3.1.1 Integral theories of mind and consciousness
A useful way to begin tackling the subject of creation
is to survey what scholars have to say about the relation between mind and the
physical world. This is reflected in the relationship between mind and brain,
this body part where our Western culture tends to locate the 'mind', and has
been the concern of many writers on consciousness. This relationship seems to
be central to the way we make sense, in a radical empirical fashion, of the
experiences in our life, whether we take a spiritual stance or deny
spirituality.
Writers such as Crick (1994) consider that
consciousness arises from complex bio-chemical, neurological processes in the
brain, and deny the 'reality' of 'spirituality' which they view as 'all in the
head'. To them, consciousness is an epiphenomenon arising from brain
functioning.
Other writers take the opposite stance, considering
that consciousness and 'mind' operate through the brain but are pre-existing.
This is the case of most transpersonal writers, such as Wilber (1977), or Grof
(1990). Rowan, in a book on transpersonal therapy that covers many of the
issues of the field, has also addressed this, quoting evidence that 'mind' can
function independently from the brain (Rowan, 1993, p.208). Hunt (1995) has
recently
attempted to bridge the gap with an inclusive model going
into the details of perception.
None of these attempts seem satisfying to me because
none manages to go beyond the 'taking sides' in the mind-brain controversy. The
fundamental ontological position they take is rooted in the meaningful
experience the authors have of their life, and so cannot be logically
challenged, as show the many criticisms on both sides, regarding circular
arguments. I have found Joanna Macy's (1991) theory particularly useful in
learning to imagine ways to transcend this kind of dualistic controversy. Her
theory of 'mutual causality' is based on the Buddhist notion that mind and
reality 'co-arise' (Macy, 1991). I propose that mind and brain could be seen as
mutually interdependent and co-evolving, neither arising from the other
'first'.
Although approaching mind as 'consciousness' is
fascinating, it seems to be a philosophical approach, doomed as a direction for
science, at this stage, because the basic ontological assumption does not
depend on scientific research but is rooted in mystical experiences = or their
absence = which are still outside the domain of science. Rupert Sheldrake put
this simply:
"In all these traditions, we sooner or later arrive at
the limits of conceptual thought, and also at a recognition of these limits.
Only faith, love, mystical insight, contemplation, enlightenment, or the grace
of God can take us beyond them." (Sheldrake,1995, p.324)
I will follow suit and will leave the essential nature
of mind, consciousness and of reality for others to debate. My interest is more
pragmatic. In order to gain useful knowledge that can help us find out how to
change, and how to live better, I need to study more practical
issues.
One domain stands out for its tendency to formulate
integral models: transpersonal psychology. I am interested here not in the
mystical dimensions relative to 'consciousness', but in the humanistic aspect
that deals with the 'psycho-spiritual development' of the self. 'Development',
in psychology, has a hierarchical connotation I give nuance to (Appendix 3.2),
but it also means learning and change, which can be very practical points of
view. The most well-known (and challenged) theory is the 'spectrum of
consciousness', formulated by Ken Wilber (1977). This is an elegant synthesis
between psychology and Eastern spiritual psychologies. Its welcome appearance
gave a solid theoretical background to the young field of transpersonal
psychology. Its hierarchical nature has been discussed, attacked, modified,
made more subtle b y many authors, but its basic developmental stance
influenced by Piaget has not. I have also seen many email list discussions on
this nagging question of linearity.
The second strong theory in the field is that of Grof,
which places the cause of many of our emotional troubles not in our early
childhood but in the perinatal period, before and just after the birth. This
model introduces the notion of 'COEX systems' (Grof,1990, pp.24-25), systems of
condensed experience that are permeated by a central theme, emotion or physical
experience, which we find re-appearing time and time again in our life. This
model pre-supposes 'causes' in the past that add up to a coex system. Michael
Washburn (1988) proposed another model, psychodynamic, centred on the movements
of life energy and in which the ego has to drastically
regress to reconnect with body and life energy before
transcending. Wiederman (1986) addresses some weaknesses of the transpersonal
field and notably the problem of being 'between two worlds', drawn to the
inner, the mystical, and yet needing to be also operational in the outer world,
or wishing to be of service. Few have addressed this issue before him, but
others followed. Kornfield (1993) points out the impermanence, the emptiness of
the self, and the childlike natural wisdom of the present, which, together with
development of self, must be integrated in compassion for the world. Fox (1990)
proposed a transpersonal ecology, and Wright (1995), described women's
spiritual paths of wholeness and the concept of 'permeable
boundaries'.
These models all assume one single direction of evolution
and development for the person, emphasising certain aspects their author feels
must be included, and simply ignoring other aspects. (discussion in Appendix
3.2).
| 
