Ken Wilber

[UDP]

This mofucka stole all my ideas. It's too bad he was born 40 years ahead of me

[UDP]

[Gilly]

INTj is most likely, IMO

[kopernikus]

I think he's ENTJ. A lot of his stuff is based largely upon facts put together and integrated into his "grand theory"... Also he seems prone to grandiose visions of development and how humans "raise their levels of conscioussness" over time. Although sometimes he behaves a bit rudely as if he had a Fi-PoLR so I dunno, maybe ESTP is possible too..?

[UDP]

In 1967 he enrolled as a pre-med student at Duke University[7], and almost immediately experienced a crisis of disillusionment with what science had to offer. It was not the psychedelics then in vogue which inspired him, rather it was Eastern literature, particularly the Tao Te Ching, which catalyzed his conversion to Buddhism. Academically he lost that first year, returning to Nebraska and enrolling in the University of Nebraska. It was there he completed a bachelor's degree with a double major in chemistry and biology, while simultaneously spending much of his time pursuing Eastern philosophy and Western psychology. He won a scholarship for graduate study in biochemistry, but by this time he was thoroughly captivated by the philosophical and contemplative life, and dropped out.

From a standpoint, I worked out a lot of the same things he is talking about, especially the intergration of many of the fields he ist alking about.


He might be EST p or ENTj, though, because he charges a hell of a lot of money for his stuff 100$ for a day of conversation with a buddhist monk? WTF?



I was originally alarmed, because my greatest fear is that someone has already come before me and ruine dmy ideas by turning them into some sort of circus, or corrupted them via profit.

Maybe he just saw the natural logic, and didn't recognize the implications of a concept / theory that DOES incorperate everything. You can't fucking charge people for that, and plaster your face over it.


I'm going to go through is works, and correct them if necessary.

I checked out his "intergral naked" site, and it..... seems almost eerily pop-CULT-ure esque. I don't know, it doesn't feel quite right.


.....

[UDP]

Bump ]

[Rick]

Have you watched videos of him? He is very enthusiastic and doesn't come across strict like he does in his pictures. He creates a light emotional atmosphere well, likes to get people to meet each other and have stimulating interaction, and his writing is far from strictly logical. The focus, in my opinion, is clearly one of rather than (it's all about classifying things correctly). The type I've been considering for him is ESE.

[machintruc]

Too absent-minded for ESE, rather EIE.

[Rick]

Too absent-minded for ESE, rather EIE.

But too aesthetically minded, bubbly and joyous for an EIE

[Rick]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IMxgUZJ4tA&mode=related&search=[/youtube]

[Rick]

I actually like Wilber a lot, even if I'm not too close to his theoretical work.
He is a very intelligent man.
Very expressive, very rich and melodic voice.
Somewhat effeminate despite the very masculine features.
Uses "absolutely tons and tons" of superlatives. Very forceful in his use of superlatives.
Great communicator.
Creates an extraverted, emotionally aware, open and easy-going atmosphere.
Somewhat prone to rants and tirades.

[FDG]

ENTJ

[machintruc]

I actually like Wilber a lot, even if I'm not too close to his theories.
He is a very intelligent man.
Very expressive, very rich and melodic voice.
Somewhat effeminate despite the very masculine features.
Uses "absolutely tons and tons" of superlatives. Very forceful in his use of superlatives.
Great communicator.
Creates an extraverted, emotionally aware, open and easy-going atmosphere.

I don't really like Wilber's paradigm, because he says that Catholics are fundamentalistic rednecks. "There's one God, there's one book, there's ten commandments, and if you break those you're gonna go to hell for ever."

I am Catholic myself. This is pretty offensive to me. Wilber possibly finds excuses to live like a sex maniac and justify it by bogus models, just like Freud, which invented the Unconscious.

Wilber has also contributed to make a bogus school of Spiral Dynamics : Beck's. Wilber says that 1st Tier is non-buddhist, and 2nd Tier is buddhist.

