From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Sun Feb 23 2003 - 11:45:37 GMT
Hi David, Matt, others,
I found David's discussion of Campbell interesting, but unpersuasive. My
fundamental problem relates to the idea of Perennial Philosophy (PP)
itself - I don't think it stands up to scrutiny; at least, not yet.
DMB quotes Wilber describing the PP as "the common core of the world's great
spiritual traditions". This is an explicitly essentialist approach. I want
to know IF there is a common core, and see some evidence for that.
Some sort of common core has prima facie plausibility, simply because there
is a common human biological nature. Yet the acceptance of the MoQ states
that the social level - which constitutes the foundations of our humanity -
is separate from the biological. Thus there seems to me no obvious
contradiction in claiming that different spiritual traditions show a 'family
resemblance' but there is no core common to all.
This seems to be a particularly characteristic metaphysical conceit. It is
the 'conventional wisdom' on the subject (all religions are different roads
up the same mountain) but I think that owes much more to Enlightenment
ideologies than a proper acquaintance with the facts.
Sam
The lover of myth is in a sense the lover of wisdom, for myth is composed of
wonders. Aristotle
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 12:07:05 GMT