Ken Wilber - The Paradox of Tolerance
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 січ 2019
- Excerpted from The Baby and the Bathwater: Saving Liberalism
You can find the full 3.5 hour episode here:
integrallife.com/the-baby-and...
In this episode of The Ken Show we explore five themes that are near and dear to the liberal heart - tolerance, nonviolence, power, privilege, and gender - each of which has been corrupted by regressive elements on both the left and right. Watch as Ken helps identify the healthy expressions of these issues that we would like to include in a more integral embrace, while weeding out the unhealthy regressive narratives that most of these have devolved into.
In this episode of The Ken Show we explore five themes that are near and dear to the liberal heart - tolerance, nonviolence, power, privilege, and gender - each of which has been corrupted by regressive elements on both the left and right. Watch as Ken helps identify the healthy expressions of these issues that we would like to include in a more integral embrace, while weeding out the unhealthy regressive narratives that most of these have devolved into.
Corey: “For everyone listening, I hope you really experience this [as] a love letter to liberalism. We’re often a little bit harder on the left than we are the right, because they should know better - but I think in this conversation we’ve done a really good job of identifying the healthy sort of contributions of the green attitude and leftism in general, while also kind of tracking how they got so corrupted and toxified.”
Ken: That’s important, precisely because green is the leading edge right now. We’re not going to get to second tier except going through green, and if green is going to take every person that’s evolving and moving to these even greater, more comprehensive stages, and it’s going to be broken and twist them that way, that’s not good. That’s why I’m much more concerned with what’s going wrong there than I am with all the idiocies of the lower [stages], even though that is absolutely catastrophic and can be much more vicious in its own way. But that’s not the real cultural concern right now. The cultural concern is how the leading edge is badly tilted. We’ve got to address that, and they’ve got to start to have that understanding so that more people can continue onward.
Issue #1: The Paradox of Tolerance
Liberals like to think of themselves as the party of tolerance and inclusion, with a massive index of various intersectional identities that it likes to parade around as evidence of its radical inclusivity. And yet, most liberals seem to find themselves either stuck either in what Karl Popper called the “paradox of tolerance”, or else regressed toward an exclusionary and condescending “us vs. them” mentality that, while using the familiar slogans and soundbites of tolerance, have become every bit as ethnocentric and discriminatory as the most conservative groups they criticize. What is a more integral approach to tolerance, inclusion, and diversity? Watch to hear Ken’s thoughts.
Excerpted from The Baby and the Bathwater: Saving Liberalism
You can find the full 3.5 hour episode here:
integrallife.com/the-baby-and...
BLUE thinking they are green with unhealthy red while saying things are as bad as they have ever been
Such a great job ken
“They’re killing the path to their own values.” ~Ken Wilber
Here is some good advice: Extract the clips about JBP and release them as soundbites- "Ken Wilber Critiques Jordan Peterson" or something- so that his fans will find it (maybe JBP too) and find their way to Integral.
I've observed that a large portion of JBP fans (and Ruben's) are Integral or entering Integral.
This is actually really good advice. Should be done
The more extreme Green goes, any developmental level, actually, it produces heaps, not a coherent whole. Or, as Plato stated, "A place for each thing; everything has a place." And that produces growth, or natural, hierarchies. The other thing about Green extremism is that it's preoccupied with economic materialism, but plays down, or ignores, any discussion of people's interior stadial development.
Well said sir.
Green kept the old measures of success but intuited that all life is valuable and needs nurture. Trouble is, green sees success through the same lense as orange. So for example, success is to be a CEO so everyone in the company should be a CEO. Value of green is the recognition that better outcomes are achieved by nurturing all life. Next stage would be understanding individuality and different needs and nurture requirements.
Tolerance with a boundary. Exactly. Appreciated this discussion.
Christine Hutton this is the first thing I think of every time I hear someone mention “the paradox of tolerance”. It’s entirely possible for a society, or a person to practice tolerance and have boundaries. Why is that so hard for people to understand?
Thanks Ken ! I share your vision
Good to see Ken addressing IDW and current political reactions!
I wish I had come across sd when I was in school or college...Clare graves had done such a brilliant research... Wilbur had given such insights....how could so many of us have missed it...that too when most of us went to college,..I just think they are true geniuses....I hope we get more of this in academics
Interesting you mention this: My nephew took a Psche class in college that introduced Spiral Dynamics. He was unimpressed. I believe the Green vMeme professors present it as a dominator heirarchy and is dismissed out of hand.
Please keep posting this good stuff. I love 💕 Ken Wilbers wisdom. We must tolerate the intolerant. I does not mean we have to like it, but the exercise of tolerance makes you more compassionate and everyone wins. 🙏
Don't lie. All you want is cake! I know it!
