In Defense of Ken Wilber

Author: David Schier Publisher: Neural Surfer Publication date: 1996

E-mail David Christopher Lane directly at

I want to go back to the home base now.

Mueckler is treating Wilber as a physicist who lacks experimental or methodological rigor--not not as a philosopher. Does Wilber claim he can 'verify' his interpretation of quantum theory? No. Has he misrepresented the substance of the theory? Well, perhaps he has not been systematic about the exposition. However, he has not misrepresented Schrodinger's 'speculation' on the meaning of physics. After a century of relativity theory how can a serious critic exclude the examination of the premises of cause and effect? It's Mueckler who's out in left field here, not Wilber.

More broadly, it is silly to expect a philosopher to found his argument on "experimental" proofs. The invocation of physics in Wilber's books is meant to be suggestive, not as empirical verification. Clearly, Mueckler feels uncomfortable with philosophers invoking 'science' in the defense of 'pseudo-science'. Yet what about the reverse? Physicists have simply appropriated the philsophy of Descartes--I think, therefore I am--as the tacit or underlying empirical worldview which justifies their attempt to find "objective" truth.

As for Mueckler, to paraphrase Mayor Shin from "The Music Man", 'I want to see this man's (philosophical) credentials! It's always comforting for "scientists" not to have to examine their assumptions!

E-mail The Neural Surfer directly at

I want to go back to the home base now.