Response to Ken Wilber – A Brief History of Everything

Interior / Exterior / Collective / Individual – the four quadrants of Ken Wilber’s integral approach to understanding not only where we came from and where we are now but also predicting where we are going. Slowly and steadily, Wilbur builds a strong and validated case for his supposition.

But there is part of me that bristles at linear and ‘boxable’ categories. He gets around my objections by positing his categories as holons. And on a physical / external level that concept works very well. In the individual quadrant, atoms are entities unto themselves. Molecules, made of atoms, are entities unto themselves and so on, ad infinitum. He goes on to state that if you eliminate holons from a simpler level that holons above that level cannot exist. Animals cannot exist without cells, and cells cannot exist without molecules. One thing builds upon the other. So, from the standpoint of an individual / behavioral / exterior perspective the idea of holons is concrete and satisfyingly representational. And the evolutionary arc and directionality in the quadrant is quite workable.

When you move to the Collective / Social / Exterior quadrant it starts to become more problematic. Up to a certain point it works very well. Galaxies evolve planets which evolve Gaia systems (in whatever form) which then evolve heterotrophic systems (although I think that is a bit Gaia centric) and so on into evolving social structures. This is where it becomes, for me more of an issue. In terms of each being a holon, once you evolve to a certain social level it can be argued that you don’t necessarily need to contain the level below you and if it were to disappear would your social superstructure collapse? The idea of the holon doesn’t disappear but it does become weaker. Is it external? Is it measurable? Absolutely. But the interdependence concept weakens.

When you move to the interior quadrants of the individual and the collective is where the idea of holons is the weakest. However, the evolutionary aspects are still quite valid. In the individual, the movement from one level to the next is logical and seems very appropriate. Sensations lead to perception which leads to impulse which in turn becomes emotions. Makes sense. But by being unmeasurable (which is part of the nature of the left-hand quadrants) you rely on hermeneutics. This is a slippery eel which is driven largely by context and perspective. In other words, situations surrounding it and the effect of an observer on the observation.

In the lower left quadrant is where I probably have the hardest time with the applicability of holons. You can eliminate entire categories within the hierarchy of cultural beliefs and still evolve into ‘higher’ transitional states. I don’t feel that its existence as a whole predicates the existence of ‘higher’ states of cultural consciousness.