Transcendence, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality & Ken Wilber

It’s always a little difficult breaking through to a new level of consciousness; it’s even more difficult when it has to happen because of Ken Wilber. But if you want new levels of consciousness… if there’s a desire or a notion in you that says, ‘what I know is not enough’. Ken, may be the way forward… read on


Ken Wilber

I am about half way through his book, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality, which is amazing but for some reason, I wonder why did it have to be him. I have seen Ken Wilber on you tube videos and heard his talks with Andrew Cohen and somehow I don’t like him.

Perhaps, it’s some deep shadow hidden inside me, some reaction to either inadequacy or the past that creates the tension, but never-the-less, I am reading the book, enjoying it on many levels and yet unable to get over my basic dislike of the man. Perhaps, I sense in him a air of elitism, superior intellectualism and pretension.

I am absolutely sure that Ken, wouldn’t give a crap about that ! The purpose of me telling you the above  is because of what I do have to say next.

The book is fantastic. It is as deep as it is wide and yet it is only an introduction to the whole topic. It opens up a vast area inside your cranium that says, ‘YES!”

Although, I do feel that Ken Wilber spends far too long gunning down his opponents than on positive points.

Perhaps I am entirely wrong on that and that he purposefully guides you to ‘what  is not‘ in order for you to see ‘what is‘.

Well enough code…

So what is the book about?

It’s subject can be broadly categorized as ‘Integralism’, and Integralism is an ‘ism’ that tries to be the big daddy of all ‘isms’.

Rephrased, it is a theory, a system of thought, an awareness that Integrates all levels of thought/experience/trans-experience while acknowledging the essences and limitations of each of them in an encompassing Holarchy (read hierarchy).

Still doesn’t make sense?

Ok, it is about the evolutionary development of the Universe in three realms, the physical, the biological, and the mental. What is magical about the book is that you start to realise that perhaps it has different meanings to people who are in different levels of mental ‘evolution’. In fact you start realising that is must be so on all levels, with all books and even with all experiences.

Ah ha… what at once seems magical becomes obvious. You feel that this is how you must have always thought but didn’t realise.

And again that leads you to realisation that this IS transcendence!

You have transcended in thought, your one rung up the ladder. And you must thank, Ken Wilber!


11 thoughts on “Transcendence, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality & Ken Wilber

  1. Ken Wilber’s Sex Ecology, and Spirituality is a good book, isn’t it?

    Yes, one of the challenges of attempting to re-define a conversation with existing voices is that, if you want to pretend to be comprehensive, you have to comprehend/articulate your ideas in the context of the existing ones. Critical? Certainly. Annoying? At times. 🙂

    Glad you are enjoying the book. When you can get past the personality issues to the luminosity of the teaching, there is a lot more where that came from. I was fortunate to have been introduced to Wilber about 25 years ago, and have read most all of his work (20 books or so) several times. I find his insights to be absolutely top notch. I hope you continue with other Wilber works. I never fail to widen and integrate my understanding and my practice after reading him.


    1. Dear Mark,

      Thank you for your comments. I have now finished the book and have happily digested whatever I could.

      Quick question. What would you recommend be the 2nd book I read by Ken Wilber, should I choose to?

      Personality or not, I appreciated the book. I like the astute and Ken is definitely one of them.

      I hope to follow you on the net and very briefly visited your web site. Of everything there, what would you recommend I look at more closely?

      1. I know this is super old, but I’d recommend One Taste Next (entries are hit or miss, but many of them really fill in the question gaps generated by SES.

  2. Ken Wilber is phenomenal.
    Much of my blog is dedicated to
    a whole lot of Ken Wilber’s work.
    Check it out, if you’re interested:

  3. I haven’t read a lot of Ken Wilber’s other books, but have been absolutely bowled-over by a book that assembles (what can only be properly termed) mystical views of famous physicists–a majority of whom are Nobel laureates. I have many friends who are avowed atheists, and wasn’t feeling as secure in my own, indefensible on rational grounds, beliefs. The message is that there’s not necessarily a contradiction between religion and science, and indeed they ought to be informed by each other for the healthiest world…

  4. words are things, and they have knock-on power too. It is not necessary to share baseless negative thoughts about someone, especially someone offering only inspiration and vision. A back-handed compliment holds no joy for anyone.

    1. Words are things… hmmm… not quite sure what you mean by that but I will take it as it is. My original post was neither to criticize nor compliment Wilber but only to write about my experience while reading the book, some of which was good and some of which was bad. I am happy to see that you find value in this even if it is in the negative.

      Currently however, I have changed my mind since I last wrote on this topic, although I had not thought about sharing it until now.

      I find that the core arguments put forth by Wilber are quasi-religious (based on untestable assertions and metaphysics) and in many cases just plainly wrong. His whole holon theory simply stinks of mumbo jumbo and he doesn’t seem to understand neo-darwinism very well, contradicting it in places (in ‘A brief History of Everything’).

      I am not sure why you think that dissidence or character assasination (even when tempered by jest) is inappropriate, especially when the subject matter in question is not widely accepted as fact.

      Neither am I sure that Wilber is offering “only inspiration and vision”. He is in fact offering a lot more, he is offering a world vision and philophosy that could/and does have far reaching consequences for those that swallow it in part or in whole.

      Ultimately, I feel entirely justified in what I wrote, based on what I knew while I wrote it. Time permitting, my post today would not be half as generous.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s