post-metaphysical reference

First some quotation, I find important, from Ken Wilber's latest book Integral Spirituality. Then some reflection. The quotations deal with the theoretical aspect of what I have been exploring--language, meaning-making, how we come to understand, how we come to understand how we define understanding/truth, in a post-metaphysical age.

Here 'exist' means 'ex-ist': to stand out, to be known, to be disclosed, to be tetra-enacted, anything except being part of a pregiven world lying around out there waiting to be perceived. Part of an object's Ksomic address is the fact that objects come into being, or are enacted, only at various developmental levels of complexity and consciousness. Whether they exist in some other way CANNOT BE KNOWN in any event, and assuming that they do exist entirely independently of a knowing mind i snothing but the myth of the given and the representational paradigm...

Metaphysical thinking assumes a perspective-free universe, and then makes assertions about things that exist as if they were free of perspectives and free of contexts in general...All real objects are first and foremost perspectives. NOT 'are seen from perspectives,' but 'ARE PERSPECTIVES'....All occassions possess 4 dimensions/perspectives/quadrants. These are the 4 dimensions of what they are, and not something apart from that--because there is no 'apart from' how a thing appears; there is simply how it appears, and it ALWAYS ALREADY appears as a perspective. (Integral Spirituality pp.251-252)

----
Semiotics as translated through quadrants:

A sign can be looked at through the quadrants (quadrivia):

UL: Signified LL: Semantics UR: Signifiers LR: Syntax

The four-dimensions help reveal/tetra-struct referents.

Referents are perspectives. Not they arise in perspctives, but are perspectives. Referents are, Wilber argues, "real objects", by whatever definition of real we mean. Post-metaphysics is not idealism in the sense that my subjective creates all reality--because even if it were idealism, my subject is vastly shaped by the intersubject I am a member of.

But it is a philosophical system that believes in the reality of interiority. There are real "objects" of the inner world. The reality of phenomena, at whatever level/whatever dimension is checked via the three strands: injunction-empiricism-collective validity check. For AQAL praxis that is achieved through: enactment, enfoldment (holonic transcend-include), and nonexclusion (everyone is partially right).

And all of that is only the check for the True Dimension of the Kosmos (not Beautiful, Good, or Spirit necessarily). And there are other integral (non-AQAL) injunctions/principles that could be followed. And the Kosmic Address, Wilberian praxis only gets one "in the ballpark" (p253 IS).

And moreover there are mistakes. There are mistakes (referential falsehoods) that describe an existing phenomena but mislocate it (wrong level, perspective, state, type, etc) or simply illusory about the existence of a phenomena at any level/dimension. There are temporary versus permanent structures at any level.

So the thing is endless.

It is also as such content-less. It is giving a view of how the Kosmos appears from a certain worldspace (underlying patterns) and therefore acts as an invitation to participation & meditation in that experiential reality (both subjectively and objectively). A not the view. Of 1-2 levels with certain surface features: tending towards Western (particularly American), 3rd person perspectives (though still grounded in referential inner reality).

To me, this post-metaphysical languaging for all the limitations of its display (analogies culled from computers for example) is allowing no place to be disconnected from, to observe, to judge righteously.

As Einstein said showed in physics, there is no center to the universe--not geocentricism, not heliocentricism, but omnicentricism--or conversely every point in the universe is the center of the universe (from its own stance) expanding in all directions and standards are created by creating vectors from the beginning point to another, all of which undergirded by the Absolute (speed of light).

Interiorly, it is much the same. Truths can only be established by reference to one's own interior location (worldspaces--real locations, real spaces, real referents) in order to describe what one sees/feels within. Both have to be referenced creating standards relative to the Absolute of Consciousness/Godhead.

And similiarly within, there is no fixed center, no pole that can be established as primary over others which can be described as true for all, imposed from without, judge otherwise as ignorant peons. There are better and worse, more complex and less, but only relative to what is arising--post-metaphysics.