Philosophy, Dichotomy and Going Beyond Dualism

A vs B and why that model’s time has passed.

I started my classes again today. The first up was “Philosophy of Mind.” The professor seems to be very into this topic, and for starters made it very intimidating. It’s not that the material is un-readable, but his harsh grading system (A/F) is a little disconcerting. Nevertheless. What is the philosophy of mind? From what I heard today, it’s the study of the mind/body “problem.” That is, how does consciousness arise in the body? Does it? Do we have free will, or if everything is physical, then is choice an illusion? There are many other questions that come up with this topic. We are going to be focusing on the “mind-body” split and how many philosophers chose (no pun intended) to answer it. Some go for the determinist view, the physicalist argument (No free will). Others go for the opposite view: All is mind. Then there are others who attemp to create a middle way, or balance between the perspectives. I personally agree with the third way, but the philosophy of integral has definitely had an influence in me in this respect.

While in class, I couldn’t help but remember the name of a chapter in Grace and Grit by Ken Wilber, “Mind-Body Drop!” A buddhist teacher used this as a koan, or a pointing out instruction for his students. The third topic I’d like to see in this class (though it wasn’t in the syllabus), would be- is there anything more? When mind-body drops, what is left? Or, as the Zen masters might say, what is your original face, before your parents were born?

So this is what we’re focusing on: The mind/body problem. I’d like to think of us as mind-bodies. We are both biological and mental. Being a fan of quantum physics and all related research, I’m somewhat aware that we are learning more about the mind potentially (pun not intended, again) being quantum-related. That is, some aspects of our consciousness can be explained through quantum science. I need to look up the article, but I recently read that protons move roughly around or beyond the speed of light. This would have profound insights into consciousness and how we experience it. 

But, back to the class, “Philosophy of Mind.” I’m going to try not to raise too many questions based on things I’ve read outside of the class. For instance, we know with quantum science that the universe is certainly not deterministic. In fact, it’s all about potential and probability collapsing into our experience. The mind is as much a creator of reality as it is a subject to it. That is, we are biological indeed, and all laws of the universe apply to us, but the brain helps create the experience of reality. It’s our way of interacting with the world, and it has gradually adapted and complicated over the eons. 

I wasn’t aware of this, but the term “science” was hardly used before the scientific revolution. Before then, it was called “natural philosophy.” Philosophy was a part of science, and vice versa. So, I see that as an example of yin-yang relationship that I’d like to see in mind-body theories. 

From what I know, the problem with the ‘physicalists’ or extreme ‘reduction’ is that it cannot yet account for the very basic experience of consciousness. It just can’t explain why on earth we’d have this awareness. 

So, to express my final thoughts on this subject (for now, of course), seeing modern philosophy as a series of “dichotomies” has inherently limited it to dualism, when it has so much more potential. The “problem” of inner mind and outer world can be dispelled, I think, with a third view. Instead of “either/or” let’s look at how “both/and” is possible. Instead of night or day, we have night and day. Life and death are intrinsic, and so why not body-mind? These are all just words, but they point to something more. I think this could be seen as an evolution from traditional philosophy (of dichotomies) to eteology, or the study from beingness. It could be said, the phrase, “I think, I am,” is not digging deep enough. Instead, “I am, I think, I feel, I see,” could help us gain more insight. The space between the words gain importance in an “integral” attitude. The connectivity, the complimenting of once opposing views are deeply valued. Seeing the flex-flow evolution of memes, consciousness and perspective- this is the future of so many things, including philosophy. 

And so, maybe I’ll mention these ideas in class, but either way, I hope to see them in our lives. The tool of stepping back from dualistic thinking does not leave us with idiocy, but the profound silence of transcendent and transrational consciousness.

Indigo Children!

So, let's take a ride in the New Age section - This way please! Step here, if you will. Strap in and get ready. We're going to tour the Indigo Section - full of psychics, transformations and new "age" consciousness. We're also going to describe what the greatest flaws, not of the children, but of the advocates perpetuated.

What is an indigo child? There is a general definition: The latest and greatest generation, starting somewhere in the late 1980's and onward. They are characteristically known for being "system breakers," allegedly having psychic ability and a deep spiritual awareness for such an early age.

Wendy Chapman is quoted here, saying

Indigo Children are the current generation being born today and most of those who are 8 years old or younger. They are different. They have very unique characteristics that set them apart from previous generations of children. The name itself indicates the Life Color they carry in their auras and is indicative of the Third Eye Chakra, which represents intuition and psychic ability. These are the children who are often rebellious to authority, nonconformist, extremely emotionally and sometimes physically sensitive or fragile, highly talented or academically gifted and often metaphysically gifted as well, usually intuitive, very often labeled ADD, either very empathic and compassionate OR very cold and callous, and are wise beyond their years. Does this sound like yourself or your child?

