Integral philosophy

If you have not noticed yet in some previous posts, I am fond of systems that explain the universe, both physical and non-physical. I just am! For the most part, it's my personality. I like to look at how things work, and the universe qualifies as the biggest "thing" there really is. So hey.

One of the biggest problems in the world is the fact that there are so many systems and beliefs on how the universe works that it causes mass conflict and destruction repeatedly in our history. The bottom line of all these conflicts is a fight over what is the truth.

"My god can beat up your god."

"My way is the only way."

"Your way is evil. My way is good."

How many millions of people have died over those ideas? Yet, none of the warring religions or philosophies have EVER won once and for all.

What if they were all right? What if there was some overarching structure or principle that could unite all religions and philosophies, whether they acknowledged it or not?

They are, and there is.

Over the next batch of posts, I'm going to talk about Integral Philosophy, which was pioneered by Ken Wilber. This is a belief system, like any other, so all the disclaimers apply. However, as far as belief systems go, it is the most encompassing one I have ever seen, and it is able to literally explain anything with regard to religion or spirituality, but also physical objects, emotions, life.... everything.

When I started looking at this system, and I am still a novice, I was fascinated at how it did not do away with any of my current beliefs or practices at all. Rather, it encompassed them, validated them. It showed where tweaks are needed, but it did not in any way tell me what I should or should not do or believe. It is not dogma, and it is not new agey crap.

It is also not relativism, by the way. Relativism only gets part of the picture by stating that all actions can be viewed as good or bad depending on how you look at them. While this is true, relativism does not account for the witnessing oneness behind everything, to which there is no opposite.

The other thing is that this system is quite technical. Whenever I read these books, my brain hurts because it's like reading a graduate level philosophy text, which I don't like much. Luckily, I plan to present it in layman's terms, so anyone can understand it, because when it comes down to practicality, living this system is not hard at all.