Re: integral ideologies 101 by Richard Carlson by Rich on Sat 17 Mar 2007 04:11 PM PDT Profile Permanent Link
Bourdieu is acknowledging that in epistemological shifts from embodied to discursive ways of knowing meanings are often dislodged and reconfigured in terms of analytical schema alien to their embodied source. What Jung and Pauli are attempting is to locate the psychic and physical gradients that unify the complimentary realities of archetypes and mathematics which are the strange attractors of human psychology, evolution, and culture. In the Jung quote the "non-psychic element of archetypes" refers to their cybernetic relationship with the phenomena of physics and the feedback loop between the physical world and our psychic apprehension of it. Bourdieu demonstrates through developing notions of “habitus”, that our knowledge of the physical world is backgrounded by our embodiement in it and insists that we primarily encounter this world through enactive engagement which cuts across physical, vital, and metal boundaries. He distinguishes such multiple ways of enactive knowing, which are imperceptible to theoretical constructions and discursive language regimes, from the mechanisms of ratiocination. The articulation and transfer of knowledge between embodied and informational (theoretical) context therefore becomes problematic. For their part Jung and Pauli erase the -“cut” - between the poles of psyche and physics and show that their relationship- before it crosses the threshold of consciousness - are complimentary polarities of a wider synchronicity comprising a unified field of consciousness, which can not be defined exclusively as either subjective or objective. So what is commons to both Jung’s and Bourdieu’s accounts is the problem of the observer, and the attempt to straddle the Cartisian divide which separates object and observation, information and embodiment, through existentsional encounters which allow one to know the world through direct sensorial contact, through an interpenetration of psyche with physics, which need not be articulated consciously or formulated rationally to be effective.