Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi Everybody!

I love zaadz.

I love Integral Theory.

I love Spiral Dynamics.

I think that all three represent an incredible interface of ideas, communities, practices - all that have the potential to be genuinely transformational and shift another .0001% of the populace toward second tier. :O)

Now I know this is a new thing and all, and I really do have compassion and patience for the process - but i wonder if zaadz has fallen prey to a kind of green/blue politeness combined with an orange/green enterprising positive thinking and is calling that “second tier”.

What I mean is that i see a real absence of messy, authentic, honest debate about what the transition  to second tier might  actually entail.

I love the guidelines that (i think) ken wrote up for integral forums - but one glance at the wyatt earpy chronicles makes that seem like a bit of a double standard, yeah? Don't get me wrong though, I am not suggesting chaos, merely a little more substance.

Frankly i see a lot of waaay regressive green/purple new age stuff, a lot of green relativism and a general assumption that spirituality and critical thinking are mutually exclusive and that changing the world means buying into some cutesy positive belief system.

Now of course no-one on zaadz gets to define the dialog or the philosophy. So this is not an integral site per se, a spiral dynamics site, (a julian site lol), or a network explicitly devoted to making the leap to second tier - the center of gravity will define itself, and so it should be. But one of the things that troubles me with integral in general, as well as SD, as well as what I see happening at zaadz, is a kind of reliance on cool jargon to create shared identifications with little discussion of the hard fucking work it takes to actually create real stagewise growth.

At times it seems like it all becomes a hip identification - a new-new age for really smart people, and then a additional crop who know the language by imitation, but don't really get the implications of what it is saying.

So i want to instigate a little more debate, serious discourse, brainstorming about real ways to effect change, honesty about how fucked up the world really is right now.

I am kinda tired of meeting new integral folks who proudly proclaim they are second tier - it's like the wave of papaji devotees who came back from Lucknow in the 90's claiming non-dual enlightenment and offering satsang. Integral and SD sometimes sound like they are just more  accessories for the spiritual hipster - like that deep knowing vacant look that I remember from my satsang days….do you know? do you know, that i know, that you know, that i know, that i am that?

So, in closing, I am all for inclusiveness, but let's bust out and actually say something. Let's express opinions and share theories and ways to apply them and get our hands dirty, and take action together - this network has amazing potential - let's not allow it to become the New Age my space for people who read.

Who wants to play?

Yours

~Julian

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi Julian,

great little slideshow of viewpoints there. Very enjoyable. But what to debate when there’s total agreement? I recognize every one of your POVs as valid and smart, observant, and in its own way - right. And so? Are you going to make others post the way you want them to? (big smiley grin) Hm, wanting anybody to be different… uh… that’s a lot like trying to herd a gaggle of cats. I’ve tried it again just recently, despite so many spectacular previous failures, to get some pesky netizens that I adore, to do something and NOT something else. Did they listen to me? Yes. Did I have even the slightest bit of power over them? Ha ha ha! But good luck to you and your quest to find people who disagree and put up some feisty, flamboyant repartee. I’ll be happy to throw an occasional left-fielder in there, probably.

Later,

M

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi Julian

Thank you for your post; like Mascha, I find myself in substantial agreement - so I guess you'll have to work a little harder to stir debate, lol.  I think you'll find people willing to engage in lively debate if you approach it in a respectful, authentic way as you are doing here (as opposed, say, to just stirring up shit for it's own sake, which is not very desirable).

I'll ponder this - and I invite you to bring up more concrete examples or suggestions - but what's coming up off the top of my head is that, for me, doing the nitty-gritty work required to go to second tier means - for one thing - making sure you do some actual shadow work and avoid doing a spiritual bypass or resting self-satisfied in a primarily intellectual understanding of these concepts.  In my own case I've been doing shadow work by going to sessions (individual and group) with integral therapist Robert Augustus Masters, and also (although not very recently) doing Ayahuasca ceremonies.  I also try to surround myself with people with well-functioning bullshit detectors who know they have my permission (even encouragement) to use them on me.  :)

Another aspect which seems key to me is staying engaged in debate and speaking uncomfortable truths when it seems important and appropriate to do so.  I don't feel like going into the details, but there was a huge, long-term debate in the Integral Naked forum over the interpretation of the Road Rules, and how to approach trolling/spamming on the forum.  IMO, there was way too much of a pathologically inclusive, green-meme vibe in how that situation was (not) handled, and ultimately I moved on as a result. 

Briefly, engaging in f2f relationships (especially with people who are “second tier” or trying to be) based on healthy openness and integrity is another way to move things along.  Finally, for now, there's the question of taking tangible action in the world - I think your post is pointing in that direction, and if you have ideas on tangible actions to take in the world I'd love to hear more about that.

Again, thanks for asking some interesting questions, and I'd love to hear what others have to say about this.

spiral out,
arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

arthur right on! yea shadow work is an invaluable and oft overlooked component of serious stage wise growth…i would hazard a gues that you are amongst the 10 or 15% on zaadz who not only get that, but are doing something to that end!

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

This really resonates with me:

“let's not allow it to become the New Age my space for people who read.”

I was talking about this exact thing with my ex-husband/best friend last night. I've been really delving into personal issues around this, so excuse the slight tangent. But I've noticed that so many of the profiles and photos are exactly like a “second-tier” MySpace, which is what my ex suggested it was.

I see what appears to me to be a lot of first-tier, preconventional behavior masquerading as post-conventional second-tier stuff. It seems like the men are touting their spiritual accomplishments (puffing out their chests) and the women are trying their damnedest to post the sexiest pictures of themselves they can find. Hell, when that fails, they just post pictures of other naked women!

Is this really all there is? I read the comments under the pictures and they are just like what you'd read on MySpace, only dressed up in fancier words. Instead of “You're Hot!” it's “You're a radiant beauty!” Some of it's not even as dressed up as that.

I'm sure the guys could find similar stuff that they find less-than-inspiring, but I'm not as attuned to that.

Some guy has been asking me to be his “friend” and I went to look at his profile. Virtually all of his friends are attractive women, and he only joined a few days ago. He's obviously on a very focused mission. So while I will acknowledge that it feels good to be asked, it also creeps me out that there are men on here who simply want to put together a harem of attractive women's pictures. I'd really like to bring a discussion of this out into the open.

Is there any way around the ego-reinforcing aspect of this interface? Do we have to remove all the pictures in order to level the playing field (ugh, boring) or can we transcend and include this?

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

liz, i loved your response. right on!

let's talk more about this stuff. start a thread with these points and i will definitely respond…

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

OK, I'll pick up the stick.  I'll start by saying I probably disagree with much of  what integralists are calling Integral.  Maybe it's because I don't know integral.  Maybe it's because I do.  Frankly, I don't know which is the case.  Anyway, to get into it in depth is seeming to require much more effort than I am able to manage these days.  I'll try with a pithy comment that might get it started.

Second Tier, Third Tier, Fourth?…..none of them are enlightenment (assuming that a goal of integral practice is to move people closer to the realization of enlightenment). 

Those are identifications that might actually be harder to drop than a simple First Tier identity.   So much of integral, SD, etc. is just higher order egoity.  Being higher order to me implies a greater level of empowerment, but the dark side of that is the inflation that can accompany that empowerment.  I think there is more than enough ego-inflation to go around the Second Tier.  Second Tier is not liberation from the ego.  At that level, in my view, the ego is even more powerful than at lower levels.  It is more clever.  The depressed person doesn't need very complex structures of consciousness to maintain their depression.  “Woe is me!” is good enough, and also pretty simple (though not easy..ego seems to be just as tenacious at all levels) to disassemble.  At higher levels, the egoic structures are much more complex,  and way harder to take apart.  (begin edit) They need to be, or else a higher order conciousness would be able to accelerate along the path infinitely and there would be no problem at all.  If someone with really high order conciousness was faced with the simple limitations that depressed people struggle with (I'll admit this is not an AQAL argument…to keep it simple, or to be lazy, you make the call), then the higher order being would see through it in a second.  But they have a whole new set of issues to work with, and the ego is still there, and maybe it knows it has it's work cut our for it at higher levels, so the problems  of consciousness, aka the ego, get more and more complex as we move up the ladder.   (end edit) Not only that, but these higher order structures are relatively new, so we look at them with amazement and think that they are so much more special than the old structures we are familiar with.  But they are structures, and in my view, structure implies limitation, and limitation is incompatible with enlightenment.  So, if you want to realize your enlightened nature, drop not only your First Tier structures, but do so without picking up any Second Tier ones to just replace them.  The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

OK, that's pretty anti-integral from somebody who really does love integral theory.

Keith

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Wicked, Keith!

I've been having my doubts lately about this whole integral nonsense anyway, lol!

Seriously, I have been feeling more, like you said, that it's been getting in the way of progress rather than helping it along, in both my personal path and in the world at large.

I wish I had the words to describe it. But I think you're getting at it for a start. Perhaps it's just the actual taking seriously of it that is the problem. I know Ken has said over and over, “It's the map, not the territory” but perhaps we need to take that deadly seriously and take the map as lightly as possible.

You're right that it's harder and harder to shed this stuff the more “advanced” we become. You a fan of Stuart Davis? “The higher that we climb, the more the ladder sways.”

So that implies, does it not, that we have to be ever more vigilant, ever more questioning about our own motives and shadows, right? Yet what I see is still lots of facades and posturing, made worse by the veneer of a second-tier stamp of approval.

The phrase “Integral Naked” just came to my mind, and what it's supposed to be about, that phrase. It's an ideal. Try and integrate all of ourselves with the utmost clarity and honesty and openness. It's a tall order.

