Positive-biased metaphysics seem to be all the rage right now,

                      in the philosophical/spiritual pop-culture fashion show;

                                          If "Integral" includes all valid truth,

                                     which is to say all accurate data, then,

                                We must look at, and balance in our minds,

                                                     both the positive and the negative,

                                                            both the light and the dark,

                                                            both the good and the evil,

                                                         both the higher and the lower,

                                                           or we are not truly "Integral",

                                                     by definition, both logical and literal.



                                                  Some may have "difficulty" with this, and do.

                              That is the usefulness of the adequate application of Integral Theory;

                                       it can reveal to us our areas of emphasis and de-emphasis,

                                                           what is clear, and what is obscured,

                                                    our field of vision, and what we can not see,

                                                    what we pay attention to, and what we miss;

                                                        what's both necessary and insufficient

                                                                  is rationality clear and true,

                                                        and first one's intention and character

                                                          must be healed with love and cured

                                                       in one's own interior zone one and two.

                                                         If not, then a life of self-acceptance
 
                                                     as one's death sentence, will continue.



                                                                     As our faculty of volition

                                                                    graces us with "free will",

                                                                    we all make our choices,

                                                                and we each pay our own bill,

                                                                         for what we ordered,

                                                                     and what we consumed.


                                                                       Or did it consume us?




                                                              My personal opinion about this is,

                                                                "If I'm not watching my dark side,

                                                                      because I'm looking at you,

                                                                          I might not notice what

                                                                        it's 'objectively' 'arranging',

                                                                        and what it's about to do."




                                                                               All the best, love
                                                                                         Eliot

NOTE: The following is a private letter between Eliot and I in November 2005, the beginning of my journey in self-awareness. I read this so many times and still continue to read his reply as it helps me develop interior awareness. I am posting this, even as it is personal, in the case that it might touch someone out there.

Dear Eliot,
    I have totally destroyed myself and others with ego games in the name of spirituality. My heart is so broken. I am in complete darkness wanting to die and I don't understand because I thought my intentions were always good and that evil was just when I forgot about my spiritual nature. No one in this community wants to talk about evil, everyone told me it is an illusion and that we are always enlightened. Can you please describe for me the nature of good and evil as it pertains to integral as I believe you have higher consciousness than me. How can I be part of a spiritual-integral community and feel that the devil has my soul? No one undestands me. How could this path have led me to such a place. How could I have done this to myself. Please help, as this is life and death for me. I want to be a bringer of light...

In search of truth,
Jana
                                 

Dear Jana;

We are absolutely blessed by the pain we experience; it is the soul pain of a true and honest heart living in this world of ours. The gong of your heart has been struck HARD, so to resonate louder, longer and deeper. Cherish and appreciate the increased sensitivity and clarity this gift affords you, in one sense, it fades too soon. My dear friend Lewis told me, "Eliot, there are two kinds of people in the world: those we learn with and from; and those who test us." No shit. And the ones who test us are the VAST majority. I am really, truly thankful that you and I can learn with and from each other, and I too feel the beauty and goodness of our connection, as it is based on a mutual love of truthfulness, wisdom, goodness and compassion, and aspiration toward increasing love, wholeness and growth.

One of the main developmental lines that I've been aware of in my own life is that of character judgment, and I seem to be gifted in that area, subjectively it almost feels like esp or clairvoyance sometimes. As my close friends ask for and seek my counsel, I always point out the opportunity to develop along this line, however, the "rub" is that without an extremely intimate awareness of one's own consciousness (the illusory nature of content vs. structure), and the tricks that the body-mind is always playing, honestly looking within, seeing how we ourselves have been party to darkness and [self] deceit, takes sincere intentionality towards truth [and in this case, that means away from the ego], and unfortunately, most people would actually rather literally die than look upon this with innocent recognition), they don't "get it", or it doesn't "stick". I can hear my old Wing Chun Master, Hawkins, the Evil Genius himself, saying, "You need the eye to see, and the standard to check" in relation to the martial arts. Our inner "standard" in relation to this issue, pathologically sick vs. adequately healthy, is our own character, our "eye" must see clearly inwardly and outwardly. Seeing with clarity inwardly naturally brings about character development in the individual interior, seeing clearly outwardly with sensitivity to the inner resonances in relationship naturally develops character judgment, or more accurately: character discernment.

