Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

oh dear. time to vent  a little - just some thoughts on what i find troubling:

i can hardly stand it around here in the second tier club.

at times it feels like self-congratulatory, insipid nonsense.

sometimes even insubstantial elitist pretentious crap. (as opposed to elitist pretentious crap with substance - which i love! :O)

a couple things are setting me off here:

1) pelle in te pre/trans thread (no offense here bro, we agree on a lot and i enjoy your brain) telling me to “trust integral people more” and that “everyone here is at turquoise cognitively.” 

2) the thread i just looked at called the “loneliness of 2nd tier” and the thread about the “shadow of turquoise being that you don't know how great you are….”

now i kow it's all just smart people people being nice to each-other and that's great - but to quote steve carell in his stephen vs. steven days - “i think i just threw up in my mouth!”

i am disillusioned by the emphasis on the SDi color-coded shorthand as a predictable way to humbly self-assess as not even yellow but turquoise - ah the .05%!

this has always seemed incredibly problematic to me, even before SD became such a big part of the conversation. i used to post on the worldofkenwilber forum years ago and people who (on inquiry) had done no mind-body practice, no therapy, no meditation would self-identify as being at “the centaur level” based on reading a couple books - which i aways felt was a total and utter missing of the point.

everyone who has read some wilber or done some integral stuff is poised for second tier, has integrated body, mind and shadow and is on the verge of some kind of non-dual understanding? - unfortunately usually of the andrew cohen or adyashanti variety…

i have also had it with what i find to be the most superficial relativist reading of non-dual ideas to mean that somehow the answer to the world's suffering is to just “wake up from the illusion,” or that  rational distinctions and moral value judgments are so first tier…

case in point, the steve pavlina juvenile solopsistic/subjectivist take on the secret even being labeled intelligent much less integral….(by the HOLONS newsletter no less!)

i love wilber's work.

i love the map-making and the stage models, but his body of work is vast and the emphasis seems to have gotten more and more disconnected from the psycho-spiritual practice orientation that got it all started, so that now there is such a preponderance of using SDi-speak and a certain mental understanding of the model to assert some kind of psycho-spiritual attainment….

and then it starts to feel like an in-group with a jargon that others can't penetrate, not because they aren't second tier but because they don't speak the code and they aren't carrying the mental identification.

i really dislike the way it can also become a free pass to a kind of ungrounded vague relativism in the name of being integral or staying out of the “first tier food fight.” the distaste for my use of the word “pathology” is one example.

this is not directed at anyone in particular, nor do i mean it as a statement on integral in general or the members of this pod and the totality of what they say, it's just an element of the zeitgeist that irks me.

one point i want to make is that there is a problematic reductionism that happens with using SDi language to talk about UL development. a lot gets lost in that translation.

what i have always found hopeful about wilbers work was his willingness to make distinctions to be polemical and to emphasize the need for serious psycho-spiritual work, that the map is not the territory, and ideas and beliefs won't get you there, that the awakened heart screams in agony and shouts in compassionate anger… for me this distinguished him from the new age nonsense that is so ubiquitous.

my question these days is this: will the psycho-spiritual aspect of the much larger integral vision become a repository for what amounts to merely a slightly more complex new age superficiality?

none of this is intended as a direct challenge, attack, or stereotyping of anyone here, it's just a set of tendencies that i observe that i wanted to air out, and see if anyone is observing anything similar. it's kinda like my problem with half the population on zaadz wanting to change the world through angelic intervention and positive vibrations. integral is gonna change the world by attaching color coded labels to everyone's stage-appropriate ideas reserving the most prestigious colors for itself?

any thoughts?

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Geeze, man, why don't you tell us what really gives you the shits. (~_*)

I've only been here for a short time, yet in that time I've read a lot of what you have penned and you seem to be quite the writer. However, everything you write appears to carry such a saddening undercurrent of bitterness.
Why is that so?
Why are you so annoyed with the merriment and joy, particularly with lightedhearted posts found in the 'Water Cooler' section?
How come your unable to over look the fact that not everyone is at your particular level of understanding? 
Why does it matter if people say they are at a particular level of attainment, yet clearly have not put in the yards, as in meditation, body work and the like? Who are they fooling? Only themselves! It's no reflection on you, there's no reason for your good self to get upset, just let it go.

I've played golf with many a fine man and many, many times I've asked “How'd ya go on this hole”? As I'm filling out the score card, and they reply, ” Ohh, four on this one”. “OK”, I'd nod, “Four it is” Yet, I would know they had shot a six or a seven. Who were they kidding? Certainly not me. Often they would win the round with these false scores. But who cares? I knew the truth. And, more importantly, they knew the truth. 

It's pretty much the same with levels of enlightenment, just saying one is at a certain level doesn't make it so.  However, trying to call them on it doesn't make it better, in fact, it becomes two wrongs trying to make a right. And that never works in my book.

Now, back to you. From what i've seen of your stuff you appear to be very clever and have quite a commanding grasp of what integral is, and is not. Unfortunately, you seem to write from a position further up the mountaintop than most, and it appears you are keen to keep that distance between yourself and others. Simply by calling others out and making what they are doing wrong,-by default,-makes you right. But really, is that how you want it to be? Is that the best way to seen as right?

I feel, that a gifted man as yourself, can, or more to the point could, make a huge change in many peoples lives. You have the knowledge. You have the gift of the keyboard. All you need to do is come down from your lofty position. Open your heart and smile at the self-congratulatory, insipid nonesense that others find such joy and companionship in.  In short, lighten up a little, laugh a lot. 

But most importantly, come down and talk to the people at their level, not yours. Show them what you know in words and phrases that they are familiar with. Don't worry about impressing them with big fancy terminology and excessive integral jargon, be more concerned with offering real transformative information in simple terms, for the simple people. let's face it, there are far more of the simple folk who need your help then there are smarty pants who you enjoy mentally jousting with.

So, the things that have been setting you off, as you put it, show more about you and what your going through, than it does about the other who posted the stuff that annoys you so.

OK, that's it.

Ohh, and one question I've been needing some thoughts on.
Are there six billion people on one world?
Or, are there six billion worlds?

All the best.
Guest.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Guest - what a very compassionate inquiry, thank you for that.

Julian - I have been wanting to ask you these same questions, but I didn't know how to say it.  I don't have the words to debate with you.  As a fellow bodyworker, I originally thought you are perhaps someone I could dialogue with.  But, your tone in your posts has been off-putting to me.

The 6 billion dollar question?  I can only quote from one of my favorite inspirational books which saved my life at 15, when I began to question my (heretofore inadequately explained) faith (Mister God, This is Anna).

“Humanity…has and infinite number of points of view, whereas Mister God has an infinite number of viewing points.”

To me, the answer is both…….6 billion people on one world, and 6 billion worlds.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Righteous, or self-righteous?

My thread on turquoise shadow was meant to wake people up a bit. I actually know that there are specific people on this pod who are contributing less than they could be to reduce the suffering of all beings because they are too caught up in false humility. Greatness doesn't matter one goddamn bit if you keep it to yourself to prevent your ego from getting slammed once in awhile. You missed the point completely.

What if Wilber were still washing dishes and not publishing because he just didn't feel like his ideas were worth all that trouble?

As to using colors–it's shorthand. We need shorthand unless we're going to be explaining ourselves an awful lot. This is why jargon exists.

No, I'm not going to bend over backwards to make sure everyone understands what I'm saying, nor will I ask people to do that for me. I'm happy to let people who are more into the finer points have at it, and read from the sidelines. There is an understanding that we are at a certain level and don't need hand-holding. Don't assume that a lack of interest in posting about a certain topic means that people don't understand it.

There is also a presumption that we're talking about specifics that is misguided. Being at a center of gravity does not mean that all of your lines are at that level. So presuming that everyone needs to have had certain experiences  to be at a turquoise center of gravity (darn it, I just know these people don't meditate enough-how dare they claim to be where I am?) is a misunderstanding of what this shorthand means.

What we say reveals more about ourselves than whatever we're talking about. What are we revealing here? What is this elite to which everyone is invited? Being part of it doesn't make me elitist. I'm far less elitist than I used to be when I was (here goes the colors again-watch out!) an angry green.

I think what I reveal to and about myself over and over again is that I have what Ken called a green allergy. That is, I was so recently a member of that center of gravity that it really triggers me. I've yet to get to that stage where I truly feel comfort with green. I don't think I'm kidding myself about being higher up; I'm grateful that I've got the map to know where I am, so I can do the work I need to do.

Also, to Julian, you are mixing up some of Wilber's and SDi's colors, or I'm not following you. We should probably be clear on that. Yellow doesn't enter into the Wilber scheme, which I'm trying to use more and more, as this forum is tied to I-I.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

thanks for the reflections liz and thanks for pointing out the color confusion. i'll be sure and get that straight. :O)

i just wanted to toss some stuff out there and see if anyone resonated or had any substantial disagreement or clarity.

i may have missed the point of your thread, and i do hear what you are saying about false humility - which is awesome, do you get what i mean about the problem with self-assessing predictably at the top of a theoretical hierarchy?

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Sure, Julian. I guess I missed that particular tree in the forest. You have some valid points. I winced when so many people jumped on you. You've taken it very well. It seemed like you had a general problem with the whole onilne world that got directed here, which is unfair. I felt like the new girlfriend taking the shit for all the old girlfriend's bad habits.

Actually, this is the best online place I've found so far, with a real balance of criticism and support for wilberites like myself. I was actually PMing Pelle and we agreed that it's very much improved by your presence.

I only use the self-assessing as a sort of guideline. It's important to remember it's just a damn map. It will change and get more accurate and stuff, but in the end I am the person who has to get out of bed every day and do my practice. Yeah, there are a lot of people who think they're hot shit. Who cares? What's it to you, as they say?

The part that got me (in part because it is the weak link in my ILP-and thanks for the nudge, I needed it) was the implication that sitting meditation is the only yardstick, the only measure. It's just so myopic. Ken is guilty of this too. Mind you, he's way the hell more advanced than I will ever be in many lines. but his interpersonal line is shite. He's a freaking cave man.

I don't live in a cave. I live in a very messy world with a thousand commitments and others to answer to. Actually, I'm going to shut up and let Stuart Davis tell you about it. We need a more balanced approach, and integral needs to get more dirty.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

thanks liz!

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

thanks for the reflections humblgodes.

~julian

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

guest said: “But who cares? I knew the truth. And, more importantly, they knew the truth. ”

LOL. i love your golf metaphor. exactly :)

reminds me of my favorite quote:

Think like a wise man but communicate in the language of the people.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

thanks guest, i appreciate the reflections.

~julian

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

appreciate your honesty and clarity guest.

thanks
~julian

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

You're being very honest Julian so I will respond in kind.
To me this is not only a righteous but self-righteous vent you are sharing with us.


i can hardly stand it around here in the second tier club.
at times it feels like self-congratulatory, insipid nonsense.
sometimes even insubstantial elitist pretentious crap. (as opposed to elitist pretentious crap with substance - which i love! :O)

Why are you attacking the fact that people are being mutually supportive? Do you have a problem with deep communion?
And calling the discussions here “insubstantial elitist pretentious crap” is just pure slander. There have been and are a lot of interesting threads and posts here.


1) pelle in te pre/trans thread (no offense here bro, we agree on a lot and i enjoy your brain) telling me to “trust integral people more” and that “everyone here is at turquoise cognitively.”

Do not use quotation marks to make it look like you are quoting me! If you are going to use quotation marks then find and use actual quotes from me. This is what I wrote:
1) “Apart from cognition, I make no claim about my turquoise-ness. My general stance on this is that people aren't attracted to this pod if they don't have turquoise cognition.”
2) “I feel that the risk of integral people sliding down into prerationality is minor, hence I feel comfortable speculating and sharing non-rational intuitions in this environment.”


now i kow it's all just smart people people being nice to each-other and that's great - but to quote steve carell in his stephen vs. steven days - “i think i just threw up in my mouth!”

Again, why this aversion to supportiveness and communion?


i am disillusioned by the emphasis on the SDi color-coded shorthand as a predictable way to humbly self-assess as not even yellow but turquoise - ah the .05%!

Generally we don't use the SD color scheme any more, except for v-memes. Ken's new colors can be used for any line of development being discussed, whereas SD colors can only be used for discussing v-memes.
And it's 0.5% that Ken says is turquoise, not 0.05%.

Spiral dynamics causes a lot of confusion stressing the difference between yellow (teal) and turquoise, when the primary development is the unfolding of perspectives: 1-p, 2-p, 3-p, 4-p, 5-p, etc.
Green is 4-p and turquoise 5-p, so cognitively teal is nothing but part of the journey from 4-p to 5-p. That's the reason that integral, second tier and turquoise are more and more being used interchangeably. There's nothing less-than-humble about it.


everyone who has read some wilber or done some integral stuff is poised for second tier, has integrated body, mind and shadow and is on the verge of some kind of non-dual understanding? - unfortunately usually of the andrew cohen or adyashanti variety…

Apparently this is one of your pet peeves Julian, since you once again return to the subject. Why is it that you keep insinuating that Wilber readers and pod members consider themselves to be centaurs with integrated body/mind/shadow? I have never, and I mean never, seen anybody claim this in this pod or over at the Multiplex.


i have also had it with what i find to be the most superficial relativist reading of non-dual ideas to mean that somehow the answer to the world's suffering is to just “wake up from the illusion,” or that  rational distinctions and moral value judgments are so first tier…

This is not what people are saying! We're fine with rational distinctions, we're fine with the moral line of development, we're fine with judgments.
We're aware of both vertical and horizontal development, etc etc
All this is Integral 101 so you're basically accusing us of not understanding the first thing about AQAL and Wilber's writings.


case in point, the steve pavlina juvenile solopsistic/subjectivist take on the secret even being labeled intelligent much less integral….(by the HOLONS newsletter no less!)

