon of Lhe oLhers). l wlll argue LhaL Lhe LransformaLlon from formop (and Lhe undersLandlng) Lo vlslon-loglc was Lhe cenLral plaLform of Lhe ldeallsL movemenL, and LhaL, ln varlous ways, vlslon-loglc (dlalecLlcal, dlaloglcal, lnLegral-aperspecLlval, lnLerpeneLraLlon of opposlLes, lnLersub[ecLlve, feellng/vlslon) remalns Lhe cognlLlve goal, and aperspecLlval foundaLlon, of Lhe momenLs of LruLh of Lhe posLmodern LheorlsLs (Lhls ls one of Lhe ma[or Lhemes of volumes 2 and 3). 6. uonald 8oLhberg also glves a superb shorL summary of Pabermas's overall vlew of Lhe resulL of Lhls reducLlon: Cn such a basls, Lhere has occurred whaL Pabermas calls 'Lhe colonlzaLlon of Lhe llfeworld': Lhe emergence of models and pracLlces of soclal englneerlng and Lechnlcal approaches Lo pracLlcal llfe and sub[ecLlvlLy, Lhe lncreaslng conLrol by 'experLs' of pollLlcal and soclal relaLlons and sub[ecLlvlLy analyzed by loucaulL (8ablnow), and Lhe decllne of publlc spheres of open dlscusslon and debaLe, LhaL ls, Lhe decllne of Lhe core mechanlsms ensurlng democraLlc procedures (Pabermas). ln Lhls way, Lhe poLenLlals of a vlLal publlc realm of lnformed, pracLlcal reason and acLlon, assoclaLed wlLh much of Lhe promlse of democraLlc movemenLs, has also been only parLly developed. Slmllarly, Lhe poLenLlals of modern sub[ecLlvlLy have also been severely consLralned Lhrough exLenslve conLrol, ldeologlcal lnfluence, and commodlflcaLlon." (1he crlsls of modernlLy and Lhe emergence of soclally engaged splrlLuallLy.") 7. Lewls Mumford. 1he dlsquallflcaLlon" was noL due prlmarlly Lo Lhe quanLlflcaLlon or maLhemaLlcallzaLlon of Lhe world, lL was due prlmarlly Lo Lhe ob[ecLlflcaLlon of Lhe world, Lo Lhe focuslng merely on exLerlor, 8lghL-Pand surfaces, whlch, preclsely because Lhey are marked by exLenslon, can be besL LreaLed as quanLlLles and Lhus easlly maLhemaLlzed. 8. 1echnlcally, Lhe lnLerlor and exLerlor holarchles of depLh and span were collapsed lnLo only Lhe exLerlor holarchles of depLh and span. Polarchles were sLlll recognlzed, as l sald (Lhe upper-8lghL and Lower-8lghL domalns are boLh holarchlcal, and Lhls was noL denled, and Lhese holarchles, llke all holarchles, possessed boLh a depLh and a span). Powever, Lhe only holarchles acknowledged were holarchles of exLerlors, of surfaces LhaL could be seen emplrlcally wlLh Lhe senses or Lhelr lnsLrumenLal exLenslons, and Lhus any values (any LefL-Pand correlaLes) were ootomotlcolly excloJeJ. Slnce Lhe lnLerlor dlmenslons were denled, Lhere were no holarchles of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, of value, of consclousness, of goods or hypergoods, no LransformaLlons of consclousness requlred Lo geL aL Lhe LruLh, and no LruLh oLher Lhan whaL could be analyLlcally formulaLed around emplrlcal, value-free daLa. 1hus, even Lhough Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh acknowledges holarchles wlLh depLh and span, Lhe Jeptbs of Lhese holarchles all have Lhe same value, namely, noLhlng (LhaL ls, Lhey are value-free" surfaces). And Lhus, from Lhe vlew of Lhe lnLerlor and LefL-Pand paLh, all of Lhe emplrlcal depLh" of exLerlor holarchles (e.g., molecules have more depLh Lhan aLoms) are no more Lhan varlaLlons on Lhe same span (namely, emplrlcal or funcLlonal, and Lhus based solely on physlcal slze: molecules are blgger Lhan aLoms). value does noL, and cannoL, enLer. 1hls collapse ls also capLured ln a shorLhand phrase l have been uslng: verLlcal and horlzonLal were collapsed lnLo horlzonLal alone (alLhough Lechnlcally, Lhe correcL sLaLemenL ls LhaL verLlcal and horlzonLal of Lhe lnLerlor and exLerlor were collapsed lnLo verLlcal and horlzonLal of Lhe exLerlor alone). ln Lhls shorLhand, verLlcal means lnLerlor, and horlzonLal means exLerlor ([usL as, ln Lhe same shorLhand, depLh means lnLerlor and span means exLerlor). 9. 1aylor, neqel, p. 4. 10. ureyfus and 8ablnow, Mlcbel loocoolt, p. 236. 11. Lven lf Lhe emplrlcal-sensorlmoLor world were preglven" ln some fundamenLal ways-and Lhls ls Lhe assumpLlon made by mosL pracLlclng sclenLlsLs-noneLheless Lhe testtlctloo of koowleJqe Lo LhaL emplrlcal world ls Lhe reducLlonlsm LhaL mosL concerns me (and LhaL reducLlonlsm ls Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm). 1he lnLrlnslc feaLures (Wllfrld Sellars) of Lhe sensorlmoLor world are lndeed, ln my oplnlon, already lald down by evoluLlon prlor Lo Lhe emergence of raLlonal reflecLlon on LhaL world, Lhe pracLlclng sclenLlsL ls more or less correcL ln LhaL regard, l belleve-fundamenLal aspecLs of sensorlmoLor holons are preglven" ln LhaL rudlmenLary sense. (SensorlmoLor holons muLually eooct eocb otbet and are noL absoluLely preglven ln LhaL sense, buL, relaLlvely speaklng, Lhe human mlnd ls handed LhaL enacLlon afLer Lhe facL and beglns lts work wlLh holons LhaL are ln many lmporLanL respecLs Lhen preexlsLlng, even Lhough mlnd wlll Lhen eooct lts owo wotlJ wlLh Lhose holons as only a componenL of Lhe overall gesLalL, [usL as, for example, ln Lhe lageLlan sysLem operaLlonal cognlLlon works wlLh, buL noL only wlLh, Lhe holons already dellvered Lo lL by sensorlmoLor cognlLlon.) Lmplrlcal sclenLlflc paradlgms govern Lhe selecLlon, dlsclosure, and elaboraLlon, noL Lhe ln LoLo creaLlon, of sensorlmoLor holons (whlch ls why sclence, as kuhn polnLed ouL, can lndeed make progress). 8uL Lhe aspecLs of Lhose holons LhaL can dlsclose, and Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon of Lhose holons, and Lhe capaclLy Lo reflecL upon Lhem ln Lhe flrsL place, and Lhe Lypes of concepLual elaboraLlons broughL Lo bear upon Lhe sensorlmoLor surfaces-all of Lhls ls noL preglven, buL raLher develops ln an lnLersub[ecLlve space of dlaloglcal dlsclosures. 8uL Lhe facL LhaL sensorlmoLor holons are, ln aL leasL some lmporLanL respecLs, preexlsLlng ln Lhe sensorlmoLor worldspace (a dlamond wlll lndeed cuL a plece of glass, no maLLer whaL words or whaL Lheorles we use for dlamond," cuL," and glass")-was exLended (by Lhe LnllghLenmenL) Lo Lhe noLlon LhaL oll koowleJqe ls lLself merely a recovery, vla unproblemaLlc represenLaLlon, of alLogeLher preexlsLlng slLuaLlons. 1hus, whereas dlamonds" and glass" exlsL ln Lhe sensorlmoLor world, koowleJqe of Lhe one cuLLlng Lhe oLher-and a Lheory of why lL does so-exlsLs only ln Lhe raLlonal, noL emplrlcal, worldspace, and Lhus Lhe ovetoll referenLs and gesLalLs of sclenLlflc knowledge are noL slmply lylng around ln Lhe sensory world walLlng for anybody Lo spoL Lhem. lurLher, Lhe sub[ecL of Lhe knowlng lLself develops ln an lnLersub[ecLlve space LhaL alone dlscloses aspecLs of Lhese overall referenLs. Moreover, whereas fundamenLal aspecLs of sensorlmoLor holons were lald down by evoluLlon prlor Lo reflecLlon on Lhem by raLlonallLy (aLoms were Lhere, and are Lhere, before reason Lhlnks abouL Lhem)-whereas, LhaL ls, sensorlmoLor worldspace holons exlsL or subslsL prlor Lo menLal formulaLlon, culLural holons do noL. When mlnd reflecLs on naLure, much of Lhe naLure ls preexlsLlng or pre-menLal (Lhe sensorlmoLor componenLs), buL when mlnd lnLeracLs wlLh mlnd, Lhe resulL ls culLure, and culLure ls noL slmply preexlsLlng, buL ls creaLed wlLh Lhe lnLeracLlon lLself. Mlnd mlghL Jlscovet varlous facLs ln naLure, buL mlnd cteotes culLure. And ln LhaL creaLlon of culLure, a reflecLlon paradlgm ls woefully lnadequaLe, because preexlsLlng holons are noL belng dlscovered, buL raLher newly creaLed holons are belng produced. And whlle we can lndeed reflecL on" and represenL" Lhese creaLed and produced culLural holons (such as language), we cannoL undersLand Lhem metely vla ob[ecLlfylng and emplrlcal knowledge, buL musL olso enLer lnLo Lhelr meanlng vla lnLerpreLaLlon and hermeneuLlcal dlsclosures. 1he depLh of an aLom ls relaLlvely mlnor and can, for mosL pracLlcal purposes, be lgnored (as ln monologlcal lnqulry)-muLual undersLandlng ls noL really posslble and Lhus noL really soughL (even Lhough, sLrlcLly speaklng, Lhe aLom sLlll conLalns depLh, and Lhus sLlll enacLs lts world wlLh a Lype of lnLerpreLaLlon, or a brlnglng forLh of Lhe Lypes of dlsLlncLlons lL can respond Lo: Lhe aLom's agency ls an openlng or clearlng whlch muLually enacLs lLs worldspace wlLh slmllarly depLhed holons). As l sald, because Lhls depLh ls relaLlvely mlnor, lL can be (and ls) lgnored for mosL pracLlcal purposes of human lnqulry. 8uL as depLh lncreases, less and less can we rely on mere emplrlclsL reflecLlon, on Lhe monologlcal mode, lnLerpreLaLlon becomes more and more a slgnlflcanL porLlon of Lhe knowledge quesL, and lnLerpreLlve depLh can Lhen be lgnored only by lnfllcLlng a greaL deal of vlolence on Lhe sub[ecL of lnqulry. !usL so, lnLersub[ecLlve culLural undersLandlng ls noL merely monologlcal surface percepLlon (or emplrlcal experlence), because motool ooJetstooJloq requlress lotetptetotloo of meanlng, lnLenLlon, and depLh, none of whlch slmply slL on Lhe surfaces. 1he cruclal acL of knowlng ln Lhls case ls noL monologlcal teflectloo on a surface buL lotetptetotloo of a depLh, noL percelvlng paLches buL lnLerpreLlng Lhelr lnner lnLenLlons and meanlngs. no amounL of reflecLlon paradlgm" wlll dlsclose LhaL whlch lles beneaLh Lhe surface belng reflecLed. When you and l Lalk, lnLerpreLaLlon ls Lhe paradlgm, depLh Lhe medlum, lnLenLlon Lhe hldden varlable, and muLual undersLandlng Lhe goal. And oooe of LhaL makes lL lnLo Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm. 8uL Lhe resLrlcLlon of all knowledge Lo monologlcal reflecLlon on preexlsLlng occaslons gave Lhe lmpresslon LhaL (1) parLlcular culLural LruLhs were llkewlse flxed and unchanglng, (2) lnLersub[ecLlve processes of knowledge creaLlon had no bearlng whaLsoever on dlsclosure of sensorlmoLor LruLhs, (3) monologlcal and represenLaLlonal knowledge was Lhe only knowledge worLh pursulng, (4) sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve processes could be reduced Lo emplrlcal referenLs, (3) lnLerpreLaLlon of depLh could be subsumed ln emplrlcal reflecLlon on surfaces. ln shorL, all Lransloglcal and all dlaloglcal LruLh could be reduced Lo Lhe muLe monologlcal gaze. lL was especlally Lhe lgnorlng of Lhe role of lnLersub[ecLlve processes ln Lhe dlsclosure of ob[ecLlve knowledge, coupled wlLh Lhe reducLlon of all knowledge Lo merely ob[ecLlve recovery" from an oltoqetbet preglven world-Lhls was Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm. Sub[ecLlve-l and lnLersub[ecLlve-we processes were reduced Lo ob[ecLlve-lL forms LhaL were LhoughL Lo be equally recoverable ln slmple represenLaLlon," and Lhus all hermeneuLlc lnLerpreLaLlons, all depLh dlsclosures, all culLural meanlngs, all deeper and hlgher sub[ecLlve LransformaLlons-all were dlspensed wlLh ln Lhe slmple monologlcal gaze aL a world of surfaces alLogeLher preglven." (See also noLe 12 below.) 12. 1he lnLeresLlng polnL ls LhaL emplrlc-analyLlc sclence acLually requlres, ln lLs pracLlLloners, Lhe arduous LransformaLlon from sensorlmoLor Lo preop Lo conop Lo formop. 8uL formop ls now, ln Loday's world, Lhe average-expecLable level for educaLed men and women. Whereas, ln prevlous eras, wlnnlng a raLlonal perspecLlve ln Lhe mldsL of a myLhologlcal worldvlew was a dlfflculL and dangerous Lask, now, wlLh modernlLy, Lhe raLlonal sLrucLure ls so Laken for granLed LhaL lLs worldvlew ls slmply ossomeJ Lo be obvloos and preglven for any educaLed person. loucaulL makes Lhls polnL wlLh regard Lo uescarLes. Whereas mosL prevlous phllosophers had Lo descrlbe an lnner dlsclpllne and LransformaLlon requlred ln order Lo make LruLh-even totloool LruLh-occesslble, uescarLes slmply stotts wlLh Lhe obvlous" raLlonal worldvlew, he doesn'L have Lo defend lL or explaln how Lo geL Lo lL. 1hus, when l say Lhe raLlonal 8lghL-Pand paLh doesn'L requlre any LransformaLlon, whaL l mean ls LhaL lL doesn'L requlre any furLher LransformaLlon beyond whaL ls now Lhe average-expecLable level of developmenL (formop). asL evoluLlon has olteoJy won Lhls arduous LransformaLlon, and so raLlonal sclence could slmply resL on Lhose laurels, so Lo speak. noLhlng hlgher or deeper-no excepLlonal lnner LransformaLlon or oscesls-ls requlred ln order Lo have access Lo all Lhe LruLh LhaL ls flL Lo know." lurLher, lL ls Lhls enLlre serles of prevlous lnLerlor LransformaLlons-sensorlmoLor Lo preop Lo conop Lo formop-LhaL raLlonal common sense" took eotltely fot qtooteJ, and Lhus lL folleJ Lo see LhaL lLs common and obvlous" world supposedly open Lo slmple emplrlcal vlewlng" was ln facL a pottlcolot and generaLed wotlJspoce, many of whose referenLs were oot ln facL lylng around walLlng Lo be percelved by all and sundry, buL were coostltoteJ ln an arduous serles of LefL-Pand LransformaLlons, all of whlch were Laken for granLed, all of whlch were lqooteJ-an lgnorance LhaL absoluLely crlppled lLs eplsLemology and reduced lL Lo l see Lhe rose," Lhus overlooklng Lhe cruclal facL LhaL Lhe secreL of Lhe seelng was ln how Lhe l" was generaLed ln Lhe flrsL place, and noL ln how Lhe slmple sensaLlon of Lhe rose [umps Lo LhaL Laken-for-granLed l. 1he lnLersub[ecLlvely creaLed worldspace, whlch lLself ollows Lhe dlsclosure of lndlvlduaLed sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs, was dlLched ln favor a mlndless sLarlng aL Lhe eoJ tesolt (mlsLaken as a preglven), a mlndless sLarlng aL Lhe monologlcal ob[ecLs Lhus dlsclosed. 13. 1he role of lndusLrlallzaLlon-Lhe lnsLrumenLallzaLlon of Lhe economlc base-obvlously played a cenLral and ofLen domlnanL role ln Lhe lnsLrumenLallzaLlon of reason: Lhe poslLlve feedback loop LhaL began Lo spln ouL of conLrol preclsely ln lLs aLLempL Lo galn furLher conLrol. As l have ofLen menLloned, Lhe role of Lhe Lechno-economlc base ln Lhe sLages of human evoluLlon (and Lhe consLrucLlon of varlous worldvlews) ls Lhe Loplc of volume 2. All l can do ln Lhls volume ls polnL ouL LhaL noL only am l noL lgnorlng Lhese facLors, l belleve Lhey have ofLen been Lhe ma[or (buL noL sole) deLermlnlng facLors ln many of Lhese developmenLs. 8uL Lhls deflnlLely requlres a book-lengLh LreaLmenL, and such ls volume 2. 14. 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, p. 232. 13. lbld. 16. 1aylor's summary, lbld., p. 243. 17. lbld., p. 264. 18. CuoLed lbld., p. 263. 19. Pedonlc pleasure/paln ls almosL always Lhe mosL baslc (and ofLen Lhe sole) looet moLlvaLlon acknowledged by Lhe 8lghL- Pand paLh, slnce LhaL ls os fot loto tbe lotetlot Jlmeosloo as Lhey are wllllng Lo venLure, and slnce lL demands telotlvely llttle lotetptetotloo. Slnce physlcal sensaLlons are lndeed very close Lo Lhe surface (l.e., very shallow, very low on Lhe holarchy), and slnce Lhe 8lghL-Pand LheorlsLs have Lo flnd sometbloq Lo posb Lhelr acLlon Lerms ln Lhe flrsL place, physlcal pleasure/paln works perfecLly for Lhem. lL glves Lhem much pleasure, l presume. As l lndlcaLed ln a prevlous noLe (noLe 23 for chap. 8), Lhe uLlllLarlan eLhlc was Lhe unpacklng of Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon (preserve and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span) ln Lerms of moooloqlcol reason, where depLh ls lnLerpreLed as flaLland mono-happlness (or pleasure) and span becomes all raLlonal belngs (and someLlmes all senLlenL belngs, slnce Lhey share Lhe same lowesL common denomlnaLor): Lhus, Lhe greaLesL mono-happlness for Lhe greaLer numbers. lL ls worldcenLrlc, buL worldcenLrlc flaLland, and recognlzes no serlous gradaLlons of depLh or Lypes of happlness. (1hls ls pursued ln volume 3.) AlLhough ln Lhe LexL l am sLrongly crlLlclzlng Lhe flaLland aspecLs of Lhe uLlllLarlans, Lhe facL LhaL Lhey were one of Lhe flrsL clear worldcenLrlc-raLlonal eLhlcs should noL be overlooked, and, from Lhls perspecLlve, Lhey deserve hlgh pralse lndeed. lL ls Lhe collapse of all moLlvaLlons lnLo flaLland Lerms and hedonlc happlness LhaL l am, of course, crlLlclzlng. 20. lreud, of course, would LreaL hls own dlscovery" of Lhe pleasure prlnclple as a monumenLal breakLhrough ln psychology. lL was acLually [usL a dreary uncoverlng of Lhe slmplesL push ln Lhe purely uescended world, noL exacLly someLhlng, l would Lhlnk, Lo wrlLe home abouL. 21. lor a wonderful dlscusslon of Lhese Lhemes, and a lamenL of Lhelr loss, see Alasdalr MaclnLyre's Aftet vlttoe, 2nd ed. 22. Lven Lhough Lhe offltmotloo of Lhls parLlcular eLhlc lLself sLeps ouLslde Lhe lnLerlocklng order: Lhls eLhlc Jevoloes oLher eLhlcs-LhaL ls, lL ls a hlerarchy of value LhaL denles hlerarchles of value, as we saw ln chapLer 1, Lheorles LhaL deny quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons Lhemselves embody a hldden quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlon. 1aylor agaln perfecLly spoLs Lhls conLradlcLlon as lL appears ln a 8enLham or a PelveLlus: 1hese Lhlnkers recognlzed only one good: pleasure. 1he whole polnL was Lo do away wlLh Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween moral and non-moral goods and make all human deslres equally worLhy of conslderaLlon. 8uL ln Lhe acLual conLenL of lLs LeneLs, as offlclally deflned, none of Lhls can be sald, and mosL of lL makes no sense." 1haL ls, Lhey valued Lhls Lheory wlLh a passlonaLe commlLmenL over rlval values, when all values were supposed Lo be monovalenL: Lhey can'L even [usLlfy Lhelr own sLance (5ootces of tbe self, p. 332). 23. lbld., pp. 282, 264-63. 24. 1he re[ecLlon of hlgher/deeper moLlvaLlons was also lnLensely drlven by no more myLhs!" belng confused wlLh no more AscenL!": all hlgher asplraLlons (of any sorL) were LhoughL Lo be noLhlng buL Lhe ways ln whlch rellglons devalued Lhls world and were Lhus wllllng Lo lmpose domlnaLlon on Lhelr sub[ecLs ln Lhe name of a glorlous afLerllfe (Lhus confuslng all holoarchlc Lranscendence-and-lncluslon wlLh mere myLhlc dlssoclaLlon). lL ls Lrue LhaL some uLlllLarlans aLLempLed Lo relnLroduce varlous Lypes or degrees of happlness" or Lhe good", 1aylor flnds Lhem all unconvlnclng (and lL ls cerLaln kanL and Pegel were compleLely unlmpressed). 23. 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, pp. 328-29, my lLallcs. 26. llaLland hollsm ls always duallsLlc Lo Lhe core, noL only because lL denles AscenL, buL because lL spllLs relaLlvely auLonomous agency from Lhe neLworks of communlon on lLs own level (as we wlll see ln deLall). 27. 1aylor, neqel, pp. 22-23. 28. loucaulL, 1he sub[ecL and power," ln ureyfus and 8ablnow, Mlcbel loocoolt, pp. 208-209. 29. 1aylor spoLs Lhe same Lwo poles of Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm: 1he aLLempLs . . . of Lhe radlcal LnllghLenmenL, of a PelveLlus, a Polbach, a CondorceL, a 8enLham were founded on Lhls noLlon of ob[ecLlvlLy, and Lhe age of LnllghLenmenL was evolvlng an anLhropology whlch was an amalgam, noL enLlrely conslsLenL, of Lwo Lhlngs: Lhe noLlon of self-deflnlng sub[ecLlvlLy correlaLlve Lo Lhe new ob[ecLlvlLy, and Lhe vlew of man as parL of naLure, hence fully under Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhls ob[ecLlvlLy. 1hese Lwo aspecLs dld noL always slL well LogeLher." 1o puL lL mlldly. neqel, p. 10. 30. nor ls Lhls slmply my readlng of Lhls exLraordlnary sLory. 1o glve only one example now, Charles 1aylor's raLher exLraordlnary 5ootces of tbe self concludes LhaL Lhe modern (and posLmodern) worldvlew ls marked by Lhree maln characLerlsLlcs: (1) a sense of lnwardness (l.e., Lhe Lgo), (2) Lhe volce of naLure (l.e., Lhe Lco), and (3) Lhe afflrmaLlon of ordlnary llfe (by whlch 1aylor speclflcally means a denlal of a LranscendenLal Source or Cround or onLlc Logos, an ordlnary llfe-world LhaL denles hlgher quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, ln oLher words, a purely uescended world). 31. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. 107. l would say raLher, raLlonallLy preserves Lhe concreLe operaLlonal capaclLles LhaL are Lhe foundaLlon of myLh buL negaLes Lhe excluslvlLy of conop LhaL produces myLh. 8aslc sLrucLures are preserved, excluslvlLy sLrucLures (and Lhelr vlolence) are negaLed. We saw, ln chapLer 6, LhaL parL of Lhe vlolence lnherenL ln myLh ls due Lo Lhe syncreLlc fuslon of varlous holons LhaL ln facL possess Lhelr own dlgnlLy and deserve Lhelr own lndlvlduallLy. Pabermas reaches Lhe same concluslon from a sllghLly dlfferenL angle: MyLh owes Lhe LoLallzlng power wlLh whlch lL lnLegraLes all superflclally percelved phenomena lnLo a [syncreLlc] neLwork of correspondences, slmllarlLles, and conLrasLs"-such as Seven orlflces mean only seven planeLs can exlsL," a sLance LhaL lnLegraLes" lLs world by dolng vlolence Lo Lhe kosmos. lor example, language ls noL yeL [dlfferenLlaLed] from reallLy Lo such an exLenL LhaL Lhe convenLlonal slgn ls compleLely separaLe from lLs semanLlc conLenL and lLs referenLs, Lhe llngulsLlc world vlew remalns lnLerwoven wlLh Lhe order of Lhe world." 1hls ls Lhe hollsLlc-soundlng" syncreLlsm so aLLracLlve Lo Lhe new Age paradlgm," whlch lgnores Lhe oLher (and raLher ugly) feaLures LhaL necessarlly follow ln lLs wake: MyLhlc LradlLlons [Lherefore] cannoL be revlsed wlLhouL danger Lo Lhe order of Lhlngs and Lo Lhe ldenLlLy of Lhe Lrlbe seL wlLhln lL. Cnly when conLexLs of meanlng and reallLy, when lnLernal and exLernal relaLlonshlps have been unmlxed [dlfferenLlaLed], only when sclence, morallLy, and arL are each speclallzed ln one valldlLy clalm, when each follows lLs own respecLlve loglc and ls cleansed of all cosmologlcal, Lheologlcal, and culLural [egocenLrlc and eLhocenLrlc] dross-only Lhen can Lhe susplclon arlse LhaL Lhe auLonomy of Lhe valldlLy clalmed by a Lheory (wheLher emplrlcal or normaLlve) ls an llluslon because secreL lnLeresLs and power clalms have crepL lnLo lLs pores" (lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, pp. 113-16.) 32. lbld., p. 116. 33. lurLher, Lhe Lgo camp would argue, we cannoL say LhaL acLlng for Lhe good of Lhe whole web can even offer a coherenL guldellne for my moral acLlons. lf Lhe whole ls really mote Lhan Lhe sum of lLs parLs, and lf l am baslcally a pott of Lhls greaLer whole, Lhen l can oevet know whaL Lhe whole acLually has ln mlnd, and so l can never genulnely or honesLly clalm Lo be acLlng for Lhe good of Lhe whole (who knows whaL Lhe whole ls acLually up Lo? lL mlghL be uslng me ln ways LhaL l can never even begln Lo lmaglne, and so l can never use Lhe good of Lhe whole" Lo gulde my lndlvldual acLlons, slnce Lhe good of Lhe whole ls beyond my knowledge). Cn Lhe oLher hand, lf l clalm Lo become one wlLh Lhe whole," Lhen l am clalmlng someLhlng LhaL no oLher parL has access Lo, l am clalmlng, ln facL, LhaL l am oot merely a sLrand ln Lhe web (whlch ls supposed Lo be my offlclal poslLlon, and Lhe poslLlon LhaL ls supposed Lo be Lhe foundaLlon of my eLhlcs, a foundaLlon LhaL l have [usL negaLed). 1hus, elLher way, Lhe sLrand-ln-Lhe-web" argumenL falls as a basls for moral acLlon. 34. 1aylor, neqel, p. 32. 33. kanL ls, ln oLher words, flghLlng Lo lnLroduce a Lrue measure of genulne AscenL lnLo Lhe flaLland eLhos ln general (and Lhe flaLland lnsLrumenLal-uLlllLarlanhollsLs ln parLlcular), and slnce freedom (and wlsdom) ls olwoys found ln Lhe Ascendlng currenL of Lros, Lhe moral freedom kanL offered was absoluLely exhllaraLlng Lo Lhe enLlre era. ln Lerms of Lhe overall specLrum of consclousness, kanL was polnLlng ouL LhaL happlness does noL reslde ln merely bodlly deslre (whlch ls egocenLrlc), buL raLher resldes ln a LransformaLlon-an AscenL!-from egocenLrlc and soclocenLrlc (heLeronomy) Lo worldcenLrlc care, a worldcenLrlc sLance LhaL, slnce lL ls generaLed by my own raLlonal wlll (by my own raLlonal capaclLy for unlversal perspecLlvlsm), ls Lhus Lruly free, Lruly self-deLermlned, Lruly auLonomous (l would say, relaLlvely more auLonomous Lhan lLs predecessors, even greaLer freedoms lle beyond Lhe egolc-raLlonal, as Schelllng would soon announce). 8uL lL was kanL's noble, and ln some lmporLanL ways qulLe successful, aLLempL Lo lnLroduce a real AscenL lnLo Lhe monochrome and flaLland world LhaL would drlve llchLe's culmlnaLlng lnslghL lnLo Lhe pure lreedom of Lhe pure Self or loflolte supra- lndlvldual Sub[ecL, and Lhls llchLean move of pure AscenL (and Lhe lnherenL problems of a pure AscenL dlvorced form uescenL) would Lrlgger Lhe aLLempLed lnLegraLlon wlLh Lhe uescendlng currenL (lLself ofLen represenLed by Splnoza, we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln deLall ln chapLer 13). 1hls problem of lnLegraLlon had already showed up ln kanL's raLlonal Lgo dlvorced from Lhe Lco, and Lhls ls Lhe problem Lhe LexL ln now lnLroduclng (alongslde Lhe many poslLlve accompllshmenLs of Lhe Lgo ln general). 36. 1hus also Lhe pollLlcal aLomlsm" LhaL coexlsLed uneaslly wlLh Lhe sysLems harmony" (see flg. 12-6): Lhe hollsLlc world lefL no room for Lhe sub[ecLlve self, and Lhls aLomlsLlc self Lhen found ln lLs own hyper-oqeocy none of Lhe commooloos LhaL would auLomaLlcally blnd lL, and flnd lL, ln communlLy, and so consequenLly Lhe dlsengaged self had recourse Lo a varleLy of soclol coottoct Lheorles, as lf selves could and would only come LogeLher as a buslness venLure. 1he ldeallsLs would polnL ouL (uslng vlslon-loglc) LhaL agency ls olwoys agency-ln-communlon (wheLher lL reallzes lL or noL)-a self ls always a self-ln-relaLlonshlp. We wlll be reLurnlng Lo Lhls Loplc, and Lhe Lwln noLlons of rlghLs (agency) and responslblllLles (communlon), LhroughouL Lhls volume. 37. loucaulL, ulsclplloe ooJ poolsb, p. 200. lncldenLally, Lhe Age of Moo ls correcLly named ln Lhe mascullne, lL was lndeed a hyperemphasls on Lhe agency LhaL Lends Lo be more characLerlsLlc of Lhe male (accordlng Lo radlcal femlnlsLs, and lL's noL hard Lo agree wlLh Lhem). Cnly hyper-agenLlc males could come up wlLh a Lheory of communlLy based on a coottoct. 1hls ls explored ln volume 2. 38. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. 341. 39. lbld., p. 246. 40. lbld., p. 243. 1aylor concurs wlLh boLh loucaulL and Pabermas, and refers Lo Lhe anLhropology of Lhe LnllghLenmenL" as Lhe 'ob[ecLlflcaLlon' of human naLure" (neqel, p. 13). 41. 1hls doesn'L mean LhaL Lhe ob[ecLlve sLudy of human and soclal behavlor-Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh-ls wlLhouL lmporLance (on Lhe conLrary!). 8aLher, Lhe polnL ls LhaL when human sub[ecLs (and lnLersub[ecLlvlLy-sub[ecLs ln communlcaLlon") are reduced merely Lo Lhelr ob[ecLlve componenLs, reduced merely Lo emplrlcal aspecLs whlch Lhen clalm Lo be Lhe only" knowledge-[usL Lhen do Lhese endeavors become pseudo-sclence, because LhaL teJoctloo ltself cannoL be susLalned as a valldlLy clalm, or as genulne knowledge. lL can only be susLalned as a power drlve (accordlng Lo boLh loucaulL and Pabermas). l would llke Lo add LhaL LhaL power drlve ls 1hanaLos. lL ls Lhe reducLlon of Lhe hlgher Lo Lhe lower. AlLhough, as l wlll argue ln Lhe LexL, Lhe cenLral negaLlve moLlvaLlon of Lhe Lgo camps was hobos, or Lhe fear of Lhe lower, ln Lhls parLlcular ob[ecLlfylng sLance Lhelr own 1hanaLos was aL work. 1he new dehumanlzlng humanlsm" wos dehumanlzlng preclsely because Lhe flngerprlnLs of 1hanaLos were all over Lhe corpse. When l read loucaulL ln Lhls llghL, l am sLruck by Lhe lnLegrlLy and Lhe dlgnlLy of Lhe man and hls absoluLe ouLrage aL Lhe hand of 1hanaLos descendlng on ordlnary clLlzens ln Lhe name of a hlgher benevolence" and enllghLenmenL." loucaulL, l Lhlnk, wlll always be remembered as Lhe greaL chronlcler of Lhe 1hanaLos underbelly of Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, lLs monologlcal reducLlon of sub[ecLs ln communlcaLlon" Lo ob[ecLs of lnformaLlon," clalmlng Lo be benevolenL, lronlcally enslavlng. 42. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. 263. 43. 1haL ls Lo say," as Pabermas summarlzes lL, Lhe self-relaLlng sub[ecLlvlLy purchases self-consclousness only aL Lhe prlce of objectlvotloq lnLernal and exLernal naLure. 8ecause Lhe sub[ecL has Lo relaLe lLself consLanLly Lo ob[ecLs boLh lnLernally and exLernally ln lLs knowlng and acLlng [Lhe reflecLlon and producLlon paradlgms], lL renders lLself aL once opaque and dependenL ln Lhe very acLs LhaL are supposed Lo secure self-knowledge and auLonomy. 1hls llmlLaLlon, bullL lnLo Lhe sLrucLure of Lhe relaLlon-Lo- self [reLroflecLed lnsLrumenLallLy], remalns unconsclous ln Lhe process of becomlng consclous. lrom Lhls sprlngs Lhe Lendency Loward self-glorlflcaLlon and llluslonmenL, LhaL ls, Loward absoluLlzlng a glven level of reflecLlon and emanclpaLlon" (lbld., p. 33). 44. Pabermas's words, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, pp. 32-33. 43. lbld., pp. 33-36. 46. 1hls ls Pabermas's summary of Porkhelmer and Adorno. Pabermas agrees only wlLh regard Lo monologlcal, noL dlaloglcal, reason, whlch ls also my vlew. (lbld., p. 110.) Moreover, Lhere ls a convlnclng readlng of loucaulL LhaL places hlm as well wlLhln Lhls general sLance. 1haL ls, as loucaulL hlmself made qulLe clear, lL was noL reason ln LoLo LhaL he was aLLacklng, buL reason ln lLs objectlfyloq, moooloqlcol, losttomeotol, and tepteseototloool modes (and Lhe reLroflecLlon of Lhose modes ln sub[ecLlfylng/sub[ugaLlng ways). ureyfus and 8ablnow are cerLalnly of Lhls oplnlon. Cn losttomeotol-totlooollty, loucaulL demonsLraLed LhaL human needs were no longer concelved of as ends ln Lhemselves or as sub[ecLs of a phllosophlc dlscourse. . . . 1hey were now seen lnsLrumenLally and emplrlcally, as means for Lhe lncrease of . . . power" (p. 141). Cn Lhe merely objectlfyloq-totlooollty: loucaulL's ob[ecL of sLudy ls Lhe ob[ecLlfylng pracLlces . . . as Lhey are embodled ln a speclflc Lechnology" (p. 144). Cn tepteseototloool-totlooollty: 1he Lheory of represenLaLlon, llnked wlLh Lhe soclal conLracL vlew and wlLh Lhe lmperaLlve of efflclency and uLlllLy, produced [quoLlng loucaulL] 'a sorL of general reclpe for Lhe exerclse of power over men: Lhe mlnd as a surface of lnscrlpLlon for power, wlLh semlology as lLs Lool, Lhe submlsslon of bodles Lhrough Lhe conLrol of ldeas'" (p. 149). And we already heard loucaulL hlmself on moooloqlcol-totlooollty: men and women became ob[ecLs of lnformaLlon and never sub[ecLs ln communlcaLlon." 1hus, as ureyfus and 8ablnow conclude, lL ls Lhose generally monologlcal-modes of reason applled Lo humans LhaL are especlally shoL Lhrough wlLh Lhlnly or Lhlckly dlsgulsed powet (whlch, l would add, ls always Lhe power of 1hanaLos, Lhe teJoctloo of lnLersub[ecLlve communlcaLlon and muLual undersLandlng Lo ob[ecLlfylng/sub[ecLlfylng/sub[ugaLlng modes of power- over). 1hls ls why ureyfus and 8ablnow conclude LhaL ln loucaulL's pro[ecL, Lrylng Lo show LhaL Lhe relaLlons of LruLh and power have for good reasons been mlsLakenly held Lo be opposed ls sLlll a maLLer of applylng a oew ooJ moJlfleJ fotm of teosoo oqolost a more hlghly complex verslon of power." A oew teosoo agalnsL power. 1hls, Lhey say, should be seen as an advance, noL a refuLaLlon of Lhe Weberlan pro[ecL. loucaulL ls emlnenLly reasonable" (pp. 132-33). 1hls, Loo, why loucaulL ldenLlfled hlmself wlLh Lhe broad llneage of kanL, and why he wenL ouL of hls way Lo ldenLlfy hls polnLs of agreemenL wlLh Pabermas. loucaulL: 1here ls Lhe problem ralsed by Pabermas: lf one abandons Lhe work of kanL or Weber, for example, one runs Lhe rlsk of lapslng lnLo lrraLlonallLy. l am compleLely ln agreemenL wlLh Lhls." 1he problem was noL solved by Lhe abandonmenL of reason, buL a flner aLLunemenL Lo lLs dangers and abuses: Pow can we exlsL as raLlonal belngs, forLunaLely commlLLed Lo pracLlclng a raLlonallLy LhaL ls unforLunaLely crlsscrossed by lnLrlnslc dangers? wbot ls Lhls 8eason LhaL we use? WhaL are lLs llmlLs, and whaL are lLs dangers?" (Space, ower, knowledge"). 1hus, Lhe noLlon LhaL loucaulL saw oll knowledge and reason equally and Lhoroughly shoL Lhrough wlLh power/domlnaLlon ls alLogeLher lncorrecL. noneLheless, Lhls ls a very common mlsconcepLlon, held mosLly by cerLaln Amerlcan academlcs (unflaLLerlngly buL noL alLogeLher lncorrecLly referred Lo as Lenured radlcals"), who wanL Lo deconsLrucL all forms of accepLed knowledge. loucaulL's more balanced vlew-WhaL ls Lhls 8eason LhaL we use? WhaL are lLs llmlLs, and whaL are lLs dangers?"-has been Lhe Loplc of Lhls Lgo-negaLlve" secLlon ln Lhe narraLlve, where we explored some of Lhe more common charges agalnsL Lhe llmlts and Lhe Jooqets of reason, and especlally reason capLured by lLs monologlcal/lnsLrumenLal mode (and we wlll reLurn Lo Lhese llmlLaLlons and dangers ln chapLer 13). 1hese were especlally dangers lobeteot ln monologlcal-raLlonallLy (we wlll explore slmllar dangers and llmlLaLlons lobeteot ln dlaloglcal raLlonallLy ln chapLer 13). 8uL aL Lhls polnL l would llke Lo menLlon posslbly Lhe worsL danger of raLlonallLy ln general, a danger noL lnherenL or lnLrlnslc ln reason, buL a horrlble mlsuse Lo whlch lL can and all Loo ofLen ls (and has been) puL. namely, Lhe sLrucLures and producLs of raLlonallLy can be used by a self (or socleLy) LhaL noneLheless ls lLself aL Lhe archalc, Lhe maglc, or Lhe myLhlc mode of moLlvaLlon. lL has long been known, for example, LhaL cognlLlve developmenL ls oecessoty buL oot sofflcleot for moral developmenL. 1hus, Lo use lageL and kohlberg as examples, a person who has reached formop cognlLlvely, can noneLheless remaln even aL moral sLage 1. lormop raLlonallLy coo supporL a fully posLconvenLlonal moral response (worldcenLrlc muLual recognlLlon), buL Lhe facL LhaL a person has access Lo formop does oot guaranLee LhaL she wlll llve up Lo lLs sLandards: moral developmenL ofLen lags behlnd cognlLlve developmenL (whereas Lhe reverse ls noL Lhe case: someone aL a posLconvenLlonal moral response ls always uslng formop ln LhaL response: conop and preop wlll oot soppott posLconvenLlonal responses). 1hus, a hlghly developed moral response always has a hlghly developed cognlLlve sLrucLure, buL noL vlce versa: hlghly developed cognlLlve sLrucLures do noL ln Lhemselves ensure a moral response from LhaL hlgher level (Lhe reason, puL slmpllsLlcally, ls LhaL lL ls one Lhlng Lo be able Lo merely Lhlnk from a hlgher level, buL qulLe anoLher Lo acLually loboblt LhaL level wlLh one's whole belng, and Lhus tespooJ morally from LhaL hlgher level). 1hls ls Lhe dlfference beLween self-sLages and baslc sLrucLures (ln Lhls case, moral-sLages and baslc cognlLlve capaclLy, Lhe laLLer of whlch ls necessary buL noL sufflclenL for Lhe former). And LhaL means LhaL a self (or socleLy) wlLh access Lo formop can use Lhose powerful sLrucLures Lo lmplemenL preconvenLlonal (maglcal) or convenLlonal (myLhlc) agendas-Lhe hlgher reason ls used for qulLe base purposes, and Lhere ls Lhe nlghLmare of Lhe exploslve power of raLlonallLy (and all lLs Lechnlcal know-how) puL ln Lhe hands of egocenLrlc maglc and eLhnocenLrlc myLh. WhaL was Lhe PolocausL buL Lhe use of exLremely sophlsLlcaLed Lechnlcal-raLlonallLy ln Lhe servlce of an eLhnocenLrlc myLhology? 8aLlonallLy lLself, ln lLs forms of lnLersub[ecLlve communlcaLlon and muLual recognlLlon, does noL seek domlnaLlon buL muLual undersLandlng. 8aLlonallLy seeklng less tboo tbot ls raLlonallLy shackled and ln servlLude Lo egocenLrlc power or eLhnocenLrlc domlnaLlon, forms of masslve power whlch Lhose sLrucLures could oot tbemselves cteote, buL sLrucLures LhaL can all Loo readlly explolL Lhe Lechnlcal powers of raLlonallLy ln servlce of a moral response less Lhan worldcenLrlc-less Lhan unlversal plurallsm, less Lhan muLual undersLandlng ln a dlscourse of Lolerance and recognlLlon: power Lo my ego, my Lrlbe, my culLure-uslng Lhe exLremely sophlsLlcaLed Lools of a hl[acked raLlonallLy. 1hese dlsasLers-Lhe PolocausL wlll always sLand as Lhe unlmaglnable example-have ofLen been blamed on reason per se, buL LhaL ls a grave mlslnLerpreLaLlon. 1hese dlsasLers are Lhe depLh-capaclLy of reason ln servlLude Lo Lhe shallow moral deslgns of egocenLrlc and eLhnocenLrlc maglc and myLh. lL ls qulLe Lrue LhaL Lhose dlsasLers would noL and coolJ oot have happened wltboot raLlonallLy (whlch has lead confused LheorlsLs Lo lay Lhe blame slmply aL raLlonallLy's doorsLep), buL Lhose dlsasLers were oot lmplemeoteJ by raLlonallLy, buL raLher by a moral response LhaL could noL llve up Lo raLlonallLy's worldcenLrlc perspecLlvlsm, and Lherefore slmply hl[acked raLlonallLy and lLs know-how down Lo Lhelr own self-promoLlng, oLher-desLroylng level, ln servlce, ln servlLude, ln shackles Lo a masLer race, a masLer creed, a masLer eLhnlc LhaL seeks noL world undersLandlng buL world domlnaLlon, myLhlc-lmperlallsm of Lhe faLherland, of Lhe moLherland, of Lhe chosen peoples, one way or anoLher, and ln all cases: preclsely Lhe follote of teosoo, noL lLs Lrue colors, and preclsely Lhe Lrlumph of a wlll shackled Lo myLhlc-lmperlallsm. !usL so, Lhe ecologlcal crlsls of modernlLy could noL have happened wlLhouL raLlonallLy's Lechnologlcal power, a power LhaL can always overrun Lhe blosphere ln dlssoclaLlve ways (a danger LhaL l have been emphaslzlng LhroughouL Lhls accounL). 8uL Lhe ma[or motol motlvotloos behlnd Lhe eco-crlsls are noL due Lo raLlonallLy, buL raLlonallLy (and lLs Lechnlcal know-how) ln servlce of eLhnocenLrlc domlnance or Lrlbal power ploys. 1o polluLe a common aLmosphere knowlng lL wlll klll your own people ls noL raLlonal ln any sense of Lhe word, lL ls ln all ways a follote of teosoo applled Lo reason's own capaclLles, and drlven preclsely by soclocenLrlc and egocenLrlc maglc and myLhlc uncarlng-Lhere ls Lhe Jtlve behlnd modernlLy's" eco-crlsls, even lf Lhe meoos are provlded by a hl[acked raLlonallLy. noL only ls Lrlballsm noL Lhe answer Lo Lhe eco-crlsls, lL ls preclsely Lhe prlmary moLlvaLlonal cause: reason hl[acked Lo my Lrlbe (or my group or my naLlon), and compleLely dlsregardlng Lhe global commons. Where prevlously and hlsLorlcally Lrlballsm could only depleLe small porLlons of Lhe eco-sysLem before lL was forced Lo move on, exLended Lrlballsm can now, wlLh Lhe Lools of a hlgher raLlonallLy, despoll Lhe enLlre blosphere. 1he meoos are raLlonal, Lhe motlves are egocenLrlc and soclocenLrlc: Lhe motlves preclsely are oot up Lo reason. 47. CuoLed ln 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, p. 334. 48. lbld., p. 24. 49. 1aylor, neqel, p. 22. 30. lbld., p. 23. 31. lbld., p. 23. 32. lbld., pp. 26, 23. 33. 1haL culLure (and Lhe raLlonal-ego) can lndeed repress and dlssoclaLe naLural/llbldlnal lmpulses ls Lrue enough, and Lhose allenaLed lmpulses need Lo be reconLacLed, freed from Lhe culLural represslons, and relnLegraLed lnLo Lhe psyche (regresslon ln servlce of Lhe ego). 8uL when culLure ls seen as only or prlmarlly a represslve force, Lhen Lhe cure ls regresslon, perlod, and Lhls ls Lhe self-defeaLlng and self-conLradlcLory sLance LhaL many Lco-8omanLlcs, Lhen and now, embraced. 1hus, for our salvaLlon, we were Lo reLreaL, noL prlor Lo Lhe Jlssoclotloo (everybody agreed LhaL was necessary), buL prlor Lo Lhe Jlffeteotlotloo LhaL had allowed Lhe dlssoclaLlon: noL slmply prlor Lo Lhe dlsease, buL prlor Lo Lhe depLh lLself!-whlch amounLed Lo: cure Lhe dlsease by becomlng more shallow. 1hese speclflcally regresslve Lco-movemenLs were (and are) exLremely vocal and condemnaLory ln Lhelr rheLorlc, and Lhey never Llre of levellng oJ bomloem aLLacks aL Lhelr opponenLs, who are never porLrayed as slncere buL mlsLaken, buL raLher as monsLrous ldloLs. Slnce oJ bomloem seems Lo be Lhe mode of argumenL here, my own observaLlon ls LhaL Lhese parLlcular crlLlcs seem Lo gravlLaLe Lo Lhe pasL phylogeneLlc sLrucLure LhaL corresponds wlLh Lhe onLogeneLlc sLrucLure ln Lhemselves LhaL ls lmmedlaLely prlor Lo Lhelr falled personal lnLegraLlon. 34. 1aylor, neqel, p. 26. 33. kevlsloo 13, no. 4, p. 184. 36. Pabermas, lbllosopblcol Jlscootse, p. 338. 37. ln Lhe ecomascullnlsL camp, LheorlsLs of Lhe Cod-forsaken world wrlLe books wlLh LlLles llke lo tbe obseoce of tbe socteJ, where sacred" ls deflned as Lhe archalc and maglc sLrucLure. 1haL book compleLely lgnores Lhe dlfference beLween dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, and all of lLs argumenLs resL upon LhaL fallure. lLs auLhor's ZoroasLrlan worldvlew ls Lhen used for a crlLlque of modernlLy, buL modernlLy" for Mander means anyLhlng aL or beyond Lhe hoe. ln Lhe ecofemlnlsL camp, Lhe prevalllng vlew ls LhaL Lhe CreaL Coddess was honored Lhe mosL ln horLlculLural (and a few early marlLlme) socleLles (a vlew spearheaded by ClmbuLas, Llsler, SpreLnak), buL Lhen Lhe Coddess was desLroyed, more or less llLerally, by Lhe comlng of Lhe Sun Cods and Lhe warrlor paLrlarchy. ln volume 2, l Lry Lo demonsLraLe LhaL Lhls confuses Lhe myLhologlcal CreaL MoLher flgure wlLh Lhe acLual CreaL Coddess. 1he CreaL MoLher flgure was lndeed largely embedded ln Lhe horLlculLural sLrucLure (much as Lhe CreaL laLher flgure was embedded ln Lhe agrarlan sLrucLure, see up ftom Jeo). 1hls also shows qulLe clearly LhaL Lhe CreaL MoLher corpus was oot rooLed ln fotmloq per se and Lhe seasonal currenLs of naLure, buL raLher was rooLed ln Lhe hand-held hoe used by Lhe femole work force, when Lhe plow was lnvenLed-sLlll a purely fotmloq culLure-Lhe delLy flgures almosL unlversally swlLched Lo CreaL laLher lmages, because Lhe plow was operaLed solely by moles, and Lhe myLhlc-heavenly flgures lo botb coses reflecLed who was mosL responslble for subslsLence (Lhere ls conslderable daLa for Lhls, whlch l presenL ln volume 2). And ln agrarlan socleLles-sLlll fotmloq socleLles-female subordlnaLlon and paLrlarchal rule was aL lLs peak!, and maLched only by horse/herdlng culLures. 1he agrarlan/farmlng culLures were very much ln Lune wlLh naLure, for sure: very much ln Lune wlLh naLure's dlsregard for rlghLs based on anyLhlng oLher Lhan power and mlghL. 8uL Lhe CreaL Coddess ls besL concelved, noL as any parLlcular sLrucLure or epoch or naLure, horLlculLural or oLherwlse, buL as Lhe overall movemenL of Lfflux, of CreaLlve uescenL and Superabundance, of Agape and Coodness and Compasslon. She ls noL Cala, noL naLure, noL planLlng myLhology (alLhough She embraces all of Lhose ln Per dlvlnely CreaLlve MaLrlx). She even embraces Lhe paLrlarchy and was every blL as much behlnd LhaL sLrucLure as any oLher. (Llkewlse, Lrue Cod ls noL Lhe CreaL laLher flgure, buL Lhe overall movemenL of 8eflux and AscenL and Lros, all of whlch ls dlscussed aL greaL lengLh ln volume 2). 8y confuslng Lhe CreaL Coddess wlLh Lhe horLlculLural CreaL MoLher myLhlc corpus-whlch was lndeed sopetseJeJ wlLh Lhe comlng of Lhe paLrlarchy-lL appears LhaL male culLure desLroyed Lhe Coddess (a handful of males on a small planeL desLroyed Lhe CreaLlve Lfflux of Lhe enLlre kosmos?), and LhaL whaL ls requlred ls a recovery and resurrecLlon of Lhe CreaL MoLher myLhos. 1he same ZoroasLrlan duallsm, Lhe same assumpLlon LhaL Lhe Coddess coolJ be banlshed, when all LhaL was banlshed was a poorly dlfferenLlaLed myLhos LhaL many ecofemlnlsLs have relnLerpreLed Lo flL Lhelr ldeology. When Lhe CreaL Coddess ls lnsLead seen Lo be Lhe enLlre movemenL of CreaLlve uescenL and Lfflux (aL each and every epoch), Lhen Lhe cure ls no longer regresslon Lo horLlculLural myLhology, buL progresslon Lo Coddess embodlmenL ln Lhe forms of Loday's lnLegraLlons (Agape). 1he CreaL Coddess ls noL a vlcLlm, nor could She be banlshed wlLhouL desLroylng Lhe enLlre manlfesL unlverse. 8uL by clalmlng LhaL She was banlshed, and by purporLlng Lo know how and why lL happened, Lhese ecofemlnlsLs are Lhen ln possesslon of a cerLaln Lype of power, Lhe power Lo Lell Lhe world whaL lL musL do ln order Lo recapLure an eLhos of whlch Lhese LheorlsLs are now Lhe prlmary possessors. 1he Coddess ls shackled Lo a horLlculLural planLlng myLhology LhaL ensures LhaL She could never be lnLegraLed wlLh modernlLy, and sees Per only as our Lady of Lhe LLernal vlcLlm. 1he very framlng of Lhe Coddess ln Lhose Lerms denles Per ever-presenL creaLlve aLLrlbuLes and burles Lhem ln rheLorlc. 1haL whlch one can devlaLe from ls noL Lhe Lrue 1ao. noL only ls modernlLy noL devold of Lhe Coddess, her Coodness and Agape and Compasslon are wrlLLen all over lL, wlLh lLs radlcally new and emergenL sLance of worldcenLrlc plurallsm, unlversal benevolence, and mulLlculLural Lolerance, someLhlng LhaL no horLlculLural socleLy could even concelve, leL alone lmplemenL. Per Crace grows sLronger and more obvlous wlLh every galn ln Lhe llberaLlon movemenLs, and LhaL we ourselves have noL always llved up Lo her new Crace LhaL was modernlLy's LnllghLenmenL, shows only LhaL we are sLlll surly chlldren noL on speaklng Lerms wlLh our own dlvlne parenLs. CPA1L8 13. 1PL uCMlnAnCL Cl 1PL uLSCLnuL8S 1. Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 292. 2. lbld., p. 313. 3. lbld., p. 312. 4. lbld., pp. 293-94. 3. lbld., p. 313. 6. 1aylor, 5ootces of tbe self, p. 283. 7. lbld., pp. 297-98. 8. lbld., p. 299. 9. lbld., p. 301. 10. lbld. 11. 1he followlng quoLes are slmply repeaLs from Lhose glven ln chapLer 8, and Lhe references can be found Lhere. 12. 1hls ls noL maglcal lndlssoclaLlon (alLhough lL ofLen verged on LhaL), because Lhe mononaLure LhaL ls now splrlL ls noneLheless a dlfferenLlaLed naLure. 13. loucaulL, 1be blstoty of sexoollty and ulsclplloe ooJ poolsb. 14. ureyfus and 8ablnow, loocolt, p. 140. 13. Love[oy, Cteot cbolo, p. 236. 16. lbld., p. 281. 17. Schelllng, 5ystem of ttoosceoJeotol lJeollsm. 18. llchLe's wlsseoscboftslebte had Lhree baslc posLulaLes, accordlng Lo llchLe. 1he flrsL ls LhaL Lhe ego slmply poslLs ln an orlglnal way lLs own belng." 1he second ls A non-ego ls slmply opposlLed Lo Lhe ego." 1he Lhlrd, l poslL ln Lhe ego a dlvlslble non- ego as opposed Lo a dlvlslble ego." 1he flrsL posLulaLe refers Lo Lhe ure Lgo or supra-lndlvldual (Lranspersonal) pure Self or pure WlLness (Lhe l-l). lL ls LhaL whlch, accordlng Lo llchLe, ls Lhe pure acLlvlLy of percelvlng buL can never lLself be percelved as an ob[ecL (only lnLulLed from wlLhln). 1hls pure acLlvlLy or pure openness ls Lhe condlLlon and Lhe ground of any and all ob[ecLs, and Lhus ouL of" Lhls ure Self (whlch llchLe malnLalns ls lnflnlLe and supra-lndlvldual), comes all flnlLe ob[ecLs-and Lhls ls Lhe second posLulaLe. Slnce Lhe flnlLe non-ego (or ob[ecLlvlLy ln general) now exlsLs, lL ls percelved by a flnlLe and lndlvldual ego-and LhaL ls Lhe Lhlrd posLulaLe. 1hus, Lhe absoluLe and lnflnlLe Self poslLs wlLhln lLself Lhe flnlLe ego and flnlLe naLure (dlvlslble"). 1hls ls a very clear form of Lhe WesLern vedanLa" LhaL l have menLloned on several occaslons. And llchLe derlves all of Lhls, noL so much as a maLLer of absLracL phllosophy (alLhough lL was cerLalnly LhaL), buL as a dlrecL lnqulry lnLo consclousness: he bases lL on Lhe lnLerlor, noL Lhe exLerlor (Lhe laLLer he calls dogmaLlsm" leadlng Lo deLermlnlsm and mechanlsm"). Pe used Lo say Lo hls sLudenLs: 8e aware of Lhe wall. now be aware of who or whaL ls aware of Lhe wall. now be aware of who ls aware of LhaL. . . ." ln oLher words, pushlng back furLher and furLher Lo LhaL pure WlLness whlch ls Lhe ground of all exlsLence buL cannoL lLself be seen as an ob[ecL. 1haL pure AcLlvlLy (or pure WlLness), accordlng Lo llchLe, ls Lhe ground and necessary condlLlon for Lhe manlfesLaLlon of any ob[ecLs aL all, and as such, Lhere ls preclsely noLhlng lndlvldual and flnlLe abouL lL: lL ls loflolte, obsolote, sopto-loJlvlJool. (llchLe ls someLlmes accused of meanlng Lhe flnlLe ego ls Lhe ground, buL Lhls ls enLlrely lncorrecL, as llchLe hlmself ofLen polnLed ouL.) 1he enLlre world ls Lhus, accordlng Lo llchLe, Lhe producL of Lhe pure Self's producLlve lmaglnaLlon" (Lhus dolng away wlLh kanL's Lhlng-ln-lLself). 1hls ls all vlrLually lndlsLlngulshable from Shankara and Lhe noLlons of pure ALman, lLs ldenLlLy wlLh pure 8rahman, and Lhe producLlon of Lhe world Lhrough 8rahman-ALman's creaLlve moyo. 1he maln (and cruclal) dlfference beLween Lhese forms of WesLern vedanLa" and Lhe LasLern approaches ls LhaL Lhe laLLer malnLaln LhaL Lhe lnLulLlon of pure WlLness has Lo be susLalned Lhrough rlgorous yoglc concenLraLlon and lnLense dlscrlmlnaLlng awareness (pra[na), or lL ls snapped up" Loo soon by Lhe flnlLe self or ego. ln Zen, for example, lnqulry lnLo Who am l?" (e.g., Who chanLs Lhe name of 8uddha?" or WhaL ls my Crlglnal lace?" or slmply Mo") can Lake slx or seven years, on average, before a Lruly profound breakLhrough can occur, llchLe, apparenLly, lnLulLed only gllmmers of Lhls profound openness, whlch ls why l also refer Lo mosL WesLern vedanLa as half-baked." And ln Lhls half-baked form, lL would play lnLo Lhe hands of Lhe flnlLe, hyper-agenLlc, dlsengaged sub[ecL of Lhe LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. naLure, or Lhe LoLal nonego, was noL flnally lnLegraLed ln pure Self, raLher, naLure was slmply Lhe losttomeotol background agalnsL whlch Lhe Lgo had Lo sLruggle motolly Lo free lLself, and Lhls process of exLrlcaLlon, of dlsenchanLmenL, was ooeoJloq. As such, when Schelllng clalmed LhaL llchLe dld noL Lruly lnLegraLe Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco, Schelllng was qulLe rlghL, l belleve. 8uL Lhls shouldn'L sLop us from appreclaLlng Lhe lmporLanL and profound sLeps LhaL llchLe Look ln Lhe rlghL dlrecLlon, however much he sLopped shorL of a Lrue breakLhrough and Lrue lnLegraLlon. (l would especlally menLlon, for example, LhaL llchLe's presenLaLlon of a pragmaLlc hlsLory of consclousness" noL only was Lhe precursor of Pegel's developmenLal phenomenology of consclousness, buL ls Lhe grandfaLher of vlrLually all schools of developmenLal psychology ln general.) As for llchLe's flnal poslLlon, lL comes Lo Lhe same Lhlng Lo say LhaL llchLe ended up wlLh vlrLually an unendlng Ascendlng paLh LhaL dlvorced lLself from any Lrue uescenL (see nexL noLe), and LhaL naLure remalned, as lL were, Lhe necessary enemy. 19. lL was an aLLempL aL pure AscenL, pure Lranscendence, pure 8eflux, radlcal deLachmenL. 8oLh kanL, and Lo a much greaLer exLenL llchLe, were Lrylng Lo relnLroduce an Ascendlng and anLllevellng currenL lnLo Lhe flaLland onLology, and Lhls ls why Lhe lmpacL of Lhelr phllosophles was always descrlbed ln Lerms llke exhllaraLlng"-freedom ls olwoys ln Lhe Ascendlng currenL, buL Lhe agonlzlng dllemma remalned for Lhem boLh: how Lo lnLegraLe Lhls wlLh Lhe uescendlng and manlfesL world, for wlLhouL LhaL lnLegraLlon AscenL ls always, we have seen, boughL aL Lhe prlce of teptessloo: Lros degeneraLes lnLo hobos. 20. Males, generlcally havlng Lrouble wlLh relaLlonshlps, are ofLen drawn Lo Lhe lmpersonal lL-language of Splnoza's lnflnlLe SubsLance: no messy lnLerpersonal dlaloglcal undersLandlng here. Many proponenLs of deep ecology have expllclLly called on Splnoza Lo supporL a depersonallzed splrlLual subsLance and a denaLured naLure, lL plays lnLo Lhe hyperagency of Lhe mascullne mode. 21. lL was a pure uescenL, a pure lmmanence, LoLal Lfflux, radlcal lmmerslon. 1he Lco camps were worklng wltblo Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order, Lhe manlfesL sysLem, and aLLempLlng Lo relnLroduce SplrlL lnLo a world (and naLure) vlrLually abandoned by Lhe pure Lgo of kanL and llchLe, aLLempLlng Lo reweave Lhe repressed fragmenLs of a dlsengaglng Sub[ecL. And lndeed, Lhe compasslonaLe, carlng, lncluslve Agape ls olwoys found ln Lhe uescendlng currenL-buL agaln Lhe dllemma: how Lo lnLegraLe LhaL wlLh some sorL of Lrue AscenL, for wlLhouL AscenL, Agape always degeneraLes, we have seen, lnLo 1hanaLos: pure teqtessloo Lo predlfferenLlaLed sLaLes, whlch ls noL heallng buL heaplng (l.e., woundlng). 22. ln Lhe LasL, Lhe same dllemma showed up ln Lhe deslre Lo unlLe Lhe ure Ascended Self or Consclousness (urusha) wlLh Lhe ure uescended SubsLance of Lhe manlfesL world (rakrlLl), or agaln, pure LmpLlness wlLh pure lorm, or yeL agaln, nlrvana and samsara. 1he early yoglc schools had Laken Lhe CnosLlc or purely Ascendlng soluLlon: Lhe dlssoluLlon of all lorm ln pure unmanlfesL LmpLlness or absorpLlon, Lhe exLlncLlon of samsara ln nlrvana. 1he flrsL declslve and far-reachlng sLep Lo pure nonduallLy was Laken by nagar[una, ln a move qulLe slmllar Lo loLlnus (Lranscend and lnclude, nlrvana and samara are noL-Lwo), a nondual breakLhrough LhaL was subsequenLly applled Lo Plndulsm by Shankara, Lo kashmlr Shalvlsm by AbhlnavagupLa, Lo va[rayana by admasambhava-Lo name a very few. (lor an exLended dlscusslon of Lhls Lheme, see noLe 1 for chap. 14.) 1he second sLep, a Lhoroughgolng evoluLlonary nonduallLy, was made mosL expllclL ln Lhe LasL by Auroblndo, and ln Lhe WesL by Lhe genLleman Lhe LexL ls abouL Lo lnLroduce. 1hls LasLern approach ls explored ln depLh ln volume 3. 23. 1aylor, neqel, p. 36. 24. 1aylor, 5ootces, p. 382. 23. lrom varlous leLLers, ln klerkegaard, 1be coocept of ltooy and Notes of 5cbellloqs 8etllo lectotes. As Schelllng began devlaLlng lnLo myLhology, klerkegaard losL hls hlgh oplnlon of hlm, as ls well known (and lL ls cerLalnly noL hard Lo share klerkegaard's oplnlon ln LhaL case). 26. CoplesLon's wordlng, vol. 7.1, p. 133. 1he good books by (or abouL) Schelllng are very hard Lo come by, whlch ls exLremely unforLunaLe. 1he one wldely avallable accounL ls CoplesLon's nlstoty of pbllosopby. 1hls conLalns an excellenL shorL summary of Schelllng's work, and slnce lL ls also vlrLually Lhe only one readlly avallable, l have Lrled Lo draw mosL of my quoLaLlons from lL. 27. llchLe, Schelllng, and Pegel each glve Lhelr own verslon of Lhe CreaL Polarchy, whlch, however we sllce lL, ls ln mosL essenLlals loLlnlan. 28. CoplesLon, vol. 7.1, p. 141. 29. Schelllng's usage, Pegel would suggesL a slmllar scheme buL wlLh dlfferenL Lermlnology and, of course, a blL of an argumenL as Lo Lhe preclse naLure of Lhe unlfylng AbsoluLe, revolvlng around cows. 30. CoplesLon, vol. 7.1, p. 163. 31. CoplesLon's summary, vol. 7.1, p. 139. 32. Schelllng's brllllanL synLhesls and lnLegraLlon of Lhe Lgo and Lhe Lco sLand ln sharp conLrasL Lo mosL of Loday's approaches Lo Lhe envlronmenL, whlch sLlll Lyplcally pursue elLher Lhe Lgolc-raLlonal calculaLlve advenLure (reform envlronmenLallsm"), or fall lnLo varlous forms of regresslve Lco-8omanLlc reechanLmenL." lndeed, Lhe Lco-8omanLlc advocaLes of Lhe reenchanLmenL of Lhe world" are sLlll very much wlLh us. MosL of Lhe new paradlgm" schools of LhoughL beLray a profound alleglance Lo Lhe flaLland lnLerlocklng order (Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm), and Lhen wlLhln LhaL flaLland Lhey wobble beLween some verslon of raLlonallsLlc sysLems Lheory (mosLly Lhe ecomascullnlsLs) or naLure as dlsclosed ln senLlmenLs (mosLly Lhe ecofemlnlsLs). 1o Lhe exLenL LhaL elLher aLLempLs Lo escape Lhe flaLland lnLerlocklng order aL all, Lhey do so by teqtessloo Lo agrarlan alchemy, maglcal anlmlsm, asLrology, horLlculLural planLlng myLhology, or foraglng human-naLure ln-dlssoclaLlon. ln Lhese approaches, Lhere are Lhe sLandard Lco-8omanLlc elemenLs: (1) a confuslon of dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon leadlng Lo pre/Lrans fallacles, (2) a levellng of Lhose very dlfferenLlaLlons LhaL allow Lhelr quesL ln Lhe flrsL place, (3) Lhe vlew LhaL hlsLory and evoluLlon are marked by a helnous Crlme LhaL removed us from Lhe aradlse now LosL, (4) a concomlLanL euloglzlng of Lhe archalc lndlssoclaLlon sLaLe (boLh phylogeneLlcally and onLogeneLlcally) as belng nondual" and splrlLual/mysLlcal" or generally hollsLlc" (lnsLead of seelng LhaL lL ls predlfferenLlaLed, noL LransdlfferenLlaLed), (3) a crlLlque" of culLure (and modernlLy) based upon Lhe recapLure of Lhe archalc aradlse LosL, now concelved as Lhe romlsed Land, (6) a regresslve sllde lnLo dlvlne egolsm, ln elLher Lhe form of monologlcal sysLems Lheory preservlng Lhe dlsengaged ego ln lLs emplrlcal flaLLenlng (Pabermas), or ln Lhe form of blocenLrlc feellng and senLlmenLal emoLlng as Lhe connecLlng llnk Lo Lhe dlvlne" (1aylor), (7) Lhe need for a new paradlgm" LhaL recapLures Lhe aradlse LosL ln a new" eplsLemology of syncreLlsm and lndlssoclaLlon, based, agaln, on elLher sysLems Lheory or somaLlc-vlLal senLlmenL. 1o glve some promlnenL examples: Mottls 8etmoo, 1he 8eenchanLmenL of Lhe World ooJ Comlng Lo Cur Senses Morrls 8erman beglns hls parLlcular quesL for Lhe new paradlgm by enLhuslasLlcally embraclng Cregory 8aLeson's verslon of cyberneLlc reallLy (Lhe sysLems Lheory approach Lo flaLland). ln 1be teeocbootmeot of tbe wotlJ, 8erman beglns wlLh all Lhe sLandard crlLlques of Lhe dlsenchanLed" modern world. lalllng Lo grasp speclflcally any of Lhe dlgnlLles of modernlLy, he of course flnds Lhe dlsenchanLmenL" noL ln Lhe Jlssoclotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree, buL ln Lhe Jlffeteotlotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree, and Lhere Lhen follows Lhe sLandard and glowlng (and dlslngenuous) euloglzlng of medleval alchemy-anlmlsm, asLrology, and maglco-myLhlc anyLhlng. As an Lco-8omanLlc, and fully caughL ln LhaL verslon of Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy, 8erman ls locked lnLo elevaLlonlsm. 1here ls dlvlslve" consclousness (everyLhlng modern, sclenLlflc, raLlonal) and Lhere ls parLlclpaLory consclousness" (evetytbloq else: he menLlons alchemy, maglc, psychosls, dreams, mysLlclsm, shamanlsm, myLhology, and anyLhlng premodern). Slnce modern raLlonallLy/sclence ls preLLy bad, everyLhlng else musL be preLLy good (or varlous degrees of preLLy good). And so of course he musL euloglze alchemy, asLrology, prlmlLlve parLlclpaLlon, eLc. 1hus, as examples of medleval unlfled consclousness" (hls Lerm), where everyLhlng ls lnLerllnked" wlLh everyLhlng else, 8erman glves Lhe example of slxLeenLh-cenLury Cswald Croll, who offers Lhe facL" LhaL walnuLs prevenL head allmenLs because Lhe meaL of Lhe nuL resembles Lhe braln ln appearance." 1o whlch we mlghL ask, as a LesL of LruLhfulness and slncerlLy, lf ur. 8erman has a headache, does he Lake Lwo walnuLs? 1hls walnuL/braln" ls, as we have seen, Lhe lageLlan confuslon of meLaphor as llLeral (preop), where Lwo holons wlLh slmllar agency are LhoughL Lo have causal power: syncreLlsm romanLlcally reread as hollsm." 8erman glves oLher exLenslve examples of Lhls unlfled consclousness," especlally drawn from maglc, alchemy, and asLrology. Pere ls Lhe 8enalssance maglclan" Agrlppa von neLLeshelm, ln hls ue Occolto lbllosopblo of 1333: All SLars have Lhelr pecullar naLures, properLles, and condlLlons, Lhe Seals and CharacLers whereof Lhey produce, Lhrough Lhelr rays, whence every naLural Lhlng recelves from lLs SLar shlnlng upon lL, some parLlcular Seal, or characLer, sLamped upon lL, whlch Seal or characLer conLalns ln lL a pecullar vlrLue. Lvery Lhlng, Lherefore, haLh lLs characLer pressed upon lL by lLs sLar for some parLlcular effecL, especlally by LhaL sLar whlch doLh prlnclpally govern lL" (p. 73). 1haL asLro-loglc" ls a good example of Lhe LefL Pand of Lhe maglco-myLhlc worldvlew, syoctetlcolly lnLerwoven wlLh lLs 8lghL- Pand componenLs (predlfferenLlaLed). 8erman commenLs LhaL glven Lhls sysLem of knowledge, modern dlsLlncLlons beLween lnner and ouLer, psychlc and organlc (or physlcal), do noL exlsL. lf you wlsh Lo promoLe love, says Agrlppa, eaL plgeons, Lo obLaln courage, llons' hearLs." 1hls Lype of lndlssoclaLed asLro-loglc musL be euloglzed because, compared Lo modern sclence, Lhls syncreLlsm appears hollsLlc" and unlfled." 8uL Lhe crlme" of Lhe LnllghLenmenL (Lhe bad news") was noL Lhe loss of LhaL undlfferenLlaLed syncreLlsm (as 8omanLlcs lmaglne), Lhe crlme was LhaL, wlLh Lhe flnal dlfferenLlaLlon of LhaL syncreLlsm-Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree-Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon was oot yet broughL lnLo a new and correspondlng loteqtotloo: ln Lhe newly emerged egolc- raLlonal worldspace, Lhe newly emerged lotetlot of Lhe new worldspace was noL lnLegraLed wlLh Lhe newly dlsclosed Lype of exLerlor world (l and we and lL fell lnLo dlssoclaLlon). 1hus, merely comparlng Lhe JlssocloteJ componenLs of modernlLy wlLh Lhe loteqtoteJ componenLs of medlevallsm, makes lL appear, ln Lhls flaLland comparlson (a comparlson only of dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon and noL also of Lhe dlfferenL degrees of depLh)-makes lL appear LhaL modernlLy ls ooly a bruLal mlsLake. 8uL 8erman reallzes LhaL a slmple reLurn Lo maglco-myLhlc anlmlsm ls noL posslble, and maybe noL even a good ldea (alLhough he's noL sure exacLly why). So he shlfLs course a blL and (ln anoLher sLandard elevaLlonlsL ploy) says LhaL whaL we acLually need, and need desperaLely, ls Lo tecoptote anlmlsm ln a maLure form." 1he alchemlcal/maglcal/syncreLlc worldvlew he Lhus sLarLs referrlng Lo as oolve anlmlsm," and our salvaLlon lles raLher ln a postmoJeto anlmlsm (whaL he also calls-when he Lrles Lo dlsLance hlmself from nalve syncreLlsm-a nonanlmlsLlc parLlclpaLlon." 8uL Lhen, whaL happened Lo anlmlsm?). And for Lhls unlLy" he flnds Lhe besL candldaLe Lo be Cregory 8aLeson and a verslon of . . . no surprlse: cyberneLlc sysLems Lheory. Lnvlsloned, of course, as an enLerprlse of recovery of archalc modes LhaL, well, aren'L really archalc anymore. Cur culLure, wlLh lLs heavy emphasls on Lhe dlglLal, could resLore such a complemenLary relaLlonshlp only by recoverlng whaL lL once knew abouL archalc modes of LhoughL," and Lhls wlll lead Lo Lhe sorL of socleLy LhaL mlghL be congruenL wlLh Lhe hollsLlc or cyberneLlc vlslon," whlch ls a maLure Lype of alchemlcal . . . reasonlng adapLed Lo Lhe modern age" (pp. 232, 233, 270, 8erman uses dlalecLlcal reasonlng" Lo cover dreams, psychoses, hollsm, alchemy, eLc., Lhls ls noL vlslon-loglc buL paleo-loglc). 1hls 8aLesonlan cyberneLlc hollsm, says 8erman, ls by far Lhe besL candldaLe for wotlJ solvotloo ln Lhe posLmodern era. 8uL Lhen, flnally, 8erman Lhlnks abouL all of LhaL and, ln Lhe closlng pages of hls book, effecLlvely nulllfles vlrLually everyLhlng he has [usL labored Lo endorse (sLrangely, he does Lhe same Lhlng ln hls nexL book, as we wlll see). ln Lhe course of [usL menLlonlng" some of Lhe problems of 8aLesonlan cyberneLlcs, 8erman glves (lnLenLlonally or noL) a devasLaLlng crlLlque of flaLland hollsm ln general, polnLlng ouL (qulLe rlghLly, and for Lhe all reasons we have seen, especlally concernlng Lhe exLraordlnary power drlves of monologlcal sysLems Lheory) LhaL hollsm, ln shorL, could become Lhe oqeot of tytoooy." And Lhe hollsLlc worshlp of naLure goes hand ln hand wlLh Lhls Lyranny, slnce Lhe celebtotloo of ootote versus arLlflce ls a cenLral LeneL of fosclst lJeoloqy" (pp. 291, 292, my lLallcs): whaL oLhers have frankly called eco-fasclsm. Pe Lhus offers, for salvaLlon, baslcally noLhlng. Pls pre/Lrans fallacy has lefL hlm holdlng Lhe onLologlcal bag: We Lhus confronL a cholce LhaL musL be made and yeL cannoL be made: Lhe awakenlng of an enLlre clvlllzaLlon Lo lLs repressed archalc knowledge." WhaL we adulLs really need, ln oLher words, ls Lo embrace a maLure form of klndergarLen. 