So, the appropriate question becomes: What is the source of this evil, where does it live, breathe, and breed? What is its true nature?

Is it the inner trickster, the archetypal joker within, or the evil in others, their dark side feeding on our energy and light?

Yes.

Of course. "Dracula can not enter, until he is invited in." It takes (at least) two to tango, so to speak, the "inviter" and the "invitee". This is a gift from God, an opportunity for you to look within and clearly differentiate "LOVE" from "ATTACHMENT", they are not even opposite, they are so different. The darkness, evil, never gets "less", it just gets less obvious, more evolved, more subtle (the lovely scent of almonds, is someone cooking up some delicious Trout Amandine, or are we getting cyanide gas?). The potentials for good and evil are always infinite, our stuckness in a perspective, however "second tier" it feels, and however "enlightened" we tell ourselves we are, is just a pitiful rationalization and egoic self-justification for our inner, and by extension outer, selective blindness. Living in dynamic truthfulness will set us free, attaching to a static truth that supports our attachments keeps us in bondage, which is rationalized as freedom. The hard path toward life and true freedom (resonance in truth in spirit), or the comfortable path toward death and false validation and support (resonance in spirit), PICK ONE. Choose wisely. After the feedback loops and support systems (internal and external) are in place, most people don't get another chance; the die is cast, so to speak.

Kenny and Andrew (Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen in conversation in "What Is Enlightenment?" magazine, in the regular column, "The Guru and the Pandit" {one of my favorite things in the world to read}) talk about the need "to get your ears boxed" from a spiritual teacher, and the main thrust of that thought is that people need to be reminded of this fact, they need to be "kicked" loose when they get stuck, and they need to be guided to grow up straight and tall when they start to lean and bias themselves away from perfectly vertical. Spirit is the bottom line, however, and the choice to be open to the truth is made in spirit long before it ever gets to the (thinker's) mind. I have been both cursed and blessed in this life, but one of the great blessings is my early training in metaphysics by my friend (and to be honest, somewhat of a surrogate father/big brother) Lewis, and I have unusual clarity about this, due to that. The post-metaphysical perspective merely re-frames these truths in a co-enacted worldspace, rather than a pre-given one, and has little to do with the relationship between the truths revealed in principle and their manifest counterparts, only the structure within which this arises.

I must state that if I had not seen all this (stuff, movement, attachment, etc.) in myself, I would not be able to recognize it, so please know that I have had my heart broken too, and all this work of differentiation and integration is what we're here to learn, and what I'm doing is opening my heart and mind and life to you. We all (even ME!) have a dark nature and a light nature, and we mustn't be (self) deluded into thinking we've won the battle, for in that instant we have lost the war. I want you to KNOW that there is love and compassion, and no negative judgment, just clear discernment. You are one of the best people I've met in this life, and as we agreed, I'm not censoring or watering down what I feel needs to be said.

People cannot hide their true self-system center-of-gravity, for as Confucius said, “A man (or woman) can not hide his (or her) true character, it reveals itself in what he (or she) takes pleasure in”. These “friends/humans” you speak of... it is a pitifully childish game you describe; one moment of acknowledgment followed by hours, days, and weeks of projections and blame, all rationalized to their cognitive limit, beige [infrared] hijacking red hijacking green; it is so unbalanced, so obviously biased, how can one possibly be deceived? One can not, without one’s willing participation. To quote Dr.Phil, “Everyone does what they do for a payoff; if there was no payoff, they wouldn’t do it; what’s your payoff?” To see and acknowledge an ego need while still stuck in relativistic embeddedness, and to balance that thought form into freedom by seeing objectively it’s genealogical grounding with integral/aperspectival awareness and setting it free in love, are indeed different levels of differentiation and integration. Can you let go? Who would you be if you let go? Do you see it AS you (structure) or is it within you (content)? Sit with it until you know, look at it until you see, be it until you know yourself and can recognize that spirit in others. Understanding and compassion are appropriate responses to seeing this in others, but never forget the first law of metaphysics,” You become like that which you stand in relation to". Choose your identifications wisely, inner and outer, my friend, your authenticity and sanity hang in the balance.

