Alan Kazlev. Neo-Aurobindian. Kazlev disagrees with Ken's description of Sri Aurobindo. It generally revolves around a similar issue with Frank--the labeling of Aurobdino as meta-physical and Wilber-5 as post-metaphysical. posted by CJ Smith @ 9:04 AM 1 comments Monday, October 30, 2006At 8:40 PM, DGA said... There's another angle of critique, which is an ideological one. It may or may not be the best way into a critique of integral theory, but it's the one I have. Check out the forthcoming Integral Review for my article "Of Syntheses and Surprises," which basically argues that Aurobindian and post-Aurobindian integralism finds its roots in the political contingencies of British imperialism... with some interesting consequences. Daniel Gustav Anderson http://for-the-turnstiles.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment