I agree it is very probably all of the above (99% of scientists agree), but then, I'm not blue or orange! :)  The key is motivation in the right areas/ways, I think.

Yes, I think you're right..........from what I've seen, this is what Don Beck preaches and practices.........

They did it because the endangered species law was their only solid 'weapon,' but it was a terrible public relations mistake. If they had instead used scientific/geological evidence (that was already present at the time) that all the logging was beginning to cause massive and dangerous mudslides, they would have made much more headway. 

The green movment had and still has to learn by doing.....and they are becoming more sophisticated I think.........but it takes time and resources.........and as we are regressing more and more to blue lately (as they have gained more power and resources)......the battle is even more challenging.......and I think it is more than OK to have those emotion-laden symbols like owls and polar bears in the green arsenal.... 

Communication strategy is of the utmost importance. We can't afford any more blunders like that one. We urgently need to think about who we are talking to and in what level/culture they are centered, so that we can communicate with them effectively.

The recent elections offer some badly-needed hope that progress toward healthy orange and green can still be made here in the U.S..........

Just as an aside: the forum discussions could be kinder to us academic types. Not all professors are postmodern idiots. :)

I'm probably oblivious to this, but where and from what "types" do you see this?  In the college I'm associated with as an applied reseracher, most academics haven't really gotten to or don't see through a post-modern lens (those that do are generally younger, somewhat-closet post-modernists.......which BTW are a breath of healthy fresh air)..........

How pervasive and effective is the post-modern lens in your academic world?

R.K.

Well, I teach in California. My university is wonderful, though quite steeped in green, largely excessive postmodernism (in my opinion & matching some of Wilber's complaints). Not all, of course, and I don't mean to slight green, as in many ways it is certainly pleasantly welcome. I am from Texas, where even the professors are still largely blue and orange. Not an insult - some of my best friends are there and part of those colors. That's part of why I understand their thinking so well. All first tier realms have their problems, of course. But also their good side. It is true that we tend to think of the bad/shadows first: mean green, greedy orange, blind blue. But green is also kind, orange is rational and progressive and blue has some very comforting norms of family solidarity etc. Anyway, my comment was just a slight complaint that "traditional" academia is still taking a hard rap from integral thinkers. Largely deserved, but not entirely. And, academia itself is evolving. I personally work with some pretty amazing people. And I teach an integral version of intercultural communication, making use of writings by Graves, Beck, Wilber and so forth. Where are you? I always enjoy your comments.

-Annie

Anyway, my comment was just a slight complaint that "traditional" academia is still taking a hard rap from integral thinkers. Largely deserved, but not entirely. And, academia itself is evolving.

Yeah, some of the rap is deserved when there is too much rigidity, disciplinary reductionism and group-think (which is very often), but I've always felt that the integral philosophy and praxis itself is mostly a product (and an extremely innovative and important fusion) of select prior academic achievements............esp systems theory, sociological "values" studies, anthropology, philosophy and comparative religious studies............

I will send you a pm on the rest..........

R.K.

Hey RK,

I just replied to your pm.

-Annie