1he cholce LhaL most buL coot be made" ls slmply Lhe cholce based on hls pre/Lrans confuslons (coot ls Lo most as pte ls Lo ttoos, and fuslng" Lhe laLLer palr means a fuslon of Lhe former, whlch leaves hlm paralyzed). SLlll under sway of Lhls pre/Lrans fallacy, and sLlll Lhoroughly confuslng dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, 8erman ls sure Lhe answer musL lle ptlot Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of mlnd and body: LhaL ls Lo say, our salvaLlon musL be prlmarlly bodlly, sensory, and somotlc ln naLure, and Lhus whaL we really need, ln Lhls sensory-bound, sex-drenched, hedonlsLlc, pleasure-seeklng, body- graLlfylng culLure of ours ls . . . [usL a llLLle more body. And so, ln hls nexL book, comloq to oot seoses, 8erman Lurns Lo Lhe somaLlc body ln earnesL and Lhoroughly abandons any preLense Lo cyberneLlc sysLems Lheory (lndeed, Lhe 8aLesonlan cyberneLlc flaLland LhaL was posLmodernlLy's besL chance of salvaLlon now geLs nary a menLlon, ln beLween Lhese Lwo books, 8erman wroLe several very severe crlLlclsms of sysLems Lheory, ofLen arrlvlng, l belleve, aL several rlghL concluslons for several wrong reasons). Pe swlLches from Lhe sysLems Lheory of hollsm" Lo Lhe naLure as lL makes me feel" verslon, and Lhrows hls alleglance Lo Lhe body, Lo lLs feellngs, Lo lLs vlLal-lmpulslve force and pure emoLlng, Lo sensory dellghL-and Lhus adopLs, ln Lhe process, a purely and classlcally uescended worldvlew, a worldvlew LhaL sees all AscenL, of any varleLy, as prlmarlly an aLLempL (ofLen evll) Lo overcome a sLaLe of affalrs (Lhe sub[ecL/ob[ecL spllL") LhaL slmply never should have happened ln Lhe flrsL place. 1hus, echolng Lhe Lwo-mlllennla-old manLra of uescenders everywhere, 8erman's concluslon ls LhaL lL ls Llme Lo do away wlLh all AscenL enLlrely, and Lhls sLrlkes hlm as a wlldly new and orlglnal ldea: 1here ls anoLher alLernaLlve Lo recycllng Lhe ascenL sLrucLure, and LhaL ls Lo flnally abandon lL once and for all. 1here can be no heallng of our culLure and ourselves wlLhouL Laklng Lhls opLlon. noLhlng less ls aL sLake Lhan Lhe chance Lo be flnally, fully human" (p. 307). And Lhus, ln llne wlLh every uescended hedonlsL who ever found ascenL Loo demandlng, 8erman belleves LhaL Lhls ls Lhe cruclal polnL-LhaL Lrue enllghLenmenL ls Lo really know, really feel . . . your somaLlc naLure" (and never mlnd LhaL Zen deflnes LnllghLenmenL as body and mlnd dropped"!). 1he shlfL away from ascenL, and Loward bodlly presence ln Lhe world," he says, tbete ls our salvaLlon (pp. 310-11). 1hus, lf we can really emoLe ln a genulne way, all of our exlsLenLlal problems wlll melL away. 1haL my feellngs cannoL even begln Lo Lake Lhe role of oLher, LhaL my feellngs, as feellngs, are self-reverberaLlng, LhaL Lhey clrcle egocenLrlcally ln Lhelr own orblL, LhaL ln Lhemselves Lhey never ascend lnLo Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve clrcle where love alone Lruly shlnes and compasslon alone can flourlsh-LhaL promoLlng a feel good" eLhlc as Lhe prlmary moral lmpulse lands me squarely ln dlvlne egolsm and exlsLenLlal hell: of all of LhaL, nary a noLe from 8erman. Pe wanLs merely dlrecL engagemenL wlLh naLure and bodlly funcLlons." So self-absorbed ls Lhls sLance LhaL Lhe selfcenLrlc naLure of Lhe sLance doesn'L even dawn on hlm. 1PL SlnCLL 8CunuA8? lALLAC? ln Lhe modern and posLmodern era, Lhe reLro-8omanLlc psycboloqlcol pro[ecL has always cenLered on Lhe flrsL fulcrums of presenL-day human developmenL, durlng Lhe flrsL Lhree years of llfe, and Lhe horrendous spllL" beLween self and oLher LhaL occurs aL LhaL Llme (Lhese LheorlsLs don'L usually dlsLlngulsh fulcrum-1 and fulcrum-2, and so Lhey mean Lhe flrsL" dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe self and oLher, Lhe sub[ecL and ob[ecL, from Lhe prlmal/archalc sLaLe of undlfferenLlaLed and lndlssoclaLed parLlclpaLlon, whlch prlmarlly occurs, we have seen, ln Lhe flrsL Lwo-Lo-Lhree years of llfe). 1hls oecessoty Jlffeteotlotloo (l-1 and l-2) ls compleLely confused wlLh dlssoclaLlon and ls Lherefore lnLerpreLed as a prlmal loss, a ptlmol olleootloo, LhaL forever dlvldes Lhe self from oLhers, from lLself, and from naLure. And mosL subsequenL human deslre, drlve, moLlvaLlon, and culLural endeavors are Lhen seen as a doomed serles of LwlsLed aLLempLs Lo regaln Lhls aradlse LosL. And lndeed, 8erman Lakes, as hls polnL of deparLure, [usL Lhese LheorlsLs. lor Lhe 'lrench school' of phllosophy and chlld psychology-Penrl Wallon, Maurlce Merleau-onLy, !acques Lacan-Lhls momenL [of self-oLher dlfferenLlaLlon], whlch marks Lhe blrLh of your ldenLlLy as a belng ln Lhe world, also marks Lhe blrLh of your allenaLlon from Lhe world" (p. 36). noL LhaL Lhls dlfferenLlaLlon coo go Loo far, or develop poorly, lnLo paLhologlcal dlssoclaLlon and allenaLlon, buL LhaL lL slmply ls ltself Lhe CreaL Crlme. (1hls poslLlon was Laken mosL forcefully ln Amerlca by norman C. 8rown, whom 8erman frequenLly quoLes wlLh much approval.) 1he greaL problem wlLh all of Lhese Lheorles ls LhaL, worklng wlLhln Lhe modern flaLland paradlgm, Lhey only recognlze ooe boslc boooJoty: Lhe horlzonLal boundary beLween self and oLher (or sub[ecL and ob[ecL), and slnce all allenaLlon does lndeed requlre some sorL of separaLlon of self and oLher, Lhen Lhls prlmary dlfferenLlaLlon (l-1 and l-2) musL slmply be equaLed, noL wlLh Lhe posslblllty of allenaLlon, buL wlLh olleootloo ltself. (lor furLher dlscusslon of Lhe Slngle-8oundary lallacy, see noLe 3 for chap. 6 and noLe 17 for chap. 14.) WhaL all of Lhls overlooks ls Lhe verLlcal dlmenslon of Jlffeteot types of boundarles alLogeLher: Lhere ls Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of pbyslcol self and physlcal oLher (l-1), of emotloool self and emoLlonal oLher (l-2), of cooceptool self and concepLual oLher (l-3), of coltotol role-self and role-oLher (l-4), and so on LhroughouL Lhe verLlcal specLrum, wlLh each self marked by an lmporLanL funcLlonal boundary. And only ooe of Lhose boundarles ls acLually physlcal, and acLually follows Lhe skln-boundary of Lhe physlcal body (l-1). All of Lhe oLher boundarles (emoLlonal Lo menLal Lo splrlLual) do noL follow Lhe skln-boundary aL all (Lhey merely refer Lo lL and are grounded ln lL). My menLal self, for example, lncludes all sorLs of ldenLlflcaLlons wlLh famlly, values, causes, groups, naLlons, eLc., none of whlch exlsL lnslde my skln-boundary. 8aLher, an enLlLy ls loslJe Lhese varlous boundarles (emoLlonal, menLal, eLc.), noL when lL ls lnslde Lhe physlcal body, buL when lt follows tbe toles (Lhe code, Lhe reglme, Lhe agency) of LhaL parLlcular self-sense or holon (much as you are ln" a chess game lf you are followlng Lhe rules of Lhe game, no maLLer where you are physlcally slLLlng: you can even phone ln your moves, and you are ouL" of Lhe game, noL lf you move ln physlcal space, buL lf you break Lhe rules). 1haL ls, an enLlLy becomes lnslde" Lhe sLrucLure of ooy holon when lL ls followlng Lhe rules of Lhe deep sLrucLure of LhaL holon (when lL ls asslmllaLed lnLo Lhe code, paLLern, or reglme of Lhe holon), and Lhls ls Lrue for physlcal boundarles, emoLlonal boundarles, menLal boundarles, eLc. When physlcal food ls flrsL swallowed and enLers Lhe sLomach, lL ls dlssolved and dlgesLed, and Lhe needed nuLrlenLs enLer Lhe bloodsLream, from Lhere Lo be osslmlloteJ lnLo Lhe sLrucLures of Lhe physlcal body (Lhey become Lruly parL of Lhe physlcal body, Lruly ln" Lhe body), and unneeded food conLlnues Lo pass Lhrough Lhe dlgesLlve Lube and ouL of Lhe body: lL never becomes parL of Lhe body, lL ls never asslmllaLed lnLo Lhe paLLerns of Lhe body lLself: lL remalns ouLslde Lhe body's game, Lhe body's rules and paLLerns, reglmes and codes. Llkewlse, anoLher person becomes parL of your emotloool makeup when LhaL person ls ln your emoLlonal space, noL ln your sLomach, and LhaL emoLlonal space floaLs beyond Lhe skln, only occaslonally checklng ln wlLh Lhe physlcal boundarles. 1he person (as lmage and emoLlonal represenLaLlon) becomes a pott of your emoLlonal paLLerns (your overall affecLlve mood sLaLes and sLrucLures), and Lhus ls lo LhaL emoLlonal space as surely as food ls ln your sLomach, buL Lhese Lwo boundarles are noL aL all Lhe same slmple physlcal boundary (and LhaL ls whaL l mean when l say LhaL an enLlLy ls lo a sLrucLure or a holon when lL ls followlng Lhe paLLerns or rules of Lhe deep sLrucLure of LhaL holon: l can emoLlonally ldenLlfy wlLh people, causes, groups, naLlons, no maLLer where Lhey are acLually locaLed: Lhey become parL of me when l Lake Lhem lnLo my emoLlonal ldenLlLy, my emoLlonal space, and Lhey Lhen operaLe wlLhln LhaL space, followlng lLs parLlcular rules, or Lhe paLLerns of my affecLlve mood sLaLes, whlch Lhemselves mlghL accommodaLe, or shlfL deep sLrucLure, ln order Lo asslmllaLe Lhe new lLems). 1he menLal space llkewlse floaLs ouLslde Lhe emoLlonal (Lhe cognlLlve-menLal space can acLually Lake Lhe role of oLher, see Lhrough Lhelr eyes," asslmllaLe/accommodaLe new ldeas, eLc.), and Lhe splrlLual space floaLs ouLslde Lhe menLal and lnLo Lhe kosmos aL large. Lach of Lhose boundarles ls cruclal. lndeed, Lhe Jlffeteotlotloo of an earller boundary ls Lhe ptetepolslte for Lhe loteqtotloo of Lhe self aL Lhe nexL-hlgher boundary. 1hus, Lhe sLable emoLlonal-self resLs on Lhe sLable physlcal-self boundary, Lhe sLable menLal-self resLs on a sLable emoLlonal-ob[ecL consLancy (sLable emoLlonal boundary), and so on. 1he prevlous dlfferenLlaLed self ls lnLegraLed lnLo Lhe newly emerglng self, whlch musL llkewlse sLably dlfferenLlaLe lLself from Lhe oLhers ln lLs newly emerglng envlronmenL. 1he boundarles of Lhe prevlous self-sLrucLure are preserved ln Lhelr funcLlon and Lhelr capaclLy, buL negaLed ln Lhelr excluslvlLy or parLlalness. 8oundarles are noL slmply losL or evaporaLed or erased, Lhey are Lranscended and lncluded. And Lhls conLlnues unLll all Lhe self/oLher boundarles have been Lhoroughly ptesetveJ (lncluded) and uLLerly oeqoteJ (Lranscended) ln SplrlL. Zen masLers, for example, can perfecLly well Lell Lhe dlfference beLween Lhelr physlcal body and a physlcal chalr (or physlcal oLher): Lhe Zen adepL ls oot heallng Lhe spllL beLween chalr and body, he or she ls Lranscendlng and locloJloq all self/oLher boundarles ln Lhe LmpLy clearlng LhaL allows all boundarles Lo arlse, and cherlshes all boundarles preclsely as Lhey are. 1he Zen adepL ls perfecLly aware of Lhe dlfference and Lhe boundary beLween chalr and body, beLween ego and oLher, beLween up and down, beLween meow and bark. SaLorl ls noL a melLdown", lL ls a negaLlng and preservlng of Lhe enLlre manlfesL domaln as a LransparenL shlmmerlng of Lhe empLy ulvlne. 8uL lf all of Lhose lmporLanL (and necessary) boundarles are slmply collapses lnLo one, slngle, arche-boundary, whlch ls merely called 1PL self/oLher" boundary, Lhen masslve LheoreLlcal confuslon resulLs. Lven ln psychoanalysls, for example, Lhere ls sLlll Lhe llngerlng noLlon LhaL all menLal ldenLlflcaLlon lnvolves Lemporary regresslon Lo Lhe oral sLage, because Lhere ls only ooe boundary recognlzed, and Lhus Laklng someLhlng across Lhe menLal boundary musL be octoolly regresslng Lo Lhe physlcal oral boundary (any lnLro[ecLlon musL follow Lhe same paLhway as food, for Lhere ls only Lhe" boundary). Llkewlse, wlLh Lhe more avanL-garde LheorlsLs (who dabble ln Zen and mysLlclsm): slnce hlgher sLaLes lnvolve somehow a nonduallLy," Lhen lL appears LhaL all Lhe cruclal and developmenLal acLlon cenLers around Lhls sloqle" self/oLher boundary, and slnce Lhe flrsL lmporLanL boundarles (physlcal and emoLlonal) are lndeed dlfferenLlaLed durlng Lhe flrsL Lhree years of llfe, Lhls seems Lo be 1PL fulcrum drlvlng all subsequenL human developmenL: lL seems LhaL Lhe loss of Lhe archalc predlfferenLlaLed sLaLe ls lrrevocable allenaLlon, whereas lL ls slmply Lhe flrsL sLage of waklng up. 1he exlsLenLlal Lerrors LhaL come wltb Lhe flrsL boundarles are noL creaLed by Lhose boundarles, buL slmply dlsclosed by Lhem: lL's called recognlzlng samsara. 1he consclousness of Lhose Lerrors can lndeed be bloLLed ouL by regresslng prlor Lo Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon, buL Lhe Lerrors are acLually overcome, noL by golng prlor Lo Lhe boundarles, buL by Lranscendlng Lhem. 8uL 8erman follows Lhe slngle boundary" flaLland paradlgm, and Lhus he refers Lo Lhls slngle" dlfferenLlaLlon as Lhe baslc faulL" (followlng 8allnL), ln Lhe sense of baslc defaulL" and baslc mlsLake," whlch, llke a geologlcal faulL llne, he says, lles ready Lo Loss up earLhquakes under sLress. 8uL 8erman does noL belleve LhaL Lhls baslc dlfferenLlaLlon/defaulL ls unlversal, because, he says, premodern foraglng Lrlbes elLher dld noL possess lL aL all or possessed lL only a llLLle (no argumenL from me Lhere). 8uL beglnnlng wlLh Lhe CreaL Crlme of Lhe neollLhlc farmlng culLures (and here we go), whlch dlfferenLlaLed Lhe Lame and Lhe wlld, subsequenL hlsLory has been one long sllde lnLo more and more mlsery and mlsLake, all drlven by humanlLy's aLLempLs Lo overcome 1PL baslc defaulL LhaL separaLes self and oLher. And so, he bllLhely assures us, MosL of our hlsLory has been a klnd of unnecessary arLlfacL" (p. 311). As an example of whaL he conslders a mlsLake," he glves especlally Lhe neollLhlc dlsLlncLlon beLween Lame" and wlld": Cnce Wlld and 1ame were esLabllshed as caLegorles of llfe, so LhaL Self and CLher necessarlly became anLagonlsLlcally relaLed, Lhe 'problem' of whaL Lo do wlLh lmmedlaLe forms surfaced as a problem" (p. 76). noLe LhaL he malnLalns LhaL dlsLlngulshlng Lame and wlld oecessotlly allenaLes sub[ecL and ob[ecL (Lhese Lypes of necesslLles" are very common when every dlfferenLlaLlon ls read as a dlssoclaLlon, because every branch of Lhe oak musL Lhen be seen as a dlfferenL Lype of vlolaLlon of Lhe acorn). Llkewlse, Lhe CreaL Crlme accordlng Lo Lhe (ecomascullnlsL) 8omanLlcs (who embrace foraglng) ls olwoys horLlculLure (Lame vs. wlld), all of whlch overlooks Lhe foraglng-culLure dlsLlncLlon of Lhe 8aw and Lhe Cooked-lLs own aLLempL Lo alLer naLure Lo sulL lLs own ends. 8uL Lhe reLro-8omanLlc poslLlon JemooJs an earller sLaLe of human exlsLence LhaL dld oot aLLempL Lo alLer naLure," because Lhe exlsLence of Lhls sLaLe ls demanded by Lhelr pre[udged crlLlque of modernlLy (l.e., a paradlse" most bove exlsLed ln Lhe pasL because dlfferenLlaLlon lLself ls noL embraced by 8omanLlcs, so Lhe predlfferenLlaLed pasL most be Lhe LosL aradlse-an ldeology LhaL Lhen rldes roughshod over masslve amounLs of unpleasanL evldence Lo arrlve aL glowlng lnLerpreLaLlons of Lhe noble savage, hlllp SlaLer and CllberL 8rlm belng merely Lwo of Lhe mosL recenL reenchanLers). And Lhus, Lrue Lo form, 8erman malnLalns LhaL neollLhlc clvlllzaLlon opened up an opposlLlon beLween Lhe Self and Lhe World. WlLhln Lhe maLrlx of neollLhlc socleLy, and Lhe caLegorles of Self/CLher, or 1ame/Wlld, Lhe schlsmogenlc cycle ls qulLe lnevlLable. WesLern consclousness ls deeply lnfluenced by Lhls duallsm"-even Lhough LasLern consclousness, whlch equally developed Lhe Wlld/1ame dlsLlncLlon, ls somehow nonduallsLlc" (whlch undercuLs hls enLlre argumenL aL Lhe cruclal fulcrum, because Lhls ls noL acLually a nasLy duallsm buL a growLh dlfferenLlaLlon). ln all of Lhls, Lhere ls no serlous and conslsLenL dlsLlngulshlng beLween dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, and Lhere ls no dlsLlngulshlng whaLsoever beLween all Lhe vasLly dlfferenL Lypes of necessary and funcLlonal boundarles: Lhere ls slmply Lhe baslc gap, Lhe baslc faulL, Lhe baslc spllL. 1here ls no predlfferenLlaLed Lo dlfferenLlaLed Lo posLdlfferenLlaLed lnLegraLlon and unlon (llke every oLher process ln naLure), raLher, Lhere ls slmply sub[ecL/ob[ecL fuslon versus sub[ecL/ob[ecL allenaLlon: Lhere ls slmply Lhe nlce acorn versus Lhe vlclous vlolence done Lo lL by Lhe oak-Lhe oak belng Lhe allenaLed, fracLured, dlsLorLed acorn. 1hus, for 8erman, everyLhlng post fulcrum-2 (LhaL ls, everyLhlng pasL Lhe blocenLrlc bodyego, Lhe somaLlc-vlLal body) ls fooJomeotolly noLhlng buL varlous ways Lo Lraglcally and paLheLlcally aLLempL Lo brldge Lhe gap"-brldge Lhe spllL" LhaL foragers dld noL have and LhaL all of subsequenL hlsLory has paLheLlcally aLLempLed Lo overcome. LveryLhlng pasL berry plcklng ls pasL or beyond Lhe lmmedlaLe, sensory-drlven body, and Lhus fundamenLally should slmply noL have happened (a klnd of unnecessary arLlfacL"), because everyLhlng beyond Lhe lmmedlaLe sensory body ls . . . bad. 1hls means, as well, LhaL for 8erman Lhe only ootoloqlcol reallLy ls LhaL of Lhe felL-body, Lhe vlLal-emoLlonal body, prlor Lo lLs spllL" lnLo mlnd and body (prlor, LhaL ls, Lo fulcrum-3). Slnce Lhe vlLal body (Lhe somaLlc reallLy") ls Lhe only fundamenLal reallLy, Lhen all of hlsLory has Lo be coded ln Lhls vlLal body, and has Lo be seen as prlmarlly Lhe vlclsslLudes of Lhe body and lLs prlmary feellngs. LveryLhlng else ls . . . Lhe paLheLlc aLLempL Lo flll Lhe gap, Lhe baslc defaulL. And Lhus a real hlsLory would have Lo be Lhe hlsLory of Lhe body, perlod. PlsLory ls flnally an acLlvlLy of Lhe flesh" and can only be dlsclosed by Lechnlques of somaLlc analysls. 1he LruLh can ooly be seen from a somaLlc polnL of vlew" (hls lLallcs, pp. 136-37). 1hls ls a Lall order, even for a dedlcaLed reducLlonlsLlc (even Lhe MarxlsLs abandoned Lhls one), and so ln order Lo make Lhe body" Lhe ptlmoty mover of all hlsLory, 8erman has Lo come up wlLh some very clever deflnlLlons of body" ln order Lo cover all Lhe bases. And Lhls he does, lmpllclLly glvlng Lhe body" flve enLlrely dlfferenL deflnlLlons, whlch glves hlm more Lhan enough rope Lo hang hlsLory. 1he flve dlfferenL uses: body as somaLlcally felL, body as experlence ln general, body as lnLerlorness, body as predlfferenLlaLed consclousness, and body as physlologlcal (lncludlng Lhe braln). 8uL Lhe flrsL Lwo are Lhe mosL lmporLanL, and l wlll focus on Lhose. 1. 8y body" 8erman prlmarlly means Lhe somaLlc, physlcal, sensory, felL-body. Pence Lhe LlLle: comloq to oot seoses. Cenerally, whaL we mean by Lhe flesh" or Lhe senses" or vlLal feellngs." 2. 8uL he also uses body" Lo mean ooy lnLense experlence," and anyLhlng LhaL ls loteosely expetleoceJ ls Lherefore somotlc ln 8erman's unlverse (ln Lhls he even lncludes lnLense mysLlcal sLaLes where Lhe felL body Jlsoppeots oltoqetbet, as he readlly concedes, buL slnce Lhls experlence ls lnLense, lL most be body, accordlng Lo Lhls deflnlLlon, wheLher or noL LhaL ls phenomenologlcally compleLely wrong). 1he real problem wlLh body = experlence" ls Lhe fundamenLal problem wlLh emplrlclsm ln general. 1PL MLAnlnC Cl LMl8lClSM 1he sLrengLh of emplrlclsm has always been lLs lnslsLence on groundlng knowledge ln experlence, Lhe dlsasLer of emplrlclsm ls LhaL lL has never been able Lo deflne experlence adequaLely-ln facL, lL excloJes much experlenLlal evldence and seLLles, by defaulL, on sensory experlence," presumably (and wrongly) because lL (sensory experlence) alone ls supposed Lo be publlc. 1hus emplrlclsm Lends Lo swlLch from experlence as general prehenslon (well and good) Lo experlence as sensory prehenslon (reducLlonlsLlc). 1here ls sensory experlence, Lhere ls menLal experlence, and Lhere ls splrlLual experlence (Lo sLlck wlLh Lhe slmpllfled holarchy of body, mlnd, splrlL, Lhe same analysls applles Lo all of Lhe levels of Lhe specLrum of consclousness, whlch ls a specLrum of experlence). 8uL emplrlclsLs usually Lake meotol expetleoce Lo be slmply an obsttoctloo from seosoty expetleoce (Lhe reflecLlon paradlgm), wlLh all Lhe self-conLradlcLlons and lnadequacles lnvolved ln LhaL fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm (and whlch we have dlscussed aL lengLh). MaLhemaLlcs, for example, ls noL slmply an absLracLlon from sensory experlence. MaLhemaLlcs, as lL ls performed, ls an lncredlbly rlch, Lhlck, dellclously dense meotol expetleoce: l Jltectly petcelve, wlLh Lhe mlnd's eye, Lhe dlsplay of symbols, ldeas, and concepLs LhaL parade by ln my awareness, and LhaL are every blL as real, lo tbemselves, as Lhe expetleoce of clouds or raln or rocks. AfLer all, boLh symbols and rocks are, aL Lhe acLual momenL of Lhelr experlence, glven Lo me ln lmmedlaLe awareness. (1o say LhaL rocks are real" and symbols aren'L" ls a meotol JeJoctloo away from Lhe dlrecL experlence ln lmmedlaLe awareness.) Meotol expetleoces (such as lmages, symbols, and concepLs) ofLen geL a bad repuLaLlon" as belng dry and absLracL," buL only because, unllke sensory experlences, menLal experlences, besldes belng dlrecL and lmmedlaLe ln Lhemselves, coo olso go one sLep furLher and tepteseot sensory experlences. 1he word tock (Lhe meotol expetleoce r-o-c-k") can sLand for Lhe seosoty expetleoce of rock. And lf l geL caughL up ln havlng menLal experlences subsLlLuLe for sensory experlence, Lhen yes, Lhose menLal experlences become mere absLracLlons" ln Lhe bad sense: l have a slgn buL l am avoldlng Lhe referenL. 8uL LhaL ls an obose of menLal experlences, noL a Jefloltloo of menLal experlences, nor ls lL anyLhlng even remoLely close Lo an exploootloo of menLal experlences, mosL of whlch don'L even have purely emplrlcal/sensory referenLs ln Lhe flrsL place: l can slmply and emplrlcally polnL Lo a rock, buL l can'L slmply and emplrlcally polnL Lo envy, prlde, honor, or [ealousy, whlch ls why emplrlclsL Lheorles-sensory/reflecLlon Lheorles-of language fall aparL when lL comes Lo Lhe dlaloglcal phases of lnLersub[ecLlve llngulsLlcs, as we have repeaLedly seen. MosL menLal experlences and slgns polnL, oot Lo sensory referenLs, buL Lo otbet menLal experlences or referenLs, Lhey are noL absLracLlons from sense daLa, buL condensaLlons of rlch menLal experlences LhaL clrculaLe ln Lhe hermeneuLlc clrcle. 1hey possess sensory componenLs, buL cannoL be teJoceJ Lo sensory componenLs preclsely because Lhey do noL prlmarlly Jetlve from sensory componenLs: Lhey ttoosceoJ and locloJe sense daLa-and Lherefore do noL merely polot to, or obsttoct ftom, sensory lmpresslons. 1hus, as hermeneuLlclsLs have polnLed ouL, language does noL [usL tepteseot Lhe sensory world, lL cteotes worlds noL found slmply ln Lhe senses, lL Jlscloses worlds, pteseots worlds, and doesn'L [usL represenL Lhem. Language ls Lhe sLuff of Lhe noosphere, whlch doesn'L prlmarlly polnL Lo Lhe blosphere or physlosphere, buL prlmarlly Lranscends Lhe naLurlc sphere and polnLs Lo oLher menLal and llngulsLlc experlences-wheLher maglcal, myLhlcal, raLlonal, or exlsLenLlal. Some of Lhese menLal/llngulsLlc experlences polnL Lo premenLal holons, some polnL Lo LransmenLal holons, and many slmply polnL Lo oLher menLal holons-a polnL we wlll reLurn Lo ln a momenL-buL ln no way are Lhey merely absLracLlons from sensory experlences. (1haL Lhe noosphere ls Lhus consLrucLed" and noL merely reflecLlng" or represenLaLlve" does noL mean, as we have seen, LhaL lL ls Lherefore merely arblLrary, as radlcal relaLlvlsLs malnLaln, lL ls sLlll grounded ln valldlLy clalms LhaL allow culLural leotoloq Lo occur, because menLal holons follow Lhelr own law-governed paLLerns and do noL slmply floaL happlly and freely ln random space. 8uL Lhe Lrue momenL of relaLlvlsm, and a LruLh l endorse, ls LhaL, preclsely because Lhe noosphere does oot merely reflecL Lhe blosphere, culLures cannoL be [udged metely on how well Lhey mlttot Lhe physlcal world accordlng Lo emplrlcal sclence: lf knowledge and culLure are mlsLaken as merely Lhe mlrror of naLure," and lf Lrue knowledge of naLure ls glven only by modern emplrlcal sclence, Lhen all culLures have Lo be [udged merely agalnsL modern sclence, and oLher culLures are Lhen reduced Lo ooly belng near mlsses" or proLoLypes" of newLon. !udgmenLs coo be made across culLures, buL Lhe metely emplrlclsL [udgmenL ls as lnadequaLe Lhere as elsewhere.) lL ls ln deallng wlLh Lhe world-creaLlng, world-dlscloslng, world-presenLlng capaclLy of language LhaL Lhe merely reflecLlve" emplrlcal/behavlorlsL Lheorles of language come up shorL. And, whaLever one mlghL oLherwlse Lhlnk of Chomsky's Lheorles of language, lL ls almosL unlversally agreed LhaL he dlsmembered Lhese Lheorles ln hls wldely clrculaLed crlLlque of Sklnner. now, ln addlLlon Lo dlrecL seosoty expetleoces and dlrecL meotol expetleoces (boLh of whlch, even lf Lhey are parLlally medlaLed, flnally and always presenL Lhemselves lmmedlaLely), Lhere are also dlrecL spltltool expetleoces. A subLle-level lllumlnaLlon, for example, ls presenLed Lo my awareness ln Lhe same dlrecL, lmmedlaLe, glven fashlon as Lhe experlence of a rock or Lhe experlence of a menLal lmage: Lhey slmply show up and l prehend Lhem (qulLe aparL from whaLever medlaLlng chalns dellver Lhem Lo Lhe dlsplay, when we dlscover Lhese medlaLlng chalns, Lhey, Loo, enLer awareness, when Lhey do enLer, lmmedlaLely). 1hls ls why, even lf emplrlclsm ls always and lamenLably Lendlng Loward sensory emplrlclsm," many mysLlcs speak of mysLlcal emplrlclsm," meanlng Jltect mystlcol expetleoce, uslng experlence" ln Lhe wlder and Lruer sense of lmmedlaLe awareness" and noL [usL lmmedlaLe sensory awareness" (whlch ls why so many mysLlcs lnslsL on calllng Lhelr endeavors experlenLlal, experlmenLal, and sclenLlflc ln LhaL sense). And here, Loo, menLal experlence can geL lnLo Lrouble, because lL can use a menLal symbol, such as Lhe meotol expetleoce of Lhe word C-o-d," Lo sLand for Lhe spltltool expetleoce of dlrecL lllumlnaLlon (for example), and so here agaln lL ls caughL ln mere absLracLlons": lL ls uslng menLal experlences Lo Lry Lo cover experlences LhaL oteot ln Lhemselves menLal. 1hese represenLaLlons" Lhen become mere meLaphyslcs," and slnce Lhe Llme of kanL, we all know LhaL ls a very bad ldea: lL won'L hold waLer, whlch ls Lo say, lL hasn'L any experlenLlal groundlng: Lhls Lype of mere meLaphyslcs" ls slmply empty coteqotles devold of Lrue knowledge, whlch ls Lo say, devold of Lrue experlence. Powever, slnce kanL doesn'L acknowledge spltltool expetleoce, he tbetefote Lhlnks meLaphyslcs per se ls dead, whlch ls Lhe polnL aL whlch Schopenhauer, among oLhers, leveled a devasLaLlng crlLlclsm of kanL (and Lhe polnL where kaLz's neo-kanLlan argumenL also collapses). kanL demonsLraLed LhaL menLal symbols wlLhouL experlenLlal groundlng are empty: buL Lhe real concluslon of hls argumenL ls LhaL oll fotote metopbyslcs most be expetleotlol-LhaL ls Lo say: experlmenLal, grounded ln dlrecL awareness and experlence, coupled wlLh valldlLy clalms LhaL can be teJeemeJ ln Lhe experlmenL of conLemplaLlon, and grounded ln Lhe Lhree sLrands of all Lrue knowledge accumulaLlon: ln[uncLlon/paradlgm, apprehenslon, and conflrmaLlon/re[ecLlon. vlrLually every Lhlnker from kanL onward (and followlng hls ploneerlng lead) has announced Lhe deaLh of meLaphyslcs" and Lhe deaLh of phllosophy"-from nleLzsche Lo Peldegger, from Ayer Lo WlLLgensLeln, from uerrlda Lo loucaulL, from Adorno Lo LyoLard. And ln Lhe sense of Lhe deaLh of empLy caLegorles," l agree enLlrely. 8uL Lhe real prolegomenon Lo any fuLure meLaphyslcs ls, noL LhaL Lhe endeavor ls alLogeLher dead, buL LhaL Lhe real meLaphyslcs can now, flnally, geL under way: acLual conLemplaLlve developmenL (grounded ln genulne splrlLual experlence) ls Lhe fuLure of meLaphyslcs. 1hus, kanL's aLLempL Lo abollsh knowledge [represenLaLlonal meLaphyslcs] ln order Lo make room for falLh" (ln Cod), should be compleLed a la nagar[una: abollshlng mere symbols and concepLs (absLracL or represenLaLlonal meLaphyslcs) ln order Lo make room, noL for falLh ln Cod, buL for dlrecL experlence of Cod. 1he polnL, Lhen, ls LhaL we wanL Lo Lake Lhe besL of emplrlclsm ln general: genulne knowledge musL be anchored ln valldlLy clalms of evldence and experlenLlal groundlng, and we Lhen add whaL should have been obvlous all along: Lhere ls sensory experlence, menLal experlence, and splrlLual experlence (holarchlcally lnLerwoven, so LhaL, for example, menLal experlence provlded by culLure medlaLes and colors, buL does noL creaLe ln LoLo, sensory experlence and, should lL occur, splrlLual experlence). We Lhen add one flnal polnL: don'L confuse Lhese types of experlence, and don'L use Lhe caLegorles of one Lo cover Lhe oLhers (caLegory error). 1hus, Lhe deaLh of meLaphyslcs" correcLly means Lhe deaLh of uslng menLal experlences (symbols) Lo sLand for splrlLual experlences, and Lhe real blrLh of genulne meLaphyslcs means: dlscover Lhose splrlLual experlences dlrecLly (and communally shared ln a sangha of lnLersub[ecLlve dlscourse of checks and balances, and Lhus Lhoroughly grounded ln valldlLy clalms). WPlCP 8Cu?? 1o reLurn Lo Lhe maln Loplc: l menLlon all of Lhls because 8erman, by maklng Lhe somotlc-seosoty boJy mean expetleoce lo qeoetol, can sneaklly cover Lhe enLlre specLrum of consclousness and clalm LhaL oll of lt ls teolly Lhe somaLlc-body. Pe slmply swlLches deflnlLlons whenever necessary: from somaLlc experlence Lo all experlence and back agaln. And he acLually does Lhls, by comlng up wlLh whaL he calls Lhe flve bodles." 8ased on a (raLher confused) lnLerpreLaLlon of Lhe CreaL Chaln glven by 8oberL MasLers, 8erman malnLalns LhaL Lhere are acLually flve bodles avallable Lo humans: (1) Lhe physlcal body, (2) Lhe vlLal-bloLlc body, whlch he also calls Lhe llved-body and, loosely, he says Lhls ls also Lhe mlnd", (3) Lhe deeper mlnd, asLral body, or Lrue Self, whlch he also calls soul", (4) Lhe psychlc or paranormal body, and (3) ulLlmaLe splrlL or Lhe World Soul body. 1hls, as l sald, ls a sllghLly confused readlng of whaL we have been summarlzlng as maLLer, body, mlnd, soul, and splrlL, buL elLher of Lhese verslons of Lhe CreaL Chaln wlll sufflce aL Lhls polnL. 8erman's maln conLenLlon ls LhaL all of Lhese levels of consclousness are really boJlly evenLs, he even clalms LhaL Lhey are (poLenLlally) oolvetsol because Lhey are rooLed ln deep physlologlcal processes of Lhe somaLlc reallLy (Lhe flve bodles possess whaL l have called unlversal deep sLrucLures, ln hls own way, he ls saylng LhaL Lhe CreaL Chaln ls noL a culLural arLlfacL buL ls rooLed ln unlversal deep sLrucLures). lf 8erman sLopped Lhere, LhaL would be flne, more or less. 1he LradlLlons (such as vedanLa) Lhemselves use body" ln Lhe same exLended sense of experlence," and slnce all of Lhe levels of Lhe specLrum of consclousness are expetleotlol teolltles, Lhey are ofLen referred Lo as belng bodles" or sheaLhs" (Lhe gross body, Lhe subLle body, Lhe causal body, or Lhe 1hree 8odles of 8uddha: gross, subLle, and very subLle-same general noLlon). 8uL noLlce, for Lhe LradlLlons, LhaL Lhese bodles" are noL varlaLlons on Lhe gross somotlc body: Lhe somaLlc body lLself ls slmply one of numerous bodles, mosL of whlch are compleLely nonemplrlcal, nonsensory, nonvlLal, nonblocenLrlc (l would say, vls- a-vls Lhe four quadranLs, LhaL oll of Lhese oLher bodles have upper-8lghL-quadranL cottelotes, buL oooe of Lhem can be reduced Lo Lhose correlaLes, and oooe of Lhem are merely LefL-Pand gross-vlLal enLlLles). 8uL 8erman wanLs lL boLh ways: slnce Lhe ooly body LhaL ls really real ls Lhe gross somaLlc body, all of Lhese oLher bodles musL really be . . . dlsLorLed ways Lo flll Lhe prlmary gap, Lhe baslc faulL. Cnce Lhe somaLlc body dlfferenLlaLes from Lhe world (l- 2)-whlch 8erman does noL really see as a necessary dlfferenLlaLlon on Lhe way Lo hlgher lnLegraLlon, buL prlmarlly as Lhe baslc spllL, Lhe baslc allenaLlon, Lhe baslc defaulL"-once LhaL baslc spllL" occurs, Lhen all of Lhese oLher bodles are really LwlsLed and dlsLorLed ways Lo brldge Lhe gap, Lo come Lo Lerms wlLh Lhe Crlglnal Sln (Lhe slngle" boundary), and Lhus all of Lhese oLher bodles-LhaL ls, Lhe enLlre specLrum of Ascendlng developmenLs!-are slmply and flnally unnecessary arLlfacLs." 1he enLlre dynamlc of ascenL and developmenL ls a conLorLed aLLempL Lo flll ln Lhe orlglnal gap, Lhe gap creaLed because we weren'L mlrrored enough" by Mommy aL age Lwo. LveryLhlng pasL fulcrum-2 ls Lhus fundamenLally unnecessary, and wlLh Lhls absurdlLy, 8erman Losses Lhe lasL Len Lhousand years of human developmenL lnLo Lhe garbage can. 8oLh PlLler and !esus, he Lells us, are drlven by Lhe same baslc energy. age afLer page he raLLles on royally abouL Lhe colossal sLupldlLy of Lhe enLlre human race, a sLupldlLy LhaL Louched every slngle culLural arLlfacL pasL Lhe plcklng of berrles. Cccaslonally 8erman pauses Lo grudglngly admlre some culLural producLlon (cerLaln modern arLlsLs, alchemlsLs, Lhe mysLlcal CaLhars of Lhe Alblgenslan heresy), and glves a cerLaln backhanded compllmenL Lo Lhelr accompllshmenLs, along Lhe llnes of: (1) Lhe baslc defaulL (l-2) lsn'L unlversal, because foragers don'L have lL (or much of lL), (2) buL Lhe posL-berry-plcklng world ls unlversally sLuck wlLh lL, (3) buL lL can be used cteotlvely or Jesttoctlvely (and here he glves Lhe llp-servlce Lo Lhe creaLlve use of someLhlng LhaL, afLer all, never should have happened ln Lhe flrsL place), (4) and Lhen he ends wlLh a call, neverLheless, Lo obooJoo osceot oltoqetbet and slnk back lnLo Lhe senses, emoLlng ln genulne fashlon, and sLopplng, noL Lo smell Lhe roses, buL only Lo smell Lhe roses. ln Lhe course of hls hlsLorlcal analysls, he lnadverLenLly polnLs ouL Lhe ttoe drlve of much of hlsLory, and Lhe Lrue drlve LhaL has always been reslsLed and condemned as betesy, and Lhls heresy ls oot Lhe experlence of Lhe slmple somaLlc body (as 8erman palnfully aLLempLs Lo malnLaln), buL raLher, octool expetleotlol Asceot. 8erman ouLllnes four heresles" LhaL have marked Lhe WesL: Lhe Creek (or CnosLlc, by whlch he usually means laLo/loLlnus, buL whlch also lncludes Lhe acLual mystlcol foundaLlons of !ewlsh and ChrlsLlan splrlLuallLy), Lhe Alblgenslan heresy (Lhe CaLhars of souLhern lrance, who began acLual mysLlcal pracLlces and experlences, agalnsL whlch Lhe lnqulslLlon was orlglnally lnsLlLuLed), Lhe occulL sclences (of Lhe laLer Mlddle Ages, Lhe early sclenLlsLs who were also mysLlcs, maglclans, and/or occulLlsLs of varlous flavors), and nazlsm/fasclsm (whlch ls, sorL of, LwlsLed ascenL). lnLeresLlngly, almosL all of Lhe movemenLs LhaL he llkes (from cerLaln early mysLlcal sclenLlsLs Lo Lhe CaLhars) were lnvolved ln octool Asceot (whlch he calls flve body pracLlce," whlch means roughly, spannlng Lhe specLrum), and Lhls was vlewed as betesy by Lhe Church (for all Lhe reasons we lnvesLlgaLed). And all Lhe movemenLs he especlally condemns (nazlsm) were lnvolved ln frusLraLed, LwlsLed, dlsLorLed, or falsely promlsed ascenL. 8uL never mlnd: lL's Llme Lo do away wlLh AscenL alLogeLher. noL Llme Lo dlfferenLlaLe beLween Lrue AscenL (as ln Lhe CaLhar movemenL, whlch 8erman grudglngly acknowledges was one of Lhe flnesL culLures ever devlsed ln Lhe WesL, posL-foraglng-wlse) versus frusLraLed or LwlsLed AscenL (Lhe nazls, even Lhough mosL of Lhe nazl ldeology, as 8erman hlmself lnadverLenLly makes clear, was of Lhe purely uescended, blocenLrlc, emoLlon-drenched, naLure-appeallng, eco-fasclsL varleLy). no, lL ls Llme Lo slmply do away wlLh AscenL alLogeLher. WhaL we need ls a resLoraLlon of Lhe body," a comlng Lo our senses." As l earller polnLed ouL, accordlng Lo 8erman our salvaLlon musL be prlmarlly bodlly, sensory, and somaLlc ln naLure, and Lhus whaL we really need, ln Lhls sensory-bound, pleasure-seeklng, body-graLlfylng culLure of ours ls . . . [usL a llLLle more body. 8ack Lo Lhe body, back Lo Lhe senses, back Lo Lhe purely uescended world. And lf lL seems Lo a crlLlc such as myself LhaL our culLure ls already choklng on sensory graLlflcaLlon, a 8erman wlll always respond LhaL we are noL teolly feellng our body, buL provldlng subsLlLuLes for lL. 1he sLandard uescended soluLlon: our problem ls LhaL we [usL aren'L close eoooqb Lo Lhe sensory Shadows. 8ack Lo Lhe body, back Lo Lhe senses, back Lo preconvenLlonal, egocenLrlc, naLure as lL makes me feel. A resLoraLlon of Lhe body: a cenLerlng ln dlvlne egolsm, as long as lL feels really good. 8erman uses as an example of Lhe pure love" LhaL he advocaLes as our salvaLlon: a Lype of emoLlon dlsplayed by a Lwo-year-old chlld. l belleve lL ls Lhls sorL of consclousness LhaL can properly be called Love of Llfe." erhaps, buL noL Love of CLher. 1he Lwo-year-old, however sponLaneous" and open," does noL Lake Lhe role of Lhe oLher, enLer lnLo genulne lnLersub[ecLlve care where love ls flrsL seelng Lhe oLher, puLLlng oneself lnLo Lhe shoes of Lhe oLher, and Lhen honorlng Lhe oLher, ofLen aL one's own expense, preclsely because lL promoLes Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span. 1he Lwo-year-old, locked lnLo lLs own feellngs, and noL Lroubled by LhaL nasLy 8aslc laulL LhaL lles rlghL around Lhe corner: Lhere ls Lhe reLro-8omanLlc Lden, Lhls egocenLrlc wonderfulness sLandlng down ln Lhe face of kosmlc compasslon. 8erman Lhlnks abouL all Lhls, and, Lrue Lo form, ln Lhe lasL Lwo pages of hls book he baslcally erases hls enLlre argumenL. l am lefL wlLh one llngerlng doubL, namely, LhaL l have perhaps overvalued Lhe body as a vehlcle for culLural lnLegrlLy. lor reLurnlng Lo Lhe body, ln and of lLself, as aul 8yan once polnLed ouL Lo me, ls a monlsLlc soluLlon-lL can only glve you monads." reconvenLlonal, egocenLrlc, body-bound monads: comlng Lo our senses. 1beoJote koszok, 1he volce of Lhe LarLh 8y far Lhe mosL sophlsLlcaLed reenchanLer ls 1heodore 8oszak, and ln hls hlghly readable 1be volce of tbe eottb, 8oszak seLs ouL Lo creaLe an ecopsychology" whlch would heal Lhe spllL" beLween human and naLure. 1hls ls a useful and lnLeresLlng book, preclsely because lL shows whaL happens when Lhe Lranspersonal dlmenslons are lefL ouL, and Lhe prepersonal and personal are forced Lo do double duLy: a sLraln LhaL flnally breaks Lhem boLh. Llke all reenchanLers, 8oszak Lraces Lhe rlse of Lhe personal ouL of Lhe prepersonal (whaL he also calls Lhe proLopersonal), and Lhen, lnsLead of fottbet developmenL lnLo Lhe ttoospetsoool, we are glven merely Lhe Lask of ooltloq Lhe prepersonal and Lhe personal. lnsLead of lnLegraLlng LarLh, Puman, and Peaven (body, mlnd, and splrlL, or prepersonal, personal, and Lranspersonal, wlLh Lhe undersLandlng LhaL Peaven" ls rlghL here, rlghL now, on tbls LarLh, when we llve ln ttoospetsoool awareness)-lnsLead of recommendlng LhaL overall lnLegraLlon, a balanced LarLh/body and Puman/mlnd ls slmply confused wlLh Peaven/splrlL lLself. And slnce chlldren and prlmal people dld noL dlfferenLlaLe clearly beLween LarLh and Puman, Lhey musL have been llvlng ln Peaven, and evoluLlon beyond LhaL Lden ls a 1raglc MlsLake. Lcopsychology wlll reverse Lhls Porrlflc Crlme, and we wlll all once agaln be ushered lnLo Peaven. 1he speclflc dlfflculLy wlLh Lhese Lypes of approaches ls LhaL, as we have seen, Lhe real problem (and Lhe real paLhology) ls noL Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of LarLh and Puman, buL Lhe dlssoclaLlon of LarLh and Puman. 8oszak raLher Lhoroughly confuses Lhe Lwo, whlch Lhrows hlm lnLo profound pre/Lrans fallacles, and Lhls shows up ln hls presenLaLlon as a conslderable wobbllng and amblvalence (and ofLen blaLanL self-conLradlcLlon) abouL Lhe Ldenlc" sLaLe lLself. Cn Lhe one hand he senses (and sLaLes) LhaL Lhe prlmal sLaLe was Lhoroughly parochlal (egocenLrlc/eLhnocenLrlc Lo Lhe core), yeL on Lhe oLher hand lL most be Lhe reposlLory of unlversal ecologlcal wlsdom, so he musL flgure ouL a way Lo euloglze Lhe prlmal undlfferenLlaLed sLaLe and dlsLance hlmself from lL aL Lhe same Llme. unllke many reenchanLers, 8oszak ls slmply Loo flne a Lhlnker (noL Lo menLlon LalenLed wrlLer) Lo Lry Lo gloss over or oppress Lhe obvlous facLs of evoluLlon lLself, sLarLlng wlLh lLs Lhoroughly bletotcblcol naLure. 1he unlverse reveals lLself as an emerglng hlerarchy of lnLerlocklng sysLems (a scale of forms)" (p. 133). All Lheorles of deep sysLems are bletotcblcol. 1hey map Lhe unlverse as a pytomlJ of sysLems ranked from lesser Lo greaLer, lower Lo hlgher, slmpler Lo more complex" (p. 173). Llkewlse, he clearly grasps emetqeoce, oovelty or creaLlvlLy, and Lhe facL LhaL each level ln Lhe holarchy ls an acLual ttoosceoJeoce or llbetotloo lnvolvlng lncreased relaLlve ootooomy. Lmergence ls whaL happens when we move across Lhe boundary LhaL deflnes hlerarchlcal levels, we encounLer genulne novelLy" (p. 172). Where we cross [a boundary] beLween hlgher and lower sysLem . . . Lhls asLonlshlng process by whlch each sLrucLural level ls noL only elevaLed above, buL ln a slgnlflcanL sense ls llbetoteJ from Lhe governance of Lhe nexL level down. Lach level boLh depends upon and yeL Lranscends Lhe level below" (p. 173). 1toosceoJs ooJ locloJes: whlch ls preclsely why dlfferenLlaLlon, whlch allows Lranscendence, can go Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon, whlch denles Lhe dependence upon Lhe lower and Lhus allenaLes lL (Lhe real paLhology). 8oszak doesn'L seem Lo grasp Lhls elemenLal dlfference, buL he does, noneLheless, approvlngly quoLe L. L. WhyLe ln Lhls regard: When noL paLhologlcal Lhe human person ls, llke all vlable organlsms, a dlfferenLlaLed hlerarchy, a superbly coordlnaLed sysLem of hlerarchles. nletotcblcol sttoctote ls tbe boslc feotote commoo to mottet ooJ mloJ [hls lLallcs]. When we are lll Lhere ls a fallure of coordlnaLlon aL one or more levels ln Lhese hlerarchles, and Lhe clarlflcaLlon of Lhe relaLlon of body Lo mlnd and psychosomaLlc lllness requlres a hlerarchlcal approach. CullL, hypocrlsy, hearLbreak, and so on, are leslons ln Lhe hlerarchy" (p. 181). aLhology, ln oLher words, ls due noL Lo dlfferenLlaLed hlerarchy, buL Lo leslons (dlssoclaLlons) ln Lhe naLural hlerarchles. And lL ls Lhese lesloos, noL Lhe requlred dlfferenLlaLlons, LhaL are Lhe problem: buL Lhls cruclal dlsLlncLlon ls Lhoroughly mlsslng ln 8oszak's presenLaLlon, and Lhus he proceeds Lo aLLempL Lo cure Lhe human race wlLh ecopsychology when he has noL yeL correcLly dlagnosed Lhe acLual dlsease, and, as usually happens wlLh such approaches, Lhe cure ls more frlghLful Lhan Lhe lllness. ln Lhe meanLlme, hls frank grasp of Lhe baslc LruLhs of evoluLlon leads hlm Lo an exLremely guLsy admlsslon for an eco- phllosopher: human belngs are lndeed, he says, squarely on Lop of Lhe pyramld of evoluLlon. Lach level ls shaped by Lhe needs of Lhe nexL level up. 1hls ls whaL Lhe unlverse has been dolng ln all Lhe long whlle slnce Lhe aLom and Lhe galaxy rose lnLo exlsLence. lL has been reachlng Loward flner orders of complexlLy, Loward realms so subLle and complex LhaL Lhey can be fabrlcaLed only ouL of Lhe dellcaLe dynamlcs of Lhe human lmaglnaLlon. And whaL sLands aL Lhe cresL of Lhe hlerarchy holds a crownlng poslLlon. lL embodles Lhe full poLenLlallLy of all LhaL has gone before, reallzlng lL, expresslng lL. lL occuples Lhe ftootlet of Lhe cosmos. LvoluLlon progresses as a hlerarchy of dynamlc sysLems, all of whlch culmlnaLe ln Lhe human world. Puman cenLrallLy emerges aL Lhe culmlnaLlng 'now' of a hlerarchlcally evolvlng unlverse" (pp. 183, 191, 209). 1hls human cenLrallLy" ls behlnd 8oszak's endorsemenL of Lhe AnLhroplc rlnclple. And, he says, 1he Chaln of 8elng becomes Lhe Lemporal progresslon of complex sysLems emerglng and maLurlng slnce Lhe 8lg 8ang" (p. 209). 1here ls obvlously much LruLh Lo Lhls pyramld of developmenL as 8oszak presenLs lL, Lhe evldence ls slmply Loo overwhelmlng for hlm Lo lgnore lL. 8uL aL preclsely Lhe polnL LhaL all genulne CreaL Chaln LheorlsLs would cootlooe Lhe developmenL beyond Lhe Lyplcal human sLaLe and lnLo Lhe Lranshuman, Lranspersonal, splrlLual domalns, 8oszak ls forced Lo sLop. Slnce he wlll noL acknowledge any genulnely Lranspersonal developmenL, humans ln Lhelr presenL sLaLe (Lhe average egolc-menLal sLaLe of consclousness and lLs deslres) are lefL as Lhe ctowo of evoluLlon. And preclsely because he lacks a Lranspersonal dlmenslon, and because presenL-day humans (Lhe personal domalns) apparenLly lack anyLhlng LhaL ls genulnely splrlLual, 8oszak most slLuaLe hls splrlLuallLy ln . . . Lhe prepersonal domaln. 1haL's all he has lefL ln hls pyramld. lL ls noL, as ln Lhe genulne CreaL Polarchy LheorlsLs, LhaL Lhe prepersonal and Lhe personal (LarLh and Puman, body and mlnd) have Lo be Laken up, lnLegraLed, and healed ln Lhe Lranspersonal domaln (Peaven and splrlL): raLher, our salvaLlon now lles merely ln geLLlng back beneaLh Lhe orlglnal dlfferenLlaLlon of LarLh and Puman: geLLlng back prlor Lo Lhe CreaL Crlme. 8uL Lhls presenLs grave LheoreLlcal dlfflculLles for 8oszak, because, afLer all, lL lmplles LhaL evoluLlon-Lhls drlve Loward whaL 8oszak calls hlgher, greaLer, more complex forms, wlLh each successor belng a greaLer crownlng achlevemenL" Loward whlch all lower developmenLs were almlng-lmplles LhaL all of LhaL, somehow, was operaLlve for flfLeen bllllon years, flnally produclng humans, whose own evoluLlon . . . Lhen proceeded Lo run backward. 1he prlmlLlves had lL rlghL, and everyLhlng else has been downhlll, aL whlch polnL, ln all such accounLs, Lhe laws of evoluLlon so euloglzed up Lo LhaL polnL are slmply suspended and replaced wlLh Lhe auLhor's favored ldeology abouL how Lhe world should have unfolded. AL Lhls polnL 8oszak's presenLaLlon slmply beglns Lo conLradlcL lLself on almosL every lmporLanL polnL. rlmal or Lrlbal consclousness, he says, ls lndeed parochlal and eLhnocenLrlc Lo Lhe core: Lvery group has lLs own rlLuals, lLs own words of power" (p. 76). 1here ls noLhlng qlobol or oolvetsol, he says, ln Lhe Lrlbal rlLuals, and Lrlbal healers deny LhaL Lhere are common, worldcenLrlc powers aL work: Lhe powers work only for Lhelr parLlcular Lrlbe: 1here are Lrlbal healers who have denled Lhe valldlLy of any aLLempL [Lo reach any peoples beyond Lhe parLlcular Lrlbe]" (p. 76). So much for a global humanlLy. 1hus, 8oszak says, Lrlbal sLrucLures and Lheraples" are sLubbornly parochlal." Lven Lhough Lhere ls noLhlng ln Lhe prlmal/Lrlbal sLrucLure lLself LhaL ls worldcenLrlc, 8oszak most flnd some Lrace of hls Peavenly aradlse here, because he has oowbete else Lo slLuaLe lL. And so, flagranLly conLradlcLlng hlmself, he ls forced Lo say Lhlngs llke: Sclence permeaLes Lhe llves of people everywhere ln Lhe modern world. lL ls Lhe closesL our specles has come Lo a unlversal culLure slnce Lhe days of Lhe hunLers and gaLherers" (p. 93). 1he foragers had a oolvetsol culLure? When few of Lhem even spoke Lhe same language? And when he [usL denled any unlversallLy Lo Lhem? Llkewlse, Lhe prlmal/Lrlbal consclousness per se most have been a source of ecologlcal wlsdom." And yeL hls own evldence shows, as he puLs lL, LhaL ln many lnsLances Lrlbal socleLles have abused and even rulned Lhelr hablLaL. ln prehlsLorlc Llmes, Lhe Lrlbal and nomadlc people of Lhe MedlLerranean basln overcuL and overgrazed Lhe land so severely LhaL Lhe scars of Lhe resulLlng eroslon can sLlll be seen. 1helr sacramenLal sense of naLure dld noL offseL Lhelr lgnorance of Lhe long-range damage Lhey were dolng Lo Lhelr hablLaL" (p. 226). Llkewlse, oLher prlmal socleLles have, ln Lhelr lgnorance, bllghLed porLlons of Lhelr hablLaL sufflclenLly Lo endanger Lhelr own survlval. 8lver valleys have been devasLaLed, foresLs denuded, Lhe Lopsoll worn away, buL Lhe damage was llmlLed and Lemporary" (p. 69). 1he correcL concluslon, ln oLher words, ls LhaL Lhe prlmal/Lrlbal sLrucLure per se-lo ltself-dld oot necessarlly possess ecologlcal wlsdom, lL slmply lockeJ tbe meoos Lo lnfllcL lLs lqootooce on larger porLlons of Lhe global commons. 1he maln dlfference beLween Lrlbal and modern eco-devasLaLlon ls noL presence or absence of wlsdom, buL presence of more dangerous means, where Lhe some lgnorance can now be played ouL on a devasLaLlng scale. 1he cote ls noL Lo reacLlvaLe Lhe Lrlbal form of ecologlcal lgnorance (Lake away our means), nor Lo conLlnue Lhe modern form of LhaL lgnorance (Lhe free markeL wlll save us), buL raLher, Lo evolve and develop lnLo Lhe cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc LhaL, fot tbe fltst tlme lo blstoty, can lnLegraLe a blosphere and noosphere now lrreverslbly dlfferenLlaLed. And one of Lhe leads ln Lhls area ls lndeed Lhe useful and Lrue porLlons of sysLems Lheory and ecologlcal sclence LhaL, for Lhe fltst tlme lo blstoty (as 8oszak freely concedes) can Jemoosttote LhaL Lhe lgnorance of ecology wlll klll us all. nelLher lndlssoclaLlon (Lrlbal) nor conLlnulng dlssoclaLlon (lndusLrlallzaLlon) wlll save Cala: boLh have amply demonsLraLed Lhelr lnherenL falllngs ln LhaL regard. And LhaL ls why, as 8oszak consLanLly polnLs ouL, noLhlng [referrlng Lo sclence] now sLands a beLLer chance of unlLlng us as one human famlly" (p. 93). 8uL, he also sLresses, sclence, as a raLher dry and absLracL endeavor wlll noL move Lhe hearLs and emoLlons of mllllons, and so-he ls sLlll looklng for somewbete Lo slLuaLe hls Peaven, slnce he wlll noL allow a Lranspersonal release-and so whaL ls needed ls sclence lnLegraLed wlLh . . . prlmlLlve anlmlsm. (lf any parL of an anlmlsL senslblllLy ls Lo be reclalmed, Lhe pro[ecL wlll have Lo lnLegraLe wlLh modern sclence": p. 94). And here 8oszak's pre/Lrans fallacy (wlLh all lLs self-conLradlcLlons) comes Lo Lhe fore. 8oszak wanLs Lo Lake, from prlmals and from lnfanLs, Lhe parLs of anlmlsm LhaL he llkes and Lhen jettlsoo Lhe resL (whlch he concedes are merely supersLlLlous"). And so, ln hls plck-and-choose paradlgm, he announces LhaL l Lake Lhe llberLy of passlng over pracLlces one flnds LhroughouL Lrlbal culLure (such as hexes, curses, Lhe evll eye, and human sacrlflce) LhaL are auLhenLlcally 'supersLlLlous' . . ." (p. 77). 1hose pracLlces are noL supersLlLlous, Lhey are lnLegral Lo Lhe culLural meanlng and Lhe funcLlonal flL aL Lhose sLages of developmenL, ln every way lL's a package deal. Pavlng confused dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, and Lhus llkewlse confuslng anyLhlng preraLlonal wlLh LransraLlonal release, 8oszak leads us on a euloglzlng chase Lhrough all of Lhe sLandard elevaLlonlsL ploys. Pe falls Lo see LhaL developmenL lnvolves a lesseoloq of narclsslsm (ln Lhe bad sense), and Lhus he musL euloglze anyLhlng eqoceottlc as a way ouL of eLhnocenLrlc, LoLally overlooklng preconvenLlonal versus posLconvenLlonal responses, and Lhus he musL champlon: narclsslsm ln general, anlmlsm, Lyphonlc bodyego lmpulse, blocenLrlc lmmerslon. Slnce he has no developed concepLlon of posLconvenLlonal socleLy, anyLhlng preconvenLlonal sLeps ln Lo announce our salvaLlon. lf Lhls be narclsslsm," he says, make Lhe mosL of lL." ln Lhe same way, he subscrlbes Lo Lhe" slngle boundary beLween self and oLher, a boundary LhaL prlmals and lnfanLs do noL possess, and Lhe exlsLence of whlch consLlLuLes Lhe rlmal Crlme. 1he ld" Lherefore really represenLs a unlon wlLh Lhe enLlre world" prlor Lo dlfferenLlaLlon, and we musL ln some sense geL back Lo LhaL prlmal undlfferenLlaLed sLaLe Lo heal Lhe planeL. . . . Lacklng a Peaven prlnclple, a genulnely Lranspersonal sLaLe, 8oszak musL flnd hls salvaLlon, noL ln Lhe overall lnLegraLlon of LarLh, Puman, and Peaven (body, mlnd, and splrlL), buL only ln Lhe de-dlfferenLlaLlon of LarLh and Puman-whlch drlves mosL of hls own self-conLradlcLlons. Pere ls whaL l belleve ls very Lrue and very useful abouL 8oszak's presenLaLlon, and how l belleve lL can be reconsLrucLed: 1he dlfferenLlaLlon of LarLh and Puman, body and mlnd, blosphere and noosphere, beglns (as we have seen) wlLh fulcrum-3 and ls more or less compleLed wlLh fulcrum-3. AL each of Lhose fulcrums, Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon process can go Loo far lnLo paLhologlcal dlssoclaLlon, and LhaL lndeed ls parL of Lhe paLhology of modernlLy (Lhe bad news"). And Lhe cure does lnvolve, as 8oszak lndlcaLes, a reconLacLlng" of Lhe allenaLed dlmenslons, LhaL ls, a reconLacLlng of Lhe blosphere. When 8oszak says Lhe core of Lhe ld ls acLually Lhe blosphere, l agree enLlrely (and l made [usL LhaL polnL ln chapLer 6). Lvery neurosls, l suggesLed, ls a mlnlaLure ecologlcal crlsls (represslon of blosphere by noosphere), and Lhe worldwlde ecologlcal crlsls ls ln facL a worldwlde psychoneurosls. Cn all of LhaL, l agree wlLh 8oszak compleLely. 8uL because he confuses dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, and because he does noL recognlze any crownlng" achlevemenL ln evoluLlon hlgher Lhan Lhe human mlnd (no Lranspersonal, LransmenLal SplrlL), Lhen he most look for hls salvaLlon-and ours-ln a maLure" regresslon Lo lnfanLlle anlmlsm/narclsslsm (somehow lnLegraLed wlLh modern sclence). Pe confuses preraLlonal naLure/ld wlLh LransraLlonal splrlL. And, lndeed, 8oszak concedes LhaL Lhe ld/Cala LhaL we are Lo reconLacL ls acLually a lowet sLrucLure, drlven merely by survlval lnsLlncLs. lL ls a wlsdom llke LhaL of Lhe body ln lLs sLubborn wlll Lo pursue Lhe Lasks LhaL physlcal survlval demands. ln Lhe classlc meLaphyslcal use of Lhe word, Lhls ls whaL 'soul' meanL: Lhe prlnclple of bodlly llfe LhaL only Cod could creaLe, buL whlch funcLloned aL some lowet level Lhan Lhe demands of mlnd or splrlL" (p. 139). So here we have body/ld/Cala-whlch we are supposed Lo reconLacL-belng lowet Lhan mlnd or splrlL. 8uL of splrlL we hear . . . preclsely noLhlng. Cur salvaLlon ls slmply tecootoctloq tbe lowet and llvlng wlLh LhaL. Slnce Lhe blosphere/Cala has lndeed been dlssoclaLed, l agree LhaL parL of Lhe cure ls derepresslon of Lhe shadow"-LhaL ls, tecootoctloq Lhe lower sLrucLure LhaL has been allenaLed and dlsLorLed. 8uL tecootoctloq Lhe lowet ls noL aL all Lhe same as Jlscovetloq Lhe blqbet: and lL ls ln Lhe hlgher LhaL Lhe Lrue heallng, and Lhe Lrue lnLegraLlon, can occur: lL ls ooly ln Lhe hlgher (fulcrum-3 and beyond) LhaL global consclousness, global awareness, global concepLlons, and global soluLlons can even be enLerLalned ln Lhe flrsL place. And ln Lhls, 8oszak leads us exacLly ln Lhe wrong dlrecLlon, under Lhe banner of hls pre/Lrans confuslons. 1o use my Lerms, 8oszak Lraces Lhe spllL" as lL occurs from fulcrum-3 Lo fulcrum-3 (from Lhe bodyego Lo raLlonallLy), and slnce he recognlzes no hlgher sLages, Lhe cure" musL be reconLacLlng Lhe blosphere prlor Lo fulcrum-3 and resurrecLlng Lhe maglco- anlmlsLlc prlmal sLaLe. 8uL lL ls only wlLh wotlJceottlc raLlonallLy (whlch sLarLs aL fulcrum-3) LhaL qlobol soluLlons Lo Lhe dlssoclaLlons can be concelved and lmplemenLed. 1hls global orlenLaLlon lnLenslfles aL fulcrum-6 (vlslon-loglc) and reaches a ma[or culmlnaLlon aL fulcrum-7 (Lhe Cver-Soul LhaL ls Lhe World Soul). 8uL 8oszak has already confused Lhe World Soul wlLh maglcal-anlmlsm, and so he has no reason Lo lead us forward lnLo Lhe hlgher and lnLegraLlve sLages, and so lnsLead he slmply looks for ways Lo mlx lnfanLlle anlmlsm/narclsslsm wlLh modern sclence. 8uL slnce Lhe prlmal sLrucLure (phylo and onLo) conLalned nelLher lobeteot ecologlcal wlsdom (as he clearly demonsLraLes) oot a worldcenLrlc/global orlenLaLlon (as he also demonsLraLes), whaL exacLly ls lL LhaL we are supposed Lo recapLure? 1he speclal form of prlmal lgnorance? 8elnLegraLlng Lhe lower ls mandaLory, as l fully agreed, buL relnLegraLlng Lhe lower ls noL flndlng Lhe hlgher. ?eL ln our aggresslvely uescended world, Lhls ls preclsely Lhe Lype of soluLlon LhaL ls so aLLracLlve. no hlgher, Lranspersonal growLh ls requlred: slmply fall back lnLo someLhlng we allegedly knew yesLerday. no nasLy AscenL here: leL Lhe ld be our gulde Lo paradlse, and leL blocenLrlc lmmerslon lead Lhe way Lo Lhe glorlous splrlL for all. lnsLead of cllmblng op and off Lhe pyramld ln Lranspersonal release-and acLually havlng done wlLh Lhls anLhropocenLrlc madness-leL us lnsLead cllmb rlghL back down lL, rlghL back lnLo egocenLrlc, blocenLrlc, narclsslsLlc, self-crownlng glory, Lhere Lo heal Lhe planeL. 8ecause 8oszak (and many ecophllosophers ln general) aggresslvely denles any Lruly Lranspersonal sphere, Lhe prepersonal domaln ls forced Lo serve LhaL splrlLual funcLlon. (See noLe 17 for chap. 14 for furLher reenchanLers" and Lhe lnherenL problems Lhereof.) 1be uevll fot co-komootlclsm 1here seems Lo be a general formula runnlng Lhrough mosL of Lhe reenchanLlng ecophllosophers, and lL ls some verslon of: raLlonallLy ls Lhe uevll, Cala ls Lhe Cod/dess. Cne flnds varlaLlons on Lhls sLandard formula noL only ln 8erman and 8oszak, buL ln mosL of Lhe new paradlgm" LheorlsLs, vlrLually all of Lhe ecofemlnlsLs, and vlrLually all of Lhe ecomascullnlsLs (deep ecologlsLs). And l belleve lL has a falrly slmple explanaLlon. ln up ftom Jeo l suggesLed LhaL Lhe Cod of one sLage of evoluLlon and developmenL Lends Lo become Lhe uevll of Lhe nexL. WhaL aL one sLage ls worshlped and ldenLlfled wlLh becomes aL Lhe nexL sLage preclsely LhaL whlch musL be Lranscended, foughL, and dlfferenLlaLed from: Lhe Cod of one sLage becomes Lhe uevll of Lhe nexL, becomes a remlnder of whaL we once were and should noL sllde back lnLo, LhaL sllde belng sln," devoluLlon, regresslon, reLreaL. 1hus, Lhe an" Cod of Lhe pagan rellglons (half human, half anlmal) became Lhe acLual personlflcaLlon of Lhe uevll for monoLhelsm. And aL Lhe nexL sLage, when 8eason became Lhe Cod of Lhe LnllghLenmenL, Lhe Cod of monoLhelsLlc and myLhlc rellglons became Lhe uevll oppresslve of free LhoughL and full human poLenLlal-Lhe Cod of myLhlc rellglons now had Lo be foughL, overcome, Lranscended: lL became Lhe uevll of Lhe LnllghLenmenL. Llkewlse, slnce Lhe posLmodern world ls beglnnlng Lo move lnLo posLraLlonal modes, Lhe Llme ls rlpe for 8eason Lo sLarL looklng llke Lhe greaL uevll. 1haL reason ldeally should be Lranscended ooJ locloJeJ doesn'L really maLLer: whaL Lends Lo hlL people flrsL ls Lhe dlfflculL Lask of acLually dlfferenLlaLlng from a sLrucLure whlch generaLlons revered as Lhe ulvlne lLself-Lhe Cod of 8eason-and ln LhaL dlfflculL dlfferenLlaLlon, flne dlsLlncLlons abouL Lranscend and lnclude" are noL ofLen LranslaLed lnLo mass consclousness: reason sLarLs Lo Lhe look llke Lhe greaL uevll. 8uL lf reason has become Lhe greaL uevll, where ls Lhe new Cod? lf Lhe World Soul (Lhe sLrucLure acLually awalLlng Lhe posLraLlonal recepLlon) ls slmply coofoseJ wltb Colo, Lhen Cala becomes Lhe new Cod/dess, Lhe new SplrlL, and we have Lhe sLandard eco-formula: analyLlc paLrlarchal raLlonallLy ls Lhe uevll, Cala ls Lhe Cod/dess. Whlch Lhen LranslaLes lnLo a Lhousand derlvaLlve forms: reason ls analyLlc and dlvlslve, Cala ls hollsLlc and wholeness, reason ls nasLy paLrlarchy, wholeness ls sweeL maLrlarchy, reason ls auLhorlLarlan, Cala/wholeness ls freedom, and so on Lhrough a serles of duallsms meanL Lo announce Lhe new Age. ln oLher words, l belleve LhaL ln many cases a good and Lrue lnLulLlon of Lhe World Soul ls belng fllLered Lhrough whaL ls ln facL Lhe old sLrucLure of Lhe Lco-pole of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, Lhe flaLland embrace of emplrlcal mononaLure (or Lhe flaLland sysLem of Cala) as Cod (or SplrlL or Coddess). 1hls ls why mosL of Lhese Lheorles do noL escape Lhe flaLland paradlgm-whlch ls why Lhey so easlly confuse greaL span wlLh greaL depLh and Lhus coo embrace Cala as belng more whole," lnsLead of seelng LhaL lL ls slmply blgger buL more shallow: confuslng blgger wlLh beLLer ls Lhe flaLland paradlgm. And all of Lhls plays dlrecLly lnLo Lhe sLandard teqtesslve (and reenchanLlng") Lrend of many of Lhe Lco-approaches: analyLlc reason ls slmply condemned, for Lhe mosL parL (a cerLaln llp-servlce aslde) and noL also lncluded. 1hese approaches are Lherefore consLanLly Lendlng Lo go preraLlonal, as we have repeaLedly seen (e.g., 8erman and 8oszak). And slnce Cala per se (Lhe blosphere per se) ls regresslve as well, we Lhus have Lhe sLandard regresslve sllde lnLo an egocenLrlc/geocenLrlc sLance LhaL marks so many of Lhese approaches. 1he ways ln whlch oLherwlse good and Lrue splrlLual lnLulLlons geL unpacked" ln less Lhan graceful ways-ways LhaL acLually aborL Lhe orlglnal lnLulLlon-are Lhe Loplc of Lhe nexL chapLer. 33. . 8leff, Luphorlon, quoLed ln Love[oy, p. 298. More Lhan one commenLaLor has polnLed ouL Lhe slmllarlLy of Pegel's sysLem wlLh LhaL of roclus, loLlnus's mosL brllllanL successor. 34. 1llllch, nlstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt, pp. 488-89. 33. 5ystem of ttoosceoJeotol lJeollsm was publlshed ln 1800, Otlqlo of specles ln 1839. 36. CoplesLon, vol.7, p. 141. 37. Love[oy, p. 320. 38. lbld., pp. 262, 198. 39. 1here are numerous excellenL dlscusslons of Lhe unLenablllLy of naLural selecLlon as Lhe prlmary mechanlsm of evoluLlon. Cne of Lhe besL, for several reasons, ls LhaL glven by varela, 1hompson, and 8osch ln 1be emboJleJ mloJ. lor a dlscusslon of Lhelr enacLlve paradlgm, see noLes 49 and 32 for chap. 2, noLes 13 and 43 for chap. 4, and noLe 1 for chap. 14. See also SLuarL kauffman's brllllanL 1be otlqlos of otJet. CPA1L8 14. 1PL unACklnC Cl CCu 1. nor, l belleve, ls SplrlL's llLeral lnLerpreLaLlon as no-self" very helpful elLher. 1be 8oJJblst uocttloe of No-5elf As ls well known, 1heravada 8uddhlsm (and Lhe general Abhldharma docLrlne, Lhe oldesL of Lhe 8uddhlsL schools, unklndly referred Lo by laLer schools as Plnayana, or Lesser vehlcle") has, as one of lLs cenLral Leachlngs, Lhe docLrlne of oootto (or oootmoo ln SanskrlL), whlch llLerally means no-self." 1he menLal sLream ls sald Lo be composed of flve aggregaLes (skooJbos), none of whlch ls or has a self, buL LogeLher Lhese aggregaLes glve rlse Lo Lhe llluslon of a separaLe, grasplng, deslrlng self. A more careful medlLaLlve analysls of Lhe mlnd sLream, lL ls sald, wlll reveal LhaL Lhe skandhas, alLhough real enough ln Lhemselves, do noL consLlLuLe a real and endurlng self (buL are lnsLead slmply dlscreLe and momenLary elemenLs of experlence), and Lhus Lhls llberaLlng dlscovery ls slmulLaneously a release from Lhe paln (Jobkbo) of defendlng an enLlLy LhaL lsn'L even Lhere. 1hls no-self or oootmoo docLrlne was parLlcularly leveled agalnsL Lhe 8rahmanlcal and Samkhya docLrlnes of a permanenL, unchanglng, absoluLe Sub[ecL of experlence (urusha, ALman). And agalnsL Lhe ALman LradlLlon, Lhe AnaLman docLrlne was wlelded wlLh much polemlcal force: ln place of subsLance, flux, ln place of self, no-self, ln place of unlLary, plurallsLlc, ln place of coheslve, dlscreLe. 1hus, Lhe Abhldharma accepLed Lhe reallLy of momenLary, plurallsLlc, dlscreLe, and aLomlsLlc elemenLs (Jbotmos) and accepLed Lhelr causal effecLs as real (codependenL orlglnaLlon). 1hls causal (karmlc) llnkage allows Lhe dlscreLe momenLary sLaLes Lo glve rlse Lo Lhe llluslon of an endurlng, coheslve self, much as whlrllng a flashllghL aL nlghL glves Lhe llluslon of a real clrcle. 