User:Joshua Jonathan/Developmental stages

__NOINDEX__

In the 1970's and 1980's, following Piaget's model, several "structural stage models" of human psychological development were developed. Ken Wilber tried to integrate those models into one model, synthesizing them with Path-descriptions of Buddhism and Vedanta.

Criticism

 * Wilber acts on the premise that 'mystics all over the world' have experiential knowledge of the same higher developmental stages, which he sees as structural stages. This assumption is incorrect:
 * this 'experiential knowledge' is preceded by prolonged training, incorporating extensive worldviews and contemplative practices, which guide and structure these 'experiences';
 * these 'experiences' are not the same; Madhyamaka's notion of and insight into "emptines" is diametrically opposed to Advaita's maya-vada.


 * Wilber treats 'states', temporary "mystical experiences" as glimpses of higher developmental structural stages. This is ad hoc; temporary is temporary.
 * "Enlightenment" is either meditative experience or insight:
 * Meditative experience is not structure-bound; it's learning. Insight is cognitive; it's ramifications are to be incorporated. This is also learning.
 * Meditative experience and insight are not bound to "transpersonal stages"; they may appear at "lower" stages.


 * Gebser's theory describes collective development, whereas structural stage theory describes individual development; how are they to aggregated?
 * The "transpersonal stages" are a fantasy, that doesn't work, nor explain:
 * Wilber's "transpersonal stages" are not described by other theories; they all collapse into the centaur, or Fowler's conjunctive faith; or Fowler's conjunctive faith plus universalizing faith.
 * The "transpersonal stages" take effort; they don't come natural, like the stages as described by Fowler and others.


 * "Insight", or "emptiness", or "nondual awareness", is not a goal on it's own, nor "the" goal; it aids in loosening the self-focus or self-structure. Karuna is another aid in this shift - or is karuna the actual goal? Note that "karuna" is suspiciously absent in Wilber's model... Anyway, Fowler's "universalizing faith" seems to be a more accurate, and more attractive, "highest" developmental stage.

Alternative
Various contemplative traditions require prolonged training, and the study of a large corpus of (sacred) texts. these texts have first to be heard and learned by heart; then they are to be studied and pondered; then they are to be understoot intellectually; and finally they are to be understood "intuitively", anubhava. This is not a "spontaneous awakening", nor is it prove of a transcendental reality. On the contrary, it's the affirmation of an already set worldview.

These developments fit perfectly well into the cognitive structures: conventional learning (accept it as it is eing told to you), study and ponder it it (individual-reflective), and grasp it intuitively in all it's connections and ramifications (conjunctive; Wilber's centaur). And finally, practice it: the Bodhisattva, compassion, going to the marketplace.

The Ten Bulls also fit in: searching (synthetic-conventional), taming the bull and riding it home (individual-reflective), emptiness (conjunctive), and the marketplace (universalizing).

Buddhist dhyana does not fit in as a separate, structural stage. There is development in it's practice, though; this deveopment could fit in all over the place, but preferable at the "personal stages".

Altgether, this would give the following model: