Wishing to share her enthusiasm for this subject she presented me with a book of essays entitled Consciousness and Healing - Integral approaches to Mind-Body Medicine, Ed. M. Schlitz, T. Amorok and M. S. Micozzi, 2005, Elsevier.
She requested that I read the foreword to the book so that I could at least understand the basics of her interests. It was my first encounter with New Age pseudo-philosopher and founder of the Integral Institute, Ken Wilber, and it was also the beginning of my realization that the Age of Reason had been displaced by the bankruptcy of postmodern relativism. I was shocked at what I read:
...when it comes to deciding which approaches, methodologies, epistemologies, or ways of knowing are "correct," the answer can only be, "All of them." That is, all of the numerous practices or paradigms of human inquiry--including...hermeneutics, meditation, vision quest, phenomenology, structuralism, subtle energy research, shamanic voyaging, chaos theory...All of these modes of inquiry have an important piece of the overall puzzle of a total existence that includes, among other things, health and illness, doctors and patients, and sickness and healing.Basically, Wilber claims indiscriminately that everything is true - as long as it fits his particular view of reality; for example, Intelligent Design and Michael Behe are in; Charles Darwin and the Theory of Evolution are definitely out!
He goes on to say that
Nobody is smart enough to be wrong all the time... hundreds of thousands of decent men and women around the world are already practicing [some form of alternative medicine.] For the most part they are responsible, sincere, and concerned men and women of integrity, and they honestly believe that the practice of their chosen field is making a positive and helpful contribution to humanity. I believe them. And I hope you do too.With an unbelievable dose of hubris Wilber then states that he has formulated the mother of all ontologies. Arthur Koestler's concept of holons are diagrammed by Wilber into a four quadrant map that supposedly includes and interconnects everything hierarchically into his infallible understanding of the Kosmos.
He claims that modern medicine is lacking because it fails to embrace the potential to be found in all four of his quadrants, and by not doing so
some sort of rupture has occurred somewhere. Both practitioners and their patients can feel it, can feel this fracture in the Kosmos called "going to the doctor."I don't mean to sound trite, but really, whenever I go to the doctor I feel relief and gratitude for their help! Wilber claims his ontological system to be the essential integral framework for uniting and justifying the grab-bag of complementary and alternative medical (CAM) treatments described in the collection of essays that comprise the rest of the book. I will be turning a skeptical eye on some of these claims in future posts.
Amusingly, Wilber describes himself as being particularly in favor of subtle energy medicine; the National Institute of Health describes it as
the most controversial of CAM practices because neither the external energy fields nor their therapeutic effects have been demonstrated convincingly by any biophysical means.His enthusiasm is no doubt financially related to his marketing of a pseudo-scientific device known as the Q-link pendant that claims to recharge your 'biofield' ... and I'll be covering that absurdity in a future posting also.
My aversion to Ken Wilber is probably by now quite clear! But what disturbed me the most when reading this book was the dissonance it created when I realized that intelligent people were embracing pseudo-science, against all the evidence, because of their religious beliefs, no matter how well-meaning their intentions.
I find it astonishing that an intellectually advanced nation such as Germany actually acknowledges and thereby legitimizes the various forms of medical quackery known as CAM. However, I hope that by their official licensure of these practitioners some measure of control can be exercised over the potential excesses and dangers that CAM poses to the general public.
In the name of real science, practice real medicine so you can really help people.
Jeff Meyerhoff, Bald Ambition - a rigorous critique of Wilber's Theory of Everything
Gregory Falk, Norman Einstein: The Dis-Integration of Ken Wilber - an evaluation of Ken Wilber and the Integral Institute as a cult phenomena.
Quack Watch - a guide to Quackery, Health Fraud, and Intelligent Decisions
The Scientific Review of Alternate Medicine
The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice
8 comments:
Good words.
very interesting article about medicine I'm very interesting in different health topic specially in Impotence and online meds like a Viagra Online
So it's obvious from your comments that you've not read a great deal of Ken wilber - I can't comment on that particular introduction, however:
Charles Darwin and the theory of evolution are most definitely in. Richard Dawkins verion of Darwinism is however out.
