• home
• about
• new
• essays
• AI
• book

Frank Visser, graduated as a psychologist of culture and religion, founded IntegralWorld in 1997. He worked as production manager for various publishing houses and as service manager for various internet companies and lives in Amsterdam. Books: Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion (SUNY, 2003), and The Corona Conspiracy: Combatting Disinformation about the Coronavirus (Kindle, 2020).

Which Will We Encounter First

Extraterrestrial Intelligence or a Wilberian Reply on Evolution?

Frank Visser / ChatGPT

For decades, scientists have scanned the skies for signs of extraterrestrial intelligence. Radio telescopes sweep the heavens, algorithms parse static, and astronomers patiently wait for a signal that says, in effect, you are not alone. This enterprise“SETI“is widely regarded as speculative, high-risk, and possibly quixotic. And yet, compared to the likelihood of Ken Wilber offering a sustained, technically engaged response to his critics on evolutionary theory, SETI begins to look almost pedestrian.

The question, then, is not merely humorous. It is methodological. Which event is more probable: first contact with ET, or a detailed Wilberian reckoning with mainstream evolutionary biology and its critics?

The Drake Equation vs. the Wilber Silence

SETI at least has an equation. The Drake Equation, for all its uncertainties, makes its assumptions explicit. It itemizes the variables: star formation rates, habitable planets, the emergence of life, intelligence, technology. The numbers may be guesses, but the structure is transparent. You can argue with it.

Wilber's engagement with evolution, by contrast, operates without an equation, a model, or even a stable definition of causation. “Eros” is invoked as a real force—sometimes metaphorical, sometimes ontological, sometimes coyly both—but never operationalized in a way that would allow critics to test, falsify, or even clearly address it. When challenged, the response is not recalibration but elevation: the problem, we are told, lies at a “lower altitude” of understanding.

SETI listens harder. Wilber ascends higher.

Signals from Space vs. Signals from the Footnotes

Astronomers know that intelligent signals, if they exist, may be rare, faint, and easily drowned out by cosmic noise. They therefore build better instruments, refine their filters, and collaborate across disciplines.

Wilber's critics, by contrast, have been sending clear, repeated, and well-documented signals for years—about category mistakes, metaphysical inflation, misunderstandings of evolutionary theory, and the persistent smuggling of teleology into biology. These signals are not faint. They are published, footnoted, and often meticulously argued.

And yet they vanish into a kind of intellectual event horizon. The response, when it comes, is rarely a direct engagement. Instead, we get gestures toward “post-metaphysical” perspectives, reminders that science itself is partial, or assurances that the critic is really objecting to a “straw version” of Integral Theory.

SETI has a name for this problem: false negatives. Wilber studies have perfected it.

The Great Filter and the Integral Altitude Barrier

In astrobiology, the “Great Filter” refers to some unknown barrier that prevents intelligent life from becoming detectable. Perhaps civilizations destroy themselves. Perhaps they lose interest in communication. Perhaps intelligence itself is a short-lived phase.

Integral Theory appears to have its own Great Filter: the altitude barrier beyond which critique cannot pass. Below a certain developmental level, objections are dismissed as “Green,” “Orange,” or insufficiently integral. Above it, mysteriously, critique dissolves into affirmation. Either way, nothing reaches the core claims about evolution itself.

Extraterrestrials, at least in principle, might want to talk.

Probability Assessment

So let us assess the odds.

Finding ET requires that intelligent life exists elsewhere, develops technology, and chooses to signal across interstellar distances. These are daunting requirements—but they are physical, empirical, and increasingly constrained by data.

Finding a Wilberian response on evolution requires that:

• Metaphysical Eros be clearly distinguished from metaphorical language.
• Evolutionary biology be engaged on its own terms, not reframed as “partial truth.”
• Critics be answered directly, rather than reclassified developmentally.
• Errors be acknowledged as structural, not incidental.

This sequence of events has so far shown no empirical support.

First Contact

If tomorrow a radio telescope detects a narrow-band signal from Alpha Centauri, the world will be stunned. Philosophers will scramble. Theologians will issue statements. Ken Wilber may even write a foreword situating the discovery within a Kosmic address.

If tomorrow Ken Wilber publishes a careful, point-by-point response to his evolutionary critics—addressing teleology, causation, and the misuse of scientific authority—that would truly shake the foundations of the Integral cosmos.

One event would confirm we are not alone in the universe.

The other would confirm that Integral Theory has finally come down to Earth.

On balance, it may be wise to keep the radio telescopes running.

Addendum: What is SETW?

SETW is a satirical coinage modeled on SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence).

It stands for:

SETW — Search for Evolutionary Theory in Wilber

The joke works on several levels:

Structural Parallel - SETI scans the cosmos for intelligent signals that may or may not exist.

SETW scans Ken Wilber's vast corpus for a clear, testable, scientifically literate account of biological evolution—and, more specifically, for a direct engagement with critics of his evolutionary claims.

Implied Rarity - Just as extraterrestrial intelligence is presumed to be rare and difficult to detect, a sustained Wilberian response to evolutionary criticism is portrayed as elusive, intermittent, and possibly nonexistent. Signals are hoped for, occasionally rumored, but never conclusively confirmed.

Methodological Contrast - SETI relies on:

• Explicit assumptions
• Public criteria
• Instrumentation tuned to detect falsifiable signals

SETW, by contrast, confronts:

• Shifting definitions of “Eros”
• Strategic ambiguity between metaphor and ontology
• Criticism reframed as developmental deficiency rather than answered on its merits

Irony - SETI is often mocked as speculative science.

SETW suggests that, in practice, it may be more speculative to expect Wilber to:

• Address evolutionary biology without teleology
• Distinguish clearly between poetic metaphor and causal explanation
• Admit structural errors rather than incidental “misunderstandings”

Deeper Satirical Point - SETW is not merely about Wilber's silence. It highlights an asymmetry:

• Wilber routinely critiques science from a meta-theoretical altitude.
• Science, when critiquing Wilber, is told it lacks sufficient altitude to count.

In short, SETW names an ongoing, good-faith search for something that should be easy to find if it existed: a rigorous, grounded, and accountable treatment of evolution within Integral Theory. The humor lies in the growing suspicion that this search may take longer than first contact with ET.