The Four Quadrants

[@johnbrown4568]

Ken Wilber’s Integral Philosophy’s “Quadrant Model” along with Popper’s “Three Worlds” and LeShan and Margenau’s “Domain Theory” represent the foundation of a Post-postmodern Philosophy that is yet to be fully understood, appreciated and broadly applied.

[@humanistastv]

This is what I needed!! So interesting!

[@ryannagy]

What's the best book by Ken to learn more about the four quadrants?

[@jonathanlivingston7358]

Sex ecology and spirituality

[@IansUToob57]

"A Brief History of Everything" has the maps as well.

[@deadfdr]

Ken, You are a treasure. I’m trying to get people to see Jesus is best understood within your framework!!

[@ErnestoEduardoDobarganes]

What a fantastic system to understand the external and external Universe.

[@petesheehan6927]

Very helpful introduction. Thank you.

[@davidcraze3993]

Very helpful thank you for this

[@raycooper1943]

great introduction

[@trashiewhite6111]

Travlers?

[@johnallegra7667]

Ken Wilber has never claimed to be 100% right.. Just partially right.. I suggest people get to know him before they critique him.. That is a real problem in our culture.::speaking out haphazardly before we understand where the person is really coming from.. And I'm no Ken Wilber apologist.. I don't even like him that well , but he is by far the most comprehensive philosopher in the business..

[@publicopinion3596]

Exactly, he has offered some profound concepts and even asks people to add to his theories in his books to prove him wrong or add to those theories and some just dismiss his philosophy as being "Mystical". Unfortunately, a lot of the hard science scientists dismiss these perspectives like those of Carl Jung too as they are exploringthe subjective inner world of humans. Even in the social sciences a lot of those social scientists who analyze the subjective realm will also dismiss philosophies like this in a blink of an eye.

[@candaniel]

Where would one place knowledge about, let's say, a distant black hole many many light years aways from us, in this model / map of knowledge? It would certainly be in the half that represents the External & Objective - but what about the Individual : Collective dichotomy? The Individual External quadrant contains the materiality, biology, physiology of the individuals body. The Collective External quadrant contains the materiality of our society, eco system, planet earth. But what about things that are in the External like black holes, that are so far away from our planet that they are hardly affecting the Individual or the Collective (at least not in any easily conceivable way). They are still obviously part our knowledge of the world. So where would one place such an object in this model?

[@sandygibbon2761]

@candaniel 4m ago ... the AQAL model is for humans or rather for Souls, travellers, looking out its EYES cal.cu.lat.ions.... For human Tree of Life understanding etc ... for our Souls to grow as in ascend as in return home... Other animal Souls ... dogs kangaroos birds etc ... have a slightly different model or (AQAL) spectrum that they belong on ... because they have a different Intellect = inside + telios + lectern = Forms Ideals instructions to species... their SoNaR pull down... With black holes and stars and etc... they are outside of our (human) spectrum or AQAL Grid ... and they arrive in our situation via bringing in the Big Bang and following evolution (quarks, atoms, etc and the forming of ancient molllusc species and ancient lizards etc following evolution) along to the existence or evolutionary arrival of us humans... So a black hole would appear in - or belong to the process of evolution ... as separate to us humans... has a different life and evolutionary path to us ... but is operational in the same time as us ... in a different frame ... We right quadrant lenses objectively view (black holes) and run that (merkaba body) observation through our left quadrant internal Soul thoughts beliefs thinking mind of which has an AQAL Base Level ascension or attainment build thus far on journey...

[@mrsbethaniesmith]

It's still the external. If you can see it or otherwise experience it, even with a telescope, it then it's external. If it's something you're just hoping is real or hypothesizing as real, then it might be internal, idk.

[@lauramatsonhahn5169]

???? Do people pay him to talk like this?

[@maciej.ratajczak]

If you want hear how integral theory is applied to real-world situations, rather than having it's framework laid out, listen to something like this. Hope it helps :) Ken Wilber - Integral Politics kzbin.info/www/bejne/qoK1hqiVabxloJo

[@trashiewhite6111]

It