Ken Wilber – Spirituality and the 3 Strands of Deep Science

November 08, 2009

The three strands of deep science—injunction, apprehension, confirmation—give us a reliable methodology for learning about both the world without and the world within. Want to know what the moons of Jupiter look like? Look through a telescope. Want to know what satori is? Sit down and count your breaths. While you’re at it, have a couple friends do the same thing, and then compare notes. After all, if your experience of satori involves becoming one with a jelly donut, you, um, might want to see if that happened to anyone else….

Duration : 0:8:1


Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Tags: , , , , ,

25 Responses to “Ken Wilber – Spirituality and the 3 Strands of Deep Science”

  1. shlempnar Says:

    the fact that …
    the fact that phenomena exists in our minds as a concept is proof enough for me.
    what i’m saying is that if god does not exists than how is it possible for us to conceptualize the idea.
    it’s making sense to me anyways.

    lately though i’ve become more interested in language though. as opposed to finding the “truth”.
    i would say just keep in touch with the dome. mother earth. the big round womb of grass and water that conceived us.

  2. Darkgravx12 Says:

    Excellent video btw …
    Excellent video btw, every atheist should watch this. Most atheists wrongly associate spirituality with religion and consider spirituality unscientific even though it is not.
    Religion is dogmatic, spirituality is not. This may sound confusing at first, but if you read into what religion is and what spirituality is, you will start to see the whole picture as to why they are different.

  3. Darkgravx12 Says:

    shlempnar…
    Your …

    shlempnar…
    Your comment just described spirituality lmao. Also, religion is not the same as spirituality and meditation is a big part of being spiritual.
    And DHG1 – the mental does not effect the physical???? Are you on crack or something? That’s a completely untrue statement.

  4. zerosetteaccordion Says:

    I suggest that you …
    I suggest that you look at burtharding channel….

  5. cacaolover Says:

    Wilber is …
    Wilber is remarkably clever!

  6. hyperseauton Says:

    Hamlet IS physics.
    Hamlet IS physics.

  7. GodNyou2 Says:

    Science and …
    Science and religion are part of spirituality.

  8. plathhs Says:

    Shakespeare
    Shakespeare

  9. CloudshadowMan1 Says:

    Ken includes even …
    Ken includes even narrow science in his considerations.
    Peace and contentment to all beings.

  10. MaBu888 Says:

    Spiritualty and …
    Spiritualty and religion are not the same.

  11. Frogstomp121 Says:

    All the worlds a …
    All the worlds a stage, and all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.

  12. Mcfaie Says:

    thank you very much …
    thank you very much for sharing this information with us. It can help a lot :)

  13. frankroshi2 Says:

    You are a house …
    You are a house with four rooms: physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual. The room causing all the suffering is the emotional room. All the fear, anger, and grief that is unresolved (unembraced) of childhood is down in the metaphorical basement and is causing the unconscious mind to constantly ask, “What happened?” and “How do I keep it from happening again?” This causes our unconscious needs and wants which prevent us from being optimistic and being in the moment. Well intended and useless.

  14. frankroshi2 Says:

    Science… …
    Science… Spirituality… just as half-assed no matter which cheek you got. Clearly, without any leaps of faith, you have a mind and you have a body. Check it out with your direct experience. They are not the same and cannot be reduced one to the other. The brain (material) is the mind’s servant (nonmaterial). A non-material being has access to this physical plane through the human nervous system. Consciousness can move a protein chain that controls the potential across a human nerve membrane.

  15. shlempnar Says:

    spirituality is …
    spirituality is just redundant and boring. we will not find and answer.
    so take what we do have proof of. strive to become peaceful, happy and healthy. be optimistic and listen to your body. always live in the moment, and your life will be justified. just because you aren’t religious doesn’t mean you cannot benefit from meditation.
    the brain is gnarly. treat it well!

  16. visionsofsilver Says:

    OnlyInNaziGermany …
    OnlyInNaziGermany
    very well voiced my friend, but are you yourself, any more satisfied with this answer?

  17. OnlyInNaziGermany Says:

    Spirituality is a …
    Spirituality is a lie, it’s an idea based truly on imagination and has not one piece of evidence that it exists. Mr dyer said it has no material form therefore it doesn’t exist. Being sad, happy or angry is just hormones and chemicals not some up about religion.

  18. astrixx Says:

    The real answer to …
    The real answer to that question, is because it “feels” wet. It’s a phenomenological explanation.

  19. astrixx Says:

    The point is not …
    The point is not the relationship between the physical and the mental. I think there are is a causal relationship, but more complicated than “A” brain state -> “B” mental event, which is why I only mention that there is a supervenience relationship. The point is that no amount of “A” brain state explanations will qualitatively explain a “B” mental event. For example, to answer the question, “Why is water wet?” one cannot merely say, well because its 2 hydrogen and one oxygen molecule.

  20. DHG1 Says:

    I agree that the …
    I agree that the mental does not reduce to the physical; but, given that you agree that the mental supervenes on the physical, what is your position on the causal relation between the two? And to make the point about meditation concrete, consider this: attainment of a brain state may cause an epiphenomenal mental state, but if we are to imagine that mental states can cause brain states then any description of that relationship will have to respect (somehow) the rules of empirical verification.

  21. deagla Says:

    Eh, the Illuminati …
    Eh, the Illuminati is run by reptilian kin known throughout history as Jinn, Naga, Angels/Demons, Dragons, Dracul, Al Gore, Windsors, Rothschilds etc. that rule the inner circles of Freemasonry and do foul sex&torture rituals. They’ll probably release a bird flu virus via vaccines(or by drones), go to internet 2, start WW3 w/China, have a staged alien invasion(2010) to get a microchipped pop/world gov but they will fail! Support FreemanTV, Alex Jones, Dr.Deagle, David Icke & Project Camelot!

  22. astrixx Says:

    Well there are some …
    Well there are some prominent philosophers that would disagree with you, including John Searle and Charles Taylor. I’m assuming you’re familiar with their stance on consciousness. If not, consider the idea that my seeing a red patch in my visual field (’qualia’) is in no way equivalent to a firing of a neuron. Certainly one event supervenes on the other, but one event is not equivalent to the other. Therefore, my phenomenological experience must be verified on its own terms.

  23. scoobydoo84 Says:

    DHG1,

    You …
    DHG1,

    You materialists and reductionists are the modern day equivalents of the flat earthers. Clueless, ignorant, raving, ranting, ignorant nuts.
    VAGRANT BE GONE!!

  24. scoobydoo84 Says:

    DHG1,
    “better …

    DHG1,
    “better to stay silent and be thought of as a fool, rather than open your mouth and be proven one.”
    This applies to you and the rest of the delusional materialists. IT ISN’T A PHYSICAL EVENT YOU CLUELESS IMBICLE!!

  25. astrixx Says:

    DHG1, did you miss …
    DHG1, did you miss the point? In Wilber’s analogy, just as a microscope (or even our eyes) are injunctions, so too can our mind be an injunction, another tool to apprehend datum. Give me a reason why meditative practice can’t be considered an injunction. Certainly, when we see a phenomenon with our eyes, we rely on our (and other scientist’s) cognitive interpretive faculty to verify it. Inward-looking apprehension can be confirmed as well.

Leave a Reply

Powered by Yahoo! Answers