Animals do what feels natural, led by feeling, feeling good, feeling safe, and feeling secure. People have the potential, they MAY act from principle, doing what is right, doing what is fair, doing from the larger perspective, even if it doesn’t feel good, natural, safe or secure subjectively – because it is right – a triumph of the higher potentials over the lower embeddedness – a triumph of character over personality, of healthy WE centeredness over pathological I embeddedness - IF they carefully choose AND manifest their humanity over their human weakness, animal nature, and body-mind centeredness.

Let us not forget that the truth test of the upper left quadrant is authenticity, sincerity, and subjective truthfulness, NOT objectively accurate truth. One can be sincere, and be wrong (in either type, yin or yang). I see it all the time. Subjective and objective truth in dynamic balance is the apex, the summit, of upper left development; some archetypal psychology models reflect this with the structure: passive shadow, active shadow, balanced fullness.

My two cents: choose the growth path, my friend, feel like crap in the beginning and feel authentically good at the end, rather than its much more popular inversion, the rationalized, justified and subjectivized self-absorption that feels great in the beginning, and then, much later, commits suicide after destroying the lives of its “loved ones”, feeling powerless against the inertial onslaught of it’s own design. Choose wisely, my friend, as though your life hangs in the balance, it well may. An old folk wisdom saying reflects this, "Those who begin with certainty, end with uncertainty. Those who begin with uncertainty may end with certainty". Another good one that comes to mind, from Stephen Hawking, is "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge". The really sad thing is, some people use their illusions (a vicious circle between spirit, energy, thought, feeling, character, and life conditions) as a source of power, they think it is they who are choosing it, when in truth it is that spirit feeding on them, for they have the gift of life and its energy, without which that spirit is merely an unmanifest potential, waiting for a willing host upon whom to feed. Symbiosis becomes addiction, becomes identity, becomes self, invoking the hierarchy of hell in spirit and energy,” Bring food or become food". I once said to my meditation teacher, "There are two kinds of people in this world, agents and super-agents, agents not knowing what spirits control them, and the super-agents both knowing and embracing that spirit. Super-agents are extremely rare, almost non-existent, and they appear in both types, good and evil. My teacher was pleased, and a little surprised.

The bottom line with love as relates to relationship, it seems to me, is that the love be good, true, and beautiful, evolving with us and as us, true Eros born from romantic spark, sensuality growing into real concern for the other's spiritual growth and welfare, honesty and authenticity in relationship fearlessly reflecting truth (we know who is open to truth, in our hearts, and which relationships we risk by speaking truth freely and openly), mutually enacted compassion for and as the other. Human love has a developmental spiral of growth, physical attachment and familiarity gives way to shared values and communion while encouraging healthy agency, which can become spiritual and transcendent; attachments can die and be reborn as universal love free from all attachment. In his book "The Road Less Traveled", M.Scott Peck gives a sensitive treatment of this subject.

Are we good enough? That's up to us. We answer that question with our every thought and action, every intention we allow to take root in us, our contracted motives murdering love in it's sleep, our willingness to witness this small, dark spirit in us is our only chance for love's revival; do we choose to die, painfully, to our contractions as we witness the light of truth shine in our being, the old self and its attachments burn in the light, replaced by motiveless and unattached true love; or do we choose our comfort, looking away just in time, quietly maintaining our position in the status quo, safe in our embeddedness and "love", with all its constructs and attachments?