That said, I'm not despairing of “integral” and what it means. Surely, it's a moving target and we're all on a path that, no matter its appearance, is heading in the right direction.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi Keith

First I'd like to point out there is nothing intrinsically “wrong” with ego, and if by “liberation from the ego” you mean something like ”elimination of the ego,” then I think this has nothing to do with integral living or spirituality.  Transcending exclusive identification with the ego would be part of what this is all about - according to my current understanding - but the other part would involve refining the ego, transforming the ego into more functional forms that better serve Spirit in-and-as the world.  The ego, in itself, is nothing more (or less) than the aspect of your bodymind that interfaces with the rest of the kosmos - it's the boundary where “Spirit manifesting as you” interfaces with “Spirit manifesting as everything else” here in Samsaraland - while bearing in mind that all that is “merely” temporary manifestations of the Ground of Being.  As long as your bodymind exists, the ego as I'm defining it will exist in some form.  And when I say “merely” I would also note that this means that everything is also always already a perfect manifestation of the Ground of Being; thus, as Robert Augustus Masters points out, “there is no such thing as an insignificant act” (I like that interpretation a lot better than an alternative interpretation I've heard from people to the effect that “everything in the manifest world is utterly insignificant”).

I agree that we can get too obsessed with the map and make an idol of it, but it seems to me that the underlying motivation in the integral enterprise is to attempt to touch base with all of reality as you live your life, to leave nothing out.  It may well be the case that focusing too much on the map can actually interfere with that; this may be a sign that it's better for one to throw the map away - having already largely internalized it - and get on with the matter of integral living.  Later the map may once again become explicitly useful and/or interesting to you, or maybe not.  It doesn't mean that the map is necessarily wrong or misleading or counter to one's growth or being in the world (although any of those could be true) - it could just be that at a particular stage or point in time, it's not useful to you.

Perhaps it's like learning the rules of language and grammar and then getting on with the matter of communication itself.  You don't need to keep focusing on the rules of how all that fits together in order to communicate effectively - but you need to have learned them in the first place, right?   Trans-AQAL/integral-map would be a lot different than pre-AQAL/integral-map, yes?

spiral out,

arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

loved this response arthur!

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Me too, Julian.

Arthur, that post is a thing of beauty, I just read it again for the third time. You continue to spiraliciously rock, young man.

A secret admirer

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

“A secret admirer”

Mascha - not so secret anymore, lol.  :p  Glad you and Julian liked my scribbles.

arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

“First I'd like to point out there is nothing intrinsically “wrong” with ego”

Oh yeah, Arthur?  Well, I think you're wrong:-p

Actually, I don't know whether there is or isn't  something wrong with ego, and I don't think it can be “eliminated.”  I believe an integrated ego is “better” than a disintegrated one, but I think that's not the same as transcending the inherent limitation of the ego.  If one transcends ”exclusive identification with the ego,”  does that mean one identifies with something beyond ego?  What is that?  I would argue that if it is anyway a limited identification, it is still ego.  It might be “higher ego,” but all limited, or separated sense of self is not Self.

Anyway, I think what we are talking about are complementary aspects of the same path.  In the context of this thread, I might say:

If you want to be and effective agent of change in the world, purify (aka integrate) your ego.  If you want to really change the world, be the world (aka no longer identify with any limited causes, higher or not, altruistic or selfish, that are the nature of the ego).   You can only change yourself.  If you identify yourself as an ego, you can change your ego (for better or worse).  If you identify with all Being, you can change that.  Both happen incrementally.  There is also this unshakable sense that to be the “best” agent of change in the context of the current zeitgeist, than integrating the ego might habituate (create a Kosmic groove?) certain beneficial structures of consciousness, so that when the ego-disidentified being emerges, it will naturally be an agent of change.   (probably didn't describe that very well)

Julian, what makes you think enlightenment is a red herring?  I might agree, if what you mean is the popular notion of enlightenment is what you describe.  In my view, most contemporary explanations of what enlightenment is are really just higher egoity.  That would indeed be a red herring.

Anyway, this shit just unfolds itself anyway (as we appear to be witnessing with the developments at I-I).  No worries.

Keith

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

love the inquiry keith. i plan to start a new thread on “enlightenment vs. the ego.” let's chat there….

have a great weekend!
~julian

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

well i just started reading this discussion, and Arthur's words eloquently express what i feel and think about the subject of ego's.
Sometimes the constant obsession about relinquishing one's ego seems to also breed a fair amount of very subtely big ego's - the shadow being quashed and repressed and popping out unseen as it only can.
What is enlightenment? Good question, but im knowhere near it yet, but i still feel a massive amount of (well on a good day) growth and progress - it almost sounds like dismissing the second tier as not enlightened enough is just another form of dismissing a part of the spiral.
I think its down to the person who themselves decide that integral thought makes sense, but to then make sure they in fact walk the territory, explore it, and yes the map looks very very different to the territory.

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

hey keith!

thanks for going there. i appreciate the chutzpa to be anti integral on the integral pod!

let me say right off that i think the concept of enlightenment is a big ass RED HERRING.

i will go into this in a more detailed post when i get a second.

suffice it to say for the moment that i think the concept gets literalized into creating a  false duality between the ego and some imagined “enlightened state.”

more later…

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

“thanks for going there. i appreciate the chutzpa to be anti integral on the integral pod!

let me say right off that i think the concept of enlightenment is a big ass RED HERRING.

i will go into this in a more detailed post when i get a second.”

Yeah, kudos to Keith for that also.  Reasoned dissent and constructive criticism are good.

Julian, I was wondering if you were going to return to that idea, “enlightenment is a big ass red herring” (a great thread title, if you ask me).  I partially agree with you.  It's a big ass red herring if people mean you arrive at a state of enlightenment, full stop, and no further movement is possible - especially odious is the idea that once you've “arrived” then every word and deed of yours is perfectly in alignment with the Ground of Being, and therefore beyond reproach or argument.  One of the great things about integral is the idea that you can be God manifesting as a complete asshole - something to be avoided for sure - or just as someone who still needs a lot of work in various areas.  I also love the emphasis on incarnating as the spirit of evolution unfolding, which Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen in particular keep emphasizing.

I don't think that “enlightenment” is a meaningless or false concept, just that it is usually interpreted in a limited or distorted way.  For example, I think it makes sense to talk about oneness with all phenomena on various levels, or with the ground of being, or of nondual enlightenment.  Perhaps you meant “red herring” in the sense that it is a mistake to chase after it, rather than that it is meaningless?

Anyway, feel free to start another thread on this if you like and perhaps I'd have more to say about it.  Hmm, this could be a great topic for the sadly neglected “Chapel Perspicacious” board.

spiral out,
arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Peeps – I remember joining Zaadz about a year ago, before the rapid growth it's undergone, and there were relatively few folks in the z-space (as far as I could tell). At first, it seemed people started connecting together through their interests – spiritual/philosophical leanings, political bent, artistic tastes, etc. For example, people invited me (and likewise I invited others) to be a z-friend because of shared interests in mysticism, interfaith dialogue, certain writers, mutually-appreciated postings on blogs, etc.

Then this kind of shift occurred. And it's not all bad – but it did have me mostly avoiding this place until the II-Zaadz pod blossomed. Here's what it was: I started getting “friends invites” from people whose main goal seemed to be to sell something. I'd receive this invitation in my mailbox, which would sometimes include a very flattering compliment. I'd click on the inviter's avatar and discover that they already had something like 2355 “friends,” and that – beyond an interest in integral itself – we had few or no common interests. Initially, I felt bad not accepting invitations – it seemed mean to click “decline”, to say something akin to “No, I don't want to be your friend.” So at first I accepted all invitations. Then I started getting e-mails from some of these new “friends,” wanting to sell some kind of service – coaching, crystal workshops, energy realignments, etc. Or invitations to read and comment on their brilliant blog or e-book or something. So I began to feel suspicious, like this was just a new way to get spammed, only this was integral/zaadz spam – higher-tier spam, I suppose, lol! Of course, all I needed to do to prevent this was to not accept invitations from everyone, and to withdraw from friendships that amounted to advertising …

Again – I don't think it's necesarily wrong for people to do some kind of individual self-promotion or advertising at Zaadz. There are actually some people whose stuff I want to buy, like Todd's / paleblueiris's T-shirts! But having strangers use the friends function to sell stuff turned me off, and kept me from engaging here all that much. Until now.

Genuinely sharing opinions and ideas and stories and experiences is really what I'd been hoping to do here – no matter the tier. Thank you Julian, and all.

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

mary start a thread on this if youu like - its a good point…

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Yeah – sorry Julian. I actually wrote that post in response / agreement to Liz's point about the ego-reinforcing New Agey-ness of much of Zaadz … and didn't click the right button.

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Well….

Like Julian, I find Zaadz interesting.

I am into integral theory, spiral dynamics much the same.

However, I do not revolve around those things, and rarely discuss them. Why? I always assumed I was talking to people (esp. at I-I) that got it. They understood. I never saw the need to keep rehashing the obvious.

Any eye opener for me, was months ago…..I was arguing against global warming (While I believe mankind has damaged the planet, and should reduce emissions, I believe it to be a naturally occuring phenomena, and there is evidence that this could very well be the case) and was TOLD that I could not argue against it, until I admited that the theory was valid. Amazing.

People like to claim they are second tier, but are they? It is as much like claiming you are a Buddha. I don’t think it can be declared, as much as it is observed. Sure, you can claim it. If I don’t see it in you, I certainly won’t declare it for you. Others, they won’t either. It’s something that is seen or sensed and no matter how much someone may want it to be so…..actions, writings, etc. speak much louder than words.

Me? Definately NOT second tier, not in my mind anyway. I tend to think of myself as someone who is moving up the spiral. Since I occupy different levels, at different times and circumstances, it’s hard to place myself on any one level. I can see the level I operated at, but I cannot always see that level when I am operating FROM it. (If this makes any sense).