This definition, in my opinion, is setting up what Ken Wilber has described as a "Pre-Trans Fallacy." Basically, what is happening here is 1) the acknowledgment of true transpersonal individuals with developed spiritual intelligence, 2) the affirmation of a shift of consciousness by the later generations and 3) society mislabeling this shift for disorder (ADD, ADHD, etc).

We can understand why society would label it a disorder - any epoch does not wish to see its own end, and those within its structures will fight to defend it, because it makes the most sense to them. That's fine.

For many of us who believe in reincarnation and "old souls," it makes sense that an individual who being born again would be traveling up through the developmental process quicker. That's fine. The psychic-subtle realm of development has alot of the characteristics of "indigo" children. But this is where the pre-trans fallacy comes in to play in two parts. The first? If you have authentically developed spiritual individuals - they still have to grow like everyone else. Meaning, you won't necessarily see a child dictating the law of karma to you. We aren't born mystics, we blossom into them. This is a very old mistake that dates back even to Jung. We misinterpret the non-rational for the transational. To be spiritual, to have the capacity for wisdom, you must go through it and then beyond it. The body/mind/spirit must develop an ability to tap into the divine that is ever-present.


The second issue is still of the Pre/Trans fallacy. I am sure there are a number of individuals with authentic spiritual intelligence. On the surface level, however, the definition of an indigo child is rather loose and up for interpretation. People will and have been throwing the term around at the slightest hint of talent. Your child is a great painter? He must be an indigo! Your child told you to love everyone? Oh, that must be deep indigo wisdom! Again I am going to stress here: There are always exceptions, but I have a feeling that this, like most movements, have far rarer authentic spiritual prodigies than described. There's nothing wrong with this. We want our children to feel special, because they are special for us.

Another interesting point raised by John D. Spalding in his article, "Brood Indigo,"

The Indigo Children are supposed to save the world--just like their Boomer parents set out to do.

Could many boomer parents simply be projecting their own unfulfilled desires onto the next generation? Are they passing the torch of narcissism to their children? Unfortunately it seems highly likely that this is at least part of what is going on.

Aside from the Pre/Trans fallacy the Indigo movement is suffering from, there is also the huge load of metaphysics that come with it. Again, with any authentic spiritual experience, we mold and interpret it according to where we are from on the spiral of consciousness: What level? What line? What culture? How deep? How shallow? A number of reasons why and what the indigo children are have arisen, and I'm afraid they rely too heavily on the surfaces to ever penetrate much validity.

Entering the reasoning behind the indigo children, we find a mess of new-age metaphysics. There's nothing inherently wrong with them - crystals, light, energy, vibrations. But we have to ask: Are these taken literally? Are they authentic spiritual experiences? Is there anything more to it? Anything deeper? Is anyone trying to make a general framework we can more easily navigate with? Also, what are indigo children saying themselves? Are they regurgitating what their parents are telling them or... ?

Well, thankfully there's a little bit of light shined on this! Not by those who have profited and wrote about indigos from the outside (Which is fine, if you understand what you're talking about), but an indigo herself. Interestingly, and in a rather integral fashion, indigo Laurel Chaisson has written: "The Seven Stages of Awareness." In the spirit of other developmental hierarchies throughout history, note 7 is once again present.

Right off the bat, I'm feeling good about this,

People are their purest at birth - everything after that is downhill in most cases! All babies are born with a higher-vibrational aura… not all of them start out at the highest level though,

The stages go like this: Searching for Truth, Gathering Knowledge, Shifting, Awakening, Remembering, Becoming, Being. We already have a good start. The details of this hierarchy are similar to many traditional systems of development, even to Wilber's developmental models. They apply to everyone, but indigos in particular are noted. Anyone can be anywhere, and can go up and down depending on circumstances. Sounds dynamic enough. There is a bit of metaphysics in it, but there is a healthy balance of tried-and-tested, perennial concepts utilized to make it worthy to read.

So, diving deeper into her writing, I found this juicy bit that literally cripples the movement's leaders (People talking ABOUT indigos but not actually asking them or others for alternatives. . . and the profit just rakes in):

Don’t ask, “How do I know if I am indigo/crystal?” because that will get you nowhere. There are hundreds of characteristic-lists that apparently outline our thought patterns and physical features. Books, websites, and people are just filled to the brim with theories on what makes us tick! It’s ironic that they’ve never actually experienced what it is they have dedicated their lives to. How can someone possibly understand something without becoming it first? What psychologists, psychics, parents, and teachers see is our outside - what we allow you to see without you asking us to show you more. What we expected was that you would immediately request that we explain ourselves but for some reason this is not the case. Perhaps it is our age or (for indigos) our sometimes extreme bluntness, but the fact is that you don’t talk to us enough. Instead studies are done or parents are asked to tell our story… but you have to hear it from us because we have been analyzing ourselves ever since we first came here; it’s our job! So that’s what I’m doing.