We all choose, all the time. To be conscious that we have a choice is the interruption of our inner inertia, a split second of clarity, which offers a way out. Freedom and love are scary, do we really want them? Most choose safety. The light can be too bright, it burns and hurts, do we really want it? Most choose self-acceptance and self-absorption. Jesus said "He who hateth not his own soul can not come unto me", telling us all to choose self-awareness and inward objectivity, and that which survives the burning of the light is what is real, true, and deserves to live in the light of truth. Today's last quote, from Albert Einstein "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it's limits." We are "what passes for humanity", let us all feel the responsibility that implies.

A test of character, indeed. Keep choosing, my friend, just don't forget that you are.

With Loving friendship,

Eliot

P.S. Be careful with the desire to be a "bringer of light" (I know you mean it in a good and loving way), it cost a close friend of mine his sanity. Remember what I wrote about Krishnamurti and his cautions about the imprisonment in time that attachment to a motive, however beautiful and well intentioned, guarantees? More subtle, indeed. "I want to become a better person, and I don't know what that is" aligns the intention correctly, without the fatal error of ego identification with a crystallized thought-form (or, in blue meme bible thumpin' terms, a "graven image", i.e. a "bringer of light"). I think I know what is in your heart, though, which is to be an agent for positive change. Yeah, me too. BEING is more than doing, in many cases involving higher consciousness, and simply being (in energy and vibration) around people can help more than any doing ("bringing", for example). It is in "doing" that ego attachments can creep quietly in, which is of course not to say we shouldn't "do", only that it can be dangerous, and we must be "mindful" (like good little Jedi - remember, Anakin became Darth, the brightest of the angels became Satan - it gets so subtle that it fools the very best, highest, and brightest - it is a matter of spiritual life and death to remain mindful of this - it was their sincere, well-intentioned desire to DO that led them down their fateful path).

From homogeneity (fusion) to polarization into fragments (differentiation) is the encroaching movement of life.

Stacked ascending spiral levels of order (grounded integration) is the evolutionary movement of spirit.

Feeling is superior to thought because it tracks the infinitely detailed territory, moment to moment (interaction with [reception from] the immanent physical universe, full-spectrum). Thought is comparatively crystallized/rigid, insensitive, stuck and dead, and can interfere with the living flow and mindfulness of true healthy fullness and freedom in feeling (ALIVE / stupid).

Thought is superior to feeling because it opens up more worldspaces of potential and multi-dimensionality (interaction with [creation in] the transcendent inner universe, full-spectrum). Feeling is comparatively one-dimensional, a body-mind reptilian brain stem emotional impulse, which we must keep in our self-awareness to minimize unreasonable bias in thought (INTELLIGENT / dead).

ALIVE / stupid and INTELLIGENT / dead can synthesize and integrate into INTELLIGENT / ALIVE that is mindful of stupid / dead tendencies. This is the essence of my art.

 

                                                                             Eliot Bissey, 8-21-2007

Above PICTURE: 23.5 deg. a multiplicity of duality by Integirl

Article Updated Dec. 2, 2007

An integral perspective on Climate Debate

By Jana Espiritu Santo

Inspired by Eliot Bissey

 

The Global Climate debate reveals the spectrum of humanity, like no other debate; a sparkly clusterfuck. It’s an excellent topic for an integral discussion.

Are you ready for a colorful ride WITHIN?

At the very root survival level [INFRARED] the thought of a global catastrophe naturally arouses our limbic system as survival is our fundamental imperative. Being reminded of our mortality in the fear that our home planet could possibly perish can drive us to action before the thinking mind can even begin to analyze; depth and span principle: the lower the rung the quicker the reflexes. In a magical worldview [MAGENTA], one may understand climate change to be a punishment by the vengeful gods and seek safety from these mysterious forces that threaten existence by binding with a protective tribe. The need to make things right with might and challenge the sky lords, emerges with the individual ego [RED]. The ego believes that it alone (because it’s literally as big as “the world”) can influence global temperature with sheer will and is therefore inclined to fight this crusade that offers a power rush and self-righteous vindication. When the ego begins to seek something outside itself, the sense of purpose emerges with the absolutist-authoritarian structure [AMBER] in the communal space. One such (yin) manifestation is the Mother Earth/Gaia religion of nature worship, where industrialized CO2 emissions are seen as the shameful byproduct of man’s sin, the 21st century apple. Salvation can be found in surrendering to a “spiritual” authority and institutionalized government (legislation), to give the herd security. When the religious myth is transcended with Reason, the autonomous self [ORANGE] emerges and seeks out personal gain and achievement in the debate, like a successful and status-driven leader of the Global Crisis, a more sophisticated (higher harmonic) crusader then the brutal red warrior. With the economic machine, political self-interest parties and big-time corporations jump into to the controversy to have their say with effective propaganda of carefully selected scientific data to support their objectives and profits (i.e. oil companies, politically funded science, outlandish journalism etc.); facts attract the rational mind and using the “right” facts in strategic positioning can potentially control a mind: look at this graph ONLY (but don’t at that graph) magician games. When personal gains are no longer satisfying, the humanitarian sensitive self emerges [GREEN], concern outside the human is rendered and the environmentalist is born to protect all life in caring embrace.

When there is ONLY persona and NO shadow (ego split) this widely extended care may really only extend as far as the self-image. Pathological environmentalism turns against human evolution to value nonhuman life more (deep ecology and retro-romanticism). When the ego infects (Boomeritis) the “I am going to save the world” campaign is joined complying with the  ‘spiritual’ contracts that give life fuzzy meaning and a sense of global identity.

To see all this we must have the courage to look WITHIN as there is an I, we, it to every occasion; if you can SEE it, it is within; in Oprah's terms: "You spot it, you got it." We are the whole spiral fluctuating moment-to-moment and have the need to survive, be safe, have power and purpose, profit and humanitarian concern AND we all have the potential to get stuck somewhere along the spiral when it is not appropriate or healthy. AND we all have the potential to not be aware of any of this (persona/no shadow): the ANIMAL in control of the HUMAN.

In attempting to have an integral approach, we must first meet this debate with understanding, NOT attack (for we would only be attacking ourselves, closing our eyes from the very needs that make us human). And incorporating shadow work, a charge or disturbance is usually the disowned shadow, which should ideally be integrated prior to discussion.

As the spiral of development moves from I/individualistic to WE/collective and back again, we have the rise of activists and leaders along with the rise of camps and “sides” prioritizing 1^st tier bottom-lines over simply LOOKING with open eyes. The BOUNDARY is erected between “me and you”, “us and them” and the witch hunt begins of the projected shadow; the animal chasing its tail. And thus here we have the birth of our extremes: global warming is a joke and global warming is a man-made crisis and they call each other the denial machine against the catastrophists/doomsayers.

The irony is that a “versus” perspective is DEPENDENT on its opposition (there is co-dependency in every war): you better be wrong so I can be right! To remove opposition would entail DEATH. This dependency traps life energy (Eros) and its potential freedom (in the VOID in which BOTH arise).

THE CAR IS BROKE?

My car insurance (esurance) is collaborating with Al Gore's LIVE earth concert so I am going to talk about a CO2 emitting car (hooray for irony!)

If we suspect there is a problem with our car, is it intelligent to panic and then immediately replace the engine in an emotional frenzy with very little data? This is the limbic system hijacking rational thought.  In such a case: THE ANIMAL IS RIDING THE HUMAN. Happens all the time to all of us. Are we aware of this when it happens or do we have a cozy rationalization to nestle in (i.e. well the funny sound was coming from the engine! so...uh...)? Rationalizations make it so much easier to live with ourselves :-P

Theoretically, 2nd tier FIRST sees the whole picture before acting within such binary constructs. Any one down for still gathering the data about this very complex matter and keeping an open mind?

Taken from Spiral Dynamics, p. 289

“TURQUOISE views a world of interlinked causes and effects, interacting fields of energy, and levels of bonding and communicating most of us have yet to uncover. The vMEME liberates a sense of living systems that mesh and blend, flowing in concert with the other. This is another order-seeking system, but the first one that searches for the macroview. ‘Seeing-everything-at-once’ dominates before doing anything specific dominates the thinking process.”