Anyone that knows me from I-I could probaby testify that I tend to post at levels that are all over the map (or spiral, if you will). I think others do this as well. I know they do, in fact, simply because I can see that they do. I can see that I do.

-Greg

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi MaryW,

Excellent post!  I, too, have felt this way, and I'm sure we're not alone in it.  Our policy, at Zaadz, has been to encourage well-intentioned solicitors to post on our zLounge (specifically the bulletin board), which we created to diffuse this sort of behavior, AND give people a place to go to both offer their services to the Zaadz community, and find services others might be offering. And the zPages, of course, is our on-line conscious yellow pages.

Next, we have the “report as spam” and flagging features coming out that will allow you to have better control over what lands in your inbox.  When a message receives enough points, it will be automagically taken out of everyone else's inbox who also received it.  My colleagues and I are working on adding these features, as I type.  It won't be long before we have them, and once they're out, we'd love to get your feedback on the Thinktank.  They'll start out as general features, and we'll be fine-tuning them with your help and the collective genius of this community.

We respect everyone's right to receive the kinds of messages they wish to receive, AND we encourage conscious capitalism.  These two aspects needn't be mutually exclusive.  Again, thanks for coming back to Zaadz, and please let me know if there's ever anything I or we on the zTeam can do for you!

Blessings,
~M

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Thank you for all of this information, Matthew – much appreciated!

Salud,
Mary

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi Everyone,
Interesting thread, and a lot of juicy undercurrents…

Proclaiming one's own second tier-dom is a suspect act. At least if it is asserted frequently.

And yet, we are all We's as well as I's and It(s), and as we's, regardless of where one's center of gravity is on the developmental spiral (and degree of stability at that center), we have a need to belong, to feel belonging, and to be reflected and engaged in our wholeness by the groups with which we identify. I think that people who tend to have achieved a certain center of gravity approaching and/or occupying second tier are often lonely. We suffer from isolation, at least in our moments of aspiration and hunger to grow, when we need support and reflection and mentoring and community – examples and models to learn from. To discover a name for people like yourself, a fairly accurate reflection of your values and ways of thinking, is pure exhilaration. Especially after the drought.

But any identity will become a suit of armor, if it's not worn loosely, if we forget to disrobe and do the laundry and walk about town with another outfit on.
I appreciate Greg's honesty and insight when he says:
“I tend to think of myself as someone who is moving up the spiral. Since I occupy different levels, at different times and circumstances, it’s hard to place myself on any one level.”

I think the problem might be not so much what is your real center of gravity (are you REALLY integral?) but how sticky are your self-assessments, the identities you assign yourself? It seems a fairly common occurence that someone thinks integrally but is not a very integrated person. I think one key is to train yourself to raise a red flag in your awareness every time you feel the need to assert who you are, feel smug and disdainful of anyone, are acting defensively, and lack fluidity with regard to your positions; and as you become aware of it, turning your attention back towards yourself and explore a little. I like how Diane H. once explained the 3-2-1 process and shadow work in general, and I'm paraphrasing and hope not misrepresenting her… she said something like it's not that the behavior you are observing is all your own (inaccurate) projection, and that there's no legitimate complaint to be had. You may be observing with great discernment and insight. But if your response is emotionally charged, if they've gotten under your own skin, then there's also something for you to look at in yourself. And your ability to positively influence the interaction, the other person (or culture), will be enhanced and perhaps even transformed by your ability to come into true presence with that person, which requires dropping your identities and positions and taking responsibility for your own shadow.
Wyatt Earpy and all that, it needs to really be practiced for it to work.
Humility is a beautiful quality.

I think we also need to understand and honor our own needs for belongingness. To not underestimate its power and scope.



Matthew: “automagically”! Was that intentional? I kind of like it.

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

hey lauren

i feel what you are saying about beloningness needs. beautifully said.

at the same time i want to disagree a little.

the thrust of my post was this - let's not have zaadz become a new age myspace.

perhaps more to the point: i am interested in discussing how integral differentiates itself clearly from the mess of the new age, and makes a strong call for genuine stagewise growth.

along with your compassion i hear a little overly-nice and perhaps potentially pious attitude. while  i agree about the necessity of shadow work. i think healthy frustration with and disdain for certain beliefs and ideas is part of how the center of gravity shifts.

in fact, i think that the ability to call nonsense by it's true name is part of what distinguishes integral from the new age.

i have posted another entry called The Spiritual Psyche's Shadow, with video links and written info on some of the guru, cult and alien new age phenomena of the last 30 years.

My premise is that the need to believe has  a massive existential shadow that can and often does have disastrous consequences.

What do you or others think about the implications of this for Integral and for zaadz?

Does anyone else see the new age as problematic?

Let me say at the outset - the things I am referring to can't be transcended and included - they are pathologies.

just a few light throw away questions……:O)

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

“Does anyone else see the new age as problematic?”

Yes and no.  The New Age “paradigm,” infused with narcissism, is most definitely problematic.  However, its pluralistic roots can, I believe, be expressed in healthy ways.  But as you allude, this would require some major shadow work, as this country's ties to narcissism seem to be ingrained in our LL culture. 

But even an integral, post-new age, post-post-modern worldview does not inherintly solve this problem.  It may make it easier to see and more fun to diagnose in others, but it also makes the shadow more sophisticated.  With a more transclusive internal structure, a vaster array of possibilities presents itself.  So, anyone claiming to be “2nd-tier” or higher owes it to the rest of society to be exponentially more vigilent in shining light on his/her shadow.  For, without doing so, the narcissistic tendencies will, IMO, be exponentially more harmful, as well as difficult to diagnose since the resultant hiding strategies will become increasingly more sophisticated.

Just a thought…
~M

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

I was pulled in by the heading of the thread, so I apologize if I take this off course.

Honestly, I find a significant portion of “integral” folk to be some of the most excluding and closed minded people on zaadz.

I would suspect second tiers to be some of the most mutable people around, thus allowing them the ability to use their heightened awareness to influence the consciousness of others without the others even being aware of it.  Just through plain old interaction, no manipulation required.

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

yes, yes, and yes…

and no.
me overly nice…. ha! oh i'm a grumpy and frustrated tendency a great deal of the time. hallelujiah for calling nonsense by its true name. i feel disappointment too frequently that the communities I'm involved with become (or actually, always were) narcissistic havens for the conflict-allergic. i have little patience with communities that self-consciously identify themselves as “spiritual” (i'm spur-chul, are you spur-chul?), not because i think the core aspirations of the participants are insincere, but because the mean-green value systems which tend to dominate in such cultures sabotage possibility for true, supportive, courageous, and often confrontational interaction. yeah, yeah, what matthew said: “So, anyone claiming to be '2nd-tier' or higher owes it to the rest of society to be exponentially more vigilent in shining light on his/her shadow.  For, without doing so, the narcissistic tendencies will, IMO, be exponentially more harmful, as well as difficult to diagnose since the resultant hiding strategies will become increasingly more sophisticated.” i agree that the more developed we are, the more sophisticated our capacities for evasion. oh we are soo slippery. and we need community that shares our general developmental level in order to be given real opportunities to confront our resistances, self-fictions, arrogance, ignorance, laziness, hypocrisy, blind-spots, evasions, and false identifications. i don't think i've ever yet met a person who would willingly move waay beyond their comfort zone regularly, daily, as a matter of sincere practice, and i think moving beyond our comfort zone is what's often required, to make developmental leaps. and even with the willingness, who's capable of REALLY doing it without being challenged by circumstance or true friends/spouse/child/ or sacred opponents?

on the other hand, i'm suspicious of self-conscious attempts to make developmental leaps. i think there's far too much mystery and grace in the process and when our genuine aspirations become (self)conscious goals, pretention and preciousness usually insinuate themselves and your once-sincere longing for Truth, Beauty, Goodness becomes corrupted. just another hip identification, as you say, Julian. i might say an intention is subtly different from a goal in that it acknowledges mystery and is more likely to be born of humility and identification with the Undefinable. of course, that's just semantics, and i can easily appropriate the word “intention” so that i can now be spur-chully correct and continue to pledge alliegance to my own comfortable, “known”, solidified self and its habits of self-perpetuation and self-aggrandizement. also, i love when Ken said our primary work ought to be to harmonize and integrate at the level of awareness which we currently occupy (there's almost always, uh, plenty of work to be done there) and yet practice with utter commitment and let transformation come as it will (or won't.) so, maybe we don't need to TRY so much, and just trust and accept, yourself and others, and call bullshit where you see it, but dammit, do it with love, not scorn.

what i want to say here is… listen…
do you hear the disdain subtly mixed in with my observations and opinions? the opinions may be lucid and coherent or they may be muddled and lacking in insight. but either way, disdain weakens the power of my observations and influence. i agree with you, frustration and disdain are useful; but i feel they are so because they alert us to the places in our psyche still corrupted by non-acceptance. i feel disdain is a very different animal than “the ability to call nonsense by it's true name”. perhaps disdain might be a helpful, even possibly necessary tool in developing deep discernment – the ability to see and call a spade a spade. but i wonder if it is necessary, and even if it is i suspect its usefulness is limited. the energy of disdain is alienation, not embrace. it is also almost exclusively employed in situations when one's self-identifications are being desperately defended or asserted vehemently. so as a tool for self-awareness it is a magnificent tool, but as a social tool, as an evolutionary tool, it's doomed, or obsolete at least. or not. argue with me. i like this! this here actually feels like wonderfully engaged debate, and despite your comments about disdain, Julian, i felt no disdain in your challenge of disagreement to me. perhaps you disdain some of the views i hold, but i don't feel you disdain me, and maybe that makes all the difference in the world. maybe that is skillful employment of disdain.

i fall prey to the temptations of disdain and scorn… far too much. it's a comfortable place to be. it brings some relief! but i have not found it serves the awakening of the best in me, nor the expression of my true being, and i wish to grow more skillful.

i think just before disdain there is hot outrage or deep vibrant sadness, some lucid and sensitive response to an untruth or misalignment, and after this initial thrust of recognition, in our lack of mastery and skillfulness, disdain or its cousins take up residence, and our fluidity gets impeded. our energy gets a little crooked, and grace can't flow as freely, and we begin to express not so much from true Presence as from our habituated selves, and the habits get reinforced quickly. and we continue to not realize the true potency of a we-space that fully engages confrontational honesty and true compassion. i think disdain might point to Big Mind not balanced by Big Heart.


i don't think we can keep zaadz from becoming a new age myspace, sadly. but conversations like this might help to mitigate the tendency some. that's my hope. so i hope we keep this conversation going.

oh, i'm very tired. too tired to edit this. i hope it makes some sense. i think i may be presenting about six different, sometimes contradictory, theories here. thanks for bearing with…
and i apologize for the lack of proper capitalization. bad habit, and too tired to fix it now.



p.s. Julian, this idea of yours is compelling:
“The need to believe has a massive existential shadow that can and often does have disastrous consequences.” I'm looking forward to reading your post on the spiritual psyche's shadow. also, i enjoyed your comments on “what the bleep”.