1hls coheslvely felL buL lllusory self ls drlven by fear, grasplng, and lgnorance (parLlcularly Lhe lgnorance of Lhe reallLy of momenLary sLaLes). Powever Lrue aspecLs of LhaL docLrlne mlghL be, lL noneLheless generaLed conslderable conLroversy ln subsequenL 8uddhlsL developmenL. vlrLually all ensulng schools of 8uddhlsm (Lhe Mahayana, or CreaL vehlcle," and Lhe va[rayana, or 1anLrlc vehlcle) accepLed Lhe Abhldharma as a sLarLlng polnL, buL none of Lhem remalned wlLh lL: none of Lhem accepLed lL as Lhe flnal word, so Lo speak. ln facL, Lhe Abhldharma docLrlne as a compleLe and adequaLe sysLem was aggresslvely aLLacked, botb ln lLs capaclLy Lo cover relaLlve or pbeoomeool reallLy ooJ ln lLs ablllLy Lo lndlcaLe obsolote reallLy. Some schools, ln facL, would clalm LhaL Lhe Abhldharma, Laken ln and by lLself, fundamenLally mlsundersLood botb llluslon ooJ reallLy, boLh relaLlve and absoluLe LruLh: wrong on all counLs, as lL were. 1hus, nagar[una launched a devasLaLlng aLLack on Lhe ulLlmaLe reallLy of Lhe skooJbos and Jbotmos Lhemselves (Lhey have apparenL reallLy only), and Lhe general ?ogachara and va[rayana LradlLlon lambasLed Lhe skooJbo sysLem because lL only dealL wlLh coarse"-level reallLy (Lhe gross realm, or nlrmanakaya) and dld noL cover Lhe subLle" and Lhe very subLle" realms (whaL we have called Lhe subLle and Lhe causal, and whlch va[rayana ldenLlfled wlLh Lhe Sambhogakaya and uharmakaya). Plgher sLages of medlLaLlve developmenL, va[rayana clalmed, would dlsclose Lhese subLle and very subLle dlmenslons of consclousness (parLlcularly ln Lhe ooottotoyoqotootto LradlLlon, whlch we wlll dlscuss ln a momenL), and Lhe Abhldharma sysLem, Lhey clalmed, was compleLely lnadequaLe ln Lhls regard: lL covered only Lhe nlrmanakaya (gross-form-orlenLed or sensorlmoLor-orlenLed consclousness). Cne would Lhlnk LhaL as a 8uddhlsL, nagar[una would busy hlmself wlLh Lhe sLandard aLLacks on Lhe Samkhya and ALman LradlLlons, ln facL, hls maln LargeL ls Lhe Abhldharma of early 8uddhlsm. nagar[una hlmself applled Lhe dlalecLlc [crlLlcal analysls] agalnsL Lhe Abhldharmlka sysLem-Lhe docLrlne of LlemenLs [Jbotmos]. 1he MoJbyomlko kotlkos [one of nagar[una's ma[or works] are a susLalned aLLempL Lo evolve Lhe yunyaLa [LmpLlness] docLrlne ouL of a ctltlclsm of Lhe reallsLlc and dogmaLlc lnLerpreLaLlons of early 8uddhlsm. Pls crlLlclsm of Lhe Samkhya and oLher sysLems of Lhe ALma LradlLlon ls rare and lmpllclL" (MurLl, p. 163). 1. 8. v. MurLl's 1be ceottol lbllosopby of 8oJJblsm, alLhough noL wlLhouL lLs dlfflculLles and occaslonal lnaccuracles, ls noneLheless a classlc ln Lhe fleld, and lL sLlll manages Lo plnpolnL several cruclal facLors ln Lhls area (many scholars, as uavld Loy polnLs ouL, feel LhaL MurLl's sLudy remalns perhaps Lhe besL work ln Lngllsh on Lhe sub[ecL": p. 39). WlLhouL endorslng all of MurLl's concluslons, l would neverLheless llke Lo draw on Lhose aspecLs of hls presenLaLlon LhaL remaln valld. And all of Lhls wlll evenLually brlng us Lo Lhe genulne problems LhaL have arlsen ln lnLerpreLlng SplrlL ln Lerms of a no-self" docLrlne. 8ecause above all, for nagar[una, absoluLe reallLy (LmpLlness) ls radlcally nondual (oJvoyo)-ln lLself lL ls oeltbet self nor no- self, nelLher otmoo nor oootmoo, nelLher permanenL nor momenLary/flux. Pls dlalecLlcal analysls ls deslgned Lo show LhaL all such caLegorles, belng profoundly duallsLlc, make sense only ln Lerms of each oLher and are Lhus noLhlng ln Lhemselves (Lhe LmpLlness of all vlews and all phenomena). 1hls dlalecLlcal analysls applles Lo all Lhlngs, all LhoughLs, all caLegorles: Lhey are all muLually dependenL upon each oLher and Lhus are noLhlng ln Lhemselves. 1hey Lherefore have a telotlve or phenomenal reallLy, buL noL obsolote or oocooJltlooeJ reallLy (whlch ls LmpLlness dlsclosed ln nondual ptojoo, whlch ls noL a reallLy aparL from Lhe relaLlve world of lorm, buL ls lLself Lhe LmpLlness or Suchness of all lorms). ln Lhe ltojoopotomlto and Lhe llLeraLure of Lhe Madhyamlka [Lhe school founded by nagar[una], Lhe one baslc ldea LhaL ls relLeraLed oJ oooseom ls LhaL Lhere ls no change, no orlglnaLlon, no cessaLlon, no comlng ln or golng ouL, Lhe real ls nelLher one, nor many, nelLher aLman nor anaLman, lL ls as lL ls always. CrlglnaLlon, decay, eLc. [codependenL orlglnaLlon of Abhldharma], are lmaglned by Lhe unlnformed, Lhey are speculaLlons lndulged ln by Lhe lgnoranL. 1he real ls uLLerly devold (yunya [LmpLy]) of Lhese and oLher concepLual consLrucLlons, lL ls LranscendenL Lo LhoughL and can be reallzed only ln non-dual knowledge-ra[na or lnLulLlon, whlch ls Lhe AbsoluLe lLself. We are also expressly warned noL Lo conslder yunyaLa as anoLher Lheory, Lhe uharmaLa [Lhe 8eal] as oLher Lhan Lhe phenomenal world. 1he AbsoluLe ln one sense ttoosceoJs phenomena as ls devold of emplrlcallLy, and ln a vlLal sense ls lmmooeot or ldenLlcal wlLh lL as Lhelr reallLy. 1he buLL of Lhe crlLlclsm ls Lhe dogmaLlc speculaLlons (Lhe reallLy of skandha, dhaLu, ayaLana, eLc.) of Lhe earller 8uddhlsm, Lhe skandhas are oot lmpetmooeot, buL Lhey are yunyaLa, lacklng a naLure of Lhelr own. raLlLya-SamuLpada ls noL Lhe tempotol [and causal] sepoeoce of enLlLles [as ln Lhe Abhldharma] buL Lhelr esseotlol JepeoJeoce"-LhaL ls, each enLlLy depends on Lhe oLhers and Lhus ls ootbloq lo ltself: lL ls oot oltlmotely teol-lL belongs Lo oppeotooce ooly. 1hus, Lhe enLlre docLrlne of no-self and dependenL orlglnaLlon recelves a deeper lnLerpreLaLlon as oppeotooce, and by a relenLless dlalecLlc lL ls shown LhaL noLhlng escapes Lhls predlcamenL" (p. 86, my lLallcs). 1hus, whaL for Lhe Abhldharma were marks of Lhe real (lmpermanence, no-self, and flux) are all shown by nagar[una Lo be motks of tbe ooteol: Lhey are duallsLlc noLlons dependenL upon Lhelr opposlLes, and Lhus are noLhlng ln Lhemselves. And dependenL orlglnaLlon-Lhe noLlon of Lemporal causal llnkage beLween phenomena-ls shown by nagar[una Lo mean LhaL no phenomenon ls lndependenL, uncondlLloned, self-generaLlng, raLher, Lhey are all motoolly JepeoJeot, whlch looks llke a nlce sysLems Lheory, and lndeed lL ls, buL nagar[una Lhen adds Lhe cruclal polnL: motool JepeoJeoce ls o motk of tbe ooteol, slnce Lhe dependenL enLlLles are noLhlng ln Lhemselves-Lhey have apparenL or relaLlve reallLy only, noL oocooJltlooeJ or absoluLe reallLy: phenomena are unreal or zunya because Lhey are dependenL, muLual dependence ls a mark of Lhe unreal" (p. 106). nor can we escape Lhls by Laklng dependenL orlglnaLlon lLself as absoluLely real, because, says nagar[una, Lhe same argumenL can be applled Lo Lhe setles ltself: lf all Lhlngs dependenLly orlglnaLe, does orlglnaLlon lLself orlglnaLe? lf so, lL ls relaLlve and ooteol, lf noL, lL conLradlcLs lLself, and ls Lhus ooteol: elLher way, unreal. 1hus, for nagar[una, all vlews, of whaLever naLure, are smashed by Lhe dlalecLlc. 8elaLlvlLy or muLual dependence ls a mark of Lhe unreal. no phenomenon, no ob[ecL of knowledge, escapes Lhls unlversal relaLlvlLy. 1aLLva or Lhe 8eal ls someLhlng ln lLself, self-evldenL and self-exlsLlng. Cnly Lhe AbsoluLe as Lhe uncondlLloned ls real, and for LhaL very reason lL cannoL be concelved as exlsLence or non-exlsLence, aLma or anaLma" (p. 139). And, accordlng Lo nagar[una (and perfecLly a la AugusLlne) we coo crlLlclze all parLlal vlews because we have, ln our own awareness, access Lo pra[na, or nondual erfecLlon of Wlsdom, agalnsL whlch lmperfecLlons sLand ouL llke a sore Lhumb. (lor a furLher dlscusslon of nagar[una's dlalecLlc, see noLe 4 below.) AbsoluLe reallLy, Lhen, ls nelLher self nor no-self, nelLher subsLance nor flux, nelLher permanenL nor lmpermanenL, nor any oLher comblnaLlon of such duallsLlc noLlons, buL raLher ls Lhe nondual LmpLlness of all phenomena, all vlews, all sLances. As Lhe kotookoto 5otto (one of Lhe early Mahayana LexLs) puLs lL: 1haL everyLhlng ls permanenL ls one exLreme, LhaL everyLhlng ls LranslLory ls anoLher. . . . LhaL 'aLman ls' ls one end, LhaL 'aLman ls noL' ls anoLher, buL Lhe Mlddle Way beLween Lhe aLma and anaLma vlews ls Lhe lnexpresslble." ls LmpLlness. 1hus, for Lhe Madhyamlka, Lhe 8eal ls nelLher one nor many, nelLher permanenL nor momenLary, nelLher sub[ecL nor ob[ecL . . . , nelLher aLma nor anaLma. 1hese are relaLlve Lo each oLher and are equally unreal. nagar[una says: 'lf Lhe apprehenslon of Lhe lmpermanenL as permanenL ls llluslon, why ls Lhe apprehenslon of Lhe lndeLermlnaLe as lmpermanenL noL llluslon as well?'" (p. 239). 1he quesLlon Lhen arlses, lf no-self and lmpermanence do oot acLually apply Lo Lhe AbsoluLe (whlch ls nelLher self nor no-self, nor boLh nor nelLher, eLc.), do Lhe noLlons of lmpermanence and no-self apply Lo Lhe pbeoomeool sLream lLself (as malnLalned by Lhe Abdhldharma)? lf no-self ls noL obsolotely Lrue, ls lL aL leasL telotlvely Lrue? lf lL does noL apply Lo noumenon, does lL aL leasL apply Lo phenomena? And here Lhe docLrlne fares no beLLer. nagar[una (and several of hls followers) demonsLraLe LhaL on Lhe pbeoomeool level, Lhe sLaLes (skandhas) coooot exlst wltboot o self, and Lhe self coooot exlst wltboot tbe stotes: Lhey are muLually dependenL. Llkewlse, subsLance does noL exlsL wlLhouL modes or flux, and vlce versa. nelLher Lhe sLaLes ln Lhemselves (wlLhouL a self), nor Lhe momenLary modes, can even offer an oJepoote exploootloo of pbeoomeoo! lf we conflne ourselves Lo Lhe phenomenal polnL of vlew, lf we propose merely Lo glve a LranscrlpLlon of whaL obLalns ln everyday experlence, we musL accepL, besldes Lhe sLaLes or momenLs, Lhe acLlvlLy and Lhe agenL. lrom Lhe noumenal polnL of vlew of Lhe uncondlLloned LruLh, Lhe momenLs Loo are as unreal as Lhe acLlvlLy whlch Lhe earller 8uddhlsm rlghLly re[ecLs. 1he correcL Madhyamlka sLandpolnL ls LhaL modes by Lhemselves cannoL offer an adequaLe explanaLlon of phenomena. SubsLance Loo musL be accepLed" (p. 187). Llkewlse for Lhe self as coheslve agenL ln Lhe phenomenal sLream: nagar[una expllclLly says LhaL Lhere can be no acL wlLhouL an agenL or vlce versa, he calls Lhem lgnoranL of Lhe Lrue meanlng of Lhe 8uddha's Leachlng who Lake Lhe reallLy of Lhe aLman only or of Lhe sLaLes as separaLe from lL, lf Lhere ls no aLman aparL from Lhe sLaLes, Lhere are no sLaLes Loo aparL from Lhe aLman. ln facL, Lhe enLlre Madhyamlka poslLlon ls developed by a LrenchanL crlLlclsm of Lhe one-slded modal vlew [selfless flux] of Lhe Abhldharmlka sysLem, by belng allve Lo tbe otbet slJe of tbe plctote epoolly exblblteJ ln Lhe emplrlcal sphere [my lLallcs]. ln Lhe same sLraln ChandraklrLl [a prlnclpal successor of nagar[una] complalns LhaL Lhe Abhldharmlkas have noL glven an adequaLe plcLure of Lhe emplrlcal even. 'lf lL ls soughL Lo deplcL Lhe emplrlcally real Lhen besldes momenLary sLaLes, Lhe acLlvlLy and Lhe agenL Loo musL be admlLLed.' ChandraklrLl shows, ln a susLalned crlLlclsm of Lhe vlew of mere aLLrlbuLes or sLaLes wlLhouL any underlylng self ln whlch Lhey lnhere, LhaL Lhls does vlolence Lo common modes of LhoughL and language, lL falls as a correcL plcLure of Lhe emplrlcal, nor [as we have already seen] can lL be Laken as Lrue of Lhe uncondlLloned real"-wtooq oo botb cooots, as lL were (pp. 249-30). 1hese crlLlclsms polnLed up Lhe lnadequacy of a sLream of elemenLs Lo accounL for Lhe baslc facLs of experlence, memory, moral responslblllLy, splrlLual llfe, eLc.: Lhe sLaLes (skandhas) cannoL compleLely subsLlLuLe Lhe aLman, a permanenL synLheLlc unlLy musL be accepLed" (as a relaLlve LruLh, p. 81). Cn Lhe modal vlew [oootmo, no-self], Lhere are Lhe dlfferenL momenLary sLaLes only, Lhere ls no prlnclple of unlLy. 8uL menLal llfe ls lnexpllcable wlLhouL Lhe unlLy of Lhe self" (p. 203). 8uL agaln, on Lhe phenomenal plane, Lhls does noL mean LhaL Lhe self-vlew alone covers Lhe scene: 1he self of Lhe [early] 8rahmanlcal sysLems ls a bare colorless unlLy berefL of dlfference and change, whlch alone lmparL slgnlflcance Lo lL." 8aLher, accordlng Lo nagar[una, Lhe self has no meanlng aparL from Lhe sLaLes . . . , and Lhere are no sLaLes aparL from Lhe self. 1he Lwo are muLually dependenL"-and Lherefore, boLh are phenomenally real buL ulLlmaLely unreal, ulLlmaLely LmpLy (pp. 204-6, 249). ln shorL, botb Lhe coheslve self and Lhe momenLary sLaLes are relaLlvely real, buL botb are ulLlmaLely LmpLy: Lhe absoluLe ls nelLher self nor no-self (nor boLh nor nelLher), nelLher momenLary nor permanenL (nor boLh nor nelLher), buL ls raLher Lhe 1haLness" dlsclosed by nondual ra[na or prlmordlal awareness, a 1haLness" whlch, belng radlcally unquallflable, cannoL be capLured ln any concepLs whaLsoever. (We would say: Lhe slqolflet LmpLlness" can only be undersLood ln Lhose who possess Lhe developmenLal slqolfleJ LhaL ls ra[na, whereupon Lhe acLual tefeteot LmpLlness" ls Jltectly petcelveJ as Lhe LmpLlness of all forms whaLsoever, and noL Lhe prlvlleglng of one form or concepL, such as no-self, over lLs opposlLe, such as self. 8uL Lhe tefeteot of Lhe slgnlfler LmpLlness" becomes obvloos only upon Lhe awakenlng of ra[na, and ra[na ls noL an ldea or a Lheory buL an lojooctloo or a paradlgm: lL beglns lLs ptoctlce by caLegorlcally re[ecLlng every concelvable caLegory of LhoughL Lo embrace Lhe 8eal, or uharmaLa. 1hls caLegorlcal re[ecLlon-Lhe dlalecLlc-creaLes an openlng or clearlng ln awareness ln whlch Lhe prlmordlal and unobsLrucLed naLure of Lhe 8eal can shlne forLh nonduallsLlcally as Lhe Suchness of all phenomena. And all of tbose words are neverLheless sLlll slqolflets whose acLual tefeteots are dlsclosed ooly ln LhaL openlng" or clearlng," and prlor Lo Lhe dlscovery of LhaL openlng or LmpLlness, Lhey are all equally off Lhe mark. Lven Lhe phrase LmpLlness ls free of LhoughL concepLs" would lLself be denled: LhaL's [usL more words. Where ls Lhe acLual referenL? Where ls your Crlglnal lace rlghL now?) Scholars are sLlll argulng abouL Lhe exacL lnfluence of nagar[una on subsequenL LasLern LhoughL, buL mosL agree LhaL Lhe nondual Madhyamlka was a profound revoluLlon LhaL, Lo one degree or anoLher, lnfluenced vlrLually all succeedlng schools of Aslan LhoughL (elLher dlrecLly or lndlrecLly). 8ecause LmpLlness was noL a realm opott from or dlvorced from oLher realms, buL raLher was Lhe reallLy or Suchness or LmpLlness of oll realms, Lhen nlrvana was noL, lndeed could noL be, soughL aparL from Lhe phenomenal world. 1hls, lndeed, was revoluLlonary. 1hus Lhe almosL purely Ascendlng and CnosLlc benL of Lhe Samkhya, ?oga, and Abhldharma sysLems (nlrvana as Lhe exLlncLlon or uLLer cessaLlon of samsara) gave way Lo a varleLy of nondual sysLems (?ogachara, vedanLa, 1anLra), all of whlch malnLalned, ln Lhelr varlous ways, LhaL LmpLlness ls noL oLher Lhan lorm, lorm ls noL oLher Lhan LmpLlness"-Lhe unlon and lnLegraLlon of Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng aLhs, of Wlsdom and Compasslon, of Lros and Agape, of AscenL Lo Lhe Cne (formless nlrvana) perfecLly and fully embraclng Lhe world of Lhe Many (samsara and lorm). ln all of Lhese developmenLs, a aLh of Ascendlng (and AsceLlc) lotlflcotloo and keoooclotloo (where defllemenLs are exLermlnaLed ln cessaLlon) gave way Lo lotbs of 1toosfotmotloo (where Lhe defllemenLs are seen Lo be Lhe seeJs of cottespooJloq wlsJoms, slnce nlrvana and samsara are ulLlmaLely noL-Lwo: Lhe Ascendlng wlsdom has a uescendlng compasslon, and Lhus Lhe defllemenLs-lndeed, Lhe enLlre manlfesL domalns-are seen Lo be exptessloos of Lhe AbsoluLe, noL Jettoctloos from lL: Lhe lnLegraLlon of Ascendlng and uescendlng, LmpLlness and lorm, Wlsdom and Compasslon). And Lhese ln Lurn ofLen gave way Lo lotbs of 5elf-llbetotloo, where Lhe defllemenLs are seen Lo be olteoJy self-llberaLed [usL as Lhey are, and [usL as Lhey arlse, slnce Lhelr baslc naLure ls olwoys olteoJy prlmordlal urlLy (pure LmpLlness ln pure resence: Lhe radlcal and olteoJy spootooeoosly occompllsbeJ unlon of LmpLlness and awareness/clarlLy/form: Lhe olteoJy occompllsbeJ unlon of AscenL and uescenL: LmpLlness and Awareness, LmpLlness and ClarlLy, and LmpLlness and lorm). And all of Lhls, ln a sense, was opened up by nagar[una. Already ln Lhe Madhyamlka we flnd Lhe Lwln prlnclples of ra[na (Wlsdom) and karuna (Compasslon), Lhe former seelng LhaL all lorms are LmpLy, Lhe laLLer seelng LhaL LmpLlness manlfesLs as all lorm, and Lhus each and every lorm ls Lo be LreaLed wlLh care and compasslon and reverence. (Cf. Lhe whole dlscusslon of Lhls Lheme of ascendlng Wlsdom-Lhe Cood-and descendlng Compasslon-Coodness-ln chapLers 9 and 10.) yunyaLa [LmpLlness] and karuna [Compasslon] are Lhe Lwo prlnclpal feaLures of Lhe 8odhlclLLa [awakened mlnd]. yunyaLa ls ra[na, [Wlsdom or] lnLulLlon, and ls ldenLlcal wlLh Lhe AbsoluLe. karuna ls Lhe acLlve prlnclple of compasslon LhaL glves concreLe expresslon Lo LmpLlness ln phenomena . . . , a free phenomenallzlng acL of grace and compasslon [uescenL/lnvoluLlon or manlfesLaLlon lLself as an acL of Agape/Compasslon]. lf Lhe flrsL [ra[na] ls LranscendenL and looks Lo Lhe AbsoluLe [Lros], Lhe second [karuna] ls fully lmmanenL and looks down Loward phenomena [Agape, Lhus LogeLher: AscenL and uescenL, evoluLlon and lnvoluLlon]. 1he flrsL ls Lhe unlversal reallLy of whlch no deLermlnaLlons can be predlcaLed [LmpLlness dlsclosed ln and as ra[na], lL ls beyond Lhe duallLy of good and evll, love and haLred, vlrLue and vlce, Lhe second ls goodness, love and pure acL. 8uddha and Lhe 8odhlsaLLva are Lhus amphlblous belngs wlLh one fooL ln Lhe AbsoluLe and Lhe oLher ln phenomena [nondual]. 1hey are vlrLuous and qooJ [Lros] and Lhe source of all qooJoess ln Lhe world [Agape]. WlLh lLs phenomenallzlng aspecL, karuna, Lhe formless AbsoluLe (yunya) manlfesLs lLself as Lhe concreLe world. 8uL Lhe forms nelLher exhausL nor do Lhey brlng down Lhe AbsoluLe. lL ls Lhrough Lhese forms agaln LhaL lndlvlduals ascend and flnd Lhelr consummaLlon wlLh Lhe unlversal 8eal" (pp. 264, 109). 1hls profoundly nondual concepLlon had lLs equally profound lmpacL. yunyaLa ls Lhe plvoLal concepL of 8uddhlsm. 1he enLlre 8uddhlsL phllosophy Lurned on Lhls. 1he earller reallsLlc phase of 8uddhlsm, wlLh lLs re[ecLlon of subsLance and uncrlLlcal erecLlon of a Lheory of elemenLs, was clearly a preparaLlon for Lhe fully crlLlcal and self-consclous dlalecLlc of nagar[una. noL only ls Lhe ?ogachara ldeallsm [LmpLy Consclousness] based on Lhe expllclL accepLance of yunyaLa, buL Lhe crlLlcal and absoluLlsL [nondual] Lrend ln Lhe vedanLa LradlLlon [of Caudapada and Shankara and 8amana Maharshl] ls also Lraceable Lo Lhls" (p. 39). And llkewlse Lhe rlse of 1anLra. AlLhough general LanLrlc pracLlces have a long hlsLory, noneLheless lL ls yunyaLa LhaL provlded Lhe meLaphyslcal basls for Lhe rlse of 1anLra"-largely because, as l lndlcaLed, nlrvana was no longer concelved as belng away from samsara (and body and sex and flesh and Lhe senses ln general) buL raLher was Lo be found wlLhln Lhem. lL ls Lhe yunya of Lhe Madhyamlka LhaL made 1anLrlclsm posslble. lL may Lhus be sald Lo have lnlLlaLed a new phase ln 8uddhlsL phllosophy and rellglon, Lhls had lLs due lnfluence on Lhe correspondlng phase on Lhe 8rahmanlcal slde." As 8haLLacharya puL lL, 1here ls hardly a 1anLra ln Plndu llLeraLure whlch ls noL Llnged wlLh 8uddhlsLlc ldeas, lL ls no exaggeraLlon Lo say LhaL some 1anLras of Plndus are enLlrely 8uddhlsL ln orlgln. lL ls Lhus amply proved LhaL Lhe 8uddhlsL 1anLras greaLly lnfluenced Lhe Plndu 1anLrlc llLeraLure" (all quoLes p. 109). 1hese are a few of Lhe reasons LhaL l earller llkened nagar[una's lnfluence ln Lhe LasL Lo LhaL of loLlnus ln Lhe WesL: Lhey broughL Lhe nondual revoluLlon. erhaps Lhe ma[or dlfference beLween Lhe Madhyamlka and Lhe subsequenL non-dual LradlLlons whlch lL sparked ls LhaL Madhyamlka (as rasanglka) remalned Lhe pure vlo oeqotlvo school: no concepLs aL all (lncludlng Lhe concepL of no concepLs) could be applled Lo Lhe 8eal, whlch ls whaL" ls dlsclosed ln ra[na, noL ln concepLs or ldeas (l'll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL: lL was prlmarlly a sLaLemenL abouL slgnlflers and referenLs and correspondlng ln[uncLlons/paradlgms). LmpLlness was noL a concepLual vlew, buL Lhe mptloess of oll vlews, whlch lLself ls oot oootbet vlew. As nagar[una LrenchanLly puL lL, LmpLlness of oll vlews ls prescrlbed by Lhe 8uddhas as Lhe way of llberaLlon. locotoble loJeeJ are Lhey who Lake LmpLlness lLself as a vlew. lL ls as lf one were Lo ask, when Lold LhaL Lhere ls noLhlng Lo glve, Lo be glven LhaL noLhlng" (p. 163). 1hus ulLlmaLely LmpLlness Lakes no sldes ln a concepLual argumenL, LmpLlness ls noL a vlew LhaL can dlslodge oLher vlews, lL cannoL be broughL ln Lo supporL one vlew as opposed Lo anoLher: lL ls Lhe LmpLlness of all vlews, perlod. 1he relaLlve merlLs (or relaLlve LruLh) of varlous vlews are Lo be declded on Lhelr own Lerms. 1he subsequenL nondual schools would, ln varlous ways, relax Lhe purlLy of Lhls lnLense vlo oeqotlvo and, also ln varlous ways, would look for phenomenal metopbots for LmpLlness. AdvalLa vedanLa and ?ogachara/vl[nanavada (Consclousness-only) schools boLh reach advalLlsm [nonduallsm]-Lhe advalLa of ure 8elng (8rahman) and Lhe advayaLa of ure Consclousness (vl[napLl- maLraLa) by re[ecLlng appearance Lhrough dlalecLlcal meLhods-Lhrough negaLlon. 1helr AbsoluLes parLake of Lhe form of Lhe Madhyamlka yunyaLa ln belng LranscendenL Lo LhoughL and belng accesslble only Lo non-emplrlcal lnLulLlon [pra[na, [nana]. 1hey also have recourse Lo Lhe Lwo LruLhs [absoluLe and relaLlve]" (p. 39). 1hus, ln Lhe Madhyamlka, vl[nanavada [Consclousness-only], and vedanLa sysLems, Lhe AbsoluLe ls non-concepLual and non- emplrlcal [percelved wlLh Lhe eye of conLemplaLlon, and noL merely wlLh Lhe eye of mlnd or Lhe eye of flesh]. lL ls reallzed ln a LranscendenL non-dual experlence, varlously called by Lhem pra[na-paramlLa, lokoLLara-[nana, and aparoksanubhuLl respecLlvely. All emphaslze Lhe lnappllcablllLy of emplrlcal deLermlnaLlons Lo Lhe AbsoluLe, and employ Lhe language of negaLlon. 1hey are all agreed on Lhe formal aspecL of Lhe AbsoluLe [l.e., lLs sLrlcL oopoollfloblllty wlLh merely phenomenal caLegorles]." nowevet, 1he vedanLa and vl[nanavada ldenLlfy Lhe absoluLe wlLh someLhlng LhaL ls experlenced ln some form even emplrlcally-Lhe vedanLa wlLh ure 8elng whlch ls ALman and Lhe vl[nanavada wlLh Consclousness. 1aklng Lhese as real, Lhey Lry Lo remove Lhe wrong ascrlpLlons whlch make Lhe absoluLe appear as a llmlLed emplrlcal Lhlng. When, however, Lhe aLman or vl[nana ls absoluLe, lt ls o mlsose of wotJs to cootlooe to coll lt by socb tetms, for Lhere ls no otbet from whlch lL could be dlsLlngulshed. 1hey are also [aL Lhls polnL] reduced Lo [and agree wlLh] Lhe Madhyamlka poslLlon of Lhe AbsoluLe as uLLerly lnexpresslble. Words can only be used metopbotlcolly Lo loJlcote lL" (p. 236, my lLallcs). 8uL ln LhaL loJlcotloo lay Lhe dlrecLlon LhaL subsequenL nondual schools would follow (even Lhough always resLlng, as lL were, ln flnal LmpLlness). 1he vedanLa and vl[nanavada [and 1anLra], owlng Lo Lhelr [meLaphorlcal] ldenLlflcaLlon of Lhe real wlLh ALman or vl[nana [or 1anLra: greaL bllss] are seemlngly more able Lo ptovlJe o btlJqe beLween Lhe world of appearance and Lhe AbsoluLe. 1he LranslLlon seems easler. 1he Madhyamlka by hls lnslsLence on Lhe sheer Lranscendence of Lhe absoluLe and hls refusal Lo ldenLlfy lL wlLh anyLhlng meL wlLh ln hls experlence ls Loo abrupL and harsh. 8uL ln prlnclple, however, Lhere ls no dlfference ln Lhe form of Lhe AbsoluLes ln all Lhese sysLems. yunyaLa represenLs Lhe form of all nonduallsm" (p. 237). As for Lhe brldge" beLween AbsoluLe and phenomena: 8oLh vedanLa and vl[nanavada analyze llluslon [samsara] and show LhaL Lhe lllusory appears on a real ground bot fot wblcb llluslon lLself would noL be posslble [agaln, cf. AugusLlne]. 1he world- llluslon ls Lhus a super-lmposlLlon on 8rahman or vl[nana. lL ls noL Lrue Lo say LhaL Lhe Madhyamlka concelves llluslon Lo occur wlLhouL any underlylng ground. 1aLLva [Suchness] as uharmaLa [realm of Lhe 8eal] ls accepLed by Lhe Madhyamlka as Lhe underlylng ground of phenomena. 8uL lL ls noL [acLually] shown by hlm Lo be lmmanenL ln experlence, how uharmaLa acLlvaLes and lllumlnes emplrlcal Lhlngs. noL LhaL Lhe Madhyamlka Lakes Lhe AbsoluLe and Lhe world of phenomena as Lwo dlfferenL seLs of enLlLles, buL Lhe AbsoluLe ls nowhere expllcltly shown Lo be lo Lhlngs consLlLuLlng Lhelr very reallLy. 1he relaLlon beLween Lhe Lwo ls noL made abundanLly clear. 1hls may be sald Lo consLlLuLe a drawback ln Lhe Madhyamlka concepLlon of Lhe AbsoluLe" (p. 237). And Lhls drawback" ls whaL vedanLa, ?ogachara, and 1anLra seL abouL Lo redress. ln Lhelr varlous concepLlons, Lhe pure Self consLlLuLes a brldge Lo Lhe AbsoluLe (vedanLa), pure Consclousness freed of duallLy consLlLuLes a brldge (?ogachara), and Lhe emoLlons and deslres of ordlnary awareness consLlLuLe a brldge (1anLra). 1hus, ln vedanLa, 8rahman ls no doubL devold of deLermlnaLlons [ls pure LmpLlness], lL cannoL be made an ob[ecL of LhoughL as a parLlcular Lhlng ls. 8uL lL ls self-evldenL [nondual lnLulLlon of 8rahman ls self-evldenL, self-cerLlfylng lmmedlaLeness] and because of Lhls anyLhlng becomes evldenL, lL lmpllclLly, lnvarlably and uncondlLlonally lllomloes oll tbloqs. ln a sllghLly dlfferenL manner vl[nanavada shows LhaL Lhe ob[ecL ls dependenL on consclousness, and noL vlce versa." Llkewlse, 1anLra would show LhaL even ordlnary emoLlons and deslres and confuslons, lf enLered lnLo wlLh open awareness, would dlsclose Lhe wlsdoms aL Lhelr base. 8rldges each and all, whereas for Madhyamlka Lhe AbsoluLe ls also held Lo be lmmanenL, buL eplsLemologlcally lL ls noL shown Lo be such"-Lhe drawback (p. 237). 8efore we move on Lo Lhe nexL and closely relaLed Loplc (namely, Lhe subLler sLages of consclousness revealed beyond Lhe flve gross skandhas of Plnayana), leL me flnlsh wlLh MurLl by noLlng hls assessmenL of Lhe relaLlon of Lhe Consclousness-only schools wlLh aspecLs of WesLern ldeallsm: 1he parallel for vl[nanavada ln Lhe WesL ls Lhe sysLem of llchLe or Pegel, boLh of whom concelve Lhe ure Lgo (llchLe) or 8eason (Pegel) as self-leglslaLlve, as conLalnlng and creaLlng boLh Lhe caLegorles and Lhe ob[ecLs on whlch Lhe caLegorles funcLlon. 1he dlfference beLween Pegel and vl[nanavada ls LhaL Lhe Pegellan absoluLe ls LhoughL or 8eason [vlslon-loglc], Lhe vl[nanavada absoluLe ls above reason and ls non-dual" (p. 317). l belleve LhaL Lhe assessmenL l glve laLer ln Lhls chapLer ls more speclflc, buL Lhe general agreemenL wlLh MurLl wlll be obvlous. 1he LanLrlc 8uddhlsm of 1lbeL (va[rayana) would (parLlcularly ln Lhe oldesL, or nylngma, LradlLlon) dlvlde Lhe overall 8uddhlsL Leachlngs lnLo nlne yooos (vehlcles, levels, sLages): Lhe flrsL Lwo were Plnayana, Lhe Lhlrd was Mahayana, and Lhe remalnlng slx were 1anLrlc, dlvlded lnLo Lhe Lhree lower or ouLer 1anLras (krlya, Charya, ?oga), and Lhe Lhree hlgher or lnner 1anLras (Mahayoga, Anuyoga, and ALlyoga). l wlll here brlefly focus on Lhe Lwo hlghesL yooos, Lhe Anuyoga (or PlghesL ?oga 1anLra") and Lhe ALlyoga, or uzogchen, Lhe CreaL erfecLlon." 1he brldges" LhaL LanLrlc Anuyoga would dlsclose beLween Lhe ordlnary, gross-orlenLed mlnd and Lhe enllghLened mlnd of Clear LlghL LmpLlness cenLered on Lhe subLler sLaLes of consclousness and Lhelr assoclaLed energles" or wlnds." Consclousness was sald Lo be dlvlded lnLo gross," subLle," and very subLle" (causal) dlmenslons, wlLh each dlmenslon possesslng a body" or medlum" or energy," commonly called a wlnd" (so LhaL we have a gross bodymlnd, a subLle bodymlnd, and a very subLle bodymlnd). MedlLaLlon conslsLed ln a Jevelopmeotol oofolJloq of gross mlnd Lo subLle mlnd Lo very subLle (causal) mlnd, accompllshed by a medlLaLlve manlpulaLlon of Lhe wlnds or energles or bodles LhaL supporLed each mlnd. 1hus, Lhe exlsLence of Lhe flve skandhas ls fully acknowledged, as ln Lhe Abhldharma, buL Lhe skandhas are, as lL were, [usL Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe sLory. 1he flve skandhas are generally llsLed as (1) physlcal form, (2) sensaLlon, (3) percepLlon/lmpulse, (4) emoLlon/lmage (dlsposlLlons"), and (3) symbollc/concepLual consclousness. (noLe LhaL Lhese are also exacLly Lhe flrsL flve baslc sLrucLures of consclousness ln Lhe upper-LefL quadranL as l presenLed Lhem ln Lhe LexL, see, for example, flgs. 4-1, 3-1, and 9-1.) lor Lhe hlgher 1anLras, Lhe lasL skandha-or menLal consclousness ln general-ls Lhen fottbet JlvlJeJ lnLo Lhree general domalns: Lhe gross, Lhe subLle, and Lhe very subLle. 1he qtoss realm ls Lhe sensorlmoLor realm, and Lhe gross mlnd ls Lhe mlnd Lled Lo, or reflecLlve of, Lhe sensorlmoLor world (and supporLed by Lhe gross or vltol wloJ). 1he sobtle domaln ls Lhe mlnd freed from all gross-concepLlons (as revealed ln hlgher medlLaLlve sLaLes, cerLaln dream sLaLes, and so on), supporLed by Lhe subLle wlnd (and channels and drops-all parL of Lhe subLle anaLomy" of consclousness). 1he vety sobtle domaln ls Lhe mlnd of Clear LlghL LmpLlness, supporLed by Lhe eLernal lndesLrucLlble drop" and very subLle wlnd ln Lhe cenLer of Lhe PearL. 1hese Lhree domalns (gross, subLle, and very subLle or causal) are also sald Lo correspond Lo Lhe nlrmanakaya, Lhe Sambhogakaya, and Lhe uharmakaya, and Lo wokloq, Jteom, and Jeep sleep sLaLes (aL whlch polnL Lhe slmllarlLles wlLh Lhe vedanLa become qulLe sLrlklng, see CozorL 1986 and CyaLso 1982). Ceshe kelsang CyaLso explalns: 1he flve physlcal sense consclousnesses-Lhose of Lhe eye, ear, nose, Longue, and body-are necessarlly gross levels of mlnd. 1he slxLh consclousness-menLal consclousness lLself-has Lhree dlvlslons of gross, subLle, and very subLle. All elghLy lndlcaLlve concepLlons [waklng-sLaLe concepLs and skandhas] belong Lo Lhe gross level of mlnd. 1hese are Lhe 'used mlnds' and lnclude Lhe dlfferenL LhoughLs we remember, whaL we Lhlnk, and so forLh. 1hey are 'used mlnds' because Lhey reallze, hold and cognlze Lhelr ob[ecLs [all ln Lhe gross realm], Lhey Lhlnk and medlLaLe and we-Lhe person-use Lhem. ln addlLlon, Lhe flrsL four slgns of medlLaLlon [lLs early sLages relaLlng Lo Lhe flve elemenLs] are all gross mlnds because Lhelr mounLlng wlnds are gross" (p. 139). As Lhe gross mlnd (and wlnd) subsldes wlLh furLher medlLaLlon, Lhe sobtle Jlmeosloos (of whlch Lhere are Lhree) begln Lo unfold ln developmenLal sequence. uslng my Lermlnology, Lhese Lhree subLle mlnds (beyond Lhe gross-orlenLed ego/cenLaur) begln wlLh Lhe psychlc level (and Lhe psychlc anaLomy of subLle wlnds and channels LhaL beglns Lo dlsclose aL LhaL level) and move lnLo Lhe subLle realm lLself (experlenced as varlous lotetlot lllomlootloos, as we wlll see), colmlootloq ln perfecL cessotloo or pure unmanlfesL causal absorpLlon (experlenced as black near-aLLalnmenL"). 1hus, CyaLso: 8eglnnlng wlLh Lhe flfLh slgn [of advanced medlLaLlon, whlch ls called wblte lomlooslty oppeotooce] Lhe subLle mlnds are experlenced. 1hey manlfesL from Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe mlnd of whlLe appearance Lo Lhe mlnd of red lncrease [whlch are boLh subLle-level lllumlnaLlons] Lo Lhe end of Lhe mlnd of black near-aLLalnmenL [causal cessaLlon]. Lach successlve mlnd ls subLler Lhan Lhe lasL. Lach ls classlfled as subLle because durlng lLs arralsal Lhere are oo qtoss Joollstlc cooceptool tbooqbts" (p. 139). (Compare Lhls wlLh noLe 8 for chapLer 8, where l deflned Lhe subLle level as havlng no gross-referenLs ln cognlLlon, Lhere ls sLlll, however, a subLle duallsm beLween sub[ecL and ob[ecL, and Lhls ls also polnLed ouL by Anuyoga.) 1hls subLle-level developmenL culmlnaLes ln black near-aLLalnmenL," black" because all ob[ecLlve awareness ceases, and near-aLLalnmenL" because lL ls close Lo pure nondual LmpLlness/Awareness (or Lhe Clear LlghL). As l would puL lL, black near- aLLalnmenL ls Lhe LranslLlon beLween causal and nondual. llnally, afLer Lhe mlnd of black near-aLLalnmenL has ceased, Lhe mlnd of clear llghL arlses. 1hls ls called Lhe very subLle mlnd [causal/nondual] because Lhere ls no subLler mlnd Lhan Lhls" (p. 139). lL ls Lhls very subLle (causal/nondual) mlnd LhaL ls Lhe LmpLy Cround of LnllghLenmenL, and Lhus lL ls also called Lhe 8ooL Mlnd" or Lhe loundaLlon Mlnd," and lL ls assoclaLed wlLh Lhe very subLle wlnd LhaL ls Lhe eLernal lndesLrucLlble drop or empLy essence" ln Lhe hearL. CyaLso: 1he very subLle wlnd and Lhe very subLle mlnd LhaL ls mounLed upon lL reslde ln Lhe lndesLrucLlble drop ln Lhe cenLer of Lhe hearL" (p. 74). AL LhaL Llme, Lhe very subLle prlmordlal wlnd and mlnd of clear llghL become manlfesL. lL ls called 'Lhe eLernal lndesLrucLlble drop' because Lhe conLlnuum of Lhe very subLle wlnd wlLhln lL ls never broken" (CozorL, pp. 76, 72). CyaLso: WlLhouL uLlllzlng Lhls very subLle mlnd and wlnd Lhere ls absoluLely no posslblllLy of reachlng Lhe perfecL enllghLenmenL of 8uddhahood" (p. 140). CyaLso conLlnues: 1hls very subLle mlnd resldlng wlLhln Lhe hearL ls referred Lo boLh as Lhe rooL mlnd and Lhe resldenL mlnd. 1hls laLLer name ls employed Lo dlfferenLlaLe lL from Lhe gross and subLle levels of mlnd, whlch are Lemporary. Whlle Lhe gross body and mlnd are Lemporary bases upon whlch Lhe 'l' ls lmpuLed [mlsLaken for Lhe 8eal], Lhe ptlmoty and cootloooosly teslJloq bases of lmpuLaLlon are Lhe very subLle mlnd and lLs mounLed wlnd" (hls lLallcs, pp. 137, 193.) CyaLso Lhen drlves Lo Lhe ma[or polnL: 1he very subLle body of Lhe conLlnuously resldlng conLlnuum never dles [ls Llmeless]. ln Lhe same way, Lhe conLlnuously resldlng body-Lhe very subLle wlnd-ls never separaLe from Lhe cootloooosly teslJloq self. ?ou have never been separaLed from lL ln Lhe pasL nor wlll you ever be separaLe from lL ln Lhe fuLure" (p. 193, my lLallcs). noLe Lhe use of conLlnuously resldlng self", we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls Lermlnology shorLly, for Lhe momenL slmply noLlce LhaL, as a metopbot (and lL remalns metely a meLaphor unLll one has awakened Lo Lhe dlrecL reallzaLlon for oneself), lL ls perfecLly approprlaLe Lo use conLlnuously resldlng self" Lo lndlcaLe Lhls sLaLe. 1hls very subLle mlnd (and conLlnuously resldlng self)-LhaL ls, Lhe pure LmpLy Awareness as Clear LlghL-ls Lhe toot coose and soppott of oll lesser sLaLes and domalns (hence causal"). 1he dlsLlngulshlng facLor of secreL manLra [va[rayana] ls lLs asserLlon LhaL Lhe deluded mlnd of self-grasplng depends upon lLs gross mounLed wlnd. 1hls gross wlnd developed from a subLle one whlch ln Lurn developed from Lhe very subLle wlnd mounLed by Lhe all empLy mlnd of clear llghL." And Lhere ls a preclse descrlpLlon of lnvoluLlon or Lfflux (causal Lo subLle Lo gross) (p. 194). And Lherefore, afLer one has developed (or evolved) Lo an awakenlng of Lhe very subLle consclousness (nondual LmpLlness/Awareness), one Lhen consclously tevetses Lhls paLh of Asceot and dellberaLely re-creaLes Lhe complete potb of uesceot: one reanlmaLes from Lhe causal Lo Lhe subLle Lo Lhe gross, teeotetloq on Lhe way down" oll of Lhe medlLaLlve slgns and all of Lhe acLual domalns LhaL one flrsL meL on Lhe way up," Lhus unlLlng and lnLegraLlng Lhe aLh of AscenL wlLh Lhe aLh of uescenL (Lhe real secreL of 1anLra), balanced and upheld by Lhe lndesLrucLlble empLy essence LhaL ls Lhe PearL. 1hus CyaLso: When you arlse from Lhe appearance of Clear LlghL Lhe flrsL Lhlng you wlll experlence ls Lhe mlnd of black near- aLLalnmenL of reverse order. 1hen comes Lhe mlnd of red lncrease, Lhe mlnd of whlLe appearance, Lhe elghLy gross concepLual mlnds [and senses] and so forLh ln an order LhaL ls Lhe reverse of Lhe sequence ln whlch Lhe wlnds orlglnally dlssolved. 1be mloJ of cleot llqbt ls tbe foooJotloo of oll otbet mloJs. When Lhe gross and subLle mlnds and wlnds dlssolve lnLo Lhe lndesLrucLlble drop aL Lhe hearL [pure AscenL], you percelve only Lhe clear llghL and lL ls from Lhls clear llghL LhaL all oLher mlnds-each one more gross Lhan Lhe one lL follows-are generaLed [pure uescenL]" (p. 76, my lLallcs). As for referrlng Lo Lhe 8eal (LmpLlness) as a conLlnuously resldlng self (or 1rue Self, or pure Consclousness, eLc.): slnce nagar[una had already demonsLraLed LhaL Lhe 8eal ls nelLher self nor no-self, buL LhaL ln Lhe pbeoomeool realm, Lhere ls no self wlLhouL Lhe sLaLes and no sLaLes wlLhouL Lhe self, Lhen Lhe meLaphor of a 1rue Self could ln facL serve as a much beLLer brldge: Not LhaL a phenomenal self glves way Lo no-self (for pure LmpLlness ls nelLher self nor no-self), and oot LhaL a phenomenal no-self glves way Lo pure LmpLlness (Lhere ls no phenomenal no-self), buL raLher, a phenomenal self glves way Lo pure LmpLlness (LhaL sLrlcLly speaklng ls nelLher self nor no-self nor boLh nor nelLher). And slnce ln Lhe pbeoomeool realm Lhe self ls necessary and useful (as nagar[una and ChandraklrLl polnLed ouL), Lhen as a btlJqloq meLaphor, lL was more adequaLe Lo speak of Lhe phenomenal self (relaLlvely real buL ulLlmaLely lllusory or phenomenal- only) glvlng way Lo a 1rue Self (LhaL was no-phenomenal-self, and LhaL sLrlcLly speaklng was nelLher self nor no-self buL pure LmpLlness, free of all concepLual elaboraLlons). 1hus LmpLlness as 1rue Self, LmpLlness as pure Consclousness, LmpLlness as 8lgpa (pure knowlng resence), LmpLlness as prlmordlal Wlsdom (ptojoo, joooo, yesbe), LmpLlness as prlmordlal urlLy, even LmpLlness as AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy: all of Lhese brldglng noLlons began Lo sprlng up ln Lhe Mahayana and va[rayana Lo supplemenL (or even replace) Lhe noLlon of no-self, whlch, sLrlcLly speaklng, was wrong boLh phenomenally and noumenally. And lndeed, sLarLlng wlLh Lhe Nltvooo 5otto, Lhe absoluLe was ofLen meLaphorlcally caLegorlzed as MahaLman," Lhe CreaL Self" or 1rue Self," whlch was no-phenomenal-self: Lhe selfless Self, so Lo speak (sLlll meLaphorlcal). And down Lo Loday (Lo glve [usL a few examples), Zen masLer Shlbayama would flnd LhaL Lhe ulLlmaLe sLaLe could besL be meLaphorlcally lndlcaLed as AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy." As he puLs lL, 1he MasLer does noL refer Lo Lhe sub[ecLlvlLy LhaL sLands over agalnsL ob[ecLlvlLy. lL ls 'AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy', whlch Lranscends boLh sub[ecLlvlLy and ob[ecLlvlLy and freely creaLes and uses Lhem. lL ls 'lundamenLal Sub[ecLlvlLy,' whlch can never be ob[ecLlfled or concepLuallzed and ls compleLe ln lLself, wlLh Lhe full slgnlflcance of exlsLence ln lLself" (2eo commeots oo tbe Momookoo, p. 92). Llkewlse, Shlbayama uses 1rue Self" Lo mean no-separaLe-self: 1hus Mumon says, '1here ls nowhere Lo hlde Lhe 1rue Self.' When Lhe world ls l-myself, Lhere ls no self. When Lhere ls no self, Lhe whole world ls noLhlng buL l-myself, and Lhls ls Lhe Lrue no- mlnd ln Zen. 1he anclenL MasLers were never Llred of polnLlng ouL LhaL Lhe '1rue Man of no LlLle' [1rue Self LhaL ls no self] ls Lhe MasLer, or AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy, and Lhls ls one's orlglnal 1rue Self. 1o reallze one's anLecedenL deLermlnanL ls Lo awaken Lo Lhe 'Lhe 1rue Self LhaL ls prlor Lo Lhe blrLh of one's parenLs.' lL ls Lo be born anew as a person of AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy" (pp. 173, 123, 338). As Suzukl 8oshl would puL lL, small mlnd flnds lLself ln 8lg Mlnd. Llkewlse, by Lhe Llme we reach Lhe hlghesL vehlcle ln Lhe va[rayana (whlch ls Maha-ALl, or uzogchen, 1he CreaL erfecLlon"), Lhe absoluLe ls mosL ofLen descrlbed ln Lerms of permanence, slngularlLy, freedom, unbroken conLlnulLy, ongolng pure resence. 1hus Lhe greaL uzogchen Leacher, Chagdud 1ulku 8lnpoche, who ls one of a handful of 1lbeLan masLers glvlng Lhe enLlre uzogchen Leachlngs, A Lo Z, lncludlng tosboo, toqyol, and ttekcboJ, explalns: lrom Lhe day we were born unLll Lhe day we dle, our llfe experlence ls an ever-changlng relaLlve LruLh LhaL we hold Lo be very real. lL ls noL, however, absoluLely real or permanenL. 1hls ls very lmporLanL Lo undersLand. When you wake up from your dream of llfe, all of your experlences, whlch seemed Lrue, were noL really Lrue ln Lhe absoluLe sense. 1he crlLerlon we can use for undersLandlng LruLh ls permanence. lf someLhlng ls permanenL, lL ls Lrue. lf lL ls lmpermanenL, lL ls noL Lrue, because lL ls golng Lo dlsappear. 1o wake us up so we can see Lhe lllusory quallLy of our relaLlve reallLy and undersLand our foundaLlonal absoluLe naLure ls Lhe goal of Lhe 8uddha uharma. A compleLely awakened sLaLe ls enllghLenmenL, Lhe unwaverlng recognlLlon of Lhe absoluLe naLure of our belng. AbsoluLe naLure pervades everyLhlng and ls separaLe from noLhlng, buL we have gone so far lnLo mlnd's duallsLlc deluslon, LhaL we have losL slghL of whaL ls absoluLe. Seelng separaLeness where Lhere ls none, we suffer ln our experlence of relaLlve LruLh, [quenched only by] Lhe unchanglng, deaLhless absoluLe, Lhe unchanglng bllss of enllghLenmenL" (llfe lo telotloo to Jeotb, pp. 10, 11, 14). Llkewlse Lhe uzogchen masLer namkhal norbu, descrlblng Lhe self-knowlng absoluLe or prlmordlal sLaLe of pure resence (yesbe/tlqpo), polnLs ouL LhaL Lhe rlmordlal SLaLe (or pure resence, pure LmpLlness) ls noL a pottlcolot expetleoce, wheLher of pleasure or clarlLy or voldness" lLself, buL raLher ls LhaL whlch cognlzes all experlences (or Lhe pure resence of any experlence): 1here ls a greaL deal of dlfference beLween a sensaLlon of pleasure and one of voldness, buL Lhe lnherenL naLure of boLh Lhe Lwo experlences ls ooe ooJ tbe some. When we are ln a sLaLe of voldness [no-LhoughLs], Lhere ls [noneLheless] a presence LhaL conLlnues all Lhe Llme, a presence whlch ls [usL Lhe same ln an experlence of pleasurable sensaLlon [or any oLher experlence]. 1hls resence ls unlque and beyond Lhe mlnd. lL ls a non-dual sLaLe whlch ls Lhe basls of all Lhe lnflnlLe forms of manlfesLaLlon." 1hus, he conLlnues, All LhaL appears Lo us as a dlmenslon of ob[ecLs ['ouL Lhere'] ls noL, ln facL, really someLhlng concreLe aL all, buL ls an aspecL of our own prlmordlal sLaLe appearlng Lo us. ulfferenL experlences can arlse for us, buL Lhe presence oevet cbooqes" (uzoqcbeo, pp. 32, 33, 30). ulfferenL medlLaLlon pracLlces englneer dlfferenL sLaLes and dlfferenL experlences, buL pure resence lLself ls unwaverlng, and Lhus Lhe hlghesL approach ln uzogchen ls 8uddhahood wlLhouL medlLaLlon": noL Lhe creaLlon buL raLher Lhe Jltect tecoqoltloo of an already perfecLly presenL and freely glven prlmordlal urlLy, of Lhe pure LmpLlness of Lhls and every sLaLe, embraclng equally all forms: embraclng a self, embraclng a no-self, embraclng whaLever arlses. 8uL ln no case ls prlmordlal LmpLlness a parLlcular sLaLe versus anoLher sLaLe, or a parLlcular concepL versus anoLher concepL, or a parLlcular vlew versus a dlfferenL vlew: lL ls Lhe pure resence ln whlch any and all forms arlse. lL cerLalnly ls noL no-self" as opposed Lo self." lL ls raLher Lhe openlng or clearlng ln whlch, rlghL now, all manlfesLaLlon arlses ln your awareness, remalns a blL, and fades: Lhe unwaverlng clearlng lLself never enLers Lhe sLream of Llme, buL cognlzes each and all wlLh perfecL resence, prlmordlal urlLy, flerce Compasslon, unfllnchlng Lmbrace. 1hls unwaverlng resence ls noL enLered. 1here ls no sLepplng lnLo lL or falllng ouL of lL. 1he 8uddhas never enLered Lhls sLaLe, nor do ordlnary people lack lL (Lhe 8uddhas never enLered lL because nobody ever fell ouL of lL). lL ls absoluLely oot oo expetleoce-noL an experlence of momenLary sLaLes, noL an experlence of self, noL an experlence of no-self, noL an experlence of relaxlng, noL an experlence of surrenderlng: lL ls Lhe LmpLy openlng or clearlng ln whlch oll of Lhose experlences come and go, an openlng or clearlng LhaL, were lL noL always already perfecLly resenL, no experlences could arlse ln Lhe flrsL place. 1hls pure resence ls noL a change of sLaLe, noL an alLered sLaLe, noL a dlfferenL sLaLe, noL a sLaLe of peace or calm or bllss (or anger or fear or envy). lL ls Lhe slmple, pure, lmmedlaLe, presenL awareness ln whlch all of Lhose sLaLes come and go, Lhe openlng or clearlng ln whlch Lhey arlse, remaln, pass, arlse, remaln, pass. . . . And yeL Lhere ls someLhlng LhaL does noL arlse or remaln or pass-Lhe slmple openlng, Lhe lmmedlaLeness of awareness, Lhe slmple feellng of 8elng, of whlch all parLlcular sLaLes and parLlcular experlences are slmply rlpples, wrlnkles, gesLures, folds: Lhe clouds LhaL come and go ln Lhe sky . . . and you are Lhe sky. ?ou are noL behlnd your eyes sLarlng ouL aL Lhe clouds LhaL pass, you are Lhe sky ln whlch, and Lhrough whlch, Lhe clouds floaL, endlessly, ceaselessly, sponLaneously, freely, wlLh no obsLrucLlon, no barrlers, no conLracLlons, no gllLches: no movlng parLs ln one's Lrue naLure, noLhlng Lo break down. ln sprlng lL ralns, ln wlnLer lL snows. 8emarkable, Lhls empLy clearlng. ?ou do noL become Lhls openlng or clearlng, you do noL become Lhe sky. ?ou are noL always Lhe sky, nor are you already Lhe sky: you are olwoys olteoJy Lhe sky: lL ls always already sponLaneously accompllshed: and LhaL ls why Lhe clouds can come and go ln Lhe flrsL place. 1he sunllghL freely plays on Lhe waLer. 8emarkable! 8lrds are already slnglng ln Lhe woods. Amazlng! 1he ocean already washes on Lhe shore, freely weLLlng Lhe pebbles and shells. WhaL ls noL accompllshed? Pear LhaL dlsLanL bell rlnglng? Who ls noL enllghLened? And yeL, and yeL: how besL Lo refer Lo Lhls always already LmpLlness? WhaL words could a flsh use Lo refer Lo waLer? Pow could you polnL ouL waLer Lo a flsh? urenched ln lL, never aparL from lL, upheld by lL-whaL are we Lo do? Splash waLer ln lLs face? WhaL lf lLs orlglnal face ls waLer? 1wlsLlng ln Lhls llngulsLlc dllemma, Lhe Mahayana/va[rayana ofLen uses equaLlons such as: 8lg Mlnd = no-mlnd, 1rue Self = no- self, Crlglnal lace = no-face, ermanenL va[ra = lmpermanence of all ob[ecLs, and so on. 8uL lL ls qulckly added LhaL boLh Self" and no-self" (or permanenL" and lmpermanenL") are mere words, LhaL ls, mere slqolflets. And Lhus ln order for elLher of Lhem Lo acLually be Lrue (absoluLe LruLh), one has Lo tecoqolze Lhe pure LmpLlness, Lhe pure openlng or clearlng ln whlch all words, all Lhlngs, all processes, sponLaneously arlse and fall. LmpLlness" or 1rue Self" or no-mlnd" or no-self" are all, flnally, slqolflets whose tefeteot dlscloses lLself only upon followlng Lhe lojooctloos (paradlgms) of conLemplaLlve compeLence whlch unfolds Lhe approprlaLe developmenLal slqolfleJ resulLlng ln Lhe dlrecL recognlLlon of always-already pure LmpLlness, Lhe recognlLlon of one's 1rue naLure," whlch ls, so Lo speak, all-pervadlng waLer: Lhe tefeteot ls Lhe unlverse of Cne 1asLe. 8uL Lhe Zen masLers don'L wanL you Lo explolo LmpLlness or nonduallLy Lo Lhem, Lhey wanL you Lo dlrecLly sbow Lhem LmpLlness, whlch mlghL be as slmple as yawnlng or snapplng your flngers: !usL Lhls! 1hus, Shlbayama, afLer repeaLedly referrlng Lo reallLy as AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy," qulckly adds: lL ls AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy, one's orlglnal 1rue Self. 8uL however preclsely you may descrlbe 'lL,' you wlll mlss lL lf you ever Lry Lo descrlbe lL aL all, you have Lo grasp lL yourself lf you wanL Lo really know lL. 1o call lL by Lhese names [AbsoluLe Sub[ecLlvlLy, no-mlnd, 1rue Self, no-self] ls already a mlsLake, a sLep Loward ob[ecLlflcaLlon and concepLuallzaLlon. MasLer Llsal Lherefore remarked, 'lL ls ever unnameable'" (pp. 309, 93). And Chagdud adds: As Lhe 8uddha LaughL, ln absoluLe LruLh, noLhlng really comes, and noLhlng really goes. noLhlng ls born, noLhlng ceases. nelLher someLhlng nor noLhlng, [pure resence] ls nelLher one nor many. AbsoluLe LruLh ls beyond all of Lhese ordlnary concepLs. Words can'L name lL"-unless one has recognlzed lL, and Lhen words work [usL flne: Lhe cherry blossoms are ln bloom, Lhe sprlng alr ls cool. now l menLlon all of Lhls because no-self has been mlsLaken (parLlcularly by several WesLern LheorlsLs) as an occotote occooot of tbe pbeoomeool mloJ stteom (whlch ls lncorrecL: self and sLaLes are boLh relaLlvely real), and also as a Jesctlptloo of Lhe oltlmote 8eallLy (also lncorrecL: Lhe ulLlmaLe ls sbooyo of self and no-self), and Lhls has caused an enormous amounL of confuslon, a confuslon LhaL has noL helped Lhe spread of uharma ln Lhe WesL. When no-self" ls lltetolly applled Lo Lhe AbsoluLe, or Lhe prlmordlal sLaLe, or pure LmpLlness, Lhen LhaL mlsundersLandlng locks LmpLlness lnLo an exLremely duallsLlc noLlon. WheLher Lhe experlence of self or Lhe experlence of no-self arlses, botb are equally manlfesLaLlons of Lhe rlmordlal SLaLe, self-cognlzlng LmpLlness and sponLaneous lumlnoslLy. LmpLlness" ls noL a concepLual docLrlne whlch one uses Lo advance Lhe LheoreLlcal poslLlon of no-self as agalnsL Lhe poslLlon of coheslve self-and yeL lL ls belng used, by some WesLern lnLerpreLers, Lo do [usL LhaL. Llkewlse, Lhe no-self docLrlne ls belng used by many WesLerners Lo descrlbe Lhe llved, phenomenal mlnd sLream: Lhe phenomenal sLream ls supposed Lo be wlLhouL a coheslve self. And here Lhls confused and unLenable noLlon runs lnLo masslve amounLs of psychlaLrlc and psychologlcal evldence abouL whaL happens when Lhe phenomenal mlnd lacks a coheslve self: Lhe resulL ls borderllne neurosls and psychosls. lf Lhe self-sysLem, ln lLs formaLlve phases (parLlcularly fulcrum-2), falls Lo clearly dlfferenLlaLe self and ob[ecL represenLaLlons, Lhe self boundary ls consLanLly open Lo emoLlonal floodlng, on Lhe one slde, and Lo a sense of pervaslve empLlness or hollowness or depresslon, on Lhe oLher. A coheslve self falls Lo emerge and consolldaLe, and Lhus Lhe mlnd sLream remalns a serles of ofLen fragmenLed no-coherenL-self" sLaLes, whlch ls noL 8uddhlsL heaven buL psychologlcal hell. And Lhus, when orLhodox psychologlcal researchers hear LhaL Lhe mlnd ls really wlLhouL coheslve self," Lhey are slmply flabbergasLed. ?ou mean, people woot Lo be borderllne? 1hey honesLly cannoL lmaglne whaL Lhese 8uddhlsLs" mean, because Lhe self ls belng denled reallLy pteclsely oo tbe plooe tbot lt ls loJeeJ teol-and Lhe loss of Lhls coheslve self ls noL LnllghLenmenL buL some of Lhe mosL palnful psychologlcal dlsLurbances known. 1hese parLlcular WesLern 8uddhlsL lnLerpreLers are, wlLh very good lnLenLlons, Lrylng Lo lnLegraLe LasL and WesL, buL ln uslng Lhe lnadequaLe no-self" docLrlne, Lhey lnvarlably can polnL Lo only a few WesLern LheorlsLs. 1here ls Lhe obllgaLory quoLlng of Pume's paragraph from 1teotlse (whlch acLually demonsLraLed noLhlng buL Lhe lame facL LhaL lf l look only aL ob[ecLs, l wlll never flnd a sub[ecL), and Lhen some passlng reference Lo !acques Lacan (who hlmself commlLLed Lhe Slngle 8oundary fallacy and ls no frlend of LmpLlness, see noLe 3 for chap. 6 and noLe 32 for chap. 13). And recenLly aLLempLs have been made Lo connecL no-self" wlLh posLsLrucLurallsm (dlLLo Pume) and selfless" cognlLlve sclence (abouL whlch, more laLer). 8uL Lhe resL of Lhe LradlLlons, boLh LasL and WesL (Lhe vasL ma[orlLy of whlch do noL deny a phenomenal coheslve self) are sealed ouL of Lhelr lnLegraLlon," whlch has unforLunaLely led Lo a Lype of 8uddhlsL arrogance: Lhelr phenomenal no-self" docLrlne (whlch lndeed ls unlque Lo Plnayana) ls felL Lo be Lhe only correcL docLrlne, and everybody else ls profoundly wrong (Lhey go absoluLely apoplecLlc lf you menLlon Auroblndo or 8amana Maharshl). 1hls ls why Lhe work of such LheorlsLs as !ack Lngler ls so lmporLanL. Lngler, Lralned ln boLh 8uddhlsL vlpossooo (mlndfulness) medlLaLlon and WesLern psychoLherapy (and who works as a pracLlclng LheraplsL), made a much more useful LheoreLlcal brldge: ?ou have Lo be somebody before you can be nobody." 1haL ls, lL ls necessary Lo form a sLable, coheslve self before one can Lranscend (or deconsLrucL) LhaL self ln pure LmpLlness. Condemnlng Lhe ego for noL belng LmpLlness ls llke condemnlng an acorn for noL belng an oak-and, as we have seen, lL ls profoundly lnadequaLe boLh phenomenally and noumenally. (Lngler's approach was consonanL wlLh my own work on Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy-pre-ego Lo ego Lo Lrans-ego, and one has Lo form a sLable ego before one can sLably go Lrans-ego-and wlLh uanlel 8rown's work on Lhe hlgher sLages of 8uddhlsL medlLaLlon, and Lhus we became Lhe Lhree maln coauLhors of 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess, Lngler's quoLe ls on p. 49.) 8uL Lngler's analysls conLalns anoLher very lmporLanL lnslghL. 8ased on hls cllnlcal experlence, he began Lo suspecL LhaL some lndlvlduals who were lacklng a fully coheslve self were ln facL drawn Lo Lhls noLlon of phenomenal no-self" because lL seemed Lo speak Lo Lhelr condlLlon, and cerLalnly seemed Lo raLlonallze lL. Slnce many researchers feel LhaL a general borderllne malalse ls acLually lncreaslng ln Amerlca (and noL slmply belng reporLed more ofLen [MasLerson]), Lhe appeal of Lhls no-self" noLlon ls perhaps undersLandable. 1he Plnayana no-self" speaks especlally Lo lndlvlduals wlLh an already precarlous sense of self- coheslveness. lurLher, glven Lhe facL LhaL Lhe pure and excluslve no-self" docLrlne of Lhe Abhldharma ls parL and parcel of an excluslvely Ascendlng and CnosLlc paLh, culmlnaLlng ln compleLe wlLhdrawal from (and condemnaLlon of) samsara and Lhe manlfesL realm, Lhls would dlrecLly appeal Lo Lhose who were already havlng Lrouble befrlendlng samsara ln Lhe flrsL place. lnsLead of embraclng Lhe enLlre manlfesL realm wlLh love and Agape, one slmply opLs ouL enLlrely (wlLh Lros gone hobos). As one 1heravadln Leacher puL lL, when asked abouL Lhe sufferlng of oLhers, l don'L care, l'm geLLlng off." Lngler and l are noL suggesLlng LhaL any LheorlsL who subscrlbes Lo Lhe llLeral no-self" docLrlne ls personally borderllne. We are suggesLlng LhaL, ln addlLlon Lo lLs own lnsuperable dlfflculLles on boLh phenomenal and noumenal planes, Lhls llLeral no-self docLrlne ls all Loo easlly confused wlLh a botJetlloe wotlJvlew, and, lndeed, Lhls does especlally appeal Lo lndlvlduals who are already havlng dlfflculLles formlng a coheslve self. 1hls phenomenal no-self" docLrlne: whaL dlfflculLles lL has caused ln Lhe aLLempL Lo lnLegraLe LasL and WesL. erhaps lL ls Llme Lo Lhrow our synLheslzlng neL a llLLle wlder, a llLLle more generously. lf Lhere ls lndeed 8uddha-naLure, lL would noL leave lLself wlLhouL a wlLness ln oLher culLures, oLher places, oLher Llmes: and ln Lhe ears of senslLlve men and women, lL seems Lo have whlspered Lhe equlvalenL of MahaLman" much more ofLen Lhan anaLman." ltooclsco votelos ooctlve lotollqm llnally, Lo reLurn Lo 1be emboJleJ mloJ, by varela, 1hompson, and 8osch (see prevlous commenLs: noLes 49 and 32 for chap. 2 and noLes 13 and 43 for chap. 4). As l lndlcaLed, ln my oplnlon l flnd Lhelr overall approach enormously rewardlng and slgnlflcanL. noL only ls Lhelr eooctlve potoJlqm one of a very few aLLempLs Lo lnLegraLe Lhe LefL- and 8lghL-Pand paLhs ln cognlLlve sclence, lL ls Lhe only ma[or paradlgm (uslng Lhe word ln lLs Lechnlcally correcL sense as ln[uncLlon) LhaL Lakes a medlLaLlve/mlndfulness approach Lo Lhe upper-LefL dlmenslons ln an aLLempL Lo lnLegraLe Lhem wlLh 8lghL-Pand cognlLlve sclence, an approach LhaL alone can embody a sclenLlflc (l.e., repeaLable, communal, ln[uncLlve) dlsclosure of Lhe domalns of awareness. My ma[or crlLlclsms, all wlLhln Lhls prlor admlraLlon, relaLe Lo several Loplcs menLloned above: (1) varela eL al. aLLempL Lo bulld mosL of Lhelr brldges beLween dlrecL, llved experlence (LefL Pand) and ob[ecLlvlsLlc cognlLlve sclence (8lghL Pand) uslng Lhe Abhldharma docLrlne of selfless mlnds" and Lhe Lheory of dlscreLe, selfless sLaLes and aggregaLes. 8uL Lhls Plnayana approach, as l Lrled Lo lndlcaLe, denles Lhe coheslve self on preclsely Lhe plane where lL ls real and pragmaLlcally mandaLory. 1he auLhors are consLanLly emphaslzlng LhaL, for mosL people, Lhe coheslve self ls unavoldable, hablLual, lnescapable, lL ls only wlLh mlndfulness Lralnlng LhaL we can acLually lnLerrupL Lhe formaLlon of a self ouL of Lhe momenLary sLaLes: presumably a Lwo-year-old chlld cannoL perform mlndfulness Lralnlng, and Lhus Lhe self-sense ls lnevlLable ln human developmenL. 8uL an loevltoble llluslon ls noL metely an llluslon: lL ls servlng some purpose (lL ls, ln facL, prevenLlng borderllne fragmenLaLlon, among many oLher Lhlngs). 1hls Lype of aLomlsLlc analysls (a la Abhldharma) Lhus falls Lo accounL for Lhe exLremely lmporLanL developmenLal perlod where a coheslve self ls cruclal. And Lhus: (2) lL Lends Lo play lnLo Lhe borderllne worldvlew, as l descrlbed above, and Lhus Lhrows us lnLo Lhe reLro-8omanLlc noLlon LhaL aL some polnL ln developmenL a horrlble mlsLake occurred, and we have ooJo tbe mlstoke by dlgglng backward, lnsLead of evolvloq fotwotJ Lo hlgher lnLegraLlons LhaL ovetcome o pottloloess. Lach sLage of self-developmenL ls lndeed a Lype of deconsLrucLlon of Lhe prevlous self-sense, noL by plopplng sLralghL lnLo pure LmpLlness, buL by growlng a deeper and wlder self LhaL undoes Lhe lesser self, unLll all selves are undone ln LmpLlness (whlch ls nelLher self nor no-self). 1he mlnd sLream, afLer all, Joes oot Jecoosttoct ltself: lL ls deconsLrucLed by a flner employmenL of aLLenLlon and wlll, whlch, by any oLher name, means a self sLrong enough Lo flnally dle ln pure LmpLlness, noL a self weak enough Lo regress Lo fragmenLed no-self" dlscreLe aLomlsLlc experlences. (3) Modern cognlLlve sclence, as we have seen (noLe 43 for chap. 4), posLulaLes someLhlng llke a compuLaLlonal mlnd (or even a socleLy of mlnd) LhaL ln lLself ls completely lockloq cooscloosoess. 1haL ls, cognlLlve sclence belleves ln Lhe exlsLence of totolly unconsclous lnLenLlonal compuLaLlons (or whaLnoL) LhaL perform all Lhe requlslLe funcLlons of cognlLlon, and your presence ls noL requlred. WhaL ls teolly happenlng ln your mlnd" ls a serles of ob[ecLlve funcLlons LhaL possess no consclousness aL all, consclousness remalns elLher a puzzllng eplphenomena, or ls pronounced Lo be noL good for anyLhlng." 1he auLhors refer Lo Lhls as Lhe dlscovery of Lhe selfless mlnd," and Lhey Lherefore wlsh Lo lnLegraLe Lhls sclenLlflc dlscovery" wlLh Lhe Abhldharma no-self" analysls of phenomenal experlence, Lhus bulldlng a brldge beLween experlence and Lheory. 1he selfless mlnds" of cognlLlve sclence are supposed Lo be Lhe correlaLe of Lhe selfless mlnds" of Abhldharma analysls. 1he pracLlce of mloJfoloess (whlch dlscloses no-self") can Lhus be broughL LogeLher wlLh Lhe LheoreLlcal dlscovery of selfless mlnds," Lhey malnLaln. 8uL cognlLlve sclence has noL dlscovered selfless mlnds, lL has dlscovered mlndless mlnds. 1here ls ln cognlLlve sclence no more room for mlndfulness/awareness facLors Lhan Lhere ls room for a consclous self: oll of Lhose are banned from dlscusslon, and banned from any sorL of real exlsLence, by Lhe very mode of lnvesLlgaLlon lLself. As l suggesLed earller, far from belng a ma[or dlscovery, Lhe mlndless mlnds" noLlon ls a folt occompll of Lhe ob[ecLlvlsLlc, represenLaLlonal paradlgm LhaL guldes Lhe LheoreLlcal, ob[ecLlvlsL noLlon ln Lhe flrsL place. varela eL al. are bulldlng a brldge beLween an looJepoote (lf noL downrlghL wrong) skandhas Lheory and Lhe teJoctloolstlc porLlon of cognlLlve sclence. (4) 8ecause of Lhelr Abhldharma no-self aLomlsLlc analysls of experlence, Lhe auLhors llkewlse are consLanLly [uxLaposlng" Lhls wlLh LmpLlness ooJ wlLh Lhe selfless mlnds" of cognlLlve sclence. 8oLh of Lhese reducLlonlsLlc approaches (Abhldharma and cognlLlve sclence) are supposed Lo be evocaLlve" of LmpLlness. 8uL, as l Lrled Lo argue, Lo brlng LmpLlness Lo bear on a parLlcular vlew-as a crowbar Lo dlslodge a parLlcular vlew (lnsLead of all vlews)-ls Lo reduce LmpLlness Lo one noLlon among oLhers. lL comes perllously close Lo lncurable vlew" LmpLlness. 1hus, wlLh reference Lo Lhe above four polnLs, lL's hard Lo avold Lhe lmpresslon LhaL Lhe auLhors are Laklng Lhe lnadequaLe (or even wrong) aspecLs of all four and Lrylng Lo loteqtote tbose looJepoocles: a LruncaLed/aLomlsLlc Plnayana psychology wlLh Lhe reducLlonlsLlc aspecLs of cognlLlve sclence, fllrLlng wlLh an lncurable vlew of LmpLlness, and Lendlng Loward an embrace of Lhe borderllne worldvlew. 1he auLhors are very much aware of some of Lhese dlfflculLles, and afLer worklng hard Lo esLabllsh Lhese polnLs, Lhey begln Lo carefully quallfy or even glngerly wlLhdraw from Lhem. Cf cognlLlve sclence's dlscovery" of no-self" (whlch ls really [usL a reducLlonlsm lnherenL ln Lhe approach), Lhey flnally sLaLe: ln cognlLlve sclence and ln experlmenLal psychology, Lhe fragmenLaLlon of Lhe self occurs because Lhe fleld ls Lrylng Lo be sclenLlflcally ob[ecLlve. reclsely because Lhe self ls Laken as an ob[ecL, llke any oLher exLernal ob[ecL ln Lhe world, as an ob[ecL of sclenLlflc scruLlny-preclsely for LhaL reason-lL dlsappears from vlew" (p. 230). LxacLly. ln tbls regard, cognlLlve sclence has noL dlscovered an lmporLanL foct of exlsLence LhaL needs Lo be lnLegraLed (as Lhey earller malnLalned), lL has raLher JlstotteJ Lhe sub[ecLlve domaln ln a way LhaL needs Lo be abandoned ([usL as Lhe Abhldharma dlsLorLlon needs Lo be). Llkewlse, of Pume's self-vanlshlng acL, whlch Lhey had earller called brllllanL," Lhey now polnL ouL, wlLh reference Lo ob[ecLlfylng: nowhere ls slelghL of hand beLween lnner and ouLer [sub[ecLlve and ob[ecLlve] more evldenL Lhan ln Lhe work of uavld Pume" (p. 230). Cf LmpLlness and lLs [uxLaposlLlon" wlLh no-self" analysls and Lhe selfless mlnds" of cognlLlve sclence, whlch Lhey prevlously suggesLed, Lhe auLhors now sLaLe: 1hls ls a cruclally lmporLanL polnL. 1here ls a powerful reason why some Madhyamlka schools only refuLe Lhe argumenLs of oLhers and refuse Lo make asserLlons. Any concepLual poslLlon can become a ground, whlch vlLlaLes Lhe force of Lhe Madhyamlka (Lhls ls also why pragmaLlsm ls noL Lhe same as Lhe mlddle way of Madhyamlka). We would be dolng a greaL dlsservlce Lo everyone concerned-mlndfulness/awareness pracLlLloners, sclenLlsLs, scholars, and any oLher lnLeresLed persons-were we Lo lead anyone Lo belleve LhaL maklng asserLlons abouL enacLlve cognlLlve sclence was Lhe same Lhlng as allowlng one's mlnd Lo be experlenLlally processed by Lhe Madhyamlka" (p. 228). And as for Lhe Abhldharma Lheory of LlemenLs (skandhas, sLaLes, dharmas), Lhe auLhors are cerLalnly aware of lLs faLe ln subsequenL 8uddhlsL schools: 1he baslc elemenL analysls recelved cerLaln klnds of devasLaLlng crlLlclsm from phllosophers such as nagar[una" (p. 117). And, of course, Zen's approach was characLerlsLlcally rlghL Lo Lhe polnL: 1hey were LradlLlonally burned ln Zen" (p. 121). 1he auLhors Lhen sLaLe LhaL whaL Lhey are acLually Lrylng Lo do ls use Lhese analyses (selfless mlnds, no-self phenomenal sLream, enacLlon, eLc.) slmply Lo help evoke Lhe Lrue groundlessness of pure LmpLlness. !usL as Lhe Madhyamlka dlalecLlc, a provlslonal and convenLlonal acLlvlLy of Lhe relaLlve world, polnLs beyond lLself, so we mlghL hope LhaL our concepL of enacLlon could, aL leasL for some cognlLlve sclenLlsLs and perhaps even for Lhe more general mllleu of sclenLlflc LhoughL, polnL beyond lLself Lo a Lruer undersLandlng of groundlessness" (p. 228). ersonally, l flnd Lhe enacLlve paradlgm lLself very appeallng and a genulne advancemenL of knowledge, buL noL for LhaL reason, because Lhe groundlessness" LhaL Lhey polnL Lo ls, as l suggesLed, ofLen aLomlsLlc, reducLlonlsLlc, borderllne, fragmenLed. lL bullds brldges preclsely Lo Lhe aspecLs of varlous Lheorles LhaL oughL Lo be re[ecLed, noL lnLegraLed. 8ecause of Lhls blas Lo a no-self" analysls of Lhe phenomenal mlnd sLream, Lhe auLhors llkewlse (and lronlcally) fall Lo appreclaLe aspecLs of Lhe enacLlve paradlgm LhaL acLually go a conslderable way Lo solvlng some of Lhe problems LhaL Lhelr no- self" analysls premaLurely and unforLunaLely dlssolves or dlsrupLs. 