Gaia: The Integral Pod - Integral Basics - Groking the map

Re: Groking the map

http://grainytaste.gaia.com — Sat, 16 May 2009 11:38:33 GMT

OK so I have been thinking about this too within the past week, because I have been sitting down and looking really at my own first person perspective and just wondering what is going on. In highschool I did a lot of drugs, in a very sort of spiritual layed back manner just contemplating life and enjoying the vibe, consciously considering things like meditation, spirit, the nature of the mind, the self, all of this, while going on journeyes and interacting with the various places we (my friends and I) would end up. It was a special time really, although I stopped going to classes and flunked high school. So there went my dreams of becoming an astronaut, but what did I have left? Time to think about things more deeply. Maybe an inch in the right direction is better than a hard earned mile in the wrong, whose to say.

The result however is that I learned to trip off on things including my own personality, not unlike narcissus. OK so I'm looking at my thoughts, I'm looking at spirit, I'm not sure who I am but really half the time I'm fine not knowing ...

And eventually I hit bottom. You can't keep that sort of thing up forever. There are bills to pay etc. But the question is still there, who the F*** am I, taking bills into account?

So in a long winded sort of way I'm grappling with this distinction of who I am really, and a mind that is fragmented in some pretty fundamental ways, and trying to piece it all back together sometimes feels like humpty dumpty.

Life goes on and I could take the Romanticist view of things and try to look back on the good ol days, project my negativity on the world and say that I just want to live a simple life, or I could embrace the fragmented self that I am and in the same instant embrace the fragmented self that we all are. The integral framework really looks like the best sort of whole system view that fits my (/that/this) experience. Anybody whose done drugs in any serious sort of way knows how things seem to fit together. A good hallucinatory journey will end in a realization of systemic proportions. A hallucinatory personality which is what we get from all of the Rainbow acid trippers has all of this fragmentation of the self but also embracing of the connections that integral thinkers are talking about albeit from a more grounded space.

So we all go through stages in our development. We are kids in one world view, then we are that kid encountering another world view, which for me was hallucinagenic, for others is "integral." So I sort of become the swamp in which this kid is traveling through in some personal discovery trip. Being a swamp is a lot different than being a kid though, and so I discover multitasking!

Ok so eventually the kid gets it, wakes up to his place in all of this, and what does he find but a thousand eyes looking right back at him. The jig is up, and all of the "I" energy that the kid was hogging is sort of given to the respective places in the swamp which (who) appreciates it very much, and we get what now is a transpersonal kid, running around in a transpersonal I space, with what looks now like a whole bunch of other transpersonal people. That is the personality structure that is the kid doesnt die the way the kid was afraid it would, but gets a place in this greater developmental scheme. When this whole thing finally occurs a lot of the fighting and unrest, that was the war the kid was going through to prove that he exists, (damnit!) dissipates at least if not goes away altogether, waiting for the next developmental personality to realize that it too is part of the greater scheme of things.

I sort of know this post is a little flaky, but I mean this is the process that is my life and its gotta be what Wilber is talking about, with the developmental and internal external perspectives. But especially that the kid is a level of development that share's "I" space with other things. The "voices" I think are like these, things competing for "I" energy.

Eddie

Re: Groking the map

http://grainytaste.gaia.com — Sat, 16 May 2009 00:40:28 GMT

Cartosys: we can individually grow in new and more complex ways now than anyone before us.

Indeed! Taking how our biology copes with this new world view is one of the greatest next insights I bet. Seeing ourselves as part of an ongoing continuum from the big bang, through to the development of atmosphere, biosphere, anthroposphere, technosphere (and civilized thought, including printed language) ... thats us. Crazy in its grandeur, that is in our grandeur ... hard to believe.

Eddie

Re: Groking the map

http://czg3000.gaia.com — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:28:43 GMT

Heh. It is an ongoing process of trying to understand it, i agree, but some key points have revealed a lot to me that lend credibility to the quadrants approach:

Evolution occurs in groups: It's not like a single organism randomly mutates one day and--pow!--a new species. Evidence suggests that changes occur over time in a group of organisms which lead to new species.

Evolution isn't completely a physically random phenomenon: Interior motives can influence exterior behavior which programs habits into DNA, which are then passed down to offspring.

In these ways we owe our own Individual Interior development as much to the collective as ourselves. For instance, language isn't a structure born from a single person. It is a purely collective occurrence. How much of our own experience relies on language to communicate the experiences of others to us? Developmentally we would be nowhere without it--although that it exists and we can take advantage of the contributions all of humanity since history began, we can individually grow in new and more complex ways now than anyone before us.

The Gods Must Be Crazy - loved it: Our screwed up society completely turned the perfect Green bushmen tribe's world upside down in that movie, didn't it? ;)

Re: Groking the map

http://co-mason.gaia.com — Fri, 15 May 2009 09:31:41 GMT

Eddie:the word “contrived” and the idea of “my understanding of AQAL” arefloating close enough together right now to have some commonality.

Ken Wilber says:" You can't have singular without a plural, nor exterior without interior - it makes no sense whatsoever. Rather all holons have 4 quadrants"

The 4 quadrants are deeply enmeshed to one inseparable whole in all occasions.
In that sense the 4 quadrants, and even the whole AQAL, is contrived.

However the 4 quadrants form clearly four different categories of perspectives and methodologies to look at and make sense of occasions.
These different methodologies were not created by Wilber. Many endless and frustrating disagreements and debates have been due to people looking at issues form wildly differing perspectives trying to prove that their perspective is the only correct one. The 4 quadrants can help to see how these perspectives can be complementary ways of describing the occasion, like looking at the scenery from different sides of the mountain.

Also In the UL quadrant internalizing the idea of 4 four quadrants can help in allowing more inner voices, perspectives, emotions and feelings to peacefully coexist and be in an internal dialogue with each other. There is less need to eradicate some thoughts or ideas, and feelings. A state of mind can appear where all the different voices are allowed to mutually interact in an accepting way. This can make the disturbing thoughts disappear much more effectively than by trying through meditation to silence your mind.

Irmeli

Irmeli

Re: Groking the map

http://grainytaste.gaia.com — Thu, 14 May 2009 08:08:21 GMT

Irmeli,

So from the point of view of a yogi in the forest contemplating the nature of the tree he didn't see falling, the tree doesn't matter, just his personal experience. However to the ecologist who was studying the termites living inside of the tree, the tree falling does matter, did happen, and he can prove it. Both are right from their particular perspectives, however both would be wrong to say that the other guy is mistaken. This kind of distinction is true in the case of this example, but is also a type of mistake that happens all the time which has to do with these two kinds of approaches. Where are you coming from, from the inside or from the outside? So the insight is about this kind of mistake that people tend to make. I can dig.

So what about individual vs collective? What is so valuable about that distinction? Essentially to say and i dont have any good examples, but that my experience is mine alone and no one elses, is true in terms of direct experience - no one else can see the screen from this angle - however its not altogether true because others can see this screen (assuming someone else was here), and do know what I'm talking about when I say screen, so we share the experience of a screen, just not the exact particular very same experience. I mean I might see a different thing when I say blue then you see when you say blue, but we both agree of the general type of thing to call blue whether or not its appearance is exactly the same in our particular, individual experiences. The distinction wanders along the weird area of what is true to me, and what is true to you ... and then what for whatever reason appears to be commonly true for both of us.

However like the distinction in the kind of truths of the yogi and the ecologist, just because something is true for both of us, doesn't mean it is true for either of us in particular. Its a kind of collective truth, a shared truth, a common, conventional truth. That is a screen but the direct experience of it is a truth ofa sort which is not a shared experience. I could tell you that it is its own great expression, and you could also say yes it is its own great expression, but then u could also say whatever you're retarted, its an f-ing screen, and then well the whole commonality thing just went to ... off the side of the earth.

ok so what does the inidiviuality vs commonality thing have to do with the inside vs the outside thing? It really just feels like how many different dimensions can one event have? Because after individual collective theres another split into the 8 zones.

the word "contrived" and the idea of "my understanding of AQAL" are floating close enough together right now to have some commonality.

Eddie

Re: Groking the map

http://co-mason.gaia.com — Thu, 14 May 2009 06:42:50 GMT

Eddie:However I haven't seen how the different quadrants play a particularly relevant role, in my direct experience.

It is important to realize that the four quadrants are dimensions of reality, that are actual aspects of reality always present in each moment. It is very useful, if possible, to have have this ingrained in your awareness so that it influences your meaning making process and judgments already when they appear. Or is present at least as an internal reminding and correcting observation in your inner questioning, and also in your communication with others. This creates space for more comprehensive and tolerant worldviews.

The four quadrants are also important to keep in mind when evaluating approaches that are claimed to be comprehensive. Integral theory insists that you cannot understand the realities any of these four quadrants disclose through the lens of another quadrant. Spiritual approaches have often tried to explain everything by looking only through the lens of UL quadrant. Science has tried to get at comprehensive answers of reality through only UR approach, or a combination of UR and LR approaches. Systems theory through solely an LR approach, postmodernism often through a LL approach. This way many approaches, that are capable of disclosing invaluable insights, become erroneous, when they try to explain phenomenon that belong to another quadrant. This is called quadrant reductionism.

Irmeli

Re: Groking the map

http://grainytaste.gaia.com — Thu, 14 May 2009 04:10:27 GMT

Cartosys,

I agree that AQAL is intriguing. Have you ever seen that movie where a person flying an airplane drinks a bottle of coke and throws it out the window, and it soon lands nearby a group of aboriginals who have never seen glass before. The coke bottle quickly becomes everybody's favorite object and disrupts the whole group. Its not the bottles fault of course, but the frenzy over it made one guy just come over, pick it up and proceed to take it to the end of the earth and throw it away. AQAL has some mystical thing about it that just doesn't fit into my purple (or whatever) brain. Trying to get it.

Eddie

Re: Groking the map

http://czg3000.gaia.com — Wed, 13 May 2009 03:22:33 GMT

I've found the Quadrants very clarifying in sorting out worldviews.

I.e. Scientific Rationalists will always need right-hand Quadrant-based measurable evidence in order for something to be accepted in their worldview.

Also it's very interesting to see correlations in one Quadrant with another.

i.e. UR brain chemistry correlates with UL experience.

I loosely define the Quadrants as so:

UL - Self and that which I experience
UR - Physical body / brain and immediate surroundings.
LL - Culture
LR - Society

This image shows brilliantly how Spiral Dynamics + the Quadrants make for a more intriguing map:
http://aura1.gaia.com/photos/27/268545/large/AQAL_2.jpg

Re: Groking the map

http://grainytaste.gaia.com — Wed, 13 May 2009 00:47:10 GMT

Irmeli,

I have also tried other maps, and have been able to fit the scheme of those maps into the spiral dynamic developmental model. However I haven't seen how the different quadrants play a particularly relevant role, in my direct experience. In what way would expanding on my experience of development by seperating it into different quadrants be a good idea? So far it feels more like, well, we could put it this way so why not, rather than we should and here's why.

Of course, I'm new around here!

Interesting aside, just to put AQAL into perspective, is to have a progressive history of the evolution of maps in general, like this one:

http://www.geekologie.com/2008/02/19/character-evolution.jpg

or like this one:
http://cache.kotaku.com/assets/resources/2006/10/dc1ae9ae0bb9.jpg

or any of these:
http://hydrodictyon.eeb.uconn.edu/courses/EEB210/evolution.jpg
http://nborgis.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/apple_evolution.jpg
http://www.churchofreality.org/kansas-evolution.jpg

Eddie

Re: Groking the map

http://co-mason.gaia.com — Tue, 12 May 2009 07:59:32 GMT

In Integral Life practice the 3-2-1 Shadow Process is bound to lead to better being able to perceive another person as other by learning to draw back one's projections of own qualities to others. This process inevitably facilitates also the capacity of taking the position of another. Without this capacity there are really no others.

Irmeli

Re: Groking the map

http://co-mason.gaia.com — Tue, 12 May 2009 07:48:53 GMT

Eddie:I guess I'm wondering of whether to look at AQAL as a map, or the map.

For me AQAL is a map. So far it has been the most comprehensive map I have encountered. The other maps I have been found to be more limited, and I have been able to include them in AQAL.

But I'm curiously waiting for a more inclusive map than AQAL to appear to my horizon.

Irmeli

Re: Groking the map

http://co-mason.gaia.com — Tue, 12 May 2009 07:43:49 GMT

Eddie:I tend to feel that one of the main messages of perspective taking is
being able to take the perspective of another person, especially if
they have a different genereal paradigm of looking at things. Does
seeing things from another persons perspective fit into the quadrant
scheme?

I also agree with you that the capacity to take another person's perspective is crucially important. This may not fit to the quadrant theme alone, but does fit perfectly in the AQAL scheme.

In his book 'The Evolving Self' Robert Kegan throughly and beautifully explains how the capacity to learn to take the position of another person is an important milestone in ego development. Before that accomplishment our communication and interaction with others is inevitably through trying to control and manipulate others or to live in symbiotic relationship with them. Learning to take the perspective of another is a crucial step in individuation in the holarchical development of self line. When that stage has been established, it has strong influences on how we can operate in the four quadrants. In UL a new voice appears: the voice of another. In LL quadrant true dialogue becomes first time possible.

Irmeli

Re: Groking the map

http://brucealderman.gaia.com — Tue, 12 May 2009 05:25:27 GMT

I would say it doesn't fit specifically into the quadrant scheme, but it is an important aspect of Integral's overall focus on perspective-taking in relation to cognitive and moral development.

Re: Groking the map

http://tely.gaia.com — Tue, 12 May 2009 04:48:10 GMT

Eddie, I think this is such a great question. I'm not sure if there's an answer for it, but I think it's an important thing to keep in mind as a question, lest we get too closed-minded and dogmatic about AQAL. I definitely think it's a great map. I've also read/heard critiques and suggestions for different maps and for improving AQAL that have seemed to make sense, although I can't remember where, so unfortunately, I can't provide any links.

IMO, even if one were to look at AQAL as the map, it would be important to hold onto it lightly so as to allow an evolution in the map and/or our relationship to it.

I'm curious as to what others think about this.

Re: Groking the map

http://pelle.gaia.com — Tue, 12 May 2009 01:43:56 GMT

"Does seeing things from another persons perspective fit into the quadrant scheme?"

No.

Re: Groking the map

http://grainytaste.gaia.com — Tue, 12 May 2009 01:14:55 GMT

Is the fervor for the AQAL map a popularity thing, like everyone likes Ken's map the best, or is it more of a this really is the best map, and we've checked?

I could imagine one way to check would be to get a bunch of people to list as many perspectives as they can and then take a tally. You'd get the most frequently thought of perspectives. Still not necessarily the most fundamental but itd have some research to back it.

I guess I'm wondering of whether to look at AQAL as a map, or the map.

Eddie

Re: Groking the map

http://serengeti.gaia.com — Mon, 11 May 2009 22:26:53 GMT

What can transcend the map but a given? That anyone exists at all is mappable, thus anything "happening" in that person (nondual awareness) presumably has a map correlate, like an UR brain-correlated state. The UR is really quite a bear for givens. Smokes them out all the time.

Re: Groking the map

http://czg3000.gaia.com — Mon, 11 May 2009 20:21:16 GMT

Does seeing things from another persons perspective fit into the quadrant scheme?

Definitely. I'd venture that any and all perspectives available to us can theoretically be mapped (maybe with the exception of nondual awareness which perhaps transcends the map) using AQAL.

Re: Groking the map

http://grainytaste.gaia.com — Mon, 11 May 2009 19:46:47 GMT

Thanks for the responses everyone. Would it be fair to say that the quadrants, and zones are the main perspectives that occur in any given event? I like the visual of the binoculars you put on that have a scene loaded on them, and then you flip a switch and another scene pops up; except the integral binoculars have many different scenes for the same event, that is interior individual, interial collective, external individual, and external collective.

I tend to feel that one of the main messages of perspective taking is being able to take the perspective of another person, especially if they have a different genereal paradigm of looking at things. Does seeing things from another persons perspective fit into the quadrant scheme?

Eddie

Re: Groking the map

http://drane.gaia.com — Mon, 11 May 2009 09:24:29 GMT

Irmeli: If the right hand quadrants It and Its are lumped together to It, we get the big three: I, We, It.

Yep. The Big Three I like are: the Good, the Beautiful, and the True. Which, of course, is just another way of saying the same thing.

G:D