Brighton Integral Salon

In his magnum opus 'Sex, Ecology and Spirituality' (1994) Ken Wilber first introduces the concept of the holon. The term was first coined by Arthur Koestler in 'Ghost in the Machine' but Wilber extends the idea and, while trying to cover as much territory as possible but not trying to be exhaustive, gives 20 tenets.

A quick summary

"Reality is not composed of things or processes; it is not composed of atoms or quarks; it is not composed of wholes nor does it have any parts. Rather, it is composed of whole/parts, or holons.

This is true of atoms, cells, symbols, ideas. They can be understood neither as things nor processes, neither as wholes nor parts, but only as simultaneous whole/parts, so that standard "atomistic" and "wholistic" attempts are both off the mark. There is nothing that isn't a holon (upwardly and downwardly forever).

Before an atom is an atom, it is a holon. Before a cell is a cell, it is a holon. Before and idea is an idea, it is a holon. All of them are wholes that exists in other wholes, and thus they are all whole/parts, or holons, first and foremost (long before any "particular characteristics" are singled out by us)."[1]

The idea of the holon, as used by Koestler and Wilber, is stiking in two ways. It's sheer obviousness, "yes, and... so what?", and it's deep profoundity, echoing Nagarjuna's Tetralemma:

"Neither from itself nor from another, nor from both, nor without a cause does anything whatever anywhere arise"[2]

Before Nagarjuna Buddhist philosphy was paralysed in a battle between the realists and the idealists. This battle continues today in philosophy, science, theology and spirituality.

The search for a 'fundamental' substance has led physics, the hardest of sciences, into the virtual cloudy realm of quantum probability while the search for a fundamental ideal has led countless seekers deep into their navels, some never to return.

It is clear that both extremes are lacking. The view that "things exists" is rather like saying "things are wholes". The view that "things don't exist" is rather like saying "things are merely parts". The holonic view honours both perspectives but privilages none.

"This approach also undercuts the argument between the materialist and idealist camps. Realist isn't composed of quarks, or bootstrapping hadrons, or subatomic exchange; but neither is it composed of ideas, symbols, or thoughts. It is composed of holons." [3]

I may be erroneously conflating two very important ideas here, grasping neither fully, but the feeling I get from contemplating the idea of the holon, and Nagarjuna's "two truths that are not two" is very similar. Both confer a sense of freedom over the old rigid ways of thinking, the clunky "is it?" "isn't it".

I've blogged about this before, in fact the whole endeavor was aimed at finding those things which fell into the both/and rather than either/or category.

Finding the excluded middle way was the idea.

Finding a deluded muddle way is more likely.

Please feel free to comment.

References:

[1] Wilber, 'Sex, Ecology, Spirituality', 1996, p41-2
[2] Wikipedia, Tetralemma, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetralemma
[2] Wilber, 1996, p43