[Rick]

I actually like Wilber a lot, even if I'm not too close to his theories.
He is a very intelligent man.
Very expressive, very rich and melodic voice.
Somewhat effeminate despite the very masculine features.
Uses "absolutely tons and tons" of superlatives. Very forceful in his use of superlatives.
Great communicator.
Creates an extraverted, emotionally aware, open and easy-going atmosphere.

I don't really like Wilber's paradigm, because he says that Catholics are fundamentalistic rednecks. "There's one God, there's one book, there's ten commandments, and if you break those you're gonna go to hell for ever."

I am Catholic myself. This is pretty offensive to me. Wilber possibly finds excuses to live like a sex maniac and justify it by bogus models, just like Freud, which invented the Unconscious.

Wilber has also contributed to make a bogus school of Spiral Dynamics : Beck's. Wilber says that 1st Tier is non-buddhist, and 2nd Tier is buddhist.

I can see that. You're responding to his idea system. I find him an interesting person who would be fun to spend some time with because of his particular viewpoint and experience. He does not seem focused so much on his idea system, but rather the actual experience of various things, which I find more valuable.

[Rick]

lol, when I tried to reply to your post I got:

"Sorry, but only administrators can reply to posts in this forum."*

(*now I understand -- you had deleted your post)

I have found a number of Wilber's ideas interesting, but when I looked at one of his books, I actually found it quite incoherent.

[machintruc]

lol, when I tried to reply to your post I got:

"Sorry, but only administrators can reply to posts in this forum."*

(*now I understand -- you had deleted your post)

I have found a number of Wilber's ideas interesting, but when I looked at one of his books, I actually found it quite incoherent.

Just like Darwin's - we can't be related to monkeys, because monkeys don't have the freedom to choose between Good and Evil. They are only driven by their instinct, and behave in very complex algorithms. One can build a supercomputer which simulate the whole human cerebral system, conscience won't emerge for that.

[Rick]

lol, when I tried to reply to your post I got:

"Sorry, but only administrators can reply to posts in this forum."*

(*now I understand -- you had deleted your post)

I have found a number of Wilber's ideas interesting, but when I looked at one of his books, I actually found it quite incoherent.

Just like Darwin's - we can't be related to monkeys, because monkeys don't have the freedom to choose between Good and Evil. They are only driven by their instinct, and behave in very complex algorithms. One can build a supercomputer which simulate the whole human cerebral system, conscience won't emerge for that.

For the record, I believe I personally am driven wholly by instincts, albeit through complex algorithms, and have no freedom to choose between Good and Evil

[UDP]

This thread was written a lifetime ago....

ENTJ

Seems like it.

[Rick]

Here's a large set of pictures:
http://www.kenwilber.com/personal/photos/index.html

And here's one more good video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQRUu_4W2j8

(if anyone's interested...)

I have some problems with the LIE version:
- narcissism and striving to be in the center of attention
- a habit of praising others in a very emotional way
- he seems to try to get people to feel things rather than focusing "just" on information

Back in London Expat talked about how the question "what are you passionate about?" would stump him, and he wouldn't know what to answer. This guy seems like he is very open about his passions (they are self-evident, actually) and would be only too happy to answer that question.

[godslave]

ESE (not sure yet !)

Fascinating ! I didn't know about that man before this morning. I evoked the Spiral Dynamic in another thread and wanted to illustrate the basic idea of it with a Youtube video and stumbled upon one of his interview in the process (via Youtube suggestion).

I kinda agree with his view, the difference is that I don't believe in significant development of individuals at least not in the way he describes it which is more like a metamorphosis from stages to stages when and if they occur. Development theories (including stuff like Enneagram) are thus to me kinda New agey and "wishful thinky". I prefer to talk about the Human condition and the fact that all its spectrum is always present in all societies as long as a given population has reached a certain threshold. I mean there is social progress and discoveries about the true nature of things and there is Human nature. The rest in literature.

[qaz00]

maybe LII

[godslave]

Here are videos of him younger.

Edit : Self-censored !

[necrosebud]

Don’t know this guy, watched half of the first video posted above

I mean I generally get it? He might be assuming the audience is familiar with some of the lingo he is using but he is essentially talking about yin/yang in a stereotypical or archetypal sense