There has been a lot of harsh criticism of Pavlina and the LoA in this pod. There have also been some slightly milder criticisms. I only know of one single poster who has embraced Pavlina/LoA unconditionally.


i love wilber's work.
i love the map-making and the stage models, but his body of work is vast and the emphasis seems to have gotten more and more disconnected from the psycho-spiritual practice orientation that got it all started, so that now there is such a preponderance of using SDi-speak and a certain mental understanding of the model to assert some kind of psycho-spiritual attainment….

Are you serious? Do people not discuss their ILP and their spiritual teachers regularly? Does I-I not hold regular experiential workshops?

It's just that it's kind of hard to do Qi Gong, yoga or the Alexander Technique together online. Not to mentions deep therapeutic work that is best done with a professional therapist of some kind.

And since you reject the possibillity that humans connect non-locally could it be that you miss a lot of what goes on beneath the surface here? Just being painfully honest here, it is not meant in a bad way.


the distaste for my use of the word “pathology” is one example.

Combine integral cognition with green values and yes, you won't like the word “pathology”. But again, most people do not have a problem with that word apart from maybe Siona who is pretty green value-wise.
Why is it that it upsets you so much that some people have reached integral cognition but not integral values? Be content that you can spot it and that it is all exposed in the loving embrace of this pod.


one point i want to make is that there is a problematic reductionism that happens with using SDi language to talk about UL development. a lot gets lost in that translation.

SD and the development of values in humans is a zone 2 science, and therefore something that studies the UL from the outside. I honestly don't know where you're coming from when you find it problematic that SD talks about UL development. This is what zone 2 does by definition!


integral is gonna change the world by attaching color coded labels to everyone's stage-appropriate ideas reserving the most prestigious colors for itself?

Yeah we label structures and we label a lot of thing. Green hates this and believes it to be arrogant. Are you coming from green here Julian?
The changing-the-world thing is mostly a Zaadz idea, though I do believe that Integral has the ability to effectuate serious change.


With radical honesty and compassion,

Pelle

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

i loved your response pelle.

thanks so much!

yea i can be a prick sometimes, so i bow to your mild outrage. you are right, a lot of what i said wasn't fair - it's why i included the word “vent ” in the title - i wanted to blow off some steam and se if anyone felt the same or felt like setting me straight.

do i have pet peeves and conflict over this stuff? - oh yeah you betcha! it's because it really matters to me - and i know it does to y'all too…..

i do appreciate your up to the minute wilber V corrections.

to clarify:

i was not saying that anyone was claiming to be centauric here - i was comparing the turquoise  self-assessment to the tendency i noticed when the language/model was not yet color coded and pointing out the pitfalls of the jargon and the way it can lose its meaning when not connected to something experiential.

i hear that i have struck a nerve and rather stupidly - seeing as you are actually involved in the integral circles - i stand happily corrected and relieved that ILP is still very much in the mix.

My criticism was not of integral in general, but of one particular zeitgeist around the jargon and the identifications that i think can be problematic and diluting.

i must say - when i got interested in wilber and his stage models it was from the place of thinking about psychospiritual development and the therapies and practices that helped to heal certain wounds, resolve certain issues and untangle certain energy blocks so that growth could continue. the reason that i use the centaur example is that i took this idea of the centaur very seriously as representing the integration of mind and body, a certain amount of serious shadow work and an initiation into existential reality that allowed one to forego prerational spiritual fantasies - all this as preparation for grounded adult transrational spirituality.

do you see in that context how someone merely reading a book or an article and liking the idea of being ready for “higher level” spirituality so self-identifying as centauric would be a complete missing of the point?- which is that the map describes territory that we all have to travel in order to develop certain capacities in a healthy way…

as to the non-dual stuff, well, i feel like it is a hugely problematic aspect of integral and i feel like it is represenative of the problem i am sugesting might be at play, namely the intellectualization of certain experiential insights in a way that gives people conceptual language for someting that is beyond concepts - which sets them up to imagine that non-duality is proof of something it has nothing to do with.

ummmmm your reference to the beneath the surface non-local stuff i am missing here was so left field dude - please use your substantial intelligence to fill me in on what you mean! - or is this just further proof of my lack of second tier open-ness? :O)

lastly - i humbly apologize for misquoting you - it was late and i was being sloppy.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Julian,

I feel your pain brother. “Insubsantial, pretentious crap” is exactly what Integralism is becoming, and that’s why you should not, as Guest suggests, temper your tone or otherwise pussyfoot around. The misuse of spiral dynamics and the resultant in-group dynamics have already turned off and pushed away many of the best and brightest hearts and minds sympathetic to Wilber’s original Integral Vision.

The cult vibe is so strong around I-I these days it can knock you off your feet. For a monthly fee you too can go from Joe Shmoe to the leading edge of evolution. If you read A Brief History of Everything and “get it,” then suddenly everything you do becomes “integral.” If you blog, now you’re an “integral blogger” (as long as you mention Ken Wilber and use the right lingo). If you play music, now you’re an “Integral musician” (as long as you throw in some spiritual lyrics). What could be a shorter route to a wholly transformed identity? Just read a few books and give us your credit card number!

Next stop – The Oprah Winfrey Show.

–Bob

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Okay, so my response was supposed to be a little mini-vent in the spirit of Julian’s original post, but then a few of you snuck in your responses before I sent mine. Now, reading it after Pelle’s and Liz’s responses, I just sound like a dick. What can you do.

Anyway, I know there are incredibly bright and sensitive people here and with I-I. It’s tough to vent without ruffling feathers and people taking things personal. No offense intended.

Rock on,

–Bob

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Thanks for my first laugh of the day, Bob! You're a treasure. If I ever take offense, it's with the full knowledge that this is what I signed up for–honesty. Let us have it.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Bob said: “Now, reading it after Pelle’s and Liz’s responses, I just sound like a dick. What can you do.”

man, i almost laughed out loud here in the coffee shop after reading this. that is all.

~C

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

bob bobby robert - you big frikkin dick!

let's all keep visualizing ken appearing non-locally on oprah winfrey and manifesting his rainbow body as he teleports into the astral realm while hooked up to an EEG that reads str8 delta, yo!

if there are 6 billion different worlds out there and post-metaphysics is true i am gonna create that reality….. we're gonna be ritch, biatch! (it's simple quantum physics…)

:O)

now whose a dick?

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

I think the overall message of your rant is something that can't hurt being said.  I'm not saying this because I think people on this pod are elitist jerks.  They aren't – not in my opinion.  And I'm not saying this because the SD color system or Wilber's new system are misguided or inherently harmful.  They are nice tools for making rational distinctions, in fact! 

But with you, I have had some misgivings about how SD and “second-tier talk” is sometimes used.  I am reminded of the Theosophy movement in the beginning decades of last century, where people in those circles jockeyed for the highest initiatory status and ended up in fragmentation and disillusionment.  In the loneliness thread, I commented that “second-tier loneliness” may be a real phenomenon, but cautioned also against reifying it – identifying with it and turning it into another self-protective, self-isolating status symbol.  The same could be said for second-tier talk in general.  While such distinctions are useful, they can also be limiting, particularly when or if we aren't clear about the dynamics of identification, or about our motivations and needs, etc.  Saying this, I'm not pointing the finger at anyone in particular, except maybe myself: because I know I am capable of deceiving myself.

I think you are pointing to some real potential problems:  cliquish in-group/out-group dynamics, impenetrable lingo, mistaking a mental understanding of the map for being at the highest stages of the map (accompanied by group shame dynamics which may encourage people to self-identify higher than they are).  The emphasis in the recent marketing of AQAL/ILP on “downloading an operating system” and easy one-minute modules may unfortunately contribute to these trends.

Of course, group dynamics such as “boundarying” and forming linguistic codes are, in themselves, not unhealthy or problematic.  And I think most people on this pod are fairly cognizant of these processes and the dangers of fragmentation (rather than integration) that may sometimes follow from them.  Even if we get swept up unconsciously in some sort of unconscious identification, however, I trust the level of self-awareness among individuals here is sufficient to be able to face and deal with that trend, once it is pointed out.

With that said, however, I admit that I remain a little “cautious” or apprehensive about some of the trends I'm observing in the Integral “popularized” movement overall.  This is new territory, in many ways, and I have hope that we can weather it without repeating a lot of old mistakes, but I don't think we should get complacent or so self-satisfied that we imagine that we are immune from those powerful forces and shadows that have driven and divided human groups and communities throughout history.  That would be a big mistake.  That would be ignoring one of postmodernism's most urgent warnings.

Best wishes,

Balder

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

P.S.  It's probably a tangent on this thread, but I'd like you to explain your understanding of nondualism, from experiential as well as theoretical perspectives.  I think you sometimes fail to distinguish between “spiritual people in general” and people in this pod when you level your criticisms about flimsy understandings of nonduality, resistance to rational distinctions, etc.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

See, that's the thing. Second tier and “better” do not go together. Second Tier is the first place where one begins to fully realize that. And that's the trouble. It's a pretty lonely place …

Julian, there is plenty of company to be found out there where being “better” that no one is the better than everyone else stance.

I want to make sure I repeat that.

You have just asserted here how much better you are than all of those evil elitist second tier people … who might find themselves in a lonley world, since when they speak up,  …erm, people tend to jump the hell all over them … um, Yeah, like now.

Thanks for proving my point.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

timelody this was intended to be funny? i laughed - so thanks.

say more if you like - i am intrigued..

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

thanks for this thoughtful and observant response balder.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Dear Julian,

I would like you to read my following comments on aspects of your “vent” as references to the “contextual” background of what you have to say more than a mechanical, point-by-point refutation of your “thoughts” and opinions.

Softly, (almost seductively,) you begin:  “oh dear. time to vent  a little - just some thoughts on what i find troubling:”

Then,

“i can hardly stand it around here in the second tier club.
An emotionally-based admission of discomfort - disclosure yes, but a thought? - a thought in the purest sense? - a thought that acknowledges its own speculative nature?

at times it feels like self-congratulatory, insipid nonsense.
References “feeling” but sounds more like judgment, still no real thought.

sometimes even insubstantial elitist pretentious crap. (as opposed to elitist pretentious crap with substance - which i love! :O)”
More judgment, ridicule even, a little humor - but all in the service of establishing yourself as “better-than.”  Do you get where I am going with “context” here?

You then establish the “issues” which are driving your critical reaction, and commenting: 
“now i kow it's all just smart people being nice to each-other and that's great - but to quote steve carell in his stephen vs. steven days -

Just ”smart people being nice to each-other and that's great-…” a sarcastic, condescending and belittling opinion - still no thought.  You then quote Steve Carell and identify your self with his out of context remark, “i think i just threw up in my mouth!”  Over the top judgment, condemnation, hyperbole, and self-admission of your own disturbed state of integration.  The context is beginning to look ever-more reactionary and thoughtless.

‘i am disillusioned by the emphasis on the SDi color-coded shorthand as a predictable way to humbly self-assess as not even yellow but turquoise - ah the .05%!' I like your admission of disillusionment here, but the judgment of “predictability” is unwarranted in my case in particular, and not evidenced in any significant way on either of the two threads to which you refer.  Still no thought.

“this has always seemed incredibly problematic to me, even before SD became such a big part of the conversation. i used to post on the worldofkenwilber forum years ago and people who (on inquiry) had done no mind-body practice, no therapy, no meditation would self-identify as being at “the centaur level” based on reading a couple books - which i aways felt was a total and utter missing of the point.”  Softening here with more admission of annoyance at what you perceive as trespassing in your garden, but still no thought.

“everyone who has read some wilber or done some integral stuff is poised for second tier, has integrated body, mind and shadow and is on the verge of some kind of non-dual understanding? - unfortunately usually of the andrew cohen or adyashanti variety…”  Categorical, judgmental opinion posed as a question and sealed with a self-referencing, better- than rebuke.

“i have also had it with what i find to be the most superficial relativist reading of non-dual ideas to mean that somehow the answer to the world's suffering is to just “wake up from the illusion,” or that rational distinctions and moral value judgments are so first tier…”  What do you mean, ”had it”?  Can we expect another vent?  Neither of the two threads which have upset you so was intended to discuss non-dualist ideas per se thus the posters wisely stayed away from going off-topic into that discussion and allowed each other their individual perspectives without argument.  Another expression of judgment and more indication of better-than.  No thought yet.

“case in point, the steve pavlina juvenile solopsistic/subjectivist take on the secret even being labeled intelligent much less integral….(by the HOLONS newsletter no less! ) Horrors!  Heresy sayeth the righteous man!  More opinion, judgment, hyperbole and contempt.  Have you, as a integrally developed man, yet taken the perspective of the “other” and followed to its roots.”  If so, I have not seen evidence of it on any of the many threads that have addressed this subject.  Pelle, Balder, Mascha, and others have walked a while in those shoes, not conceding surrender to the LoA per se, but they have allowed to the potential of its possible implications.  I am, as you are aware, the champion of it in the context of I-I.  No one yet, has taken on, in dispassionate terms, the case I have made for it.  If you should choose to, I would only ask that you stick to the fundamental issue of the LoA, and skip any criticism of the movie which is utterly beside the point.  Is it?  Or isn't it?  If it is, I think the Integral must find a way to accommodate it.

i love wilber's work. Hmmmm…. No thought yet, but no quibble either.  I too admire Wilber and I deeply admire your comprehensive, academic grasp of his work.  (think context here Julian)

“i love the map-making and the stage models, but his body of work is vast and the emphasis seems to have gotten more and more disconnected from the psycho-spiritual practice orientation that got it all started, so that now there is such a preponderance of using SDi-speak and a certain mental understanding of the model to assert some kind of psycho-spiritual attainment…”. Softening opinion, but no thought yet, and generally I agree with your opinion on this one.  As soon as Wilber moves to 3Dimensionality, and away from any linearity, 2D “overviews” “windows” “lattices” and the like, it will be much easier to follow him.  My mind has rebelled at 2D all my life.

