Dear Friends,
The sun sets, the sun rises, the sun rinses and repeats six more times, and we return to Wednesday, when it is time to discuss the Forumnal events of the past week. Not that we’ve been doing that much lately – my apologies for skipping Wednesday of two weeks ago. There was an incident with a fish, a bicycle, and a series of monkeys that we needn’t go into. You may be reading about it in the news, soon. And last week’s attempt to revive old conversations resulted in a final score of 0 revived and 11 still dead, which means it’s high time for new topics.
More of the intentionally controversial threads have sprung up lately. Gay Marriage and Abortion were followed up with Gun Control and Capital Punishment. There seems to be a certain glee among the Integral community here for taking apart major political wedge issues. If you have some topic you’d like discussed, but don’t want to bring it up yourself, go ahead and private message me (iiwhatsnew) and I’ll make it happen for you.
Particularly in the Capital Punishment thread, people have come forth with a lot of heart and openness, sharing their thoughts and awaiting insight together. Randomturtle says, “Killing off bits of the spiral is not healthy, though it sometimes seems much easier to just kill off our shadowy elements, rather than bring them out into the light and heal them,” and Balder says “Even if… there is a direct correlation between the harshness of a society's response to crime and the crime rate, I ask: At what cost? In my view, such a harsh and "final" approach to justice cannot help but spill out into society and affect it in subtle and profound ways.” What do you think?
There has been a certain amount of controversy in practice on the site lately, as well as in theory. A little bit of tension has sprung up in each of the three major forums.
In Integral Institute forums, I-I staff’s own Yschachter recently clashed with one of our members, Timelody, over his use of Spiral Dynamics – one of the most direct conflicts we’ve yet seen arise out of these controversial topics. After the critique of Timelody’s post, Yschachter says generally of interpersonal conflict in the forums, “It seems to me that the danger of avoiding Green as we often do here is that it makes Red riskier, because healthy Green can help soften the blows of healthy Red.” As we continue to discuss and debate here at I-I, conflict and tension are sure to arise. Will we find an Integral way to resolve them?
On the ISC side of the fence the challenge is directed a little more globally. User McFarlin, in the Integral vs. integral thread, encourages folks in the community to consider how Integral appears to the rest of the world, given the emphasis on jargon and the implicit sense of superiority that can be seen in all the talk of second-tier. “Do you wonder if you're becoming too comfortable in your own ‘community’?” she asks us. There have been some very interesting answers already, but it’s a tough question, and one that may be increasingly important as I-I continues to grow.
These issues become even more difficult when we begin to discuss who should and should not be participating in these debates. A few days ago, one member of the IN forum suggested that another only be allowed to post in the 7th Circle, and the debate is still raging. The I-I Road Rules have been used as guidelines by all so far, and have helped us create a second-tier community. It’s a difficult moment when we have to start thinking about enforcing them, especially in a case as ambiguous as this one. These conflicts, however they will be resolved, are the birth pangs of a new way of relating to one another. No one ever said changing the world would be easy.
On a more pleasant note, an effort has come up to balance out the controversy. You may want to take a look at the attempt to find something we can all agree on, and consider adding something to the list.
Excluded from that thread by virtue of its obviousness is agreement about the work of one Ken Wilber, whom everyone here seems to enjoy. The latest chapter of Integral Spirituality, “The Conveyor Belt,” with previously unmatched enthusiasm. “A brilliant climax to the book,” Davidd calls it, and Timelody calls it “nothing short of a Holy and inspired sermon!” Not we are without our uncertainty, however. Even as PrickliestPear reflects on the idea of religion as conveyor belt, he says, “I do wonder, though, how such an idea could be implemented.” Davidd also adds later, “I'm kind of worrying about the extent to which such disparate traditions can be generalised about...” This is where everything in the book so far comes together. What do you think about it all?
That sun, it just keeps on rising and setting, doesn’t it? And in the meantime, all kinds of interesting things happen. We’ve got lively and at times heated debate going on in these forums. Thanks to all of you whose posts are helping to build this community. And if you haven’t posted anything yet, could this be the moment for you to join in the fun and share with us your thoughts on something? I think it could be.