8:46 I nominate this . . . as one of the Top Ten Most Important Wilber Insights.

I had to listen to him for over 12 hours until it all started making sense. I promise what he's saying is true

@brianlinville439

7 жыл бұрын

try Mooji then, or alan watts philosopher.

@4991544

6 жыл бұрын

Sure thing dude. Now you're enlightened... ya just need to suffer through this babble for 12 hours! Ohmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

@TV-cb2uu

5 жыл бұрын

Keith Kalfas took me 5 years. He is dead on.

@fightington

5 жыл бұрын

One of his intros books can be read in a day or two

@aptcmpasion

4 жыл бұрын

its true alright, but y' need the previous vid/s, ie, what the white-board was all about-- hope i EVENTUALLY come across it...

compassion towards those who do not understand. and god i like Ken Wilber's teachings a whole lot

@mwilliamson4198

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your comment Katya. What other work of his have you looked at, or read? My favorite is Sex, Ecology, Spirituality but I have also very much enjoyed Eye to Eye, Eye of Spirit and Integral Spirituality.

@KatyaMillsauthor

7 жыл бұрын

Mark Williamson yes Integral

Essentially, when the chakras are blocked, preventing the flow of Kundalini ascension, what manifest are various states of pathology, such as trauma, grievances, worry, doubt, hate, anger and so on, but as you keep working with the cycles, you can remove the false content, and develop structuring so that you can maintain a balance between the high, middle and low. To do this is incredibly complicated.

Wow, Ken firing on all "Integral" cylinders. Thank you :)

Thank you so much for this. Blessings

this is AMAZING

So cool.

Wholly inspiring as usual. Just one suggestion - change the background as there are all kinds of demonic little creatures staring out of the curtains!

I can't decide if this is wonderful or horrible. To have a conceptual map which is full of landmarks charting the unknown could lead us on a wild goose chase and waste time or really be helpful. We should have those who follow this map on their path report how it is working and note the successes and failures. It's unproven as far as I know.

for commentators out there, who trash KW, but who do not have a decent knowledge base: PLEASE SPARE US BY POSTING YOUR IGNORANT COMMENTS THANK YOU

Naked reality is an online vid course I am making that tries to modernize and simplify the core of all mystical traditions so they can hopefully touch more people/

Final laugh is quite meanigful. 19:39

10:48 Why... also helps you deal with the shadow, avoid psychosis.

@mwilliamson4198

7 жыл бұрын

Yep totally

Where is the long version

There is no "false self" and "real self". There is only your Self. The false self is not false...it is an adapted self, a wounded self that needs to be healed. There is the "I" or the personal evolving Soul. As Aurobindo pointed out, the Soul or Psychic Being is a spark of the Divine and is located deep inside the heart. This is Jung's Self, which is the "real authentic self". Then there is the Transpersonal Self, which is Universal. The Transcendent Self is also called the "Spirit" or "Higher Self". The goal is to heal the Soul from its developmental wounds and karma and to integrate the Soul with the Spirit. The marriage of Soul and Spirit is enlightenment. The One and the Many are co-emergent and are the same.

Where is this clip from? Where could we find the full recording(s)?

@mwilliamson4198

4 жыл бұрын

It's one of the Integral Naked videos from around 2006 I think. Last time I checked some of these DVDs were available on ebay

Oh my, his eyes are enormous. No wonder he hides them under the shades pretty much constantly - otherwise people would run away in panic.Its a shame still no one cares about what he is saying - he's the best spiritual guide ever. Christ, Buddha Gautama and Castaneda are ok, but look at these eyes, and try to stop and actually listen to what he's trying to share with you.

If Nirvana is possible then why is buddy the only one who made it there???

@scottkraft1062

3 жыл бұрын

He's lying and doesn't know what he's talking about . The Buddha was enlightened and died before Buddhism existed. Buddha didn't have followers he would never want people following him around suffering because his message was simple . The reason I clicked on this video was to answer questions without riddles . I give a clear answer to this question on my channel