“and then it starts to feel like an in-group with a jargon that others can't penetrate, not because they aren't second tier but because they don't speak the code and they aren't carrying the mental identification.”  Another admission of feeling followed by an opinion that “…that others can't penetrate…”  Who are you referring to here, yourself?  Others who have told you that they can't penetrate the 2^nd tier babble?  Can you reference specific code that is difficult and note the prevalence of it?  Admissive, explanatory, probing the boundaries of thought.

“I really  dislike the way it can also become a free pass to a kind of ungrounded vague relativism in the name of being integral or staying out of the “first tier food fight.” the distaste for my use of the word “pathology” is one example.”  Another admission of emotion, and some explanation, but, here, I am beginning to sense what may be a legitimate concern.  There is no doubt that the “run-for-cover” option can and has been taken, by me on occasion for instance. 

“this is not directed at anyone in particular, nor do i mean it as a statement on integral in general or the members of this pod and the totality of what they say, it's just an element of the zeitgeist that irks me.”  Softening substantially, not backpedaling, but admitting that there is an “element” in the ”zeitgeist” that annoys you.  You are not alone in that sentiment, Julian.  I think that many of us are troubled by this as yet un-discussed issue.  I know that I am and I appreciate your pointing it out.  More, closer probing of the boundaries of thought.

“one point i want to make is that there is a problematic reductionism that happens with using SDi language to talk about UL development. a lot gets lost in that translation.” A statement of opinion as fact, not a thought, but an opinion I wholeheartedly agree with.

what i have always found hopeful about wilbers work was his willingness to make distinctions to be polemical and to emphasize the need for serious psycho-spiritual work, that the map is not the territory, and ideas and beliefs won't get you there, that the awakened heart screams in agony and shouts in compassionate anger… for me this distinguished him from the new age nonsense that is so ubiquitous.  Discovery, not thought, but the use of the word hopeful points in the right direction.  I agree with you and Ken up to the point of the “…awakened heart screams in agony and shouts in compassionate anger.” I am not versed enough in Wilber to know if that's his quote or your paraphrase.  In either case, I think that the heart may not awaken until the agony has been purged.  Again, I think, that the awakened heart can dispense some compassionate anger (and I do hear your heart speaking here in this context) without jeopardizing its state, but if the compassionate anger is expressed from the cerebral cortex-centered mind, then the compassion becomes suspect (as it is a resident of the heart) and the anger, however legitimate in the beginning will turn to righteousness. I think.

“my question these days is this: will the psycho-spiritual aspect of the much larger integral vision become a repository for what amounts to merely a slightly more complex new age superficiality?”  To my eye, I think this question exposes a genuine thought.  May I paraphrase?  What I hear you saying (out of the fullness of context) is this:  “When I think that it might be possible for some complex shallow thinking to pass through the filters and into the Integral, I experience a certain annoyance and (borrowing on my intimations of your admissions of emotion above,) I am afraid that the potential purity of Integral will be forever tainted.”  An entirely legitimate concern, and, since you posed the question in such open and dispassionate terms, I would say that this was your first, unqualified thought.

none of this is intended as a direct challenge, attack, or stereotyping of anyone here, it's just a set of tendencies that i observe that i wanted to air out, and see if anyone is observing anything similar. it's kinda like my problem with half the population on zaadz wanting to change the world through angelic intervention and positive vibrations. integral is gonna change the world by attaching color coded labels to everyone's stage-appropriate ideas reserving the most prestigious colors for itself?  No, I don't think so either Julian, nor, I dare, does anyone else paying attention to this dialogue.

“any thoughts”?  Yes, one more.  I think that you are brilliant and I see your brilliance diminished by what Guest referred to above - a pronounced difficulty to allow others to approach expanding awareness according to their own set of perspectives - a certainty that if we could all see things the way you do, we would all be better off.  I think that you have a great handle on the Integral Julian and, at times, you can write like crazy (the Pan's Labyrinth review for a shining example) but, to my eye, ear, and heart, I see a persistent thread of atheism in your expression, practically a contempt for all those who feel and have experienced intimations of the Divine.  Who knows, you may be right, but you do not have a single shred of real evidence to support your conviction, none.  Whereas many of us out here are friggin' awash in a state where evidence for an utter “thusness” is everywhere.  I urge you to try life out for a while in the shoes of what appears to be your enemy.

Best,

Michael

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

whew! rock on michael….

you just dissected my nasty little vent with the attention to detail of an english or philosophy professor.

what can i say - i am flattered, amused and appreciative.

BOW.

you raise some good points, point out some irrefutable truths, meet me half way and then suggest that my problem is atheism and i should try a litle thusness…..

it's funny, to me being awash in thusness and remaining atheist or at the very least agnostic, have never been mutually exclusive.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Julian,

I will admit that my “observation of “Atheism” could be dead wrong and I agree with you that “thusness” may be just as prevalent in the agnostic state as it is in the Deist.  Also, I appreciate your good sportsmanship, and welcome the same sort of “take down” when I get out of line.

I feel I owe you an apology - not for what I said, as I strove to be as honest, authentic, and compassionate as I can be at this time in my life.  No, not for that.  But if it were me on the receiving end, I know that I would have experienced some significant emotions, maybe even a powerful resentful reaction or two, or three.

So, in that event, it is that for which I apologize.  I apologize for the consequences of me being me in your life.

The irony here is that the first post I submitted to the I-I forum was similar to your, er, screed.  I was antagonized by the relentless rip-job that the admittedly misleading film the Secret, took in that thread you started.  I read the thread from beginning to end and then just let fly.  My post followed the same pattern as yours, was just as villifying in the beginning, rationalized my objections in the same way, and reached the same level of moderation in the end. 

As I compare the two of us from the vantage point of having tried on your perspective after posting my reply yesterday, I have come to consider that we may have more in common than I thought.  I have struggled with a nasty temper most of my life.  I know that when I let it out I am essentially blackmailing my audience emotionally.  I can see that quality still lurking in that initial post of mine, and for that, I deeply apologize to this forum as well.

Sail on Julian.  I really liked what Guest had to say about bringing your gifts to the party rather than requiring the party to come to you.

Namaste,
Michael

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

no need for any apology michael - i liked what you had to say and i came to party looking to get into it and see if it would be productive!

i want to make a distinction between: a) skillful means in the rest of the world, which i exercise everyday as a teacher and a healer - i am very caurious to hold a respectful space for where people are at and the importance of honoring and having compassion for their defenses or developmental levels etc

and b) being par tof what i think of as an integral think-tank where we throw around ideas of what works and doesnt work, what the pitfalls might be, what we are jazzed about and how to make the best contribution to the outside world.

in the think tank mode (and my lets change the world zaadz presence) i am all for debate, getting my hands dirty, trying to make sharp distinctions and calling bullshit when i hear new age stuff in drag as integral and notice a superficiality in the way jargon starts to lose it's grounding/meaning….. i think that these things can potentiallly (as you correctly interpreted) hamstring not only integral but any sincere attamept at a next level adult integration of east/west, psyche/soma, universal/personal.

seeing as i dont know anyone here personally i would assume that it is a given that nothing i could possibly say would be personal in nature - even though it is about things we all have personal feelings about - but i will emphasize that from time to time…..

i did not feel any resentment in this thread at all - but thanks for your compassionate concern.

all the best
~julian

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Julian,

Amen to that Julian, amen to all of that.  I think your distinction between the professional demeanor or “wa” as the Japanese might say, and the speculative, “Balderian” (sorry Bruce, I just could not hold it in any longer) wa of the I-I complex of perspectives, is a great point.  The shift must be made when traveling from one to the other or we will risk appearing wimpish and uncertain professionally, and stentorian or imperative in the I-I space. 