The question is how YOU come to the water.
Thank You, Ken and Cory. So ... when are we going to see second tier people coming into more power? Any estimates? Since I've stopped paying as much attention to the Integral news ... Can someone, who is more in the know, give me some updated numbers on how many are estimated to be at second tier now and how many of those are actually in positions of influence? Any that we can vote for or get behind and actively support? Thank You to anyone able to throw some estimates my way. Love & Peace to All
The tolerance of the intolerant, turning the other cheek, nonresistance, nonviolence but assertively.
Thats great. Can you make a video about next level ?. after green ...
The "Peterson's confusion" argument : 1:04:44 - 1:16:49
The word tolerance must be returned to the mechanics, plumbers, carpenters and the tools they use. Wrong is not in tolerance for the task at hand. The word in the social context is an abuse of a fine word that we should redeem to mean an important factor in success.
The “paradox of tolerance” strikes me as just poorly applied thinking. I think it’s a bad example to look to, one that the leftists I’ve met use to justify _their_ brand of intolerance.
If we just think about it a little bit, it doesn’t make sense... _Does tolerance have to mean full acceptance of anything people do without any boundaries?_ Obviously not. I think if it is taken that far, it stops being tolerance and becomes something else, perhaps just weak passivity.
_Will a society really be taken over by the intolerant amongst us ?_ Not necessarily. Tolerance is not the same thing as having no boundaries. Tolerance implies that we could take action to stop somebody we disagree with, but we won’t by choice. That a very different thing from not having the ability to stop somebody we disagree with at all.
_Will tolerance as a virtue disappear if we take it too far?_ This is a problem if we take having poor boundaries too far, not tolerance.
It’s just a poorly thought out idea with too many untrue assumptions in the background, too many loaded presuppositions.
Ultimately, if we hold a value such as tolerance in our heart, that value is _OURS_ to uphold and practice. It’s not something we need to force upon others. We demonstrate its importance by modeling it for others, not by cramming it down their throat with threats. Looking at others and saying “you must have this value” doesn’t work, and never will. We cannot make anybody value something they don’t. We can only show them why they might want to take it on for themselves.
The failure of the left to properly embody and live their own values is its Achilles heel. It destroys their credibility. Instead of applying their heart wisdom, they are all too often _not_ practicing what they believe, but instead doing the opposite such as being intolerant of intolerant people. It’s sad to watch people with such beautiful values fail so often, and in such a hypocritical way. If we want to be idealists, we have to live up to that ideal.
What a pity that so many people drawn to Ken Wilber fail to actually comprehend what the man is saying.
Nowdays mr ken seems to talk more on d lower left lower right of d quadrants
How much is enough?
And what is the measure we should use?
Haha! The “Bathwather”?
Stop posting interesting stuff! Corey looks too good!
Is the Direct Taxation of Income a modern form of Legalized Government Slavery?
@zakrocz I did not say there was anything wrong with taxation.
I said the direct taxation of income is a legal form of slavery.
The Constitution was very clear on the matter and limited the Government's right to taxation to legal Indirect taxation and outlawed the direct taxation of income.
Rome survived for a thousand years with indirect taxes and money printing. It was only after Rome began to borrow that she ran into problems and began to tax income directly, and it was this unfunded pensions along with the debt that ended Roman Empire.
We had a Representative Democratically voted on Republic form of Government, but now we have devolved into Oligarchy of 535 women and men Career Politicians in the House and Senate and they with the Executive appoint the Judicial, corrupting the courts.
Government is Legal Right to Violent Force and Coercion. Is this even moral?
Still, it is very odd. I agree with JP's argument that privilege, benefits the people within the same culture, as long as they have the same folk identity.
Yet, even then marginalization takes place, it is nice to have the term people of color imo. In order to associate and help other human beings who are more burdend by economy, development, over population, consumerism, etc.
Yet, I don't feel that I am support in terms of job opportunities as others solely basdd on sympathy, most often ones own culture is appreciated over time with so much diversity. IMO.
Also, through all this polarization I feel the new safe stance js liberterianism, even for people of color. In cultures where individuality is reered...
Yet, having this is similar to having purple athelethic teams and master mind grouos, who only care about their tribe, individuality and achievement and tolerate diversity, but often don't include it?
Or this a form of new autonomy on an integral level? In larger cities I believe so, but here in a rurual area college. This is a big cognitive joke. It's farily unfair with so many white people to not have some sort of identity issues, which ofc can help in that line of development. Still, the ones who have the most multicultural friends here in Germany are the left. Green for me atm is a moral Majority joke stealing serotonin.