Blessings, everyone! Gratitude for this opportunity to hear your ideas, tease out some of my own, express them, and see what unfolds.

new age, integral, there are issues -let's get our hands dirty...

i am enjoying your reflections a great deal lauren. you too matthew, thanks!

this is a response to both of you.

i am trying to come up with what the specific focus of my question is……maybe i'll find my way into it.

i see (after being around it for 15 years or so) the new age as predominantly pathological. predominantly regressive. predominantly a delusional, regressive, magical, fantasy based, anti-intellectual, unintegrated mess.

i don't see the new age as being emblematic of a stage of development, so much as being emblematic of what has gone horribly wrong with spirituality, mostly in america. isee it less as an alternative to conventional religion and more as  hipper, more ecelectic version of that same unconscious existential need to believe.

i think the MGM analysis and the boomeritis analysis are useful here too.

so given that premise:

i observe that what most people in the wolrd mean when they say the word “spiritual” is new age synchronicity meets reincarnation as we all teleport through the matrix creating our own reality based on junk interpretations of “quantum physics.”

it's like how what most people in l.a. meann when they say ” i am a buddhist” is that nichiren daishoshu chant om nyo renge kyo for abundance and happiness  thing…what happened to the four noble truths and vipassana?

i observe too that a lot of what people on zaadz mean when they add their voice to the “let's change the world” chorus is - let's just see the angel in everyone and by sheer force of positive thinking and paying attention to the signs  and prophecies know deeply in our being that 2012 is coming soon… :O)

(hear the disdain? good. )

so my question is: how do we diffferentiate healthy adult integral spirituality from this nonsense in a world that automatically has those associations? how do we kindly put firmly start to carve out a set of distinctions that offer a real next level alternative to the new age?

i am trying to do this on my blog with varying degrees of success and a lot of too be expected flack.

i have always thought that it was by emphasizing that psychological work was deeply spiritual and that there was a way that people could and did avoid doing their deep psychological work by buying into consoling regressive belief systems. part of my concern with the new wave of KW 4/5 integral folks  (i have been reading and applying ken's work to my own since 95) is that there is often a lack of psychological work - it seems like a batch of particularly smart young people who get the framework and the lingo, but havent necessarily done a lot of work viz deep process or meditation…..just an observation, i am open to comments.

i see also this unconscious overlap with either the new age stuff, as well as contoroversial ( and i find quite immature) gurus like andrew cohen, and other more pretentious satsangish folks like adyashanti that i find troubling. sorry if i just offended anyone deeply.

i guess i am saying the proposed inclusivity of yellow is great, but i feel a responsibiity to make some distinctions and i shudder to think of integral and SD becoming just another faddish identification on the new age smorgasbord, without folks realizing the profound implications of the work. inclusivity does not include pathology. i think the biggest nightmare has happened with the transpersonal and otherwise spiritually oriented therapists who should be midwiving this transition getting all naively invested in new age stuff and going along for the ride on their clients delusional fantasies without their own inner knowing that clearly this kind of defense was obscuring a deeper trauma and fragmentation…

the other big nightmare is the jz knight meets michael beckwith find abundance and mental freedom by realizing that a) quantum physics proves new age nonsense and b) the secret that all great and powerful people throughout the ages have known is that you can have anything you want if you just believe…..

i saw the relegating of the work happening when people learned a little about say wilber 3/4 and then assumed in forum conversation that of course all of us are at the centaur level, right? usually not. i see stabilization at the centaur as requiring a lot of shadow work, psychological integration, existential breakthrough beyond superstitious narcissistic beliefs etc….

or now with SDi around people assume, once they read a little, that we are all green into yellow, or all second tier, rather than getting fired up about the work - the bittersweet gruelling and fascinating process that this entails. either that or they react to the hierarchy and go deeper into relativism.

i also hear a kinda smug priviledged faux-witnessing of the fucked up world and it's red/blue/orange samsaric inevitability that we smart enlightened folks understand as we watch from above, y'know?

given this i find the “well, as we get more evolved the ego traps are more subtle and complex” analysis a little self serving - y'know? like oh yeah up here at second tier we have to be vigilant, cause that goshdarn ego still has it's tricks…we're not quite perfectly enlightened beings yet, almost, but not quite…… :O) people lower down on the spiral will catch up eventually if they're lucky, if not there's always resting the great perfection.

lastly i think ken's embrace of folks like adi da over years (though i know he has since somewhat recanted, then not, then recanted more fully) reveals a really big blind spot in integral, one that is somewhat generational as ken got his start in a time where the idealizing of so called enlightened gurus was quite commmon. the archetype of the awakened master from afar was very compelling in the 70s and 80s. hopefully time and the ubiquitous disasters that resulted from that  fantasy will allow us to see it for what it mostly is.

phew, ok. thanks for the chance to vent!

i guess iam aching for dialog in which we really addres some of these central puzzles and how intgeral can orient itslef in relationship to them.

i was very excited when the ILP kit came out, and really liked much of it, but was quite disappointed with a lot of it and wrote a proposal about how to deepen and improve it if any here are interested in checking that out.

Re: new age, integral, there are issues -let's get our hands dirt

Hi to all, and thanks Julian for the openess.

I want to comment on a few things.

First of all my ILP kit was defectuous. Why? It's been 6 months since I've had it and I'm still at first tier!!!!

I really love the integral approach, but I'm also interested in seeing how many traditionnal approaches used to be integral - they were for the time. So this Integral thing is not new, and we should not forget it.

As for new age: this approach sometimes irritates me, but I believe it's a very emmotionnal approach vs. Integral approach which is an intellectual one. New age needs thinking in order to become balanced (and it's not my cup of tea, but I respect it). New Age, for me, should concentrate on an opening of the heart. But as soon as it starts to give explanation of how the world is (a map), it becomes delirious and hilarious.

And integral approach needs emmotionnal food, and opening of the heart. Otherwise it gets dry and people start thinking at what tier or Vmeme they're at - which becomes….delirious and hilarious!

As for “Changing the world” which is Zaadz moto, well, that doesn't speak to me. I prefer the Zen idea that says: live this moment as if it was your last one. That tends to bring to my mind the idea that I should not forget to keep my spiritual fire going on. If it changes the world or not, that is not so important.

Well, that is all for now.

Patrick

Re: new age, integral, there are issues -let's get our hands dirt

thanks patrick - good reflections.

Re: new age, integral, there are issues -let's get our hands dirt

Nice post Julian, and you hit the nail on the head a couple of times…..This is what I was attempting to allude to when I said I didn’t consider myself second tier, but only moving up the spiral.

I find there are many that consider themselves second tier, only because they know the books back and forth, but don’t appear to practice what they so readily preach. When you see them post or talk, you can see they are not 2nd tier, but living mostly green or blue or whatever.

Having said that, I do know people that are truly second tier. Their actions speak louder than their words in many instances. They do the work, and still do the work that got them there.

There have been some stranges bedfellows at I-I, the most recent was the Rabbi and his inappropriate behavior (read: criminal). I haven’t heard much about it since the story broke, but there should have been enough evidence available before I-I embraced him.

New age….Again, I think you hit the nail on the head.

Re: new age, integral, there are issues -let's get our hands dirt

Hi Julian,

I appreciate your thoughtful and detailed response.  And I'm glad you take such a thorough approach to teasing out the fallacies in much of today's “spiritual” culture.  I just want to respond to a few of your points, but I feel as though your analysis is mostly right on the money.

”i see (after being around it for 15 years or so) the new age as predominantly pathological. predominantly regressive. predominantly a delusional, regressive, magical, fantasy based, anti-intellectual, unintegrated mess.

i don't see the new age as being emblematic of a stage of development, so much as being emblematic of what has gone horribly wrong with spirituality, mostly in america. isee it less as an alternative to conventional religion and more as  hipper, more ecelectic version of that same unconscious existential need to believe.”

I understand what you're saying.  I think that's mostly correct.  However, I'd say that the “new age” as you coin it (though I believe there may be some disagreement as to what “new age” means) could not exist without a post-modern base.  That is, though it carries a strong thread of “regressive, …delusional, …magical, fantasy based, anti-intellectual”ism, it's foundation is pluralism.

”i think the MGM analysis and the boomeritis analysis are useful here too.”

Exactly!

”i observe that what most people in the wolrd mean when they say the word “spiritual” is new age synchronicity meets reincarnation as we all teleport through the matrix creating our own reality based on junk interpretations of 'quantum physics.'”