There was a moment in the parallel unfolding of Liz's Turquoise Shadow, and Balder's Flower's and Trees threads, when a genuine (to me) and somewhat sustained “moment” occurred.  Liz put her finger on it when she said,

“Deep bow to all of you. I feel a bit of the sanga that we used to have at IN resurfacing…with new faces and a new dedication to awakening forming. Bless you all for being… Mary, you nailed it. Ripley's tired. I felt tears welling up when you gave her permission to rest. She is so tired of being strong. She deserves a rest.”

I suspect this welling of tears to which Liz referred was running all through the sangha - I certainly felt it.  As I have thought about it since, I wonder if the experience of “we” that came from as-honest-as-can-be sharing of both intimations of “greatness” and experiences with the “doubt” shadow, had manifest a monad of pure joy as we all might have identified with the “permission” to rest from the struggle between confidence and doubt - that both were ok, both were welcome, both were fruitful.

Ironically, there lies the very potential of “pitfall” that you addressed in your original post and outlined most recently as the void space between east/west, psyche/soma, universal/personal. 

How can we continually hold these polarities as welcome, how can we honor them both while “suffering” in the dichotomous void, how can we at the same time protect this treasure of “we” space while at the same time admitting for consideration what might be threats to it? 

Well, I don't know the “how” of it, that I know for sure, but I do think that rigorous, searching honesty, and a willingness to share it, will attract the “how” to show itself when needed.

Best,

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

oh my goodness no i am embarassed - i had no idea that thread had been emotionally meaningful - i was just reacting to the title…..

apolgies to any who had their heart opened by it only to have me seem to scorn that…. this is not where i was coming from.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Julian,

Mmmmmm … hence my vigorous response to your post.  I think this moment right now is a gift from the “Thusness”, when intentional “groping” towards the truth, when a “turning too” each other strives for authentic selflessness, that the “thusness” steps in to close the curtains on the scene while the performers prepare for the second act.

I hope that you can now truly appreciate the gentility expressed towards you by others than me before this last was revealed.  I sure don't know about their assumptions, but mine was that you had read the thread.  If you haven't, please do.  I, for one, would love to hear what you think/feel of it from this now, truly amazing perspective.

Namaste,
Michael

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Julian,

I started the Loneliness at 2nd tier thread, and I responded to this thread in that one, because Pelle noted what you said about it. I have made a few corrections in my last post there, to better express the intent of why I started the thread.
Basically, I've been saying very similar things you've brought up, mostly in Integral Naked. It is important though to not fall into the vent vs. supress dualism that is so easy to fall into. It seems the way you have presented your thoughts, which I see as mostly valid, has been lost by many, because of the inherent hostility of your post. Especially, the throw up in your mouth bit.
I was guilty of this with the “bullshit” thread started on I.N. a while back, but even that was much less hostle toward those that would read it.

Remember, right speech, is to not lie, or slander, but it is really about creating more calm, harmony, and understanding with your speech, than anger. Sometimes the kindest word is one that hurts, but sometimes it isn't.
To quote:
“1. to abstain from false speech, especially not to tell deliberate lies and not to speak deceitfully, 2. to abstain from slanderous speech and not to use words maliciously against others, 3. to abstain from harsh words that offend or hurt others, and 4. to abstain from idle chatter that lacks purpose or depth. Positively phrased, this means to tell the truth, to speak friendly, warm, and gently and to talk only when necessary.”

There's no ruler for right speech, so we look toward intent and outcome. Here I would look to see that your intent was not comparable with the outcome. I know, because if you read my posts, you'll find that I end up appologizing a lot and realizing that my intent was not from a pure mind. This is because my speech doesn't always lead to greater understanding, group cohesion or harmony, which it should. Along with this is a basic understanding that humans only use either phonetic or written language to a very small extent to express themselves.  The current idea is that up to 60-70% of symbolic, expressive language is expressed in ways beyond the words themselves. This means we are starting with a loss of precise communication, and working our way down from there.
We also need to remember to be patient with people that don't understand the extreme need and value of right practice or who are practicing, but still haven't come to certain realizations. If nothing else AQAL helps us to be more patient and compassionate towards others, and give them the space and help they need to grow.

I would also like to point out that the things your talking about are prevalent in the places where people do a lot of practicing as well. We see these kinds of things in every movement, even the big, well established ones like Buddhism.


rick

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

interesting and generous thoughts rick - thank you.

your point is well taken.

~julian

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

I found this thread pretty interesting.  I found myself agreeing with Julian's basic criticism, but I

think others have brought up good counter points.  I think the jist of the problem is identification

and reification of self.  If spiral dynamics, or Wilber's framework, or whatever conceptual system
perpetuates habits of reifying one's self and reifying others then it's basically a trap.  A trap of

ego.  A trap of mind.  A trap of delusion.  I look at Wilber's as well as others maps as tools,

rather than truths to grasp onto or falsities to fight.  If Wilber's framework truly serves someone

to release their self projects and penetrate a more unitive dimension of existence, great.  If not,

I'd say it's just another crutch that needs to be let go, loosened and thrown away.  As the

historical buddha, probably one of the first integral teachers in my opinion, said, skillful means. 

Strange, this world we share, conscious presence looking through so many beings.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Julian:
i must say - when i got interested in wilber and his stage models it was from the place of thinking about psychospiritual development and the therapies and practices that helped to heal certain wounds, resolve certain issues and untangle certain energy blocks so that growth could continue. the reason that i use the centaur example is that i took this idea of the centaur very seriously as representing the integration of mind and body, a certain amount of serious shadow work and an initiation into existential reality that allowed one to forego prerational spiritual fantasies - all this as preparation for grounded adult transrational spirituality.

This is why I got interested in Wilber as well, and the bulk of the work I do on myself is still targeted towards this area. To me healing the shadow and integrating body/mind is far more important than ego transcendence - whatever that means.



Julian:
do you see in that context how someone merely reading a book or an article and liking the idea of being ready for “higher level” spirituality so self-identifying as centauric would be a complete missing of the point?- which is that the map describes territory that we all have to travel in order to develop certain capacities in a healthy way…

To me Wilber-IV was hugely problematic and I would actuallly hesitate to recommend pre-Wilber-V books to a friend. What Ken was doing at that time is that he first listed a nice progression of levels up to Centaur, and then proceed to stack psychic, subtle, causal and non-dual on top of that. Talk about a magnet for confused green spirituality! Oh, let's see, I'm having subtle experiences on and off, that must mean that I'm way past the Centaur! It was truly a theoretical disaster and you can't really blame Ken's readers for being confused.
Luckily Wilber-V corrected all this, and as far as I'm concerned Wilber-V inspires humillity instead of pride.