He doesn't claim integral theory is the mother of all ontologies - he repeatedly states that it will be improved upon by others and will certainly be replaced, but is a good starting point to start combining the accumulated knowledge of the world.
And your quote about CAM simply smacks of gross scientism. Simply put, absence of proof is not proof of absence. I guess your argument is that because science has not yet found any proof for Qi, then the millions of people of thousands of years who have felt and experienced Qi are all deluded. How very scientific of you.
As you may have guessed I am pro wilber, but am open to well thought out informed criticism. This is neither.
Dear Pete:
Many thanks for talking the time to comment upon my blog.
I guess you haven't read Wilbur's support for various ID claims. You can't be a Darwinist and support the notions of Intelligent Design. Your objections to Dawkins are presumably related to his New Atheism, for his evolutionary biology is but a genetic explanation of Darwin's theory and is commonplace science. I guess you haven't done much reading on this topic or you would realize how absurd it is to say Darwin is in and Dawkin's "version" of Darwinism is out.
I am most amused at your apologetics for Wilber's hubris... he thinks his ontology will be improved upon?.. how modest of him to think he has such legitimacy in the first place! I am sure he is painfully aware that his volumes are still being relegated to the shelves for New Age trivia alongside books on Tarot cards and palm reading in the bookstores. No-one has been hoodwinked enough to upgrade his drivel to the philosophy section that I have seen as yet! Imagine it! Wilber stacked next to Wittgenstein! Oh how the noble great thinkers will spin in their graves at such a travesty!
I just love the old standby "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument you dragged up about Qi. When there is a consistent lack of evidence where there most certainly should be evidence, then the case for evidence of absence can be legitimately made.
Your argument that Qi has been believed in by millions of people is a logical fallacy known as the Appeal to the Masses. Millions of people used to believe the world was flat because that was they way it looked to them. It didn't make it true though did it?
My remarks about CAM are based upon the results of years of time-consuming research that scientists have had to do to protect the general public from quackery and nonsense.
Sorry mate, trying to use the word scientism as an insult reeks of post-modernist sticks and stones, and hardly makes an honorable argument.
I would recommend a book called "How to think about Weird things - Critical thinking for a New Age" by Theodore Schick Jr and Lewis Vaughn. Perhaps after reading it, when you are armed with the necessary mental tools, you might try creating a well reasoned and informed criticism of of Ken Wilber yourself. So far you have done neither. You might find it a lot more interesting than reading the rubbish produced by vulgar hucksters like Ken Wilber flogging their bogus Q-Link pendants for a cheap buck.
All the best,
Jennifer
i'm new... promise to register round more oftentimes!
I'm with you most of the way.
Really.
Just to clarify my position I'm a dyed-in-the-wool skeptic and "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre is probably my favourite book that I've read in the past year.
I think that Wilber is a classic example of very smart people being morons outside of their field.
I was very disappointed to see him spew the absolutely braindead "micro-evolution exists but macro-evolution doesn't", and discovering that he endorses a cool looking bunch of wires that claims to make you both more relaxed, and more alert at the same time, was pretty depressing.
That being said, I do find value in Wilbers approach to philosophy, and in recognising the the fact that knowledge in one field doesn't cancel out knowledge in another. The grumpy reductionist "If its not mathematics then you're a hippie" sort of attitude.
So I have to take you up on your "Basically, Wilber claims indiscriminately that everything is true" point.
If you read his stuff, he's way more rigorous than you are suggesting, but he doesn't apply the same criteria for validation of some things that he seems to just like on principle.
Dismissing him out of hand as a complete crackpot is a loss, because he does have some worthwhile things to say about philosophy and the quest for knowledge, but I think its becoming increasingly clear that that's about as far as he can be taken seriously.
Post a Comment