Hi, Schalk,

I am unclear how your two recent posts relate to my last post to you, or to the topic of this thread.  Not that I don't appreciate your thoughts -- I do; I'm just trying to connect whatever dots I might be missing, unless there are no dots and this is just a leap...

I had hoped, with this discussion on inclusivism, to do a pointing, and to invite others to do the same, in the interest of uncovering and articulating some patterns that might be present but unacknowledged.  Because I do believe it is "enormously health-restoring when we state what really goes on" ... when we perform a clear pointing. 

Regarding life in America ... certainly, there are many vague promises, but no guarantees.  Having married someone from another country, who came here with many hopes, I have watched a slow evolution of perspective -- from a rather naive belief in the myth, to disappointment that the myth is a myth, to a more mature recognition of, and appreciation for, what is still possible here even if there are no guarantees...  The ongoing lesson for me is to actually stand forward, to act, to take chances.  After traveling around the world and living on the edge, I've returned to the US and settled into a familiar and unambitious routine ... and my wife's aspirations are a wake-up call regarding opportunities squandered.

About your amendment to the Road Rules, I hear you calling for inclusiveness ... for a freedom to speak not only from our highest selves, but from whatever level of ourselves will really connect with someone in a skillful way at any given time.  This is not ideological inclusivism, but an inclusive, embracing orientation that, ironically, ideological inclusivism does not fully allow for. 

If we were to change the Road Rule to accommodate your impulse, perhaps it would be more something like, "Speak from your fullest self," or "Speak from your completeness."

Best wishes,

Balder

 

---

May the boundless knowledge that time presents and space allows illuminate the native perspectives of your original face.

Thanks, all of you, for your insights.  This discussion has been very helpful.  I'd like to add that as far as not being too fast to leap-frog over Green that various developmental lines may come into play here, for even if you cognitively understand Teal and beyond in many ways, you probably won't successfully display that understanding the the world around you if you haven't fully explored it in other lines, including the self-related streams and more talent-based streams that apply to specific skills, like linguistics and aesthetics, that are vital in actually displaying an idea in conversation with another human being.  So even if you know Green in some way you may not feel it and express it quite so well until you delve more deeply into the post-modern turn of the evolution of the human being on this planet, and an AQAL framework can actually help with that, as it puts it in the frame of a larger, holonic perspective, which of course is also not whole in and of itself, though I suppose "greater fullness" may be an accurate description.  I think, though, that the idea of different developmental lines being required other than cognition in discussion with others may account for proponents of AQAL being "out-gunned" by those taking a post-modern tact, as opposed to the idea of "Yellow-false-postives," an idea which doesn't quite sit so well with me for some reason.  Maybe you could elaborate on that, Balder?

Also, in terms of exploring our methods of knowing, it may be important to note here, as I bring up lines, that the developmental lines as we group them are essentially arbitrary, based on the methods chosen to research them, and it seems to me most useful to think of the idea of lines in general, along with the reseach that is currently available, as a reminder that doesn't happen striaght up a single spectrum, but is much more complex, with very different methods of learning and knowing that are intricately and intimately tied together, as I think Ambo suggested in one of these posts.

By the way, I think the current featured video on Integral Naked is especially appropriate to this topic.

And one more comment: one thing that may help us expand our view of an integral vision as it is actively constructed in the world and become less insulated might be to try explaining why AQAL is important to others without using AQAL terminology or the word "AQAL" at all.  Of course, conversations where we use the terminology are also important, because we are essentially co-created a new language to describe new phenomena, but the terms we find in the works of Ken Wilber and various people associated with Integral Institute and have come to call "the AQAL map" are really only the very first attempts to build this new language to describe the waves of Kosmic emergence we are currently engaged in, and they will likely sound as foreign to the ears of the distant future as the grunts and howls of the early human species would sound to us.

Hi fangz. Say balder, schalk, fangz and others I'm hoping I'll have more to say soon on this interesting phenomenon around 'inclusion' and the implied challenge of integration for it to be meaningful inclusion. Balder, I have looked at your blog and it looks like a good discussion, and yes, it is good to feel some resonance with Jim - and yourself. I'm not sure what more I might have to put forth to the discussion, but I'm hoping this week some time. Thanks you all, ambo

---

Ambo Suno

Balder:

I would like to request that you write a book. It seems to me that there is a treasure trove of applied synthesis waiting at the tip of your pen.

I am kind of amazed that with all of the really rich experience in the consciousness movement, there are not more "Razor's Edge"-type of works.

Regarding what I see in my world:

One of the features of life as we live it that really strikes me is how much editing happens. In America, there seems to be such a strong conspiracy to shame each other. Or to put it another way, we reward each other to the extent that we present a consistent, dignified, unfaultable face. This presentation function seems to be alive everywhere I look.

For example, I am amazed at how rarely older people ask questions. What is this concern for dignity at the expense of remaining ignorant?

So, to tie in the injunction to speak from the fullest self, I am wondering, what does it take for someone to open up all of the nooks and crannies of themselves and to give full play and air time to everything?

I wonder - maybe we edit and choke off so much of ourselves because we know that we are massively engaged in the deception of perception and the less we provide air time, the less likely we are to reveal just how "scoffable" we are.

Is it better to say something and be corrected and live with the shame of having been wrong, or to say nothing and always retain the ability to insinuate that we have been right all along?

I don't know about you or anyone else, but a pattern I see more and more of is that as information flies faster and faster, we all become slicker and slicker at sounding informed, defining topics to suit our strengths, framing issues to measure them based on yardsticks we are familiar with, and just ignoring that which may reveal us as we are.

What Integral does for me is remind me of all of the facets of who I am, how them fit together or can be describing usefully as fitting together, and it makes my facing of the world on Tuesday morning fuller from every angle.

I do not feel a need to reach higher. I simply want my boat to float at the level where the water is. Integral for me is about getting all rivers running into the full ocean.

 

Fangsz:

Thank you for pointing out the value of exploring consciousness altitude on various lines, and especially "talent based streams."

This is something that I think makes for rich living.

I was just talking with a good friend about how when we try our hand at something, we immediately get feedback from the product.

And we then become immediately aware of how that thing strikes us. And the awareness that allows us to see what may be limiting or "wrong" about what we just did carries the very seed that allows us to correct it and improve it.

I have a friend who has a son with Down's Syndrome. About a week ago, I wrote a song for the son and it goes "Willie, Willie, Mom and Daddy love you, touch the ground and see the sky."

The melody line falls and rises in an arpeggio. And then I realized, the song was too sweet. So, I left the sweet part, but added a chorus with minor chords and these slow thumping bass drum beats. And the melody goes "here we are, at our home, in the yard, room to roam."

So, now this lad has a respectable song that is both sweet but not completely "incapable." There is some competency in it. We may think he is just retarded but he has his own sphere of competence too.

And my friend listened to it and said exactly what I thought, it was kind of like a nursery rhyme song at first, and then this powerful section with the drums was just right!

So, I am thinking, the song may sound good to this kid, I have no idea what the world looks like to an 8 year old with Downs Syndrome. But the song also sounds good to an adult who happens to be his parent. And so we are firing on different levels now.

And then I realized what I had done - touch the ground and see the sky, the earth and heaven. Grounded and yet growing beyond.

So, I wrote a song for one kid and his parents. And it is good. And I learned a lot from doing it. And for me, that is kind of the Integral challenge. To try one's hand and see what happens.

I am suspicious of the value of positing AQAL. I think many people are just not patient enough or cognitively prepared to make sense of a layman's explanation of "this is what it is."

Let me suggest an alternative route. List the ways that the Kosmic views of most people simply are incapable of coherently unifying anything.

Say, "you have to admit don't you that:

1. A, B, and C seem to be real facets of the world, and they cannot be reconciled.

2. Everywhere we look we see hierarchies of development. In the natural world, in the mental world, in the development of emotions, and sense of self, and ethics, and artistic eye, etc.

3. We are surprised, aren't we, when people with outstanding spiritual insights behave badly.

4. There is a physical world that we seem to agree on, and when we ask what is really real, we tend to fall back on exterior descriptions based on this physical world. This screen cannot be denied as real, and yet my awareness of it cannot be denied as real.

In other words, identify all of the features of the non-Integral world view that just barely hang together long enough to maintain sanity in the daily life. And identify all of the facets of this world view that are not reconciled. In other words, instead of making a positive description of AQAL, make a positive description of the world without AQAL and show how it requires massive bluffing and deliberate ignorance just to function. And then the pieces of AQAL almost want to fall in place without even referring to AQAL.

So, when people feel that they are putting the pieces together, it becomes their product, whereas when it comes pre-packaged, it feels like the product of someone else.

Hi, Fangsz,

Thanks for your comments.  I agree with Schalk that bringing in the question of various lines is helpful, and I agree with you that that might be one explanation for the kinds of interactions I've witnessed, where self-proclaimed Yellow folks sometimes seemed to be out of their depth in conversation with postmodern folks.  My reference to "Yellow false positives" was prompted by a remark by Jim on a discussion related to this topic:

"I agree with Natasha Todorovic that some Wilberians who believe themselves to be at what Wilber used to call 'yellow' may in fact be 'yellow false positive.'"

If you haven't read Todorovic's essay, I recommend it.  I don't know if her conclusions are correct, but it does provide food for thought.  Essentially, what she says is that a faulty questionnaire they have been using to determine v-Meme affiliation sometimes falsely places Orange or Blue/Orange respondents at Yellow because of a similarity in surface values; whereas a sentence completion test reveals these individuals to actually be thinking at an Orange or Blue/Orange level.  (The main thrust of the argument in her essay is towards challenging the notion of the Mean Green Meme, which she says is a construct that is more likely to be formulated and used by individuals at Orange or Blue/Orange than by folks at Yellow.)

What is interesting about such possibilities -- that there may be folks at Orange or Blue/Orange resonating wth Yellow integralism -- is that the inclusivist strategy I've been describing in this post is essentially an Orange strategy.  Again, I am not saying Wilber's model is Orange; but because of the potential for folks at Orange to resonate with it, the implementation of it in the community may sometimes end up looking more like Orange inclusivism.

Best wishes,

Balder

---

May the boundless knowledge that time presents and space allows illuminate the native perspectives of your original face.

balder,

that's an interesting perspective on natasha todorovic and her essay--and i know exactly what essay you mean, even though i haven't looked at it since reading it in preparation for an SD group discussion more than 4 years ago.

our group was sharply divided between those who thought the essay was wonderful, and those who thought it stank. i belonged to the latter half. i remember pointing out how fast and loose she had played with statistics, which drew cheers from the one half, but only stoned silence from the other. it was what some wanted to hear, and others, decidedly, didn't.

clearly, i and others were being less than inclusive. it doesn't matter that todorovic herself was much less than inclusive. a more integral embrace would find a way to include her, something i suspect wilber has been doing, and i'm trying to.

it's not easy, especially if your own construction is being deconstructed, wilber and beck being the authors of the notion of an MGM. as well as i know, wilber never specifically rejected todorovic's view. he simply maintained his own view, broadening it to include MOM and the general notion that each level has its unhealthy, as well as healthy, aspects.

that the notion of MGM would resonate with orange is hardly surprising, given that green has become its primary nemesis. it's good to keep in mind, though, that it is not an orange construct nor one orange can hope to fathom while remaining at orange.

the same, i guess, could be said about blue, although with a twist. as wilber has warned us, amber/blue--a more stubborn version, it seems to me--has actually benefited from green's attacks on orange--and not just in the u.s., it's worldwide.

this is just another instance of a question i've been grappling with, which i think you've done an admirable job of bringing before us in your thread.

---

Thanks for pointing out that essay, Balder.  The problem I see with it is that it doesn't seem to recongize the importance of developmental lines, especially where psychodynamic processes are concerned.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that its idea of "yellow-false positives" was based on the fact that the data from a sentence completion test didn't match up with the data from the Spiral Dynamics test, which, if the sentence completion test is the one I'm thinking of from Susan Cook Greuter, does not make sense because the two tests are measuring completely different lines of development.  The idea of Boomeritis or the "Mean Green Meme," seems to me to be rooted in psychological shadow, narcisism is expressed through individuals with Green values, even though they would likely deny they are being narcisistic, which is exactly what it seems these kinds of tests would not identify, because they measure what an individual consciously identifies with.  Also, I would say that Yellow values sharing the greatest degree of similarity with Green values makes perfect sense, and I don't think Ken Wilber's Boomeritis ever implied that thoughs developing Yellow values somehow distanced themselves from or denied the validity of Green values, only that they recognized their problems and inherent contradictions.  Healthy Green values, especially when directed by Yellow-value leadership, could still be one of the most powerful forces available on the planet for social transformation, which is all the more reason why it's important not to distance ourselves from post-modernism simply because we feel we're "beyond" it.  For healthy tranformation, we need to embrace our post-modern selves, and use that to interact with other post-modernists in a skillful, forward-looking way.

From my understanding, anyone who can understand a book that represents a Teal-level cognitive structure has some degree of Teal cognition, they can at least see that those Teal structures exist in some way, but it doesn't mean they have Teal values or a Teal self-sense, which is what those tests measure.

fangsz:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that its idea of "yellow-false positives" was based on the fact that the data from a sentence completion test didn't match up with the data from the Spiral Dynamics test, which, if the sentence completion test is the one I'm thinking of from Susan Cook Greuter, does not make sense because the two tests are measuring completely different lines of development.

it's worse than that, fangsz. on p.4 she says that essentially, the sentence completions, direct observation and knowledge of some of the subjects, compared with results from the form A [the SD test] led to the idea of yellow-false positives. i don't want to belabor the point, but the paper is rife with things that simply aren't supposed to be done in scientific papers. it's simply not acceptable practice to massage the data and introduce new, fortuitous data in order to get the results you want; nor to introduce unexplained procedures, nor to omit crediting others, if indeed, by sentence completions she means the sentence completion test (SCT) of cook-greuter. and believe me! that's just the tip of the iceberg.

what is happening here? i certainly don't claim to know, although i feel i'm now capable of arriving at a more comprehensive perspective than i could 4 years ago, and that would include your all's reference to lines of development, your reference, fangsz, to unconscious shadows, and some of the things, i guess, you are trying to bring to our attention, balder, with this thread.

---

Thanks, Fangsz and Ralph, for your comments.  When I read the paper, I had assumed she was talking about a sentence completion test used in Spiral Dynamics assessments.  I have just reviewed all of the Spiral Dynamics assessment tools, and I think you're right -- she was probably referring to another type of assessment, likely Susan Cook-Greuter's.  So, I agree, she is conflating lines, or assuming that development in one line necessitates equal development in others, which isn't the case.

I am reminded of a comment that I saw recently posted on a discussion on the Gaia Integral forum.  Someone was quoting Sean Hargens:  "A lot of the people that like the integral model are not integral. There's a lot of people who have not stabilized second tier awareness in the self-identity line who love the integral model, who are proponents of the integral model. I don't think the integral community is as self-reflexive and as honest with themselves as they might benefit from. I think everyone gets that your cognitive line is higher than your self line. So, let's just say your cognitive line is turquoise; then most likely your inter-personal line would be teal and your self line would be green (your center of gravity). Because, each of those lines are usually one line above the other and that's pretty common in my experience. And so, I think more integral practitioners need to sober up to the fact that their center of gravity is probably green. There tends to be a bit of an anti-green dynamic out there which I think is problematic and I think this (knowledge) would change the dynamic and rhetoric around how we relate to green."

