Sri Aurobindo is clearly playing along with the ideologies of the British empire

It occurs to me now that my analysis of Aurobindo would have gone a lot easier if I'd simply gone for Bhabha's "Of Mimicry and Man" essay, but that would have made it harder for me to extrapolate out into the directions I'd like to see integral theory go. Anyway, I'm still working on that holon essay (had to bang out a few book reviews first, and I'm teaching a lot this semester...). The Bhabha thing on mimicry is playing an important role in it. I suppose you could say that I'm saying that holons are colonial enterprises, "pathological" or otherwise. posted by DGA at 10:53 AM 0 comments

Oh yeah, and to clarify: It's not a question of whether something is or is not ideological (to address a concern voiced in an email from a reader earlier). It's all ideological in one way or another. The question is where you fit in strategically to the ideological matrix (or matrices if you prefer) that you're working in whether you like it or not. In the case of Aurobindo, he's clearly playing along with the ideologies of the British empire whether he knows it or not, and in a way that's where integral theory comes from, whether we like it or not. What are you invested in? that's another way of asking, What desiring machines are you plugged into? posted by DGA at 10:55 AM 0 comments