Yes! That's what we need. So, she goes on to describe that even reading the former description is altering our perception and molding our reality. So, if it can do that so easily, what's so weird about being an indigo? She gives a few easy steps,

Step one: when you are faced with a situation - any situation at all - take the time to ask yourself, “If I were called to be indigo/crystal right now, how would I respond?”

Step Two: act accordingly.

Step Three: Repeat steps one and two.

Hey, you’re done! Now wasn’t that simple? I bet you’re surprised… most people place us so high on a pedestal that they think it’s no longer possible to reach us way up there. But we’ve been saying it all along… if you want to be like us then you’d better start acting like it!

This is at least a great start - acknowledging the existential self, how we are influenced by others, how we tend to idealize "Others," yet this "other" is closer than we think. The transpersonal stuff starts to kick in, and suddenly we start seeing into other's perspectives, and they start seeing through ours. The higher "stages" of awareness are deeper and ever present, but I think it's also important to add that we may not necessarily have the capacity to "witness" that suchness at birth- at least, not in the way the sage does. Yet the wisdom of emptying the mind is eternal. And on that note, here's a few silly videos about indigo children. I think I've wrote quite enough now. You can take off your seat belts, the ride is over!

P.S. Here are some amusing media treats on Indigos,

Wolves and Angels; An Integral Reflection

The following piece was inspired by a class I am taking at Fordham University. Our assignment for the semester is to critically analyze any modern social movement. And, without any exaggeration on my part, 2/3rds of the class are writing about civil rights, pluralism, and sensitivity. The remaining classmates, including myself, are writing about consciousness, suicide and evangelism. For those of you who are familiar with Integral lingo, I suppose this class would be gravitating heavily toward the "green" meme, or pluralism/sensitivity.

And that's fine.

Two weeks ago, we had to present our topics. Unfortunately, when students that dared utter terms like: development, levels, lines, integral, unified diversity, map of consciousness, hierarchy of meaning,

They were on me like white on rice.

I was instantly given looks, raised eyebrows, questions with a mildly condescending tone.

"How can this be applied on a practical level?" I was asked by someone, with nods of agreement from other classmates.

"What are they doing to help people?" Another suggested.

I can understand where they are coming from, for sure. Our school is relatively progressive, heavily focused on the arts, liberal sciences, sensitivity, cultural awareness, etc. Yet, when the mention of unified diversity hit the air, they were wary and skeptical. This was disconcerting to me, as I was hoping to gain a spark of interest from the class (Integral is a rare topic in the university). My ego was smushed.

So the irony here began to set in. They had no problem being intolerant to the evangelical movement, agreeing whole heartedly that it was oppressive and backwards, shaking their heads at the in-class film, Jesus Camp. Yet, when something that is authentically unified comes along, like the mention of integral theory, they attack it! Strange, no?

And without further delay (Sorry for the ramble folks), here it is:

Wolves and Angels; An Integral Reflection

And we had it all. Upstairs in the student hall at least a hundred fliers, with a dozen different things to do. The world was at our fingertips, right there in our classrooms, and it was in very bad shape they'd tell us, very bad shape.

You could travel to Africa with foreign aid projects, discuss gender and race with the sensitivity club, and taste fine exotic foods in MultiCulture club. And this was all very progressive, so they would tell us. I had begun to have my doubts.

We sit in classrooms and discuss the same theme: Oppressive, hungry, needing world. Woe to you and we, the more fortunate, should extend our efforts. Sensitivity. Awareness. Effort. Assistance. The students are rallied up, in a very subtle way, to help. Yet I noticed, as each took their turn discussing one strife or another, that there was a level of enjoyment in it! Yes, hidden there, in the words of liberty, sensitivity, multiculture, there was an escape. Dare I say, it? No, I needn't, shouldn't. The escape was simple: If we all could immerse ourselves in these ideas, this diversity, we would be safe, we could make a meaning out of our lives and wish the demons away. These students were not actively wishing anything but their own security. The ultimate narcissism, it seems for us here in school, is through ideals. And this, if I were to say it aloud, would have them at me like a pack of wolves, who had just forgotten they were supposed to be angels.