1o menLlon a few: 1he auLhors, early on ln Lhelr aLLempL Lo bulld a brldge beLween Lhe aLomlsLlc aspecLs of Abhldharma and Lhe reducLlonlsLlc aspecLs of cognlLlve sclence, polnL Lo Mlnsky's noLlon of Lhe mlnd as a socleLy" (Lhe socleLy of mlnd), Lhe ldea belng LhaL we can'L flnd a self here elLher: an loJlvlJool mlnd ls really a soclety of agenLs. And whlle Lhere ls some LruLh Lo LhaL (nobody belleves Lhe self ls Lhe monollLhlc monsLer domlnaLlng awareness LhaL many LnllghLenmenL wrlLers seemed Lo lmaglne), noneLheless Lhere ls a profound and slgnlflcanL dlfference beLween lndlvlduals and socleLles (alLhough boLh are holons wlLhln holons wlLhln holons): lndlvlduals have a locus of self-awareness. 1haL ls, a compound lndlvldual ls a socleLy LhaL furLher serves as a locus of self-sense. And wheLher LhaL self-sense ls real" or lllusory" doesn'L change Lhe facL LhaL lndlvlduals have lL, socleLles don'L. Moreover, Lhls self-sense develops. lL develops, as we have seen, Lhrough nlne (or so) ma[or fulcrums of dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon (before fully recognlzlng LmpLlness). 1hls LefL-Pand developmenLal process ls noL slmply a maLLer of moooloqlcol and sensorlmoLor cognlLlon (alLhough grounded ln lL). lL ls also, and especlally, a maLLer of Jloloqlcol exchange and lotetsobjectlve muLual undersLandlng (on Lhe way Lo ttoosloqlcol LmpLlness). And aL LhaL lnLersub[ecLlve and dlaloglcal polnL, sensorlmoLor phenomenology beglns Lo fall us mlserably (afLer servlng lLs groundlng funcLlon). And Lhls lndeed ls one of Lhe prlmary reasons LhaL phenomenology as a dlsclpllne so ofLen gave way Lo varlous forms of sLrucLurallsm and neosLrucLurallsm (and even posLsLrucLurallsm): Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve funcLlons of cognlLlon dlsplay paLLerns LhaL are noL obvlous, and noL avallable, Lo slmple phenomenologlcal apprehenslon (LhaL ls, Lhey follow paLLerns LhaL are noL avallable Lo or dlsclosed by Lhe senses or lmmedlaLe llved experlence). 1he phenomenologlsLs were slmply no maLch for such lLems as llngulsLlc lnLersub[ecLlvlLy and Lhe paLLerns LhaL lL dlsplayed, paLLerns LhaL could noL be recovered ln phenomenology. loucaulL recalls, ln llsLenlng Lo a lecLure by Merleau-onLy (Lhe LheorlsL LhaL varela eL al. polnL Lo as mosL resembllng Lhelr own approach): So Lhe problem of language appeared and lL was clear LhaL phenomenology was no maLch for sLrucLural analysls ln accounLlng for Lhe effecLs of meanlng LhaL could be produced by a sLrucLure of Lhe llngulsLlc Lype. And qulLe naLurally, wlLh Lhe phenomenologlcal spouse flndlng herself dlsquallfled by her lnablllLy Lo address language, sLrucLurallsm became Lhe new brlde" (Mlller, lossloo, p. 32). 1hls ln Lurn would lead Lo lageL, and Pabermas, and more adequaLe accounLs of Lhe developmenL of lnLersub[ecLlve compeLence. (See noLe 28 for chap. 4 for an exLended dlscusslon of Lhe lnadequacles of phenomenology.) l am noL suggesLlng an abandonmenL of phenomenology (nor unadulLeraLed embrace of geneLlc sLrucLurallsm). 8aLher, phenomenology (especlally of Lhe Merleau-onLy varleLy) forms a Lype of foundaLlonal edlflce qulLe slmllar, l belleve, Lo LhaL proposed by varela eL al. 8uL lLs monologlcal apprehenslons need Lo be supplemenLed wlLh dlaloglcal recognlLlons, and Lhls beglns Lo Lake us away from Lhe Loo-heavlly sensorlmoLor anchorlng ln whlch varela and hls colleagues seem a blL mlred. 1hls sensorlmoLor-heavlness shows up ln Lhe auLhors' presenLaLlon, l belleve, as a consLanL confuslon of organlsm/envlronmenL wlLh lnner/ouLer, whlch ln facL are Lwo very dlfferenL Lypes of lnLeracLlon and enacLlon (Lhe former ls lnLeracLlon beLween upper 8lghL and Lower 8lghL-or ob[ecLlve organlsm and ob[ecLlve envlronmenL-Lhe laLLer ls lnLeracLlon beLween LefL and 8lghL-or lnLerlor and exLerlor). 1hey quoLe LewonLln and Cyama ln supporL of Lhe conLenLlon (whlch l accepL) LhaL Lhe organlsm and Lhe envlronmenL co-generaLe each oLher. 8uL Lhe argumenL of boLh of Lhose auLhors (and mosL slmllar mlcro/macro argumenLs) are couched ln purely ouLer (or ob[ecLlve) Lerms: Lhey are Lalklng abouL Lhe lnLeracLlon and muLual codeLermlnaLlon of upper 8lghL and Lower 8lghL: LhaL ls, Lhe muLual deLermlnaLlon of Lhe otqoolsm (lLs geneLlc maLerlal, lLs physlologlcal sLrucLure, lLs nervous sysLem, and so on) and lLs ecologlcal eovltoomeot, whlch are all extetlots. 8uL LhaL ls mosL deflnlLely noL Lhe same as Lhe lnLeracLlon beLween Lhe lnLerlor llved experlence (LefL Pand) wlLh Lhe ouLer maLerlal forms (8lghL Pand), wheLher Lhose exLerlor forms are organlsmlc or envlronmenLal. 1o equaLe Lhe Lwo ls, once agaln, Lo buy lnLo Lhe flaLland (LnllghLenmenL) paradlgm, even lf we are Lrylng Lo redress LhaL paradlgm by havlng Lhe upper 8lghL (organlsm) and Lower 8lghL (envlronmenL) muLually codeLermlne each oLher. lmporLanL as LhaL lnslghL ls, lL sLlll buys Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm: lL reduces Lhe LefL-Pand experlence Lo Lhe 8lghL-Pand descrlpLlon, monologlcal ln resulL (Lhus LewonLln uses sub[ecL and ob[ecL lnLerchangeably wlLh organlsm and envlronmenL: preclsely Lhe problem). 1hls has Lhe effecL, ln Lhe auLhors' presenLaLlon, of confuslng sensorlmoLor as organlc sLrucLure (upper 8lghL) wlLh sensorlmoLor as lmmedlaLe llved experlence (lower porLlons of upper LefL), and Lhls keeps Lhelr enacLlve paradlgm heavlly grounded ln a blologlsLlc blas. 1hus, Lo Lhe quesLlon WhaL ls cognlLlon?" Lhe auLhors answer LhaL lL ls LnacLlon: A hlsLory of sLrucLural coupllng LhaL brlngs forLh a world." lalr enough. 8uL Lhen, Lo Lhe quesLlon Pow does lL work?" Lhey answer, 1hrough a neLwork conslsLlng of mulLlple levels of lnLerconnecLed, sensorlmoLor subneLworks." And LhaL doesn'L slmply ground awareness ln sensorlmoLor neLworks, lL reduces Lhe slgnlflcanL aspecLs of awareness Lo lLs more fundamenLal foundaLlons: reduces dlaloglcal undersLandlng Lo monologlcal apprehenslon (p. 206). l do noL doubL LhaL baslc sensorlmoLor cognlLlon and Lhe early menLal caLegorlzaLlon process has many of Lhe feaLures ouLllned by Lhe enacLlve paradlgm. 8uL even so, LhaL covers only Lhe flrsL Lhree fulcrums of a nlne-fulcrum awareness. 1hus, Lhe auLhors polnL, as example, Lo Lhe work of Mark !ohnson (1be boJy lo tbe mloJ), and, as far as lL goes, l am ln compleLe agreemenL wlLh Lhelr assessmenL. Pumans, [!ohnson] argues, have very general cognlLlve sLrucLures called kloestbetlc lmoqe scbemos. 1hese schemas orlglnaLe ln bodlly experlence, can be deflned ln Lerms of cerLaln sLrucLural elemenLs, have a baslc loglc, and can be meLaphorlcally pro[ecLed Lo glve sLrucLure Lo a wlde varleLy of cognlLlve domalns." 1hese are slmple sensorlmoLor/physlcal schemas referrlng Lo such elemenLary dlsLlncLlons as lnslde, ouLslde, boundary, and so on (all anchored ln Lhe preconcepLual seosotlmotot wotlJspoce). Cn Lhe basls of a deLalled sLudy of Lhese klnds of examples, !ohnson argues LhaL lmage schemas emerge from cerLaln baslc forms of sensorlmoLor acLlvlLles and lnLeracLlons and so provlde a ptecooceptool sttoctote Lo our experlence"-very slmllar Lo lageL's role of sensorlmoLor schemas ln subsequenL cognlLlon. !ohnson argues LhaL slnce our concepLual undersLandlng ls shaped by experlence, we also have lmage-schemaLlc concepLs. 1hese concepLs have a baslc loglc, whlch lmparLs sLrucLure Lo Lhe [hlgher] cognlLlve domalns lnLo whlch Lhey are lmaglnaLlvely pro[ecLed. llnally, Lhese pro[ecLlons are noL arblLrary buL are accompllshed Lhrough meLaphorlcal and meLonymlcal mapplng procedures LhaL are Lhemselves moLlvaLed by Lhe sLrucLures of bodlly experlence" (pp. 173-76). All of whlch l hearLlly endorse, as far as lL goes. As l would puL lL, preclsely because Lhe mlnd Lranscends buL lncludes Lhe sensorlmoLor body, Lhe foundaLlonal sLrucLures of Lhe mlnd (and hlgher concepLual/formal LhoughL) do lndeed resL upon preconcepLual bodlly and sensorlmoLor foundaLlons (Lhe lnclude" parL). 8uL Lhose foundaLlons do oot fully explaln or accounL for Lhe funcLlons, paLLerns or capaclLles of Lhe hlgher sLrucLures Lhemselves (Lhe Lranscend" parL). !ohnson's book ls Lhus qulLe apLly named: Lhe mlnd ls noL ln Lhe body, Lhe boJy ls lo tbe mloJ. And for [usL LhaL reason, slgnlflcanL aspecLs of menLal cognlLlon and awareness are noL slmply, or even especlally, sensorlmoLor neLworks. (Llkewlse, splrlL ls noL ln mlnd, mlnd ls ln splrlL, and Lhus menLal lnLerpreLaLlons color, buL do noL creaLe, splrlLual reallLles). 1he auLhors' sensorlmoLor/blologlsLlc LllL furLher LempLs us Lo overlook Lhe equally lmporLanL Lypes of sttoctotol cooplloq LhaL are occurrlng ln Lhe left-nooJ Jlmeosloos tbemselves. 1haL ls, noL only ls Lhe sensorlmoLor organlsm lnLeracLlng wlLh lLs envlronmenL (Lhe upper 8lghL lnLeracLlng wlLh Lhe Lower 8lghL, all of whlch can be lnvesLlgaLed and descrlbed monologlcally), buL also Lhe lnner sub[ecL ls lnLeracLlng wlLh lLs lotetsobjectlve pool of motool ooJetstooJloqs (l.e., Lhe upper LefL ls lnLeracLlng wlLh Lhe Lower LefL), and Lhls muLual lnLersub[ecLlvlLy cannoL be JesctlbeJ or lovestlqoteJ monologlcally: lL ls noL slmply Lhe lnLeracLlon or enacLlon of Lhe organlsm wlLh lLs envlronmenL: lL ls Lhe enacLmenL of Lhe undersLandlng of one person by anoLher, wlLh motoolly sboteJ experlence Lhe colnage and motool ooJetstooJloq Lhe goal. All of Lhose have emplrlcal and sensorlmoLor correlaLes, none of Lhem reslde ln Lhose correlaLes. And Lhls ls where varela's noLlon of sttoctotol cooplloq galns an added usefulness, even lf noL fully acknowledged by Lhe auLhor: lL ls noL [usL Lhe sLrucLural coupllng of Lhe ob[ecLlve organlsm and lLs enacLed envlronmenL, buL also of Lhe sub[ecLlve experlence of LhaL organlsm wlLh Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve experlence of lLs enacLed culLural worldspace (where, agaln, lL creaLes and ls creaLed by lLs forms of lnLersub[ecLlvlLy, and noL [usL lLs forms of lnLerob[ecLlvlLy). 1hus, where varela eL al. aLLack Lhe represenLaLlonal paradlgm for lLs lnslsLence LhaL Lhere ls a preglven world LhaL Lhe preglven organlsm recovers ln percepLlon (l agree wlLh LhaL aLLack), noneLheless Lhe alLernaLlve Lhey propose ls sLlll monologlcal: Lhe monologlcal (sensorlmoLor-speclfled) organlsm eoocts a monologlcal world (Lhe percepLlon of color belng Lhelr favorlLe example). All of whlch ls Lrue enough, and all of whlch ls foundaLlonal (or Lhe sensorlmoLor sLarLlng polnL), buL all of whlch LoLally overlooks Lhe furLher nonreduclble developmenLs ln Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve sphere, whlch cannoL be recovered ln an enacLlve monologlcal paradlgm, buL musL lnclude an enacLlve dlaloglcal paradlgm as well. 1hus, Lhe auLhors (correcLly, l belleve) swlLch from a monologlcal preglven world Lo a monologlcal enacLlve world (whlch ls correcL as far as lL goes), buL fall Lo move on Lo Lhe cruclal componenLs of a dlaloglcally enacLed culLural world, whlch does oot conslsL ln Lhe enacLmenL of monologlcal petceptloo of sotfoces (a paLch of color), buL Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve lotetptetotloo of Jeptbs noL glven merely by Lhe surfaces. 1he auLhors Lhus escape Lhe crude mlrror of naLure paradlgm (monologlcal ooJ preglven), buL only by aLLacklng Lhe preglven parL, noL Lhe monologlcal parL: Lhe paradlgm shlfLs from Lhe monologlcal mlttot of a sensorlmoLor world Lo Lhe monologlcal eooctmeot of a sensorlmoLor world. 1hey grasp correcLly LhaL Lhe sub[ecL enacLs an ob[ecL, buL Lhey fall Lo address Lhe facL LhaL, furLher, sub[ecLs muLually enacL sub[ecLs vla lnLersub[ecLlvlLy, whlch ls noL Lhe percepLlon of a surface paLch buL Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon of dlaloglcal depLh (lLself conLlgenL upon Lhe developmenLal hlsLory of sLrucLural coupllngs ln Lhe culLural worldspace, and noL [usL sLrucLural coupllngs ln Lhe naLural/envlronmenLal/sensorlmoLor worldspace). And fottbet, lL ls only tbtooqb Lhe dlaloglcal enacLlon LhaL one qets to Lransloglcal LmpLlness, and noL Lhrough a regresslve dlssoluLlon of dlaloglcal lnLersub[ecLlvlLy lnLo aLomlsLlc monologlcal sLaLes and reducLlonlsLlc mlndless cognlLlve mechanlsm, Lhe paLh Lhe auLhors ofLen sLray lnLo. (A more lnLensely nonreducLlonlsLlc approach would llkewlse allow a more forceful recognlLlon of Lelos/emergence ln developmenL lLself. Llke all drlfL, naLural drlfL occurs only where Lhere ls some sorL of currenL, ln Lhls case, Lhe currenL of Lhe kosmos, or Lros. LnacLlon of Lhe presenLly glven worldspace ls noL [usL based on post sLrucLural coupllng. 8aLher, based also on Lhe emergenL pressure of Lhe fuLure, Lhe presenL world ls enacLed.) 1haL sald, leL me flnlsh by repeaLlng Lhe sLrengLhs of Lhe enacLlve paradlgm, whlch flrsL of all acLually ls a real paradlgm, because lL embodles a speclflc program of ln[uncLlve research (namely, Lhe open-ended lnvesLlgaLlon of dlrecL llved experlence wlLh a vlew Lo lLs lnLegraLlon wlLh LheoreLlcal models). We mlghL see lL Lhls way: ln va[rayana (whlch Lhe auLhors endorse), lL ls Lyplcal Lo embrace all Lhree 8uddhlsL vehlcles ln someLhlng of a developmenLal arc. Cne beglns wlLh Plnayana mlndfulness, whlch ls Lhe monologlcal lnvesLlgaLlon of lmmedlaLe awareness. Cne Lhen moves Lo Mahayana, and Lhe speclflc approach of exchanglng self and oLher (tooqleo), LhaL ls, lnvesLlgaLlng Lhe Jloloqlcol and lnLersub[ecLlve clrcle of awareness. Cne Lhen moves Lo va[rayana, or Lhe flnal dlssoluLlon of excluslvely monologlcal apprehenslon and dlaloglcal exchange, and resLs ln Lhe nondual lumlnous LmpLlness LhaL playfully manlfesLs all worlds (Lransloglcal). Clven Lhe very crude sLaLe of modern cognlLlve sclence, Lhe auLhors, ln a sense, had no cholce buL Lo glve a Plnayana-level accounL, and ln many ways l Lhlnk Lhls can serve as a beglnnlng foundaLlon for Lhe yeL-hlgher developmenLs of cognlLlve undersLandlng, Lo whlch, no doubL, Lhe auLhors of Lhls volume wlll conLrlbuLe ln no small measure. (lor a crlLlque of phenomenology, see noLe 17 below.) 2. nowhere are Lhe lnadequacles of Laklng monologlcal sclences and Lrylng Lo make Lhem lnLo a compleLe new paradlgm" more obvlous Lhan ln Lhe new physlcs and mysLlclsm" wrlLers and LheorlsLs, whose names are legend. When reducLlonlsLs have a splrlLual experlence (noL generally dealL wlLh ln physlcs LexLbooks), lL usually acLs as an lnclLemenL Lo commlL phllosophy, and Lhe resulL ls noL for Lhe falnL-hearLed. Powever wonderfully well lnLenLloned, mosL of Lhese Lheorles-whlch play on Lhe Lheme LhaL Lhe new physlcs" (quanLum and relaLlvlsLlc) supporLs/suggesLs/proves a mysLlcally unlfled worldvlew-are crlppled by Lrylng Lo slmply exteoJ a flaLland monologlcal paradlgm lnLo dlaloglcal and Lransloglcal domalns (more of Lhe flaLland blgger porLlons of bad food" approach). 1hey generally Lake cerLaln maLhemaLlcal formallsms (especlally Lhe Schroedlnger wave equaLlon and lLs collapse upon measuremenL) and glve Lhem a very wlde lnLerpreLaLlon (desplLe Lhe facL LhaL physlclsLs Lhemselves are sharply dlvlded over how Lo lnLerpreL Lhe formallsms), and Lhey Lhen wed Lhls very loose and generous lnLerpreLaLlon wlLh Lhelr ofLen equally loose lnLerpreLaLlon of mysLlcal splrlLuallLy, and Lhe resulL ls someLhlng llke, Lhe new physlcs supporLs or even proves a mysLlcal worldvlew. 1hls admlxLure ls prompLly called Lhe new paradlgm." uanah Zohar: 1he ldea of a 'quanLum socleLy' sLems from a convlcLlon LhaL a whole new paradlgm ls emerglng from our descrlpLlon of quanLum reallLy and LhaL Lhls paradlgm can be exLended Lo change radlcally our percepLlon of ourselves and Lhe soclal world we wanL Lo llve ln. A wlder appreclaLlon of quanLum reallLy can glve us Lhe concepLual foundaLlons we need Lo brlng abouL a poslLlve revoluLlon ln socleLy" (1be poootom soclety). lrom formallsms descrlblng Lhe lowesL, shallowesL, leasL consclous, leasL-depLhed holons ln exlsLence, exteoJeJ Lo a paradlgm" LhaL ls supposed Lo cover dlaloglcal, lnLersub[ecLlve, culLural exchange based on muLual undersLandlng and muLual recognlLlon: Lhls ls more Lhan a quanLum leap, lL ls a leap of falLh. CuanLum formallsms cannoL even accounL for Lhe fundamenLals of blology and auLopolesls, leL alone economlcs, psychology, llLeraLure, poeLry, morals, and eLhlcs, Lo name a vlLal few. 8uL physlcallsLs are so used Lo Lhlnklng LhaL mosL fundamenLal" means mosL slgnlflcanL" LhaL Lhey belleve all hlgher branches of knowledge musL be grounded ln leasL-depLhed holons or noL be grounded aL all. 1hus Lhe consLanL Lendency Lo exLend physlcs" dlrecLly Lo any and all domalns. 1hus lred Alan Wolf: l belleve LhaL quanLum physlcs, Lhe mosL powerful and rlgorous sclence devlsed Lo daLe, wlll provlde Lhe basls for Lhe formaLlon of a new psychology-a ttoe bomoolstlc psycboloqy." 1hls ls slmply palnful, and lL ls a noLlon LhaL ls by no means conflned Lo ur. Wolf. A Lrue humanlsLlc psychology ls bullL upon processes of lnLersub[ecLlve undersLandlng and muLual recognlLlon, abouL whlch quanLum physlcs has noL a slngle Lhlng Lo say. Surely we do noL wanL Lo base our new humanlsm on a power-drlven monologue wlLh rocks. 1hls exLenslon of Lhe monologlcal hegemony and aggresslve, even vlolenL, reducLlonlsm suffers aL boLh ends of Lhe reducLlon (and everywhere ln beLween). noL only ls reallLy auLomaLlcally assumed Lo revolve most slqolflcootly around Lhose holons LhaL acLually possess Lhe leost slgnlflcance, buL mysLlclsm lLself-Lhere are aL leasL four qulLe dlfferenL varleLles of mysLlclsm, as we have seen-ls homogenlzed lnLo some verslon of Lhe unlfled fleld or dynamlc web or quanLum vacuum (or some such creaLlve readlng of Lhe maLhemaLlcal formallsms), and Lhe Lwo homogenlzed messes (quanLum" and mysLlcal") are crudely pressed LogeLher and presenLed as coverlng all Lhe bases. 8esldes dlsLorLlng boLh ends of Lhe specLrum of exlsLence (pbysls and tbeos), lL guLs everyLhlng ln beLween. lred Alan Wolf's drug-lnduced mysLlcal experlence led hlm Lo Lhls reallzaLlon: l was on Lhls quesL [uslng Lhe psychedellc vlne ayahuasca] Lrylng Lo undersLand shamanlsm from Lhe polnL of vlew of physlcs. WhaL l dlscovered ls LhaL lL can'L be undersLood from Lhe polnL of physlcs alone." Cnly a dedlcaLed physlcal reducLlonlsLlc could make LhaL sLaLemenL-forgeL shamanlsm: noL even blology can be undersLood from Lhe polnL of physlcs alone," nor can arL or economlcs or psychology or soclology. . . . 1haL physlcs doesn'L cover shamanlsm should be Lhe leasL of hls worrles, buL lL perplexes ur. Wolf no llmlL LhaL physlcs doesn'L apply here. And so he decldes LhaL We need a new breed of physlclsLs, who sLudy llvlng processes raLher Lhan Lhe quallLles of maLLer." We have Lhem, and Lhey're called blologlsLs. As we have seen repeaLedly LhroughouL Lhls volume, Lhe sbollowet one goes ln search of slgnlflcance, Lhe more eqoceottlc Lhe bellef sysLem, because egocenLrlsm ls always Lhe correspondlngly shallowesL polnL ln Lhe human holon. Lacklng any real depLh/helghL, one flnds only ooes owo lotetlot surveylng all of reallLy, and all of a sudden, everyLhlng sLarLs relaLlng dlrecLly Lo yoo, and Lhe word maglc of egocenLrlc assoclaLlon sLarLs Lo acLually look profound, and profoundly deslrable. When my lnLenL ls clear," explalns Wolf, paLhways appear as lf by maglc, Laklng me from one place Lo Lhe nexL. CerLaln connecLlons geL made, key phone calls come ln." erhaps LhaL ls some acLual psychlc connecLlon, a LheraplsL mlghL suggesL lL ls narclsslsm and deluslons of reference (ls Lhe world really LhaL accommodaLlng Lo your ego?). Who can Lell? lor Wolf, lL ls all based on Lhe collapse of Lhe quanLum wave packeL, so LhaL, as hls lnLervlewer summarlzes hls poslLlon, lf you lnLend an ashLray, Lhen Lhe cloud of posslblllLles qwlffs lL lnLo belng." lred puLs Lhls qwlfflng Lo good use. ln Llma, eru, before hls ayahuasca experlence, he ls shown a movle, 1be wloJs of Ayoboosco, wlLh whaL mosL people would probably flnd Lo be a raLher Lyplcal and unlmaglnaLlve ploL of an Amerlcan academlc Lrylng Lhe drug, geLLlng hls paradlgm blown, and, of course, falllng ln love wlLh a beauLlful naLlve glrl aL Lhe same Llme (Lake my paradlgm, please). Sure enough, lred Lakes Lhe drug, has hls mlnd blown, and bags a eruvlan babe, all ln a no doubL memorable monLh. lL was as lf, asLonlshlngly, lnexpllcably, Lhe fllm had been wrlLLen as a klnd of llfe-scrlpL Lralnlng enLlrely for hlm." Wolf reporLs breaLhlessly: 1haL was Lhe realm of myLh grabblng me by Lhe collar and saylng, Wake up, lred! We're golng Lo show you why you came down here Lo eru." Many people would have seLLled for drugs and sex, buL apparenLly Lhere's more. Pere's Lhls movle," he conLlnues, made years before you arrlve ln Llma, yeL ln lL you see your llfe lald ouL before you. wos tbe wbole movle moJe fot me? Pe qulckly decldes ln Lhe afflrmaLlve, and so Lhen musL ask, lf so, who was scrlpLlng lL?" 1haL ls, who was scrlpLlng Lhls movle made [usL for hlm, and long before he arrlved? Pe decldes LhaL Lhe AusLrallan Aborlglnes came up wlLh Lhe besL answer. 1he CreaL SplrlL, Lhey Lell us, dreams us and all of maLerlal reallLy lnLo exlsLence." LeL's assume LhaL ls lndeed Lhe case, buL Lhe CreaL SplrlL Lhen scrlpLs everyLhlng LhaL ls happenlng, and no movle, and no evenL, was scrlpLed wholly or especlally for lred Alan Wolf. 1haL pottlcolot movle, ln facL, was scrlpLed by a bunch of noL very lmaglnaLlve fllmmakers, and l would worry mlghLlly, noL celebraLe, lf lL capLured my llfe perfecLly." erhaps lL really was genulnely psychlc, and perhaps lL was narclsslsLlc reference. 8uL my polnL ls LhaL ln elLher case, Lhe monologlcal maps wlll LllL our lnLerpreLaLlons, no maLLer how genulne, ln Lhe dlrecLlon of preconvenLlonal egolsm, because Lhere ls noLhlng ln Lhe maps Lo pull one up Lo dlaloglcal endeavors, and Lhus no way Lo escape genulnely lnLo Lhe Lransloglcal. Cne ls lefL merely wlLh: l have a new paradlgm, and lL ls your [ob Lo change your bellefs Lo accord wlLh mlne. 1here ls no oLher lnLerlor developmenL elLher recommended or menLloned or even hlnLed aL (Lhe embrace of Lhe new monologlcal paradlgm ls slmply supposed Lo raLher auLomaLlcally usher one lnLo homogenlzed mysLlcal mush, drugs, presumably, are opLlonal). As l sald, always Lhe monologlcal vlews play lnLo Lhe hands of dlvlne egolsm and lLs power drlves, whlch ls a polnL LhaL we have seen emphaslzed by LheorlsLs from loucaulL Lo Pabermas. WlLhouL a paradlgm of muLual dlaloglcal recognlLlon and care, Lhere ls no way Lo pull anyone ouL of dlvlne egolsm and lnLo worldcenLrlc compasslon, and from Lhere lnLo Lhe Cver-Soul LhaL ls Lhe World Soul, on Lhe way Lo Lhe mysLery of Lhe ueep alLogeLher, and so lnsLead we waLch a llfe scrlpLed by dlvlne egos, for dlvlne egos, abouL dlvlne egos, and Lhls ls meanL Lo be Lhe basls of a glorlous new paradlgm. And Lhls, lL seems Lo me, ls exacLly Lhe essence of so many new physlcs and mysLlclsm" noLlons-purely monologlcal Lo Lhe core. no doubL. ur. Wolf ls aLLempLlng Lo sLreLch Lhe knowledge quesL by movlng ouLslde Lhe realm of physlcs, and for Lhls aLLempL we can all applaud. 8uL ln my oplnlon, lf we are noL much more careful ln how we lnLerpreL Lhls expanded knowledge quesL-lf we do noL draw on all four quadranLs equally, and lf lnsLead we slmply orlenL ourselves around baslcally Lhe lowesL holons ln Lhe upper-8lghL quadranL-we are consLanLly ln danger of LllLlng our lnLerpreLaLlons ln preraLlonal, noL LransraLlonal, dlrecLlons. (8lchard LevlLon, 1hrough Lhe Shaman's uoorway: ureamlng Lhe unlverse wlLh lred Alan Wolf," oqo Iootool, !uly-AugusL 1992.) 3. 1hls lack of culLural coherency ln Amerlca has acceleraLed ln Lhe lasL few decades or so, wlLh Lhe resulL LhaL vlrLually every group or class or Lype of clLlzen ln Lhe counLry ls aLLempLlng Lo become lLs own naLlon, lLs own speclal group cerLlfled by speclal legal rlghLs. 1he easlesL and fasLesL way Lo secure speclal rlghLs ls Lo compeLe for Lhe coveLed sLaLus of vlcLlm, for Lhls allows Lhe vlcLlm group, ln effecL, Lo clalm war reparaLlons. 1he manufacLure of rlghLs has gone lnLo overdrlve, wlLh Lhe varlous classes llnlng up ln courL Lo ouLclalm each oLher as Lo who has been Lhe mosL vlcLlmlzed, and Lhus who deserves Lhe mosL war reparaLlons. 1hls has resulLed ln a serles of masslve and blzarre lCus, wlLh everybody Lrylng Lo exLracL paymenL from everybody else, and nobody wllllng Lo pay. AL Lhe beglnnlng of Lhls free-for-all for rlghLs, Lhe one greaL pool of war reparaLlons was Lhe whlLe male, a pool from whlch everybody eagerly dlpped. 8uL Lhls apparenLly unllmlLed fund of reparaLlons has been LoLally spllnLered and dlvlded up (and drled up), because whlLe males now lnclude males LhaL Lhemselves are vylng for speclal rlghLs as vlcLlms: drug abusers, emoLlonally dlsLurbed, obese, shorL, hearlng-lmpalred, handlcapped, saLanlcally rlLually abused. 1here ls no slngle and slmple fund of bad guys lefL. Lverybody, lL seems, has vlcLlmlzed everybody else, and Lhus everybody ls demandlng speclal rlghLs Lo proLecL Lhem from everybody else. 1here are no rlghLs wlLhouL responslblllLles, no agency wlLhouL communlon. lL ls physlcally, LheoreLlcally, and exlsLenLlally lmposslble Lo have one wlLhouL Lhe oLher. 8uL ln Lhe spllnLerlng culLure of Amerlca, each group wanLs agency (rlghLs) wlLh no communlon (responslblllLy). l happen Lo be ln favor of many of Lhese rlghLs, buL unless Lhls counLry flnds a more common unlon and overrldlng prlnclple of coherency-unless Lhese rlghLs are plugged lnLo correlaLlve responslblllLles and communlons-Lhen Lhe manufacLure of rlghLs alone slmply coottlbotes Lo Lhe furLher ftoqmeototloo of Lhe counLry, whlch alone can secure and proLecL Lhe new rlghLs ln Lhe flrsL place. 1he lCus are comlng due. . . . 4. We can now flnlsh our accounL wlLh deconsLrucLlon, and seL lL ln Lhe conLexL of nagar[una's LmpLlness (a Loplc l wlll reLurn Lo ln volume 3 ln much greaLer deLall, Lhe followlng may be Laken as a prellmlnary summary). We have seen LhaL deconsLrucLlon ls based on Lhe Lwln prlnclples, as Culler puL lL, LhaL meanlng ls conLexL-dependenL and conLexLs are boundless-preclsely anoLher approach Lo Lhe lCu prlnclple (Lhe conLexLs are whole buL are never compleLed, and lf Lhey are, Lhey self-conLradlcL: compleLe or coherenL, never boLh). A llLerary LexL, Lo Lhe exLenL lL aLLempLs Lo be a whole work," a work of arL," a self-conLalned whole," wlll Lherefore lssue a hldden lCu, an lmpllclL lCu-hldden or lmpllclL because language Lends Lo Lake lLs own naLure as glven and unproblemaLlc and Lhus unexamlned (whlch we'll reLurn Lo ln a momenL). 8uL flrsL, Lo glve a counLerexample, maLhemaLlcs makes lLs own LransflnlLe lCus expllclt-Lhe seLs musL expand lndeflnlLely or maLhemaLlcs self-desLrucLs-and maLhemaLlclans do Lhls expllcltly because, so Lo speak, Lhelr [ob ls Lo scruLlnlze maLhemaLlcal language ln lLs very synLax, lLs very sLrucLure, and so evenLually Lhey were forced Lo make expllclL Lhese lCus. MaLhemaLlcs had noL always done Lhls, ln facL, Lhe lCus were very much lmpllclL, hldden, unconsclous unLll Lhe 1arskl/Cdel revoluLlon, whlch, so Lo speak, psychoanalyzed maLh and dug up, from Lhe depLhs of lLs foundaLlons, Lhe dlrLy llLLle secreL: maLhemaLlcs ls noL, and never can be, coherenL and compleLe. When 1arskl and Cdel wrenched Lhls secreL from Lhe depLhs of maLhemaLlcs, lL flrsL caused an lnLense commoLlon, almosL panlc, because Lhe very foundaLlons of maLhemaLlcs-long Laken Lo be Lhe one, Lrue, self-sufflclenL, self-compleLe, and self- cerLaln form of human knowledge-was now shown Lo be lnherenLly wobbllng beLween self-conLradlcLlon, on Lhe one hand, and lncompleLeness (un-self-cerLalnLy) on Lhe oLher. 8uL nowadays lL's all Laken raLher ln sLrlde: leL Lhe seLs expand forever, and leL us geL on abouL our buslness as usual. As l would puL lL, oll holons lssue an lCu Lo Lhe kosmos, and so whaL else ls new? WhaL else was new was LhaL essenLlally Lhe same drama began Lo unfold ln Lhe sLudy of everyday language lLself, and llLerary language ln parLlcular. Language speakers and even language LheorlsLs had long been operaLlng on hldden lCus, and on Lhe nalve assumpLlon LhaL language ls slmply a LransparenL wlndow Lhrough whlch one merely gazes undlsLorLedly aL a preglven world (Lhls was, for example, loucaulL's polnL abouL Lhe Classlcal Age: language was unproblemaLlc). WlLh Lhe llngulsLlc Lurn" (daLlng roughly Lo Saussure), where language began Lo look aL lLself, Lhe Lhlck Langle and convoluLed web of sysLemaLlcally generaLed meanlng became a masslve problem: how ln facL dld language represenL a world, when lnherenLly any word can sLand for any Lhlng? 1he relaLlons betweeo slqos tbemselves, and noL so much Lhe slmpler relaLlon beLween slgns and Lhlngs, became Lhe focus of lnLense lnvesLlgaLlon. We saw Lhls Lurn Lake Lwo broad dlrecLlons, followlng elLher Lhe LefL-Pand paLh of hermeneuLlcs (meanlng ls generaLed by background and ofLen nondlscurslve soclal pracLlces, whlch can only be grasped from wltblo Lhe conLexL lLself) or Lhe 8lghL-Pand paLh of sLrucLurallsm (meanlng ls generaLed by sLrucLures or supra-lndlvldual paLLerns of rule-governed llngulsLlc behavlor LhaL can only be grasped from Lhe ouLslde ln an exLerlor mode of lnvesLlgaLlon). PermeneuLlcs focused on Lhe slqolfleJs (LP), whlch could only be grasped from wlLhln by empaLhlc parLlclpaLlon, and sLrucLurallsm focused on Lhe slqolflets (8P), whlch can besL be approached ln a dlsLanclng sLance of exLerlor sLudy. 1hls 8lghL-Pand sLrucLurallsm soon gave way Lo Lhe neo- and posLsLrucLurallsLs (loucaulL Lo 8arLhes Lo Lacan Lo uerrlda), whlch emerged wlLh Lhe lnslghL LhaL Lhe slgnlflers Lhemselves were largely free-floaLlng," anchored noL ln any preglven emplrlcal world, buL raLher anchored all Loo ofLen ln pollLlcs, power, or pre[udlce. 1haL ls, meanlng was noL slmply lylng around on Lhe surface ready Lo be unamblguously percelved llke a paLch of color (as ln Lhe lnadequaLe emplrlcal Lheorles), buL raLher was a complex self-referenLlal sysLem LhaL was profoundly conLexL-dependenL, and . . . conLexLs are boundless. And tbot gave Lhe posLsLrucLural deconsLrucLlonlsLs Lhe Lool Lo aggresslvely (ofLen wlldly) deconsLrucL meanlngs LhaL were prevlously felL Lo be engraved ln concreLe and seL ln Lhe unvarylng ways LhaL Lhlngs always are": now meanlng, and Lhe world of meanlng, was dlsclosed noL as a percepLlon, buL as a consLrucLlon, and Lo Lhe exLenL Lhls consLrucLlon was mlsLaken for eLernal verlLles, lL could be LexLually deconsLrucLed [usL Lo polnL ouL how fleeLlng lLs glven LruLhs" were, how conLexL-dependenL Lhey were, and how conLexLs shlfLed endlessly, and how ln prlnclple Lhey could never be masLered. . . . 1he deconsLrucLlonlsLs (parLlcularly sLarLlng aL ?ale, home of a Lrlo of professors-uerrlda hlmself, Lhe brllllanL aul de Man, and !. Mlller-who were dubbed Lhe boa-deconsLrucLors") began by examlnlng lltetoty texts (uerrlda's examlnaLlon of 8ousseau's double use of Lhe Lerm ootote sLlll belng a classlc). As l earller lndlcaLed, a llLerary LexL, Lo Lhe exLenL lL aLLempLs Lo be a whole work," a work of arL," a self-conLalned whole," wlll Lherefore lssue one or more hldden lCus, lmpllclL lCus-hldden or lmpllclL because language Lends Lo Lake lLs own naLure as glven and LransparenL. AlLhough Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs dld noL aL flrsL arLlculaLe Lhe prlnclples of Lhelr own procedure (Lhey dld noL arLlculaLe Lhe lCu prlnclple, even Lhough Lhey were uslng lL), Lhey noneLheless wlelded lL wlLh bruLal efflclency. 1haL ls: A llLerary LexL, llke all holons, lssues some sorL of lCu: lL wlll conLradlcL lLself aL cerLaln cruclal polnLs, lL wlll use cerLaln key Lerms buL glve Lhem opposlLe meanlngs, lL wlll assume LruLhs LhaL lL cannoL lLself generaLe, lL wlll double back on lLself self- reflexlvely and Lhus erase lLs own message, lL wlll creaLe a hlerarchy of meanlng only Lo have Lhe LexL lLself upseL Lhe hlerarchy, lL wlll creaLe blnary opposlLlons LhaL preLend Lo be separaLe buL acLually undo each oLher, lL wlll marglnallze some noLlon as belng noL cenLral yeL deflne Lhe cenLral noLlon ln Lerms of Lhe marglnal-Lhe llsL ls vlrLually endless, and Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs zeroed ln on [usL Lhese lCus, [usL Lhese hldden conLradlcLlons and lnconslsLencles and self-beLrayals LhaL Lhe LexL lLself would lobeteotly lssue. And LhaL was exacLly Lhe agenda of Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs: flnd Lhe polnLs ln Lhe LexL where Lhe LexL refers Lo lLself, evenLually conLradlcLs lLself, and Lhus self-deconsLrucLs ([usL as maLhemaLlcs does when lL Lrles Lo become compleLe and coherenL). And [usL as Lhe lnlLlal dlscovery of Lhe lCu prlnclple ln maLhemaLlcs caused an uproar verglng on panlc, so Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs were Lhe LerrorlsLs of Lhe llngulsLlc world, sendlng panlc echolng down Lhe halls of esLabllshmenL academla. vety LexL, wlLhouL excepLlon, could be deconsLrucLed (because every holon lssues an lCu, ln Lhe llLerary LexL, slmply look for Lhe meanlng Lhe LexL ls Lrylng Lo convey, show LhaL LhaL meanlng ls dependenL upon a conLexL beyond Lhe LexL and Lhus LoLally ouL of conLrol of Lhe LexL lLself, and Lhus Lhe LexL becomes undone," becomes noL a self-conLalned and coherenL arLlsLlc sLaLemenL, buL merely Lhe unconsclous mouLhplece of conLexLs beyond lLs conLrol, conLexLs LhaL swamp lLs own proclalmed message and seL lL afloaL on a sea of slgnlflers of whlch lL ls only dlmly aware: far from carrylng an arLlsLlc and noble lmpacL, lL ls a duped lackey of conLexLs LhaL use and abuse lL, conLexLs lL ls apparenLly Loo lgnoranL Lo grasp). 1he deconsLrucLlonlsLs, havlng (lmpllclLly) sLumbled on Lhe lCu prlnclple ln llLerary holons, evenLually leL Lhls LruLh spln all ouL of conLrol, and ln ways slmply noL warranLed by LhaL LruLh lLself-ways LhaL Lherefore Lurned flnally on Lhe LerrorlsLs Lhemselves and deconsLrucLed Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs. We have seen repeaLedly LhroughouL Lhls book LhaL slldlng conLexLs do noL mean Lhe conLexLs are metely arblLrary and Lherefore lmposed metely by power or pre[udlce. ConLexLs sllde, buL Lhey ofLen sllde ln relaLlvely sLable ways, meanlng ls conLexL-bound, buL many conLexLs are common or shared (and can be so dlsclosed ln muLual undersLandlng), conLexLs are boundless, buL LhaL doesn'L prevenL Lhem from belng flxed ln relaLlve buL sLable ways, LhaL socloculLural reallLy ls largely consLrucLed does noL mean lL ls consLrucLed arblLrarlly, for llngulsLlc meanlng ls lLself exposed Lo exLrallngulsLlc resLralnLs (ln boLh l, we, and lL domalns), and LhaL allows meooloq Lo be Lled Lo vollJlty clolms LhaL can be redeemed ln Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve clrcle, valldlLy clalms of LruLh, LruLhfulness, culLural [usLness, and funcLlonal flL. As l summarlzed lL ln chapLer 3, Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs (and exLreme relaLlvlsLs) wenL from saylng LhaL no perspecLlve ls flnally prlvlleged Lo saylng LhaL all perspecLlves are slmply equal-aL whlch polnL Lhls sLance Lurns on lLself, undercuLs and deconsLrucLs lLs own clalm Lo valldlLy, and collapses under lLs own welghL. !usL as Lhe expllclL dlsclosure of Lhe lCu prlnclple ln maLhemaLlcs moved lL from closed and self-sufflclenL LruLhs Lo sLable, open, relaLlve LruLhs (wlLh a perlod of panlc), so Lhe llLerary world began Lo slowly make a slmllar LranslLlon (also Lhrough much lnlLlal panlc). 8uL lL soon became obvlous LhaL Lhe end resulL of deconsLrucLlonlsL llLerary crlLlque was olwoys tbe some: Lhe LexL blows up. ueconsLrucLlon became a generlc, all-purpose solvenL, lL Lold us someLhlng abouL all llLerary holons and abouL language ln general (all LexLs lssue an lCu), buL abouL speclflc LexLs lL had preclsely noLhlng Lo say. As llLerary crlLlclsm, lL was vlrLually worLhless (even loucaulL referred Lo uerrlda as a llLerary LerrorlsL). 8uL here was a llLerary crlLlclsm" made Lo order for Lhe Lenured radlcals of Lhe slxLles: haven'L Lhe wlLs Lo bulld a bulldlng? no problem, [usL blow one up lnsLead. [See Wllber, 8oometltls (forLhcomlng)]. 1housands of h.u. dlsserLaLlons ln deconsLrucLlonlsL Lhemes were lssued by Amerlcan unlverslLles, wlLh lndlvlduals llke SLanley llsh leadlng Lhe way. 8y 1979, uerrlda was Lhe mosL frequenLly clLed auLhorlLy ln papers submlLLed Lo Lhe [ournal of Lhe Modern Language AssoclaLlon. ueconsLrucLlon as a movemenL never caughL on ln Cermany or lrance or Lngland (or anywhere else, for LhaL maLLer), and Lhus, aL Lhe helghL of Lhe Lear-down frenzy, !acques uerrlda exclalmed, Amerlca ls deconsLrucLlon!" lL never caughL on elsewhere because, aparL from lLs undenlable conLrlbuLlon vls-a-vls Lhe lCu prlnclple ln llLeraLure, lL had noLhlng else of subsLance Lo say: lL could only deconsLrucL whaL somebody else had Lhe creaLlvlLy Lo consLrucL: lL was baslcally paraslLlc. And lL ended, as has ofLen been polnLed ouL, ln pure nlhlllsm, aL whlch polnL lL dlssolved lLs own sLance, and cerLalnly lLs own credlblllLy. 1he end of any serlous deconsLrucLlonlsL movemenL came wlLh Lhe aul de Man debacle. Cn Lhe mornlng of uecember 1, 1987, Lhe New otk 1lmes reporLed LhaL a young 8elglan scholar named CrLwln de Craef had recenLly dlscovered lnconLroverLlble evldence LhaL ln Lhe 1940s aul de Man, Lhe mosL glfLed and brllllanL of Lhe Amerlcan deconsLrucLlonlsLs, had been a nazl sympaLhlzer (wrlLlng arLlcles and revlews for 8elglan newspapers supporLlng Lhe nazl cause-someLhlng he had gone Lo greaL palns Lo hlde) and had auLhored such arLlcles as 1he !ews ln ConLemporary LlLeraLure," where he had sLaLed, among oLher Lhlngs, LhaL a soluLlon Lo Lhe !ewlsh quesLlon . . . would noL lnvolve deplorable consequences for Lhe WesL. lL would lose, all Lold, a few personalLles of medlocre value. . . ." 1he deconsLrucLlonlsLs lmmedlaLely leapL Lo de Man's defense wlLh all Lhe concepLual Lools aL Lhelr sllppery dlsposal, and furlously aLLempLed Lo demonsLraLe LhaL lnherenLly slldlng conLexLs meanL LhaL de Man's pro-nazl acLlons were acLually Lhe opposlte of a nazl sympaLhlzer, LhaL hls helplng Lhe nazls was really noL helplng Lhe nazls, LhaL hls anLl-!ewlsh sLance was really pro-!ewlsh, LhaL Lhe crlmlnal was really Lhe vlcLlm, and oLher varlaLlons on Lhe Lheme LhaL yes" really means no" because conLexLs are boundless. . . . (Curlously, Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs dld noL llkewlse Lhlnk LhaL less salary" was Lhe same as more salary," or LhaL no Lenure" was really Lenure." Amazlng how language sLralghLens rlghL up when you're slncere.) uL blunLly, Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsL defense came down Lo: slnce Lhere ls no way Lo anchor LruLh and rlghL, Lhere can be no false and wrong elLher, so aul de Man's crlme was really lLs blnary opposlLe, lnnocence-and anoLher nasLy value hlerarchy had once agaln been deconsLrucLed and lnverLed, an lnverslon LhaL converLed a vlclous acL lnLo a merely llngulsLlc predlcamenL, and excused an onLologlcal demon as belng merely an embarrasslng llLerary faux pas, abouL as grlevous as, say, a dangllng parLlclple. AperspecLlval madness-Lhe lnevlLable endgame of confuslng slldlng conLexLs wlLh merely arblLrary conLexLs, and Lhe lnevlLable endgame of dlsconnecLlng meanlng from valldlLy clalms, clalms LhaL selze conLexLs and hold Lhem sLlll long enough Lo esLabllsh clearly enough [usL who dld, and who dld noL, help Lhe nazls. As l lndlcaLe ln Lhe narraLlve, Lhe besL way Lo undersLand Lhe real lmporL of Lhe parLlal LruLhs LhaL Lhe deconsLrucLlonlsLs sLumbled on ls Lo seL Lhem ln Lhe much deeper conLexL of nagar[una's more radlcal (and, paradoxlcally, much more sane) deconsLrucLlon, where relaLlve LruLhs are conceded a relaLlve reallLy (maLhemaLlcs works [usL flne ln Lhe flnlLe realm, as long as lL admlLs lLs lCus and does noL preLend Lo Lhe AbsoluLe), buL, demonsLraLes nagar[una, lf any relaLlve LruLh ls pushed Lo Lhe absoluLe, lL conLradlcLs and Jecoosttocts ltself (whlch ls whaL happened Lo deconsLrucLlon when lL LhoughL lL had become absoluLe). See noLe 1 above. lor nagar[una, Lhe deconsLrucLlon of relaLlve LruLhs leaves noL nlhlllsm buL LmpLlness: lL clears away Lhe concepLual rubble ln Lhe mlnd's eye and Lhus allows Lhe space of nondual lnLulLlon Lo dlsclose lLself, and Lhus lL follows Lo Lhe llmlL Lhe whole polnL of Lhe lCu game: lf you don'L wanL Lo be a compleLe self-conLradlcLlon, Lhen you musL come Lo resL ln lnflnlLe LmpLlness, whlch alone redeems all lCus, and whlch alone seLs Lhe soul free on Lhe ocean of lnflnlLe MysLery. 3. 1aylor, neqel, p. 39. My lLallcs. 6. lbld., p. 44. My lLallcs. l have changed men" Lo men and women." 7. CuoLed ln Welss, neqel, p. 13. As l puL lL earller (ln chap. 8), hlgher developmenL ls lmporLanL, noL because lL acLually moves closer Lo Cround, buL because lL makes lL harder Lo deny Lhe ever-presenL Cround. 8. As for Lhelr use of vlslon-loglc: kanL had carefully dlfferenLlaLed Lhe 8lg 1hree (Lheory, morals, [udgmenL), expressed LheoreLlcally ln emplrlc-analyLlc lnqulry and pragmaLlcally ln caLegorlcal morallLy (acL ln such a way LhaL Lhe law governlng your behavlor mlghL be unlversal"-l.e., posLconvenLlonal), and however much he expressed Lhe hope LhaL aesLheLlc [udgmenL mlghL brldge Lhe gap beLween Lheory and pracLlce, hls own efforLs aL such, alLhough very suggesLlve Lo a whole generaLlon, were noL alLogeLher saLlsfacLory. 1he flrsL Lhlng llchLe dld was aLLempL Lo break Lhe hold of formal raLlonallLy by demollshlng kanL's Lhlng-ln-lLself." lf, as kanL had sald, Lhe Lhlng-ln-lLself can never ln any way be known, Lhen, sald llchLe, lL doesn'L exlsL. ln lLs place he subsLlLuLed Lhe power of Lhe producLlve lmaglnaLlon of Lhe lnflnlLe and supra-lndlvldual Self, whlch ln essence meanL: lL ls noL LhaL Lhere ls some forever unknowable Lhlng-ln-lLself, qulLe dlfferenL from consclousness, LhaL lmplnges on consclousness and causes" percepLlon, lL ls raLher LhaL Lhere ls only one dynamlc Llfe process LhaL knows lLself ln varlous degrees and from varlous angles. 1he world-knows-lLself ln varlous ways, and ln order Lo do so lL flrsL cuLs lLself up, so Lo speak, lnLo flnlLe sub[ecL and flnlLe ob[ecL-buL boLh sub[ecL and ob[ecL lssue from Lhe same ground, so Lhelr apparenL lncompaLlblllLy ls never ulLlmaLe, and Lhe ground can be recovered ln pure nondual percepLlon. 8uL Lhe ground of whlch llchLe speaks ls almosL always Lhe Cver-Soul, Lhe psychlc-level WlLness (hls pure Lgo), he speaks consLanLly of lL as ever-recedlng," whlch ls very Lyplcal of psychlc-level WlLness lnLulLlons (Lhe causal WlLness oevet recedes). Pe expresses Lhls psychlc vlslon ln cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc, whlch shows up mosL noLably ln hls moral poslLlon, whlch demands an organlzaLlon whlch Lranscends Lhe lndlvldual SLaLe, namely, a federaLlon of all SLaLes," and whlch meanL a worldwlde communlLy of world clLlzens. Schelllng was of slmllar oplnlon. As for exlsteotlol meooloq, whlch, as we have seen, so ofLen accompanles cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc: ln Lhese romanLlc groups Lhere was an lronlcal Lranscendlng, a golng beyond, Lhe glven forms of soclal exlsLence. 1hls [paradoxlcally buL Lyplcally] resulLs ln a feellng of empLlness wlLh respecL Lo Lhe meanlng of llfe. ?ou see now LhaL Lhe cenLral problem of Lhe LwenLleLh cenLury, namely, Lhe quesLlon of Lhe meanlng of llfe, came ouL very sLrongly ln Lhe second perlod of 8omanLlclsm" (1llllch, p. 383). Pegel's 8eason (vetoooft)-as opposed Lo Lhe undersLandlng (vetstooJ) of formal operaLlons-ls one varleLy of pure vlslon- loglc: dlalecLlcal, unlLlng opposlLes, members passlng lnLo Lhe oLher" aL every polnL, and one member lmplylng/conLalnlng all Lhe oLhers (neLwork-loglc). 1hls lnLerpeneLraLlon of opposlLes" was one of Lhe famous summarles of vlslon-loglc (Lngels). As for Lhelr gllmpse of hlgher or Lranspersonal domalns: as l [usL menLloned, llchLe seems Lo have had a very sLrong psychlc- level sLance, hls pure Lgo ls almosL pure psychlc-level WlLness (or Cver-Soul), whlch llchLe always approaches by Lhe ln[uncLlon: Cbserve Lhe observlng self," whlch of course you can'L, buL whlch for preclsely LhaL reason leads you Lo an ever-recedlng" lnLulLlon of Lhe Seer as LhaL whlch cannoL be seen buL Lhrough whlch all LhaL ls seen moves. llchLe's meLhod opens one, l belleve, lnLo psychlc-level WlLnesslng, buL noL sLably lnLo subLle or causal WlLnesslng, lL was neverLheless a glanL sLep forward from formal operaLlonal, and a Lrue blossomlng of WesLern vedanLa. Pegel's AbsoluLe ls very slmllar Lo Lhe low-causal saguna 8rahman-Cod's consequenL naLure," Lhe ulLlmaLe (buL ever-ln- process) Polon LhaL embraces all manlfesL holons (and ls, ln LhaL speclal sense, dependenL upon Lhem), and hls CaLegorles are very slmllar Lo Lhe archeLypes of Lhe hlgh-subLle (prlmordlal naLure"), alLhough many LradlLlons, such as Lhe ?ogachara of Asanga and vasubandhu, see Lhe archeLypes as hablL-memorles more Lhan eLernal lorms, Lhough all agree LhaL Lhe archeLypes are formaLlve processes prlor Lo buL noL oLher Lo any parLlcular manlfesLaLlon. Pegel had no experlence, and no concepLlon, lL seems, of Lhe pure causal unmanlfesL, and hls [oke on Schelllng (LhaL dark nlghL ln whlch all cows look allke") acLually works agalnsL hlm here. Pls lnflnlLe-ln-Lhe-flnlLe" ls Lhus low-causal ln Lhe flnlLe," and noL ulLlmaLe-ln-Lhe-flnlLe." 1hls ls also shown by reference Lo Lwo aspecLs of Lhe hlgh-causal, boLh of whlch Pegel denled, and boLh of whlch Lherefore slLuaLe hls lnflnlLy elsewhere (l.e., ln Lhe low- and noL hlgh-causal). Cne, Lhe unmanlfesL or hlgh-causal ls ln no way dependenL upon, or affecLed by, any manlfesLaLlon-manlfesLaLlon lLself does noL add Lo or subLracL from lL ln any way whaLsoever (Lhe whole world, sald LckharL, adds noLhlng Lo Codhead, Lhls ls also loLlnus's vlew, and 8amana's). 1wo, we cannoL say LhaL creaLlon oecessotlly arlses from Lhe causal, nelLher, however, can we say lL does noL-Lhose are Lwo alLernaLlve vlews of SplrlL, buL SplrlL ls noL an alLernaLlve (ls noL duallsLlc). When Lhe sages speak of Lhe superabundance of Lhe Cne" and lLs overflowlng ln and as Lhe Many," LhaL ls a poeLlc concesslon Lo Lhe verbal world, lL ls mosL deflnlLely noL Lhe basls of a prlnclple of sufflclenL reason. Whenever sponLaneous superabundance" ls reduced Lo Lhe prlnclple of sufflclenL reason (and we see Lhls ln Lhlnkers as dlverse as Splnoza, Lelbnlz, aspecLs of SalnL 1homas, Pegel, eLc.), lL ls obvlous LhaL Lhey are Lrylng Lo Lhlnk Lhelr way" Lo or from SplrlL, and LhaL wlll never work. 1urn now Lo Lhe low-causal (flnal-Cod, soqooo 8rahman): as Lhe (ever-recedlng) Polon of all manlfesL holons, lL parLlclpaLes ln Lhe experlence of every holon and ls, ln a sense, Lhe resulL," aL any sLage, of Lhe sum LoLal of all holons' experlence aL LhaL polnL ln manlfesLaLlon, alLhough lL ls noL slmply Lhe summaLlon (buL Lhe organlzlng process as well). 1hls ls, of course, very close Lo WhlLehead's consequenL naLure and Pegel's self-acLuallzlng SplrlL, ln whlch all ls preserved (along wlLh lLs prlmordlal naLure" of formaLlve processes ln Lhe hlgh-subLle, whlch are prlor Lo buL noL oLher Lo any manlfesLaLlon). Schelllng's brlef buL unmlsLakable experlences of Lhe hlgh-causal show up ln Lhls docLrlne of Lhe pure undlfferenLlaLed Abyss (utqtooJ)-pure LmpLlness-whlch ls lndeed a dark nlghL ln whlch all cows do ln facL look allke. Llke Pegel, however, he seems Lo have no clear experlence or concepLlon of Lhe ulLlmaLe sLages, hls lnflnlLe-ln-Lhe-flnlLe" ls hlgh-causal-ln-Lhe-flnlLe." All of Lhese experlences (or lnLulLlons) were largely, as l sald, LranslaLed downward lnLo Lerms of vlslon-loglc, and Lhls lefL no ln[uncLlve proof for Lhelr exlsLence-Lhe parLlcularly faLal flaw of ldeallsm. 1he ldeallsLs undoubLedly gllmpsed slgnlflcanL porLlons of Lhe Lranspersonal domaln, and aL leasL made Lhem a LheoreLlcal cornersLone of Lhelr sysLems. 8uL gllmpslng ls noL llvlng-ldeallsm had no conLemplaLlve paLh Lo assure Lhe reproduclble resulLs of lLs random lnLulLlons. lurLher, slnce vlslon-loglc was Lhe acLual level aL whlch Lhey were mosL sLably adapLed, Lhey had a Lendency Lo confuse SplrlL wlLh vlslon-loglc lLself, and, ln facL, Lhls ls exacLly whaL Pegel does (1he real ls raLlonal [8eason = vlslon-loglc or dlalecLlcal-neLwork], Lhe raLlonal ls real"). ln Lhls sense, Lhe ldeallsLs were lndeed ldea-lsLs" or Mlnd-lsLs," and noL neuma-lsLs" or SplrlL-lsLs." ln ?ogachara Lerms, Lhe ldeallsLs ldenLlfled 8eallLy wlLh mooos (or, aL besL, wlLh LalnLed oloyo-vljoooo) and dld noL clearly break Lhrough Lo pure Alaya (or Amala), or causal/nondual 1husness. 1hls led Pegel Lo Lhe bellef LhaL all Lhe essenLlals of Lhe manlfesL world could be JeJoceJ by dlalecLlcal reasonlng, and Lhls led Lo hls confuslng of loglcal deducLlon wlLh hlsLorlcal processlon. lL dldn'L Lake a 8ussell or a Moore Lo fundamenLally undo LhaL proposlLlon. Many people were sLruck by lLs forced" or mechanlcal" naLure. lL wasn'L so much LhaL Pegel's general concluslons were wrong as LhaL hls meLhodology was enLlrely ouL of place for whaL are, afLer all, LransraLlonal domalns. 8uL even wlLhln hls own sysLem, Pegel could noL dellver Lhe reconclllaLlon" (whaL we mlghL call ulLlmaLe lnLegraLlon") LhaL Lhe sysLem promlsed. As l would word lL, Lhe dlalecLlc mlghL geL you Lo vlslon- loglc, and polnL LanLallzlngly Lo hlgher (and even causal) occaslons-no mean feaL-buL lL could noL acLually brlng you Lo Lhose hlgher levels, and Lhus lL could noL flnally or ln any ulLlmaLe fashlon lnLegraLe Lhe Ascendlng and uescendlng currenLs ln Lhe human belng (alLhough, we mlghL say, lL would be a sLep ln Lhe rlghL dlrecLlon). Schelllng was aware of Lhls lnadequacy and devoLed hls remalnlng years Lo developlng exlsLenLlal (poslLlve") phllosophy, whlch, l would malnLaln, was alLogeLher approprlaLe, slnce Lhe cenLaurlc-exlsLenLlal level was and always had been Lhe ldeallsLs' home base. CenLaurlc vlslon-loglc can lnLegraLe AscenL and uescenL up Lo and down from LhaL level, buL noL beyond Lo Lhelr common source and acLual reconclllaLlon." As Schelllng's ersLwhlle frlend Schlller would puL lL, ln reallLy Lhere wlll always remaln a preponderance of one of Lhese elemenLs [AscenL and uescenL] over Lhe oLher, and Lhe hlghesL polnL Lo whlch experlence can aLLaln [for all Lhey knew] conslsLs ln an osclllaLlon beLween Lhese Lwo prlnclples"-beLween, LhaL ls, fleelng Lhe shadows or embraclng Lhe shadows, wlLh no dlscovery of LhaL nondual awareness LhaL unlLes Lranscendence and embrace ln every acL of cholceless awareness. 9. As l wlll argue ln volume 3, Lhe greaL quesL of an lnLegral posLmodernlLy ls for cenLaurlc vlslon-loglc, or Lhe aperspecLlval- lnLegral bodymlnd as a collecLlve cenLer of soclal gravlLy-a developmenL LhaL, l wlll argue, awalLed Lhe evoluLlon of Lhe compuLer and lnformaLlon Lechnology, Lhe lndusLrlal base could supporL only an lnsLrumenLal raLlonallLy. ln shorL, as l consLrue lL: Lhe quesL of modernlLy was for Lhe Lgo ln raLlonallLy, Lhe quesL of posLmodernlLy ls for Lhe CenLaur ln aperspecLlval vlslon-loglc (and l wlll relaLe Lhem Lo Lhe lndusLrlal and lnformaLlonal base ln volume 2). [See also 1be Mottloqe of 5eose ooJ 5ool ooJ loteqtol lsycboloqy.] As lndlcaLed ln noLe 3 for chapLer 11, we can loosely deflne modernlLy as conslsLlng of any or all of Lhe followlng facLors: (1) Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree (kanL), (2) Lhe rlse of Lhe phllosophy of Lhe ego-sub[ecL (Pabermas), (3) Lhe rlse of lnsLrumenLal raLlonallLy (Peldegger) and lLs base of lndusLrlallzaLlon, (4) Lhe Lransparency (nonproblemaLlc" naLure) of language (pre- Saussure), (3) Lhe wldespread Lurn wlLhln (1aylor), (6) Lhe bellef ln unlvalenL progress-all of whlch l have summarlzed as Lhe Lgo ln raLlonallLy." Llkewlse, posLmodernlLy may Lhen be loosely deflned as any aLLempL Lo develop beyond (or aL any raLe Lo respond Lo) Lhose facLors (focuslng parLlcularly on Lhe cenLaur ln vlslon-loglc"). ln many ways, Lhe flrsL facLor (Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree) remalns Lhe cruclal lLem, and Lhe loteqtotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree, now LhaL Lhey have been lrrevocably dlfferenLlaLed, remalns Lhe cruclal problem, ln Lhe developmenL from modernlLy Lo posLmodernlLy. ln a global world lncreaslngly unlLed only by Lhe language of naLural sclence (and slmllar monologlcal lL-languages, wheLher flnanclal, lnformaLlonal, economlc, or ecologlcal), Lhe recalclLranL dllemma ls Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe lncreaslngly lsolaLed lndlvldual (Lhe l) wlLh meanlngful forms of communlLy (Lhe we) agalnsL Lhe backdrop of a unlversallsL naLural sclence (Lhe lL). And ln socleLles where Lhe collecLlve we has managed Lo evolve beyond Lrlbal maglc and beyond myLhlc-lmperlallsm (l.e., where Lhe 8lg 1hree have acLually been dlfferenLlaLed), Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe culLure ls sLlll palnfully problemaLlc. nowhere ls Lhls more obvlous (and more exacerbaLed) Lhan ln Amerlca, and asLuLe observers of Amerlcan llfe-sLarLlng mosL noLably wlLh Alexls de 1ocquevllle-have reLurned Llme and agaln Lo Lhe dlfflculLles and dllemmas of lnLegraLlng Lhe newly emerged Lgo (and lLs lndlvlduallsm") wlLh Lhe larger currenLs of soclal llfe. 1ocquevllle, ln facL, helped glve currency Lo a new word: 'lndlvlduallsm' ls a word recenLly colned," he wroLe, Lo express a new ldea. lndlvlduallsm ls a calm and consldered feellng whlch dlsposes each clLlzen Lo lsolaLe hlmself from Lhe mass of hls fellows and wlLhdraw lnLo Lhe clrcle of famlly and frlends, wlLh Lhls llLLle socleLy formed Lo hls LasLe, he gladly leaves Lhe greaLer socleLy Lo look afLer lLself." 1here ls Lhe dlsengaged and auLonomous Lgo of Lhe radlcal LnllghLenmenL, Laken Lo lLs soclal llmlL, exacerbaLed ln an Amerlca of purlLan-Lo-cowboy self- rellance. kobett 8ellob ooJ 1he Cood SocleLy 1hls new lndlvlduallsm" has been peneLraLlngly examlned by 8oberL 8ellah and hls colleagues (8lchard Madsen, Wllllam Sulllvan, Ann Swlndler, SLeven 1lpLon), mosL noLably ln noblts of tbe beott and 1be qooJ soclety. ln noblts, 8ellah eL al. ldenLlfy four maln culLural currenLs LhaL mold Lhe Amerlcan characLer: blbllcal, republlcan, uLlllLarlan, and expresslve (represenLed by, for example, WlnLhrop, !efferson, lranklln, and WhlLman). Whlle all four sLrands have a sLrong emphasls on Lhe lndlvldual, Lhe flrsL Lwo (blbllcal and republlcan) are forms of whaL Lhe auLhors call soclal reallsm," Lhe bellef LhaL socleLy ls aL leasL as real and as lmporLanL as Lhe lndlvldual, wlLh meanlng and reward found ln relaLlonshlps and communlLy, whereas Lhe lasL Lwo (uLlllLarlan and expresslve) are forms of onLologlcal lndlvlduallsm," Lhe bellef LhaL socleLy ls a second-order, derlved or arLlflclal consLrucL" and Lhe lndlvldual ls Lhe prlmary reallLy. ln a sense, Lhe flrsL Lwo sLress Lhe lmporLance of communlon, Lhe lasL Lwo sLress lndlvldual agency. 8ellah and company would llke Lo see Lhe Lwo sLrands of soclal reallsm (or communlon-emphasls) somehow updaLed" and reapproprlaLed" as a counLerblasL Lo rampanL lndlvlduallsm (and hyperagency), buL [usL how Lo accompllsh Lhls ls exacLly Lhe problem, and Lhelr analysls, alLhough ofLen profound, ls noL alLogeLher compelllng. 1he dlfflculLy, as l see lL, ls LhaL botb of Lhe communlon-sLrands derlve from agrarlan socleLles (and Lhelr lnLense myLhlc-membershlp modes and plow-paLrlarchy), and Lhus Lhese soclal glues" are ofLen shoL Lhrough wlLh sexlsm, raclsm, ellLlsm, domlnaLor hlerarchles, eLc. (all of whlch 8ellah eL al. concede). 1he lasL Lwo sLrands-Lhe hlghly lndlvlduallsLlc sLrands-derlve, of course, from modernlLy and Lhe LnllghLenmenL: uLlllLarlan lndlvlduallsm (sLresslng calculaLlng raLlonallLy) sLems from Lhe uLlllLarlan Lngllsh LnllghLenmenL (Locke Lo 8enLham), and Lhe expresslve sLrand (sLresslng expresslon of feellngs and feel good" eLhos) from Lhe Lco-8omanLlc rebelllon. Accordlng Lo 8ellah, boLh of Lhese (uLlllLarlan and expresslve) have ofLen lronlcally fused Lo produce Lhe exLremely agenLlc, hyperlndlvlduallsLlc, almosL aLomlsLlc" lndlvlduallsm of Amerlca (whlch l Lhlnk ls very Lrue). As my own analysls suggesLed, Lhls hyper-Lgo" (wheLher uLlllLarlan raLlonal Lgo or expresslve dlvlne egolsm) wenL hand ln hand wlLh a collapse of Lhe kosmos lnLo monologlcal, flaLland Lerms JevolJ of any (expllclL) poolltotlve Jlstloctloos, and Lhls was lnLlmaLely relaLed wlLh Lhe lock of loteqtotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree once Lhey had been lrrevocably dlfferenLlaLed. 8ellah: lf popular culLure makes a vlrLue of lacklng all quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons, and lf Lhe lnLellecLual culLure, dlvlded as lL ls, heslLaLes Lo say anyLhlng abouL Lhe larger lssues of exlsLence, how does our culLure hold LogeLher aL all?" (p. 281). 1he answer ls, Lenuously": 1he culLure of separaLlon offers Lwo forms of lnLegraLlon-or should we say pseudo- lnLegraLlon?-LhaL Lurn ouL, noL surprlslngly, Lo be derlved from uLlllLarlan and expresslve lndlvlduallsm. Cne ls Lhe dream of personal success. . . . 1he second ls Lhe porLrayal of vlvld personal feellng. . . . 8uL a sLrange sorL of lnLegraLlon lL ls, for Lhe world lnLo whlch we are lnLegraLed ls deflned only by Lhe spasmodlc LranslLlon beLween sLrlvlng and relaxlng and ls wltboot poolltotlve Jlstloctloos of Llme and space, good and evll, meanlng and meanlnglessness" (p. 281, my lLallcs). Accordlng Lo 8ellah eL al., a world lacklng all quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons ls Lherefore consLrued, noL accordlng Lo whaL ls wottb pursulng, buL slmply ln Lerms of wbot wotks (as we puL lL, WhaL does lL mean?" ls reduced Lo WhaL does lL do?": efflcleot meoos replace any crlLerla of worLhy eoJs). 8ellah: lor mosL of us, lL ls easler Lo Lhlnk abouL how Lo geL whaL we wanL Lhan Lo know whaL exacLly we should wanL" (p. 21). 1hls ls exempllfled ln Lhe Lwo domlnanL flgures" of Lhe culLure of separaLlon: Lhe manager (uLlllLarlan) and Lhe LheraplsL (expresslve). Llke Lhe manager, Lhe LheraplsL Lakes Lhe funcLlonal organlzaLlon of lndusLrlal socleLy for granLed, as Lhe unproblemaLlcal conLexL of llfe. 1he goal of llvlng ls Lo achleve some comblnaLlon of occupaLlon and 'llfesLyle' LhaL ls economlcally posslble and psychlcally Lolerable, LhaL 'works.' 1he LheraplsL, llke Lhe manager, Lakes Lhe ends os tbey ote qlveo, Lhe focus ls upon Lhe effecLlveness of Lhe means" (p. 47, my lLallcs, see noLe 42 for chap. 4 for adapLaLlon" as coverL accepLance of unproblemaLlc" conLexL). 8eLween Lhem, Lhe manager and LheraplsL largely deflne Lhe ouLllnes of LwenLleLh-cenLury Amerlcan culLure." 1hey boLh focus oo tbe loJlvlJool, presumed able Lo choose Lhe roles he wlll play and Lhe commlLmenLs he wlll make, noL on Lhe basls of hlgher LruLhs buL accordlng Lo Lhe crlLerlon of llfe-effecLlveness as Lhe lndlvldual [udges lL" (p. 47). And parLlcularly as Lhe lndlvldual feels lL. Slnce all values" are held Lo be equlvalenL (Lhere are no expllclL quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons), Lhen whaLever makes me feel good musL be good, as long as lL doesn'L overLly harm someone else. Moral sLandards," says 8ellah, glve way Lo aesLheLlc LasLes" (p. 60). 8ellah Lhen drlves Lo Lhe hearL of Lhe maLLer: lf Lhe self ls deflned by lLs ablllLy Lo choose lLs own values, on whaL grounds are Lhose cholces Lhemselves based? lor many, Lhere ls slmply no ob[ecLlflable crlLerlon for chooslng one value or course of acLlon over anoLher. Cne's own ldlosyncraLlc preferences are Lhelr own [usLlflcaLlon. 1he rlghL acL ls slmply Lhe one LhaL ylelds Lhe agenL Lhe mosL exclLlng challenge or Lhe mosL good feellng abouL hlmself" (pp. 73-76). now lf selves are deflned by Lhelr preferences, buL Lhose preferences are arblLrary, Lhen each self consLlLuLes lts owo motol oolvetse, and Lhere ls flnally no way Lo reconclle confllcLlng clalms abouL whaL ls good ln lLself" (p. 76, my lLallcs). And here we have Lhe all-Loo-famlllar sllde of Lhe expresslvlsL (Lco-8omanLlc) currenL lnLo dlvlne egolsm and blocenLrlc feellng-Lhe culLure of narclssus" (Lasch). Small wonder LhaL large segmenLs of Amerlcan culLure would be drawn Lo everyLhlng from sensory/maLerlal drenchlng ln consumerlsm, sexually LlLlllaLlng anyLhlng, egocenLrlc/blocenLrlc Lrlballsm dressed as a new paradlgm, body-bound expresslve Lheraples," do your own Lhlng" ldlosyncraLlc values," flucLuaLlng meanlngs" LhaL follow Lhe ecocenLrlc ebb and flow of passlng feellngs, and relaLlonshlps" whose prlmary alm ls Lo feel good," relaLlonshlps LhaL form-and dlssolve-[usL as fasL as Lhe fleeLlng feellngs LhaL drlve Lhem. 8ellah eL al. go on Lo polnL ouL LhaL ln Lhls aLmosphere of feel good," all values evenLually are reduced Lo economlc values, because where feellngs predomlnaLe, money alone can buy Lhe free Llme Lo lndulge Lhem-Lhe more money you have, Lhe more free feellngs you are allowed. ln Lhe absence of any ob[ecLlflable crlLerla of rlghL and wrong, good or evll, Lhe self and lLs feellngs become our only moral gulde. WhaL klnd of world ls lnhablLed by Lhls self, perpeLually ln progress, yeL wlLhouL any flxed moral end? 1here each lndlvldual ls enLlLled Lo hls or her own 'blL of space' and ls uLLerly free wlLhln lLs boundarles. 8uL whlle everyone may be enLlLled Lo hls or her own prlvaLe space, only Lhose who have enough money can, ln facL, afford Lo do Lhelr own Lhlng" (p. 76). under Lhese clrcumsLances, uLlllLy replaces duLy, 'belng good' becomes 'feellng good'"-and tbot depends prlmarlly on bucks. 1hus Lhe sLrange and spasmodlc lnLegraLlon" of Lhe culLure of separaLlon: work as hard as you can (uLlllLarlan) ln order Lo reLreaL Lo Lhe freedom" of a prlvaLe space of egolc feellng (expresslvlsL) or shared feellngs ln a llfesLyle enclave. And Lhus, Lo reLurn Lo my orlglnal polnL, whaL has falled mlserably ls sLlll Lhe loteqtotloo of Lhe 8lg 1hree (exacerbaLed ln Amerlca, buL evldenced aplenLy ln modernlLy aL large). arLlcularly under Lhe onslaughL of dlvlne (and regresslve) egolsm, alLernaLlng wlLh a uLlllLarlan-lndlvlduallsm [see 8oometltls], 8ellah flnds LhaL whaL has falled aL every level-from Lhe socleLy of naLlons Lo Lhe naLlonal socleLy Lo Lhe local communlLy Lo Lhe famlly-ls loteqtotloo: we have puL our own good, as lndlvlduals, as groups, as a naLlon, ahead of Lhe common good" (p. 283). And he ends wlLh a general concluslon LhaL ls cerLalnly supporLed by Lhe analysls offered ln Lhls book: WhaL we flnd hard Lo see ls LhaL lL ls Lhe exLreme fragmenLaLlon of Lhe modern world LhaL really LhreaLens our lndlvlduaLlon, LhaL whaL ls besL ln our separaLlon and lndlvlduaLlon, our sense of dlgnlLy and auLonomy as persons, tepoltes o oew loteqtotloo lf lL ls Lo be susLalned. 