Ha ha… Interesting observation.  I'd say you're likely talking about a specific sect of American culture, but it seems to be true enough…

”i observe too that a lot of what people on zaadz mean when they add their voice to the “let's change the world” chorus is - let's just see the angel in everyone and by sheer force of positive thinking and paying attention to the signs  and prophecies know deeply in our being that 2012 is coming soon… :O)

(hear the disdain? good. )”

Was that disdain?  OK, I'm going agree and disagree here (again).  I'd say this does exist on Zaadz, but I've certainly not seen so much of it that I'm disgusted… or even disdainful.  In fact, we have those people on Zaadz, but we also have you, and we have fundamentalist Christians, and we have others…  And if we're going to use a color-scheme, such as spiral dynamics or Ken's Integral Spirituality, then I'd say Zaadz's center of gravity is somewhere around high Green.  And the reason I believe that's a good thing is because we have enough people, such as yourself, to meet others where they're at, challenge them, and hopefully bring the larger collective a little bit higher up the spiral… just one of the benefits of hanging out around here, I'd hope.

”so my question is: how do we diffferentiate healthy adult integral spirituality from this nonsense in a world that automatically has those associations? how do we kindly put firmly start to carve out a set of distinctions that offer a real next level alternative to the new age?”

Sounds to me like you're doing it…

”i am trying to do this on my blog with varying degrees of success and a lot of too be expected flack.”

Sounds like a reasonable outcome for the time being.

”i have always thought that it was by emphasizing that psychological work was deeply spiritual and that there was a way that people could and did avoid doing their deep psychological work by buying into consoling regressive belief systems. part of my concern with the new wave of KW 4/5 integral folks  (i have been reading and applying ken's work to my own since 95) is that there is often a lack of psychological work - it seems like a batch of particularly smart young people who get the framework and the lingo, but havent necessarily done a lot of work viz deep process or meditation…..just an observation, i am open to comments.”

I strongly disagree.  I hang out with some of these “kids” and they do more meditation, psychological shadow-work, intellectual work, and physical exercise than 99% of the “older” crowd.  They're just not on the radar yet, because they understand their own short-comings.

”i guess i am saying the proposed inclusivity of yellow is great, but i feel a responsibiity to make some distinctions and i shudder to think of integral and SD becoming just another faddish identification on the new age smorgasbord, without folks realizing the profound implications of the work. inclusivity does not include pathology. i think the biggest nightmare has happened with the transpersonal and otherwise spiritually oriented therapists who should be midwiving this transition getting all naively invested in new age stuff and going along for the ride on their clients delusional fantasies without their own inner knowing that clearly this kind of defense was obscuring a deeper trauma and fragmentation…

the other big nightmare is the jz knight meets michael beckwith find abundance and mental freedom by realizing that a) quantum physics proves new age nonsense and b) the secret that all great and powerful people throughout the ages have known is that you can have anything you want if you just believe…..”

LOL… totally with you on this!  That's the narcissism I was speaking to in a previous comment above.  But it's the post-modern narcissism… the attempt to inflate this ego to an Ultimate level.  Preposterous! 

“i saw the relegating of the work happening when people learned a little about say wilber 3/4 and then assumed in forum conversation that of course all of us are at the centaur level, right? usually not. i see stabilization at the centaur as requiring a lot of shadow work, psychological integration, existential breakthrough beyond superstitious narcissistic beliefs etc….”

Perhaps, but Wilber 5 might disagree.  Stabilization at the Centaur doesn't mean all lines of development are at that level.  This is hardly the case.  And I doubt that the Centaur is some pie-in-the-sky superman stage where personal interior work is no longer needed.  I'd wager a guess that this stage, once reached, requires the most work (up to that point) to maintain a healthy interior.  It is an integrated stage, yes.  But that also means its shadow can become far more of a nightmare than any previous stage… as has been the case with each emergent prior to it.  Ken doesn't talk much (or at all?) about the murky, shadowy side of the Centaur, but that doesn't mean it's non-existant.  Quite the contrary.  Perhaps it just hasn't been around long enough for us to know exactly what that will be.  But this is why I assert that anyone who claims to be “2nd-tier” or higher owes it to the rest of us to be vigilant at shining light on its own shortcomings.  Wouldn't it be nice if the next big emergent DIDN'T actually fuck up the planet to a greater extent than the previous ones combined, as all the previous emergents so carelessly did when they had their day in the sun?

”given this i find the “well, as we get more evolved the ego traps are more subtle and complex” analysis a little self serving - y'know? like oh yeah up here at second tier we have to be vigilant, cause that goshdarn ego still has it's tricks…we're not quite perfectly enlightened beings yet, almost, but not quite…… :O) people lower down on the spiral will catch up eventually if they're lucky, if not there's always resting the great perfection.”

As I believe this paragraph was directed toward me, see my above comment… :O)

”i guess iam aching for dialog in which we really addres some of these central puzzles and how intgeral can orient itslef in relationship to them.”

Beautiful!  And I'm on that same page.

Thanks for the lively discussion!
~M

Re: new age, integral, there are issues -let's get our hands dirt

matthew
 
this makes me happy:

“I strongly disagree.  I hang out with some of these “kids” and they do more meditation, psychological shadow-work, intellectual work, and physical exercise than 99% of the “older” crowd.  They're just not on the radar yet, because they understand their own short-comings.”

and i agree with this:

Perhaps, but Wilber 5 might disagree.  Stabilization at the Centaur doesn't mean all lines of development are at that level.  This is hardly the case.  And I doubt that the Centaur is some pie-in-the-sky superman stage where personal interior work is no longer needed.  I'd wager a guess that this stage, once reached, requires the most work (up to that point) to maintain a healthy interior.  It is an integrated stage, yes.  But that also means its shadow can become far more of a nightmare than any previous stage… as has been the case with each emergent prior to it.  Ken doesn't talk much (or at all?) about the murky, shadowy side of the Centaur, but that doesn't mean it's non-existant.  Quite the contrary.  Perhaps it just hasn't been around long enough for us to know exactly what that will be.  But this is why I assert that anyone who claims to be “2nd-tier” or higher owes it to the rest of us to be vigilant at shining light on its own shortcomings.  Wouldn't it be nice if the next big emergent DIDN'T actually fuck up the planet to a greater extent than the previous ones combined, as all the previous emergents so carelessly did when they had their day in the sun?


i am not suggesting that “centaur” or integrated bodymind/ego-self axis/existential level is free of stuff to work on at all!

what i was trying to get at is the amount of work it takes to even start to come close to that stage along the way.

in fact i think no stage is “final” and that is why i said in an earlier post in this thread that “enlightenment” is a highly problematic red herring concept that causes more trouble than its worth!

:O)

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

this is a great thread. my head is still literally spinning just reading from all the responses here. i don't know if i can add something useful that wasn't yet mentioned in one way or the other. but anyway, i'll stil try:

first of, second-tier is just another label. people are free to believe and use it or label themselves with it, or to project it to whomever. we can't really do much about it. this is a free world.  and besides, technically, you have to be second-tier to make a valid judgement of who's second-tier or not. so beware of the performative contradictions when you make certain value judgements :) but what we can do is look at the result and consistency of other people's actions (including our own), and see if they (we) practice what they (we) preach.

“Now I know this is a new thing and all, and I really do have compassion and patience for the process - but i wonder if zaadz has fallen prey to a kind of green/blue politeness combined with an orange/green enterprising positive thinking and is calling that “second tier”.”

the way i see it is that: Zaadz is a container. it's a “container” that allows for those different perspectives to interact (in a constructive way). and by doing it, by allowing it, by moderating it as compassionately as we can to avoid degenerating into senseless chaos, that is a quality of an emerging second-tier awareness. imho.

then again, you can say the same with any social networking site. e.g. millions of people on myspace have millions of perspectives. so what's the big deal? well, the big deal is the content and people in the community–the varying awareness of the people in the community. take a look at myspace, facebook, friendster, and other social networking sites out there, and including the Multiplex. then make a comparison. i'll leave it to you to make your own judgement. but like Matthew said, you are here on Zaadz. you picked Zaadz over (or along with) the other social networks. we're glad you did :) but the question is: why?

is it because Zaadz is a hippie site? is it because of conscious capitalism? is it because of the transparency of our business model? of our purpose? is it because some people in the community can talk the integral lingo? the SD lingo? is it because some people here are into spiritual practice? is it because all of the above and then some?

i think Julian answered it already: “the center of gravity will define itself, and so it should be.”

“let's bust out and actually say something. Let's express opinions and share theories and ways to apply them and get our hands dirty, and take action together - this network has amazing potential - let's not allow it to become the New Age my space for people who read.”

i couldn't agree more. if you are reading this, we appreciate all the help. not only in knowing, but especially in the doing, online and offline…

~C (for Cents 0.02)

p.s. i invite everyone to say something on their blog, with passion and compassion…

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

c4 i always enjoy what you have to say. thanks!

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Great thread.

I would just like to add a couple of things. First of all the only thing anybody needs to understand AQAL or SD is a teal level or above in the cognitive line. That's it. That is the only prerequisite for reading KW, grasping what he says and even for enjoying this pod or the Multiplex boards.

Actually using AQAL in our daily life to be more effective, or developing an integral cross-training practice to become more whole, present and integrated - that is something different altogether. Not different in the sense that it isn't directly related to the the first part, because it is, but different in the sense that this is yet another choice one has to make and keep making every day. An integral awareness (teal or above in the cognitive line) does not “automagically” (love that word) bring about practice IRL, or walking the talk, or whatever we call it.

—————

I believe the shadow of Integral (what might be called Early Integral in the future…) is a sense of superiority and dissing “first-tier hell” on a regular basis. Doing that is fine in one sense, and I definitely still do it myself, but shouldn't we all be able to navigate this first-tier hell samsara we talk about a lot more skilfully than those still equipped with only first-tier consciousness?

