Ken Wilber on Involution and Evolution

Ken Wilber is sometimes identified as a neoplatonic philosopher. Part of this philosophy is a conception of cosmic forces and a spiritual view of nature. According to one interpretation of this worldview spirit is returning to itself as a drive of Eros that can also be seen as a force of self organisation. This doesn't mean that the forms that this drive creates are pregiven or created ex nihilo (like creationists would claim), what this entails is that there is a very small tilt towards complexity that builds up over time and makes all the difference. - This is one of the more contested aspects of his Integral Philosophy.
These three audio files are from the KenShow interview series as well as a discussion with autor Tim Freke.
You can watch the full dialogue with Tim Freke here:
• WHAT IS LIFE? #3 Philo...
For a critical take on Ken Wilbers view on eros and evolution you can go here:
www.integralworld.net/visser9...
www.integralworld.net/visser1...
www.integralworld.net/visser1...

[@elplanetadorado]

Great

[@xaviere.3299]

great publishing thanks.

[@SensemakingMartin]

Interesting stuff thanks

[@unthinkme1313]

I've always found this problematic. I fundamentally agree with the Wilberian notion that, in my own words, there is no reasonable theory of why the big bang would create life, and why life would create intelligence, and why intelligence can attain enlightenment. I do believe that "random chance" can be an explanation for the mechanism, and I don't agree that something is "pushing" it. How could these cited "simulations" possibly make sense? Reality is a given. There is no alternative to using reality itself as the basis of a simulation. Thus, it would seem, whatever occurs in reality makes mathematical sense, and I'm not aware of any deviation from that, where the mathematics of probability prove false due to some unseen variable. Maybe that exists, it's being referenced here, but I'm not qualified to say it makes sense and I haven't found this information or seen it myself. In my eyes, it is just very odd that random chance would generate unforeseeable innovation and novelty that seems to have a directional vector towards awareness in the ultimate sense of the scale of all time. However, I don't get when Wilber talks about "Spirit throwing itself out". What does that mean? When does that happen? Who does that? It seems like jargon, seems like "Amber meme" mythology. I believe it is citing Sri Aurobindo, who taught spirituality a la yoga. But it is a poetic description, and I don't think it's appropriate to treat it as a technical description. Involution, as a concept, still makes no sense to me after watching this, and after reading all of Wilber's books. It just seems like a placeholder word to the observable teleology of the Universe, it would seem, to create greater self-awareness at an accelerating rate. I worry that using weird mysticism-based jargon might muddle the presentation of this practical observation.