In my search to find a way of writing-practicing that would take me more into a introspective-phenomenological space equivalent of the integral calculus blogging process, I came across work on clean space. (H/t to my buddy Ian Johnson for the links).
I’m still just skimming the surface of a whole mess of these related ideas (see here for more). This is a psychotherapeudic practice that works with the mental landscape, the metaphoric realm of inner space. David Grove, the original thinker behind all this, described (in part) this work on clean space as “psychoactive” which is exactly the same term Ken Wilber uses for his integral map. [I think they mean slightly different but closely related imo things by the terms].
When I started reading some of these posts, I get the sense more and more that this is something I need to look at and is very close to (if not perhaps exactly) what I’ve been looking for in terms of a more first person walk through the perspectives. I’m still thinking of a way to connect this with this style of writing I’m exploring.
Clean Space basically works with the mental landscape (metaphoric) that we create and then walks individuals through that landscape, speaking from the position of that space. So there’s first a general first person mode (entering one’s subjectivity) which is metaphorized in locational vectors (3rd person of the 1st) which one can then enter and speak from (1st person of the 3rd person within 1st person) as well as dialoging between the various spaces (2nd person of the 3rd person space within the 1st person domain).
I want to see if I can walk myself through such a practice and then transcribe in a sense (or maybe write simultaneously??) the spaces and the experience, the locations/metaphoric landscape, as well as the points of view taken up.
I want to make clear yet again (on a broader point) that this form of integral thought that I’m working with (Ken Wilber, Steve McIntosh, Mark Edwards, et.al) is only one form of integral. Any openings, as Heidegger would say, are also closings. They uncover and yet conceal. Revelation is both an opening and a concealing. Same with this trajectory. It reveals a great deal (imo) but also conceals other pieces. It deals mostly with metaphors of space in the interior and exterior world: e.g. Kosmic Addresses, world-views, worldspaces, etc. It helps explain, gives voice to an amazing amount of various dimensions of existence. And others it leaves out. The nature of that process needs always to be kept in mind. To move first to perspectives is already to occlude other potential ways of writing-thinking-experiencing-feeling. As I’ve said on multiple occasions, I think the best (supplementary/complementary/alternative) view of integral is this one. Basically that tradition states that integral is an already formed living tradition of fullness which needs to be revived/re-lived in any day and age. Either of the artistic canon side (as the link previous) or say in a spiritual perennial sense. I think eventually one has to deal with society, values (implicit and explicit), worldviews/ethics, and all the rest at which point the more integral as new stage of development (integral crew #1) I think comes into play.
But the fact that I focus in one direction (predominantly the first tradition) does not mean I think the other one is not without a great deal of truth. I’m only doing that–focusing in a specific line. In one that I feel I have something to offer that is more unique. But again it doesn’t mean I don’t keep in mind the other tradition.
My lived insights into that first strain of integral philosophy (the theory-praxis strain) is very fluid and has been deeply expanding of my attention, care, understanding of the world without and within. But it is only one way. I have for a long time wished I could do more to combine both streams of integral, but at this point I feel more the need to enter into the one I feel most at home and where I can be most creative, contribute the most. And in the interim, just periodically remininding folks that it is only one strain within a larger series of strains.