Wilber's Integral Philosophy: A Summary and Critique

Abstract

An integral philosophy, such as that promoted by Ken Wilber, can be very useful in providing an individual with a wide-scope theory to serve as an orienting worldview and container enabling them to develop their spiritual practices. Wilber's view is particularly useful in that it covers objective, intersubjective, and subjective world spaces at once. Used too rigidly, it can become an overly mechanical process of merely downloading a canned integral program into one's internal operating system. Authentic spirituality, although using theory, argues for developing one's own spiritual practice. In developing one's own practice, the pragmatic writings of Dewey, Peirce, and James can serve as a guide, in that the practice is practiced, is pluralistic, requires participation with others, and is provisional.Over the years, existential-humanistic philosophical concerns have been directed to issues such as personal freedom, responsibility,

Contextualist-coaching for complex times

“…While a number of Western theorists and practitioners, such as Almaas (1988), Cortright (1997), Ferrer (2002, Murphy (1992), Rowan (2005), Vaughan (2001) and Washburn (1994Washburn ( , 1995 have linked spirituality with psychology, Paulson (2008) argues that the most ambitious works have come from Ken Wilber (1996. Described by Perloff (2010) as a theoretical psychologist who has attempted to join the normally segregated disciplines of psychology, philosophy, sociology, anthropology and religion in a meta-theoretical approach to include and contextualise all existing knowledge, Wilber's integral approach to coaching is difficult to place within Pepper's categories.…”

“…Wilber has continually built upon his theory, only rarely discarding any previous thinking (Paulson 2008). Wilber's vision is described by Taylor (2001) as representing an oscillating process marked by progressive subordination of older, lower-order behaviour systems to newer, higher order systems as an individuals' existential problems and behaviour change.…”

“…According to Paulson (2008), it is only when Wilber's work is properly read that it is possible to identify the manner in which it comes together. Thus, the extent to which Wilber's approach is understood depends upon the philosophical paradigm of the coach who interprets and implements his framework.…”

“…He has been criticised for taking a socially elitist and authoritarian stance (Bauwens 2005) and of subsuming the works of others as a subset of his own (Paulson 2008). Challenges to his theory have been mainly due to the paradigm clash between existential and transpersonal worldviews (Schneider 1987(Schneider , 1989Washburn 1990) and his stance on evolutionary theory.…”

“…Challenges to his theory have been mainly due to the paradigm clash between existential and transpersonal worldviews (Schneider 1987(Schneider , 1989Washburn 1990) and his stance on evolutionary theory. His highly controversial views have increasingly isolated him from collegial dialogue with critics (Paulson 2008). …”