Let’s say that after we suspected a car problem we got the advice from a friend because it was too inconvenient to see a mechanic, or that we diagnosed the problem ourselves because we want to be experts. What if after we replaced the engine, we find out that the problem was the transmission, or that the problem was relatively minor, or that it wasn’t the car but something external like a plastic bag covering the exhaust pipe or that it was the context the car was in (such as the way we were driving it, where we were driving it [rocky terrian]), or that the supposed problem was actually a natural byproduct, or that there was no problem at all and it was projected fear, the need for excitement, attention, and pity. What if we tried to fix the problem ourselves and created more problems with the car, creating more chaos than order? After the fact we realize that we have wasted money, time, resources, and labor feeling quite stupid by our impulsive action.

Being patient, receiving the data, and looking at the whole picture before acting never occured to us.

What if it was a strategic plan, conscious or unconscious, to borrow money for a new car or to receive one as a gift? What if having a broken car made us feel special and we wanted to be known as the "chick with the piece of shit car;" a status-symbol for humility (LOL!).

[I realize that this analogy is very poor and somewhat poorly executed; I could use some growth with my analogy-symbol subline of the cognitive and I know jack shit about cars! can you tell ;-)]

I must say, that in the statistical game of hit and miss, once in awhile stupidly replacing the engine might have been the right thing; random perfection. There will always be 1st tier luck. Every once in awhile the fool appears wiser than the wise man. This rationalization certainly gives fuel (no pun intended) for the 1^st Tier Action-Man, yet the 2^nd Tier Being-Man has no need to gamble in the dark but to see first in the light and will act more in accordance to one's goals and awarness; another depth and span principle: from ‘act more and see less’ to ‘see more and act less’. [The action of 2nd tier is much more efficient and aligned to the many dimensions in the moment, as it builds up energy for a single RIGHT (wholeness) move rather than dissipating energy in multiple wrong moves (fragmentation). There is hastily acting from subsistence needs and embedded frames of reference (as described in the first paragraph) based on assumptions, fuzzy feelings, assertions, close-ended conclusions and then there is postponing action for verification, questioning, testing, and open-ended probability waves (as a conclusion means that a mind has stop working). It is much harder to use the prefrontal cortex than the brainstem….it requires much self-control that says “hold it instincts."

It might be best to take the car to a few mechanics and gather the data first before deciding what to do, especially if we are ignorant about cars; CHECKING OUT THE SITUATION...to become more AWARE. Proposed solutions may actually create more bad than good (more fragmentation) if the problem isn't properly diagnoised.

1^st Tier begins with a perspective/worldview and then seeks out data to support it. The selected content within subjective embeddedness is the reality and truth (my data=truth; but the “my” is NOT seen). In Wilber-5, this is all Zone #1 phenomenology. To INCLUDE opposing data means perspectival death (your data=my death, YIKES!!) as 1st tier cannot see Zone #2 (the structure of perspective).

Are we interested in an integral perspective, OR do we just use rhetoric when it conveniently fits "our" perspective? (I'm gulity as charged many a time!)

In Integral Spirituality, Wilber discusses how the signifier/word “ecosystems” isn’t comprehended (signified/actual reality) until the turquoise worldspace of 2^nd tier cognition emerges (a probability wave NOT a metaphysical given). I do not have the direct experience of this worldspace in my interior, so I study the map of uncharted territory. I speak of turquoise consciousness as an "it", NOT from "I."

The nature of climate change involves complex multi-dimensional interacting systems. This isn’t just (exclusive) systems theory in the environment, collapse to modern “out there” science. Turquoise consciousness can simply hold more of the detail in the territory, aware of the systems within and without (NOT New Age fluff).

Taken from Spiral Dyanmics, p.288:

“Turquoise is far beyond GREEN’S New Age chic and faddish spirituality. It seems that as one really comes to understand pain and bodily signals, the person routinely begins to have a new control over bodily processes, ranging from blood pressure to mental attitude. From the TURQUIOSE perspective, there is nothing so mystical about mystics-a fact with disillusions GREEN to no end.”