I am all for calling bull-shit as Integral sees it, but do we not owe it to ourselves and the world to also have compassion for those who still cannot see or experience Integral? When we put too much energy into dissing and kicking on first-tier I see a real danger that we are only punching our own green shadows in certain lines of development, orange shadows in other lines, etc etc

Pelle

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Here's a simple test that occurred to me moments ago.  Ask yourself this question:

“Do I identify with second tier?”  If the answer is yes, then by definition you are first tier, in my view.  Identity is saying “I am this and not that.”  (at least that's how I see it).  So, someone who is second tier wouldn't identify with it anyway.  Soooo….

There is no second tier;-)

Further, if one who doesn't identify  (aka the second tier person) is looking at someone who might be first tier, the non-identifying one will not see that person as first tier either because the second tier is trans-identity (assuming it's correct that the second tier person doesn't identify – this is an extrapolation of the concept that second tier is the stage at which conciousness is not dominated by “I'm/we're right and they're wrong” thinking).  The second tier person can't identify themselves as second tier, and can't identify or “pigeonhole” others as first tier.

There is no first tier either;-)


Keith

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Man, Keith et al, I just don't think it's all that complicated. It's not some badge of honor that we have to have just the right mindset, or lack thereof, to have. As Ken said at one of his seminars, “You're all second-tier, because you're here.”  Where one's center of gravity is will vary a lot from person to person. I don't think the criteria are all that stringent. You just need to have heard a talk or read a book, and had that “Aha” moment where you thought, “Yes! That's what makes all the pieces fit together.”

It's not rocket science. We have Unruly Julie for that.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Pelle said:

I believe the shadow of Integral (what might be called Early Integral in the future…) is a sense of superiority and dissing “first-tier hell” on a regular basis. Doing that is fine in one sense, and I definitely still do it myself, but shouldn’t we all be able to navigate this first-tier hell samsara we talk about a lot more skilfully than those still equipped with only first-tier consciousness?

I am all for calling bull-shit as Integral sees it, but do we not owe it to ourselves and the world to also have compassion for those who still cannot see or experience Integral? When we put too much energy into dissing and kicking on first-tier I see a real danger that we are only punching our own green shadows in certain lines of development, orange shadows in other lines, etc etc

Ain’t that the truth… It’s so easy to see what’s wrong with everybody else - and it keeps us playing an endless game of one-upmanship. Acceptance of where everyone is at developmentally, including oneself and the whole world, is harder to come by. And what may masquerade as “acceptance” may turn out to be no more than a flight into dissociated aloofness, or worse, a callous indifference. Only you (and I) can know for sure what games we play - and even that only after we’ve woken up a little more.

I’m watching it, this desire to know what’s wrong, in myself. Oh, what an ego-booster that used to be… I have to laugh, it’s so transparent now.

Do you all experience it too - this sense of, “Omigod, how unconscious I’ve been in the past!”, when looking back even just a few months or a year, while at the time you thought you were really ready to go forth teaching cutting edge shit to the ignorant masses? I get that a lot, looking back.

M

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Do you all experience it too - this sense of, “Omigod, how unconscious I’ve been in the past!”, when looking back even just a few months or a year?

Absolutely. There is a sense of acceleration as well. Like a ball rolling down a hill. The sense of superiority is balanced in me by a sense of abject terror at how scary this ride is, so it all comes out in the wash! Gone is my sense of absolutely knowing anything, which has yet to be replaced by knowing the Absolute, so I'm in a bit of a limbo.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Yes and yes.

There is a new felling of comfort in resting in the mystery. 

Joe

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

mascha and pelle and all who have contributed so far:

i so hear you on being aware of not externalizing/projecting our shadow from our own gradually devloping  multiple lines. good point and important..

at the same time let me echo a point i made early on in the thread: what i am wanting to differentitate integral from is not necessarily a stage thing and more the new age pathology somehwat captured by the boomeritis/MGM analysis.

but more than that it's a psychological defense sttructure that is called “spiritual” by most people and is amazing to me in it's regressive, pollyana, magical/narcissistic dynamics..

now, my sense is that i can still work on myself and own my own shadow while pointing out what i feel is the big elephant in alt/liberal spirituality and on zaadz, and  ask: how do we keep differentiating integral from the popular perception of spirituality?

otherwise: on the one hand the straight world is gonna just lump integral in with all that kooky spirchurl nonsense.

on the other the new age worldview is going to absorb, relativize and misunderstand integral - and because this worldview is so ubiquitous, it will filter it, dilute it and add it's language to the pathology it is so enamoured of….it's already happening.

my answer is - make strong and clear distinctions. apply integral theory in very practical and grounded ways to reality.

also:

a) teach cognitive development theory and techniques for stabilizing concrete operations (rational thinking) and exploring formal operations(symbolic thnking)  for more of the population. this way pre and trans rational can be more clearly differentiated and people can start to see the irrrational and dangerous nature of where most reeligion and spirituality are at on the planet today…

b) emphasize psychological awareness as being essential to spirituality, including but not limited to shadow work, which includes but is not limited to that cutesy (but effective) 3-2-1 process.

c) define spiritual practice as something inherently other than belief and inherently oriented towards the kind of deepening awareness that is free from superstition, metaphysics and other coping mechanisms that distort reality…

my task for the new year is this: create a really compelling chapter for my book about the beauty and power of genuine trans-rational spiritual awareness and how it differs from the pre-rational fantasy.

check out my other post The Spiritual Pscyhe's Shadow: Gurus, Cults and Aliens. Let's chat some more over there….

:O)

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi Julian,

That was absolutely perfectly stated.  I agree completely and feel exactly the same way.  Can't wait to read your book!  Let me know when it's ready for general consumption!

Regards,
~M

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Oh, and it's awesome to have you here to help with making this happen… I'm thrilled when I think that there will be people such as yourself, so skillfully calling people on their bullshit and helping to usher in a healthy Zaadz, at all levels.  There's no substitute for formal operational inquiry, and it's an antidote needed for the poison of spiritual quackery.  So, thank you.

Namaste,
~M

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hmm…the quackery link used some examples that are really unfortunate. Do you really subscribe to that definition?

This would probably be another thread. If you’re interested, go for it. But taking vitamin and mineral supplementation and avoiding food additives isn’t quackery. There is good solid scientific evidence to back it up.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Well, I was using that site specifically for its definition of quackery and applying it to spirituality.  For example, instead of saying “combat health-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct,” we could say, “combat spiritual-related frauds, myths, fads, fallacies, and misconduct.”  Also, I'm not saying either way whether I “subscribe” to that site's conclusions, but it does deal with fallacies related to the health industry.  And it is using formal-operational thinking when it says,

Our activities include:

• Investigating questionable claims
• Answering inquiries about products and services
• Advising quackery victims
• Distributing reliable publications
• Debuking pseudoscientific claims
• Reporting and illegal marketing
• Assisting or generating consumer-protection lawsuits
• Improving the quality of health information on the Internet
• Attacking misleading advertising on the Internet

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Ok, I wasn’t sure. And it happens to be a hot-button issue for me, so I was probably reacting a bit.

But that brings up another point. How far can you go with rational scientific explanations for things? I agree that “belief” for the sake of it is silly. But what of trans-rational phenomena? What about things we might be able to prove one day, but don’t have the technology to do now?

I sometimes disagree with Wilber in that he seems to think that there is a clear line between that which is rational and transrational. I think that line will move with advancing technology and theory, though I do think there’s a line somwhere.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

hey thanks matthew thats cool. love the sentiment of your post about the healthy uses of rationality.

LIZ :O)

yea i hear you for sure on the tras rational stuff. i think the important line is between pre and trans though, not rational and trans. i think mainly this:

* rational, existential, formal operational healthy orange and green are pre-requisites for healthy yellow and genuinely trans rational consciousness. so so much of what's out there is pre rational, unhealthy orange and green mixed with purple/red, concrete operations rejection in drag as “spirituality.”*

i think it's less about scientific proof and more about reason, critical thinking and genuine inquiry.

i do energetic bodywork and yoga with people every day and take people into altered states, dural releases/unwinding, deep structural shifts, kundalini kriyas, etc….none of that is scientifically proven as such. but it has meaning and i have had people recover from chronic pain syndromes, deep psychological traumas, surrender outdated defenses etc as a result of synergictically  combining organ cleansing, bodywork, yoga and dialog…. very experiential and naturopathic in a way. i also use music and poetry - so it's not dry or coldly scientific!

but still, the attitude is one of groundedness, inquiry, reasonableness. i am constantly following a scientific method- gathering information,  hypothesizing, experimenting and then responding to the data, be they sensory, intuitive, structural, emotional, verbal etc..

i can often do things in this realm that could convince gullible people of me having access to “magical” powers, but i am staunchly opposed to that kind of manipulation.

my world is so filled with people looking for an experience to prove some prerational belief as a defense against doing the real work - both ordinary clients/students and practitioners/teachers/therapists  who i treat or mentor, who have never been initiated into an authentic process that goes beyond new age translation…

i have to be really kind and patient about it in my work - so i get to vent about it elsewhere and brainstorm with people who get it about how to skillfully address these problems…

but bottom line i think once we allow the healthy ratiional gaze to strip away all the spiritual/religious/superstitious delusions, we can come into more intimate and mature contact with the mystery that is. it's like giving up the plastic baubles to find the real jewels. and of course that is a work in progress - but see my other post  on here or my current blog for examples of how horribly wrong  the new age experiment has gone so much of the time…

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Again, I couldn't have said it better myself Julian, and I'm finding I have a lot more in common with you than what I thought when we first communicated.  Well-said, sir!  Sorry if I'm not arguing enough right now… it just seems as though I share quite the common ground with you here, in these respects.

;)
~M

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Keith,I see what you mean.