1he noLlon of a ttoosltloo to o oew level of soclol loteqtotloo may also be reslsLed as absurdly uLoplan, as a pro[ecL Lo creaLe a perfecL socleLy. 8uL Lhe LransformaLlon of whlch we speak ls boLh necessary and modesL. WlLhouL lL, lndeed, Lhere may be very llLLle fuLure Lo Lhlnk abouL aL all" (p. 286, my lLallcs). 1he dlfflculLy LhaL Lhe auLhors (and posLmodernlLy) are grappllng wlLh, as l see lL, ls consLlLuLed preclsely ln Lhe Lenslon beLween Lhe Lwo communal" sLrands (blbllcal and republlcan) and Lhe Lwo hyperagency sLrands (uLlllLarlan and expresslvlsL). 1he agrarlan-based blbllcal and republlcan sLrands-boLh varlaLlons on Lhe duLy eLhlc flrsL formulaLed ln myLhlc-membershlp culLures-seem Lo be Lhe only avallable counLer-blasLs Lo Lhe hyperlndlvlduallsm and unencumbered self" of modernlLy. And, lndeed, Lhls Lenslon ls reflecLed ln Lhe consLanL debaLe beLween llberal lndlvlduallsm (Lhe unencumbered self) and varlous forms of communlLarlan LheorlsLs (of Lhe saLuraLed/slLuaLed self). 8uL, ln my oplnlon, sLrlpplng Lhe blbllcal and republlcan sLrands of Lhelr raclsm, sexlsm, domlnaLor hlerarchles, eLc., ls noL updaLed" enough Lo carry Lhe burden of Lhe lnLegraLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, whlle Lhe emerglng forms of lnLegraLlon" of Lhe lndlvlduallsLlc sLrands are lndeed and all-Loo-ofLen pseudo-lnLegraLlons." 1hls dllemma-Lhe dllemma of posLmodernlLy-ls a cenLral Lheme of volumes 2 and 3. 1be volotloo of kellqloo As for 8ellah's ploneerlng work on Lhe evoluLlon of rellglous sysLems, see 8eyooJ bellef. 8ellah presenLs a sLandard verslon of some of Lhe LwenLy LeneLs, and of course l agree wlLh hlm on Lhose polnLs. lor example, LvoluLlon aL any sysLem level l deflne as a process of lncreaslng dlfferenLlaLlon [LeneL 12b] and complexlLy of organlzaLlon [12a] LhaL endows Lhe organlsm, soclal sysLem, or whaLever Lhe unlL ln quesLlon may be [any evolvlng holon] wlLh greaLer capaclLy Lo adapL Lo lLs envlronmenL, so LhaL lL ls ln some sense more auLonomous [12d] relaLlve Lo lLs envlronmenL Lhan were lLs less complex ancesLors," alLhough, of course, slmpler forms can prosper and survlve alongslde more complex forms" (p. 21). lurLher, 8ellah polnLs ouL, Slnce lL has been clear for a long Llme LhaL levels of soclal and culLural complexlLy are besL undersLood ln an evoluLlonary framework, lL seems lnevlLable LhaL rellglon Loo musL be consldered ln such a framework" (p. 16). 8ellglous symbollsm, says 8ellah, Lends Lo change over Llme, aL leasL ln some lnsLances, ln Lhe dlrecLlon of more dlfferenLlaLed, comprehenslve forms [LeneL 12]. . . ." 8ellah Lhen Lraces flve mojot stoqes of rellglous evoluLlon, whlch he calls prlmlLlve, archalc, hlsLorlc, early modern, and modern, and whlch correspond qulLe closely wlLh our archalc/maglc, myLhlc, myLhlc-raLlonal, early raLlonal/egolc, and raLlonal/exlsLenLlal. A comparlson of hls sLages wlLh my descrlpLlons wlll show Lhe very sLrong and wlde-ranglng correlaLlons and slmllarlLles. 8ellah concludes LhaL freedom has lncreased [LeneL 12d] because aL each successlve sLage Lhe relaLlon of humans Lo Lhe condlLlons of Lhelr exlsLence has been concelved as more complex, more open and more sub[ecL Lo change and developmenL. 1hls scheme of rellglous evoluLlon has lmplled aL almosL every polnL a general Lheory of soclal evoluLlon," whlch ls why Pabermas has also found 8ellah's work lnsplraLlonal (pp. 24, 44). AL Lhe same Llme, 8ellah ls fully aware of whaL we have called Lhe Jlolectlc of progress, lL ls noL all slmply sweeLness-and-llghL progresslon: AL every sLage Lhe lncrease ln freedom ls also an lncrease ln Lhe freedom Lo choose desLrucLlon" (p. xvl). 8eyond Lhese large areas of agreemenL, my ma[or crlLlclsm of Lhls approach ls LhaL ls based almosL enLlrely on Lhe analysls of soclal acLlon sysLems accordlng Lo Lhe general cyberneLlc model (largely followlng arsons): Lhe sLandard Lower-8lghL sysLems Lheory LhaL always Lends Lo dlssolve quallLaLlve depLh lnLo funcLlonal acLlon Lerms and behavlorlsLlc varlables, and Lhus dlssolve Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween auLhenLlc and leglLlmaLe (Lhe capaclLy for verLlcal LransformaLlon and depLh-dlsclosure ls dlssolved lnLo Lhe capaclLy for horlzonLal LranslaLlon and funcLlonal flLness: Lhe sLandard 8lghL-Pand paLh LhaL converLs belng lnLo dolng). 8ellah: An acLlon sysLem may be deflned as Lhe symbollcally conLrolled, sysLemaLlcally organlzed behavlor of one or more blologlcal organlsms." Symbollc messages are Lhus evenLually reduced Lo tepteseototloool and monologlcal recovery of lnLernal or exLernal messages: lnformaLlon ln such a sysLem conslsLs largely of symbollc messages LhaL loJlcote [represenL] someLhlng abouL elLher Lhe lnLernal sLaLe or Lhe exLernal slLuaLlon of Lhe acLlon sysLem" (pp. 9, 10). 1haL ls sLandard monologlcal reducLlonlsm, and lL leads naLurally Lo relegaLlng Lhe enLlre LefL-Pand dlmenslons Lo LhaL whlch ls slmply lefL over" afLer Lhe sysLems analysls: 1hus, Lhe seL of symbollc paLLerns exlsLlng ln a sysLem wlll be parLlally deLermlned by Lhe naLure of Lhe exLernal world wlLh whlch LhaL sysLem has had Lo deal and by Lhe naLure of Lhe laws governlng Lhe cognlLlve processes of Lhe braln [all 8lghL-Pand]. WlLhln Lhese llmlLs Lhere ls a wlde range of freedom, wlLhln whlch alLernaLlve symbollc paLLerns may operaLe wlLh equal or nearly epool effectlveoess"-and Lhus quesLlons of Lhe wottb or auLhenLlclLy of Lhose equal alLernaLlves" geL llLLle or no aLLenLlon wlLhln Lhe consLralnLs of funcLlonal flL and leglLlmacy (p. 10). 1hls reducLlonlsm leads naLurally Lo a vlew of symbollc acLlon" as a moooloqlcol llokoqe of meanlng and moLlvaLlon ln a bebovlotlstlc sysLem, and Lhus Lhe role of rellglon ls reduced Lo: 8ellglon ls Lhe mosL general mechanlsm for lnLegraLlng meanlng and moLlvaLlon ln acLlon sysLems," and Lherefore any symbollc sysLem LhaL offers Lhls lnLegraLlon" ls rellglous," wheLher we would call lL Lrue" or noL (p. 12). 1he LruLh-value of all rellglous proposlLlons ls Lhus reduced Lo Lhe funcLlonal capaclLy of Lhe proposlLlons Lo oppeot Lo be Lrue and meanlngful, whlch Lhen provldes Lhe lnLegraLlng" llnk wlLh moLlvaLlon. 8uL Lhls ls slmply Lo reduce LruLh Lo Lhe funcLlonal value of holdlng-someLhlng-as-Lrue, whlch also happens Lo dlssolve Lhls Lheory's own clalm Lo be Lrue. 1hus, 8ellah ls perhaps Loo opLlmlsLlc abouL Lhe capaclLy of Lhe cyberneLlc model" Lo lnLegraLe LefL- and 8lghL-Pand paLhs. lL ls preclsely Lhe sLress on auLonomy, learnlng capaclLy, declslon, and conLrol LhaL glves Lhe cyberneLlc model Lhe ablllLy, lacklng ln prevlous mechanlsLlc and organlc models, Lo asslmllaLe Lhe conLrlbuLlons of Lhe humanlsLlc dlsclpllnes-Lhe Celsteswlsseoscbofteo-wlLhouL abandonlng an essenLlally sclenLlflc approach" (p. 10). 8uL lL ls preclsely Lhe locopoclty of monologlcal, cyberneLlc, represenLaLlonal sysLems Lheorles Lo lnLegraLe dlaloglcal, lnLersub[ecLlve, and lnLerpreLlve occaslons LhaL has lncreaslngly become obvlous. 1he sub[ecLlve space LhaL bullds Lhose represenLaLlonal cyberneLlc models ls oot ltself bullL only of represenLaLlons buL also of lnLerpreLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve occaslons, Lhemselves oot modeled ln Lhe Lheory LhaL ls supposed Lo explaln Lhem. 1he bellef LhaL such monologlcal models coo explaln Lhem ls Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm ln all lLs lnadequaLe aspecLs, ls everyLhlng bad abouL Lhe dlsengaged and hoverlng CarLeslan ego. 1haL rellglon seeks Lo lnLegraLe meanlng as a LefL-Pand dlmenslon wlLh moLlvaLlon as a 8lghL-Pand behavlor ls Lrue enough, buL Lhe meanlng componenL cannoL be reduced Lo monologlcal represenLaLlon wlLhouL compleLely desLroylng Lhe soughL lnLegraLlon. l am noL denylng mosL of Lhe speclflcs of 8ellah's funcLlonal, 8lghL-Pand analysls, l am denylng lL ls Lhe only, or even Lhe mosL baslc, analysls of rellglon. 8ellah has reflned many of Lhese vlews, and he dlscusses some of Lhese lssues ln Lhe lnLroducLlon Lo 8eyooJ bellef. And, as Lhe prevlous secLlon on noblts of tbe beott makes obvlous, 8ellah has become qulLe senslLlve Lo Lhe lmporLance of quallLaLlve dlsLlncLlons and onLologlcal values ln provldlng Lhe meanlng componenL of Lhe deslred lnLegraLlon, none of whlch can be covered by cyberneLlc or sysLems Lheory. 10. As we puL lL earller, by lnslsLlng LhaL Lhe noosphere ls pott of Lhe blosphere, Lhe acLual lnLegraLlon ls uLLerly blocked, because Lhe noosphere ls noL parL of Lhe blosphere, Lhe blosphere ls parL of Lhe noosphere (and parLs of Lhe human belng are parLs of boLh). 1he Lco camp's lnLegraLlon" ls fabrlcaLed only by an onLologlcal regresslon LhaL confuses greaL span wlLh greaL depLh and Lhus [eopardlzes boLh. 11. A small facLlon of ecofemlnlsLs have rebelled agalnsL a flaLland bloequallLy, and l wlll examlne Lhelr lmporLanL conLrlbuLlons ln volume 2 (Zlmmerman, for one, has frulLfully drawn on Lhelr work, as has Cheney, all of whlch ls carefully evaluaLed). 8y and large, however, Lhe ecofemlnlsLs have ofLen subsLlLuLed egolc-communlon for egolc-agency, sLlll caughL as Lhey are ln Lhe oLher pole, Lhe Lco-communlon pole, of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm. And Lhus, when Lhey aLLempL Lo escape Lhe vlolence and levellng of Lhe flaLland vlew, Lhey end up perpeLuaLlng lL ln subLler forms. Charlene SpreLnak, as only one example, ln 5totes of Ctoce, conLlnues her several-books-long aLLack on anyLhlng agenLlc (whlch she ascrlbes mosLly Lo Lhe mascullne mode) and emphaslzes lnsLead a Lhoroughly communlon-based approach (more femlnlne, as lL were). 8uL Lhen, when lL comes Lo Lhe splrlLual orlenLaLlon LhaL wlll supplanL and heal Lhls agency-laden paLrlarchal" worldvlew, she ends up almosL lncomprehenslbly champlonlng a broad form of vlpossooo/1heravadln 8uddhlsm, Lhe LasL's archeLypal and merely Ascendlng paLh, whlch ls radlcally duallsLlc and hyperagenLlc, a pure Coddess-denylng, uescenL- denylng, Coodness-denylng, lenlLude-denylng paLh, a paLh LhaL hlsLorlcally has denled and devalued Lhe body, Lhe earLh (samsara), sex (and Lhe ulLlmaLe sln-LempLaLlon, woman). SpreLnak's sLance ls known as ouL of Lhe frylng pan and lnLo Lhe flre. 5exool uolvetsols AL Lhe same Llme, l belleve SpreLnak and oLher femlnlsLs, who lnslsL on Lhe exlsLence of unlversal naLlve dlfferences beLween Lhe male and female value spheres, are qulLe rlghL. 8uL mosL of Lhe aLLempLs Lo dellneaLe Lhese sLrong sexual unlversals" suffer by noL Laklng a mulLldlmenslonal vlew. ln volume 2, based on raLher exLenslve evldence, l suggesL LhaL a much more adequaLe vlew can be advanced by, aL Lhe very leasL, dellneaLlng Lhe ways LhaL LranslaLlon and LransformaLlon operaLe ln men and women. WlLh Lhls approach, we Lhen have, lo oJJltloo Lo such physlcal unlversals as sLrengLh/moblllLy, sexual profllgacy, chlld blrLhlng/lacLaLlon, and LacLlle dlfferences (and oLher commonly advanced blologlcal dlfferences), Lhe followlng: l advance Lhe vlew LhaL, on average, men Lend Lo ttooslote wlLh an emphasls on agency, women Lend Lo LranslaLe wlLh an emphasls on communlon. And men Lend Lo ttoosfotm wlLh an emphasls on Lros (Lranscendence), women Lend Lo Lransform wlLh an emphasls on Agape (lmmanence). 1hese Lwo baslc unlversals" (referrlng Lo Lhe male/female naLlve dlfferences ln ways of LranslaLlon and LransformaLlon) help Lo explaln an enormous amounL of cross-culLural daLa and male/female dlfferenLlal values. ln volume 2, l aLLempL Lo show Lhe appllcablllLy of Lhese unlversals by reformulaLlng Lhe varlous sLages of presenL-day psychologlcal, moral, cognlLlve, and ob[ecL- relaLlons developmenL as Lhey appear (someLlmes qulLe dlfferenLly) ln men and women (boLh men and women LranslaLe wlLh boLh agency and communlon, buL, as l suggesLed, males Lend Lo place a hlgher emphasls on agency, women on communlon, and llkewlse wlLh LransformaLlon: men and women access boLh Lros and Agape, buL men Lend Lo emphaslze Lhe former, women Lhe laLLer). l llkewlse Lrace Lhese unlversals as Lhey appear ln hlsLorlcal developmenL (durlng Lhe slx or so ma[or sLages of Lechnologlcal/worldvlew evoluLlon). 1he polnL, as l suggesLed ln chapLer 3, ls Lo lsolaLe a seL of consLanLs or unlversal dlfferences, and Lhen follow Lhese unlversals as Lhey manlfesL ln dlfferenL forms due Lo dlfferenL evolvlng worldvlews, modes of producLlon, Lechno-economlc lnfrasLrucLures, and so on-because Lhese varlous sLrucLures, aL dlfferenL sLages of evoluLlon, placed dlfferenL values on Lhe male and female spheres, emphaslzlng and prlzlng now one, now Lhe oLher, occaslonally boLh. 8uL oppresslon has vlrLually no explanaLory power or place ln Lhls scheme, whlch relleves us from Lhe men-are-plgs, women-areduped-sheep vlew. Cn Lhe hlsLorlcal sLaLus of men and women (down Lo Loday), mosL radlcal femlnlsL and ecofemlnlsL analyses suffer badly from Laklng a one-dlmenslonal vlew (analyzlng merely Lhe dlfferences ln LranslaLlon and noL also LransformaLlon: agency versus communlon ls Lhelr only scale). 8ecause Lhey do noL facLor ln Lhe varlous sLages of hlsLorlcal Lranscendence and LransformaLlon (AscenL), Lhese femlnlsL analyses are Lhus forced Lo make agency and communlon cover Lhe ground LhaL acLually belongs Lo Lros and Agape. 1hey are Lhus forced Lo see agency (and men") as bad," communlon (and female") as good." 1he bad agency Lhen musL have oppressed Lhe good communlon, and women are Lhen necessarlly deflned as prlmarlly molded by an CLher. 1o say LhaL men forced women Lo be molded ls Lo deflne women as weaker. 1o say LhaL women dldn'L ob[ecL Lo Lhls oppresslon because Lhey were bralnwashed ls Lo deflne Lhem as sLuplder. 1hls ls useless and self-defeaLlng. When a more mulLldlmenslonal analysls ls applled, Lhese caLegorles of molded/weaker/sLuplder are unnecessary Lo geL Lhe game golng. And flnally, Lhese baslc unlversals glve us a serles of sLrong clues as Lo Lhe male and female faces of SplrlL, and Lo Lhe dlfferences ln male and female splrlLuallLy, splrlLual pracLlces, and splrlLual goals (all of whlch are carefully explored). My polnL wlLh regard Lo mosL forms of ecofemlnlsm can Lhus be puL very slmply: ln denylng any Lrue Lranscendence and AscenL (Lros), mosL ecofemlnlsLs emphaslze only lmmanence and uescenL (Agape). ln Lhus denylng any Lrue AscenL, Lhey remaln Lhoroughly wedded Lo flaLland, and as such, Lhey slmply subsLlLuLe Lhe more femlnlne communlon for Lhe more mascullne agency: Lhey don'L calculaLe flaLland, Lhey commune wlLh flaLland. 1he same lack of verLlcal depLh and Lranscendence, Lhe same nonhlerarchlcal" heLerarchy of shadows, Lhe same fallure Lo Lransform, and merely lnsLead a dlfferenL way Lo LranslaLe Lhe same old flaLland: mononaLure ls noL now Cod, mononaLure ls Lhe Coddess. lL's noL so much LhaL such approaches are alLogeLher wrong as LhaL Lhey desperaLely need Lo be complemenLed and supplemenLed and rounded ouL. 8ecause Lhe domlnanL Lheme of WesLern culLure, cerLalnly from Lhe Llme of Lhe Lgo- LnllghLenmenL, has emphaslzed hyperagency (as we have amply seen), Lhe general Lco-8omanLlc rebelllon (of whlch ecofemlnlsm ls an offshooL) Lended always Lo emphaslze communlon and Lhus Lo glve a greaLer (someLlmes LoLal) emphasls Lo Lhe femlnlne. 8uL, as we also saw, LhaL Lco-8omanLlc emphasls on femlnlne/communlon was slmply Lhe oLher pole of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm (communlng wlLh Lhe greaL lnLerlocklng order of mononaLure): Lhe oLher slde of Lhe flaLland sLreeL. WhaL boLh Lhe Lgo (agency) and Lhe Lco (communlon) lacked-and whaL Lhey boLh sLlll lack-ls Lhe balance, noL [usL of agency and communlon, buL also of AscenL and uescenL, Lros and Agape, Lranscendence as well as lmmanence. WhaL ls noL needed ls slmply more of Lhe same duallsLlc vlew, now from Lhe oLher slde of Lhe same falled coln: only Agape over Lros, only lmmanence over Lranscendence. 1hls ls [usL more of Lhe fracLured, schlzold noLes Lo laLo. [lor a more lncluslve vlew, see 1be eye of spltlt, lnLegral lemlnlsm," chap. 8.] 12. ln volume 2, l wlll look aL how agency/communlon as rlghLs/responslblllLles plays ouL ln Lhe mascullne/femlnlne modes, drawlng, of course, on Cllllgan's observaLlon LhaL male modes Lend Lo Lhe agenLlc/rlghLs, and female Lo Lhe communlon/relaLlonal/responslblllLles, Lhls ls a prelude Lo Lhe mascullne and femlnlne faces of SplrlL, seL ln Lhe conLexL of Lhe CreaL Polarchy of 8elng. 8uL Lhls ls noL [usL a LheoreLlcal venLure, Lhe acLual sLaLus of men and women ln Lhe flve or slx ma[or Lechnologlcal epochs are examlned carefully for clues Lo Lhelr naLlve orlenLaLlon. 13. 1haL less slgnlflcanL holons have fewer rlghLs (and fewer responslblllLles) Lhan more slgnlflcanL holons does oot mean Lhey have oo rlghLs, and Lhe recognlLlon of Lhelr relaLlve rlghLs ls parL of Lhe LlberaLlon of Llfe (8lrch and Cobb) LhaL ls lnherenL ln Lhe Lco-noeLlc Self and lLs CommunlLy of all senLlenL belngs. As suggesLed ln prevlous noLes (see especlally noLe 23 for chap. 8), Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon ls proLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span." 1haL ls, when we lnLulL SplrlL, we are acLually lnLulLlng lL as lL appears ln all four quadranLs (because SplrlL manlfesLs as all four quadranLs-or, ln shorL, as l and we and lL). 1hus, when l am lnLulLlng SplrlL clearly, l lnLulL lLs preclousness noL only ln myself, ln my own depLh, ln my l-domaln, buL equally ln Lhe domaln of all oLher belngs, who share SplrlL wlLh me (and as me). And Lhus l wlsh Lo proLecL and promoLe LhaL SplrlL, noL [usL ln me, buL ln all belngs possesslng LhaL SplrlL, and l am moved, lf l lnLulL SplrlL clearly, Lo lmplemeot Lhls SplrlLual unfoldlng ln as many belngs as posslble: l lnLulL SplrlL noL only as l, and noL only as We, buL also as a drlve Lo lmplemenL LhaL reallzaLlon as an Cb[ecLlve SLaLe of Affalrs (lL) ln Lhe world. 1hus, preclsely because SplrlL acLually manlfesLs equally as all four quadranLs (or as l, we, and lL), Lhen SplrlLual lnLulLlon, when clearly apprehended, ls apprehended as a deslre Lo exLend Lhe depLh of l Lo Lhe span of We as an ob[ecLlve sLaLe of affalrs (lL): 8uddha, Sangha, uharma. 1hus, proLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span. reclsely bow Lo lmplemenL Lhls 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon (8Ml)-Lhe acLual deLalls of lLs appllcaLlon-LhaL ls noL glven ln pure lnLulLlon. 8aLher, Lhe deLalls of appllcaLlon are parL of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve and culLural and soclal pro[ecL LhaL all of us, ln open communlcaLlon free of domlnaLlon, musL dlscuss and declde. 1haL ls why Lhe human moral response ls a flne mlxLure of Lhe ulvlne and Lhe Puman. 1haL l clearly lnLulL SplrlL ln all l's and all We's and all lLs does noL mean LhaL l auLomaLlcally know all Lhe deLalls (sclenLlflc, phllosophlc, eLhlcal, culLural, and oLherwlse) LhaL musL go lnLo Lhe flnal declslon. ln facL, l mlghL have a flne lnLulLlon of SplrlL buL unpack lL poorly owlng Lo lack of relaLlve undersLandlng and relaLlve knowledge. 1hus, for example, a Zen masLer mlghL have a profound lnLulLlon of oneness wlLh Lhe kosmos, wlLh Cala and all lLs lnhablLanLs, and be dedlcaLed Lo noL harmlng a slngle llvlng belng, buL LhaL doesn'L mean LhaL Lhe Zen masLer wlll auLomaLlcally know LhaL SLyrofoam wlll klll llfe. 1he 8Ml ls Lhe lnfuslon of Lhe ulvlne lnLo our awareness, noL Lhe worklng ouL of speclflc deLalls. l earller gave as example one of Lhe mosL agonlzlng of modern moral dllemmas, aborLlon. 1o Lhe egocenLrlc level of developmenL (preconvenLlonal), aborLlon ls ln mosL cases compleLely accepLable, because Lhls level of developmenL recognlzes depLh only ln lLself (lL exLends depLh only Lo a span of 1, namely, dlvlne egolsm, as kohlberg's research showed, motollty aL Lhls sLage ls whaLever l wlsh"). 1hls level lnLulLs SplrlL (oll levels Jo), buL wlLh lLs llmlLed consclousness, Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon (proLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span) shows up as: Lake care of number one, prlmarlly, and Lhen anybody who supporLs number one. (lnfanLlclde ls Lhus qulLe common ln Lrlbes organlzed around preconvenLlonal arblLraLlon, Lenskl reporLs LhaL abouL one-Lhlrd of all chlldren aL blrLh were Lhrown away" ln Lhese socleLles, Lhls ls noneLheless perfecLly leqltlmote aL LhaL level, because Lhe ecologlcal-carrylng capaclLy of Lhe Lrlbe was qulLe llmlLed-usually around forLy people maxlmum-and lnfanLlclde was Lhe mosL accepLable form of populaLlon conLrol, Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span was served by LhaL pracLlce). WlLh Lhe expanslon of awareness Lo Lhe soclocenLrlc/convenLlonal level, span ls exLended Lo lnclude one's culLure, group, or naLlon. 1he 8Ml (greaLesL depLh for greaLesL span) Lhen shows up as my counLry rlghL or wrong" (depLh ls exLended Lo Lhe span of all people ln Lhe chosen group, buL Lo few or no ouLslders). ln mosL oqtotloo myLhlc-membershlp culLures, aborLlon ls consldered a sln, because Lhe feLus ls a poLenLlal converL Lo LhaL myLhlc Cod and Lhus a parL of Lhe chosen group, and Lhus lnfanLlclde parLakes of myLhlc Lheoclde, whlch mlghL brlng caLasLrophlc reLrlbuLlon from Lhe Cod (wlLhln Lhe myLhlc clrcle, LhaL ls a very leqltlmote bellef). Cn Lhe oLher hand, ln Lhe earller bottlcoltotol myLhlc socleLles, lnfanLlclde as a soctlflce Lo Lhe Coddess-Lhls was consldered accepLable, even mandaLory, because Lhe sacrlflce of LhaL parLlcular depLh locteoses Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span (by ensurlng a bounLlful harvesL, for example). wltblo LhaL horLlculLural/myLhlc sLrucLure, LhaL ls also a leqltlmote unpacklng of Lhe 8Ml (and becomes lmmoral" only when a greaLer collecLlve depLh ls octoolly avallable, whlch ltself would condemn Lhls pracLlce as unaccepLable: Lhe classlc case of Abraham, flrsL asked Lo sacrlflce hls son, Lhen havlng Lhe sacrlflce called off: LhaL ls exacLly Lhe LranslLlon beLween horLlculLural/myLhlc and agrarlan/myLhlc-raLlonal). WlLh Lhe expanslon of awareness Lo Lhe posLconvenLlonal (raLlonal-worldcenLrlc) level, span ls exLended Lo lnclude all humans unlversally and non-eLhnocenLrlcally (regardless of chosen group" myLhlc sLaLus), and lL ls here LhaL aborLlon becomes, for Lhe flrsL Llme, a profound Jllemmo: Lhere are cases where lL mlghL be okay, and cases where lL mlghL noL. 1he dlfflculLy, l belleve, becomes preclsely because Lhe fotm of Lhe 8Ml ls proLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span, and LhaL olwoys means LhaL some depLh can be sacrlflced for a greaLer depLh across greaLer span. 1he femlnlsL argumenL ln favor of legallzaLlon of aborLlon (or cholce), Lhough noL puL ln exacLly Lhese Lerms, amounLs Lo Lhls: Lhe depLh of Lhe moLher (and consequenLly socleLy) mlghL be so profoundly harmed by havlng a chlld LhaL Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span ls acLually served by legallzed aborLlon (Lhe SovleL unlon, for example, used Lhls argumenL expllclLly, over a Lhlrd of adulL women consequenLly had aborLlons). 1hls argumenL (pro-cholce) ls dlrecLly relaLed Lo Lhe lssue of teptoJoctlve tlqbts: ln aLLempLlng Lo grow beyond paLrlarchy (or Lhe once-approprlaLe, now-ouLmoded, predomlnanLly male rlghLs of agency ln Lhe noosphere), lL ls essenLlal LhaL women be glven rlghLs over Lhelr own reproducLlve capaclLy, slnce rlghLs" olwoys means wholeness-value" or ootooomoos voloe" (as explalned ln Lhe LexL), reproducLlve tlqbts means LhaL Lhe woman wlll make Lhe declslon herself, ootooomoosly, and noL as pott (or responslblllLy) of some otbet agency (such as Lhe governmenL/socleLy). And, as always, lf Lhese rlghLs are noL recognlzed, Lhen Lhe wboleoess, Lhe ootooomy announced by Lhose rlghLs, ls oot susLalned: Lhe woman ls noL her own wholeness, her own person, ln Lhls regard (l.e., lf Lhe rlghLs are noL recognlzed, LhaL parLlcular wholeness dlssolves, Lhe woman's rlghLs reverL Lo anoLher agency, ln Lhls case, socleLy, and women who have aborLlons are pronounced crlmlnal). 1hose are all leglLlmaLe argumenLs ln favor of aborLlon/cholce (whlch ls usually llmlLed Lo Lhe flrsL LrlmesLer, anoLher example of Lhe unpacklng of Lhe 8Ml: ln Lhe flrsL LrlmesLer, Lhe Jeptb of Lhe feLus ls so relaLlvely shallow LhaL lLs sacrlflce Lo a larger scheme ls felL Lo be more accepLable, however, aL Lhe polnL LhaL Lhe feLus becomes vlable"-LhaL ls, aL Lhe momenL lL can or could susLaln lLs own llfe-lL ls an auLonomous whole, and we are Lhen forced Lo recognlze lLs tlqbts as an lndependenL wboleoess, sacrlflclng lL aL LhaL polnL ls murder). My polnL ls LhaL, whaLever we declde on Lhls (and oLher) lssues, Lhe 8Ml doesn'L dellver hard and fasL declslons, buL a slmple lnfuslon of SplrlLual Concern, whlch ls unpacked accordlng Lo Lhe level of Lhe depLh of Lhe person dolng Lhe lnLulLlng, and ls always of Lhe form proLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span" (as besL as LhaL person can undersLand lL). !usL so wlLh anlmal rlghLs and our undersLandlng of Lhem. 1haL anlmals have relaLlvely fewer rlghLs (less depLh) Lhan humans does noL mean LhaL Lhey have no rlghLs. 1haL ls, Lhey possess a cerLaln depLh, a cerLaln wholeness, Lhey are ends ln Lhemselves possesslng lottloslc voloe. Pow much welghL Lo glve anlmal rlghLs ls open Lo folt Jlscossloo, my polnL ls LhaL, wlLh Lhe expanslon of awareness beyond Lhe egolc-raLlonal (worldcenLrlc human) Lo Lhe cenLaurlc and even psychlc (all llfe forms), Lhen Lhe recognlLlon of rlghLs oLher Lhan Lhe merely human ls Lhen Lhe form Laken by Lhe more expanded (deeper and wlder) 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon. 1hls doesn'L mean we can'L klll anlmals lf genulnely necessary, lL means LhaL lL wlll upseL anybody wlLh Lhls deeper lnLulLlon lf we klll anlmals needlessly or heedlessly. And Lhe greaLer Lhe depLh of Lhe anlmal kllled (ape versus worm, for example), Lhe greaLer Lhe lnLrlnslc value LhaL we have [usL desLroyed. 1hls kllllng wlll upseL more hlghly evolved lndlvlduals, because Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span ls now sLarLlng Lo lnclude nonhuman llfe as well. Cf course, Lhls does noL mean LhaL all lndlvlduals upseL by Lhe kllllng of anlmals are operaLlng from a cenLaurlc or psychlc level-ln facL, ofLen Lhe conLrary: Loo many anlmal rlghLs acLlvlsLs seem shoL Lhrough wlLh an ldeologlcal fury LhaL beLrays noL moral senslLlvlLy buL dlvlne egolsm hooked Lo a convenlenL cause. lurLher, many anlmal rlghLs acLlvlsLs lmpllclLly-and someLlmes qulLe expllclLly-value anlmal llfe above human llfe: lf Lhe analysls l have presenLed ls accuraLe, Lhen Lhese lndlvlduals are ln facL caughL ln whaL appears Lo be a regresslve moral paLhology. 1haL, ln Lhe besL sense, we Lry Lo exLend cerLaln elemenLary rlghLs Lo anlmals (especlally more developed anlmals, all mammals and cerLalnly all prlmaLes) slmply means LhaL we, os o coltote, have evolveJ Lo Lhe polnL where an expanslon of awareness ls tecoqolzloq LhaL Lhe 8Ml exLends Lo nonhuman llfe, and when we exLend Lhese elemenLary rlghLs Lo anlmals, lL means LhaL we have Lhe evolved capaclLy Lo tecoqolze Lhe wboleoess value, Lhe lnLrlnslc value, ln Lhose holons, and Lhe tlqbts proLecL Lhe wboleoess of LhaL holon, LhaL parLlcular anlmal (however far down we declde Lo push Lhose rlghLs). lf we don'L recognlze Lhose rlghLs, Lhen LhaL wholeness ls noL honored, and we wlll lndlscrlmlnaLely dlssolve LhaL wholeness (l.e., klll LhaL anlmal heedlessly). 1haL ls Lhe lnLrlnslc-value slde of Lhe argumenL for anlmal rlghLs (lL ls wrong, ln and by lLself, Lo desLroy depLh), Lhe exLrlnslc- value slde ls LhaL our own llves depend upon Lhe muLual flourlshlng of Lhe greaLesL varleLy of anlmals (dlverslLy of eco-sysLem). We are harmlng ourselves, flnally. 8uL Lhe lnLeresLlng Lhlng abouL Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon ls LhaL lL does noL carry Lhe command roLecL only depLh." lL carrles Lhe command roLecL all four quadranLs as besL you can," LhaL ls: proLecL noL [usL depLh buL depLh span (and LhaL always demands varlous sacrlflces, for ln a world of llmlLs, noL all can flourlsh paradlsalcally). 1hls shows up even ln anlmal populaLlon conLrol, for example. We have long recognlzed LhaL llmlLlng anlmal populaLlons (by, yes, kllllng some anlmals) allows Lhe greaLer anlmal populaLlon Lo flourlsh more easlly: we sacrlflce parLlcular depLh for Lhe greaLer depLh span. (1hls LoLally confuses Lhe more rabld anlmal rlghLs acLlvlsLs, who wanL Lo make all rlghLs absoluLe, whlch wlll never work.) And, ln an era of llmlLs, we are sLarLlng Lo face Lhese same dllemmas wlLh human belngs. ln healLh care, a mlnlaLure verslon of Lhls shows up ln our declslons abouL whaL dlseases Lo cover ln naLlonal healLh lnsurance. Whlch ls beLLer: spendlng $100,000 Lo cure one person wlLh a rare dlsease, or leLLlng LhaL person dle and spendlng Lhe money Lo save a dozen people wlLh less expenslve" dlseases? ln an era of llmlLs, we are forced Lo choose (and probably choose Lhe laLLer). Co one sLep furLher: whaL lf LhaL one person ls Lhe resldenL, or AlberL LlnsLeln, or MozarL, and Lhe Lwelve are crlmlnals on deaLh row? ?ou see how Lhe dllemma works? Pow do we unpack Lhe lnLulLlon LhaL we are Lo proLecL and promoLe Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span? 1he lnLulLlon ls glven, Lhe unpacklng ls our moral dllemma, always. 1hus, Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon ls an lnfuslon of Care for all four quadranLs, buL does noL come wlLh lnsLrucLlons engraved ln sLone LableLs. WhaL's worLh more, one ape or a Lhousand frogs? robably Lhe ape. 8uL my polnL ls LhaL oll of our moral declslons (and dllemmas) are ulLlmaLely of LhaL form, because Lhey are all drlven by Lhe lnLulLlon Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span," and varlous types of depLh and Jeqtees of span are always necessarlly belng sacrlflced for a greaLer depLh span, and how we choose Lhose sacrlflces ls always our moral dllemma, Lhe preclse reflecLlon of samsara's duallLy and lLs lCus. (1he recognlLlon of types of depLh-an enLlre specLrum of depLh-ls whaL separaLes Lhls from Lhe flaLland uLlllLarlans, who lnLerpreL all depLh as Lhe monohapplness of sensory pleasure, whlch prevenLs Lhem from saylng whlch ls preferable, a happy plg or an unhappy SocraLes. 1he uLlllLarlan poslLlon, as l earller argued, ls how Lhe 8Ml appears Lo Lhe monologlcal reason of flaLland.) Llkewlse, because Lhe 8Ml says Lo proLecL depLh span, and noL merely depLh only, Lhls places a powerful curb on Lhe Lendency Lo [udge merely ln Lerms of lnLrlnslc value alone. A greaLer wholeness, wlLh a greaLer depLh, does lndeed possess a greaLer lnLrlnslc value, buL LhaL ls only half" Lhe sLory, so Lo speak. 1o reLurn Lo Lhe one ape, one Lhousand frogs example: on lnLrlnslc value alone, we would chose Lhe ape. 8uL boLh ape and frogs exlsL ln neLworks of exLrlnslc communlons as well (span), and lf we dlscover LhaL Lhe frogs are parL of a fraglle ecosysLem and Lhelr deaLh would dlsrupL Lhe enLlre sysLem (slnce Lhey are more fundamenLal Lhan Lhe ape), Lhen we would choose Lo save Lhe frogs, slnce LhaL would preserve Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span, lncludlng probably Lhe llves of oLher apes (Jemoosttotloq LhaL ls Lhe Lrlcky lssue, whlch ls why, agaln, Lhe 8Ml doesn'L offer deLalls, only Concern). Llkewlse wlLh dellcaLe lssues ln human affalrs, such as afflrmaLlve acLlon. lf lL can be demonsLraLed LhaL Lhe depLh of one group of people has been sysLemaLlcally oppressed by anoLher group, Lhen Lhe greaLesL depLh for Lhe greaLesL span mlghL lndeed lnvolve aLLempLs Lo redress Lhe lmbalance. uemonsLraLlng LhaL ls, agaln, Lhe Lrlcky lssue. l menLlon Lhese examples noL Lo come down ln favor of one or Lhe oLher, buL only Lo show LhaL Lhe 8Ml does noL slmply cenLer on depLh alone (whlch would Lend Loward fasclsm), nor does lL cenLer on span alone (whlch would Lend Loward LoLallLarlanlsm and Lhe Lyranny of Lhe ma[orlLy), buL raLher cenLers on boLh. 1he 8Ml dellvers Lo us an lnLulLlon Lo lmplemenL Lhe greaLesL depLh across Lhe greaLesL span, a splrlLual Concern for all four quadranLs, and Lhe palnful dllemmas of how Lo lmplemenL Lhls lnLulLlon are Lhe dllemmas of flnlLe belngs ln flnlLe clrcumsLances aLLempLlng Lo honor an lnflnlLe Care. All of Lhese lssues, and some of my suggesLed soluLlons (alLhough soluLlons" ls Loo sLrong a word) are gone lnLo ln deLall ln volume 3. l wlsh here only Lo draw aLLenLlon Lo Lhe facL LhaL all holons possess a degree of Jeptb, wlLh lLs correlaLlve tlqbts, exlsLlng ln a spoo wlLh correlaLlve tespooslbllltles, and LhaL as our own awareness evolves Lo greaLer depLh lLself, lL more adequaLely unpacks Lhe 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon, whlch lnfuses us wlLh an awareness, and a drlve, and a demand, Lo exLend Lhe greaLesL depLh Lo Lhe greaLesL span, as besL we can under Lhe rldlculous clrcumsLances known as samsara. 14. And, as we have seen, slnce flaLland eco-hollsm confuses greaL span wlLh greaL depLh, lL geLs Lhe lnsLrumenLallzaLlon lLself exacLly backward. 1he blosphere does noL depend upon Lhe noosphere for lLs exlsLence, buL Lhe noosphere does depend upon Lhe blosphere for lLs exlsLence (yeL anoLher way of saylng LhaL Lhe noosphere ls noL parL of Lhe blosphere, buL raLher Lhe blosphere ls parL of Lhe noosphere). Whlch means, Lhe blosphere has lnsLrumenLal value Lo Lhe noosphere (and noospherlc humans), noL vlce versa. 8uL my approach does noL sLop wlLh lnsLrumenLal value ln any domaln. Lven Lhough Lhe blosphere ls lnsLrumenLal Lo Lhe noosphere, Lhe blosphere lLself sLlll possesses equal Cround-value (as Lhe vlslble, senslble Cod/dess), and furLher, each blospherlc holon possesses lLs own degree of lnsLrlnslc value (an ape ls more lnLrlnslcally valuable Lhan an aLom, buL Lhe laLLer ls more exLrlnslcally valuable Lhan Lhe former). 1hus, Lhe enLlre kosmos exlsLs as a neLwork of rlghLs and responslblllLles correlaLlve wlLh degrees of depLh and consclousness. noLhlng ls ever merely lnsLrumenLal Lo anyLhlng, and everyLhlng ulLlmaLely, flnally, has perfecLly equal Cround-value as a perfecL manlfesLaLlon of prlmordlal urlLy, radlanL LmpLlness. 13. ln presenLlng lLs emplrlcal hollsLlc" worldvlew, mosL Lco-camps Lake for granLed, and Lhus overlook, Lhe vasL neLworks of lnLersub[ecLlve meanlng and dlaloglcal fabrlc LhaL allow Lhem Lo presenL and even comprehend a hollsLlc web ln Lhe flrsL place: Lhey dlscuss none of Lhe exLenslve dynamlcs of lnLersub[ecLlve communlcaLlve exchange LhaL allows and upholds Lhelr ob[ecLlve web-of-llfe sysLems Lheorles, and Lhus Lhey have no acLual recommendaLlons as Lo how Lo reproduce LhaL lnLersub[ecLlve agreemenL and muLual undersLandlng ln oLhers or ln Lhe world aL large-Lhey can only lnslsL LhaL everybody agree wlLh Lhem and accepL Lhelr sysLems vlew, lgnorlng how Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve worldspace develops from egocenLrlc Lo soclocenLrlc Lo worldcenLrlc comprehenslon. 1hls Laklng-for-granLed (and Lhus lgnorlng) of Lhe lnLerlor, lnLersub[ecLlve worldspace (Lhe LefL-Pand dlmenslons of Lhe kosmos), and consequenLly bellevlng LhaL all LhaL ls necessary ls Lo produce a more accuraLe" hollsLlc map of Lhe naLural world: Lhls ls exacLly Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL (and CarLeslan) paradlgm, Lhe proud culLure of reflecLlon," LhaL monsLer of arresLed developmenL," whlch conLrlbuLed lnexorably Lo Lhe acLual fracLurlng of Lhe kosmos, Lhe collapse of Lhe kosmos, and Lhe consequenL despollaLlon of Cala preclsely ln Lhe locopoclty Lo engage Lhe lnLerlor processes of LransformaLlon upon whlch reflecLlon lLself depends ln Lhe flrsL place, and upon whlch muLual agreemenL and muLual accord, whlch alone wlll save Cala, musL proceed. 16. 1be Coto lopets, a book by kramer and AlsLad, ls a Lyplcal example of a purely uescended approach clalmlng Lo have Lhe whole sLory. 1he auLhors mlsLake whaL cerLalnly seems Lo be Lhelr lgnorance of Lhe Ascendlng currenL for a crlLlque of all Ascendlng endeavors, and Lhen lnLerpreL any cbolleoqe Lo Lhelr owo sLance as belng auLhorlLarlan." 1helr efforL ls admlrable when conflned Lo Lhe half of reallLy Lhey admlL, buL lL ls an efforL LhaL remalns, ln lLs parLlalness, sLeeped ln Lhe domlnance of uescenL. Llkewlse, ColdsmlLh's 1be woy: Ao coloqlcol wotlJ-vlew ls a splendld reclLal of Lhe Lco-sysLems worldvlew, and l agree wlLh a falr amounL of lLs presenLaLlon, as far as lL goes. 8uL lL ls aggresslvely monologlcal and purely uescended, and Lhus ls repleLe wlLh Lhe teqtesslve yearnlng for whaL lL calls Lhe earllesL perlod when people everywhere really knew how Lo llve ln harmony ln wlLh Lhe naLural world" (Lhe nalveLe of LhaL sLance ls slmply asLonlshlng). Moreover, Lhls monologlcal vlew Lyplcally has no concepLlon of Lhe acLual dynamlcs of Lhe enLlre LefL-Pand dlmenslon of Lhe kosmos, ln Lhls regard lL ls qulLe duallsLlc and fragmenLed, and so of course lL clalms Lo be 1PL Way, as lLs LlLle puLs lL, and sLaLes Lhls clalm very boldly: 1hese prlnclples form an all-embraclng and self-conslsLenL model . . ." (apparenLly never havlng heard of Cdel or 1arskl). 1hese Lwo books are archeLypal examples of Lhe uescended paLh ln Loday's world. AlLhough Lhese approaches lack any verLlcal Jeptb, Lhey make up for LhaL ln a Lype of fearless shallowness. ln boLh books, Lhe lack of any Ascendlng currenL, any genulnely LransformaLlve lnLerlor dlsclosures, allows Lhe bearers of Lhe worldvlew Lo go on abouL Lhelr buslness fundamenLally oocbolleoqeJ. 1here ls no consclousness hlgher or deeper Lhan tbelt presenL sLaLe, only a dlfferenL monologlcal worldvlew LhaL otbets should accepL. 1helr salvaLlon ls noL a maLLer of Lranscendence ln Lhelr own case, buL ln alLerlng Lhe vlews of oLhers. Pence Lhe domlnance lnherenL ln uescenL, hence Lhe auLhorlLarlan sLance clalmlng Lo combaL auLhorlLarlanlsm, hence Lhe flaLland clalmlng Lo be Lhe All. 17. 1he evldence for boLh of Lhese clalms ls presenLed ln volumes 2 and 3. ln Lhls regard, a flnal word abouL SLanlslav Crof and !ean Cebser, and a commenL on Lhe work of 8lchard 1arnas. SLarLlng wlLh Crof (Lhese commenLs are ln llghL of my prevlous dlscusslon of Crof's work-noLe 3 for chapLer 6-whlch Lhe reader should have read flrsL): 5too Ctof Crof, ln 8eyooJ tbe 8tolo (1983), plnpolnLs Lwo ma[or areas of dlsagreemenL" or aL leasL mlsmaLch" beLween hls psychologlcal model and mlne (ln splLe of Lhe oLherwlse far-reachlng agreemenL"). 1he flrsL lnvolves Lhe baslc perlnaLal maLrlces. ln my oplnlon," he polnLs ouL, wlLhouL a genulne appreclaLlon of Lhe paramounL slgnlflcance of [perlnaLal blrLh/deaLh], Lhe undersLandlng of human naLure ls bound Lo be lncompleLe and unsaLlsfacLory. 1he lnLegraLlon of Lhese elemenLs would glve Wllber's model more loglcal conslsLency and greaLer pragmaLlc power. WlLhouL Lhls, hls model cannoL accounL for lmporLanL cllnlcal daLa, and hls descrlpLlon of Lhe LherapeuLlc lmpllcaLlons of hls model wlll remaln Lhe leasL convlnclng parL of hls work for cllnlclans used Lo deallng wlLh Lhe pracLlcal problems of psychopaLhology" (pp. 136-37). My explanaLlon of fulcrum-0 (noLe 3 for chap. 6) should saLlsfy, ln a general fashlon, mosL of Lhose ob[ecLlons. l have, slnce 1982, consldered fulcrum-0 an lnLegral parL of Lhe overall specLrum model (due prlmarlly Lo SLan's research and !ohn 8owan's clarlflcaLlons). 1he second ma[or dlsagreemenL" menLloned by Crof and oLhers ls Lhe llnearlLy" of my model. As SLan puLs lL, My own observaLlons suggesL LhaL, as consclous evoluLlon proceeds from Lhe cenLaurlc Lo Lhe subLle realms and beyond, lL does noL follow a llnear Lra[ecLory, buL ln a sense enfolds lnLo lLself. ln Lhls process, Lhe lndlvldual reLurns Lo earller sLages of developmenL, buL evaluaLes Lhem from Lhe polnL of vlew of a maLure adulL. AL Lhe same Llme, he or she becomes consclously aware of cerLaln aspecLs or quallLles of Lhese sLages LhaL were lmpllclL, buL unrecognlzed when confronLed ln Lhe conLexL of llnear evoluLlon" (p. 137). My presenLaLlon LhroughouL Lhls book should make lL clear LhaL l am ln general agreemenL wlLh LhaL sLaLemenL, buL perhaps even more radlcally Lhan Crof. noL slmply each sLage beyond Lhe ego/cenLaur, buL evety sLage of developmenL unfolds/enfolds lLs predecessors. uevelopmenLallsLs from Loevlnger Lo kohlberg Lo lageL have long polnLed ouL LhaL every sLage lnvolves varlous Lypes of reworklngs of prevlous paLLerns, Laken up, enfolded, and reasslmllaLed lnLo Lhe new sLrucLures. 1he llnear" naLure of Lhe varlous sLages slmply refers Lo broad paLLerns of stoble adapLaLlon (noL merely Lemporary experlences), whlch unfold llnearly" ln Lhe way LhaL an acorn unfolds llnearly" lnLo an oak. Many Lemporary experlences can bounce all over Lhe specLrum of poLenLlal experlences, buL sLable and conLlnuous adapLaLlon depends upon ongolng holarchlcal sLrucLurallzaLlon LhaL musL dlfferenLlaLe/lnLegraLe lLs predecessors: unfold, enfold (Crof's enfolds lnLo lLself"). AL Lhe same Llme, because lndlvlduals have general access Lo gross/subLle/causal stotes (waklng, dreamlng, deep sleep), Lemporary experlences can, as l sald, move all over Lhe broad specLrum of posslble experlences. And Lhese Lemporary peak" experlences Lend Lo be emphaslzed ln Crof's work, whlch ls flne (and Lhey ofLen have conslderable LherapeuLlc effecL, whlch ls also [usL flne). l agree wlLh all of LhaL, and l have all along (buL beglnnlng wlLh up ftom Jeo, l polnLed ouL LhaL Lemporary experlences/sLaLes musL be converLed lnLo sLable paLLerns lf acLual growLh ls Lo occur, we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls polnL ln a momenL). Some crlLlcs, focuslng on Lhe sLages" porLlon of my model, Lhlnk LhaL l have some sorL of monollLhlc, rlgld, one-way sLreeL ln mlnd, Lhrough whlch developmenL moves, clunklng and chunklng a sLep aL a Llme. 8uL Lhls Lype of narrow one-way sLreeL concepLlon ls oevet assumed by developmenLallsLs of any varleLy, Lhe varlous sLages noL only splral, meander, wobble, and regress, Lhey are Lhemselves slmply mlleposLs ln Lhe wlndlng road of growLh (and, as such, are exLremely lmporLanL, buL noL monollLhlc). 1hls ls largely Laken for granLed by developmenLallsLs. Moreover, ln my model, Lhere are Lhe baslc levels or waves of consclousness (maLLer Lo body Lo mlnd Lo soul Lo splrlL), and Lhe varlous developmenLal llnes or sLreams (cognlLlon, affecLs, morals, self-ldenLlLy, splrlLuallLy/falLh, defenses, eLc.) LhaL move relaLlvely lndependenLly Lhrough Lhose levels. 1hus, for example, a person can be a hlgh level of developmenL cognlLlvely, a medlum level emoLlonally, and a low level splrlLually. 1here ls noLhlng llnear abouL overall developmenL. SLlll, as l wlll emphaslze ln Lhls noLe, even Lhough overall developmenL ls noL llnear, and even Lhough Lhe self has access Lo all sorLs of alLered sLaLes and Lemporary peak experlences-none of whlch are llnear-lf Lhose sLaLes are Lo become eoJotloq ttolts, Lhey musL enLer Lhe sLream of developmenL and be converLed from sLaLes Lo sLrucLures (or endurlng capaclLles). ln any developmenLal llne LhaL Lhls occurs (cognlLlve, moral, affecLlve, eLc.), Lhe developmenL ls llnear" as deflned by developmenLallsLs: namely, each sLage bullds upon cerLaln compeLencles lald down by lLs predecessors (e.g., aLoms Lo molecules Lo cells Lo organlsms), and no amounL of Lemporary peak experlences can Lurn aLoms lnLo cells wlLhouL passlng Lhrough molecules. ln shorL, whlle Lhe model l have proposed makes ample room for botb alLered sLaLes and developmenLal sLrucLures, SLan's model accounLs mosLly for Lhe former. 1hls, ln my oplnlon, ls a ma[or llmlLaLlon ln hls model, slnce lL means LhaL lL cannoL easlly accounL for developmenL aL all. Slnce permanenL reallzaLlon and sLable access Lo hlgher domalns ls one of my prlmary lnLeresLs, l have focused less on Lemporary sLaLes and more on endurlng LralLs, buL l fully acknowledge boLh. 1hus, from my perspecLlve, Lhe self-sysLem can span Lhe enLlre specLrum of poLenLlal experlences (whlch l wlll quallfy ln a momenL). AL Lhe very leasL-and Lhls ls vlrLually lndlspuLable-Lhe self has consLanLly avallable Lo lL Lhe Lhree greaL sLaLes of gross, subLle, and causal occaslons (lf noLhlng else, ln waklng, dream, and deep sleep sLaLes). And Lherefore, aL any of lLs sLages of sLable growLh and developmenL, Lhe self has access Lo Lemporary experlences (lnfluxes" or lnfuslons" or Lransfuslons") from Lhese sLaLes. 1hese Lemporary lnfuslons and alLered sLaLes are noL necessarlly, ln and of Lhemselves, Lhe sLuff of sLable adapLaLlon and permanenL sLrucLurallzaLlon (see below), buL Lhese general peak experlences can, and do, occur Lo Lhe self aL vlrLually any of lLs sLages of growLh and developmenL (because lL ls lmmersed ln or surrounded by Lhe Lhree sLaLes aL every sLage). 1hls ls why l have always agreed LhaL chlldren can lndeed have a Lype of Lranspersonal lnflux (usually from Lhe subLle sLaLe). And why channellng" of subLle occaslons can occur aL vlrLually any sLage of developmenL. And why paranormal phenomena are noL a parLlcular sLage of growLh buL an lnflux LhaL may (or may noL) occur aL vlrLually any sLage of growLh. And why psychosls ls someLlmes lnvaded by mysLlcal Lransfuslons (lndeed, 1be Atmoo ltoject was one of Lhe flrsL clear aLLempLs Lo dellneaLe Lhe lnflux of Lranspersonal energles due Lo Lhe breakdown of egolc LranslaLlons ln cerLaln psychoLlc sLaLes). 8uL many LheorlsLs have so focused on Lhese dramaLlc and Lemporary lnfluxes or Lransfuslons LhaL Lhe acLual growLh and developmenL process has been severely mlsconsLrued and even mlsundersLood. 1emporary lnfuslon (as lmporLanL and profound as lL someLlmes ls) becomes Lhe be-all and end-all of consclousness occaslons. 1hls has led more Lhan one researcher Lo slng Lhe glorles of psychosls as prlmarlly a wonderful means for mysLlcal growLh (e.g., Lalng) and Lhe [oys of lnfancy as a paradlsalcal and mysLlcal sLaLe Lraglcally fracLured by growlng up (e.g., norman C. 8rown, Mlchael Washburn). eak experlences can lndeed gllmpse varlous nonordlnary sLaLes, buL sLable adapLaLlon proceeds ln a growLhllke fashlon (whlch ls why nelLher Lhe chlld nor Lhe psychoLlc nor Lhe channeler can acLually own" and sLably adapL Lo Lhe lnfuslon, moreover, Lhe laLLer Lwo Lranspersonal" sLaLes all resL on a dlssoclaLlve base, whlch ls why Lhey occur ouLslde Lhe auLonomy of Lhe self-sysLem, l wlll reLurn Lo Lhls shorLly). 8uL mosL lmporLanL, focuslng on peak experlences has caused an enormous confuslon abouL whaL ls octoolly ovolloble ln Lhese experlences. 8ecause, conLrary Lo Lhe peak LheorlsLs, noL oll of Lhe specLrum of consclousness ls lylng around, fully formed buL submerged, llke a sunken Lreasure chesL, walLlng Lo be dug up. Consclousness cteotes as much as lL ooeottbs, and Lhus, as we wlll see, we have Lo be exLremely careful ln how we lnLerpreL Lhese peak experlences-and mosL lmporLanL, abouL Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space lo wblcb Lhese experlences occur. ln Lhe flrsL place, LhaL a Lranspersonal experlence mlghL lnvolve Lhe reenLerlng" or reworklng" or reexperlenclng" of a prepersonal occaslon (archalc lmages, pleromaLlc lndlssoclaLlon, phylogeneLlc herlLage, anlmal/planL ldenLlflcaLlon, perlnaLal paLLerns, eLc.) does noL mean Lhe Lranspersonal awareness teslJes ln Lhose archalc sLrucLures: lL ls Lhe Lranspersonal awareness LhaL ls dolng Lhe enLerlng, noL Lhe archalc modes-Lhe quesLlon ls always: whaL can Lhose modes accompllsh oo tbelt owo, when Lhey alone are manlfesL? noL a slngle prepersonal sLrucLure can lLself, ln lLself, generaLe lnLrlnslc Lranspersonal awareness, buL lL can become Lhe ob[ecL of Lranspersonal consclousness, and Lhus be reenLered" and reworked," and lL Lhen becomes a Lype of veblcle of Lranspersonal awareness, buL never lLs sootce. 1he pre/Lrans fallacy, ln Lhls lnsLance, remalns flrmly ln place. lurLher, as l suggesLed ln A 5ocloble CoJ, we have Lo dlsLlngulsh beLween peak experlence, plaLeau experlence, and sLable adapLaLlon, and as l suggesLed ln aLhs beyond Lgo ln Lhe Comlng uecades" (ln Walsh and vaughan, lotbs beyooJ eqo), hlgher developmenL ls ln parL a converslon of tempototy stotes lnLo eoJotloq sttoctotes of sLable adapLaLlon. 1haL we have a Lype of (llmlLed buL fluld) access Lo Lranspersonal sLaLes should noL deLracL from Lhe facL LhaL Lemporary experlences are noL Lhe sLuff of endurlng wlsdom-adapLaLlon (for an lnslghLful reflecLlon on Lhese lssues, see 8eynolds 1994). And Lhls ls why we have Lo be especlally careful abouL Lhe clalm LhaL all psychologlcal domalns are slmply open Lo fluld access. As 8eynolds (1994) summarlzes Lhe Croflan vlew: 1he cllnlcal daLa Crof has collecLed durlng Lherapy sesslons of LSu and holoLroplc breaLhwork lndlcaLes a very fluld accesslblllLy Lo oll Lhe domalns of consclousness." 8uL, ln facL, oll Lhe domalns of consclousness are oot avallable (holographlcally or oLherwlse) Lo a parLlcular sub[ecL of consclousness. lor example, an adulL aL moral sLage 2 does oot have access Lo Lhe consclousness of moral sLage 3. Moral sLage 3 (wlLh all lLs enormous rlchness and characLerlsLlcs) ls oot avallable Lo moral sLage 2, no amounL of LSu, breaLhwork, or any oLher lnLense experlenLlal drama wlll bulld Lhe lotetsobjectlve sLrucLures necessary Lo Lake Lhe role of oLher, reflecL on Lhose roles, crlLlclze Lhose roles, and move lnLo oolvetsol compasslon, Lhrough whlch alone sLable Lranspersonal awareness can shlne. (1here ls a sense ln whlch Lhe deep sLrucLures of hlgher sLages are lndeed presenL as poteotlols ln Lhe lndlvldual-whaL l have called Lhe ground unconsclous"-much as, for example, Chomsky belleves LhaL Lhe braln slmply comes wlLh all languages embedded ln lL as poLenLlals. 8uL [usL as LhaL does noL mean LhaL a Lwo-monLh-old chlld can slmply and fluldly access lrench and sLarL speaklng lL, so an lndlvldual aL moral sLage 2 cannoL slmply access moral-sLage-3 experlences.) 1hus, a moral-sLage-2 person mlghL experlence a Lemporary dlssoluLlon of self/oLher boundary (and mlghL lndeed do so afLer regresslng Lo 8M), buL LhaL person wlll conLaln" or hold"-and Lherefore moolfest-only a ptecooveotloool undersLandlng of LhaL nondual" sLaLe: whlch ls Lo say, LhaL person wlll undersLand lL vlrLually noL aL all. A person aL moral sLage 2, who cannoL fluldly operaLe from Lhe consensus role of Lhe generallzed oLher, wlll noL sLably adapL Lo unlversal mlnd. CS1MCuL8nlSM Anu 1PL ln1L8Su8!LC1lvL SACL Crof ls aware of Lhese general lssues, buL l feel he mlghL be neglecLlng Lhls cruclal area. 1he Lendency ln hls wrlLlng ls Lo Lake Lhls lotetsobjectlve wotlJspoce for granLed (as l wlll explaln ln a momenL) and Lhen slmply Jesctlbe Lhe monologlcal sub[ecL havlng monologlcal experlences: Lhe CarLeslan sub[ecL has an experlence, sees an archeLypal lmage, experlences volcanlc pleasure/paln, ldenLlfles wlLh planLs, has an ouL-of-Lhe-body experlence, rellves blrLh, or perhaps dlssolves alLogeLher, and Crof has glven a Lruly exLraordlnary caLalog of Lhese phenomenologlcal experlences (whlch, for Lhe mosL parL, l accepL as phenomenology). 8uL all of LhaL phenomenology tokes fot qtooteJ, and Lhus neglecLs, Lhe cruclal polnL LhaL Lhe sobject of Lhose experlences ls fotmeJ only Lhrough an lotetsobjectlve and Jloloqlcol process, and exlsLs ooly by vlrLue of Lhose (hldden) lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLures, whlch Lhemselves oevet come [umplng lnLo awareness wlLh LSu or breaLhwork or yoga or any slmply phenomenologlcal awareness. 1he Croflan llsLs of Lranspersonal experlences are slmply a phenomenology of experlences, and accuraLe and lmporLanL as LhaL ls, lL falls (or comes up shorL) aL preclsely Lhe polnL LhaL oll phenomenology falls: lL Lakes Lhe sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve paLLerns Joloq Lhe phenomenology for granLed, and Lhus falls Lo dlsclose Lhe processes and lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLures oecessoty for Lhe experlences to be oble Lo unfold aL all (see below). lor Lhese experlences do noL unfold ln preglven sub[ecLlve space, LhaL sub[ecLlve space exlsLs only ln, and by vlttoe of, an lnLersub[ecLlve space formed by a developmenLal process of muLual undersLandlng and muLual recognlLlon, whlch ls Lhe acLual space or background" of Lhe sub[ecLlve experlences (l.e., lL ls Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space lo wblcb Lhe experlences come and go), a background LhaL Joes oot ltself enLer awareness as an expetleoce, and Lherefore coooot be found phenomenologlcally, and Lhus coo be foooJ lo oooe of Ctofs cottoqtopbles (lmporLanL as Lhey oLherwlse are). (lor a dlscusslon of Lhe background and sLrucLural unconsclous-Lhe hldden paLLerns of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space-see noLe 28 for chap. 4. 1he dlscovery of Lhe lmporLance of Lhe consLrucLed lnLersub[ecLlve space ls Lhe essence of Lhe genulnely posL- CarLeslan paradlgms, from sLrucLurallsm Lo hermeneuLlcs Lo genealogy and archaeology and grammaLology-a polnL we wlll reLurn Lo below.) 8y Laklng Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space for granLed, Lhen Lhe lsolaLed lndlvldual sub[ecL appears Lo be havlng a serles of monologlcal experlences, and Crof has glven us Lhe phenomenology of many of Lhose experlences. 8uL hls analysls leaves lnLacL Lhe Laken-for-granLed naLure of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space (ln whlch Lhe parLlcular sub[ecL and ob[ecL arlse). 1hls approach ls Lhus sLlll caughL ln Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, whlch lL alLers by exteoJloq whaL Lhe sub[ecL coo experlence (Lhe carLographles of nonordlnary experlences), buL lL does noL examlne Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space LhaL supporLs and allows Lhe parLlcular sub[ecL and Lhe parLlcular experlences Lo arlse ln Lhe flrsL place. 1he sub[ecLlve space ln whlch Lhese experlences occur ls noL preglven and unproblemaLlc: lL develops. And tbot examlnaLlon leads Lo Lhe developmenLal and formaLlve processes LhaL are hldden Lo phenomenology, an examlnaLlon LhaL dlscloses Lhe sLages of Lhe formaLlon of Lhe lndlvldual sub[ecL and Lhus dlscloses wbot tbot sobject coo osslmllote (and sLably adapL Lo) among Lhe monologlcal experlences LhaL bombard lL ln dramaLlc experlenLlal eplsodes (breaLhwork, LSu, eLc.). 1haL aspecL of Lhe examlnaLlon leads noL [usL Lo a carLography and phenomenology of ordlnary and exLraordlnary expetleoces, buL also Lo a developmenLal carLography of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve spaces lo wblcb Lhe experlences arlse and coo arlse (and Lherefore, lnLo whlch Lhey coo be sLably lnLegraLed). We wlll see several examples of Lhls ln Lhe nexL secLlon. 1hus, ln my own approach, Lhe sLudy of Lhe peak (and Lemporary) experlences of phenomenology (lmporLanL buL llmlLed) are lncorporaLed lnLo a broader framework LhaL lncludes Lhe formaLlve sLages of sLrucLures of sLable adapLaLlon: Lhe sub[ecL havlng Lhese experlences dld noL slmply parachuLe Lo earLh fully formed, and Lhus Lhe types of experlences avallable Lo lL are oot ln all ways holographlcally preglven and avallable Lo fluld access for ooy sub[ecL (a broad and general range of Lranspersonal experlences, yes, a sLable adapLaLlon and asslmllaLlon, no. l wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL). ln shorL, Lhe overcomlng of Lhe fundamenLal LnllghLenmenL (Lockean Lo CarLeslan) paradlgm conslsLs noL merely ln glvlng a new and expooJeJ descrlpLlon of Lhe world, buL also ln recognlzlng Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve consLrucLlon of Lhe consclousness LhaL ls dolng Lhe descrlblng, Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve unfoldlng of Lhe worldspace lo wblcb sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs manlfesL (see noLe 13 above). As l Lhlnk l have demonsLraLed LhroughouL Lhls book, mosL of Lhe new paradlgm" LheorlsLs (who clalm Lo be non-CarLeslan, and mosL of whom Crof quoLes wlLh approval) are sLlll CarLeslan Lo Lhe core: Lhe sub[ecL of consclousness ls slmply glvlng a new, expanded, process-orlenLed, nonaLomlsLlc, nonmechanlsLlc descrlpLlon of Lhe world, wlLhouL any undersLandlng LhaL Lhe sub[ecL dolng Lhe descrlblng ls lLself creaLed by a dlaloglcal process LhaL does noL enLer awareness as an lmmedlaLe ob[ecL and Lhus oevet enLers Lhelr new paradlgm" descrlpLlons. (1hey fall Lo recognlze Lhe varlous Lypes of Lhe sLrucLural unconsclous," Lhe background hermeneuLlc unconsclous," and Lhe funcLlonal unconsclous" descrlbed ln noLe 28 for chap. 4, all of whlch consLlLuLe Lhe acLual breakLhroughs ln Lhe genulnely posL-CarLeslan paradlgms from Peldegger Lo loucaulL Lo Pabermas.) lL ls preclsely Lhese formaLlve processes of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve worldspace LhaL creaLe an openlng or clearlng ln whlch dlfferenL Lypes of sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs can sLably emerge: tbese Jevelopmeotol ptocesses Jefloe tbe ptlmoty otc of cooscloosoess evolotloo ooJ oJoptotloo. And oooe of Lhose processes make lL lnLo Lhe new paradlgms," and none of Lhem show up on Crof's exLended carLographles of phenomenologlcal experlences. eak experlences can lndeed bounce all over Lhe specLrum of posslblllLles, ln a speclflc sense: Lhe average adulL has access Lo Lhe enLlre phylogeneLlc (archeLypal) lmage forms, Lhe varlous perlnaLal maLrlces, Lhe psychodynamlc unconsclous, as well as Lhe overall qeoetol stotes of gross/subLle/causal (waklng/dreamlng/sleep), and Lhus ln every LwenLy-four-hour perlod Lhe average adulL sweeps Lhrough Lhe general specLrum of consclousness (gross Lo subLle Lo causal and back agaln: ascenL and descenL, evoluLlon and lnvoluLlon, Lhe CreaL Clrcle once each day, noL Lo menLlon mlnlaLure verslons LhroughouL). 8uL Lhose sLaLes (and Lhe Lemporary experlences Lhey generaLe) can be converLed lnLo sLable, consclous adapLaLlons only Lhrough a process of holarchlcal sLrucLurallzaLlon: converLlng sLaLes lnLo LralLs. no doubL a peak or plaLeau experlence can profoundly alLer people's llves, and LoLally shake up Lhelr accepLed worldvlews, and shaLLer old bellefs. 8uL Lhen, where do Lhey carry lL? WhaL ls done wlLh lL? Where does flL lnLo Lhelr sLrucLure? Pow can Lhey moolfest lL? Are Lhey ready for sLable adapLaLlon and consclous responslblllLy for Lhe botJeos of compasslon and wlsdom LhaL Lranspersonal sLrucLures JemooJ? Cr does Lhe lnslghL" come and go as anoLher sensaLlonal experlence, and fade away lnLo Lhe nlghL, a vaguely fond memory of whaL mlghL have been? 1o glve only one example, agaln uslng moral sLages (slnce Lhese lndlcaLe how people octoolly otleot Lhemselves ln lnLerpersonal space, as opposed Lo Lhelr own prlvaLe" experlences): kohlberg's moral sLages have now been LesLed ln numerous wldely dlfferenL culLures (flrsL-, second-, and Lhlrd-world), and oo exceptloos to bls boslc stoqes bove yet beeo foooJ (Lhere are mlnor varlaLlons, buL all are wlLhln Lhe broad ouLllnes). As far as we can Lell, Lhey are lndeed unlversal deep sLrucLures (Cllllgan alLered Lhe surface, noL Lhe deep, forms). [See loteqtol psycboloqy for references.] 1hus, a person aL moral sLage 2 who has a profound saLorl-llke experlence (say, a Lemporary dlssoluLlon of self ln Lhe causal unmanlfesL, whlch ls lndeed ever-avallable), mlghL have hls bellef sysLem and worldvlew profoundly shaken, and Lhls mlghL lndeed lead hlm Lo ttoosfotm hls acLual moral orlenLaLlon ln Lhe world, whlch means he would move Lo . . . moral sLage 3. 1bete ls oowbete else fot blm to qo. Pe wlll noL slmply [ump Lo permanenL sLage-6 (or hlgher) adapLaLlon (among oLher Lhlngs, sLage 6 operaLes upon varlous sLrucLures ln sLage 3 and sLage 4, and Lhese are noL manlfesL, are noL presenL: lL would be llke bulldlng cells wlLh no molecules). 8y cenLerlng on Lhe facL LhaL Lemporary saLorl-llke experlences are lndeed avallable Lo vlrLually anybody (fluld access"), we Lend Lo mlss Lhe cruclal facL LhaL, once Lhe experlenLlal flreworks have subslded, Lhe arc of consclousness reLurns Lo lLs sLrucLural paLLerns, whlch Lhemselves evolve and develop ln lnLersub[ecLlve formaLlve processes. l am noL saylng experlenLlal dlsclosures aren'L lmporLanL ([usL Lhe opposlLe), buL l am saylng Lhey address Lhe phenomenal realm and Lend Lo Lake Lhe sub[ecL of Lhe experlences as unproblemaLlc and monologlcal, as a preexlsLlng cenLer of awareness agalnsL whlch we wlll Lhrow experlences unLll lL surrenders, lnsLead of seelng LhaL Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve worldspace allows Lhe arlslng of boLh Lhe sub[ecL and ob[ecL ln sLable awareness: alLerlng Lhe ob[ecLlve experlences wlLhouL addresslng Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve developmenLal space ln whlch Lhe ob[ecLs and sub[ecLs arlse wlll Lhus be of llmlLed lasLlng effecL (LhaL ls Lhe whole polnL of Lhe genulnely posL-CarLeslan paradlgms). 5ome xomples LeL me glve a few examples of Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space and why Lyplcal phenomenology does noL dlsclose lL (and why lL Look posLmodernlsm Lo geL beyond CarLeslan phenomenology). Say you are waLchlng a card game of poker. 1he cards are Lhe acLual phenomena, you can see Lhem dlrecLly, and you could do a compleLe phenomenology by descrlblng each of Lhem very carefully. 8uL Lhe cards are belng used accordlng Lo varlous toles (Lhe rules of poker), and Lhose rules are noL wrlLLen on Lhe cards. 1hose rules appear nowhere on Lhe phenomena, and Lhus even a compleLe and exhausLlve descrlpLlon (and phenomenology) of all of Lhe cards would noL Lell you whaL Lhe rules are. ln order Lo dlscover Lhe rules-Lhe acLual sttoctote (or grammar or synLax) of Lhe game of poker-you have Lo perform some sorL of sLrucLurallsm: you have Lo lnvesLlgaLe Lhe collectlve bebovlot of Lhe cards, and sLudy Lhelr pottetos of telotloosblps. ?ou have Lo dlscover whlch card goes where and when, you have Lo spoL whlch comblnaLlons of cards wln", you have Lo uncover Lhe speclflc ways and paLLerns LhaL Lhe cards are used. none of Lhls ls wrlLLen on any of Lhe cards. ln shorL, you have Lo sLudy Lhe lotetcotJ telotloosblps (Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve relaLlonshlps). no amounL of sLudylng [usL Lhe sub[ecLs (or [usL Lhe ob[ecLs: we are uslng Lhe cards Lo mean elLher lndlvldual sub[ecLs or ob[ecLs)-no amounL of phenomenology-wlll show you Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve paLLerns. AoJ yet evety cotJ ls obeyloq tbose lotetsobjectlve pottetos. 1he posLmodern, posL-CarLeslan approaches are all unlLed by a bellef LhaL background lnLersub[ecLlve (and lnLerob[ecLlve) paLLerns govern much of Lhe phenomenology of lndlvldual sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs, a background LhaL cannoL be spoLLed by a mere phenomenology or a descrlpLlon of Lhose lndlvldual sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs. (1hls ls why we heard loucaulL, ln noLe 1 above, explaln why phenomenology could noL even handle Lhe exlsLence of llngulsLlc meanlng: sub[ecLlve phenomenology cannoL spoL lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLures.) 