Julian:
as to the non-dual stuff, well, i feel like it is a hugely problematic aspect of integral and i feel like it is represenative of the problem i am sugesting might be at play, namely the intellectualization of certain experiential insights in a way that gives people conceptual language for someting that is beyond concepts - which sets them up to imagine that non-duality is proof of something it has nothing to do with.

Yotam wrote a brilliant post about this over at the Multiplex. Here is a quote:

“Ken's work certainly accounts for vision logic. And you need vision logic to really understand what some of the concepts he uses are (the lower quadrants, for instance, aperspectival madness, or vision-logic itself). But the way he connects the various conceptual elements of his theory seems kinda formal operational. What he's really talking about are rules, not systems. [They're just sometimes the rules that govern or arise from systems.]

This is in no way meant to be a criticism of him. It's still pretty friggin' brilliant. But the AQAL map is basically just the rules under which things operate, and it's described in terms of one object at a time.

When I thought this up, it was in terms of analogy to “hard” science. Conop science is cooking. It's saying “when you put these things together in this way, that happens.” It can only really predict that what happened last time will happen again. Formop science is Gallileo and Newton and such. It gets to the laws which govern what happens, and is better able to extrapolate into the future. Vision-logic science is modern systems theory, neuroscience, meteorology, evolutionary biology, chaos theory, etc. It gets into what happens when the circumstances are too complicated for the rules to be easy to understand, what the limits are of predictability, and what patters will govern the unpredictable. Vision logic science takes a closer look at the stuff that makes formop scientists shrug and say “That stuff is basically the same principles at work, it's just messier,” and they discover that there are new principles in the mess.

So for a long time you have con-op consciousness studies. “If you do this, you'll have this experience” kinda stuff. Then some people start integrating various traditions and get at some of the rules at work. Ken is probably the greatest of these, and AQAL seems very comparable to Newton's three laws - simple, clean, and absolutely fundamental to explaining a whole lot of worldy phenomena. And then someday there might be folks looking at the messy parts of consciousness studies and finding patterns in the mess. I think the big messy area left for Integral theory is how the surface structure arises out of the deep structure that Ken describes. How do the orienting generalizations manifest in actual stuff? How do particular myths arise out of the framework of mythic thinking? How does the next rung of the ladder find solutions to the problems of this rung? How do individual consciousnesses combine to create a dominant mode of discourse? What actually causes growth in a given line? So far, the answer seems to be “well, they just do,” which is exactly the standard form-op response to a vis-log question.”

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

I enjoy so much what you all write and though I don't know the Integral or SD language bar the little I picked up here and what I learned via andrew Cohens teachings, I wish to partake. I am aware that I might have annoyed certain individuals here through my not so consistant reasoning, and I apologize, and see that I have a lot to learn from you all.

I thought all day about this post and its responses. I can relate to much of what is discussed, but I was interested to see if we could take it forward. I can relate to Julians frustration as I (and supposedly, at times, many of us) can share his concern. All the responses to him are lucid and clear and they reveal a lot and I am amazed at the clarity many of you display.

I was wondering though? Is there a justification for this frustration? Sometimes it seems so to me. I think I understand the throw-back-onto-yourself-replies and they ring true, but I am interested in exploring this frustration and not to “come back” to peace in oneself, letting everything just be as it is. Accepting, or learning to live with the present situation is I believe fundamental to our sanity, but I do think to push our boundaries is good, even if it comes out of frustration.

Let me venture out to risk saying that Julians brilliant “rant” was a call for higher integration among us? That is unknown and unchartered territory I think (as it would be at any time we would attempt something new), and we will have to leave our comfort zone and try to see if we can create something together.

Many times I ponder my own integration but more often than not it seems to take me to a place where I by myself is not enough any more, and in order to proceed I need to join others to “evolve” into something more, bigger, fuller. This, I believe is the source of our frustration sometimes: that we yearn for something beyond ourselves, beyond our personality and private situation. Personally I find a lot of joy and satisfaction through my Aikido training and that is I believe mainly because it is a social event, involving many people trying to harmonize together. Isn't this a step up from soley existing a private individual? Because all the knowledge in the world will not satisfy Julian unless he's able to share that very information with others.

So is our purpose then here, and always, to comprehend eachother, to build up, and to strike upwards to something more. To go beyond, together?

But also, seeing all your beautiful responses here, that is what you guys are already up to?

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

delicious and nutritous pelle. gracias…

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent ...

grrrrr!


Wrote a f…. long post that got lost. That really annoys me. You know that feeling?

Guess the cyber spaced angels didn't want me to write it!

Grrrr.


Patrick

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Sure do, Patrick. The IN forum taught me well to copy and paste…but you can sometimes retrieve what you've written if you hit the back button a few times to get to your original post.

Liz

P.S. Michael: (big hug)

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Liz,

Thanks.  That feels good.  I've been in and out of tears all day while bouncing in the wake of that rascal Julian's post.  It's time for a hot bath.

big hug to you too,
Michael

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

warmth to all of y'all for being willing to dance.

BOW<

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

attaboy.  Big hug to you too Julian.

best,
Michael

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Goshiliciousness!!! You are all amazing!

Mary

!

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

I have been enjoying reading all of this stuff about the Secret, Oprah, the Law of Attraction, ‘ask, believe, receive’. I love Oprah, and still the hokeyness seems all too apparent. In my understanding, the mechanics of the “law of attraction” are not linear cause and effect as The Secret claims. The notion that I create the world around me with my thoughts is ‘cause and effect’ rationality, even though it irrationally leaps over the natural Newtonian laws of physics(f=ma, and you can’t push a rope).

Rather, the law of attraction functions in the non-local and quantum domain, and as such a set of “non linear rules” apply. These rules are predicated by ‘fearless living’—living without fear, no matter what we are called to experience and no matter what we are forced to witness. This fearlessness is contrary to ‘survival’ in every rational sense, and most of us cannot help but quake in abhorance at the notion. The thought of living fearlessly will send most of us into a spiral of existential anxiety from which we will arrive at the very state of the egoic contraction, sadly, that we are in anyway. Most of us do not live fearless lives. Even the thought of being fearless frightens us. Most of us believe that our fear keeps us safe, and that acting from a fear-based position is the one with the most security. In these strange times, it turns out that the opposite appears to be true. (As I am writing this, I am suddenly thinking of the plethora of ‘suicide bombers’…..in some way, they must be fearless. Pre-rational and deluded granted, but fearless all the same. This is a very powerful place to be in, though it is especially scary when achieved in the pre-ratiional realm! another paradox!)