But I have a nice little game of not identifying with second tier and thinking: “I'm so humble because I can't identify with 2-3 (second -tier). This means I'm certainly 2-3!”

It's an endless game… there's no way out of it….no hope!

Patrick

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Hi Julian

Your friendly IIzaadz pod moderator adastra here.  :)

Thanks for the funny post, which I reposted on your behalf to the more appropriate Jokes and Laughs thread.  (Unfortunately I don't seem to have the power to move a post, which I would have preferred to do.)

Please don't change the title of a thread, it's confusing - better to start a new thread if the topic is changing that radically.  Also, while I appreciate the humor, the post was completely offtopic here, in what has been a very interesting discussion.

spiral out,
arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

got it - thanks man.

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

I agree that we shouldn't change the names of threads, but I tend to think that an occasional joke in a thread is fine - especially if it is related to the topic at hand. Then again, whatever way the moderator calls it, someone will have a different opinion.

Back on track: I agree that formal operation cognitive skills are great as a bullshit detector against some of the New Age stuff floating around. But we also need the green cognitive level's ability to take a strong forth person perspective to call the myth of the given bullshit that a lot of spiritual traditions perpetuate. Ken has been very clear about this since the introduction of wilber-5, and I believe it is something that will help us do the “heavy duty cleaning” needed in many spiritual circles.

Julian you teach yoga amongst other things. Do you come across a lot of other teachers/practitioners who still (unconsciously) hold on to the myth of the given? If you do how do you deal with it? The same questions go out to everyone reading of course…

Pelle

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

ah pelle, a thinker after my own heart!

yeah of course.

i am so relieved that wilber has finally gotten into debunking the myth of the given as it applies to eastern spirituality.

it was one of my real stickinh point swith his work and i felt like he had his own naivette (as evidenced by the strange case of adi da) about enlightenment, guru devotion etc as well as a fairly uncritical championing of eastern paths…….

actually i dont know any yoga teachers or people in the general spiritual community who are into debunking the myth of the given.

mostly i think folks are looking for proof of some melange of reincarnation, astrology, thought created reality and the magical possibilities of “enlightened consciousness”.

whats lacking is any kind of analysis, be it sociological or psychological of these prefabricated ideas and how they get stitched together to create this worldview…

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

“I agree that we shouldn't change the names of threads, but I tend to think that an occasional joke in a thread is fine - especially if it is related to the topic at hand. Then again, whatever way the moderator calls it, someone will have a different opinion.”

Hey Pelle

You have a point - there was some relevance to the topic; I guess the subject heading change put it a little over the top for me, and as you say it comes down to a judgement call; it might have been better to just change the subject heading back to the original. 

The last forum I participated in regularly for a long time had a strong anti-moderation of any sort vibe, IMO - which was way too green for me.  Here I won't be into the “anybody post anything anywhere anytime” style, but also please call me out if you think I'm going overboard in the other direction.

BTW, the thread I started this morning on the Adyashanti dialog has a lot of relvence for this thread, I think - in terms of what integral/second tier is all about and what makes it valuable. 

spiral on,
arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

For any who are interested (and I haven't read the whole thing myself), here's a link to an article that argues that the Integral movement is actually an outgrowth of the New Age movement. (Check out the second-to-last section of the article):

http://www.integralworld.net/index.html?kazlev6.html

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

intteresting point mary.

this is however a site dedicated to offering alternative and (wilber says) erroneous interpretations of his work.

i have spent a lot of time on the forums there and am also familiar with the whole ken/frank saga, wyatt earpy et al….

as far as the article.

again some good points, but what i am discussing as being emblematic of the new age is more than a holistic sense of inter-connectedness, it's the regressive, magical and delusional ways thaose ideas get extrapolated - something of course that integral theory strives not do by sheer virtue of it's intellectual depth and operational principles…

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

I've been meaning to jump in here for some time; there's some great stuff on this board. Julian? Brilliant. Matthew too. And ditto all the rest of you. It's a treat finding this quality of dialogue.

And …

(Before I start, please take this in the light-hearted tone in which it's intended. Integral Theory got my intellectual rocks off for too many years for me not to have developed some feelings for it. ;) )

Here's my question. How is Integral any less systemically narcissistic than the New Agers who think they can visualize a better world into being? How is the promoting of a wholly inclusive “meta-system” of reality that encompasses any and all others any different then the naive, supposedly delusional or pathological “I create my reality” of The Secret crowd? Yes, the cognitive element of is more advanced. Yes, the intellectual rationalizations are more complicated. What it comes down to for me, though, is whether these beliefs change how we act in the world, and change how we come to understand, and behave toward, others. Because otherwise, in the end, what does it matter?

If these complex debates amount only to us using these explanations and justifications to avoid doing our own work, and to avoid taking responsibility for how we are in the world and the judgments we tack on others, I don't see what good they are. If we allow these fantastic explanations to get in the way of us being in the world with the real, living, breathing bodies around us, we've already lost the point. For me, as soon as the belief system of integral starts interfering our ability to see what is most essentially human in the eyes of everyone with whom we share this planet, its started to lose its value.

And the same goes for any other system, be it Christianity or New Age channeling or neo-Marxism or Zen.

Also, I've always been curious about the need to “preserve” integral? Why worry about it being co-opted by less intellectual rigorous New Age thought? What's really at stake? I'm serious.

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Great post, Siona.

Siona: “Here's my question. How is Integral any less systemically narcissistic
than the New Agers who think they can visualize a better world into
being? How is the promoting of a wholly inclusive “meta-system” of
reality that encompasses any and all others any different then the
naive, supposedly delusional or pathological “I create my reality” of
The Secret crowd? Yes, the cognitive element of is more advanced. Yes,
the intellectual rationalizations are more complicated. What it comes
down to for me, though, is whether these beliefs change how we act in
the world, and change how we come to understand, and behave toward,
others. Because otherwise, in the end, what does it matter?”

Particular people who call themselves integral may be just as narcissitic as the New Agersyou're referring to; however the integral worldview itself, if it is
accurate, seeks to take into account all truth domains and particular
claims, evaluates them on their own terms, and does not shy away from
taking a stand if one truth or perspective is manifestly more accurate
or meaningful than another - thus in theory the integral worldview
should be more accurate, more comprehensive, and also
much more self-correcting.  The “I create my own reality” crowd you refer to
takes their own internal consciousness as the sole arbiter of what is
considered “real.”  One of the problems with this - and I've known
people who completely fall into this trap - is that they can get so lost
that they have little or no way to get out of that worldview.  Try
arguing them out of it or pointing out inconsistencies in their
worldview and at best they will acknowledge that your perspective is
neither more nor less valid than their own.

In saying this I would note a) the “I create my own reality” move is a
pathological expression of the green/pluralistic worldview; b) There
are cognitive traps and distortions that “integral” people fall into as
well - which however, are at least a little more interesting than the
pluralistic traps IMO.  :p

Siona: “If these complex debates amount only to us using these explanations and
justifications to avoid doing our own work, and to avoid taking
responsibility for how we are in the world and the judgments we tack on
others, I don't see what good they are. If we allow these fantastic
explanations to get in the way of us being in the world with the real,
living, breathing bodies around us, we've already lost the point. For
me, as soon as the belief system of integral starts interfering our
ability to see what is most essentially human in the eyes of everyone
with whom we share this planet, its started to lose its value.”

Total agreement from me - and admittedly, I do tend to talk more
about this stuff than I spend doing rigorous self-work.  As for
judging others, I think that is a stage that one naturally goes through
in the early stages of integral, and it is a sub-stage from which  I believe and
hope I am starting to emerge.  In the past, I was
particularlyjudgemental of pluralistic people - which is predicted by
integral theory as I understand it; you tend to find most odious the
stage you've most recently transcended.  And it has been too great
a tendency for me personally to sneeringly look down on “flatlanders”
and “first tier” types.  Lately, though, I find myself more
willing and able to look for common ground with people I interact
with.  I'm enjoying this change, it's a lot more fun than my
previous, more confrontational (and sometimes dismissive)
approach.

Siona: “Also, I've always been curious about the need to “preserve” integral?
Why worry about it being co-opted by less intellectual rigorous New Age
thought? What's really at stake? I'm serious.”

Here is my very serious answer: if we are going to fully enter into,
explore, and extend integral, then there must be places where integral
people can interact with each other.  While I fully respect the
right and need of people who are into New Age thought to have their own
spaces for discourse and interaction, I consider it vitally important
for there to be spaces and collectives where integral thought and action is the
standard to which people are expected to adhere - just as, to choose
another example,  to get the rational worldview off the ground,
spaces were needed where mythological worldviews would be criticized
and rejected on rational grounds.  Hence scientific associations,
clubs, meetings, schools, etc. were created to fill the needs of the
new worldview.

Does this make sense to you?

arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

arthur.

That was all brilliantly clear. Thank you! I'll continue with a few points. I loved what you wrote about the traps of the integral crowd being more “interesting” than those of the pluralistic snags; I certainly find the challenge of these, here, at least more intellectually stimulating. And I appreciated, too, your honesty about judging and the temptations of getting lost in dialogue and analysis.

What I don't feel I quite understand, though, is, again, the need to protect integral from being misunderstood by a not-quite-there crowd, or to somehow keep the New Age believers from adopting certain tenets. It seems oddly paranoid and controlling, a sort of flip-side to the similarly bizarre desire to “extend” integral in order to “get it off the ground.” I suppose that, in general, I'm a little mystified by those who want to somehow USE integral to intentionally shift people, to turn integral into some universalizing project of mass consciousness raising. This seems to be a bid for hegemony par excellance. I see integral theory as very much a product of this time and place, and in particular the current toy of a certain over-educated, overwhelmingly white, relatively wealthy, spiritually-grasping mentality,  and I can't help but worry and wonder at those who are left out of these discussion and practices. But I digress.