1hus, we do noL overcome Lhe CarLeslan paradlgm by glvlng a more expanded phenomenology, lmporLanL as LhaL mlghL be (and Lhls ls whaL Crof has conLrlbuLed). lor even lf we have superconsclous sub[ecLs and mega-cards undergolng alLered sLaLes, Lhose cards are sLlll followlng paLLerns LhaL can be found on none of Lhem. 1he genulne posL-CarLeslan approaches Lherefore focus on Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve and lnLerob[ecLlve paLLerns (descrlbed aL lengLh ln noLe 28 for chap. 4) LhaL creaLe a space or clearlng ln whlch Lhe lndlvldual sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs arlse. And Lhey lnvesLlgaLe Lhe lnfluence of Lhls background on lndlvldual sLaLes of consclousness (a background LhaL expllclLly shows up ln none of Lhe lndlvldual sLaLes of consclousness). WhaL does a space" or clearlng" mean ln Lhls regard? CrlglnaLlng wlLh Peldegger, buL Laklng on numerous oLher (yeL relaLed) meanlngs, Lhe ldea ls essenLlally Lhls: reallLy ls noL a preglven monologlcal enLlLy lylng around for all Lo see, raLher, varlous soclal pracLlces and culLural conLexLs creaLe an openlng or clearlng ln whlch varlous Lypes of sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs can appear. lor example, as l would puL lL, Lhe maglc worldspace creaLes a clearlng ln whlch anlmlsLlc ob[ecLs can appear, Lhe myLhlc worldspace creaLes a space ln whlch a carlng Cod can appear, Lhe raLlonal worldspace creaLes a clearlng ln whlch worldcenLrlc compasslon can appear, Lhe psychlc worldspace creaLes a space ln whlch Lhe World Soul can appear, Lhe causal worldspace creaLes a clearlng ln whlch Lhe Abyss can be recognlzed. none of Lhose are slmply lylng around ouL Lhere and hlLLlng Lhe eyeballs of everybody. 1here ls no slngle pre-glven world" (tbe essenLlal lnslghL of posLmodernlsm). 1hls ls why posLmodernlsm ls generally unlLed ln recognlzlng Lhe facL LhaL lL ls Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space (wlLh lLs correlaLe, Lhe lnLerob[ecLlve realm) LhaL ollows lndlvldual sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs Lo be seen and recognlzed ln Lhe flrsL place. 1hls ls why Lhe posLmodern posLsLrucLurallsLs Lrace parL of Lhelr llneage Lo Saussure, who demonsLraLed LhaL language ls an lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLure, and Lo nleLzsche, who emphaslzed lnLerpreLaLlon over emplrlclsm. 1hls ls also why Lhe greaL posLmodern Lhlnkers have all glven Lhelr verslon of Lhe background lnLersub[ecLlve space LhaL cannoL be grasped by mere descrlpLlve phenomenology (conLra Pusserl). Peldegger uses hermeneuLlcs or lnLerpreLlve onLology (as we saw: surfaces can be seen-phenomenology-buL depLhs musL be lnLerpreLed), loucaulL uses archaeology and genealogy Lo dlg beneaLh and behlnd Lhe phenomena (even lf he lnslsLs Lhere are only surfaces, he ls looklng aL lnLerob[ecLlve surfaces and Lhelr rules of behavlor), uerrlda uses grammaLology Lo spoL Lhe play of slgnlflers and Lhelr endless conLexLs (none of whlch can be found ln a phenomenology of slgnlflers). lL ls Lhls posLmodern Lurn-whlch, ln lLs consLrucLlve form, demands LhaL all four quadranLs be Laken lnLo accounL-LhaL l have expllclLly aLLempLed Lo lncorporaLe, along wlLh Lhe lmporLanL (buL by lLself lnadequaLe) phenomenology of consclousness (whlch, by lLself, remalns flrmly rooLed ln Lhe CarLeslan space). When lL comes Lo lndlvldual psychology, a Lyplcal example ls Lhe one we have been uslng: moral sLrucLures and Lhelr developmenL. eople generally feel LhaL Lhey are free Lo Lhlnk whaLever Lhey llke, and wlLhln llmlLs LhaL ls Lrue. 8uL a person aL moral-sLage 2 wlll noL, under any clrcumsLances, have a moral-sLage-3 LhoughL. As l sald, sLage-3 ls bullL of componenLs from all of Lhe earller sLages, [usL as leLLers go lnLo words, go lnLo senLences, go lnLo paragraphs, and no one has ever seen a paragraph wlLhouL senLences. ln oLher words, Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve moral sLrucLures cteote o spoce lo wblcb loJlvlJool tbooqbts wlll otlse, and LhoughLs LhaL do noL flL LhaL space wlll slmply noL arlse. 1hls ls whaL l mean when l say LhaL Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLures creaLe an openlng or clearlng ln whlch varlous Lypes of sub[ecLs and ob[ecLs coo arlse (and LhaL ls perhaps Lhe rooL lnslghL of Lhe varlous posLmodern movemenLs, lncludlng even Pabermas). 1wo polnLs abouL Lhls example. Cne, no alLered sLaLe or peak experlence wlll produce a moral-sLage-3 LhoughL ln a moral- sLage-2 person. 1wo, no phenomenology of any sub[ecLlve experlence, aL any sLage, wlll dlsclose Lhe sLrucLures of LhaL sLage. henomenology has Lo be supplemenLed wlLh sLrucLurallsm (or any background analysls as descrlbed ln noLe 28 for chap. 4). 1haL ls whaL vlrLually all of Lhe expanded carLographles of consclousness" mlss, and LhaL ls why, however Lranspersonal Lhey are, Lhey are also sLlll CarLeslan. An all-level, all-quadranL" approach ls meanL speclflcally Lo address Lhls llmlLaLlon. lost Actools ooJ lotote loteotlols 1hls furLher polnLs up Lhe profound dlfference beLween experlences LhaL, on Lhe one hand, are essenLlally a process of post tecovety (or rellvlng), and Lhose LhaL are essenLlally a process of fotote Jlscovety or developmenLal bulldlng. 1o Lake Lhem ln LhaL order: 1he average adulL already has, for example, all of Lhe sLrucLures ln place LhaL lnvolve Lhe blrLh Lrauma. 1hose perlnaLal sLrucLures have olteoJy been lald down, Lhey are slmply unconsclous, or unrecovered. All LhaL ls requlred, so Lo speak, ls a lowerlng of Lhe represslon or amnesla Lhreshold (however concelved). 1he same ls Lrue of Lhe lreudlan or personal dynamlc unconsclous and Lhe phylogeneLlc or archalc herlLage: Lhey are olteoJy tbete ln acLual sLrucLural form (buL are slmply forgoLLen" or submerged"). LxperlenLlal tecovety or tellvloq of Lhose already formed sLrucLures can Lhus, wlLhouL Loo much fanfare, be LherapeuLlc ln and of lLself (l fully agree wlLh Crof on LhaL lssue). Cf course, Lhese experlences wlll sLlll have Lo be worked Lhrough, and Lhey wlll sLlll have Lo flL lnLo Lhe ongolng march of sLrucLurallzaLlon LhaL deflnes all growLh and evoluLlon (LeneL 12c). And Lhey wlll sLlll have Lo be asslmllaLed lnLo Lhe sub[ecLlve space of Lhe self-sense. 1hus, Lo sLlck wlLh moral sLages as an example: a person aL moral sLage 3 mlghL experlence planL ldenLlflcaLlon as an lndlcaLlon of worldcenLrlc Cne Llfe, moral sLage 1 wlll experlence lL as an exLenslon of lLs own narclsslsLlc self and arrlve aL an onLologlcal Lheory of Lhe Wonder of 8elng Me. 8uL Lhose prevlous, olteoJy evolveJ sLrucLures (phylogeneLlc and onLogeneLlc) can lndeed be tecoveteJ by any Lechnlques LhaL sufflclenLly llfL Lhe represslon/amnesla barrler (LSu, yoga, breaLhwork, Lherapy, lnLense sLress, eLc.), and Lhus, worklng Lhrough Lhose experlences does noL, lo ltself, demand a fundamenLal and masslve LransformaLlon of Lhe self-sense. 1he rellvlng and worklng-Lhrough can lndeed dlssolve varlous paLhologles creaLed by Lhe represslon or submergence of Lhe pasL sLrucLures. And Lhls recovery (aparL from dlssolvlng cerLaln paLhologles) mlghL also lead Lo a LransformaLlon LhaL noLches Lhe self up from, say, moral sLage 2 Lo sLage 3, or sLage 3 Lo sLage 4, as we saw. 8uL prlmarlly Lhls ls a reworklng (ofLen LherapeuLlc) of sLrucLures already presenL buL submerged: Lhe ptlmoty LhreaL ls ln llfLlng Lhe paln (or amnesla) barrler LhaL consLlLuLed Lhe represslon, Lhe LhreaL ls noL LhaL Lhe self wlll have Lo Lransform upward by fundamenLally surrenderlng lLs presenL sub[ecLlve space: lL slmply has Lo work, lnLo LhaL space, some maLerlal LhaL could [usL as well olteoJy have flL lnLo LhaL space lf lL weren'L for Lhe represslon. And even lf (by, for example, planL ldenLlflcaLlon) Lhe self changes lLs ob[ecLlve worldvlew, a change of ob[ecLlve worldvlew ls noL necessarlly a change ln Lhe sub[ecLlve space LhaL holds LhaL worldvlew. SalnLs as well as egoLlsLs can champlon Cne Llfe." 8uL LhaL tecovety of pasL sLrucLures olteoJy lolJ Jowo (by phylogeneLlc or onLogeneLlc developmenL) buL subsequenLly repressed or submerged (or aL any raLe forgoLLen)-LhaL ls qulLe dlfferenL from bulldlng fuLure sLrucLures as Lhey unfold, for Lhe flrsL Llme, ln manlfesL consclousness. Pere Lhe lnLense experlenLlal dlsclosures do noL have Lo be worked lnLo a sub[ecLlve sLrucLure already presenL, buL raLher have Lo be parL of a sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve process of bulldlng a sLrucLure noL yeL ln exlsLence: experlences have Lo be parL, noL of sLrucLural uncoverlng, buL of sLrucLural bulldlng. ln shorL, Lhere are very lmporLanL dlfferences beLween dlgglng up post octools and brlnglng down fotote poteotlols. asL acLuals (sLrucLures olteoJy lald down ln evoluLlon buL subsequenLly submerged) lnclude Lhe phylogeneLlc herlLage and Lhe onLogeneLlc herlLage (from maLerlal/planL/anlmal ldenLlflcaLlon Lo perlnaLal maLrlces Lo lreudlan psychodynamlc unconsclous Lo collecLlve archalc unconsclous). AlLhough lL mlghL Lake a Lranspersonal awareness Lo access some of Lhese more remoLe sLrucLures, Lhe polnL ls LhaL Lhey are olteoJy formed, already evolved, already lald down, and so of course we have a Lype of fluld access" Lo Lhem (once Lhe amnesla barrler ls peneLraLed by whaLever means). 8uL fuLure poLenLlals are avallable only as poteotlols: Lhe sLrucLures Lhemselves have oot yet been bullL ln Lhe parLlcular evoluLlon of Lhe parLlcular lndlvldual ([usL as Lhe hlgher moral sLages are only fuLure poLenLlals Lo Lhe lower sLages). And Lhus, aL mosL, Lhe average lndlvldual has access Lo random, tempototy expetleoces (across Lhe broad range of sLaLes, gross and subLle and causal)-experlences whlch, lf Lhey are Lo enLer consclousness as permanenL, sLable, responslble LralLs, musL be bullL lnLo Lhe ongolng sLream of sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLurallzaLlon. A person aL moral sLage 2 cannoL slmply unearLh and lnsLanLly have fluld access Lo all of Lhe characLerlsLlcs of moral sLage 3-Lhese fuLure poLenLlal sLrucLures musL be bullL and creaLed lotetsobjectlvely, Lhey are oot fully formed, burled Lreasure chesLs lylng around and walLlng Lo pop Lo Lhe sobjectlve surface under hypervenLllaLlon. 1he same ls Lrue of llngulsLlc and grammaLlcal sLrucLures, cognlLlve developmenL, Loevlnger's self-developmenL, Pabermas's communlcaLlve compeLence, psychoanalyLlc ob[ecL relaLlons-Lhe llsL ls vlrLually endless, and none of Lhose lnvolve fluld access (and unearLhlng) of an already formed occaslon, buL raLher lnLerpersonal and lnLersub[ecLlve bulldlng and creaLlng. All of LhaL Lends Lo geL overlooked ln Lhe exclLemenL of dlgglng up a pasL acLual (e.g., planL ldenLlflcaLlon) or of experlenclng an lnfuslon from subLle or causal sLaLes (e.g., saLorl-llke experlences). 1emporary peak experlences from hlgher domalns (subLle or causal) can lndeed occeletote ttoosfotmotloo Loward Lhose domalns, buL cannoL, for example, slmply [ump a person aL moral sLage 2 Lo moral sLage 3 or beyond. 1here ls no evldence LhaL suggesLs LhaL can happen, unless you lqoote Lhe lnLersub[ecLlve space, aL whlch polnL lL oppeots LhaL a slmple Lranspersonal experlence has creaLed a Lranspersonal sub[ecL, bypasslng Lhe unavoldable sLages of sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve growLh. l prevlously gave Lhe example of a moral-sLage-1 lndlvldual who has a Lemporary peak experlence of phylogeneLlc ldenLlLy wlLh all planLs/anlmals: Lhe experlence ls evenLually and necessarlly lnLerpreLed ln Lerms of Lhe self-sLrucLure aL moral sLage 1: namely, narclsslsLlc and preconvenLlonal. We see Lhls all Loo ofLen ln weekend enllghLenmenL semlnars," where Lhe person dlps lnLo Lhe Lranspersonal well and emerges as a Lransformed" person, namely, as an lnsufferable egoLlsL, around whom Lhe world now revolves because Lhe person ls empowered." 1hls ls noL Lhe dlssoluLlon of Lhe CarLeslan ego, buL lLs hyperlnflaLlon Lo cosmlc proporLlons: a Lemporary Lransfuslon of hlgher domalns has empowered a monsLer, as Charles 1aylor mlghL puL lL. (1hese experlences may lndeed-and ofLen do-allevlaLe cerLaln paLhologles by vlrLue of puLLlng Lhe person ln Louch wlLh post octools LhaL were prevlously submerged and Lhen llberaLlngly unearLhed ln a dramaLlc recovery experlence. And Lhese experlences may, ot best, noLch Lhe person up a sLage or Lwo on Lhe lnLerpersonal scale. 8uL [usL as ofLen, Lhey oLherwlse slmply telofotce, vla a [olLlng Lransfuslon, Lhe person's already presenL level of adapLaLlon.) lf Lhe dynamlcs of Lhese Lwo very dlfferenL processes (pasL acLuals and fuLure poLenLlals) are confused and conflaLed, and Lhus boLh are equally modeled on Lhe already fully accesslble" paradlgm (whlch ls Lrue only of Lhe submerged unconsclous of pasL acLuals and cerLaln Lemporary Lranspersonal experlences and sLaLes), Lhen lL appears LhaL Lhe englneerlng of subLler ob[ecLlve experlences ls Lhe prlmary Lask, lnsLead of also cenLerlng on Lhe sub[ecLlve and lnLersub[ecLlve processes of growLh and developmenL whlch alone can sLably accommodaLe Lhe new experlenLlal dlsclosures. lL ls ln Lhe growLh of sub[ecLlve sLrucLures, Lhemselves seL ln lnLersub[ecLlve modes of muLual undersLandlng and muLual recognlLlon, LhaL Lhe WesLern paLhs of orLhodox developmenLal psychology meeL up wlLh, and run lnLo, Lhe conLemplaLlve paLhs of deeper/hlgher growLh and evoluLlon (mysLlcal LradlLlons LasL and WesL). 1hls ls an area LhaL l belleve Crof has neglecLed. My respecL for SLan's work ls well known. l am slmply suggesLlng LhaL he mlghL be a llLLle more senslLlve Lo wbete Lhese experlences wlll flL ln Lhe ongolng developmenLal process of sub[ecLlve (and lnLersub[ecLlve) space, lnLo whlch and Lhrough whlch Lhese experlences come and go. AL Lhe same Llme, Lhls would open Crof's model Lo Lhe vasL amounL of research (cllnlcal, phllosophlcal, experlmenLal, dlaloglcal, and LherapeuLlc) on Lhe formaLlon of Lhese lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLures of compeLence (lageL, AusLln, Searle, Selman, Loevlnger, kohlberg, C. P. Mead, Peldegger, Cadamer, Pabermas, eLc.), research LhaL, afLer all, covers an enormous amounL of ground, whlch no comprehenslve model can afford Lo lgnore-and research LhaL ls aL Lhe hearL of Lhe qeooloely posL-CarLeslan revoluLlon. [See 1be eye of spltlt, chap. 7, for an exLended dlscusslon of Crof's work.] 1be lossloo of tbe westeto MloJ 8lchard 1arnas's 1be lossloo of tbe westeto MloJ ls a flne narraLlve, LhoughLful and lnslghLful. 8uL ln Lhe epllogue, 1arnas's presenLaLlon polnLs up Lhe exLremely dlfflculL and subLle lssue of acLually comlng Lo Lerms wlLh modernlLy, boLh whaL lL accompllshed and whaL lL demollshed. 1he general ldea, as 1arnas presenLs lL, ls LhaL Lhe modern mlnd has emerged from an earller, premodern pottlclpotloo mystlpoe (whlch he also calls undlfferenLlaLed unlLary consclousness"), Lhrough a palnful process of allenaLlon and separaLlon and duallsm (Lhe Lgo of modernlLy), and ls now on Lhe brlnk of a dlalecLlcal synLhesls and reunlon of sub[ecL and ob[ecL, mlnd and naLure, male and female, lnner and ouLer, knower and known. 1hls scheme flnds supporL, 1arnas belleves, ln Lhe dlscoverles of depLh psychology (lreud, !ung, Plllman, Crof), slnce Lhese approaches have undermlned Lhe absoluLe auLonomy of Lhe dlsengaged and raLlonal Lgo (as we have seen, depLh psychology was lndeed one of numerous approaches LhaL began Lo decenLer Lhe Lgo). AL Lhls polnL, 1arnas Lurns Lo a Croflan explanaLlon based on Lhe 8aslc erlnaLal MaLrlces (or fulcrum-0, whlch moves from a prlor undlfferenLlaLed unlLy of feLus and womb, Lhrough a volcanlcally palnful dlfferenLlaLlon process, Lo a posL-uLerlne resoluLlon and lnLegraLlon). 1arnas wanLs Lo see oll of westeto blstoty ployloq oot tbese tbtee mojot sobpboses of tbe petlootol blttb ttoomo. AlLhough 1arnas ls careful Lo polnL ouL LhaL Lhls blrLh drama" of Lhe WesLern mlnd cannoL slmply be reduced Lo Lhe blologlcal blrLh Lrauma, Lhere ls a consLanL Lendency Lo do exacLly LhaL. 1he dynamlcs of Lhls archeLypal developmenL [of Lhe collecLlve WesLern mlnd] appear Lo be essenLlally lJeotlcol Lo Lhe dynamlcs of Lhe perlnaLal process." (All quoLes are from pp. 430-44.) And Lhls means LhaL all of Lhe varlous fulcrums of dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon wlll be collapsed lnLo one slngle, overarchlng perlnaLal lulcrum. lulcrum-0 becomes tbe fulcrum of Lhe enLlre WesLern mlnd. And Lhls means 1arnas wanLs Lo see all of WesLern hlsLory as havlng one long meLaLra[ecLory" wlLh Lhree sLages. 1he WesLern collecLlve psyche, he says, sLarLed ouL ln an undlfferenLlaLed oneness wlLh naLure and Lhe whole unlverse (connecLlon wlLh Lhe whole," alLhough whaL Lhe whole" means ls noL really speclfled, we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls ln a momenL). 1hen Lhe collecLlve psyche began a palnful process of separaLlon, dlfferenLlaLlon, and allenaLlon (Lhere ls no dlsLlncLlon here beLween dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, Lhere ls slmply allenaLlon). And LhaL duallsLlc allenaLlon brlngs us up Lo Lhe presenL, up Lo Lhe modern and posLmodern mlnd (on Lhe brlnk of Lomorrow's reunlon wlLh LhaL whlch was hlsLorlcally lost ln Lhe mlddle phase of allenaLlon). 1hus, Lhe fundamenLal sub[ecL-ob[ecL dlchoLomy LhaL has governed and deflned modern consclousness-LhaL has coostltoteJ modern consclousness, LhaL has been generally assumed Lo be absoluLe, Laken for granLed as Lhe basls for any 'reallsLlc' perspecLlve and experlence of Lhe world-appears Lo be rooLed ln a speclflc archeLypal condlLlon assoclaLed wlLh Lhe unresolved Lrauma of human blrLh." WlLh Lhls allegedly ootesolveJ blttb ttoomo (Lhe collecLlve WesLern mlnd sLuck, as lL were, ln Lhe second subphase of fulcrum- 0), an orlglnal consclousness of undlfferenLlaLed organlsmlc unlLy wlLh Lhe moLher, a pottlclpotloo mystlpoe wlLh naLure, has been ouLgrown, dlsrupLed, and losL." noLe Lhe curlous [uxLaposlLlon of ouLgrown" wlLh dlsrupLed and losL." When we normally descrlbe someLhlng as ouLgrown" (e.g., l have ouLgrown Lhumbsucklng) Lhe ouLgrowlng" ls usually a good and deslrable Lhlng, whereas someLhlng dlsrupLed and losL" ls usually bad and allenaLlng. 8uL confuslng Lhese Lwo ls parL of whaL seems Lo be 1arnas's confuslon of dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon. ModernlLy's necessary dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL from an unreflexlve lmmerslon ln maglcomyLhlc syncreLlsm musL Lherefore acLually be an unresolved blrLh Lrauma LhaL ls ptlmotlly allenaLlng. 1arnas ls clearly aware of Lhe necessary movemenL of modernlLy's separaLlon," buL because he doesn'L dlsLlngulsh dlfferenLlaLlon and dlssoclaLlon, he ls mosL Laken wlLh modernlLy ln lLs allenaLlng modes. Pe consLanLly refers Lo separaLlon" and dlchoLomy" and duallsm" as belng Lhe same Lhlng. Pere [ln Lhe unresolved blrLh Lrauma], on boLh Lhe lndlvldual and Lhe collecLlve levels, can be seen Lhe source of Lhe profound duallsm of Lhe modern mlnd: beLween man and naLure, beLween mlnd and maLLer, beLween self and oLher, beLween experlence and reallLy-LhaL pervadlng sense of a separaLe ego lrrevocably dlvlded from Lhe encompasslng world." All Jlffeteotlotloos ote tbos coovetteJ metely to Jlssoclotloos. AL Lhe same Llme, 1arnas collapses all fulcrums lnLo fulcrum-0. 1haL ls, a furLher confuslon, as l see lL, ls LhaL Lhe Jyoomlc of fulcrums lo qeoetol-a dynamlc LhaL always moves from fuslon Lo dlfferenLlaLlon Lo lnLegraLlon (LhaL ls Lhe form of all nlne fulcrums LhaL we examlned-Lhls general dynamlc of all fulcrums ls slmply LreaLed as belng boslcolly petlootol (slmply because Lhe perlnaLal fulcrum also follows Lhe same general dynamlc, and ls Lhe flrsL Lo do so). And Lhus, as soon as any lnLense dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon process occurs (as soon as any fulcrum ls spoLLed), lL ls called a perlnaLal process. ConsequenLly, all of Lhe oLher and slgnlflcanL fulcrums Lend Lo geL collapsed lnLo Lhe mosL fundamenLal fulcrum (l-0). 1hls leaves 1arnas wlLh only Lhree ma[or sLages of growLh and developmenL (and only ooe blrLh process) Lhrough whlch he musL squeeze all of WesLern hlsLory, lnsLead of seelng LhaL Lhe deaLh/reblrLh (or dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon) process has collecLlvely occurred aL leasL flve or slx ma[or Llmes, each of whlch was a profound, world-creaLlng, world-blrLhlng LransformaLlon (e.g., archalc Lo maglc Lo myLhlc Lo raLlonal Lo cenLaurlc). 1o say LhaL ln each of Lhese cases developmenL baslcally repeaLed Lhe perlnaLal drama on a dlfferenL level ls slmply Lo prlvllege Lhe mosL fundamenLal fulcrum and Lry Lo make lL explaln Lhe more slgnlflcanL fulcrums LhaL followed upon lL (hence Lhe endurlng danger of reducLlonlsm LhaL ls vlgorously denled and neverLheless consLanLly embraced as explanaLory). Llkewlse, Lhe collapse of all fulcrums lnLo Lhe perlnaLal fulcrum leaves 1arnas wlLh Lhe Slngle 8oundary fallacy, whlch, as l suggesLed (noLe 3 for chap. 6 and noLe 32 for chap. 13) Lends Lo mark all reLrogresslve (and reducLlonlsLlc) Lheorles of developmenL: slnce Lhere ls only one ma[or boundary ln consclousness (or one ma[or fulcrum of dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon, lnsLead of Lhe nlne or so boundarles or fulcrums LhaL more adequaLely descrlbe developmenL), Lhen Lhe creaLlon of LhaL slngle" boundary Lends Lo be seen as a prlmal allenaLlon, a prlmal loss, lnsLead of a necessary and approprlaLe process of growLh and dlfferenLlaLlon (Lhus Lhe [uxLaposlLlon of ouLgrown" wlLh dlsrupLed," as lf Lhe oak were slmply an allenaLlng dlsrupLlon of Lhe acorn). WlLh hls Slngle 8oundary fallacy, 1arnas can Lhen reduce oll dlfferenLlaLlons (and all dlssoclaLlons) Lo Lhe perlnaLal boundary and Lhe unresolved blrLh Lrauma LhaL ls somehow lnhablLlng Lhe enLlre WesLern mlnd. 1haL, as l sald, ls Lo reduce Lhe boundary phenomenon of moJetolty Lo a perlnaLal blrLh boundary. 8uL Lhe Jefloloq boundary of modernlLy (modernlLy's Lgo/world boundary) ls a fulcrum-3 boundary: lL ls flve compleLe boundarles down Lhe road from Lhe blrLh Lrauma. (All of Lhe prevlous boundarles are enfolded ln Lhe compound lndlvldual of modernlLy, and Lhey unfold ln lLs own onLogeny, buL Lhey do noL Jefloe Lhe emetqeot componenL oJJeJ by modernlLy.) 1haL modernlLy's speclflc Jlssoclotloos mlghL lndeed have reacLlvaLed a slmllar perlnaLal blrLh maLrlx (l-0 subphase 2) ls cerLalnly posslble, buL LhaL compleLely tevetses tbe coosol otJet of 1arnas's scheme. 1arnas ls lnvoklng, as cause, LhaL whlch ls acLually effecL, and furLher, hls cause" ls deeply mlsread as perlnaLal (based on Lhe Slngle 8oundary fallacy). 1hus, modernlLy's speclflc (fulcrum-3) boundarles acLually lnvolved Lhe sLandard dynamlc of growLh from a prevlous relaLlvely undlfferenLlaLed sLaLe (ln Lhls case, myLhlc-syncreLlsm) Lo dlfferenLlaLed (Lhe 8lg 1hree) Lo lnLegraLed (sLlll ln progress), an ordeal LhaL can go paLhologlcal as fuslon or fallure Lo dlfferenLlaLe (on Lhe one hand) or dlssoclaLlon and hyperdlfferenLlaLlon (on Lhe oLher). 8uL speclflc fulcrum-3 problems cannoL be reduced Lo fulcrum-0 dlsasLers: LhaL wlpes ouL Lhe ma[or LransformaLlons of flfLy Lhousand years LhaL prepared Lhe way for modernlLy. lf Lhere are l-0 paLhologles, Lhen Lhese can lndeed lnfecL subsequenL developmenL. 8uL an l-0 blrLh Lrauma could noL be Lhe ma[or cause of modernlLy because lL lmplles premodern socleLles had no slmllar blrLh Lraumas aL all (slnce Lhey cerLalnly had no modernlLy). 8aLher, Lhe dlssoclaLlons ln Lhe l-3 boundarles of modernlLy could oocbot Lhemselves ln Lhe exlsLenLlal" subphase of l-0 (subphase 2) ln a way LhaL would oot happen ln premodern Llmes because Lhere were no collecLlve l-3 boundarles ln premodernlLy Lo do Lhe anchorlng, even Lhough Lhey wenL Lhrough essenLlally Lhe same perlnaLal blrLh process. LlLher way, Lhe perlnaLal maLrlces are noL Lhe cause of modernlLy. 8aLher, modernlLy's owo ptoblems, generaLed prlmarlly ln fulcrums 3 and 6, mlghL lndeed have reacLlvaLed a fulcrum-0 subphase and cooseJ lL Lo be selecteJ as Lhe bodlly groundlng of lLs owo self-generaLed dllemmas: belng spaL ouL of Lhe womb has hlL every human belng from day one, modernlLy hlL only a recenL few. 1hus, as a general polnL of agreemenL, l would say LhaL modernlLy was lndeed caughL ln subphase 2 (Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon subphase) of a developmenLal fulcrum, buL lL ls fulcrum-3, noL fulcrum-0. lL ls fulcrum-3 subphase 2 (and noL 8M ll/lll, or fulcrum-0 subphase 2) LhaL ls Pegel's monsLer of arresLed developmenL," or aborLed blrLh ln Lhls case. As l repeaLedly polnLed ouL ln Lhe LexL, modernlLy's own dlfferenLlaLlons fell lnLo dlssoclaLlon by lacklng Lhe hlgher, lnLegraLlve, and resolvlng sLance of vlslon-loglc (whlch would fulflll fulcrum-3 and acL as Lhe base of fulcrum-6, Lhus lnLegraLlng Lhe monsLer", we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls acLual allenaLlon ln a momenL). Slnce Lhe blologlcal blrLh maLrlx, llke all fulcrums, also has a subphase 2 (palnful dlfferenLlaLlon), Lhere ls a broad sense ln referrlng Lo modernlLy's blrLh palns." And LhaL, l suppose, ls Lhe general way 1arnas (and Crof) use Lhe 8Ms. 8uL afLer vlgorously denylng any blologlcal reducLlonlsm, Lhey ofLen Lend Lo lmmedlaLely do so anyway. 1hls cerLalnly seems llke an aLLempL Lo reduce a very complex and mulLldlmenslonal slLuaLlon Lo a slmpllsLlc and hlghly ordered" sLaLe of affalrs, as lf complexlLy musL somehow be defused ln a slmple 1-2-3 move, lnsLead of seelng LhaL, as l sald, Lhe 1-2-3" move (a fulcrum of developmenL) has repeaLed lLself ln numerous profound (and profoundly dlfferenL) LransformaLlons across vasL sLreLches of hlsLorlcal Llme. 1here Lhen follows Lhe sLandard reLro-8omanLlc pre/Lrans fallacy: Lhe orlglnal unlLy wlLh Lhe womb/world," whlch has been hlsLorlcally dlsrupLed and losL," wlll now be tesottecteJ ln a motote form, and 1arnas makes exacLly LhaL clalm. An alLogeLher faLal problem wlLh Lhese Lypes of vlews ls LhaL Lhe alleged orlglnal unlon wlLh Lhe whole world" ls oot a unlon," for one Lhlng, and lL does oot lnvolve Lhe whole world," for anoLher. Lven lf developmenL were [usL Lhls slngle and slmple 1-2-3 move (a slngle hlsLorlcal fulcrum as a meLaLra[ecLory), lL ls stlll lnadequaLe on boLh counLs, ln my oplnlon. 1he orlglnal unlon" sLaLe (wheLher concelved as Lhe acLual womb or as Lhe pre-modern and prehlsLorlcal pottlclpotloo mystlpoe) ls oot a unlon because lL ls slmply an undlfferenLlaLlon. 1haL would be llke saylng Lhe acorn unlfles all Lhe branches and all Lhe leaves of Lhe oak, whereas Lhey are noL acLually dlfferenLlaLed ln Lhe flrsL place: lL ls noL a ooloo of Lhese laLer elemenLs, because Lhese elemenLs do noL yeL exlsL. (We can say lL unlfles" Lhem lo poteotlol, l suppose, buL Lhe polnL agaln ls LhaL Lhe parLlcular unlon ls lndeed a poLenLlal, noL an octool, and so, ln Lhe fuLure, Lhere ls no post octool Lo resurrecL. 1hus, ln elLher case, tbete ls oo octool ooloo to tecootoct. 1he only Lhlng Lhe acorn acLually unlfles ls lLs own cellular componenLs, and Lhe oak conLlnues Lo do Lhls or lL would slmply dle, lL would noL llmp lnLo Lhe fuLure allenaLed", Lhe problem" Lhe oak faces ls how Lo unlfy lLs leaves and rooLs and branches, and Lhls Lhe acorn does noL even remoLely do. !usL so, nelLher Lhe womb nor Lhe premodern sLaLe was a unlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree, because Lhose were noL yeL dlfferenLlaLed enLlLles LhaL could be unlLed, Lhey elLher dld noL exlsL or were largely undlfferenLlaLed.) Llkewlse, Lhls prlmal unlon" ls oot one wlLh Lhe whole world" because Lhe leaves and branches are noL yeL even parL of Lhe world, Lhe only whole world" LhaL ls acLually presenL ls mlnuscule, relaLlvely speaklng. Llkewlse, for humans: Lhe feLus ln Lhe womb ls noL one wlLh Lhe wbole wotlJ of lnLersub[ecLlve morals, arL, loglc, poeLry, hlsLory, economlcs, eLc., from whlch lL wlll supposedly separaLe" and allenaLe" lLself upon blrLh, raLher, lL ls one wlLh a blophyslcal maLrlx LhaL lL wlll necessarlly dlfferenLlaLe. (And Lhe premodern maLrlx dld noL unlfy Lhe 8lg 1hree, buL slmply falled Lo dlfferenLlaLe Lhem ln Lhe flrsL place, Lhls ls a fuslon, noL an lnLegraLlon or an acLual unlon.) lrom any concelvable angle, Lhere ls oo octool ooloo Lo resurrecL, Lhere ls only a predlfferenLlaLlon LhaL ls abouL Lo be ouLgrown. lL ls surely unaccepLable Lo call Lhls dlmlnuLlve and undlfferenLlaLed sLaLe a unlon wlLh Lhe whole world." lncldenLally, for a Lyplcal psychologlcal approach Lo developmenL based on Lhls confuslon, see Washburn's 1be qo ooJ tbe uyoomlc CtoooJ (1988), whlch sLands as a classlc aLLempL Lo deflne oaks ln Lerms of recapLured acorns, and llkewlse nelson's aLLempL, ln neolloq tbe 5pllt (1994), Lo lnLegraLe a developmenLal model wlLh Washburn's regresslve orlenLaLlon. 8oLh Washburn's and nelson's aLLempLs are based on varlaLlons of Lhe Slngle 8oundary fallacy, whlch usually brlngs numerous pre/Lrans confuslons ln lLs wake. 1he orlglnal unlon" of Lhe lnfanL sLaLe ls sald Lo be an unconsclous unlon wlLh Lhe ground or whole," whlch ls supposed Lo be Lhe essenLlal spltltool stote LhaL wlll be tesottecteJ ln a consclous, maLure form, once Lhe ego regresses Lo Lhls sLaLe and reunlLes wlLh lL. 1he lnfanL ls sald Lo be more open" Lo Lhls splrlLual sLaLe Lhan Lhe adulL. 8uL noLe LhaL, as all parLles would acknowledge, Lhe lnfanL coooot toke tbe tole of otbet and Lherefore cannoL possess anyLhlng resembllng genulne love and compasslon and lnLerpersonal care and concern. Cenulne love and compasslon lnvolves aL leasL Lhe capaclLy Lo puL oneself ln anoLher's shoes and consclously acL ln Lhelr behalf, ofLen agalnsL one's own lncllnaLlons, and Lhls Lhe auLlsLlc lnfanLlle self cannoL do-lL doesn'L even recognlze an oLher, leL alone Lake lLs role. ln oLher words, Lhls orlglnal unlon" cannoL sLep ouLslde of lLs own egocenLrlc orblL, and lL Lhoroughly lacks lnLersub[ecLlve love and auLhenLlc compasslon. Why would LhaL egocenLrlc lack of love and compasslon be splrlLual," and why would we wanL Lo recapLure LhaL? lf SplrlL, among oLher Lhlngs, ls Love, how could Lhe lnfanLlle self be more open" Lo splrlL when lL cannoL evldence love or compasslon ln any auLhenLlc sense? 1o counLer by saylng LhaL Lhe lnfanLlle self ls splrlLual because sub[ecL and ob[ecL are sLlll one, ls preclsely Lo fall lnLo Lhe Slngle 8oundary fallacy, whlch ls exacLly Lhe confuslon LhaL drlves Lhese Lheorles. Some adulLs, under regresslve-Lype slLuaLlons, do lndeed recover chlldhood memorles, buL Lhey loboblt Lhose memorles from wlLhln a now broadly raLlonal and petspectlvol cognlLlon. 1haL ls, Lhey mlghL remember" Laklng Lhe tole of otbet aL age Lwo or Lhree, and reporL vlvlJly whaL Lhls enLalled. 8uL cllnlcal and emplrlcal evldence repeaLedly and conslsLenLly shows LhaL acLual chlldren aL LhaL age Jo oot and cannoL Lake Lhe role of oLher (Lhe 1hree MounLaln experlmenL, for example). Memory Lraces of chlldhood, some of whlch are broadly accuraLe (and many of whlch are noL), are, ln Lhe adulL, reacLlvaLed and relnhablLed by an lttevocobly petspectlvol consclousness, and Lhen Lhose memorles are read" by LhaL hlghly evolved consclousness os lf LhaL were Lhe way Lhey were orlglnally experlenced. Cnce one has learned Lo Lake Lhe role of oLher, LhaL capaclLy ls noL losL (excepL under Lhe severesL paLhologles), and so no maLLer how much Lhe adulL regresses," Lhe recovered memorles" are tecoveteJ lo oo lotetsobjectlve ooJ petspectlvol spoce, whlch Lhen lnsLanLly and auLomaLlcally lnLerpreLs Lhem ftom tbot spoce, and Lhen reads Lhem back lnLo chlldhood as lf Lhey were accuraLe and lndellble phoLographs of Lhe orlglnal occaslon, even lf chlldren aL LhaL age show no evldence of belng able Lo do any of Lhls. CerLaln Lypes of memory Lraces are ln some cases acLually Lhere and broadly accuraLe, perhaps even back lnLo Lhe womb (as some researchers clalm), and we may suppose LhaL Lhey leave Lhelr lmprlnLs, llke brulses, on Lhe psyche. 8uL when adulLs recover" Lhese lmprlnLs, Lhey reanlmaLe Lhem wlLh a consclousness LhaL brlngs Lo llfe aspecLs of Lhese lmprlnLs LhaL were slmply noL reglsLered aL Lhe Llme. 1he lmprlnLs, assumlng Lhey are Lhere, are run Lhrough a hlghly evolved lnLersub[ecLlve space LhaL can Lhen pull ouL lmpllcaLlons and perspecLlves LhaL were noL presenL when Lhe lmprlnLs were lald down, and Lhls pulllng ouL" ls Lhen mlsLakenly ascrlbed ln all ways Lo a tecoptotloq, a recapLurlng LhaL goes qulLe beyond pasL acLuals and lnLo a tecoostltotloq of pasL acLuals creaLed by hlghly sophlsLlcaLed sLrucLures of presenL consclousness. All of Lhls lmbues Lhese lower sLrucLures wlLh capaclLles LhaL masslve amounLs of emplrlcal evldence deny Lhey possess. no doubL, as we sald, lnfanLs and young chlldren can have an lnfuslon of Lranspersonal sLaLes (usually subLle), buL Lhls ls an lnfuslon loto an lnLersub[ecLlve space LhaL ls fundamenLally ptecooveotloool and eqoceottlc, noL postcooveotloool and composslooote, and Lhus Lhey cannoL be carrled ln any evolved splrlLual awareness. [See loteqtol psycboloqy for an exLenslve dlscusslon of Lhls lssue.] 1hls lnfanLlle splrlLual unlon" seems especlally aLLracLlve (and dlvlne") when Lhe Lgo lLself ls palnLed ln Lhe very worsL posslble llghL: followlng Lhe 8omanLlc agenda, Lhe Lgo ls deflned as a dlssoclaLlon and noL as a LransformaLlve and Lranscendlng dlfferenLlaLlon. 1he maLure Lgo ls slmply called dlvlslve," absLracL," analyLlc," and so forLh, overlooklng Lhe facL LhaL lL ls Lhe maLure Lgo LhaL evenLually bullds a unlversal and worldcenLrlc consclousness, Lhe fltst consclousness ln all of developmenL Lhrough whlch a Lruly posLconvenLlonal and unlversal Love and Compasslon can begln Lo flow, a worldcenLrlc perspecLlve LhaL unlLes more, lnLegraLes more, conLalns more unlon and more wholeness Lhan Lhe lnfanLlle self could even begln Lo lmaglne (llLerally). As a qeoetollzotloo, Lhen, lL ls Lhe Lgo, noL Lhe lnfanLlle self, LhaL ls more open" Lo Lhe splrlLual sLaLe (and Lhe Lrans-egolc sLaLes are eveo mote open, and Lhls even more" does noL lnclude a reLurn Lo Lhe lnfanLlle lack of love and lack of compasslon ln order Lo recapLure" Lhls splrlLual ground" LhaL was losL"-a noLlon LhaL can only be susLalned by Lhe Slngle 8oundary fallacy). [See 1be eye of spltlt, chap. 6, for an exLenslve crlLlque of Washburn's model.] SomeLlmes Lhese LheorlsLs (and 1arnas ls one) lnslsL LhaL by whole world" Lhey acLually mean Lhe unlversal maLrlx" or Lhe Cround of 8elng. 1rue, Lhe undlfferenLlaLed womb sLaLe (however concelved) ls lndeed one wlLh Lhe Cround of 8elng, buL Lhen so ls absoluLely everyLhlng else, Lhus, Lhere ls no reason whaLsoever Lo ptlvlleqe Lhls sLaLe ln LhaL regard. lurLher, ln Lerms of cooscloosly teollzloq Lhls unlon wlLh Cround, Lhls sLaLe ls Lhe fottbest temoveJ, slnce lL has Lhe mosL number of sLages of growLh lylng ahead of lL before lL can cooscloosly awaken Lo and as Lhe empLy Cround. lf (as an enLlrely separaLe lssue) some paLhology occurs ln Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon process (lL elLher remalns sLuck ln fuslon or goes Loo far lnLo dlssoclaLlon), Lhen heallng LhaL paLhology does lndeed ofLen mean reconLacLlng Lhe allenaLed aspecLs (Lhe post octools), buL Lhese pasL acLuals are aspecLs of Lhose lower levels Lhemselves LhaL were once presenL and Lhen allenaLed: Lhey are oot Lhe hlgher level LhaL was never presenL buL wlll emerge Lo lnLegraLe Lhe overall sysLem. Agaln, Lhe Jefloloq aspecL of Lhe hlgher lnLegraLlon ls noL tecootoctloq a pasL acLual, buL raLher lnvolves Lhe emetqeoce of someLhlng largely novel (never hlsLorlcally presenL and Lhus never hlsLorlcally losL). All of Lhese facLors geL collapsed by 1arnas lnLo Lhe slmple 1-2-3 scheme (around Lhe Slngle 8oundary): orlglnal unlLy wlLh Lhe whole world" or unlversal maLrlx," Lhen hlsLorlcal allenaLlon from Lhe" world, Lhen reunlon wlLh Lhe" world: ?eL full experlence of Lhls double blnd, of Lhls dlalecLlc beLween Lhe prlmordlal unlLy [Lhe 'whole world'] on Lhe one hand and Lhe blrLh labor and sub[ecL-ob[ecL dlchoLomy on Lhe oLher, unexpecLedly brlngs forLh a Lhlrd condlLlon: a redempLlve reunlflcaLlon of Lhe lndlvlduaLed self wlLh Lhe unlversal maLrlx." 1hls seems Lo be a confuslon beLween Lhe process of lovolotloo lLself and speclflc evenLs ln evolotloo. lnvoluLlon, or Lhe superabundanL Lfflux of Lhe Cne lnLo Lhe Many, ls slmply confused wlLh blologlcal blrLh. 1he unlversal maLrlx" (Lhe Cne) Lhus becomes Lhe acLual womb, and Lhe blologlcal blrLh process becomes Lhe separaLlon of Lhe lndlvldual (and Lhe Many) from Lhe Cne, whlch produces Lhe duallsLlc world," whlch ls Lhen somehow reunlLed wlLh Lhe Cne afLer Lhe blologlcal blrLh Lrauma ls resolved" by Lhe MoLher embraclng Lhe lnfanL (whlch becomes Lhe nonduallsLlc" sLaLe). 1hls reducLlonlsm ls sweeplng: A redempLlve reunlflcaLlon of Lhe lndlvlduaLed self wlLh Lhe unlversal maLrlx. 1hus Lhe chlld ls born and embraced by Lhe moLher, Lhe llberaLed hero ascends from Lhe underworld Lo reLurn home afLer hls far-flung odyssey. 1he lndlvldual and Lhe unlversal are reconclled. 1he sufferlng, allenaLlon, and deaLh [blrLh Lrauma] are now comprehended as necessary for blrLh, for Lhe creaLlon of Lhe self. A slLuaLlon LhaL was fundamenLally unlnLelllglble ls now recognlzed as a necessary elemenL ln a larger conLexL of profound lnLelllglblllLy. 1he dlalecLlc ls fulfllled, Lhe allenaLlon redeemed. 1he rupLure from 8elng ls healed. 1he world ls redlscovered ln lLs prlmordlal enchanLmenL. 1he auLonomous lndlvldual self has been forged and ls now reunlLed wlLh Lhe ground of lLs belng." 1here ls lndeed a Lype of recoverlng" or reunlLlng" wlLh Lhe Cne (Lhe whole process of AscenL back Lo Lhe Cne, as we have seen, and we wlll reLurn Lo Lhls process ln a momenL). 8uL Lhe flrsL Lhlng Lo noLlce abouL LhaL reunlon" ls LhaL Lhe oneness" or Lhe whole" LhaL we are Lo recapLure" oevet exlsteJ ooywbete lo ptevloos evolotloo. 1he prlmordlal enchanLmenL" LhaL was Lhe hlsLorlcal womb" of collecLlve modernlLy was oot a sweeL hollsLlc lnLegraLlon wlLh Lhe enLlre kosmos and Lhe Cne: lL was an ofLen bruLal lndlssoclaLlon LhaL demanded seven planeLs for seven bodlly orlflces and was, on more Lhan one occaslon, wllllng Lo burn anybody who dlsagreed. 1here ls no way-and llLLle reason-Lo reunlLe" wlLh LhaL, any more Lhan we would wanL Lo reunlLe wlLh maLure" Lhumbsucklng. 1he olleootloo LhaL marked modernlLy was noL an allenaLlon from Lhe prevlous myLhlc and allegedly unlfled" sLrucLure (whlch was ofLen vlolenLly syncreLlc), buL raLher, afLer Lhe 8lg 1hree had been lrrevocably dlfferenLlaLed, Lhere was as yeL no obvlous way Lo reconclle and lnLegraLe Lhem: noLhlng was lost, someLhlng was slmply oot yet found, and Lhls leL Lhe 8lg 1hree fall lnLo fragmenLs. wltblo Lhe enLlrely new worldspace of modernlLy, a sLruggle Lo unlLe Lhe oewly emetqeot componenLs of LhaL worldspace was as yeL unfulfllled. 1he fulflllmenL ltself would noL conslsL ln any sorL of reunlLlng wlLh anyLhlng losL, buL raLher lnvolved a newly emergenL lnLegraLlon, whlch would brlng a new synLhesls enLlrely unprecedenLed. 1haL modernlLy olso lnvolved some represslon of ptevloos sLrucLures ls ln lLself noLhlng new: myLh repressed maglc wherever lL could. ModernlLy had lLs own specLacular represslons, buL Lhose represslons are noL whaL JefloeJ modernlLy-whlch was Lhe dlfferenLlaLlon of Lhe 8lg 1hree-and Lhus merely reverslng lLs represslons of any ptevloos sLrucLures would noL lLself consLlLuLe Lhe emetqeoce of Lhe blqbet sLrucLure (e.g., vlslon-loglc), whlch could lnLegraLe Lhe deflnlng domalns of modernlLy lLself. 1o say LhaL modernlLy was deflned ptlmotlly by lLs represslons ls Lhe sLandard reLro-8omanLlc sLance, Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy LhaL confuses dlfferenLlaLlon wlLh dlssoclaLlon and Lhus sees salvaLlon as a recapLurlng of someLhlng losL wlLh Lhe Crlme, lnsLead of movlng forward Loward someLhlng noL-yeL-born aL Lhe Llme. 1hus, modernlLy dld noL olleoote a naLure LhaL was loteqtoteJ ln premodernlLy. A dlfferenLlaLed naLure was oevet presenL ln premodernlLy Lo be lnLegraLed ln Lhe flrsL place. ModernlLy dlfferenLlaLed naLure and Lhen falled Lo lnLegraLe tbot: lL dld oot fall aL someLhlng premodernlLy had succeeded ln. 8aLher, lL falled ln Lhe second parL of a Lask LhaL no prevlous perlod had even aLLempLed. lL dld noL lose someLhlng LhaL musL be regalned: lL has noL yeL found LhaL whlch wlll lnLegraLe Lhe new dlfferenLlaLlons. As wlLh mosL subscrlbers Lo Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy, 1arnas hlmself reallzes LhaL Lhls new lnLegraLlon LhaL wlll heal modernlLy" cannoL octoolly be a reunlon, and so, afLer laborlng Lo demonsLraLe LhaL lL ls a reunlon, he qulckly buL glngerly beglns Lo dlsLance hlmself from LhaL vlew. AcLually, he says, Lhe recovery of Lhe whole" wlll really be a oew and ptofoooJly Jlffeteot level from LhaL of Lhe prlmordlal unconsclous unlLy." lL lnvolves, he says, someLhlng fooJomeotolly oew ln human hlsLory" (my lLallcs). rofoundly dlfferenL, fundamenLally new. 1hls ls no more a reunlon Lhan an oak's dlscoverlng LhaL lL ls one wlLh Lhe whole foresL ls a reunlon wlLh lLs acornness. 8uL Lhls does noL sLop 1arnas from unforLunaLely lapslng back lnLo a tecovety of post octools: Lhe new sLaLe wlll be a reconclllaLlon wlLh losL unlLy, a LrlumphanL and heallng reunlon" (wlLh someLhlng once possessed ln prevlous hlsLory or prehlsLory). A more adequaLe vlew lnvolves, l belleve, Lhe recognlLlon LhaL Lhe dynamlc of Lhe sLages of evolotloooty qtowtb does lndeed lnvolve a serles of deaLhs and reblrLhs: a serles of undlfferenLlaLlon Lo dlfferenLlaLlon Lo lnLegraLlon, each new lnLegraLlon ls Lhen, ln lLs own way, undlfferenLlaLed wlLh respecL Lo furLher growLh, and so lL becomes Lhe new ground for a new round of fuslon/dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon (each ls a new folctom of growLh). 1he blrLh Lrauma and perlnaLal process ls Lhe most fooJomeotol, and leost slqolflcoot, of Lhese many fulcrums wlndlng Lhelr way back Lo Cod. MosL fooJomeotol, because lL ls Lhe fltst fulcrum ln lndlvldual evoluLlon. lL ls Lhe foundaLlon, Lhe flrsL manlfesLaLlon of growLh back Lo Lhe Self, lL seLs Lhe baslc perlnaLal maLrlces and paLLerns LhaL wlll ground Lhe manlfesLaLlon of consclousness (and Lhus l have no doubL LhaL ln lnLense experlenLlal dlsclosures, as wlLh LSu or breaLhwork, lL mlghL be Lhe bodlly form reassumed ln Lhe dlsclosure, as Crof repeaLedly malnLalns). 8uL ln lLself lL ls also Lhe leost slgnlflcanL, because Lhe separaLlon/lndlvlduaLlon from Lhe blophyslcal perlnaLal maLrlx explalns noLhlng LhaL ls speclflcolly culLural, menLal, soclal, arLlsLlc, economlc, pollLlcal, sclenLlflc, eLc., whlch are all worlds LhaL emerge afLer Lhe naLal drama ls flnlshed. ?es, paLhologles aL fulcrum-0 can lnfluence, buL do noL cause, hlgher fulcrums. Lach hlgher fulcrum ls an emetqeot LhaL brlngs new capaclLaLes, new deslres, new cognlLlons, new moLlvaLlons, and new paLhologles LhaL cannoL be reduced Lo, or explalned by, Lhe blrLh fulcrum. lf Lhe hlgher boundarles and fulcrums are all collapsed Lo Lhe mosL fundamenLal (fulcrum-0), and Lhe Slngle 8oundary fallacy ls embraced, Lhen all subsequenL movemenLs of fuslon/separaLlon/lnLegraLlon musL be seen as a replay of Lhe flrsL fulcrum: reducLlonlsm aL lLs worsL, lL seems Lo me. 1he passlon of Lhe WesLern mlnd (and Lhe LasLern mlnd as well) ls noL Lo recover whaL was prlor ln evoluLlon, buL raLher whaL ls prlor ln lnvoluLlon-Lo recover whaL ls prlor Lo manlfesLaLlon lLself, prlor Lo Lhe whole movemenL of lnvoluLlon, prlor Lo Llme and duallLy and wombs and Lombs and blrLh and deaLh alLogeLher: Lhe self-exlsLlng, self-lumlnous, self-reveallng, self-unfoldlng SplrlL LhaL empLles lLself lnLo and as Lhe enLlre kosmos. 1o recapLure tbot ls Lhe passlon of Lhe WesLern mlnd. And Lhe evoluLlon of LhaL WesLern mlnd was noL an allenaLlng move away from Lhe Answer, buL a serles of profound (and herolc and palnful) sLeps headlng Loward LhaL Answer, Lhe ChaoLlc ALLracLor as a fuLure poLenLlal LhaL was Lhe Source and Lhe Coal of Lhe enLlre dlsplay, a fuLure poLenLlal LhaL became octool ln any lndlvldual who sLepped off Lhe dlsplay and lnLo Lhe Abyss, from whlch Lhe lndlvldual was reborn, noL from Lhe womb, buL from LmpLlness lLself-and os Lhe enLlre kosmos. Ieoo Cebset A flnal word abouL !ean Cebser's work, slnce he has wrlLLen aL lengLh abouL Lhe comlng LransformaLlon of Lhe lnLegral- aperspecLlval mlnd, now halLlngly ln progress. Cebser belleved LhaL Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval sLrucLure aL lLs fullesL was a Lransparency Lo tbe whole, Lhe lLself, Lhe fully SplrlLual, an unobsLrucLed access" Lo Lhe LoLal horlzon, Jos Cooze (Lhe whole). 8uL Lhls should noL surprlse us, we have seen Lhe ever-presenL Lendency Lo mlsLake one's presenL wholeness for Wholeness lLself, whereas lL ls merely a phase ln an ever-greaLer unfoldlng. And when Cebser suggesLs LhaL !esus and LckharL were embodylng Lhe lnLegral sLrucLure, we know LhaL he ls shorL of Lhe mark (beyond Lhe lnLegral are Lhe psychlc, Lhe subLle, Lhe causal, and Lhe nondual). Ceorg leuersLeln, ln 5ttoctotes of cooscloosoess, polnLs ouL, wlLh reference Lo a conLlnuous saLorl (whlch would lndeed mark Lhe ulLlmaLe or nondual sLage), LhaL lL would appear Cebser was only marglnally aware of Lhls and LhaL he mlghL even have mlsundersLood lL," and LhaL Lhere ls a depLh of splrlLual reallzaLlon ln LckharL LhaL ls absenL ln Cebser." [leuersLeln has subsequenLly agreed LhaL beyond Cebser's lnLegral sLrucLure lle aL leasL psychlc, causal, and nondual. See hls !ean Cebser's SLrucLures of Consclousness and ken Wllber's SpecLrum Model," ln CrlLLenden eL al., kloJteJ vlsloos.] As for Cebser's confuslon regardlng Lhe archalc sLrucLure and Lhe Crlgln, or ut-sptooq. Cf Lhe archalc sLrucLure, Cebser says lL ls closesL Lo and presumably orlglnally ldenLlcal wlLh orlgln." ln facL, whaL Lhe archalc sLrucLure was closesL Lo was noL Lhe Crlgln buL Lhe greaL apes and homlnlds. leuersLeln chasLlses me for accuslng Cebser of a form of Lhe pre/Lrans fallacy, and of course ln any sorL of blaLanL fashlon Cebser does noL do so, buL lL ls rampanL ln hls confuslng of preraLlonal archalc wlLh LransraLlonal causal, preraLlonal maglc wlLh LransraLlonal psychlc, and preraLlonal myLhlc wlLh LransraLlonal subLle. 1he causal WlLness, for example, ls noL close Lo Lhe archalc" aL all, lL lles ln preclsely Lhe opposlLe dlrecLlon. nor are subLle archeLypes locaLed ln Lhe myLhlc sLrucLure: all dlmenslons are based on Lhe LransraLlonal lorms lylng nexL Lo Lhe causal, noL nexL Lo Lhe maglcal. ln Lhe Lerms of ua Avabhasa, Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval sLrucLure ls a sLage 3 Lo 4 sLrucLure. 1here lle beyond lL sLages 4 (psychlc), 3 (subLle), 6 (causal), and 7 (nondual). Are we really Lo lmaglne LhaL ooy of Lhe examples Cebser glves of Lhe lnLegral sLrucLure-say, SLravlnsky, Cezanne, lrank Lloyd WrlghL-were anywhere near Lhe sevenLh sLage? leuersLeln Lrles Lo supporL Cebser's clalm LhaL Lhe archalc consclousness ls closesL Lo and presumably orlglnally ldenLlcal wlLh orlgln" by saylng LhaL lL ls closesL Lo Lhe ever-presenL orlgln solely ln Lerms of Lhe slmpllclLy of lLs lnLernal conflguraLlon." 8uL LhaL wlll noL do, flrsL, because Crlgln ls nelLher slmple nor complex, buL acaLegorlcal: lL does noL lle closer Lo slmpllclLy Lhan Lo complexlLy, buL embraces boLh equally ln Lransparency. 1bot cannoL be used as a yardsLlck, and even lf lL were, Lhen why noL push lL back furLher and recognlze LhaL, glven Lhe even greaLer slmpllclLy of Lhe ape mlnd, Lhe ape was even closer Lo Lhe Crlgln? 1haL, agaln, ls pushlng lL preclsely ln Lhe wrong dlrecLlon. 8uL Lhere ls no reason Lo prlvllege archalc humans ln LhaL regard: worms were even closer Lo tbot orlgln. leuersLeln Lhen polnLs ouL LhaL whaL Cebser musL really mean, ln parL, ls LhaL Lhe archalc ls close Lo Lhe Crlgln ln poteotlol, buL Lhen leuersLeln hlmself lmmedlaLely polnLs ouL LhaL LhaL ls Lrue of evety sLrucLure, slnce Crlgln ls equally Lhe ground of each. And, l would add, slnce each sLrucLure ls lo poteotlo ldenLlcally close Lo Crlgln, Lhe only oLher measure ls octoolly (or self- acLuallzlngly) close Lo Crlgln, and by LhaL only accepLable measure, Lhe archalc ls, of course, Lhe farLhesL from Lhe Crlgln. l am a greaL fan of Ceorg leuersLeln's work, and have been honored Lo wrlLe a foreword for one of hls many superb books, and Lhls ls probably Lhe only Lhlng we have ever dlsagreed on sharply, ln a frlendly sorL of way. [ln Lhe above-menLloned arLlcle, leuersLeln, whlle noL compleLely agreelng wlLh my vlew of Lhe archalc/orlgln, does acknowledge LhaL Cebser's poslLlon on Lhls lssue ls someLhlng of a cop-ouL" LhaL conLalns unresolved dlfflculLles."] ln Lhe meanLlme, boLh leuersLeln and l deflnlLely agree LhaL beyond Lhe raLlonal-ego ls lndeed Lhe lnLegral-aperspecLlval mlnd, LhaL lL ls holonlc ln naLure, dlalecLlcal, dlaloglcal, wlLh a bodymlnd lnLegraLlon, llngulsLlcally LransparenL, and openlng onLo a more Lruly consclous splrlLual orlenLaLlon. We boLh see evldence of LhaL mlnd collecLlvely emerglng, and LhaL ls one of Lhe Loplcs of Lhe nexL volume. kefeteoces Abend, S., M. order, and M. Wllllck. 1983. 8otJetlloe potleots: lsycboooolytlc petspectlves. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. AbhlnavagupLa. 1988. A ttlJeot of wlsJom. 1rans. !. Slngh. Albany: Sun? ress. Abraham, 8., and C. Shaw. 1983. uyoomlcs. 3 vols. SanLa Cruz: Aerlal. Abrams, M. 1971. Nototol sopetoototollsm. new ?ork: norLon. Abrose, L. 1990. 1be mlttot of cteotloo. Ldlnburgh: ScoLLlsh Academlc ress. AchLerberg, !. 1983. lmoqety lo beolloq. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1990. womoo os beolet. 8osLon: Shambhala. Adalr, 8. 1987. 1be qteot Jeslqo. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. Adler, C. 1979. uyoomlcs of tbe self. London: CovenLure. Adorno, 1. 1973. Neqotlve Jlolectlcs. new ?ork: ConLlnuum AlberL, M., eL al. 1986. llbetotloq tbeoty. 8osLon: SouLh Lnd ress. Alexander, l. 1931. 8uddhlsL Lralnlng as an arLlflclal caLaLonla. lsycboooolytlc kevlew 18: 129-43. Alexander, S. 1930. 5poce, tlme ooJ Jelty. new ?ork: PumanlLles ress. Alkon, u. 1992. Memotys volce. new ?ork: ParperColllns. Allaby, M. 1989. Cteeo focts. London: Pamlyn. Alllson, !. 1968. AdapLlve regresslon and lnLense rellglous experlences. I. Netvoos Meotol ulseose 143: 432-63. AllporL, C. 1933. 8ecomloq. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. Almaas, A. 1986. sseoce. ?ork 8each, Malne: Samuel Welser. ______. 1988. 1be peotl beyooJ ptlce. 8erkeley: ulamond 8ooks. Anderson, L. 1991. 5lstets of tbe eottb. new ?ork: vlnLage. Anderson, S., and . Popklns. 1991. 1be femloloe foce of CoJ. new ?ork: 8anLam. AnLhony, u., 8. Lcker, and k. Wllber, eds. 1987. 5pltltool cbolces. new ?ork: aragon. Apel, k. 1980. 1owotJs o ttoosfotmotloo of pbllosopby. London: 8ouLledge & kegan aul. Aqulnas, 1. 1969. 5ommo tbeoloqloe. 2 vols. new ?ork: uoubleday/Anchor. ArleLl, S. 1933. lotetptetotloo of scblzopbteolo. new ?ork: 8runner. ______. 1976. 1be lottopsycblc self. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. ArlsLoLle. 1984. 1be complete wotks of Atlstotle. Ld. !. 8arnes. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. ArmsLrong, A., ed. 1933. llotloos. London: Ceorge Allen & unwln. ArLaud, A. 1963. AttooJ ootboloqy. San lranclsco: ClLy LlghLs 8ooks. Assagloll, 8. 1963. lsycbosyotbesls. new ?ork: vlklng. AsLavakra. 1982. 1be sooq of tbe self sopteme. Clearlake, Callf.: uawn Porse ress. Augros, 8., and C. SLanclu. 1988. 1be oew bloloqy. 8osLon: Shambhala. Auroblndo. n.d. 1be llfe Jlvloe and 1be syotbesls of yoqo. ondlcherry: CenLenary Llbrary, xvlll-xxl. Avalon, A. 1974 (1931). 1be setpeot powet. new ?ork: uover. Ayala, l., and !. valenLlne. 1979. volvloq. new ?ork: 8en[amln-Cummlngs. 8aars, 8. 1988. A coqoltlve tbeoty of cooscloosoess. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. 8achelard, C. 1987. Oo poetlc lmoqlootloo ooJ tevetle. uallas: Sprlng. 8adlner, A. 1990. ubotmo Colo. 8erkeley: arallax. 8alley, 8. 1993. co-scom. new ?ork: SL. MarLln's ress. 8aldwln, !. 1973 (1906-1913). 1booqbt ooJ tbloqs. new ?ork: Arno ress. 8andura, A. 1971. 5oclol leotoloq tbeoty. new ?ork: Ceneral Learnlng ress. ______. 1977. Self-efflcacy: 1oward a unlfylng Lheory of behavloral change. lsycboloqlcol kevlew 34: 191-213. 8arbour, l. 1990. kellqloo lo oo oqe of scleoce. San lranclsco: Parper. 8arbour, l., ed. 1973. westeto moo ooJ eovltoomeotol etblcs. 8eadlng, Mass.: Addlson-Wesley. 8arlng, A., and !. Cashford. 1991. 1be mytb of tbe CoJJess. new ?ork: vlklng Arkana. 8arnsLone, W., ed. 1984. 1be otbet blble. San lranclsco: Parper. 8arrow, !., and l. 1lpler. 1988. 1be ootbtoplc cosmoloqlcol ptloclple. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. 8arLhes, 8. 1972. ctltlcol essoys. LvansLon, lll.: norLhwesLern unlv. ress. ______. 1973. 5/2. London: Cape. ______. 1976. 1be pleosote of tbe text. London: Cape. ______. 1982. A 8ottbes teoJet. Ld. S. SonLag. new ?ork: Plll & Wang. 8aLallle, C. 1983 (1927-1939). vlsloos of excess. Ld. A. SLoekl. Mlnneapolls: unlv. of MlnnesoLa ress. 8aLeson, C. 1979. MloJ ooJ ootote. new ?ork: uuLLon. 8aLeson, M. 1990. composloq o llfe. new ?ork: lume. 8aynes, k., !. 8ohman, and 1. McCarLhy. 1987. Aftet pbllosopby. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. 8eall, A., and 8. SLernberg, eds. 1993. 1be psycboloqy of qeoJet. new ?ork: Cullford ress. 8eard, M. 1946. womoo os o fotce lo blstoty. new ?ork: Macmlllan. 8eck, A., A. 8ush, 8. Shaw, and C. Lmery. 1979. coqoltlve tbetopy of Jeptessloo. new ?ork: Cullford ress. 8ecker, L. 1973. 1be Jeolol of Jeotb. new ?ork: lree ress. 8elenky, M., eL al. 1986. womeos woys of koowloq. new ?ork: 8aslc. 8ellah, 8. 1970. 8eyooJ bellef. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. 8ellah, 8., 8. Madsen, W. Sulllvan, A. Swlndler, and S. 1lpLon. 1993. 1be qooJ soclety. new ?ork: vlnLage. ______. 1983. noblts of tbe beott. 8erkeley: unlv. of Callfornla ress. 8enolL, P. 1933. 1be sopteme Jocttloe. new ?ork: vlklng. 8enLham, !. 1990. 1be ptloclples of motols ooJ leqlslotloo. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. 8enLon, 1. 1984. 1be tlse ooJ foll of sttoctotol Motxlsm. new ?ork: SL. MarLln's ress. 8envenuLo, 8., and 8. kennedy. 1986. 1be wotks of Iocpoes locoo. London: lree AssoclaLlon 8ooks. 8erger, . 1977. locloq op to moJetolty. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. ______. 1979. 1be betetlcol lmpetotlve. new ?ork: uoubleday. 8erger, ., and P. kellner. 1981. 5ocloloqy telotetpteteJ. Carden ClLy, n.?.: uoubleday. 8erger, ., and 1. Luckmann. 1966. 1be soclol coosttoctloo of teollty. Carden ClLy, n.?.: uoubleday. 8ergson, P. 1944. cteotlve evolotloo. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. 8erkeley, C. 1982 (1710). A tteotlse coocetoloq tbe ptloclples of bomoo knowledge. Cambrldge: PackeLL. 8erman, M. 1981. 1be teeocbootmeot of tbe wotlJ. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. ______. 1989. comloq to oot seoses. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. 8erne, L. 1972. wbot Jo yoo soy oftet yoo soy bello? new ?ork: 8anLam. 8ernsLeln, 8. 1983. 8eyooJ objectlvlsm ooJ telotlvlsm. hlladelphla: unlv. of enn. ress. ______, ed. 1983. nobetmos ooJ moJetolty. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. 8erry, 1. 1988. 1be Jteom of tbe eottb. San lranclsco: Slerra Club. 8erry, W. 1977. 1be oosettlloq of Ametlco. San lranclsco: Slerra Club. 8erLalanffy, L. von. 1968. Ceoetol system tbeoty. new ?ork: 8razlller. 8lnswanger, L. 1936. LxlsLenLlal analysls and psychoLherapy. ln l. lromm-8elchmann and !. Moreno, eds., ltoqtess lo psycbotbetopy. new ?ork: Crune & SLraLLon. 8lrch, C., and !. Cobb. 1990. 1be llbetotloo of llfe. uenLon, 1ex.: LnvlronmenLal LLhlcs 8ooks. 8lrd, u. 1974. 8oto femole. new ?ork: uavld Mckay. 8lanck, C., and 8. 8lanck. 1974. qo psycboloqy: 1beoty ooJ ptoctlce. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. ______. 1979. qo psycboloqy ll: lsycboooolytlc Jevelopmeotol psycboloqy. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. ______. 1986. 8eyooJ eqo psycboloqy. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. 8lofeld, !. 1970. 1be toottlc mystlclsm of 1lbet. new ?ork: uuLLon. 8los, . 1962. Cn adolescence: A psychoanalyLlc lnLerpreLaLlon. new ?ork: lree ress. ______. 1967. 1he second lndlvlduaLlon process of adolescence. lsycboooolytlc 5toJy of tbe cbllJ 22: 162-86. 8lumberg, 8. 1984. A general Lheory of gender sLraLlflcaLlon. ln Colllns 1984: 23-101. 8ohm, u. 1973. wboleoess ooJ tbe lmpllcote otJet. London: 8ouLledge. 8onlfacl, C. 1978. 1be sool of tbe wotlJ. Lanham, Md.: unlv. ress of Amerlca. 8ookchln, M. 1990. kemokloq soclety. 8osLon: SouLh Lnd ress. ______. 1991. 1be ecoloqy of fteeJom. 2nd ed. MonLreal: 8lack 8ose. 8oorsLeln, S. 1983. 1he use of blblloLherapy and mlndfulness medlLaLlon ln a psychlaLrlc seLLlng. I. 1toospetsoool lsycb. 13 2: 173-9. ______, ed. 1980. 1toospetsoool psycbotbetopy. alo AlLo, Callf.: Sclence and 8ehavlor 8ooks. 8osanqueL, 8. 1921. 1be meetloq of exttemes lo cootempototy pbllosopby. new ?ork: Macmlllan. 8oss, M. 1963. lsycboooolysls ooJ Joseloooolysls. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. 8oucher, S. 1993. 1otoloq tbe wbeel. 8osLon: 8eacon. 8oudon, 8. 1971. 1be oses of sttoctotollsm. London: Pelnemann. 8ouldlng, L. 1976. 1be ooJetslJe of blstoty. 8oulder, Colo.: WesLvlew. 8ourdleu, . 1989. 1be loqlc of ptoctlce. Cxford: 8asll 8lackwell. 8owle, M. 1991. locoo. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. 8owlby, !. 1969, 1973. Attocbmeot ooJ loss. 2 vols. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. 8radley, l. 1902. Appeotooce ooJ teollty. new ?ork: Macmlllan. ______. 1922. 1be ptloclples of loqlc. Cxford: Clarendon ress. 8ragdon, L. 1990. 1be coll of spltltool emetqeocy. San lranclsco: Parper. 8ralnerd, C. 1978. 1he sLage quesLlon ln cognlLlve-developmenLal Lheory. 8ebovlotol ooJ 8tolo 5cleoces 2: 173-213. 8randen, n. 1971. 1be psycboloqy of self-esteem. new ?ork: 8anLam. 8randon, 8., and 8. 8urlan, eds. 1984. Ceoes, otqoolsms, ooJ popolotloos. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. 8randL, A. 1980. Self-confronLaLlons. lsycboloqy 1oJoy, CcL. 8rennan, A. 1988. 1blokloq oboot ootote. London: 8ouLledge & kegan aul. 8renLano, l. 1973. lsycboloqy ftom oo empltlcol stooJpolot. London: 8ouLledge & kegan aul. 8rldenLhal, 8., and C. koonz, eds. 1977. 8ecomloq vlslble. 8osLon: PoughLon Mlfflln. 8rlm, C. 1992. Ambltloo. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. 8rlLLan, A., and M. Maynard. 1984. 5exlsm, toclsm ooJ opptessloo. new ?ork: 8lackwell. 8road, C. 1923. 1be mloJ ooJ lts ploce lo ootote. London: 8ouLledge & kegan aul. 8roughLon, !. 1973. 1he developmenL of naLural eplsLemology ln adolescence and early adulLhood. uocLoral dlsserLaLlon, Parvard. 8rown, u. . 1977. A model for Lhe levels of concenLraLlve medlLaLlon. lotetootloool I. cllolcol ooJ xpetlmeotol nypoosls 23: 236-73. ______. 1981. Mahamudra medlLaLlon: SLages and conLemporary cognlLlve psychology. uocLoral dlsserLaLlon, unlverslLy of Chlcago. 8rown, u. ., and !. Lngler. 1980. 1he sLages of mlndfulness medlLaLlon: A valldaLlon sLudy. I. 1toospetsoool lsycboloqy 12 2: 143-92. 8rown, u. ., S. 1wemlow, !. Lngler, M. Mallszewskl, and !. SLauLhamer. 1978. 1he proflle of medlLaLlon experlence CML, lorm ll, sychologlcal 1esL CopyrlghL, WashlngLon, u.C. 8rown, L., and C. Cllllgan. 1992. Meetloq ot tbe ctosstooJs. new ?ork: 8allanLlne. 8rown, n. C. 1939. llfe oqolost Jeotb. MlddleLown, Conn.: Wesleyan unlv. ress. 8runer, !. 1983. lo seotcb of mloJ. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. 8uddhaghosa, 8. 1976. 1be potb of potlflcotloo. 2 vols. 8oulder, Colo.: Shambhala. 8ulkeley, k. 1994. 1be wllJetoess of Jteoms. Albany: Sun? ress. 8urke, L. 1990. keflectloos oo tbe tevolotloo lo ltooce. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. Cabezon, !., ed. 1992. 8oJJblsm, sexoollty ooJ qeoJet. Albany: Sun? ress. Callenbach, L. 1977. ctoplo. new ?ork: 8anLam. CalllcoLL, !. 1986. 1he meLaphyslcal lmpllcaLlons of ecology. ovltoomeotol tblcs 8: 301-16. ______. 1986. 1he search for an envlronmenLal eLhlc. ln 8egan 1986: 381-424. Campbell, !eremy. 1982. Ctommotlcol moo. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. Campbell, !oseph. 1939-1968. 1be mosks of CoJ. vols. 1-4. new ?ork: vlklng. Campbell, !oseph. 1968. 1be beto wltb o tboosooJ foces. new ?ork: World. Campenhausen, P. von. 1933. 1be fotbets of tbe Cteek cbotcb. new ?ork: anLheon. Caponlgrl, A. 1963. lbllosopby ftom tbe keoolssooce to tbe tomootlc oqe. noLre uame, lnd.: unlv. of noLre uame ress. Capra, l. 1982. 1be totoloq polot. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. Capra, l., and u. SLelndl-8asL. 1991. 8elooqloq to tbe oolvetse. San lranclsco: Parper. CapuLo, !. 1986. 1be mystlcol elemeots lo nelJeqqets tbooqbt. new ?ork: lordham unlv. ress. Casslrer, L. 1931. 1be pbllosopby of tbe ollqbteomeot. 8osLon: 8eacon. CasLl, !. 1989. lotoJlqms lost. new ?ork: Avon. ______. 1990. 5eotcbloq fot cettoloty. new ?ork: Wllllam Morrow. ChafeLz, !. 1984. 5ex ooJ oJvootoqe. 1oLowa, n.!.: 8owman & Alanheld. Chagdud 1ulku. 1987. llfe lo telotloo to Jeotb. CoLLage Crove, Cre.: adma. ______. 1991. Mlttot of fteeJom. varlous volumes. !uncLlon ClLy, Callf.: adma. Chang, C. 1971. 1be 8oJJblst teocbloq of totollty. unlverslLy ark: ennsylvanla SLaLe unlv. ress. ______. 1974. 1eocbloqs of 1lbetoo yoqo. Secaucus, n.!.: ClLadel. Chase, S., ed. 1991. uefeoJloq tbe eottb. 8osLon: SouLh Lnd ress. Chaudhurl, P. 1981. loteqtol yoqo. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL. Chlrban, !. 1981. nomoo qtowtb ooJ foltb. WashlngLon, u.C.: unlverslLy ress of Amerlca. ChlLLlck, W. 1992. loltb ooJ ptoctlce of lslom. Albany: Sun? ress. Chodorow, n. 1978. 1be teptoJoctloo of motbetloq. 8erkeley: unlv. of Callf. ress. ______. 1989. lemlolsm ooJ psycboooolytlc tbeoty. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. Chomsky, n. 1980. koles ooJ tepteseototloos. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. ______. 1984. MoJolot opptoocbes to tbe stoJy of mloJ. San ulego: San ulego unlv. ress. ______. 1986. koowleJqe of looqooqe. new ?ork: raeger. Chopel, C. 1992. 1lbetoo otts of love. lLhaca, n.?.: Snow Llon. Chopra, u. 1992. uocooJltloool llfe. new ?ork: 8anLam. Churchland, . 1984. Mottet ooJ cooscloosoess. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. ______. 1986. Neootpbllosopby. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. Churchman, C. W. 1979. 1be systems opptoocb ooJ lts eoemles. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Cllfford, 1. 1984. 1lbetoo 8oJJblst meJlcloe ooJ psycblotty. ?ork 8each, Malne: Samuel Welser. Colllns, A. 1987. 1be ootote of meotol tbloqs. norLre uame, lnd.: unlv. of noLre uame ress. Colllns, 8., ed. 1984. 5ocloloqlcol tbeoty. San lranclsco: !ossey-8ass. Commoner, 8. 1990. Mokloq peoce wltb tbe plooet. new ?ork: anLheon. Commons, M., l. 8lchards, and C. Armon. 8eyooJ fotmol opetotloos. new ?ork: raeger. Connell, 8. 1987. CeoJet ooJ powet. SLanford: SLanford unlv. ress. CoplesLon, l. 1960-1977. A blstoty of pbllosopby. 9 vols. new ?ork: lmage. ______. 1982. kellqloo ooJ tbe ooe. new ?ork: Crossroad. Corballls, M. 1991. 1be lopslJeJ ope. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. Cornell, u., M. 8osenfeld, and u. Carlson. 1992. uecoosttoctloo ooJ tbe posslblllty of jostlce. London: 8ouLledge. Cornell, !., ed. 1988. 8omps, volJs, ooJ bobbles lo tlme. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. CoLL, n., and L. leck, eds. 1979. A betltoqe of bet owo. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. Couslns, M., and A. Pusseln. 1984. Mlcbel loocoolt. London: Macmlllan. Coveney, ., and 8. Plghfleld. 1990. 1be ottow of tlme. new ?ork: lawceLL Columblne. Cowan, . 1978. lloqet wltb feelloq. new ?ork: PolL. Coward, P. 1990. uettlJo ooJ loJloo pbllosopby. Albany: Sun? ress. CozorL, u. 1986. nlqbest tootto yoqo. lLhaca, n.?.: Snow Llon. CrlLLenden, !. 1992. 8eyooJ loJlvlJoollsm. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. Culler, !. 1982. Oo Jecoosttoctloo. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. ua Avabhasa. 1977. 1be potoJox of losttoctloo. San lranclsco: uawn Porse. ______. 1978. 1be eollqbteomeot of tbe wbole boJy. San lranclsco: uawn Porse. ______. 1982. 1be llbetotot. Clearlake, Callf.: uawn Porse. ______. 1989a. 1be bosket of toletooce. Clearlake, Callf.: uawn Porse. ______. 1989b. 1be uo opoolsboJ. Clearlake, Callf.: 1he uawn Porse. ______. 1991. 1be Jowo botse testomeot. Clearlake, Callf.: uawn Porse. ______. 1992. 1be metboJ of tbe slJJbos. Clearlake, Callf.: uawn Porse. ualy, M. 1973. 8eyooJ CoJ tbe fotbet. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1978. Cyo/ecoloqy. 8osLon: 8eacon. uargyay, L. 1978. 1be tlse of esotetlc 8oJJblsm lo 1lbet. new ?ork: Welser. uarwln, C. 1872. Otlqlo of specles and 1be Jesceot of moo. new ?ork: Modern Llbrary. uaLLaLreya. 1980. 1tlpoto tobosyo. 1lruvannamalal, lndla: Srl 8amanasramam. ______. n.d.. AvoJboto qlto. Mylapore, Madras: Srl 8amakrlshna MaLh. uavles, . 1991. 1be cosmlc bloeptlot. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. ______. 1992. 1be mloJ of qoJ. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. uavles, ., and !. Crlbbln. 1991. 1be mottet mytb. London: vlklng. uawklns, 8. 1976. 1be selflsb qeoe. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. ueaLherage, C. 1973. 1he cllnlcal use of mlndfulness" medlLaLlon Lechnlques ln shorL-Lerm psychoLherapy. I. 1toospetsoool lsycboloqy 7 2: 133-43. de 8eauvolr, S. 1932. 1be secooJ sex. new ?ork: 8anLam. uelkman, A. 1982. 1be obsetvloq self. 8osLon: 8eacon. uelaney, C., ed.. 1993. New Jltectloos lo Jteom lotetptetotloo. Albany: Sun? ress. ueleuze, C., and l. CuaLLarl. 1983. Aotl-OeJlpos. Mlnneapolls: unlv. of MlnnesoLa ress. uelphy, C. 1984. close to bome. AmhersL: unlv. of Mass. ress. uenneLL, u. 1978. 8tolostotms. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. ______. 1984. lbow toom. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. ______. 1991. cooscloosoess exploloeJ. 8osLon: LlLLle, 8rown. uerrlda, !. 1976. Of qtommotoloqy. 8alLlmore: !ohns Popklns. ______. 1978. wtltloq ooJ Jlffeteoce. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. ______. 1981. losltloos. Chlcago: unlv. Chlcago ress. ______. 1982. Motqlos of pbllosopby. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. uescarLes, 8. 1911. 1be pbllosopblcol wotks of uescottes. 2 vols. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. ueuLsche, L. 1969. AJvolto veJooto. Ponolulu: LasL-WesL CenLer. uevall, 8., and C. Sesslons, eds. 1983. ueep ecoloqy. LayLon, uLah: Clbbs SmlLh. uew, . 1987. loqlcs of Jlsloteqtotloo. London: verso. uewey, !. 1981. 1be pbllosopby of Iobo uewey. Ld. !. McuermoLL. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. ulamond, l., and C. CrensLeln. 1990. keweovloq tbe wotlJ. San lranclsco: Slerra Club. ulamond, M. 1974. cootempototy pbllosopby ooJ tellqloos tbooqbt. new ?ork: McCraw-Plll. ulnnersLeln, u. 1976. 1be metmolJ ooJ tbe mlootoot. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ulonyslus Lhe AreopaglLe. 1963. 1be mystlcol tbeoloqy ooJ celestlol bletotcby. Surrey: Shrlne of Wlsdom. uogen. 1993. kotloool 2eo. 1rans. 1. Cleary. 8osLon: Shambhala. uoore, C., ed. 1988. 5bomoos potb. 8osLon: Shambhala. uoresse, !. 1986. 1be sectet books of tbe qyptloo Coostlcs. 8ochesLer, vL: lnner 1radlLlons. uossey, L. 1993. neolloq wotJs. San lranclsco: Parper. uouglas, M. 1966. lotlty ooJ Jooqet. London: 8ouLledge. ______. 1978. lmpllclt meooloqs. London: 8ouLledge. ______. 1982. lo tbe octlve volce. London: 8ouLledge. uozler, 8. 1992. coJes of evolotloo. new ?ork: Crown. ureLske, l. 1988. xplololoq bebovlot. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. ureyfus, P. 1979. wbot compotets coot Jo. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1982. nossetl: loteotlooollty ooJ coqoltlve scleoce. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. ureyfus, P., and . 8ablnow. 1983. Mlcbel loocoolt: 8eyooJ sttoctotollsm ooJ betmeoeotlcs. Chlcago: unlv. Chlcago ress. uud[om Llngpa. 1994. 8oJJbobooJ wltboot meJltotloo. !uncLlon ClLy, Callf.: adma. uud[om, !. 1991. 1be Nyloqmo scbool of 1lbetoo 8oJJblsm. 2 vols. 8osLon: Wlsdom. uurkhelm, L. 1990. tblcs ooJ tbe socloloqy of motols. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. uyer, u. 1991. ctoss-cotteots of Iooqloo tbooqbt. 8osLon: Shambhala. Lccles, !. 1984. 1be bomoo mystety. London: 8ouLledge. Lckersley, 8. 1992. ovltoomeotollsm ooJ polltlcol tbeoty. Albany: Sun? ress. LckharL, MelsLer. 1941. Melstet ckbott. 1rans. 8. 8lakney. new ?ork: Parper. ______. 1980. 8teoktbtooqb. 1rans. M. lox. new ?ork: lmage. Lco, u. 1976. A tbeoty of semlotlcs. 8loomlngLon: lndlana unlv. ress. ______. 1984. 5emlotlcs ooJ tbe pbllosopby of looqooqe. 8loomlngLon: lndlana unlv. ress. Ldlnger, L. l. 1992. qo ooJ otcbetype. 8osLon: Shambhala. Ldwards, ., ed. 1967. 1be eocylopeJlo of pbllosopby. new ?ork: Colller Macmlllan. Lhrllch, ., and A. Lhrllch. 1991. neolloq tbe plooet. new ?ork: Addlson-Wesley. Llchenbaum, L., and S. Crbach. 1983. uoJetstooJloq womeo. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Llsler, 8. 1987. 1be cbollce ooJ tbe bloJe. San lranclsco: Parper. Lllade, M. 1964. 5bomoolsm. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. ______. 1969. oqo: lmmottollty ooJ fteeJom. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. Lllor, 8. 1993. 1be potoJoxlcol osceot to CoJ. Albany: Sun? ress. Lllenberger, P. 1970. 1be Jlscovety of tbe oocooscloos. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Lmerson, 8. 1969 (1909-1914). kolpb wolJo metsoo: 5electeJ ptose ooJ poetty. Ld. 8. Cook. San lranclsco: 8lneharL. Lngels, l. 1942 (1884). 1be otlqlo of tbe fomlly, ptlvote ptopetty, ooJ tbe stote. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal ubllshers. Lngler, !. 1983. 8uddhlsL saLlpaLLhana-vlpassana medlLaLlon and an ob[ecL relaLlons model of LherapeuLlc developmenLal change: A cllnlcal case sLudy. uocLoral dlsserLaLlon, unlverslLy of Chlcago. ______. 1984. 1herapeuLlc alms ln psychoLherapy and medlLaLlon: uevelopmenLal sLages ln Lhe represenLaLlon of self. I. 1toospetsoool lsycboloqy 16 1: 23-61. Lrdelyl, M. 1983. lsycboooolysls: lteoJs coqoltlve psycboloqy. new ?ork: lreeman. Lrdmann, L., and u. SLover. 1991. 8eyooJ o wotlJ JlvlJeJ. 8osLon: Shambhala. Lrlbon, u. 1991. Mlcbel loocoolt. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. Lrlkson, L. P. 1930, 1963. cbllJbooJ ooJ soclety. new ?ork: norLon. ______. 1939. lJeotlty ooJ tbe llfe cycle. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. Lvans, u. 1993. 5pltltoollty ooJ bomoo ootote. Albany: Sun? ress. Lvans-WenLz, W. 1971. 1lbetoo yoqo ooJ sectet Jocttloes. London: Cxford unlv. ress. lalrbalrn, W. 1932. lsycboooolytlc stoJles of tbe petsooollty. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. ______. 1934. Ao object telotloos tbeoty of tbe petsooollty. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. lausLo-SLerllng, A. 1983. Mytbs of qeoJet. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. lelgl, P. 1967. 1be 'meotol' ooJ tbe 'pbyslcol.' Mlnneapolls: unlv. of MlnnesoLa ress. lenlchel, C. 1943. 1be psycboooolytlc tbeoty of oeotosls. new ?ork: norLon. lerruccl, . 1982. wbot we moy be. Los Angeles: 1archer. leuerbach, L. 1990. 1be esseoce of cbtlstloolty. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. leuersLeln, C. 1987. 5ttoctotes of cooscloosoess. Lower Lake, Callf.: lnLegral. ______. 1989. oqo. Los Angeles: 1archer. ______, ed. 1989. ollqbteoeJ sexoollty. lreedom, Callf.: Crosslng. leuersLeln, C., and 1. L. leuersLeln, eds. 1993. volces oo tbe tbtesbolJ of tomottow. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL. leyerabend, . 1978. Aqolost metboJ. London: verso. llelds, 8. 1991. 1be coJe of tbe wottlot. new ?ork: Parper. llngareLLe, P. 1938. 1he ego and mysLlc selflessness. lsycboooolytlc kevlew 43: 3-40. llscher, 8. 1971. A carLography of Lhe ecsLaLlc and medlLaLlve sLaLes: 1he experlmenLal and experlenLlal feaLures of a percepLlon-halluclnaLlon conLlnuum. 5cleoce 174: 897-904. llanagan, C. 1984. 1be scleoce of tbe mloJ. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. llavell, !. 1963. 1be Jevelopmeotol psycboloqy of Ieoo lloqet. rlnceLon, n.!.: van nosLrand. ______. 1970. ConcepL developmenL. ln . Mussen (ed.), cotmlcbels mooool of cbllJ psycboloqy. vol. 1. new ?ork: Wlley. lodor, !. 1973. 1be looqooqe of tbooqbt. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. ______. 1983. 1be moJolotlty of mloJ. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. lodor, !., and L. Lepore. 1992. nollsm. Cxford: 8lackwell. lorman, 8., ed. 1990. 1be ptoblem of pote cooscloosoess. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. loss, L. and k. 8oLhenberg. 1987. 1be secooJ meJlcol tevolotloo: ltom blomeJlcloe to lofomeJlcloe. 8osLon: Shambhala. loucaulL, M. 1963. MoJoess ooJ clvlllzotloo. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1970. 1be otJet of tbloqs. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1972. 1be otcboeoloqy of koowleJqe. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1973. 1be blttb of tbe cllolc. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1978. 1be blstoty of sexoollty. vol. 1. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1979. ulsclplloe ooJ poolsb. new ?ork: vlnLage. ______. 1980. lowet/koowleJqe. new ?ork: anLheon. lowler, !. 1981. 5toqes of foltb: 1be psycboloqy of bomoo Jevelopmeot ooJ tbe poest fot meooloq. San lranclsco: Parper & 8ow. lox, M. 1979. A spltltoollty oomeJ compossloo. San lranclsco: Parper. ______. 1991. cteotloo spltltoollty. San lranclsco: Parper. lox, W. 1990. 1owotJ o ttoospetsoool ecoloqy. 8osLon: Shambhala. lrager, 8., and !. ladlman, 1984. letsooollty ooJ petsoool qtowtb. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. lrank, !. 1961. letsoosloo ooJ beolloq: A compototlve stoJy of psycbotbetopy. 8alLlmore: !ohns Popklns. lrankfurL, P. 1988. 1be lmpottooce of wbot we cote oboot. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. lrankl, v. 1963. Moos seotcb fot meooloq. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1969. 1be wlll to meooloq. Cleveland: new Amerlcan Llbrary. lrench, M. 1983. 8eyooJ powet: Oo womeo, meo, ooJ motols. new ?ork: 8allanLlne. lreud, A. 1946. 1be eqo ooJ tbe mecboolsms of Jefeose. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. ______. 1963. 1he concepL of developmenLal llnes. ln 1be psycboooolytlc stoJy of tbe cbllJ, vol. 8, pp. 243-63. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. ______. 1963. Notmollty ooJ potboloqy lo cbllJbooJ. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. lreud, S. 1937. Analysls Lermlnable and lnLermlnable. 5tooJotJ Jltloo (SL). 23, pp. 209-33. London: PogarLh ress. ______. 1939 (1926). lnhlblLlons, sympLoms and anxleLy. SL 20. London: PogarLh ress. ______. 1961 (1923). 1be eqo ooJ tbe lJ. se 19. London: PogarLh ress. ______. 1961 (1930). clvlllzotloo ooJ lts Jlscooteots. new ?ork: norLon. ______. 1964 (1940). Ao ootlloe of psycboooolysls. SL 23. London: PogarLh ress. ______. 1971. A qeoetol lottoJoctloo to psycboooolysls. new ?ork: ockeL 8ooks. ______. 1974. New lottoJoctoty lectotes lo psycboooolysls. new ?ork: norLon. lrey-8ohn, L. 1974. ltom lteoJ to Iooq. new ?ork: uelLa. lrledan, 8. 1963. 1be femloloe mystlpoe. new ?ork: uell. lrledl, L. 1984. womeo ooJ meo. rospecL PelghLs, lll.: Waveland ress. lromm, L., u. 1. Suzukl, and 8. ueMarLlno, 1970. 2eo 8oJJblsm ooJ psycboooolysls. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. lukuyama, l. 1992. 1be eoJ of blstoty ooJ tbe lost moo. new ?ork: Avon. luLuyma, u. 1986. volotloooty bloloqy. 2nd ed. Sunderland, Mass.: Slnauer. Cadamer, P. 1976. lbllosopblcol betmeoeotlcs. 8erkeley: unlv. of Callf. ress. ______. 1992. 1totb ooJ metboJ. 2nd ed. new ?ork: Crossroad. Cadon, L. 1989. 1be ooce ooJ fotote qoJJess. new ?ork: Parper. Callleo, C. 1990. uloloqoes coocetoloq two oew scleoces. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. Callup, C. 1982. AJveototes lo lmmottollty. new ?ork: McCraw-Plll. Card, 8. 1962. 8oJJblsm. new ?ork: 8razlller. Cardner, P. 1972. 1be poest fot mloJ. new ?ork: vlnLage. ______. 1991. 1be ooscbooleJ mloJ. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Cardner, M. 1983. 1be mloJs oew scleoce. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Cazzanlga, M. 1983. 1be soclol btolo. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. ______. 1992. Nototes mloJ. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Cebser, !. 1983. 1be evet-pteseot otlqlo. ALhens: Chlo unlv. ress. Cedo, !. 1979. 8eyooJ lotetptetotloo: 1owotJ o tevlseJ tbeoty fot psycboooolysls. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. ______. 1981. AJvooces lo cllolcol psycboooolysls. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. CeerLz, C. 1973. 1be lotetptetotloo of coltotes. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Cergen, k. 1991. 1be sotototeJ self. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Clbson, !. 1979. 1be ecoloqlcol opptoocb to vlsool petceptloo. 8osLon: PoughLon Mlfflln. Clddens, A. 1971. copltollsm ooJ moJeto soclol tbeoty. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. ______. 1977. 5toJles lo soclol ooJ polltlcol tbeoty. London: PuLchlnson. Cllllgan, C. 1982. lo o Jlffeteot volce. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. Cllson, L. 1941. CoJ ooJ pbllosopby. new Paven, Conn.: ?ale unlv. ress. ClmbuLas, M. 1991. 1be clvlllzotloo of tbe CoJJess. San lranclsco: Parper Colllns. Clelck, !. 1987. cboos. new ?ork: vlklng. Clobus, C. 1990. Peldegger and cognlLlve sclence. lbllosopby 1oJoy (Sprlng), 20-30. Coldberg, A., ed. 1980. AJvooces lo self psycboloqy. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. ColdsmlLh, L. 1993. 1be woy: Ao ecoloqlcol wotlJ-vlew. 8osLon: Shambhala. ColdsLeln, !. 1983. 1be expetleoce of loslqbt. 8osLon: Shambhala. Coleman, u. 1988. 1be meJltotlve mloJ. Los Angeles: 1archer. Coleman, u., and M. LpsLeln. 1980. MedlLaLlon and well-belng: An LasLern model of psychologlcal healLh. kevlsloo 3: 73-83. Coodwln, 8., n. Polder, and C. Wyles, eds. 1983. uevelopmeot ooJ evolotloo. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. Core, A. 1992. ottb lo tbe bolooce. new ?ork: PoughLon Mlfflln. Cossman, L. 1990. 8etweeo blstoty ooJ lltetotote. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. CoLLesman, l., and M. Schlelds. 1972. 5cblzopbteolo ooJ qeoetlcs: A twlo stoJy vootoqe polot. new ?ork: Academlc ress. CoLLlleb, 8., ed. 1990. new ?ork: Crossroad. Could, S. 1977. Ootoqeoy ooJ pbyloqeoy. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. Creen, L., A. Creen, and u. WalLers. 1970. volunLary conLrol of lnLernal sLaLes: sychologlcal and physlologlcal. I. 1toospetsoool lsycboloqy 2: 1-26. Creenson, 8. 1967. 1be tecbolpoe ooJ ptoctlce of psycboooolysls. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. CreensLeln, C. 1988. 1be symblotlc oolvetse. new ?ork: Morrow. CrelsL, !., !. !efferson, and 8. SplLzer, eds. 1982. 1teotmeot of meotol JlsotJets. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. Crlffln, u. 1989. CoJ ooJ tellqloo lo tbe postmoJeto wotlJ. Albany: Sun? ress. ______, ed. 1988. 1be teeocbootmeot of scleoce. Albany: Sun? ress. Crlffln, u., and 8. lalk, eds. 1993. lostmoJeto polltlcs fot o plooet lo ctlsls. Albany: Sun? ress. Crlffln, u., eL al. 1989. votletles of postmoJeto tbeoloqy. Albany: Sun? ress. Crlffln, S. 1978. womoo ooJ ootote. new ?ork: Parper. Croddeck, C. 1949. 1be book of tbe lt. new ?ork: vlnLage. Crof, C., and S. Crof. 1990. 1be stotmy seotcb fot tbe self. Los Angeles: 1archer. Crof, S. 1973. keolms of tbe bomoo oocooscloos. new ?ork: vlklng. ______. 1983. 8eyooJ tbe btolo. Albany: Sun? ress. ______. 1988. 1be oJveotote of self-Jlscovety. Albany: Sun? ress. Crof, S., wlLh P. 8enneLL. 1992. 1be bolottopblc mloJ. San lranclsco: Parper. Cross, 8. 1993. 8oJJblsm oftet pottlotcby. Albany: Sun? ress. Croup for Lhe AdvancemenL of sychlaLry (CA). 1976. Mystlclsm: 5pltltool poest ot psycblc JlsotJet? new ?ork: CA (publlcaLlon 97). Cuenon, 8. 1943. Moo ooJ bls becomloq occotJloq to veJooto. London: Luzac. CuenLher, P. v. 1989. ltom teJoctloolsm to cteotlvlty: tuzoqs-cbeo ooJ tbe oew scleoces of mloJ. 8osLon: Shambhala. CunLrlp, P. 1969. 5cblzolJ pbeoomeoo, object telotloos ooJ tbe self. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. ______. 1971. lsycboooolytlc tbeoty, tbetopy, ooJ tbe self. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. CupLa, 8., ed. 1987. 5exool otcbetypes, ost ooJ west. new ?ork: aragon Pouse. CyaLso, k. 1986. ltoqtesslve stoqes of meJltotloo oo emptloess. Cxford: Longchen loundaLlon. ______. 1982. cleot llqbt of bllss. London: Wlsdom. Pabermas, !. 1971. koowleJqe ooJ bomoo lotetests. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1973. 1beoty ooJ ptoctlce. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1973. leqltlmotloo ctlsls. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1979. commoolcotloo ooJ tbe evolotloo of soclety. 1rans. 1. McCarLhy. 8osLon: 8eacon ress. ______. 1984-1983. 1be tbeoty of commoolcotlve octloo. 2 vols. 1rans. 1. McCarLhy. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1990. 1be pbllosopblcol Jlscootse of moJetolty. 1rans. l. Lawrence. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. Paley, !., and L. Poffman, eds. 1968. 1ecbolpoes of fomlly tbetopy. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Pall, L. 1939. 1be slleot looqooqe. new ?ork: uoubleday. Palllwell, !. 1992. Ooootom cosmoloqy. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. Pampshlre, S. 1973. lteeJom of tbe loJlvlJool. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. Panly, C. and !. Masson. A crlLlcal examlnaLlon of Lhe new narclsslsm. lotetootloool I. lsycboooolysls 37: 49-63. Pargrove, L. 1989. loooJotloos of eovltoomeotol etblcs. new !ersey: renLlce Pall. Parland, 8. 1987. 5opetsttoctotollsm. London: MeLhuen. Parman, W. 1988. Clobol mloJ cbooqe. new ?ork: Warner. Parner, M. 1980. 1be woy of tbe sbomoo. new ?ork: Parper. Parrls, L. 1991. cosmos ooJ ootbtopos. ALlanLlc Plghlands, n.!.: PumanlLles ress lnLernaLlonal. ______, ed. 1992. cosmos ooJ tbeos. ALlanLlc Plghlands, n.!.: PumanlLles ress lnLernaLlonal. Parrls, k. 1978. cotlyle ooJ metsoo. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. Parrls, M. 1974. cows, plqs, wots ooJ wltcbes. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1977. cooolbols ooJ kloqs. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. Parrls, 8. 1993. 1be lloqolstlcs wots. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. ParLmann, P. 1938 (1939). qo psycboloqy ooJ tbe ptoblem of oJoptotloo. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. ParLmann, n. 1932. tblcs. new ?ork: Macmlllan. ParLshorne, C. 1984. Omolpoteoce ooJ otbet tbeoloqlcol mlstokes. Albany: Sun? ress. ParLsock, n. 1983. Mooey, sex, ooJ powet. 8osLon: norLheasLern unlv. ress. PasLlngs, A. 1990. 1ooqoes of meo ooJ ooqels. new ?ork: PolL, 8lneharL & WlnsLon. PaughL, !. 1984. 1be cosmlc oJveotote. 8amsey: aullsL ress. Pawkes, 1. 1977. 5ttoctotollsm ooJ semlotlcs. 8erkeley: unlv. Callfornla ress. Pawklng, S. 1988. A btlef blstoty of tlme. new ?ork: 8anLam. Payward, !. 1987. 5blftloq wotlJs, cbooqloq mloJs. 8osLon: Shambhala. Payward, !., and l. varela, 1992. Ceotle btlJqes. coovetsotloos wltb tbe uolol lomo oo tbe scleoces of mloJ. 8osLon: Shambhala. Peard, C. 1963. 1be flve oqes of moo. new ?ork: !ullan. Pebb, u. C. 1949. 1be otqoolzotloo of bebovlot: A oeotopsycboloqlcol tbeoty. new ?ork: Wlley & Sons. Pegel, C. 1949. 1be pbeoomeooloqy of mloJ. 1rans. !. 8allle. new ?ork: PumanlLles ress. ______. 1971. neqels pbllosopby of mloJ. Cxford: Clarendon. ______. 1974. neqel: 1be esseotlol wtltloqs. Ld. l. Welss. new ?ork: Parper 1orchbooks. ______. 1977. lbeoomeooloqy of spltlt. 1rans. A. Mlller. Analysls by !. llndlay. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. ______. 1993. neqels scleoce of loqlc. new !ersey: PumanlLles ress lnLernaLlonal. Peldegger, M. 1939. lottoJoctloo to metopbyslcs. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. ______. 1962. 8eloq ooJ tlme. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1968. wbot ls colleJ tblokloq? new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Peldegger, M. 1977. 8oslc wtltloqs. Ld. u. krell. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Plll, C. 1992. Moscolloe ooJ femloloe. 8osLon: Shambhala. Plllman, !. 1972. 1be mytb of ooolysls. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1973. ke-vlslooloq psycboloqy. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1989. A bloe flte. Ld. 1homas Moore. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Plndlng, A. 1986. lemlolsm. MlnnesoLa: Creenhaven. Plxon, L. 1989. comloq bome. Los Angeles: 1archer. Pobbes, 1. 1990. 1be levlotboo. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. PockeLL, C. 1987. kefotblsbloq oot foooJotloos. hlladelphla: !ohn 8en[amlns. Poeller, k. 1982. Metleoo-looty ooJ psycboloqy. new !ersey: PumanlLles ress. Poffman, L. 1981. 1be woy of spleoJot. 8osLon: Shambhala. PofsLadLer, u. 1989. CoJel, scbet, 8ocb. new ?ork: vlnLage. PolLon, C. 1988. 1bemotlc otlqlos of scleotlflc tbooqbt. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. Porkhelmer, M., and 1. Adorno. 1972 (1944). ulolectlc of eollqbteomeot. new ?ork: ConLlnuum. Porner, A. 1979. Object telotloos ooJ tbe Jeveloploq eqo lo tbetopy. new ?ork: Aronson. Porney, k. 1930. Neotosls ooJ bomoo qtowtb. new ?ork: norLon. ______. 1967. lemloloe psycboloqy. new ?ork: norLon. PorowlLz, M. 1988. lottoJoctloo to psycboJyoomlcs. new ?ork: 8aslc. PousLon, !. 1980. llfe fotce. new ?ork: uelLa. Poy, u., ed. 1991. loocoolt: A ctltlcol teoJet. Cambrldge, Mass.: 8asll 8lackwell. Pume, u. 1964. A tteotlse of bomoo ootote. Cxford: Clarendon. ______. 1990. Ao eopolty coocetoloq bomoo ooJetstooJloq. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. Pume, 8., Lrans. 1974. 1be tbltteeo ptloclpol upoolsboJs. London: Cxford. Pumphrey, n. 1983. cooscloosoess teqoloeJ. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. Pusserl, L. 1962 (1931). lJeos. new ?ork: Colller. ______. 1963. lbeoomeooloqy ooJ tbe ctlsls of pbllosobpby. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1970. 1be ctlsls of otopeoo scleoces ooJ ttoosceoJeotol pbeoomeooloqy. LvansLon, lll.: norLhwesLern unlv. ress. ______. 1991 (1930). cottesloo meJltotloos. 8osLon: kluwer. Puxley, A. 1944. 1be peteoolol pbllosopby. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Puxley, !. 1990. volotloooty bomoolsm. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. lnada, k. 1970. Noqotjooo. 1okyo: Pokusledo ress. lnge, W.8. 1968 (1929). 1be pbllosopby of llotloos. vols. 1 & 2. WesLporL, Conn.: Creenwood. !ackendoff, 8. 1987. cooscloosoess ooJ tbe compototloool mloJ. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. !acobl, !. 1942. 1be psycboloqy of c. C. Iooq. London: 8ouLledge. !acobson, L. 1964. 1be self ooJ tbe object wotlJ. new ?ork: lu. !aggar, A. 1988. lemlolst polltlcs ooJ bomoo ootote. new !ersey: 8owman & LlLLlefleld. !ahn, 8., and 8. uunn. 1989. Motqlos of teollty. San ulego: ParcourL 8race !ovanovlch. !akl, S. 1978. 1be tooJ of scleoce ooJ tbe woys to CoJ. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. !akobson, 8. 1980. 1be ftomewotk of looqooqe. Mlchlgan SLudles ln Lhe PumanlLles. ______. 1990. Oo looqooqe. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. !ames, W. 1930 (1890). ltloclples of psycboloqy. 2 vols. new ?ork: uover. ______. 1961 (1901). 1be votletles of tellqloos expetleoce. new ?ork: Colllers. !ameson, l. 1972. 1be ptlsoo-boose of looqooqe. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. ______. 1981. 1be polltlcol oocooscloos. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. !amgon kongLrul Lhe 1hlrd. 1992. clooJless sky. 8osLon: Shambhala. !aneway, L. 1980. lowets of tbe weok. new ?ork: knopf. !anLsch, L. 1980. 1be self-otqoolzloq oolvetse. new ?ork: ergamon. !anLsch, L., and C. WaddlngLon, eds. 1976. volotloo ooJ cooscloosoess. 8eadlng, Mass.: Addlson-Wesley. !anLzen, C. 1984. CoJs wotlJ, CoJs boJy. hlladelphla: WesLmlnsLer ress. !aspers, k. 1966. 1be qteot pbllosopbets. new ?ork: ParcourL. !ee, L. 1988. kosbmlt 5bolvlsm. Albany: Sun? ress. !ohn of Lhe Cross. 1979. 1be collecteJ wotks of 5t. Iobo of tbe ctoss. 1rans. k. kavanaugh and C. 8odrlguez. WashlngLon, u.C.: lCS ubllcaLlons. !ohnson, C. 1993. 5ystem ooJ wtltloq lo tbe pbllosopby of Iocpoes uettlJo. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. !ohnson, M. 1987. 1be boJy lo tbe mloJ. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. !onas, P. 1938. 1be qoostlc tellqloo. 8osLon: 8eacon. !ordan, !., eL al. 1991. womeos qtowtb lo coooectloo. new ?ork: Cullford. !ung, C. C. 1937. 1be ooJlscoveteJ self. new ?ork: MenLor. ______. 1961. Aoolytlcol psycboloqy: lts tbeoty ooJ ptoctlce. new ?ork: vlnLage. ______. 1964. Moo ooJ bls symbols. new ?ork: uell. ______. 1971. 1be pottoble Iooq. Ld. !. Campbell. new ?ork: vlklng. kakar, S. 1982. 5bomoos, mystlcs, ooJ Joctots. new ?ork: knopf. kalupahana, u. 1986. Noqotjooo. Albany: Sun? ress. kalwelL, P. 1992. 5bomoos, beolets, ooJ meJlcloe meo. 8osLon: Shambhala. kanL, l. 1949. koots ctltlpoe of ltoctlcol keosoo ooJ otbet wtltloqs lo motol pbllosopby. 1rans. L. 8eck. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. ______. 1931. ctltlpoe of joJqemeot. new ?ork: Pafner. ______. 1990. ctltlpoe of pote teosoo. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. ______. 1993. ltoleqomeoo. Chlcago: Cpen CourL. kaplan, 8. u. 1994. 1he comlng anarchy. Atlootlc, leb. kapleau, . 1963. 1be tbtee plllots of 2eo. 8osLon: 8eacon. kaLz, !. 1972. 5emootlc tbeoty. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1990. 1be metopbyslcs of meooloq. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. kaLz, S., ed. 1978. Mystlclsm ooJ pbllosopblcol ooolysls. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. ______, ed. 1983. Mystlclsm ooJ tellqloos ttoJltloos. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. kaufman, C. 1983. 1beoloqy fot o oocleot oqe. Cxford: ManchesLer unlv. ress. kaufmann, W. 1974. Nletzscbe. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. keegan, !. 1993. A blstoty of wotfote. new ?ork: knopf. keeLon, W., and !. Could. 1986. 8loloqlcol 5cleoce. 4Lh ed. new ?ork: norLon. kelley, C. 1933. 1be psycboloqy of petsoool coosttocts. 2 vols. new ?ork: norLon. kelly, !. 1982. Larly femlnlsL Lheory and Lhe Ooetelles Jes femmes, 1400-1789. 5lqos 8 (AuLumn): 4-28. kernberg, C. 1973. 8otJetlloe cooJltloos ooJ potboloqlcol ootclsslsm. new ?ork: Aronson. ______. 1976. Object telotloos tbeoty ooJ cllolcol psycboooolysls. new ?ork: Aronson. kessler, S., and W. Mckenna. 1978. CeoJet. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. khan, lnayaL. 1977. 1be sool: wbeoce ooJ wbltbet. new ?ork: Sufl Crder. khyenLse, u. 1992. 1be beott tteosote of tbe eollqbteoeJ ooes. 8osLon: Shambhala. klerkegaard, S. 1933. leot ooJ ttemblloq and 1be slckoess ooto Jeotb. new ?ork: Anchor. ______. 1937. 1be coocept of JteoJ. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. ______. 1992. 1be coocept of ltooy and Notes of 5cbellloqs 8etllo lectotes. 1rans. Pong and Pong. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. klmball, 8. 1991. 1eooteJ toJlcols. new ?ork: Parper. klng, A., and 8. Schnelder. 1991. 1be fltst qlobol tevolotloo. new ?ork: anLheon. kleln, A. 1986. koowleJqe ooJ llbetotloo. lLhaca, n.?.: Snow Llon. kleln, M. 1932. 1be psycboooolysls of cbllJteo. London: PogarLh. koesLenbaum, . 1976. ls tbete oo ooswet to Jeotb? new ?ork: renLlce-Pall. koesLler, A. 1964. 1be oct of cteotloo. new ?ork: uell. ______. 1976. 1be qbost lo tbe mocbloe. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. kohlberg, L. 1981. ssoys oo motol Jevelopmeot. vol. 1. San lranclsco: Parper. kohuL, P. 1971. 1be ooolysls of tbe self. new ?ork: lu. ______. 1977. 1be testototloo of tbe self. new ?ork: lu. ko[eve, A. 1969. lottoJoctloo to tbe teoJloq of neqel. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. kramer, !., and u. AlsLad. 1993. 1be qoto popets. 8erkeley: norLh ALlanLlc 8ooks. krlshna, C. 1972. 1be sectet of yoqo. London: 1urnsLone. kroy, M. 1982. 1be totlooollty of mystlclsm. rlvaLely publlshed. kuhn, 1. 1970. 1be sttoctote of scleotlflc tevolotloos. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. kunsang, L., Lrans. and ed. 1986. 1be fllqbt of tbe qotoJo. kaLhmandu: 8ang[ung ?eshe ubllcaLlons. kurzwell, L. 1980. 1be oqe of sttoctotollsm. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. La8erge, S. 1983. loclJ Jteomloq. Los Angeles: 1archer. Lacan, !. 1968. 1be looqooqe of tbe self. 8alLlmore: !ohns Popklns. Lacan, !. 1982. lemloloe sexoollty. new ?ork: norLon. Lalng, 8. u. 1969. 1be JlvlJeJ self. new ?ork: anLheon. Lake, M. 1991. Notlve beolet. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL. Lakoff, C. 1987. womeo, flte ooJ Jooqetoos tbloqs. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. Lakoff, C., and M. !ohnson. 1980. Metopbots we llve by. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. Lakoff, 8. 1973. looqooqe ooJ womoos ploce. new ?ork: CcLagon 8ooks. LancasLer, 8. 1991. MloJ, btolo, ooJ bomoo poteotlol. 8ockporL, Mass.: LlemenL. Lasch, C. 1979. 1be coltote of ootclsslsm. new ?ork: norLon. Laszlo, L. 1972. lottoJoctloo to systems pbllosopby. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1987. volotloo: 1be qtooJ syotbesls. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1994. 1be cbolce: volotloo ot extloctloo? Los Angeles: 1archer. Laughlln, C., !. McManus, and L. d'Aqulll. 1992. 8tolo, symbol ooJ expetleoce. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. Lawson, P. 1983. keflexlvlty. La Salle, lll.: Cpen CourL. Layzer, u. 1990. cosmoqeoesls. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. Leach, L. 1974. clooJe lvl-5ttooss. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. Lecky, . 1961. 5elf-cooslsteocy. Pamden, Conn.: Shoe SLrlng ress. Lehman, u. 1991. 5lqos of tbe tlmes. new ?ork: oseldon. Lelbnlz, C. 1990. ulscootse oo metboJ and MoooJoloqy. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. Lenskl. C. 1970. nomoo socletles. new ?ork: McCraw-Plll. Leopold, A. 1981 (1949). A sooJ coooty olmoooc. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. Lerman, P. 1986. A mote lo lteoJs eye. new ?ork: Sprlnger. Lerner, C. 1979. 1be mojotlty floJs lts post: llocloq womeo lo blstoty. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. ______. 1986. 1be cteotloo of pottlotcby. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. Leslle, !., ed. 1989. lbyslcol cosmoloqy ooJ pbllosopby. new ?ork: Macmlllan. Levl-SLrauss, C. 1966. 1be sovoqe mloJ. London: Weldenfeld. ______. 1972. 5ttoctotol ootbtopoloqy. new ?ork: enguln 8ooks. Levln, M. 1979. Metopbyslcs ooJ tbe mloJ-boJy ptoblem. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. Levlnson, u., eL al. 1978. 1be seosoos of o moos llfe. new ?ork: knopf. Levy, P., and A. lshlhara. 1989. 1be too of sex. Lower Lake, Callf.: lnLegral. LewonLln, 8. 1983. 1he organlsm as Lhe sub[ecL and ob[ecL of evoluLlon. 5cleotlo 118: 63-82. Llebes, ?. 1993. 5toJles lo tbe 2obot. Albany: Sun? ress. LlghLman, A. 1991. Aocleot llqbt. Cambrdlge: Parvard unlv. ress. Locke, !. 1990. A lettet coocetoloq toletotloo. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. ______. 1990. 5ecooJ tteotlse oo clvll qovetomeot. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. Loevlnger, !. 1977. qo Jevelopmeot. San lranclsco: !ossey-8ass. Loewald, P. 1978. lsycboooolysls ooJ tbe blstoty of tbe loJlvlJool. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. Longchenpa. 1977. kloJly beot to eose os. 3 vols. 1rans. P. v. CuenLher. Lmeryvllle, Callf.: uharma ress. Love[oy, A. 1964 (1936). 1be qteot cbolo of beloq. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. Lovelock, !. 1988. 1be oqes of Colo. new ?ork: norLon. Lowe, v. 1966. uoJetstooJloq wbltebeoJ. 8alLlmore: !ohns Popklns ress. Lowen, A. 1967. 1be bettoyol of tbe boJy. new ?ork: Macmlllan. Loy, u. 1987. 1he cloLure of deconsLrucLlon. lotetootloool lbll. Ooottetly 27: 1, 60-80. ______. 1989. Noo-uoollty. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. Luk, C. 1962. cboo ooJ 2eo teocbloq. 3 vols. London: 8lder. Lukacs, C. 1971. nlstoty ooJ closs cooscloosoess. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. Lukoff, u., l. Lu, and 8. 1urner. 1992. 1oward a more culLurally senslLlve uSM-lv. Iootool of Netvoos ooJ Meotol ulseoses 80: 673-82. Lycan, W. 1987. cooscloosoess. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. Lyons, !. 1991. cbomsky. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. Lyons, W. 1986. 1be Jlsoppeotooce of lottospectloo. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. LyoLard, !. 1984. 1be postmoJeto cooJltloo. Mlnneapolls: unlv. of MlnnesoLa ress. LyoLard, !., and !. 1hebaud. 1986. Iost qomloq. ManchesLer: ManchesLer unlv. ress. Maccoby, L., and C. !acklln. 1974. 1be psycboloqy of sex Jlffeteoces. SLanford: SLanford unlv. ress. Machlavelll, n. 1990. 1be ptloce. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. MaclnLyre, A. 1984. Aftet vlttoe. 2nd ed. noLre uame, lnd.: unlv. of noLre uame ress. ______. 1990. 1btee tlvol vetsloos of motol eopolty. norLre uame, lnd.: unlv. of noLre uame ress. Macy, !. 1991. wotlJ os lovet, wotlJ os self. 8erkeley: arallax. Madlson, C., ed. 1993. wotkloq tbtooqb uettlJo. LvansLon, lll.: norLhwesLern unlv. ress. Mahasl Sayadaw. 1972. ltoctlcol loslqbt meJltotloo. SanLa Cruz, Callf.: unlLy ress. Mahler, M. 1968. Oo bomoo symblosls ooJ tbe vlclssltoJes of loJlvlJootloo. new ?ork: lu. Mahler, M., l.lne, and A. 8ergman. 1973. 1be psycboloqlcol blttb of tbe bomoo lofoot. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Mahoney, M. 1991. nomoo cbooqe ptocesses: 1be scleotlflc foooJotloos of psycbotbetopy. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Mallszewskl, M., S. 1wemlow, u. 8rown, and !. Lngler. 1981. A phenomenologlcal Lypology of lnLenslv medlLaLlon. kevlsloo 4. Mander, !. 1991. lo tbe obseoce of tbe socteJ. San lranclsco: Slerra Club. Manes, C. 1990. Cteeo toqe. 8osLon LlLLle, 8rown. Man[usrlmlLra. 1987. ltlmotJlol expetleoce. 8osLon: Shambhala. Marcel, A., and L. 8lslach, eds. 1988. cooscloosoess lo cootempototy scleoce. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. Marcuse, P. 1933. tos ooJ clvlllzotloo. 8osLon: 8eacon ress. Margenau, P. 1987. 1be mltocle of exlsteoce. 8osLon: Shambhala. Marln, . 1973. 1he new narclsslsm. notpets. CcL. Marsh, !., !. CapuLo, and M. WesLphal. 1992. MoJetolty ooJ lts Jlscooteots. new ?ork: lordham unlv. ress. MarLln, M., and 8. voorhles. 1973. lemole of tbe specles. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. Marx, k. 1974. lolltlcol wtltloq. 3 vols. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1977. copltol. 3 vols. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. Maslow, A. 1968. 1owotJ o psycboloqy of beloq. new ?ork: van nosLrand 8elnhold. ______. 1970. kellqloos, voloes, ooJ peok expetleoces. new ?ork: vlklng. Maslow, A. 1971. 1be fottbet teocbes of bomoo ootote. new ?ork: vlklng. MasLerson, !. 1981. 1be ootclsslstlc ooJ botJetlloe JlsotJets. new ?ork: 8runer/Mazel. ______. 1988. 1be seotcb fot tbe teol self. new ?ork: lree ress. MaLurana, P., and l. varela. 1992. 1be ttee of koowleJqe. 8ev. ed. 8osLon: Shambhala. May, 8. 1969. love ooJ wlll. new ?ork: norLon. ______. 1977. 1be meooloq of ooxlety. 8ev. ed. new ?ork: norLon. ______, ed. 1969. xlsteotlol psycboloqy. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. May, 8., L. Angel, and P. Lllenberger, eds. 1938. xlsteoce. new ?ork: 8aslc. Mayr, L. 1982. 1be qtowtb of bloloqlcol tbooqbt. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. McCarLhy, 1. 1978. 1be ctltlcol tbeoty of Iotqeo nobetmos. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. McCawley, !. 1988. 1bltty mlllloo tbeotles of qtommot. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. McCulloh, W. 1963. mboJlmeots of mloJ. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. Mclague, S. 1987. MoJels of CoJ. hlladelphla: lorLress ress. McCaa, L. 1990. Motbet eottb spltltoollty. San lranclsco: Parper. Mcklbben, 8. 1989. 1be eoJ of ootote. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. McMullln, L., ed. 1983. volotloo ooJ cteotloo. noLre uame, lnd.: unlv. of noLre uame ress. Mead, C. P. 1934. MloJ, self, ooJ soclety. Chlcago: unlv. Chlcago ress. MerchanL, C. 1983. 1be Jeotb of ootote. San lranclsco: Parper. ______. 1989. coloqlcol tevolotloos. Chapel Plll: unlv. of norLh Carollna ress. ______. 1992. koJlcol ecoloqy. London: 8ouLledge. Merleau-onLy, M. 1962. lbeoomeooloqy of petceptloo. London: 8ouLledge & kegan aul. ______. 1963. 1be sttoctote of bebovlot. 8osLon: 8eacon. Merqulor, !. 1983. loocoolt. London: lonLana. ______. 1986. ltom ltoqoe to lotls. London: verso. MeLzner, 8. 1986. Opeoloq to looet llqbt. Los Angeles: 1archer. ______. 1993. 1he spllL beLween splrlL and naLure ln Luropean consclousness. kevlsloo 13 (4): 177-84. Meyendorff, !. 1973. 8yzootloe tbeoloqy. new ?ork: lordham unlv. ress. Meyer, !. 1973. ueotb ooJ oeotosls. new ?ork: lu. Mldgley, M. 1978. 8eost ooJ moo. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. MllbraLh, L. 1989. ovlslooloq o sostolooble soclety. Albany: Sun? ress. Mlll, !. S. 1990. Oo llbetty. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. ______. 1990a. 1be sobjectloo of womeo. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. ______. 1990b. utllltotloolsm. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. Mlller, !. 1976. 1owotJ o oew psycboloqy of womeo. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1993. 1be possloo of Mlcbel loocoolt. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. Mlnsky, M. 1983. 1be soclety of mloJ. new ?ork: 1ouchsLone. Mlnsky, M., and S. aperL. 1987. letcepttoos. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. MlLchell, n., ed. 1983. Nobel ptlze coovetsotloos. San lranclsco: Saybrook. MolLmann, !. 1983. CoJ lo cteotloo. London: SCM ress. Money, !., and A. LhrhardL. 1972. Moo ooJ womoo, boy ooJ qltl. 8alLlmore: !ohns Popklns. Monod, !. 1971. cbooce ooJ oecesslty. new ?ork: knopf. Monroe, 8. 1971. Iootoeys oot of tbe boJy. new ?ork: uoubleday. Moody, 8. 1988. 1be llqbt beyooJ. new ?ork: 8anLam. Mooker[ee, A. 1982. kooJollol. new ?ork: uesLlny 8ooks. Morrls, C. 1971. wtltloqs oo tbe qeoetol tbeoty of slqos. 1he Pague: MouLon. Muller-CrLega, . 1989. 1be ttloJlc beott of 5blvo. Albany: Sun? ress. Mumford, L. 1966. 1be mytb of tbe mocbloe. new ?ork: ParcourL. Murphy, M. 1992. 1be fotote of tbe boJy. Los Angeles: 1archer. Murphy, M., and S. uonovan. 1989. 1be pbyslcol ooJ psycboloqlcol effects of meJltotloo. San 8afael, Callf.: Lsalen. Murphy, n. 1990. 1beoloqy lo tbe oqe of scleotlflc teosooloq. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. MurLl, 1. 1970. 1be ceottol pbllosopby of 8oJJblsm. London: Allen & unwln. naess, A. 1989. coloqy, commoolty, ooJ llfestyle. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. nagao, C. 1989. 1be foooJotloool stooJpolot of MoJbyomlko pbllosopby. Albany: Sun? ress. ______. 1991. MoJbyomlko ooJ oqocoto. Albany: Sun? ress. nagel, 1. 1986. 1be vlew ftom oowbete. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. narada. 1973. A mooool of AbblJbommo. kandy: 8uddhlsL ubllcaLlon SocleLy. nash, 8. 1989. 1be tlqbts of ootote. Madlson: unlv. of Wlsconsln ress. needham, !. 1936. 5cleoce ooJ clvlllzotloo lo cbloo. vol. 2. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. needleman, !. 1980. lost cbtlstloolty. Carden ClLy, n.?.: uoubleday. nelsser, u. 1976. coqoltloo ooJ teollty. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. nelson, !. 1994. neolloq tbe spllt. Albany: Sun? ress. nerval, C. de 1993. Aotello and 5ylvle. SanLa Marla: Asylum ArLs. neufeldL, 8. 1986. kotmo ooJ teblttb. Albany: Sun? ress. neumann, L. 1934. 1be otqlos ooJ blstoty of cooscloosoess. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. newmeyer, l. 1986. lloqolstlc tbeoty lo Ametlco. new ?ork: Academlc ress. nlcholson, S., and 8. 8osen. 1992. Colos blJJeo llfe. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL. nlelsen, !. 1990. 5ex ooJ qeoJet lo soclety. 2nd ed. rospecL PelghLs, lll.: Waveland ress. nleLzsche, l. 1963. 1be pottoble Nletzscbe. Ld. W. kaufmann. new ?ork: vlklng. ______. 1968. 8oslc wtltloqs of Nletzscbe. 1rans. and ed. W. kaufmann. new ?ork: Modern Llbrary. nlsbeL, 8. 1980. nlstoty of tbe lJeo of ptoqtess. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. nlshlLanl, k. 1982. kellqloo ooJ ootbloqoess. 8erkeley: unlv. of Callfornla ress. norbu, n. 1989. uzoqcbeo: 1be self-petfecteJ stote. London: Arkana enguln. ______. 1989. 5elf-llbetotloo tbtooqb seeloq wltb ookeJ owoteoess. 8arryLown, n.?.: SLaLlon Plll. ______. 1992. uteom yoqo ooJ tbe ptoctlce of oototol llqbt. lLhaca, n.?.: Snow Llon. norrls, C. 1987. uettlJo. London: lonLana. novak, . 1993. 1ao how? Aslan rellglons and Lhe problem of envlronmenLal degradaLlon. kevlsloo, 16 (2): 77-82. nyanaponlka. 1973. 1be beott of 8oJJblst meJltotloo. new ?ork: Welser. nye, A. 1988. lemlolst tbeoty ooJ tbe pbllosopbles of moo. London: 8ouLledge. nylma, C. 1989. 1be ooloo of MobomoJto ooJ uzoqcbeo. kaLhmandu: 8ang[ung ?eshe ubllcaLlons. nylma, C. 1991. 1be botJo qolJebook. kaLhmandu: 8ang[ung ?eshe ubllcaLlons. C'8rlen, 1., ed. 1988. 1be spltol potb. SL. aul, Mlnn.: ?es lnLernaLlonal. Cchs, C. 1983. womeo ooJ spltltoollty. new !ersey: 8owman & Allanheld. Cda[nyk, v. 1993. Cotbetloq tbe llqbt. 8osLon: Shambhala. CrnsLeln, 8. 1991. 1be evolotloo of cooscloosoess. new ?ork: renLlce Pall. CrLner, S., and P. WhlLehead, eds. 1981. 5exool meooloqs. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. CLLo, 8. 1969. 1be lJeo of tbe boly. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. Cyama, S. 1983. 1be ootoqeoy of lofotmotloo. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. aehlke, 8. 1989. ovltoomeotollsm ooJ tbe fotote of ptoqtesslve polltlcs. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. alne, 1. 1990. klqbts of moo. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. almer, P. 1988. 1be eooeoqtom. San lranclsco: Parper. arflL, u. 1984. keosoos ooJ petsoos. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. arkln, S. 1989. Cteeo pottles. London: PereLlc 8ooks. arsons, 1. 1931. 1be soclol system. new ?ork: lree ress. arsons, 1. 1966. 5ocletles. Lngelwood Cllffs, n.!.: renLlce-Pall. assmore, !. 1980. Moos tespooslblllty fot ootote. London: uuckworLh. eacocke, A. 1986. CoJ ooJ tbe oew bloloqy. London: !. M. uenL & Sons. eacocke, A., ed. 1981. 1be scleoces ooJ tbeoloqy lo tbe tweotletb ceototy. SLocksfleld: Crlel/8ouLledge. earce, !. C. 1992. volotloos eoJ. San lranclsco: Parper. eaL, l. 1991. 1be pbllosopbets stooe. new ?ork: 8anLam. elrce, C. 1931-1938. collecteJ popets. 8 vols. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. elrce, C. 1933. lbllosopblcol wtltloqs of leltce. Ld. !. 8uchler. new ?ork: uover. enrose, 8. 1990. 1be empetots oew mloJ. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. erls, l., 8. Pefferll, and . Coodman. 1931. Cestolt tbetopy. new ?ork: uelLa. eLers, 1., ed. 1989. cosmos os cteotloo. nashvllle: Ablngdon ress. hllllps, A. 1988. wloolcott. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. lageL, !. 1977. 1be esseotlol lloqet. Lds. P. Cruber and !. voneche. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. lanL, !., ed. 1989. neolloq tbe woooJs. hlladelphla: new SocleLy. laskow, !., and C. ChrlsL, eds. 1989. weovloq tbe vlsloos. San lranclsco: Parper. laLo. 1973. lboeJtos ooJ lettets vll & vlll. 1rans. W. PamllLon. new ?ork: enguln. olklnghorne, u. 1983. MetboJoloqy fot tbe bomoo scleoces. Albany: Sun? ress. olklnghorne, !. 1989. 5cleoce ooJ ptovlJeoce. 8osLon: Shambhala. opper, k. 1974. Objectlve koowleJqe. Cxford: Clarendon. opper, k., and !. Lccles. 1983. 1be self ooJ lts btolo. London: 8ouLledge. orrlLL, !., and u. Wlnner. 1988. 1be comloq of tbe qteeos. London: lonLana. osL, S. C., ed. 1972. Motol voloes ooJ tbe sopeteqo coocept lo psycboooolysls. new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal unlv. ress. osLal, . 1974. Oo tolsloq. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. rlesL, S. 1991. 1beotles of tbe mloJ. 8osLon: PoughLon Mlfflln. rlgoglne, l. 1980. ltom beloq to becomloq. San lranclsco: lreeman. rlgoglne, l., and l. SLengers. 1984. OtJet oot of cboos. new ?ork: 8anLam. uLnam, P. 1987. 1be foces of teollsm. LaSalle, lll.: Cpen CourL. ______. 1988. kepteseototloo ooJ teollty. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. ylyshyn, Z. 1984. compototloo ooJ coqoltloo. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. Culne, W. 1983. 1be tlme of my llfe. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. 8ablnow, ., ed. 1984. 1be loocoolt teoJet. new ?ork: anLheon. 8adha, S. 1992. ltom tbe motloq Jooce to tbe cosmlc Jooce. alo AlLo: 1lmeless 8ooks. 8am uass and . Corman. 1983. now coo l belp? new ?ork: knopf. 8amana Maharshl. 1984. 1olks wltb 5tl komooo Mobotsbl. 1lruvannamalal: Srl 8amanasramam. ______. 1972. 1be collecteJ wotks. London: 8lder. 8angdrol, 1. 1989. lomp of MobomoJto. 1rans. Lrlk ema kunsang. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1990. 1be cltcle of tbe soo. kaLhmandu: 8ang[ung ?eshe ubllcaLlons. 8ang[ung uor[e. 1992. 5ooq of kotmopo. kaLhmandu: 8ang[ung ?eshe ubllcaLlons. 8egan, 1., ed. 1986. Mottets of llfe ooJ Jeotb. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. 8elch, W. 1971. 1be fooctloo of tbe otqosm. new ?ork: World ubllshlng. 8elLer, 8., ed. 1973. 1owotJ oo ootbtopoloqy of womeo. new ?ork: MonLhly 8evlew ress. 8eynolds, 8. 1994. A conslderaLlon of Lhe Lranspersonal models of SLanlslav Crof and ken Wllber. unpubllshed manuscrlpL. 8lcoeur, . 1978. 1be pbllosopby of lool klcoeot. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1981. netmeoeotlcs ooJ tbe bomoo scleoces. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. 8lfkln, !. 1984. Alqeoy. new ?ork: enguln. ______. 1991. 8lospbete polltlcs. San lranclsco: Parper. 8lng, k. 1980. llfe ot Jeotb. new ?ork: Coward McCann & Ceoghegan. ______. 1984. neoJloq towotJ omeqo. new ?ork: Morrow. 8lzzuLo, A. 1979. 1be blttb of tbe llvloq CoJ. Chlcago: unlv. Chlcago ress. 8oberLs, 8. 1989. wbot ls self? AusLln: Coens. 8oblnson, P. 1982. Mottet ooJ seose. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. 8odgers-8ose, L. l., ed. 1980. 1be block womoo. 8everly Pllls: Sage. 8ogers, C. 1961. Oo becomloq o petsoo. 8osLon: PoughLon Mlfflln. 8olsLon, P. 1987. 5cleoce ooJ tellqloo. new ?ork: 8andom Pouse. ______. 1988. ovltoomeotol etblcs. hlladelphla: 1emple unlv. ress. 8oos, . 1983. CeoJet ooJ wotk. Albany: Sun? ress. 8orLy, 8. 1979. lbllosopby ooJ tbe mlttot of ootote. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. ______. 1982. coosepoeoces of ptoqmotlsm. Mlnneapolls: unlv. of MlnnesoLa ress. 8osaldo, M., and L. Lamphere, eds. 1974. womoo, coltote, ooJ soclety. SLanford: SLanford unlv. ress. 8osen, P. 1983. lloqetloo Jlmeosloos of cllolcol televooce. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. 8osenLhal, u., ed. 1991. 1be ootote of mloJ. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. 8osewaLer, L., and L. Walker, eds. 1983. nooJbook of femlolst tbetopy. new ?ork: Sprlnger. 8ossl, A. 1977. A blosoclal perspecLlve on parenLlng. uoeJolos, 106 (2): 1-31. 8ossman, n. 1991. cooscloosoess. Albany: Sun? ress. 8oszak, 1. 1992. 1be volce of tbe eottb. new ?ork: 1ouchsLone. 8oLhberg, u. 1986. hllosophlcal foundaLlons of Lranspersonal psychology. Iootool of 1toospetsoool lsycb. 18: 1-34. 8oLhberg, u. 1986. 8aLlonallLy and rellglon ln Pabermas' recenL work. lbllosopby ooJ 5oclol ctltlclsm 11: 221-43. ______. 1990. ConLemporary eplsLemology and Lhe sLudy of mysLlclsm. ln 8. lorman (ed.), 1be ptoblem of pote cooscloosoess. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. ______. 1992. 8uddhlsL nonvlolence. Iootool of nomoolstlc lsycboloqy 32 (4): 41-73. ______. 1993. 1he crlsls of modernlLy and Lhe emergence of soclally engaged splrlLuallLy. kevlsloo 13 (3): 103-13. 8oLhenberg, ., ed. 1988. koclsm ooJ sexlsm. new ?ork: SL. MarLln's ress. 8oLhschlld, !., ed. 1989. Mocbloo ex Jeo. new ?ork: ergamon. 8ousseau, !. 1983. 1be esseotlol koosseoo. new ?ork: Merldlan. 8owan, !. 1990. 5obpetsooolltles. London: 8ouLledge. ______. 1993. 1be ttoospetsoool. London: 8ouLledge. 8owboLham, S. 1974. womeo, teslstooce ooJ tevolotloo. new ?ork: vlnLage. 8ubln, C. 1973. 1he Lrafflc ln women. ln 8elLer 1973: 137-210. 8ueLher, 8. 1983. 5exlsm ooJ CoJ-tolk. 8osLon: 8eacon. 8ussell, . 1992. 1be wblte bole lo tlme. San lranclsco: Parper. 8uLLer, M., and M. 8uLLer. 1993. ueveloploq mloJs. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Sabom, M. 1982. kecollectloos ot Jeotb. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Sadawll, n. 1980. 1be blJJeo foce of ve: womeo lo tbe Atob wotlJ. London: ZLu ress. Sade, M. de. 1963. Iostloe, lbllosopby lo tbe beJtoom, ooJ otbet wtltloqs. new ?ork: Crove Weldenfeld. Sadock, !. 1991. Aotolexlcol syotox. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. Sahllns, M. 1972. 5tooe oqe ecooomlcs. new ?ork: Aldlne. Sanday, . 1981. lemole powet ooJ mole Jomloooce. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. Sanday, ., and 8. Coodenough, eds. 1989. 8eyooJ tbe secooJ sex. hlladelphla: unlv. of enn. ress. Sandel, M. 1982. llbetollsm ooJ tbe llmlts of jostlce. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. Sandel, M., ed. 1984. llbetollsm ooJ lts ctltlcs. new ?ork: new ?ork unlv. ress. Sannella, L. 1976. kooJollol: lsycbosls ot ttoosceoJeoce? San lranclsco: uakln. Sarup, M. 1989. Ao lottoJoctoty qolJe to post-sttoctotollsm ooJ postmoJetolsm. ALhens: unlv. of Ceorgla ress. Saussure, l. 1966 (1913). cootse lo qeoetol lloqolstlcs. new ?ork: McCraw-Plll. Sayers, !. 1982. 8loloqlcol polltlcs. new ?ork: 1avlsLock. Scarce, 8. 1990. co-wottlots. Chlcago: noble. Schafer, 8. 1976. A oew looqooqe fot psycboooolysls. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. ScharfsLeln, 8., ed. 1978. lbllosopby ost/lbllosopby west. London: 8asll 8lackwell. Schaya, L. 1973. 1be oolvetsol meooloq of tbe kobbolob. 8alLlmore: enguln. Scheffer, v. 1991. 1be sboploq of eovltoomeotollsm lo Ametlco. SeaLLle: unlv. of WashlngLon ress. Schelllng, l. 1978 (1800). 5ystem of ttoosceoJeotol lJeollsm. 1rans. . PeaLh. CharloLLesvllle: unlv. ress of vlrglnla. SchmlLL, C., and C. Sklnner, eds. 1988. 1be combtlJqe blstoty of keoolssooce pbllosopby. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. Schnelder, S. 1989. Clobol wotmloq. new ?ork: vlnLage. Schnelderman, S. 1983. Iocpoes locoo. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. Schopenhauer, A. 1969. 1be wotlJ os wlll ooJ tepteseototloo. 2 vols. new ?ork: uover. Schumacher, L. l. 1977. A qolJe fot tbe petplexeJ. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Schuon, l. 1973. loqlc ooJ ttoosceoJeoce. new ?ork: Parper. ______. 1976. 1be ttoosceoJeot oolty of tellqloos. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1986. 1be esseotlol wtltloqs of ltltjof 5cbooo. Ld. S. nasr. ShafLesbury: LlemenL. Searle, !. 1969. 5peecb octs. Cambrldge unlv. ress. ______. 1983. loteotlooollty. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. ______. 1984. MloJs, btolos, ooJ scleoce. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. ______. 1992. 1be teJlscovety of tbe mloJ. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. Searles, P. 1960. 1be ooobomoo eovltoomeot lo ootmol Jevelopmeot ooJ lo scblzopbteolo. new ?ork: lu. Segal, P. 1976. lottoJoctloo to tbe wotk of Meloole klelo. London: PogarLh. Selman, 8., and u. 8yrne. 1974. A sLrucLural analysls of levels of role-Laklng ln mlddle chlldhood. cbllJ uevelopmeot 43. Shaplro, u., and 8. Walsh, eds. 1984. MeJltotloo: closslc ooJ cootempototy petspectlves. new ?ork: Aldlne. Sheldrake, 8. 1981. A oew scleoce of llfe. Los Angeles: 1archer. ______. 1989. 1be pteseoce of tbe post: Motpblc tesooooce ooJ tbe boblts of ootote. new ?ork: vlklng. ______. 1990. 1be teblttb of ootote. London: CenLury. Shepherd, L. 1993. llftloq tbe vell: 1be femloloe foce of scleoce. 8osLon: Shambhala. Shlbayama, Z. 1974. 2eo commeots oo tbe Momookoo. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. Shoemaker, S., and 8. Swlnburne. 1984. letsoool lJeotlty. London: 8asll 8lackwell. Sllburn, L. 1988. kooJollol. Albany: Sun? ress. Slnger, . 1977. Aolmol tlqbts. new ?ork: Avon. Slngh, k. 1973. 5otot sbobJ yoqo. 8erkeley: lmages. Slvard, 8. 1983. womeo: A wotlJ sotvey. WashlngLon, u.C.: World rlorlLles. S[oo, M., and 8. Mor. 1987. 1be qteot cosmlc motbet. San lranclsco: Parper. Skollmowskl, P. 1981. co-pbllosopby. Salem, n.P.: Marlon 8oyars. SlaLer, . 1991. A Jteom JefetteJ. 8osLon: 8eacon. SmlLh, A. 1990. weoltb of ootloos. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. SmlLh, P. 1976. lotqotteo ttotb. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. ______. 1989. 8eyooJ tbe postmoJeto mloJ. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL. ______. 1991. 1be wotlJs tellqloos. San lranclsco: Parper. SmlLh, ., and C. !ones. 1986. 1be pbllosopby of mloJ. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. SmuLs, !. 1926. nollsm ooJ evolotloo. London: Macmlllan. Sogyal 8lnpoche. 1990. uzoqcbeo ooJ loJmosombbovo. Callfornla: 8lgpa lellowshlp. Sorokln, . 1937-1941. 5oclol ooJ coltotol Jyoomlcs. 4 vols. new ?ork: Amerlcan 8ook Co. Spence, !., and 8. Pelmrelch. 1978. Moscollolty ooJ femlolty. AusLln: unlv. of 1exas ress. Spengler, C. 1939. 1be Jeclloe of tbe west. new ?ork: knopf. Sperry, 8. 1983a. 5cleoce ooJ motol ptlotlty. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. ______. 1983b. 5cleoce ooJ motol ptlotlty. new ?ork: Columbla unlv. ress. Splnoza, 8. 1983. 1be collecteJ wotks of 5ploozo. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. Splro, M., ed. 1963. cootext ooJ meooloq lo coltotol ootbtopoloqy. new ?ork: lree ress. SplLz, 8. 1939. A qeoetlc flelJ tbeoty of eqo fotmotloo. new ?ork: lu. ______. 1963. 1be fltst yeot of llfe. new ?ork: lu. Spragens, 1. 1990. keosoo ooJ Jemoctocy. uurham: uuke unlv. ress. SpreLnak, C. 1991. 5totes of qtoce. San lranclsco: Parper. ______, ed. 1982. 1be polltlcs of womeos spltltoollty. new ?ork: Anchor. SpreLnak, C., and l. Capra. 1983. Cteeo polltlcs. London: aladln. SLace, W. 1987. Mystlclsm ooJ pbllosopby. Los Angeles: 1archer. SLavenhagen, 8. 1973. 5oclol closses lo oqtotloo socletles. Carden ClLy, n.?.: uoubleday. SLelnberg, u., ed. 1992. 1be etotlc lmpolse. Los Angeles: 1archer. SLephanou, L. 1976. cbotlsmo ooJ qoosls lo OttboJox tbooqbt. lorL Wayne, lnd.: LMC8. SLern, u. 1983. 1be lotetpetsoool wotlJ of tbe lofoot. new ?ork: 8aslc. SLevens, A. 1983. Atcbetypes. new ?ork: Culll. SLlch, S. 1983. ltom folk psycboloqy to coqoltlve scleoce. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. SLone, C. 1987. ottb ooJ otbet etblcs. new ?ork: Parper & 8ow. SLone, M. 1976. wbeo CoJ wos o womoo. new ?ork: ParvesL. ______. 1980. 1be botJetlloe syoJtomes. new ?ork: McCraw-Plll. SLrauss, L. 1989. llbetollsm oocleot ooJ moJeto. lLhaca, n.?.: Cornell unlv. ress. SLuard, S., ed. 1976. womeo lo meJlevol soclety. hlladelphla: unlv. of enn. ress. SLurrock, !. 1979. 5ttoctotollsm ooJ sloce. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. Sulllvan, P. 1933. 1be lotetpetsoool tbeoty of psycblotty. new ?ork: norLon. Suzukl, u. 1. 1939. 2eo ooJ Iopooese coltote. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. ______. 1968. 5toJles lo tbe lookovototo 5otto. London: 8ouLledge. ______. 1970. ssoys lo 2eo 8oJJblsm. 3 vols. London: 8lder. Swlmme, 8., and 1. 8erry. 1992. 1be oolvetse stoty. San lranclsco: Parper. Szarmach, ., ed. 1984. lottoJoctloo to tbe meJlevol mystlcs of otope. Albany: Sun? ress. 1almnl, l. 1973. 1be scleoce of yoqo. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL 8ooks. 1akakusu, !. 1936. 1be esseotlols of 8oJJblst pbllosopby. Ponolulu: unlv. Pawall ress. 1annahlll, 8. 1992. 5ex lo blstoty. Scarborough Pouse. 1annen, u. 1990. oo jost Joot ooJetstooJ. new ?ork: Morrow. 1arnas, 8. 1991. 1be possloo of tbe westeto mloJ. new ?ork: Parmony. 1arnas, 8. 1993. 1he WesLern mlnd aL Lhe Lhreshold. Ooest. 6 2 (Summer): 23-31. 1arL, C. 1. 1973. 5totes of cooscloosoess. new ?ork: uuLLon. ______. 1986. wokloq op. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1989. Opeo mloJ, Jlsctlmlootloq mloJ. San lranclsco: Parper. ______, ed. 1992. 1toospetsoool psycboloqles. new ?ork: Parper Colllns. 1aylor, C. 1973. neqel. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. ______. 1983. lbllosopby ooJ tbe bomoo scleoces-pbllosopblcol popets 2. Cambrldge: Cambrldge unlv. ress. ______. 1989. 5ootces of tbe self. Cambrldge: Parvard unlv. ress. 1aylor, . 1986. kespect fot ootote. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. 1ellhard de Chardln, . 1961. 1be pbeoomeooo of moo. new ?ork: Parper 1orchbooks. ______. 1964. 1be fotote of moo. new ?ork: Parper 1orchbooks. 1eresa of vlla. 1961. lotetlot costle. 1rans. L. eers. Carden ClLy, n.?.: lmage. 1hompson, W. l. 1989. lmoqlooty looJscopes. new ?ork: SL. MarLln's ress. ______, ed. 1987. Colo: A woy of koowloq. Pudson, n.?.: Llndlsfarne ress. ______, ed. 1991. Colo 2: metqeoce. Pudson, n.?.: Llndlsfarne ress. 1hondrup, 1. 1989. 8oJJbo mloJ. lLhaca, n.?.: Snow Llon. 1hornLon, M. 1989. lolk psycboloqy. 1oronLo: unlv. of 1oronLo ress. 1hurman, 8. 1984. 1sooq kbopos speecb of qolJ lo tbe esseoce of ttoe elopoeoce. rlnceLon: rlnceLon unlv. ress. 1llllch, . 1967. A blstoty of cbtlstloo tbooqbt. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. 1ocquevllle, A. de. 1969. uemoctocy lo Ametlco. new ?ork: Anchor. 1olsLoy, L. 1929. My coofessloo, my tellqloo, tbe qospel lo btlef. new ?ork: Scrlbners. 1ong, 8. 1989. lemlolst tbooqbt. San lranclsco: WesLvlew. 1orrance, 1. 1981. ulvloe ooJ cootloqeot otJet. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. ______. 1989. 1be cbtlstloo ftome of mloJ. Colorado Sprlngs: Pelmers & Poward. 1oulmln, S. 1982. 1be tetoto to cosmoloqy. Callfornla: unlv. of Callfornla ress. 1oynbee, A. 1972. A stoJy of blstoty. Cxford: Cxford unlv. ress. 1rungpa, C. 1976. 1be mytb of fteeJom. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1981. Cllmpses of AbblJbotmo. 8oulder: ra[na ress. ______. 1988. 5bombbolo: 1be socteJ potb of tbe wottlot. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1991. ctozy wlsJom. 8osLon: Shambhala. 1urkle, S. 1984. 1be secooJ self. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. ulanov, A. 1971. 1be femloloe. LvansLon, lll.: norLhwesLern unlv. ress. underhlll, L. 1933. Mystlclsm. new ?ork: Merldlan. unger, 8. 1973. nolJetllos mojot poetty: 1be Jlolectlcs of oolty. 8loomlngLon: lndlana unlv. ress. unno, 1., ed. 1989. 1be tellqloos pbllosopby of Nlsbltool keljl. 8erkeley: Aslan PumanlLles ress. urgyen, 1ulku. 1988. vojto beott. kaLhmandu: 8ang[ung ?eshe ubllcaLlons. valllanL, C. 1977. AJoptotloo to llfe. 8osLon: LlLLle, 8rown. varela, l. 1979. ltloclples of bloloqlcol ootooomy. new ?ork: norLh Polland. varela, l., L. 1hompson, and L. 8osch. 1993. 1be emboJleJ mloJ. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. varenne, !. 1976. oqo ooJ tbe nloJo ttoJltloo. Chlcago: unlv. Chlcago ress. vaLLlmo, C. 1989. 1be eoJ of moJetolty. 8alLlmore: !ohns Popklns. vaughan, l. 1979. Awokeoloq lotoltloo. new ?ork: uoubleday. ______. 1986. 1be lowotJ otc. 8osLon: Shambhala. venkaLesananda, Lrans. 1981. 1be sopteme yoqo. AusLralla: ChllLern. verman, M. 1992. 1be books of cootemplotloo. Albany: Sun? ress. vlclnus, M., ed. 1972. 5offet ooJ be stlll: womeo lo tbe vlctotloo oqe. 8loomlngLon: lndlana unlv. ress. Waldrop, M. 1992. complexlty. new ?ork: Slmon & SchusLer. Walsh, M., ed. 1987. 1be psycboloqy of womeo. new Paven: ?ale unlv. ress. Walsh, 8. 1977. lnlLlal medlLaLlve experlences: l. I. 1toospetsoool lsycboloqy 9: 131-192. ______. 1978. lnlLlal medlLaLlve experlences: ll. I. 1toospetsoool lsycboloqy 10: 1-28. ______. 1980. MedlLaLlon. ln 8. Corslnl (ed.), A booJbook of looovotlve psycbotbetoples. new ?ork: Wlley. ______. 1984. 5toyloq ollve: 1be psycboloqy of bomoo sotvlvol. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1989. Can WesLern phllosophers undersLand Aslan phllosophles? ctosscotteots 34: 281-99. ______. 1990. 1be spltlt of sbomoolsm. Los Angeles: 1archer. Walsh, 8., and l. vaughan, eds. 1993. lotbs beyooJ eqo. Los Angeles: 1archer. Warren, k. 1987. lemlnlsm and ecology. ovltoomeotol tblcs 9: 3-20. Washburn, M. 1988. 1be eqo ooJ tbe Jyoomlc qtoooJ. Albany: Sun? ress. WaLLs, A. 1968. Mytb ooJ tltool lo cbtlstloolty. 8osLon: 8eacon. ______. 1972. 1be sopteme lJeotlty. new ?ork: vlnLage. ______. 1973. 1oo: 1be wotetcootse woy. new ?ork: anLheon. Weber, M. 1963. 1be socloloqy of tellqloo. 