Platonic Physics vs the integral philosophy of ken wilber After developing the concept of platonic physics, the integral philosophy of ken wilber has been suggested as a superior way of viewing the world. I find it difficult to find fault with wilbur's philosophy, except that it is integral, making it quite complex. He has certainly put a lot of work into it. But it is difficult to find a cause agent or theory of causation. Platonic physics is, in this sense, much simpler (see below). It is cybernetic. There is only One cause agent, the One. So causation is topdown, Thus there can be no conflict. because there is just one monarch and the universe is its monarchy. Man is just another object in the world, he is a passive puppet. Platonic physics is not cloughism. I heartily invite a correction to this criticism (see email address below). Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (retired, 2000). See my Leibniz site: rclough@verizon.academia.edu/RogerClough For personal messages use rclough@verizon.net The three levels of reality in Platonic Physics Roger B Clough, National Institute of Standards and Technology (Retired) (11-28-2014) Abstract Here we combine the top-down metaphysics of Plato and Leibniz with the inside-out categories of C S Peirce to enable us to view the world in a new, more useful light, simultaneously from two perspectives, and in more detail than Leibniz's pre-established harmony. The top down structuring from Plato and Leibniz allows us to view the world as it is: governed cybernetically by thought from the top singularity (the One, comparable to a computer processing unit), rather than from the ungoverned perspective of current science. This allows us not only to understand the world properly, but to structure the world cybernetically. with all creation, perception and control coming in the form of thought from the top down, but inside out using C S Peirce's three categories. 1. Introduction. While C S Peirce is well known to the philosophy of science, the worlds of Plato and his follower Leibniz have been less explored for such purposes. Plato was an Idealisti and Arthur Eddington spent much of his life adapting Plato to science, but his use of Mind in a world thoroughly established in materialism ihas largely blocked exploration of the use of Mind cybernetically, as a singular, mental control point, so that the current world of science is only governed, if at all, in fiefdoms. But more significantly, materialism and a lack of a single cybernetic control from top down has hindered the develepment of an understanding to consciousness, thought and the role and nature of the self. For example, Dennett in his explanation of consciences does not have a perceiver (or at best a fancifal and abstract invention of one). Moreover the perceiver, to obviate the homunculus with homunculus problem, must be on a higher ontological level, and which has to be a living singular entity, not an abstract reference. By application of Leibniz and Plato and common sense as well,, we see that the perceiver must be singular-- the One, the cybernetic Perceiver and control point, the central processing unit, to use a computer analogy. The learning curve on Plato-Leibniz is a bit steep at first, foreign to most physical scientists because of their unfamiliar top down control, which is also done indirectly by thought rather than directly by physical interaction, but also because of Leibniz's unfamiliar spreadsheet style ontology, using not atoms but complete concepts called monads, which can be nested like sets. That would seem to render Leibniz more understandable to mathematicians and computer science, but his thinking in terms of substances and monads can be off-putting. Once these are understood (through his Monadology [ ]) and if one sticks to the elementary particles scale (the particles are both substance and monads) one can proceed fairly smoothly. 2. The three levels Firstness -Mind- The One, the Monarch- this is the realm of Plato's Mind. It is life itself, pure nonphysical intelligence. Purely subjective, timeless and spaceless - with innate knowledge and a priori memory, containing the pre-established harmony, necessary logic, numbers - the womb of the WHAT. Mind creates all, perceives all, controls all. Thus the individual mind controls the brain, not the reverse. Mind plays the brain like a violin. Secondness -- Mental objects so both subjective +objective- The Many. In this, the WHAT separates from Mind and becomes a HERE. Accordingly. Heidegger referred to existence as "dasein". "Being here." According to Leibniz, all monads are alive to various degrees. There are of three gradations of life in these, according to Leibniz: a) Bare, naked monads, which we can think of as purely physical ( Eg, a fundamental particle). b) Animal and vegetative monads, which Leibniz calls souls, which can have feelings, but little intellect. c) Spirits (corresponding to humans), which have, in addition, intellectual capacities. Mind transforms physical signals in nerves and neurons into experiences. If Mind then reperceives or reflects on these experiences, they are said to be thoughgt or apperceived. To be apperceived is to be made conscious. Thus consciousness is the product of thought. Intentions are also made in the same way, so that we caqn say that thoughts are intentions by Mind. The human brain is a monad which contains as subsets, mental capacities. Neuroscience tells us that there is binding between monads for parts and functions of the brain, but since monads cannot act directly on each other, this binding must be indirect, through the sequential updates of the perceptions and appetites of the subfunction monads. These must be made by Mind, either directly or through the preestablished harmony PEH). Unfortunately the Stanford Leibniz site on Leibniz makes no mention of the action of Mind on the individual mind, IMHO a gross shortcoming. Sensory signals and signals for feelings must also go through such a binding process. In a sense, the binding process plays the role of a self, but in conventional neuroscience self is a function of the brain, rather than the other way round, as common sense suggests and the intentionality of self or mind proves, along with the need for a PEH. This shortcoming in conventional understanding of the brain becomes all the more nagging if we consider thinking, which is closely related to apperception, because it must be conscious.Thinking, we submit, consists of consciously manipulating and comparing such apperceptions. Through Mind, with its potentially infinite wisdom and intelligence, intuitions and thoughts can arise spontaneously in the individual mind. If these are to be immediate and/or original, it is reasonable to believe that they originate in Mind, rather than indirectly through separate although bound parts of the brain. Anyone who has experienced a vocal duet in which the vibratos are in phase should become convinced of this. Mind is the monarch of the intelligent mind, which controls the brain. Mind plays the brain like a violin. Mind is also is able to focus on a thought for a brief period, within the context of one's memory and universal memory, for purposes of thinking an comparison, making the biological brain and its complex bindings seem hopelessly indirect and subject to confusion. Thirdness - Corresponding physical objects as is appropriate- -here the object is born or emittted from the monad--and emerges into spacetime as a particle, becoming completely objective, a WHAT+ HERE +WHEN., In addition the Thirdness of a private thought or experience is its public expression in some appropriate form. 3. Conclusions This format allows us to examine quantum phenomena from inside out and perception, thinking and consciousness ontologically- from physical nerve signals to mental experiences such as thought, consciousness, and cognition. It also avoids problem encountered in “bottom-up” science, such as complexity and emergence, if for no other reason than there is no apparent way of conceiving of a singular control point at the bottom. -- Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (retired, 2000). See my Leibniz site: rclough@verizon.academia.edu/RogerClough For personal messages use rclough@verizon.net

He's an '' pro alien'' and intelligent but all to theoretical at the same time! We're all are the future species going to be future aliens! O yes we are!

I can't shake off the feeling of something wrong, disturbing about him on the subconscious level. He might be genuinely believing in what he is saying, but I see him as a sick soul. I can easily picture him being the serial killer, than the spiritual teacher. Listen to your inner voice and proceed with caution.

Anyone know where the term psycho babble came from? Look no further than Ken Wilber.

Wake up, show up, grow up. In some order. Hopefully reverse order.