My point is more that, if Integral theory is right, and there is a logic to the unfolding of the divine, then we certainly don't need to worry about fixing any pathologies or making sure the human race stays on the track. All we need to do is be concerned with our own integrity and our own personal development; the rest of the world will take care of itself. And if there is a chance that the integral process might somehow get hijacked or perverted by pathological hiccups, and that the work of integral theory is to make sure it stays on a certain correct path, then it must be the case that this universalizing process is somehow contingent on the theory. If this is true, then I'd have to question the project as being merely the latest incarnation of a general Western tendency toward synthetic systematization. In essence, if it's going to happen, it's going to happen, and if not, then it's simple ideology masquerading as something more, so in either case, why be concerned? Again, what's really at stake?

;)

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Siona: “What I don't feel I quite understand, though, is, again, the need to protect integral from being misunderstood by a not-quite-there crowd, or to somehow keep the New Age believers from adopting certain tenets. It seems oddly paranoid and controlling, a sort of flip-side to the similarly bizarre desire to “extend” integral in order to “get it off the ground.” I suppose that, in general, I'm a little mystified by those who want to somehow USE integral to intentionally shift people, to turn integral into some universalizing project of mass consciousness raising.”

Oh, I see what you're getting at.  Well, I would consider a program such as you are outlining here to be a perversion of integral theory/practice - perhaps it might reflect a potential pathology of the second-tier; at any rate, it is certainly not what I would attempt to do at this point.  As I understand it, a truly second-tier approach would respect people's right to be at whatever developmental stage they are at; however, to the extent that we could influence the situation, we would want to help people be healthy at their stage of development.  I certainly didn't mean to imply that we should try to force green spaces or groups to be second tier - all I mean was, second-tier spaces need to be protected and nurtured for the sake of healthy second-tier development.  What this would mean in practice is, for example, if you had a forum or pod formed by a group of people who are congregating there specifically to be around other second-tier people, then that space would need to be protected.  However, I wouldn't go into a green forum try to force it to become yellow.

Siona: “My point is more that, if Integral theory is right, and there is a logic to the unfolding of the divine, then we certainly don't need to worry about fixing any pathologies or making sure the human race stays on the track. All we need to do is be concerned with our own integrity and our own personal development; the rest of the world will take care of itself. And if there is a chance that the integral process might somehow get hijacked or perverted by pathological hiccups, and that the work of integral theory is to make sure it stays on a certain correct path, then it must be the case that this universalizing process is somehow contingent on the theory. If this is true, then I'd have to question the project as being merely the latest incarnation of a general Western tendency toward synthetic systematization. In essence, if it's going to happen, it's going to happen, and if not, then it's simple ideology masquerading as something more, so in either case, why be concerned? Again, what's really at stake?”

OK, now this takes us into rather different territory.  What's at stake in terms of overall human development?  Absolutely nothing - and relatively, everything.  From the perspective of Spirit of the Ground of Being, the Mystery - whatever you want to call it - this is all the play of spirit, and no matter how it unfolds, it's all good.  And also, evolutionary development will do whatever it's going to do, and that's no big deal.

Or is it?   What if we are undergoing a developmental crisis?  What if there are pathological aspects of our current situation that might set our development back quite a bit, or even lead to the possible destruction of the human species?  I don't have time to go into a lot of detail right now, but let me use boomeritis/pluralitis as an example.  Ken and co. claim that pluralitis is actually undermining development up to pluralistic-relativism and beyond, so that it is actually - in its current, pathological form - undermining the evolutionary game at this point.  Wouldn't it be good to correct that if we can, so that people can develop at their own pace, instead of being stymied by collective pathologies?

That's all I have time for now…spiral out,
arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Thank you again, Arthur, for your lovely and considered response.

I'll just take up your final point. Again, if the evolutionary game can “undermine” itself, than that's just part of the evolutionary game, is it not? Because if the evolutionary game can be “set back,” then the unfolding of Spirit must not be a given, and Integral theory must be prescriptive rather than explanatory. And if it is prescriptive, then I, for one, worry about all those voices and bodies and people that haven't weighed in and who are necessarily excluded from the dominant system (currently, global capitalism with a dash of Eastern wisdom; in this way, Integral theory is very much a product of the times) in place. I'm going to worry about what's fueling this ideology. And I'm certainly not about to go running around trying to heal or cure or fix what I see as a pathological disrupt merely to make it better conform to my view of what evolution should be.

Furthermore, if it is true that there is something “pathological” about certain value structures, then the solution is not to badger them back to health with intellectual arguments, or by telling them that their world view is wrongheaded or backwards. People who feel that their identity is being threatened do not become more open-minded and more willing to explore other options; they shut down and cling to whatever broken identity they can. So attempting to argue or shout or scold any “pathological” values into changing is bound to backfire and to make the problem worse. Far better to use what Integral is best at - that is, opening perspectives so as to better engage with and understand and meet people at their level - to meet people where they are and to encourage and support them toward healthier, more inclusive, more flexible perspectives.

Julian's post, at the very top, asked for debate and serious discourse about ways to effect change, and honesty about how fucked up the world really is right now. To my mind, pointing fingers at so-called pathological snags, and demanding that THEY change, is one of those blaming, “it's-them-and-not-me” that just leads to further gridlock. How is this just not a projection of our own discomfort? For me, the most important questions to ask when it comes to the “fucked up” state of the world is how Integral theory can keep itself from contributing to the problem.

;)

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Siona: “Furthermore, if it is true that there is something “pathological” about certain value structures, then the solution is not to badger them back to health with intellectual arguments, or by telling them that their world view is wrongheaded or backwards. People who feel that their identity is being threatened do not become more open-minded and more willing to explore other options; they shut down and cling to whatever broken identity they can. So attempting to argue or shout or scold any “pathological” values into changing is bound to backfire and to make the problem worse. Far better to use what Integral is best at - that is, opening perspectives so as to better engage with and understand and meet people at their level - to meet people where they are and to encourage and support them toward healthier, more inclusive, more flexible perspectives. ”

I agree with that.

Siona: “I'll just take up your final point. Again, if the evolutionary game can “undermine” itself, than that's just part of the evolutionary game, is it not? Because if the evolutionary game can be “set back,” then the unfolding of Spirit must not be a given, and Integral theory must be prescriptive rather than explanatory.”

Let me ask you some questions in response: does a human being tend to develop in a certain direction?  That is, for example, does a toddler or a teenager tend to evolve in the way they understand and interact with the world - are they going somewhere developmentally?  And if so, then are there things that can go wrong with that process?   Leukemia, autism, and suicidal depression are all equal manifestations of spirit (which is everything and nothing, the ground of all being etc.) - so if a young child has leukemia, autism, or suicidal depression, would it be more appropriate to try to treat those conditions, or to let them take their course as part of spirit or evolutions instrinsically perfect unfolding?

spiral on,
arthur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Ooh. Questions for which I have no answers! Children develop; yes, as do adults. And yes, children come down with autism, leukemia, and suicidal depression. And yes, I would advocate treating such conditions. But I would, first of all, want to treat the individual, not the symptom, and, second of all, want to look at the environment that contributed to their discomfort. I don't want to get bogged down in the details of the examples you chose (autism, for instance, is generally understood to be incurable, as well as an illness brought on by “environmental toxins”; suicidal depression, too, is heavily correlated with the alienation of contemporary life; and even leukemia is associated with radiation and certain chemicals that we originally brought into use because we thought they'd better our lives), but citing illnesses that are more the product our of modern-day attempts toward progress isn't the most helpful approach. ;) In short, I would rather remove the impediments to development – be they psychological or environmental – than I would attempt to manipulate the individual into “developing appropriately.”

Here's the thing. It's one thing to deal with the relative, individual case-by-case bases of diseases we've seeing millions of times. We can say a little, and do something to ease, biological illnesses. We can even work some with psychological issues, although, again, these problems are often the result of individuals struggling to develop healthfully in a larger structure that's not amenable to their path. But when it comes to the growth of cultures? Of whole societies? It seems absurd to pretend we might even have a clue as to what might be going on. Yes, we can say that there are connections and relationships between we as individuals and the societies we live in. Yes, there are certain patterns we can point to. But societies are not individuals. People can develop psychological problems; societies can not. And while they may very well have to contend with analogous issues, I'm not sure it's within our capacity to even hypothesize about what these might be. We can still only barely grasp the complexities of, say, the capitalist system in which we now live. We can still only barely fathom the vast network of intervening variables that shape the global forces of our own contemporary environment. Understanding, cognitively, the connections between them all would require a near eternity of time and space far, far beyond what we can imagine. And so, given this, I'd rather limit my domain to what I do know, and to what I can, to some degree, control. How can I ease the lives of those around me? How can I see what is most beautiful in them and encourage the emergence of that? How can I keep from imposing my beliefs about what they need on to them, and remain available, if they ask for it, to help?

Anyway. Thank you for allowing me the space to write a bit. I'm interested to see what your feelings are, and a little self-conscious about having gone on so emphatically. So I'll be quiet for a bit. ;)

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Siona: Please don't get shy on us now! This is good stuff.

As a total aside, autism is treatable and often curable if treated early enough. I believe Arthur was framing the question with that in mind.

Liz

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

Yes, Siona, I hope you'll stay with this.  I need to think about your latest (and wait until I'm feeling less brain-dead) but will get back to it.  Thanks for engaging in a fun and fascinating conversation.

Yar!thur

Re: Second Tier? Zaadz and Changing the World...

I totally dig what you're getting at here, Sonia.

Early in my search for some understanding of this world, I read a book titled Non-Zero: The Logic of Human Destiny.  Really well done.  I haven't followed up on the author, Robert Wright, but I think I'll now have to check his website, which is linked to the book title.

I think Wilber comes to similar conclusions as Wright.  In Wilber'