In “Meyerhoff, Wilber and the Post-Formal Stages”, Mark Edwards mounts a defense of the technique of “orienting generalisations” which Ken Wilber claims to use to create his AQAL framework. The technique has taken a bit of a beating on epistemological grounds from critical folks, but Edwards reclaims the core notion as central to social science in general:

Interestingly, the model that results from the generalising arguments of Burrell and Morgan is a quadrants model that includes a subjective-objective dimension and a transformational dimension. As Wilber was not aware of their work in the development of his AQAL model the multiparadigm framework of Burrell and Morgan seems to be an independent confirmation of some aspects of Wilber’s AQAL framework (specifically his interior-exterior dimension and his transformation-translation dynamics).

Both general systems theory and the multiparadigm approaches employ theory building research methods which are entirely consistent with Wilber’s orienting generalisations method. They all employ multiparadigm theory building methods to identify conceptual themes that can be used to connect the contributions of multiple paradigms. This is not a method that seeks to assimilate a large number of views together into a bland eclecticism. [...] The Integral endeavour is not an assimilative process.

While an integral methodology does need much further development it is not the case that such methods are not possible as Meyerhoff asserts. In fact, the idea of an “orienting generalisation” lies at the very heart of the theory building process. It is not only possible to use the method [of] orienting generalisations in theory building, it is essential that such methods be pursued for the cumulative development of scientific knowledge.

This doesn’t mean that the method is beyond reproach, but it does mean that if you’re arguing from principle that orienting generalizations can not be synthesized, you’re actually arguing with a whole lot more people than just Ken Wilber.

I really appreciate Mark’s essay, especially the way he opposes the kind of slack, ad hominem arguments which seem to have become acceptable for some people who criticize Wilber’s work.

Technorati Tags: integral

Tags: Formation, Integral