Rating: 
Summary: Science vs. Religion? Why must it be so?
Review: Ken Wilbur has got to be one of the smartest authors that I've come across. While a good portion of this book was a bit over my head, I did come away with a good understanding of his major point. It is important for modern society and science to accept the reality of spirituality and this will not happen if science continues to categorize anything without hard evidence to support it as nonsence.
Rating: 
Summary: A Reflective Work of Genuine Worth
Review: The unique aspect of Marriage of Sense and Soul for me is the literate and informed conversation Wilber has with the great thematic works of the West. His reflective appreciation of Kant's three critiques and the centrality Kant's efforts have in Wilber's overall reflection was refreshing. It is in my mind a touchstone of serious consideration to engage, in a 'meaty' way, with central themes that were, by some's analysis, definitively defined by Kant in his critiques. Wilber's subsequent tracing of that thematic line up through Habermaus was again reassuring of the seriousness of his consideration. So many of "New Age" authors, while creative and personally helpful, seem deaf to the serious reflections within their own lebenswelt that not only display similar interests, but substantive contributions. So, having proven himself conversant with "his" lebenswelt, the introduction of Eastern themes of similar parentage was enlightening. This recognition of familial roots generates, in my mind, a convergence of the two streams, and give Wilber's work it's truly reflective deepth. What some readers measured as difficulty, I would suggest is the work's reflective depth echoing against our own shallowness.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant, Challenging, Stimulating-- with needed ideas.
Review: This is not an easy read. But it is brilliant and a real eye-opener and a bridge builder with concrete, practical suggestions for building a "marriage" between science and religion-- sense and soul. It takes a historical look at the pre-modern, modern, post-modern, Romantic, Idealist approaches, starting with Kant through Nietszche and Wittgenstein (at least that's how far I've gotten.)Wilber discusses how it is tempting to look back to pre-modern times for answers on how to resolve the differences between science and the more ethereal spheres of human functioning. But he argues that there are fallacies in going that route, since we must give up the benefits which came after those nostalgic times. We need to move forward and weave together science with an integrational approach to those higher functions-- an approach that treats the scientific approach as an essential but not unique or minimal means. He points out a new way of thinking about a science which includes changes in cognitive and even spiritual experiencing-- and also discusses the liabilities of only using a flat, physical approach to dealing with processes which include emergent properties. I am confident that once we reach this point, the "technology" (just as Robert Thurman, in INNER REVOLUTION characterizes Tibetan mental discipline is a technology) will become a highly valued tool used in health care and education. Wilber suggests that even nonlinear and quantum-type scientific approaches still end up "flattening" the appraisal of processes which are more than just objective, ie., including social, moral, artistic, soul, spiritual dimensions. He characterizes empirical evaluation/science as "it", spiritual/moral as "we" and artistic as "I" based ways of knowing and experiencing. Wilber suggests that in the modern world, the good thing is that science art and spirit/morals have successfully differentiated, whereas in the old world, these three were all combined together, so that religious leaders, for example, controlled thinking about science and art. The differentiation was good, in that it led to the ideas of democracy, freedom, logical explanation of the world, independent creative expression in the arts, etc. But, Wilber says, the differentiation went too far, and science became so powerful that its viewpoint has virtually wiped out the other two viewpoints as legitimate ways of looking at the world, that this is pathological. He suggests that the way to fix the problem is to integrate the three different ways of experiencing and knowing the world. Interestingly, Wilber dedicates considerable space to discuss how the idea of Paradigms is usually wrongly used-- that Popper never intended for the idea of a paradigm shift to apply to any new idea, and he points out that Popper never uses the term anymore. Bottom line is that we need to apply the same standards to any of the three categories of knowing-- whether to the material, mental or spiritual worlds-- 1) define the methodology and training and experience required to to competently evaluate the condiditions-- whether using a microscope, using a specific cognitive activity or engaging in a specific meditation practice. 2) describe the results/experience produced by following the methodology 3) share these findings to cofirm that they are the same for anyone appropriate prepared to perform the methodology. So, for example, to evaluate a given spiritual approach, a form of meditation by Nuns, for example, and any relevant results, then by sharing these reports and findings, we can determine whether there is consistency. Wilber suggests the same approach can be used to scientifically explore what happens going all the way up to the highest levels of ecstatic spiritual union. There's a lot of epistemological, post-modernity, phenomenology jargon to wade through, but there's a lot of meat too. It's worth the effort.
Rating:
Summary: This is the one.
Review: This is the book on modern philosophy. Everyone should read this, Ken Wilbur fan or not. His ideas are revolutionary. The integrating of science and religion is one of the most important things we need today in our society, so it is imperative that we all understand this. Definately the pennacle of Wilbur's work.
| 