In my estimation, some of the ’ non-linear rules’ in the law of attraction are:
1. I am not in control. I must let go of any outcome. ‘Thy will be done.’
2. It is not up to me to balance the scales.
3. I must become vigilantly aware of my own ‘intention’, exposing all of my shadows,continuously mining all of my motivations for my deepest truth in any given moment.
4. I must choose to live according to my deepest truth with my highest integrity even though any outcome is entirely uncertain, moment to moment
5. I am impermanent. Paradoxically, I am not impermanent.
6. The only constant(apart from the universal constants) is change.
7. Anybody has the right to reject me at any time.
8. In any given moment, I must accept ‘what is’. I must open my heart fearlessly to love what is.
9. I must open my heart to all of the consequences of my behaviour and alter my behaviour accordingly to bring my ‘intention’ into alignment with unconditional love.
10. I am important.
11. The medium in which we live, the divine millieu, the ocean of our experience is a bio-spiritual reality.

Considering further, the Law of Attraction is a description of how I interact with God. (my favourite definition of God is Meister Eckhart’s: ‘God is the newest thing there is.’)
It is a description of how I let energy flow in and out of my life. Am I contracted, rigid, open, flowing, constipated, dancing, expansive, controlling, frivolous, greedy, generous, conscious, dull? How do I have my ‘energy plugs’ plugged into the world? Am I sucking energy out of the world? Is the world sucking energy out of me? Am I in balance? Am I free? Am I frightened? Am I loving?

“Freedom is the ability to have or not have what I want and still keep my heart open.”

How I interact with God is for the most part dependent on how much of me I am prepared to bring to this dance floor. This in turn is dependent on how much of my own shadow work I have been able to address on a given day, or in a given moment. Am I able to be ‘I am’….or am I a list of qualities or achievements that I am compelled to identify with to prop us some illusionary sense of my own ego?

In truth, I woke up with a start in the middle of last night having dreamt that the roof of my house had fallen in. I was contracted and anxious. I lay in the dark considered how many other people are feeling exactly the same way this moment all over the world, and how many have felt this way since the experience of the human emerged into the Kosmos. As I was considering all this, as if on cue, my dog, Rosie, suddenly hoped up on my bed and snuggled in beside me, licking my face,(eee!) demanding to be stroked, not taking ‘no’ for an answer. I laughed. How many of us really just want to crawl under somebody’s arm, demand to be loved unconditionally, and not take ‘no’ for an answer. All of us? I wonder what that would look like! Ahh, the dreamed possibilities of fearless Love.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent ...

I have been doing some alignment work with my hara line and healing my denials -boy do i feel the shift so strong today . My magnetism is like I have a huge becon signal within me and drawing all those things to me that are part of the foundation for the new world about to be created.Can you feel it? It is  like a bird that must migrate it is within me and  it is current of a swift stream that I am riding .Can you feel it?  It is the same urge that is in the salmon to spawn. Can you feel it? It is more than just survival of our species it goes to creating a new species that is what it feels like.Can you feel it?  It is so clear that i see nothing else. Can you feel it? It is stronger than ever before- like xmas eve- there is a big urgency that feel it makes my stomach sick like i have been turned upside down and inside out.Can you feel it? It this overwhelming desire for love, to be love, to teach love, to live love, to create the blue print for all future world. Can you feel it? to live to embody the bio chemical blueprint  my entire energetic make up is shifting.Can you feel it?

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Hey everyone –

A few times here people have created a different title in their response-posts. Then, when someone responds directly to your post, it ends up changing the title of the thread as it appears in the forum.

Please do not do this. It can make it difficult for people to keep track of which thread is which. Stick with the title provided by the originator of the thread.

To correct this problem here, I'm going to change all the titles back to Julian's original title.

Thanks much,

Mary

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Hey julian and all. 

Just wanted to say that I resonated well with your 'vent'. In fact, I quit Integral Naked around a year ago because of more or less the exact issues you mentioned. I haven't read the thread you're referring to, so I can't speak to that. (and don't want to…. puh, they let you have it!… ; ) )But i recognize the concerns.

It was especially the SDi lingo that got under my skin, before i left IN. Tho, as some of you have mentioned here, noone is actually going around thinking they're great big evolved superhumans, even tho they use SD concepts amongst themselves on forums. I don't doubt that. For ones own personal use, SD generalizations aren't that problematic. But when it's used in various media, like IN, to generalize about heaps of people, I think it gets weird. An example is an audio at Integral Naked. It's called “2012, aquarian conspiracy” or something like that. In it, Wilber talks about his fear that sometime in the future we might have a bunch of “greens” that will create a World Federation, built on a one-person-one-vote deomcracy, which will inevitably lead to disaster, since 70 % of the worlds population is blue (is it “amber” now?) and below. He calls these 70 % “nazis”, (I understand he's sort of kidding, and making a rhetorical point n'all, but still..) and they will crave the killing of the enemies.

Now, to me, this just seems way, way oversimplified. First of all, I just don't recognize this intensely naive green meme. (and how does it relate to the “mean” one) I've had this suspicion that Wilbers idea of  “naive-green” is basically based on new-agers from California, - cuz that's what it sounds like. But what about academic “green”, activist “green”, political “green” and , I don't know, Intelligent “green”? What I recognize as “green” in Europe, seems much more down to earth, pragmatic and realistic than this “everybody's allright” green, that Wilber and co are referring to. And what of those below? Are they really so crazy that, given the chance and power, they'll become instant nazis?

I think this is what co-creator of SD Chris Cowan, and others, have such a problem with I-I about. This reduction of the Vmemes to one specific trait - like “naive” or “fundamentalist” - without having the linguistic courtesy to nuance it a bit. I understand the need to popularize and package it so not only wordheads get the drift, but there should be a limit. I think Terence Mckenna once said; “Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.” 

So at least that part of I-I, in my view, needs some revisioning.

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

Hi folks,
  I'm new to this pod so may be jumping into a puddle that isn't really there.  ;-)

  Julian's original post, IMO, points out an aspect of a perspective that seems to me to be regularly unacknowledged in our world.  We celebrate the “we” space both in our expression of feeling and in our intellectual forms as the miracle of intersubjectivity (whether local and/or non-local) and the locus of much of the growing tip of integral consciousness.

  The responses to Julian's post seem to indicate that we seem to have little to no space in our models and metaphors for the we-space as the locus of the mob, the gang & Lord of the Flies.  By leaving this gap, we rob ourselves of the ability to try to predict, to feel into, what second-tier/turquoise/whatever manifestations of that bit of the spiral may look like, should it arise.  Should it arise?  We will continue to be human and, though someone out there (sorry, mate, I can't remember who and I'm not courageous enough to tempt the browser gods to go BACK and look) is confident that no-one in this pod could revert to pre-rational, my hunch is that it will manifest, not in pre-rational violence, but in a more realised, self-aware form of the social, drawing room savagery of the early 20th century salons.

  This gap, or related issues, seems to me to be near the heart of the I-I dysfunction and is a bit of shadow that we haven't yet seriously acknowledged the possibility of.

  I was struck by the similarities in the tone and style (which I think pelle pointed out) in Julian's post to a family member kicking around at restrictions that are not acknowledged or named by their family system and the tone of several responses seemed to me consistent with that of the rest of the family prodding him back into line, and avoiding the issue underneath the emotion.

Love to you all.
Simon

Re: Second Tier? Get Over Yourself. A Brief Righteous Vent....

right on simon - thanks for your contribution. i appreciate it.