I mention his quote here not to argue that most Integralites have a Green center of gravity, though many may; but just as a description of the likely uneven line development within the Integral community - a factor which would also have an impact on the issue I've been highlighting in this discussion, where someone might resonate with and intellectually grasp the Integral model, and yet apply it in their interactions with others in a way that more closely resembles pre-Green inclusivism.

Best wishes,

Balder

---

May the boundless knowledge that time presents and space allows illuminate the native perspectives of your original face.

Schalk, I agree one hundred percent that creating a product or work of art and bringing it into the world is one of the best and most profound ways to get feedback on our own developmental capacities, and the experience of this feedback can be rather immediate (I've had that experience, as well).  As far as most people not being ready for a layman's explination of AQAL, I think your right if it is explained in plain terms, but what if it is explained through metaphor and imagery.  It seems to me a television show like Heroes is explaining the potentials of more integral levels of development to a very wide audience with statements like, "If the soul exists, it exists in the brain."

Balder, Sean Hargen's statement makes intuitive sense to me, but do you know if there's any specific source that validates his claim about each of those lines falling one level below each other in most people's development?  It's a good statement to bring up, because the uneven development of lines can definitely be humbling idea when we think of how much development we have yet to experience and how much we do not know, even if we've been, consciously or unconsciously, patting ourselves on the back for being "integral".  Just another idea to throw in here, I think the abbility, or lacktherof, to hold hightened states for long period of time (which I suppose may tie into the spiritual line of development?) will also tie into the way people interact, because one might not always act from their highest self and practice skillful means from the highest level of integration he or she can understand, but he or she probably will be more likely to do so if he or she are in a nondual flow state, and training these kinds of states through practices like meditation means we will make use of our highest capacities mor often.

Hi, Fangsz, I'm not aware of a specific study that demonstrates staggered development between lines in the manner Sean described (a one-step staggering between self, interpersonal, and cognitive development).  I see Sean from time to time, so I'll ask him next time I run into him.

Your point about state training is a good one; I agree.

Best wishes,

B.

---

May the boundless knowledge that time presents and space allows illuminate the native perspectives of your original face.

balder:

Hi, Fangsz, I'm not aware of a specific study that demonstrates staggered development between lines in the manner Sean described (a one-step staggering between self, interpersonal, and cognitive development).  I see Sean from time to time, so I'll ask him next time I run into him.

Your point about state training is a good one; I agree.

Best wishes,

B.

Thanks, I'd appreciate that.  Best wishes back at ya.

that's a wonderful quote, balder, from sean (esbjorn)-hargens. its importance, to me, is that it comes from someone who is apt to know more about this than the rest of us. at the same time he is careful not to claim to know more than he actually does. i think he makes it clear that he is simply giving his opinion.

my objection to the paper from todorovic is that it feigns to be scientific--at least that is my impression. it pretends to know much more than it does. it asks what i would consider an important scientific question: is the Mean Green Meme hypothesis fact or fiction? and then treats that question in a pseudoscientific way.

i suppose it can be argued that i'm being insensitive to the feelings of those who like this paper, and even more so to todorovic herself. and i would agree that i could do alot better in how i bring up matters of this sort--it's something i'm working on. but not to bring them up at all would, i believe, be a disservice to the integral community.

in the same light, i would honestly appreciate any constructive criticisms any of you can give me, even if you happened not to do it that well. imo, that's of much more value than benign neglect, whatever higher state it might be coming from--from an integral perspective, stages, as well as states, need to be taken into account.

my understanding of what you're bringing up in this thread, balder, are not just isolated incidents such as this one, but what you perceive to be general patterns. there's a wonderful, little book that came out last year, that i think addresses at least one aspect of this pattern. it's called 'unspun: finding facts in a world of disinformation', by brooks jackson and kathleen jamieson hall. i've recommended it before, but thus far i'm not aware of anyone who has actually taken me up on that, and read it. but, speaking in general terms, i think it is 2nd tier, although green, i imagine, could be counted on to claim it is orange, if it said anything at all.

we each have different priorities, don't we? i appreciate that we can come together on this thread to talk about it, rather than simply going our separate ways.

---