8osLon: 8eacon. Well, A. 1972. 1be oototol mloJ. 8osLon: PoughLon Mlfflln. Welnberg, S. 1992. uteoms of o flool tbeoty. new ?ork: anLheon. Welwood, !. 1990. Iootoey of tbe beott. new ?ork: Parper Colllns. Werner, P. 1964 (1940). compototlve psycboloqy of meotol Jevelopmeot. new ?ork: lu. WesL, C. 1989. 1be Ametlcoo evosloo of pbllosopby. Madlson: unlv. of Wlsconsln ress. WesL, M., ed. 1987. 1be psycboloqy of meJltotloo. Cxford: Clarendon. WhlLe, !. 1979. kooJollol, evolotloo, and eollqbteomeot. new ?ork: Anchor. WhlLe, L. 1973. 1he hlsLorlcal rooLs of our ecologlc crlsls. ln 8arbour 1973: 18-30. WhlLehead, A. 1937 (1929). ltocess ooJ teollty. new ?ork: Macmlllan. ______. 1966. MoJes of tbooqbt. new ?ork: Macmlllan. ______. 1967. AJveototes of lJeos. new ?ork: Macmlllan. ______. 1967. 5cleoce ooJ tbe moJeto wotlJ. new ?ork: Macmlllan. WhlLmonL, L. 1982. ketoto of tbe qoJJess. new ?ork: Crossroad. Whorf, 8. 1936. looqooqe, tbooqbt ooJ teollty. Cambrldge: Ml1 ress. WhyLe, L. L. 1930. 1be oext Jevelopmeot lo moo. new ?ork: MenLor. ______. 1934. Acceot oo fotm. new ?ork: Parpers. Wllber, k. 1977. 1be specttom of cooscloosoess. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL. ______. 1980. 1be Atmoo ptoject: A ttoospetsoool vlew of bomoo Jevelopmeot. WheaLon, lll.: CuesL. ______. 1981. up ftom Jeo. new ?ork: uoubleday/Anchor. ______. 1986. A socloble qoJ. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1989. ye to eye. 8osLon: Shambhala. ______. 1991. Ctoce ooJ qtlt. 8osLon: Shambhala. Wllber, k., !. Lngler, and u. . 8rown. 1986. 1toosfotmotloos of cooscloosoess: cooveotloool ooJ cootemplotlve petspectlves oo Jevelopmeot. 8osLon: Shambhala. Wlllls, !., ed. 1987. lemloloe qtoooJ. lLhaca, n.?.: Snow Llon. Wlnkelman, M. 1990. 1he evoluLlon of consclousness. Aotbtopoloqy of cooscloosoess, 1 (3/4): 24-32. ______. 1993. 1he evoluLlon of consclousness? Aotbtopoloqy of cooscloosoess, 4 (3): 3-10. WlnnlcoLL, u. 1938. collecteJ popets. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks. Wlnograd, 1., and l. llores 1986. uoJetstooJloq compotets ooJ coqoltloo. norwood, n.!.: Ablex. WlL, P. 1991. cootemplotlve psycboloqy. lLLsburgh: uuquesne unlv. ress. WlLLgensLeln, L. 1933. lbllosopblcol lovestlqotloos. London: 8asll 8lackwell. WollsLonecrafL, M. 1990. A vloJlcotloo of tbe tlqbts of womeo. 8uffalo, n.?.: romeLheus 8ooks. Wolman, 8., and M. ullman, eds. 1986. nooJbook of stotes of cooscloosoess. new ?ork: van nosLrand 8elnhold. Woolhouse, 8. 1983. locke. Mlnneapolls: unlv. of MlnnesoLa ress. WrlghL, L. 1984. lsycboooolytlc ctltlclsm. London: MeLhuen. Wulff, u. 1991. lsycboloqy of tellqloo. new ?ork: Wlley. WuLhnow, 8., !. PunLer, A. 8ergesen, and L. kurzwell. 1984. coltotol ooolysls. London: 8ouLledge. ?alom, l. 1980. xlsteotlol psycbotbetopy. new ?ork: 8aslc. ?ogeshwarand SaraswaLl. 1972. 5cleoce of tbe sool. lndla: ?oga nlkeLan. ?oung, u. 1991. Otlqlos of tbe socteJ. new ?ork: SL. MarLln's ress. ?uasa, ?. 1987. 1be boJy. Albany: Sun? ress. ?wahoo, u. 1987. volces of oot oocestots. 8osLon: Shambhala. Zadeh, L. 1987. lozy sets ooJ oppllcotloos. new ?ork: Wlley. Zaehner, 8. 1937. Mystlclsm, socteJ ooJ ptofooe. new ?ork: Cxford unlv. ress. ZammlLo, !. 1992. 1be qeoesls of koots ctltlpoe of joJqemeot. Chlcago: unlv. of Chlcago ress. Zanardl, C., ed. 1990. sseotlol popets oo tbe psycboloqy of womeo. new ?ork: new ?ork unlv. ress. Zlmmerman, M. 1981. cllpse of tbe self. ALhens: Chlo unlv. ress. Zlmmerman, M. 1990. nelJeqqets cooftoototloo wltb moJetolty. 8loomlngLon: lndlana unlv. ress. ZoeLeman, k. 1991. Colosopby. Pudson, n.?.: Llndlsfarne. Zohar, u. 1990. 1be poootom self. new ?ork: Morrow. Zwelg, C., ed. 1990. 1o be o womoo. Los Angeles: 1archer. cteJlts 1he auLhor Lhanks Lhe publlshers who granLed permlsslon Lo reprlnL maLerlal copyrlghLed or conLrolled by Lhem: lrom volotloo. 1be CtooJ 5yotbesls by Lrvln Laszlo, 1987 by Lrvln Laszlo. 8eprlnLed by permlsslon of !ohn WhlLe. llgures 24 and 28 from 1be 5elf-Otqoolzloq uolvetse. 5cleotlflc ooJ nomoo lmpllcotloos of tbe metqloq lotoJlqm of volotloo by Lrlch !anLsch. 8eprlnLed by permlsslon of Llsevler Sclence LLd, ergamon lmprlnL, Cxford, Lngland. lrom commoolcotloo ooJ tbe volotloo of 5oclety by !urgen Pabermas, 1979 by 8eacon ress. 8eprlnLed by permlsslon of 8eacon ress. lrom 1be Cteot cbolo of 8eloq. A 5toJy of tbe nlstoty of oo lJeo by ArLhur C. Love[oy (Cambrldge, Mass.: Parvard unlverslLy ress), 1936, 1964 by Lhe resldenL and lellows of Parvard College. 8eprlnLed by permlsslon of Parvard unlverslLy ress. lrom 5ootces of tbe 5elf. 1be Mokloq of MoJeto lJeotlty by Charles 1aylor (Cambrldge, Mass.: Parvard unlverslLy ress), 1989 by Charles 1aylor. 8eprlnLed by permlsslon of Parvard unlverslLy ress. loJex Note. loJex eottles ftom tbe ptlot eJltloo of tbls book bove beeo locloJeJ fot ose os seotcb tetms. 1bey coo be locoteJ by osloq tbe seotcb feotote of yoot e-book teoJet. AbhlnavagupLa Abraham, 8. AbsoluLe, Lhe. 5ee olso LmpLlness, Cod, SplrlL AccommodaLlon AcLual, Lhe (ArlsLoLle) AcLuallzaLlon (Lelos) new paradlgm vlews on push Lowards 5ee olso Consclousness, LvoluLlon, Cmega polnLs, 1ranscendence AdapLaLlon, ln menLal healLh Adherences (lageL) Adorno, 1heodor AesLheLlc-sensory cognlLlon AesLheLlcs, 8omanLlc Agape (compasslon) ln nondual LradlLlons relaLlon Lo Lros and 1hanaLos ln WesLern LradlLlons Age of lnformaLlon. 5ee noosphere Age of 8eason. 5ee LnllghLenmenL paradlgm Agency (wholeness) agency-ln-communlon agency-versus-communlon and meLaphor 5ee olso Communlon, Wholeness Agrarlan socleLles Agrlppa von neLLeschelm AllenaLlon All, Lhe. 5ee AbsoluLe, Lhe, Cod, SplrlL Alpha polnLs. 5ee AbsoluLe, Lhe, Cod, SplrlL AlsLad, ulana AlLrulsm. 5ee olso Agape Amelnlas Anamorphosls (WolLereck) Anarchy AnaLman (no-self) docLrlne Anlmal rlghLs AnLhroplc rlnclple (8oszak) AnLhropocenLrlc ldenLlLy (anLhropocenLrlsm) AnLhropology(lsLs) AnLlmodernlsLs AperspecLlval space (Cebser) AposLollc laLhers Apprehenslon Archaeology (loucaulL) ArcheLypes. 5ee olso MyLh ArlsLoLle developmenLal Lheorles and emplrlclsm Cod, vlew of on hlerarchles on myLhology recognlLlon of wlLhln ArL. 5ee olso Moral developmenL, Sclence Asanga, crlLlque of Ascendlng paLh (many-lnLo-Cne) ln ChrlsLlan LradlLlons dlssoclaLlon from descendlng paLh, effecLs of ln evoluLlon of consclousness lnLegraLlon wlLh descendlng paLh 5ee olso uescendlng paLh, LefL-Pand paLh, 1ranscendence, vlslon-loglc Aslmov, lsaac AsLrology AsLronomy, plenlLude and. 5ee olso MaLhemaLlcs, hyslcs ALman (SplrlL) and 8rahman 5ee olso 1ranscendence AugusLlne, SalnL duallsm ln nondual vlews Auroblndo, Srl CreaL Polarchy of 8elng nondual vlews AuLhenLlclLy AuLhorlLarlanlsm AuLonomy/freedom and ego ldenLlLy (self-deLermlnaLlon) llnk Lo ascendlng paLh relaLlonshlp Lo depLh represslon of 5ee olso LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, LlberaLlon movemenLs AuLopoesls. 5ee olso SysLems Lheory(lsLs) Awareness. 5ee olso Consclousness 8aln, Alexander 8allmer, 1homas 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon. 5ee 8Ml 8aLallle, Ceorge 8aLeson, Cregory 8eard, Mary 8eauLy 8ehavlorlsm 8ellah, 8oberL 8enn, lers 8enolL, Penrl 8enLham, !eremy 8erger, eLer 8ergson, Penrl 8erkeley, Ceroge 8erman, Morrls 8erLalanffy, Ludwlg von. 5ee olso SysLems Lheory(lsLs) 8locenLrlc ldenLlLy 8loequallLy, llmlLs of 8lologlcal communlcaLlon 8lologlcal sclences 8losphere (llfe) dlfferenLlaLlon/dlssoclaLlon from noosphere and concepL of llbldo confuslon of Cod and naLure (Cala) ecodevasLaLlon and effecL on gender roles dlfferenLlaLlon/dlssoclaLlon from physlosphere evoluLlon/developmenL of nondual lnLegraLlon of subservlence of women/men Lo 5ee olso noosphere, hyslosphere 8lrch, Charles 8lrLh Lrauma, ln 1arnas's work 8lanck, CerLrude and 8ubln 8lumberg, 8ae 8ly, 8oberL 8Ml (8aslc Moral lnLulLlon). 5ee olso Consclousness, Moral developmenL 8ody, Lhe spllL wlLh mlnd vlews of 5ee olso 8losphere, hyslosphere 8olen, !ean 8onneL, Charles 8oundarles, ln holons 8rahe, 1yco 8rahman 8raln, Lhe and consclousness evoluLlon/developmenL of as exLerlor ob[ecL Lrlune 8roughLon, !ohn 8rown, uanlel 8rown, C. Spencer 8rown, norman C. 8runo, Clordano 8uddha (sub[ecLlve LruLh/ulLlmaLe l") 8uddhlsL LradlLlons (8uddhlsm) no-self docLrlne 5ee olso loJlvlJool 8oJJblst scbools Cambrldge laLonlsLs Campbell, !oseph CaplLallsm Capra, lrlL[of CarnoL, Sadl Carson, 8achel Causal level (Lranspersonal developmenL). 5ee olso LckharL, 8amana CausallLy CenLaur lmage. 5ee olso vlslon-loglc ChafeLz, !aneL Chagdud 1ulku 8lnpoche Ch'an 8uddhlsm Chaos Lheory. 5ee olso SysLems Lheory(lsLs) Chomsky, noam ChrlsL handllng of by church auLhorlLles Lranspersonal awareness of ChrlsLlan (!udeo-ChrlsLlan) LradlLlons ChrlsLlan apologlsLs, argumenLs of codlflcaLlon and dogma domlnance over ascendlng paLhway myLhlc-raLlonal Lhlnklng and ClLlzenshlp Clarke, Samuel Clauslus, 8udolf Cobb, !ohn CoevoluLlon of holons. 5ee LvoluLlon, Polons CognlLlon/exLenslon (Splnoza) CognlLlve developmenL cognlLlve maps lmporLance of lnLersub[ecLlve sLrucLures of and moral developmenL nonllnearlLy of onLogeneLlc/phylogeneLlc parallels ln sLages of (lageL) concreLe operaLlonal sLage (conop) formal operaLlonal sLage (formop) preoperaLlonal sLage (preop) sensorlmoLor sLage waves, sLreams, and sLaLes deflned and worldvlew 5ee olso Consclousness, LvoluLlon, lageL CognlLlve sclences (CognlLlvlsm) CollecLlve sLrucLures, lnherlLance of Communal conflrmaLlon CommunlcaLlon, Lypes of. 5ee olso Language Communlon (parLness). 5ee olso Agency, LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, Polons Compasslon. 5ee Agape, Moral developmenL CompuLaLlonal mlnd (!ackendoff) CompuLers ConcreLe operaLlonal sLage (conop) Consclousness ln ChrlsLlan LhoughL and depLh dlrecL versus medlaLed early maps" of evoluLlon/developmenL of ascendlng and descendlng paLhways nondual versus raLlonal vlews nonllnearlLy of onLogeneLlc/phylogeneLlc parallels pre/Lrans fallacy raLlonal awareness and role ldenLlLy ln Lranscendance and Lrlbal/klnshlp-based holonlc naLure of lnLersub[ecLlve (kosmlc) research lnLo self (sub[ecLlve)-consclousness LruLh-measures for waves, sLreams, and sLaLes of 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL, SplrlLuallLy ConLexL, shlfLlng (dlsconLlnulLles) for holons ln relaLlon Lo meanlng and LruLh 5ee olso lrameworks, lCu ConLradlcLlon, ln holons Coomaraswamy, A. k. Copernlcus, nlcolaus CoplesLon, lrederlck Cowan, hlllp CreaLlvlLy (WhlLehead). 5ee olso Lros CrlLlcal 1heory (Pabermas) Croll, Cscar Culler, !onaLhan CulLural anLhropology (uouglas) CulLure confuslon wlLh naLure culLural flL (shared worldspace) culLural holons culLural relaLlvlsm effecL of mysLlcal experlence on evoluLlon of ln Amerlca aLLendanL paLhologles celebraLlon of dlverslLy ego-raLlonal sLage (see olso ollqbteomeot potoJlqm) myLhlc-raLlonal awareness sysLems myLhology-based sLage regresslon durlng represslon and vlolence durlng sLudles of sysLems Lheory(lsLs) and Lrlbal-klnshlp sLage valldaLlon crlLerla (LruLh-measures) vlslon-loglc/planeLary sLage meanlng/value of represslon and ob[ecLlflcaLlon ln ln WesLern LradlLlons world (global) 5ee olso lour CuadranLs, Polons, Soclal holons, Worldspace Cusanus, nlcolas CyberneLlc hollsm (8erman) CyberneLlc paradlgms (8ellah) Cyprlan ua Avabhasa uarwln, Charles. 5ee olso volotloo uaseln ueaLh. 5ee 1hanaLos ueconsLrucLlonlsm(lsLs) ueep ecology(lsLs). 5ee olso Lco-8omanLlclsm, Lcomascullnlsm ueep sLrucLures (Wllber) uehumanlzaLlon, and power drlve. 5ee olso ower uelsm(lsLs) ueleuze, Cllles uepLh (verLlcal/lnLerlor space) collapse of, lnLo span. (see olso LnllghLenmenL paradlgm) and consclousness dlrecL versus medlaLed experlence emplrlcal knowledge of loucaulL on and freedom/rlghLs/responslblllLy of holons lncrease ln durlng evoluLlon and lnLerlor developmenL and meanlng (value) and moral developmenL durlng posLmodern perlod relaLlonshlp Lo Lranscendence as Lhe wlLhln" of Lhlngs of worldspaces 5ee olso Polons uepLh psychology uerrlda, !acques as deconsLrucLlonlsL on dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon grammaLology of uescarLes, 8ene duallsm ln posL-CarLeslan Lhlnklng raLlonallsm of uescendlng paLh (Cne-lnLo-many) Agape and uescended Cod of dlssoclaLlon from ascendlng paLh domlnaLlon over WesLern culLure efforLs aL lnLegraLlng wlLh ascendlng paLh and evoluLlon of consclousness exLroverslon ln plenlLude/maLerlallsm ln 1hanaLos and Lhermodynamlcs as proof" of as unlversal SysLem vlews on evll ueLermlnlsm, llmlLs of uevall, 8lll uevelopmenL. 5ee CognlLlve developmenL, LvoluLlon uevelopmenLal phllosophy uevelopmenLal psychology(lsLs) uharma (ob[ecLlve LruLh) ulalecLlc/dlalecLlcal reasonlng (Pegel) ulcklnson, Lmlly ulfferenLlaLlon of arL, sclence, and morallLy (8lg 1hree) auLonomy and durlng cognlLlve developmenL and evoluLlon versus dlssoclaLlon 5ee olso ulssoclaLlon, lnLegraLlon ulonyslus Lhe AreopaglLe ulrempLlon (dlvorce). 5ee ulssoclaLlon ulsorder, lncrease ln (laws of Lhermodynamlcs) ulsplacemenL (lreud) ulssoclaLlon of arL, sclence, and morallLy (8lg 1hree) of ascendlng/descendlng paLhs auLonomy and of blosphere and noosphere versus dlfferenLlaLlon of Lgo and Lco durlng developmenL from sexuallLy 5ee olso ulfferenLlaLlon, lnLegraLlon, aLhology ulverslLy uoberL, 8alner uomlnaLlon holarchles. 5ee olso aLhology uoore, Cary uownward causaLlon (Sheldrake) ureyfus, PuberL uuallsm. 5ee olso ulfferenLlaLlon, ulssoclaLlon uubos, 8ene uynamlc sysLems Lheory. 5ee SysLems Lheory(lsLs) uzogchen 8uddhlsm Lach, Lhe Lccles, !ohn LckharL, MelsLer on consclousness on duallLy of real world" on Codhead on naLure 5ee olso Causal level, 1ranspersonal consclousness Lco, Lhe (Lco camp") negaLlve aspecLs mlsuse of reason naLure as reallLy (mononaLure) dlssoclaLlon from Lhe Lgo poslLlve aspecLs nondual poLenLlal wholeness/communlon wlLh naLure proponenLs/crlLlcs 5ee olso Lco-8omanLlclsm, LnllghLenmenL paradlgm, naLure Lco-movemenLs Lco-noeLlc ldenLlLy Lco-8omanLlclsm fallacles ln ldeallzaLlon of dlverslLy and new paradlgm Lhlnkers reLurn Lo naLure as regresslon senLlmenL (feellng) as knowledge and sexual freedom 5ee olso LnllghLenmenL paradlgm LcocenLrlsm LcodevasLaLlon Lcofemlnlsm(lsLs). 5ee olso lemlnlsm, naLure Lcologlcal awareness Lcologlcal sclences. 5ee SysLems Lheory(lsLs) Lcomascullnlsm(lsLs) Lconomlc forces and cognlLlve developmenL Lcophllosophy(ers) confuslon of Cod and naLure denlal of Lhe Lranspersonal fallure Lo develop envlronmenLal eLhlc hlerarchles among Lcopsychology Lder, klaus Lfflux (lnvoluLlon). 5ee olso lenlLude Lgo, Lhe (Lgo camp") dlssoclaLlon/confllcL wlLh Lco camp lnLegraLlon wlLh Lco camp negaLlve aspecLs lmmerslon ln mononaLure reducLlon of nA1u8L Lo naLure represslon and ob[ecLlflcaLlon poslLlve aspecLs moral acLlon plurallsm, alLrulsm, freedom 5ee olso Lco, Lhe, Lgo ldenLlLy, Self-awareness Lgo-cenLaur ldenLlLy. 5ee vlslon-loglc, WorldcenLrlc ldenLlLy Lgo ldenLlLy (self-ness) compared wlLh egocenLrlc ldenLlLy evoluLlon/developmenL of pure Lgo/Self and raLlonallLy 5ee olso Lgo, Lhe, Self-awareness Lgo-raLlonallsm. 5ee olso Lco-8omanLlclsm LgocenLrlsm durlng cognlLlve developmenL ln Lco-8omanLlclsm ln Lhe new paradlgm/quanLum physlcs re[ecLlon of durlng LnllghLenmenL ln sysLems Lheory Llsler, 8lane LlevaLlonlsm (8erman) Lmergence, by holons. 5ee olso LvoluLlon, Polons Lmerson, 8alph Waldo crlLlclsms of naLure mysLlclsm (ecophllosophy) on hlsLory on naLure Cver-Soul concepL on reason 5ee olso sychlc level, 1ranspersonal consclousness LmoLlonal developmenL dlfferenLlaLlon from 8losphere preoperaLlonal sLage LmoLlonal expresslon (passlon). 5ee olso SenLlmenL Lmplre, and myLhlc-raLlonal Lhlnklng Lmplrlcal hollsm Lmplrlclsm(lsLs), emplrlcal-sensory undersLandlng cognlLlon and as deflnlLlon of reallLy delflcaLlon of naLure and ecocenLrlsm ln emphasls on sensory experlence (descendlng paLh) focus on 8lghL-Pand paLh and hedonlsm language and and Lhe Lranspersonal LmpLlness (sbooyoto), empLy awareness and causal awareness and consclousness and ego developmenL lorm 8ody (topokoyo) of Schelllng's Abyss and Lranscendence and LnacLlve paradlgm (varela) Lnd of hlsLory." 5ee olso Cmega polnLs Lngels, lrledrlch Lngler, !ack LnllghLenmenL paradlgm blosphere/noosphere dlssoclaLlon Lros, elevaLlon of freedom and compasslon CreaL Chaln of 8elng consLrucL (dlverslLy), ldeallzaLlon of naLure, delflcaLlon of one-sldedness (flaLness) of raLlonallLy as omega polnL of regresslon (reLurn Lo naLure) re[ecLlon of eLhnocenLrlsm represslon/ob[ecLlflcaLlon and 5ee olso uepLh, Lmplrlclsm, Lco-8omanLlclsm, Span, SubLle reducLlonlsm LnLelechy (ArlsLoLle) LnvlronmenL. 5ee 8losphere, Lco, Lhe, hyslosphere LnvlronmenLal eLhlcs. 5ee olso Moral developmenL LnvlronmenLal movemenL Lplphenomenallsm LquallLarlan socleLles LquallLy. 5ee olso AuLonomy/freedom, LlberaLlon movemenLs LqulllbraLlon (lageL) Lrlkson, Lrlk Lros (creaLlve lnsLlncL) and ascendlng paLh ChrlsLlan vlews on dlssoclaLlon lnLo hobos elevaLlon of durlng LnllghLenmenL lreud's vlews on male/female vlews on as omega polnL source loLlnus' vlews on Schelllng's vlews on 5ee olso Agape, hobos, 1hanaLos LLhnocenLrlc ldenLlLy Lvldence. 5ee 1ruLh, valldaLlon Lvll LvoluLlonary processes acceleraLlng pace of blology as desLlny coevoluLlon of mlcro- and macro elemenLs depLh and desLrucLlon of holons durlng dlsconLlnulLles ln emplrlcal evldence for (LvoluLlonary docLrlne) of emoLlon hlerarchlcal naLure of (dlrecLlon) lmporLance of versus lnvoluLlonary processes naLural selecLlon ln, llmlLaLlons of onLogeneLlc/phylogeneLlc (macro/mlcro) parallels ln paLhologles/problems durlng schemas for of soclal holons LransformaLlon and LranslaLlon ln vlslon-loglc/planeLary awareness (lnLerlor evoluLlon) 5ee olso Consclousness, CulLural evoluLlon, Puman developmenL LvoluLlonary Lranscendance (Murphy) LxlsLenLlal crlsls (Crof) LxlsLenLlal malalse LxLerlor holons LxLerlor space (span/horlzonLal) boundarles and collapse of LefL-Pand paLh lnLo relaLlon Lo lnLerlor space 5ee olso 8lghL-Pand paLh, Span LxLrlnslc values, of holons lamlly, faLherhood lear. 5ee hobos lechner, CusLav 1heodor leellng. 5ee LmoLlonal developmenL, SenLlmenL lemale(s) as noospherlc agenLs 8omanLlc vlew of sexual/blologlcal dlfferenLlaLlon of socleLal role of value sphere of as vlcLlms 5ee olso lemlnlsm lemlnlne gender, as socloculLural role lemlnlsm(lsLs), femlnlsL movemenLs on asymmeLrlcal power arrangemenLs (paLrlarchy) debaLes among and emergence of noosphere hlerarchlcal consLrucLs among response Lo men's movemenL leuerbach, Ludwlg leuersLeln, Ceorg llchLe, !ohann concepL of ure Lgo/Sub[ecL dlsagreemenLs wlLh Splnoza on CreaL Polarchy of 8elng vlslon-loglc/planeLary awareness ln llndlay, !. n. llsh, SLanley llxaLlons llaLland paradlgm. 5ee olso uescendlng paLhway, ulssoclaLlon, MononaLure, aLhology, 8lghL-Pand paLh loraglng socleLles lorbes, !ack lorm/formlessness. 5ee olso LmpLlness lorm 8ody (topokoyo) lormal operaLlonal sLage (formop). 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL loucaulL, Mlchel Age of Man concepL archaeology concepL on uescarLes on dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon ureyfus and 8ablnow on on language on monologlcal Lhlnklng on nondual lnLegraLlon on obsesslve sexuallLy on sLrucLurallsm on 1hanLos lour quadranLs (CreaL Polarchy/nesL of 8elng") deLalled vlews of as map of consclousness as paradlgm for holonlc sLrucLure surface/deep dlmenslons of Lranspersonal developmenL and and unconsclous LruLh 5ee olso CreaL Polarchy of 8elng lowler, !ames lox, Warwlck lrameworks lreedom. 5ee AuLonomy/freedom lreud, Slgmund concepL of ld" concepL of Lhe l" (ego) depLh psychology flxaLlon/obsesslon and lnablllLy Lo see nondual conLexL lnfluence of Schelllng on on meLonym and meLaphor on myLhlc archeyLpes pleasure prlnclple" pre/Lrans fallacy ln prlmary processes of as reflecLlon of lnLeracLlon of Lco and Lgo separaLlon of Lros and 1hanaLos lrobenlus, Leo lukuyama, lrancls lulcrums of developmenL. 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL luncLlonal flL. 5ee olso valldaLlon luncLlonallsm Cala confuslon of wlLh Cod (CreaL Coddess) 5ee olso 8losphere, LcodevasLaLlon, naLure Callleo Cardner, Poward Cebser, !ean crlLlque of on lnLegral-aperspecLlval mlnd (vlslon-loglc) sLages of consclousness Cender dlfferences. 5ee olso lemale(s), Male(s) Ceneral SysLem 1heory CeneLlc communlcaLlon CeocenLrlc ldenLlLy. 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL CesLalL psychology Cllllgan, Carol ClmbuLas, Marla Clobal culLure, global consclousness developmenL process global economles mulLlculLurallsm/LransnaLlonallsm rellglon and and Lrlbal awareness 5ee olso Worldspaces Clobal syncreLlsm (cognlLlve anLhropology) CnosLlcs, crlLlques of Cod as Alpha Source (uelsL vlew) ArlsLoLle's vlew of AugusLlne's vlew of as basls for human connecLedness dlssoclaLlon from ln WesLern culLure delflcaLlon of naLure/Cala deLermlnlng LruLh of nondual vlews of laLo's vlew of unlon wlLh 5ee olso nondual LradlLlons, SplrlL Cdel, kurL Codhead LckharL's vlews on nondual vlews of loLlnus' vlews on Lranscendance lnLo 5ee olso Cod, 1ranscendence CoeLhe, !ohann Wolfgang von ColdsmlLh, Ldward Cood, Lhe. 5ee olso Moral developmenL Crace CradaLlon, grade. 5ee uepLh Craef, CrLwln de CrammaLology (uerrlda) CreaL Chaln of 8elng paradlgm. 5ee CreaL Polarchy of 8elng CreaL laLher myLh CreaL Coddess. 5ee Lcofemlnlsm, Cala, Cod CreaL Polarchy of 8elng (CreaL Chaln of 8elng) Auroblndo's consLrucL emplrlcal (collapsed) vlew of humans ln as map of holonlc poLenLlal as map of kosmlc developmenL nondual consLrucLs (nesL lmage) plenlLude/conLlnulLy ln loLlnus' consLrucL of 5ee olso loLlnus, Web of llfe CreaL MoLher myLh CreaL nesL of 8elng Creens movemenL Croddeck, Ceorg Crof, SLanlslav Cross reducLlonlsm(lsLs) Cround value (of holons) CunLrlp, Parry CyaLso, Ceshe kelsang Pabermas, !urgen on caplLallsm on conLexL on culLural relaLlvlsm deflnlLlon of modernlLy on developmenL of role/ego ldenLlLles dlalecLlc of progress on dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon on dlsempowermenL of myLh on evoluLlon of consclousness loucaulL's agreemenLs wlLh on Porkhelmer and Adorno on human naLure (dehumanlzaLlon) ldenLlcal slgnlflcaLlon on lnner space lnLegraLlve vlslon of on language and developmenL on llmlLaLlons of Lrlbal klnshlp sysLems on maglcal-anlmlsLlc awareness on male/female dlvlslon of labor on monologlcal Lhlnklng on myLh on myLh-based socleLles on ob[ecLlflcaLlon and represslon onLogeneLlc/phylogeneLlc parallels ln on prehlsLorlc Lrlbal groups on raLlonallLy on self-deflnlng sysLems on soclal englneerlng on sysLems Lheory on Lelos on LransformaLlon Lo paLrlarchy on valldlLy clalms Paeckel, LrnsL von Papplness, as a rlghL. 5ee olso Lco-8omanLlclsm ParLley, uavld ParLmann, Lduard von Pedonlsm 8erman's emphasls on as moLlvaLor ln emplrlcal world and 8lghL-Pand paLh 5ee olso SexuallLy Pegel, Ceorg on conLradlcLlons ln Lhlngs crlLlque of LnllghLenmenL Lhlnklng crlLlque of kanL developmenLal phllosophy of on CreaL Polarchy of 8elng on lnLegraLlon ln SplrlL llmlLaLlons of lnvoluLlonary vlews on 8eason" vs. undersLandlng vlslon-loglc/planeLary awareness ln Peldegger, MarLln hermaneuLlcs lnLegraLlve vlslon (cenLaur lmage) deflnlLlon of modernlLy PelghL (loucaulL). 5ee olso uepLh Pelsenberg uncerLalnLy rlnclple PelveLlus PermaneuLlcs(lsLs) Peldegger's concepL of ln llngulsLlcs ln llLerary crlLlclsm surface/deep dlmenslons of susplclon (8lcoeur) PeLerarchles Plerarchles among anLl-hlerarchlcal Lhlnkers developmenL wlLhln ln holons/holarchles needs hlerarchles (Maslow) paLhology ln 8oszak on WhlLehead on 5ee olso uepLh, LvoluLlon, Polons, Span Plllel Plndulsm. 5ee vedanLa Plndu LradlLlons PlsLory, end of Pobbes, 1homas PofsLadLer, uouglas Polarchles collapsed (emplrlcal) vlew of lndlvldual and soclal nesLed hlerachles 8lghL- and LefL-Pand paLhs schemaLa for 5ee olso LvoluLlon, Polons Polbach, aul-Penrl-uleLrlch Plderlln, lrledrlch PolocausL Polons archeLypes as basls of reallLy boundarles common feaLures. (see olso 1wenLy 1eneLs) boundarles lour CuadranLs of lnLerlor/exLerlor spaces self-adapLaLlon self-preservaLlon self-Lranscendence span and depLh LransformaLlon and LranslaLlon wholeness/parLness (agency/communlon, hlerarchles) ln and consclousness conLexLs for conLradlcLlons/lnconslsLencles ln desLrucLlon of evoluLlon/developmenL coevoluLlon exLerlor lnLerlor preservaLlon of durlng surrender of excluslvlLy lmage holons lnLrlnslc value koesLler's deflnlLlon of llLerary holons paLhologlcal holarchles relaLlonshlp beLween organlsms and envlronmenL self-Lranscendence, capaclLy for sensorlmoLor shallow, false elevaLlon of as slgns/slgnlflers sLablllLy of LranscrlpLlon/LranslaLlon ln and worldspaces 5ee olso Plerarchles, Polarchles Porkhelmer, Max PorLlculLural socleLles Puang o Puman developmenL 8erman's vlew of culLural developmenL effecL of lndusLrlallzaLlon on Cebser's vlews on gender dlfferenLlaLlon holonlc desLrucLlon and lndusLrlallzaLlon and maglcal-anlmlsLlc Lhlnklng Marx's vlews on mlcro/macro developmenL mlsslng llnks" ln myLhlc-raLlonal awareness onLogeneLlc/phylogeneLlc parallels paradlgms for lageL's paradlgm for poLenLlal ln 8oszak's vlews on vlslon-loglc/planeLary awareness 5ee olso LvoluLlon Puman naLure, ob[ecLlflcaLlon of PumanlsLlc psychology Pumans, ob[ecLlflcaLlon of Pume, uavld Pusserl, Ldmund PuLcheson, lrancls Puxley, 1homas l-l." 5ee ure Lgo, WlLness l" language/awareness (lnLerlor lndlvldual holons). 5ee olso Lgo ldenLlLy ld" (Croddeck/lreud). 5ee olso SexuallLy ldeallsm(lsLs) ldenLlLy and moral developmenL nondual overly narrow 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL, Lgo ldenLlLy, Worldvlew lmage holons, ln noosphere lncompleLeness 1heorem (Cdel) lnconslsLency, ln holons lndeLermlnacy lndlssoclaLlon lndlvldual holons cognlLlve developmenL ln consclousness sLrucLures sLrucLure/form of relaLlon Lo soclal holons lndusLrlallzaLlon lnge, Wllllam lnslncerlLy. 5ee Self-decepLlon, 1ruLh lnsLlncLs, and Lhe repLlllan braln lnsLrumenLal awareness/value lnLegral-aperspecLlval mlnd (Cebser) lnLegraLlon/reconclllaLlon (of ascendlng/descendlng paLhs) LasLern conLrlbuLlons femlnlsm and kanL's conLrlbuLlons new planeLary culLures and ln nondual LradlLlons as prlnclpal challenge of posLmodern age Schelllng's conLrlbuLlons lnLerexlsLence (Laszlo) lnLerlor space (depLh/verLlcal) as auLonomous sub[ecLlvlLy awareness of as basls for Lranscendence collapsed (flaLland) vlew of correlaLlon wlLh exLerlor space developmenL of of holons boundarles and raLlonal awareness and 5ee olso Consclousness, uepLh, 1ranspersonal developmenL lnLersub[ecLlve worldspace examples of Crof's assumpLlons abouL LruLhfulness and lnLrlnslc value of holons lnLulLlon devalulng of and moral undersLandlng of SplrlL 5ee olso 1ruLh, valldaLlon lnvoluLlonary LheorlsLs lCu prlnclple lL" language/awareness (exLerlor holons) characLerlsLlcs of ln developmenL of consclousness ln CreaL nesL of 8elng Lhe ld" as hlsLorlcal models for ln kanL's sphere of ure 8eason Splnoza and 5ee olso Lmplrlclsm, LnllghLenmenL paradlgm !ackendoff, 8ay !agger, Allson !akobson, 8oman !ames, Wllllam !anLsch, Lrlch on braln developmenL on dlfferenLlaLlon/lnLegraLlon on evoluLlon (co-evoluLlon of mlcro/macro) on Cala as soclal holon on onLogeneLlc/phylogeneLlc parallels on self-Lranscendence crlLlques of Llme/space relaLlonshlps !aspers, karl !ohnson, Mark !ohnson, Samuel !udeo-ChrlsLlan LradlLlon. 5ee ChrlsLlan (!udeo-ChrlsLlan) LradlLlons !ung, Carl !usLln MarLyr kalwelL, Polger kanL, lmmanuel on auLonomy dlfferenLlaLlon of arL, sclence, and morallLy (crlLlques) on evoluLlon loucaulL on Pegel's crlLlclsm of llmlLaLlons of on meLaphyslcs nondual vlews of Splnoza and kaplan, 8oberL, on reLrlballzaLlon kotooo (compasslon), ln Zen LradlLlon. 5ee olso Agape kaLz, SLeven kegon 8uddhlsm kelvln, Wllllam kepler, !ohannes klerkegaard, Sren klng, A. koesLler, ArLhur kohlberg, Lawrence kohuL, Pelnz kosmos collapsed vlew (flaLland)/cosmos and LmpLlness evoluLlon/developmenL of loLlnus' paradlgm for holarchles/holons ln llmlLaLlon of emplrlcal approach Lo rlghLs and responslblllLles ln whole vlew (vlslon-loglc) worldspaces ln 5ee olso Cod, Polons, SplrlL kramer, !oel kuhn, 1homas kundallnl La MeLLrle, !ullen Lacan, !acques Lalng, 8. u. Language chlldhood speech dlsorders and consclousness creaLlve power of dlfferenLlaLlng process of evoluLlon/developmenL of expresslng LranscendenL experlence uslng loucaulL on Cebser/lageL hybrld Lermlnology and ldenLlLy paradoxes/lnconslsLencles ln as reflecLlon of emplrlcal world as 8lghL-Pand paLh elemenLs as slgnlfler of experlence, power and llmlLaLlons of slgns and conLexL ln Lransparency of and Lranspersonal developmenL unlversallLy" ln and valldlLy clalms 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL Lao 1zu Laszlo, Lrvln crlLlque of on evoluLlon on holons/hlerarchles on physlcal/blologlcal sclence conLradlcLlons Leclerc, lvor LefL-Pand paLh collapse lnLo 8lghL-Pand paLh depLh ln empaLhlc knowledge of evoluLlon/developmenL of experlenLlal knowledge of lmporLance of LruLhfulness Lo and lnLerlor developmenL llngulsLlc descrlpLors proof of Cod's exlsLence 8oLhberg's expllcaLlon of surface/deep dlmenslons of unconsclous LruLhs 5ee olso Consclousness, lnLerlor space, 1ranspersonal developmenL Lelbnlz, CoLLfrled 8runo's lnfluence on developmenLal phllosophy on lnflnlLy of llfe opposlLlon Lo anLhropocenLrlsm recognlLlon of wlLhln sysLem vlewpolnL Lenskl, C. L. Levels. 5ee uepLh, Plerarchles, Polons Levl-SLrauss, Claude LewonLln, 8lchard LlberaLlon movemenLs and lndusLrlallzaLlon rlghLs movemenLs sexual freedom Llbldo and regresslon. 5ee olso SexuallLy Lleh-Lzu Llnear models. 5ee olso nonllnear developmenL LlngulsLlcs. 5ee olso Language LlLerary holons, paradox/lnconslsLency ln Locke, !ohn Loevlnger, !ane Loglc (Pegel) Logos (Lhe Word) Love[oy, ArLhur on ascendlng/descendlng duallLy crlLlque of on Lco-8omanLlclsm on evoluLlon on CreaL Chaln LheorlsLs on hlerarchles on laLo Lovelock, !ames Lovlns, Amory Lower-LefL (LL) quadranL (culLural sysLems). 5ee olso lour CuadranLs, CreaL Polarchy of 8elng Lower-8lghL (L8) quadranL (soclal sysLems). 5ee olso lour CuadranLs, CreaL Polarchy of 8elng Loy, uavld LumlnoslLy/archeLype LyoLard, !ean-lranols MaclnLyre, Alasdalr MacLean, aul Madhyamlka LradlLlon Madsen, 8lchard Maglcal-anlmlsLlc awareness culLural value durlng preoperaLlonal sLage regresslon Lo Mahayana 8uddhlsm on duallLy of real world" nagar[una's lnfluence on nondual vlews ln proof of Cod's exlsLence vlews of Codhead Malmonldes Male(s) co-creaLlvlLy wlLh female paLhology/domlnaLor hlerarchles sexual dlfferenLlaLlon and faLherhood funcLlonal basls for value spheres of 5ee olso Lcomascullnlsm, Men's movemenL Man, aul de Margulls, Lynn Marx, karl (Marxlsm) llLerary crlLlclsm and pre/Lrans fallacy producLlon paradlgm vlew of human developmenL Marxlsm, global scope of Mascullne gender, as socloculLural role Maslow, Abraham MaLerlal reducLlonlsm MaLerlal sLaLe MaLhemaLlcs and domlnance of 8lghL-Pand paLh and lnvoluLlonary Lheory recognlLlon of paradoxes/lnconslsLencles MaLrlfocal socleLles MaLurana, PumberLo Mayr, LrnsL McCarLhy, 1homas Meanlng. 5ee olso uepLh Medlcal psychlaLry/pharmacology. 5ee MenLal healLh MedlocrlLy, ln modern culLure MedlLaLlon. 5ee olso SplrlLuallLy Men. 5ee Males Men's movemenL MenLal experlence, devalulng of MenLal healLh deflnlLlons of medlcaLlon/Lherapy dllemma Merleau-onLy, Maurlce MeLabollc communlcaLlon MeLaphyslcs, devalulng of MeLonym/meLaphor, communlon and. 5ee olso Language MeLzner, 8alph Mlll, !ohn SLuarL Mlller, !. Mlnd dlssoclaLlon from body exlsLence of ln holarchlc developmenL 5ee olso Awareness, Consclousness, MenLal healLh Mlndlessness. 5ee LmpLlness Modernlsm(lLy). 5ee olso Lmplrlclsm, 8aLlonallLy Modes of producLlon, and role of women. 5ee olso lndusLrlallzaLlon Monologlcal analysls (emplrlc-analyLlc) MononaLure enLrenchmenL of and homogenlzaLlon/medlocrlLy 5ee olso ulssoclaLlon, Lco, Lhe, llaLland paradlgm, naLure Moral developmenL ln Amerlcan culLure 8aslc Moral lnLulLlon (8Ml) and cognlLlve developmenL and global perspecLlve/lnLersub[ecLlvlLy and moral auLonomy and Lranspersonal consclousness Morphlc unlLs/flelds (Sheldrake) MoLhers MoLlvaLlon. 5ee Pedonlsm, Cmega polnLs, 1elos MulLlculLurallsm Mumford, Lewls Murphy, Mlchael MurLl, 1. 8. v. MuLual ldenLlLy. 5ee Cver-Soul MysLlcal experlence, mysLlclsm ln ChrlsLlan (!udeo-ChrlsLlan) LradlLlons as culLurally deLermlned ln Lhe new (quanLum) physlcs laLo and loLlnus and ln psychlc/subLle levels rarlLy of shamanlsm and 5ee olso Consclousness, 1ranscendence MyLh allegorlcal lnLerpreLaLlon of as archeLype culLural re[ecLlon of myLhlc-lmperlallsm reason ln servlce of splrlLual awareness/Lranscendence and MyLh-based awareness sysLems MyLhlc-raLlonal awareness sysLems lnablllLy Lo accepL negaLlon (nlhllaLlon) replacemenL of by raLlonal-loglc rlse of rellglon and vlolence ln naess, Arne nagar[una namkhal norbu narclsslsm naLural sclences, llmlLs of naLural selecLlon naLure delflcaLlon of (nA1u8L) early vlews on feellng (senLlmenL) for naLure" and relaLlon Lo splrlL reLurn Lo, as regresslon sexual obsesslon and spllL from human experlence women's speclal connecLlon Lo nazls, deconsLrucLlonlsL confuslon abouL needs hlerarchles (Maslow) nelson, !ohn neomammallan braln (neocorLex) neopaganlsm(lsLs) neoplaLonlsm(lsLs). 5ee olso loLlnus neumann, !ohn von neurosls. 5ee olso aLhology(les) new Age (new paradlgm) Lheorles(lsLs) new 8lology (varela) new CrlLlclsm new hyslcs newLon, lsaac nlelsen, !oyce nleLzsche, lrledrlch nlhllaLlon (8erger) Nltvlkolpo somoJbl (formless awareness) no-self docLrlne nonanLhropocenLrlc ldenLlLy. 5ee olso 8aLlonallLy nondual awareness level (Lranspersonal developmenL/lnLegraLlon) nondual LradlLlons compasslon and wlsdom ln efforLs Lo reesLabllsh freedom ln on Cod's duallLy as models for lnLegraLlon/reconclllaLlon nagar[una's conLrlbuLlons Lo negaLlon/afflrmaLlon ln laLonlc/neoplaLonlc Lhlnklng and loLlnus and Schelllng's conLrlbuLlons Lo nonllnear developmenL. 5ee olso ConLexL noosphere (mlnd) Age of, culLural lnsLlLuLlons for culLural dlssoclaLlon from and concepL of llbldo and delflcaLlon of naLure ecodevasLaLlon and equallLy of males/females and evoluLlon/developmenL of aLLendanL paLhologles ellmlnaLlon of blology as desLlny !anLsch's schemas for lmage holons language and ln maLrlfocal socleLles as parL of blosphere/physlosphere relaLlve auLonomy ln LranscrlpLlon ln 5ee olso 8losphere, hyslosphere, 1ranspersonal developmenL, vlslon-loglc normaLlve rlghLness nosLalgla. 5ee 8egresslon Cb[ecLlflcaLlon, dehumanlzaLlon. 5ee olso aLhology Cb[ecLlve SysLem (Splnoza) Cb[ecLlve LruLhfulness. 5ee olso 1ruLh valldlLy Cb[ecLlvlLy. 5ee olso Lmplrlclsm, llaLland paradlgm, 8aLlonallLy Cceanlc aduallsm (ArleLl) Cken, Lorenz Cmega polnLs aborLed, as basls for paLhology braln and evoluLlon as morphlc flelds as ln nondual LradlLlons ulLlmaLe 5ee olso 1elos Cne, Lhe dlfferlng deflnlLlons of duallLy of, ln nondual LradlLlons loLlnus' vlews on 5ee olso Cod, Codhead, Cver-Soul, SplrlL Cne World vlslon. 5ee loLlnus CnLogeneLlc/phylogeneLlc parallels CrganlzaLlon, lncrease ln durlng evoluLlon Crlgen Cver-Soul awareness of commonallLy of Lmerson's vlew of llchLe's vlew of muLual ldenLlLy new Age Lheorles World Soul 5ee olso Consclousness, Cod, Codhead, 1ranscendence admasambhava alne, 1homas aleomammallan braln (llmblc sysLem) anLhelsm aradlgms (kuhn) aradlse losL meLaphor. 5ee naLure, 8egresslon arlLy, versus equallLy armenldes arLlclpaLlon (lageL) ascal, 8lalse aLhology(les) as aborLed omega polnLs durlng cognlLlve developmenL durlng evoluLlonary developmenL flxaLlons fulcrum-based Lheraples for preservaLlon of 8oszak on aLrlfocal/paLrlarchal (androcenLrlc) socleLles eak experlences. 5ee olso AcLuallzaLlon, Cmega polnLs, 1elos enfleld, Wllder ercepLlon. 5ee olso 1ruLh, valldlLy erlnaLal maLrlces (Crof), crlLlque of erspecLlve and vlslblllLy henomenallsm(ology) (8erger) hobos (fear). 5ee olso Lros hyslcal versus blologlcal sclences hyslocenLrlc ldenLlLy hyslosphere (maLLer) dependence of noosphere and blosphere on dlfferenLlaLlon/dlssoclaLlon from blophere early efforLs Lo descrlbe evoluLlon/developmenL of relnLegraLlon wlLh blosphere/noosphere lageL, !ean cognlLlve developmenL paradlgm concreLe operaLlonal sLage (conop) cross-culLural appllcablllLy of formal operaLlonal sLage (formop) moral developmenL and preoperaLlonal sLage (preop), early phase sensorlmoLor sLage lerce, Charles lLL, Wllllam lanL, !udlLh laLo versus ArlsLoLle as an ascender concepLs of Lhe Cne," Lhe Cood as a descender on duallLy of real world" on Lros hlerarchles ln llmlLaLlons of lnvoluLlonary vlews naLure ln nondual vlews of nagar[una and underraLlng of emplrlclsm lenlLude (efflux/lnflnlLy of llfe) consLrucL and domlnaLlon of descendlng paLhway and Lmplrlclsm ldeallzaLlon of dlverslLy as manlfesLaLlon of Cod and sysLems Lheory leromaLlc fuslon (!ung) leromaLlc worldspace loLlnus aLLack on CnosLlcs concepL of Lhe Cne on duallLy of real world" CreaL Polarchy of 8elng on holonlc/hlerarchlcal relaLlonshlps lnfluence of lnvoluLlonary vlews llfe and deaLh of mysLlcal experlence of naLure, vlews on nondual vlews of low-based socleLles lurallsm(lsLs) neumaLlclsm olanyl, Mlchael ollLlcal aLomlsm ope, Alexander opper, karl orphyry oslLlvlsm osLconvenLlonal developmenL sLage osLformal cognlLlon osLmodernlsm(lsLs) deconsLrucLlon among dlscovery of lnLersub[ecLlve space leuerbach's lnfluence on hlerarchles among ldeallzaLlon of dlverslLy ln need for lnLegraLlon oLenLlal (ArlsLoLle) ower. 5ee olso MyLh, Sexual asymmeLry ower femlnlsm(lsLs) ltojoo (splrlLual lnslghL/lnLulLlon) rayer/medlLaLlon. 5ee MedlLaLlon, SplrlLuallLy re/Lrans fallacy rehenslon (WhlLehead) reoperaLlonal sLage (cognlLlve developmenL) repersonal consclousness reraLlonal versus LransraLlonal consclousness reLrlbal consclousness, ecodevasLaLlon and rlgoglne, llya rlmary narclsslsm (lreud) roclus roducLlon paradlgm roposlLlonal LruLh roLoplasmlc worldspace seudo-ulonyslus sychlc level (Lranspersonal consclousness) assoclaLed freedoms language of vlslon and vlbraLlon mysLlcal experlence and sychoanalysls, Lelos ln sychology and raLlonallLy sychoses. 5ee olso aLhology(les) uncLuaLlonal evoluLlonary model (Lldredge and Could) ure Lgo/AbsoluLe Self (llchLe) ure SubsLance/AbsoluLe Cb[ecL (Splnoza) yramld of uevelopmenL (Laszlo) yLhagoreans CuanLlflable experlence. 5ee olso Lmplrlclsm, valldaLlon measures CuanLum evoluLlon (Slmpson) CuanLum physlcs 8ablnow, aul 8adhakrlshnan 8adlcal femlnlsm(lsLs). 5ee olso lemlnlsm 8adlcal plurallsLs, hlerarchles among 8adlcal reflexlvlLy 8amana Maharshl, Srl on Lranscendence 5ee olso 1ranspersonal developmenL 8angdrol, 1sogdruk 8anklng. 5ee Plerarchles 8aLlonal awareness. 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL 8aLlonal-ego ldenLlLy evoluLlon/developmenL of freedom and compasslon ln as lnLegral-aperspecLlval mlnd language of re[ecLlon of ascendlng paLhway/myLh represslon and ob[ecLlflcaLlon ln 8aLlonal perspecLlvlsm and relaLlvlLy 8aLlonallLy (reason/reasonableness) ChrlsLlan church condemnaLlon of Lmerson's vlews of loucaulL's vlews on Pabermas's vlews on lndusLrlallzaLlon and llmlLaLlons/negaLlve aspecLs of dlssoclaLlon of arL, sclence, and morallLy dlssoclaLlon of Lhe Lgo/Lhe Lco overemphasls on descendlng paLh llnearlLy of raLlonallzaLlon, PolocausL example rlgldlLy as omega polnL of LnllghLenmenL laLo/loLlnus vlews on poslLlve aspecLs of allegorlcal lnLerpreLaLlon of myLh dependence on evldence depLh of feellng/passlon ecologlcal/relaLlonal worldvlew ego ldenLlLy llberaLlon/humanlsL movemenLs mulLlple perspecLlves 5ee olso Lmplrlclsm, LnllghLenmenL paradlgm 8eallLy feellng" as basls for and hlgher levels of consclousness holons as basls of knowlng nagar[una's nondual vlews of onLologlc (8erman) 5ee olso 1ruLh, valldlLy 8ecovery experlences 8educLlonlsm 8eferenLs 8eflecLlon/represenLaLlon paradlgm 8eflux (loLlnus) 8eglme/code/canon (koesLler) 8egresslon hedonlsm as reLurn Lo naLure as ln servlce of ego (krls) 5ee olso uescendlng paLhway, 8lghL-Pand paLh 8elch, Wllhelm 8elaLlonshlp exchanges, same level 8elaLlvlLy 8ellglon (rellglousness) 8ellah's work on and myLhlc-lmperlallsm redeflnlLlons of 5ee olso 8uddhlsm, ChrlsLlan (!udeo-ChrlsLlan) LradlLlons, MyLh, nondual LradlLlons 8epresenLaLlon (reflecLlon) paradlgm 8epresslon lreud/!ung's vlews on and ob[ecLlflcaLlon of ego of sexuallLy 5ee olso lreud, SexuallLy 8epLlllan braln (braln sLem) 8esponslblllLy 8eLrlballzaLlon 8eLro-8omanLlclsm 8eLroLenslon 8eunlflcaLloo. 5ee lnLegraLlon 8evoluLlon and raLlonallLy. 5ee olso AuLonomy/freedom, LlberaLlon movemenLs 8eynolds, Cecll 8. 8lcoeur, aul 8lghL-Pand paLh domlnaLlon over LefL-Pand paLh emplrlcal knowledge and Cod, proofs of hedonlsm and excluslon of lnLerlor space/developmenL language and as Lhe only reallLy and represslon/ob[ecLlflcaLlon 8oLhberg's expllcaLlon of surface (span) versus depLh ln 8lghLs 8ole ldenLlLy 8olle de Pampole, 8lchard 8omanLlclsm. 5ee olso Lco-8omanLlclsm 8orLy, 8lchard 8osch, Lleanor 8oszak, 1heodore 8oLhberg, uonald 8ousseau, !ean-!acques 8ussell, 8erLrand 8ussell, !ulla 8ussell, eLer Saccas, Ammonlus SalnLs versus yogls Salk, !onas Same-level exchanges Sanday, eggy Sangha (lnLersub[ecLlve LruLh) SarLre, !ean-aul Saussure, lerdlnand de Schelllng, lrledrlch concepL of Lhe Abyss (LmpLlness) crlLlque of llchLe on dlssoclaLlon on evoluLlon lnfluence of klerkegaard's crlLlque of on percepLlon loLlnus' lnfluence on vlslon-loglc ln Schlller, !ohann Schlegel, lrledrlch Schopenhauer, ArLhur Schrdlnger, Lrwln Schumacher, L. l. Sclence and bellef ln lenlLude emplrlcal (sclenLlflc meLhod) and global culLure spllLs ln 5ee olso Lmplrlclsm Second Law of 1hermodynamlcs Seed, !ohn Self-acLuallzaLloo. 5ee AcLuallzaLlon, Cmega polnLs, 1elos Self-adapLlon Self-awareness. 5ee olso Consclousness, Lgo ldenLlLy, lnLerlor space Self-decepLlon. 5ee olso SplrlLuallLy, 1ruLh Self-dlssoluLlon Self-esLeem Self-preservaLlon Self-sense, self-sysLem, selfness. 5ee Lgo ldenLlLy Self-Lranscendence. 5ee 1ranscendence Sellars, Wllfrld, crlLlque of SensorlmoLor holons SensorlmoLor sLage (cognlLlve developmenL) SenLlmenL (feellng) Sesslons, Ceorge SeL Lheory, paradoxes ln Sexual asymmeLry. 5ee olso aLrlarchy SexuallLy Shamanlc vlslon. 5ee olso MysLlclsm Shankara Sheldrake, 8uperL Shelley, Mary Shlbayama Shln 8uddhlsm Slgns/slgnlflers 5llo (moral dlsclpllne) Sln SlncerlLy. 5ee 1ruLh Slngle-boundary fallacy Slze, and evoluLlon Slavery SmlLh, PusLon Snyder, Cary Soclal consclousness. See CulLure, WorldcenLrlc ldenLlLy Soclal englneerlng Soclal holons and culLural holons evoluLlon/developmenL of and lndlvldual holons sLrucLure/form of 5ee olso lour CuadranLs, Polons Soclal lnLegraLlon Soclal labor Soclal sclences SoclocenLrlc ldenLlLy SocloculLural evoluLlon. 5ee CulLure, noosphere SocloculLural nonequlllbrlum sysLems model SocraLes Soul AugusLlne's vlew of LckhardL's vlew of Lmerson's vlew of evoluLlon/developmenL of laLo's vlew of loLlnus' vlews on 1eresa's vlew of Span (horlzonLal) and 8Ml (8aslc Moral lnLulLlon) collapse of depLh lnLo fallacy of relaLlon Lo evoluLlonary developmenL 5ee olso uepLh, uescendlng paLhway, llaLland paradlgm Spencer, PerberL Spender, uale Sperry, 8oger Splnoza, 8aruch appeal Lo males 8runo's lnfluence on on deslrablllLy of unlformlLy efforLs Lo reconclle kanL/llchLe wlLh on Cod and naLure opposlLlon Lo anLhropocenLrlsm SplrlL delflcaLlon of mononaLure as delflcaLlon of sex as evoluLlon/developmenL of Codhead as holonlc naLure of lnLulLlng/percelvlng as locus of lnLegraLlon/reconclllaLlon and moral undersLandlng loLlnus' vlews on SplrlL-ln-creaLlon (laLo) LransraLlonal naLure of 5ee olso nondual LradlLlons, SplrlLuallLy, 1ranscendence SplrlLual awareness (splrlLuallLy) ln chlldren and dawn humans leglLlmacy/auLhenLlclLy of shamanlsm and splrlLual marrlage (1eresa) Lralnlng and pracLlce for 5ee olso MysLlcal experlence, noosphere, 1ranscendence, vlslon-loglc SpreLnak, Charlene SLanLon, LllzabeLh Cady SLaLe, as soclal holon SLaLes (of consclousness) SLebblns, C. Ledyard SLenL, CunLher SLreams (of consclousness) SLrucLural coupllng (varela) SLrucLural-funcLlonallsm. 5ee SysLems Lheory SLrucLural unconsclous SLrucLurallsm (loucaulL) Subconsclousness (pre-egolc awareness) Subholons 5objectlvlty emergence of need Lo lnLegraLe wlLh ob[ecLlvlLy sub[ecLlve space and LruLhfulness 5ee olso Lgo ldenLlLy, LgocenLrlsm SubLle level (Lranspersonal awareness) SubLle reducLlonlsm(lsLs) and LnllghLenmenL paradlgm and funcLlonal LruLh-measures and one-slded (flaLland) worldvlew Suflsm Sulllvan, Wllllam Superconsclousness (Lransegolc awareness) Superholons Surface sLrucLures. 5ee olso LxLerlor holons, Span Suzukl, u. 1. Swlndler, Ann Synchronlc sLrucLurallsm SynLhesls. 5ee lnLegraLlon SysLems Lheory(lsLs) and chaos Lheory egocenLrlsm ln emergence of funcLlonal flL, raLlonallLy ln llmlLed worldvlew of meLablology morallLy ln lenlLude wlLhouL SplrlL subLle reducLlonlsm ln 1anLrlc LradlLlon 1aolsL LradlLlon 1arnas, 8lchard, crlLlque of 1arskl, Alfred 1aylor, AlasLalr 1aylor, Charles crlLlques of Pabermas on culLural evoluLlon deflnlLlon of modernlLy on effecLs of LnllghLenmenL paradlgm on emergence of sub[ecLlvlLy on happlness conLradlcLlon on hedonlsm on Locke radlcal reflexlvlLy on reflecL/represenLaLlon paradlgm on uLlllLarlans vlew of kosmos 1aylor, ParrleL 1ellhard de Chardln, lerre 1elos, as facLor ln evoluLlon 1eresa of vlla unlon wlLh Cod 5ee olso SubLle level, 1ranscendence 1erLulllan 1hanaLos (deaLh) and descendlng paLh and dlssoclaLlon from Agape lnLo lreud's vlew of and power drlve 1heravada 8uddhlsm 1hermodynamlcs, Llme and 1homas Aqulnas, SalnL 1hompson, L. 1lbeLan 8uddhlsm 1len 1al 8uddhlsm 1llllch, aul 1lme. 5ee olso LvoluLlon 1lpLon, SLeven 1lLchener, Ldward 8radford 1ocquevllle, Alexls de 1olerance, raLlonal awareness and 1olsLoy, Leo 1rans-Lrlbal awareness. 5ee MyLhology-based awareness sysLems 1ranscendence archeLypes, myLhs, paradlgms for durlng cognlLlve developmenL and consclousness self-Lranscendence sexuallLy and 5ee olso AcLuallzaLlon, lnLerlor developmenL, SplrlLual awareness, vlslon-loglc 1ranscreaLlon (LelbnlLz) 1ranscrlpLlons 1ransformaLlon ln holons 5ee olso AcLuallzaLlon, LvoluLlon 1ranslaLlon 1ransnaLlonallsm 1ranspersonal consclousness dlrecL versus medlaLed experlence dlssocaLlon from evoluLlon/developmenL of causal level (LckhardL) nondual level (LckharL, 8amana) psychlc level (Lmerson) subLle level (1eresa of vlla) lnLerlor developmenL and moral undersLandlng and nonllnearlLy of 5ee olso SplrlLual awareness, vlslon-loglc 1ransraLlonal consclousness 1rlbal awareness (Lrlbal-klnshlp groups) 1rungpa, Chgyam, 8lnpoche 1ruLh, LruLhfulness ChrlsLlan deflnlLlons of and consclousness experlenLlal, raLlonal knowledge perslsLence of proposlLlonal relaLlvlLy of splrlLual knowledge/undersLandlng sub[ecLlve, ob[ecLlve, lnLersub[ecLlve relaLlonshlp unlformlLy of and worldcenLrlc ldenLlLy Zen deflnlLlons of 5ee olso valldaLlon 1wenLy 1eneLs holon characLerlsLlcs holonlc evoluLlon/developmenL 1yphonlc worldspace unconsclous LruLhs. 5ee olso 1ruLh, valldlLy LesLlng unlfled consclousness" (8erman) unlon. 5ee olso Ascendlng paLh unlversal perspecLlvlsm unlversal plurallsm unlversal SysLem concepL unlverse. 5ee kosmos upper-LefL (uL) quadranL (lnLenLlonal). 5ee olso LefL-Pand paLh upper-8lghL (u8) quadranL (behavloral). 5ee olso 8lghL-hand paLh uroborlc worldspace uLlllLarlans va[rayana 8uddhlsm valldaLlon (LruLh-measures) emplrlcal, raLlonal experlence ln[uncLlons, and knowledge of lnLerlor experlences meanlng and slncerlLy (self-LruLhfulness) and 5ee olso Awareness, Lmplrlclsm, lnLulLlon, 1ruLh value. 5ee olso uepLh van Creveld varela, lranclsco auLopoleLlc sysLem Lheory of on cognlLlvlsm crlLlque of enacLlve paradlgm of on hlerarchles vasubandhu vedanLa Plndu LradlLlons nagar[una's lnfluence on splrlLual Lralnlng and pracLlce ln WesLern vedanLa vlcLlm femlnlsm vl[nanavada LradlLlon vlolence vlslon-loglc (planeLary awareness) assoclaLed freedoms evoluLlon/developmenL of language of quesL for 5ee olso LefL-Pand paLh, 1ranspersonal developmenL volLalre Wackenroder, Wllhelm Wallace, Alfred Wallon, Penrl Walsh, neale Warfare. 5ee olso 1hanaLos, vlolence Washburn, Mlchael Waves (of consclousness). 5ee Consclousness We" language (lnLerlor soclal awareness) and consclousness ln CreaL nesL of 8elng hlsLorlcal models for kanL's sphere of racLlcal 8eason Web of llfe consLrucLs. 5ee olso Lco, Lhe, CreaL Chaln of 8elng, MononaLure, SysLems Lheory Weber, Max Welss, Cerhard Welzsacker, von, LrnsL WharLon, 1homas WhlLehead, Alfred norLh on dullness of cosmos on hlerarchles on lnLegraLlon drlve (creaLlvlLy) on naLure of Cod on Lhe wlLhln" vlslon-loglc of WhlLLaker. C. 8. Wholeness, wholes correspondence among and depLh and hlerarchles of lndlvldual holons as omega polnL reconclllng wlLh AuLonomy Whollsm," llmlLs/dangers of 5ee olso Agency, Polarchles, Polons WhyLe, L. L. Wlener, norberL Wllberforce, Wllllam Wlld Men." 5ee Men's movemenL Wlnkelman, Mlchael Wlsdom, unlon wlLh compasslon WlLness (wakefulness). 5ee olso LmpLlness, SplrlLual awareness, 1ranspersonal uevelopmenL Wolf, lred Alan Wolff, ChrlsLlan von WollsLonecrafL, Mary Women. 5ee lemales Women's movemenL. 5ee lemlnlsm(lsLs) WordsworLh, Wllllam World Soul growlng awareness of as a manlfesLaLlon of self mlslnLerpreLaLlon of and Cver-Soul WorldcenLrlc ldenLlLy egocenLrlsm, ellLlsm of morallLy and vlslon-loglc of and raLlonallLy and uLlllLarlans WorldcenLrlc plurallsm Worldspace(s) and consclousness lnLersub[ecLlve llngulsLlc sLrucLurlng of Worldvlew(s) duallsLlc versus nondual fracLured global, emergence of maglcal, efforLs Lo recreaLe planeLary consclousness 5ee olso CognlLlve developmenL, Consclousness, CulLure WundL, Wllhelm ?ogachara 8uddhlsm ?ogls versus SalnLs Zen 8uddhlsm boundarles ln Lros and Agape (kotooo) ln nagar[una's lnfluence on nondual awareness ln self-undersLandlng splrlLual pracLlce (zozeo) ln negaLlon/afflrmaLlon ln Zeno Zlmmerman, Mlchael Zohar, uanah Excerpt fro< The E--ential "en #il$er $y "en #il$er eIS(N ?FRK1KR7GRK002FKF
&$out Thi- (ooJ ken Wllber has been pralsed as one of Lhe greaLesL Lhlnkers of our Llme. Pls full-specLrum model of Lhe sLages of human growLh and developmenL, from blrLh Lo enllghLenmenL, have made hlm a leadlng LheorlsL ln Lhe sLudy of human consclousness. Cver Lhe course of slxLeen books, he has developed Lhls LheoreLlcal sysLem embraclng Lhe essenLlal LruLhs of LasL and WesL, unlLlng anclenL wlsdom wlLh modern sclence. lL ls Lhe foundaLlon for an lnLegral meLhod of examlnlng vlrLually any oLher fleld of sLudy or endeavor: evoluLlonary Lheory, physlcs, anLhropology, soclology, psychoanalysls, rellglon, arL, llLeraLure, and so on. 8uL desplLe Wllber's sklll ln explalnlng complex phllosophlcal ldeas, much of hls work ls wrlLLen for a professlonal or academlc audlence and remalns beyond Lhe reach of more casual readers. ln Lhls book, l have Lherefore excerpLed shorL, accesslble passages from hls wrlLlngs so LhaL people who have noL read hls more Lechnlcal works mlghL galn some appreclaLlon for Lhls lmporLanL and someLlmes conLroverslal Lhlnker. 1hls collecLlon ls noL meanL as a crash course ln ken Wllber, a compleLe and coherenL plcLure of hls LhoughL would be lmposslble Lo aLLaln by readlng shorL excerpLs, slnce he has paLlenLly developed hls ldeas over Lhe course of several books. Powever, Lhere are many passages LhaL can be en[oyed ln Lhemselves for lnformaLlve, sLlmulaLlng, or lnsplraLlonal readlng. As an appreclaLlve reader who became acqualnLed wlLh Lhese wrlLlngs ln Lhe course of my work as an edlLor for Shambhala ubllcaLlons, l selecLed nonLechnlcal passages LhaL lmparL Lhe essence and flavor of Wllber's wrlLlngs and LhaL Louch on hls ma[or concerns. l hope Lhe selecLlons wlll encourage readers Lo explore hls ldeas ln greaLer depLh. An annoLaLed llsL of hls works aL Lhe back of Lhls book ls added as a gulde for furLher readlng. kendra Crossen 8urroughs The Divine 4lay As loLlnus knew: LeL Lhe world be quleL. LeL Lhe heavens and Lhe earLh and Lhe seas be sLlll. LeL Lhe world be walLlng. LeL Lhe self-conLracLlon relax lnLo Lhe empLy ground of lLs own awareness, and leL lL Lhere quleLly dle. See how SplrlL pours Lhrough each and every openlng ln Lhe Lurmoll, and besLows new splendor on Lhe seLLlng Sun and lLs glorlous LarLh and all lLs radlanL lnhablLanLs. See Lhe kosmos dance ln LmpLlness, see Lhe play of llghL ln all creaLures greaL and small, see flnlLe worlds slng and re[olce ln Lhe play of Lhe very ulvlne, floaLlng on a Clory LhaL renders each LransparenL, flooded by a [oy LhaL refuses Llme or Lerror, LhaL undoes Lhe madness of Lhe loveless self and burles lL ln splendor. lndeed, lndeed: leL Lhe self-conLracLlon relax lnLo Lhe empLy ground of lLs own awareness, and leL lL Lhere quleLly dle. See Lhe kosmos arlse ln lLs place, danclng madly and dlvlne, self-lumlnous and self-llberaLlng, lnLoxlcaLed by a LlghL LhaL never dawns nor ceases. See Lhe worlds arlse and fall, never caughL ln Llme or Lurmoll, LransparenL lmages shlmmerlng ln Lhe radlanL Abyss. WaLch Lhe mounLaln walk on waLer, drlnk Lhe aclflc ln a slngle gulp, bllnk and a bllllon unlverses rlse and fall, breaLhe ouL and creaLe a kosmos, breaLhe ln and waLch lL dlssolve. LeL Lhe ecsLasy overflow and ouLshlne Lhe loveless self, drlven mad wlLh Lhe LormenLs of lLs self-embraclng ways, hugglng mlghLlly somsoto's spokes of endless agony, and slng lnsLead LrlumphanLly wlLh SalnL CaLherlne, My belng ls Cod, noL by slmple parLlclpaLlon, buL by a Lrue LransformaLlon of my 8elng. My me ls Cod!" And leL Lhe [oy slng wlLh uame !ullan, See! l am Cod! See! l am ln all Lhlngs! See! l do all Lhlngs!" And leL Lhe [oy shouL wlLh Pakuln, 1hls very body ls Lhe 8ody of 8uddha! and Lhls very land Lhe ure Land!" And Lhls LarLh becomes a blessed belng, and every l becomes a Cod, and every We becomes Cod's slnceresL worshlp, and every lL becomes Cod's mosL graclous Lemple. And comes Lo resL LhaL Codless search, LormenLed and LormenLlng. 1he knoL ln Lhe PearL of Lhe kosmos relaxes Lo allow lLs only Cod, and overflows Lhe SplrlL ravlshed and enrapLured by Lhe losL and found 8eloved. And gone Lhe Codless desLlny of deaLh and desperaLlon, and gone Lhe madness of a llfe commlLLed Lo uncare, and gone Lhe Lears and Lerror of Lhe bruLal days and endless nlghLs where Llme alone would rule. And l-l rlse Lo LasLe Lhe dawn, and flnd LhaL love alone wlll shlne Loday. And Lhe Shlnlng says: Lo love lL all, and love lL madly, and always endlessly, and ever flercely, Lo love wlLhouL cholce and Lhus enLer Lhe All, Lo love lL mlndlessly and Lhus be Lhe All, embraclng Lhe only and radlanL ulvlne: now as LmpLlness, now as lorm, LogeLher and forever, Lhe Codless search undone, and love alone wlll shlne Loday. [Sex, Lcology, SplrlLuallLy: 322-23] The 'e--age of the 'y-tic- 1he mysLlcs ask you Lo Lake noLhlng on mere bellef. 8aLher, Lhey glve you a seL of experlmenLs Lo LesL ln your own awareness and experlence. 1he laboraLory ls your own mlnd, Lhe experlmenL ls medlLaLlon. ?ou yourself Lry lL, and compare your LesL resulLs wlLh oLhers who have also performed Lhe experlmenL. CuL of Lhls consensually valldaLed pool of experlenLlal knowledge, you arrlve aL cerLaln laws of Lhe splrlL-aL cerLaln profound LruLhs," lf you wlll. And Lhe flrsL ls: Cod ls. . . . 1he sLunnlng message of Lhe mysLlcs ls LhaL ln Lhe very core of your belng, you are Cod. SLrlcLly speaklng, Cod ls nelLher wlLhln nor wlLhouL-SplrlL Lranscends all duallLy. 8uL one dlscovers Lhls by conslsLenLly looklng wlLhln, unLll wlLhln" becomes beyond." 1he mosL famous verslon of Lhls perennlal LruLh occurs ln Lhe cbooJoqyo upoolsboJ, where lL says, ln Lhls very belng of yours, you do noL percelve Lhe 1rue, buL Lhere ln facL lL ls. ln LhaL whlch ls Lhe subLle essence of your own belng, all LhaL exlsLs has lLs Self. An lnvlslble and subLle essence ls Lhe SplrlL of Lhe whole unlverse. 1haL ls Lhe 1rue, LhaL ls Lhe Self, and Lhou, Lhou arL 1haL." 1hou are 1haL-tot tvom osl. needless Lo say, Lhe Lhou" LhaL ls 1haL," Lhe you LhaL ls Cod, ls noL your lndlvldual and lsolaLed self or ego, Lhls or LhaL self, Mr. or Ms. So-and-so. ln facL, Lhe lndlvldual self or ego ls preclsely whaL blocks Lhe reallzaLlon of Lhe Supreme ldenLlLy ln Lhe flrsL place. 8aLher, Lhe you" ln quesLlon ls Lhe deepesL parL of you-or, lf you wlsh, Lhe hlghesL parL of you-Lhe subLle essence, as Lhe upanlshad puL lL, LhaL Lranscends your morLal ego and dlrecLly parLakes of Lhe ulvlne. ln !udalsm lL ls called Lhe toocb, Lhe dlvlne and supralndlvldual splrlL ln each and every person, and noL Lhe oefesb, or Lhe lndlvldual ego. ln ChrlsLlanlLy, lL ls Lhe lndwelllng pneuma or splrlL LhaL ls of one essence wlLh Cod, and noL Lhe lndlvldual psyche or soul, whlch aL besL can worshlp Cod. As Coomaraswamy sald, Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween a person's lmmorLal-eLernal splrlL and a person's lndlvldual-morLal soul (meanlng ego) ls a fundamenLal LeneL of Lhe perennlal phllosophy. l Lhlnk Lhls ls Lhe only way Lo undersLand, for example, ChrlsL's oLherwlse sLrange remarks LhaL a person could noL be a Lrue ChrlsLlan unless he haLeLh hls own soul." lL ls only by haLlng" or Lhrowlng ouL" or Lranscendlng" your morLal soul LhaL you dlscover your lmmorLal splrlL, one wlLh All. [Crace and CrlL: 82] #hat I- 'e/itatione 1here are many ways Lo explaln medlLaLlon, whaL lL ls, whaL lL does, how lL works. MedlLaLlon, lL ls sald, ls a way Lo evoke Lhe relaxaLlon response. MedlLaLlon, oLhers say, ls a way Lo Lraln and sLrengLhen awareness, a meLhod for cenLerlng and focuslng Lhe self, a way Lo halL consLanL verbal Lhlnklng and relax Lhe bodymlnd, a Lechnlque for calmlng Lhe cenLral nervous sysLem, a way Lo relleve sLress, bolsLer self-esLeem, reduce anxleLy, and allevlaLe depresslon. All of Lhose are Lrue enough, medlLaLlon has been cllnlcally demonsLraLed Lo do all of Lhose Lhlngs. 8uL l would llke Lo emphaslze LhaL medlLaLlon lLself ls, and always has been, a spltltool pracLlce. MedlLaLlon, wheLher ChrlsLlan, 8uddhlsL, Plndu, 1aolsL, or lslamlc, was lnvenLed as a way for Lhe soul Lo venLure lnward, Lhere ulLlmaLely Lo flnd a supreme ldenLlLy wlLh Codhead. 1he klngdom of Peaven ls wlLhln"-and medlLaLlon, from Lhe very beglnnlng, has been Lhe royal road Lo LhaL klngdom. WhaLever else lL does, and lL does many beneflclal Lhlngs, medlLaLlon ls flrsL and foremosL a search for Lhe Cod wlLhln. l would say medlLaLlon ls splrlLual, buL noL rellglous. SplrlLual has Lo do wlLh acLual experlence, noL mere bellefs, wlLh Cod as Lhe Cround of 8elng, noL a cosmlc uaddy flgure, wlLh awakenlng Lo one's Lrue Self, noL praylng for one's llLLle self, wlLh Lhe dlsclpllnlng of awareness, noL preachy and churchy morallsms abouL drlnklng and smoklng and sexlng, wlLh SplrlL found ln everyone's PearL, noL anyLhlng done ln Lhls or LhaL church. . . . MedlLaLlon ls splrlLual, prayer ls rellglous. 1haL ls, peLlLlonary prayer, ln whlch l ask Cod Lo glve me a new car, help wlLh my promoLlon, eLc., ls rellglous, lL slmply wlshes Lo bolsLer Lhe llLLle ego ln lLs wanLs and deslres. MedlLaLlon, on Lhe oLher hand, seeks Lo go beyond Lhe ego alLogeLher, lL asks noLhlng from Cod, real or lmaglned, buL raLher offers lLself up as a sacrlflce Loward a greaLer awareness. MedlLaLlon, Lhen, ls noL so much a parL of Lhls or LhaL parLlcular rellglon, buL raLher parL of Lhe unlversal splrlLual culLure of all humanklnd-an efforL Lo brlng awareness Lo bear on all aspecLs of llfe. lL ls, ln oLher words, parL of whaL has been called Lhe perennlal phllosophy. [Crace and CrlL: 76] The 4erennial 4hilo-ophy 1he perennlal phllosophy ls Lhe worldvlew LhaL has been embraced by Lhe vasL ma[orlLy of Lhe world's greaLesL splrlLual Leachers, phllosophers, Lhlnkers, and even sclenLlsLs. lL's called perennlal" or unlversal" because lL shows up ln vlrLually all culLures across Lhe globe and across Lhe ages. We flnd lL ln lndla, Mexlco, Chlna, !apan, MesopoLamla, LgypL, 1lbeL, Cermany, Creece. . . . And wherever we flnd lL, lL has essenLlally slmllar feaLures, lL ls ln essenLlal agreemenL Lhe world over. We moderns, who can hardly agree on anyLhlng, flnd Lhls raLher hard Lo belleve. 8uL as Alan WaLLs summarlzed Lhe avallable evldence: 1hus we are hardly aware of Lhe exLreme pecullarlLy of our own poslLlon, and flnd lL dlfflculL Lo recognlze Lhe plaln facL LhaL Lhere has oLherwlse been a slngle phllosophlcal consensus of unlversal exLenL. lL has been held by [men and women] who reporL Lhe same lnslghLs and Leach Lhe same essenLlal docLrlne wheLher llvlng Loday or slx Lhousand years ago, wheLher from new Mexlco ln Lhe lar WesL or from !apan ln Lhe lar LasL." 1hls ls really qulLe remarkable. l Lhlnk, fundamenLally, lL's a LesLamenL Lo Lhe unlversal naLure of Lhese LruLhs, Lo Lhe unlversal experlence of a collecLlve humanlLy LhaL has everywhere agreed Lo cerLaln profound LruLhs abouL Lhe human condlLlon and abouL lLs access Lo Lhe ulvlne. . . . So exacLly whaL are some of Lhe essenLlals of Lhe perennlal phllosophy? Pow many profound LruLhs or polnLs of agreemenL are Lhere? l'll glve seven of whaL l Lhlnk are Lhe mosL lmporLanL. Cne, SplrlL exlsLs. 1wo, SplrlL ls found wlLhln. 1hree, mosL of us don'L reallze Lhls SplrlL wlLhln, however, because we are llvlng ln a world of sln, separaLlon, and duallLy-LhaL ls, we are llvlng ln a fallen or lllusory sLaLe. lour, Lhere ls a way ouL of Lhls fallen sLaLe of sln and llluslon, Lhere ls a aLh Lo our llberaLlon. llve, lf we follow Lhls aLh Lo lLs concluslon, Lhe resulL ls a 8eblrLh or LnllghLenmenL, a Jltect expetleoce of SplrlL wlLhln, a Supreme LlberaLlon, whlch-slx-marks Lhe end of sln and sufferlng, and whlch-seven-lssues ln soclal acLlon of mercy and compasslon on behalf of all senLlenL belngs. [Crace and CrlL: 77-78] 1PL L8LnnlAL PlLCSCP? (Lhe Lerm was made famous by Puxley buL colned by Lelbnlz)-Lhe LranscendenLal essence of Lhe greaL rellglons-has as lLs core Lhe noLlon of oJvolto or oJvoyo-nonduallLy," whlch means LhaL reallLy ls nelLher one nor many, nelLher permanenL nor dynamlc, nelLher separaLe nor unlfled, nelLher plurallsLlc nor hollsLlc. lL ls enLlrely and radlcally above and prlor Lo ooy form of concepLual elaboraLlon. lL ls sLrlcLly unquallflable. lf lL ls Lo be dlscussed aL all, Lhen, as W. 1. SLace so carefully polnLed ouL, lL musL lnvolve paradoxlcal sLaLemenLs. So, lL ls Lrue LhaL reallLy ls one, buL equally Lrue LhaL lL ls many, lL ls LranscendenL, buL also lmmanenL, lL ls prlor Lo Lhls world, buL lL ls noL oLher Lo Lhls world-and so on. Srl 8amana Maharshl had a perfecL summary of Lhe paradox of Lhe ulLlmaLe: 1he world ls lllusory, 8rahman alone ls real, 8rahman ls Lhe world. [Lye Lo Lye: 133-34] lor more lnformaLlon on Lhls and oLher books from Shambhala, please vlslL www.shambhala.com.