Our own bodies are microcosmic ecosystems, and deeper interior awareness can understand our complex processes more deeply. Our technology is not sophisticated enough to predict the weather yet perhaps because our awareness is not yet sophisticated enough to design such a machine. How can make declarative statements of what the weather will be, when the variables are practically infinite? How intune with our own body temperature are? And we think we know about global temperature when our bodies control us more than visa versa. Perspective of ignorance, is incorporating the shadow of knowledge.

Even though rationality emerges in 1^st tier, along with the ability to rationalize, data is still selected according to a contracted objective (no big picture, ecosystem awareness). If we reduce climate change as of consisting of one distinct variable: CO2 and then create a theory-of-connection because both have increased, is using too simplistic of a descriptive model from a vision-logic perspective. [From LR to UR:] This is like saying that body temperature is based ONLY on the correlation of blood vessel size, neglecting to look at more significant factors (i.e. hypothalamus, hormones, body movement etc.).

Can we bear to look? Or would that murder our treasured "spiritual" contracts to "save the planet"? No one wants to look at the lie embedded in one's CRUSADE. The death of crusade is the death of self. And in this is a very special opportunity called growth. Growth demands that we die.

You see, most people (self included) don't LOOK at exteriors, they think about a crude concept about exteriors, the label is NOT the thing. In such a case one may arrive at this incredibly narrow theory:

humans (man-made CO2) created temperature rise

Let's break that theory down with some lousy vision-logic (and I am only an infant at this so there will be errors and redundant complexifications).

Let's say that this is an A & B relationship [A=CO2 emissions; B=climate temperature]

To look at A & B a few things need to be considered such as:

1. holarchical arrangement: what makes up A/B and what does A/B make up? Turtles all the way up and all the way down. A/B is not just singular but also collective (i.e multiple atoms within singular molecules).

2. Measurement/qualities: 3-D shape, size, density of A/B and subA/B (within A/B and beyond A/B).

3. Look at the &; what type of relationship? how does A effect B and visa versa, feedback loops and energetic synergy (type of causality/influence), frequency pattern of interaction, logrhythmic curves, multi-dimensional algorhythms, input-out ratios etc.

4. Time dimension, fluctuations, irrelgularities, chaos-order, duration of interaction, intervals, cause-effect playout in time

5. Relativity: seeing all the components and interaction of A & B as relative to eachother, not a metaphysical given to step outside. This introduces nonlocality and transrational flexibility in thought.

6. Look at the relationship between data and meaning and the sufficient amount of data needed before meaning can be drawn; multi-dimensional statistical analysis....data threshold and meaning groundedness (from shaky conclusion to more accurate conclusions)

7. Heterarchical relationships with other elements, thus adding dimensions to cause and effect and how A relates to B etc.

8. Understanding the limitations/ignorance of our measurement tools/technology [exterior] to our depth of awareness [interior] to dissect 1-7.

Here is some of the data that ‘man-made CO2=temperature rise’ theory excludes:

1. In the medieval period temperature was higher than it is today.
2. In the CO2-temperature relationship C02 lags 100 years behind temperature, revealing that temperature drives CO2.
3. Animals give off 150 gigatons of CO2 and humans give off 6 gigatons.
4. Volcanoes and oceans produce the most CO2; 95% of all CO2 emissions are produced by nature.
5. CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas (1%). Water vapor is the most.
6. Temperature rose about the same pre-industrial as post-industrial.
7. Surface of the earth is warming; temperature decreases with altitude, which shows that greenhouse gas isn’t fully responsible.
8. Sunspot/solar flare data correlates more precisely to temperature rise than CO2.
9. Clouds and galactic rays also contribute to temperature rise.
10. Global Warming is also occuring on other planets such as Mars and Pluto.
    

For further research (this is just a start):

 

Additionally, we must not exclude from the composite picture that atmospheric CO2 has increased by 30% postindustrial and has been the highest it has been for 650,000 years, an increase factor of 1.3. This is something to investigate. We must ask from a vision-logic perspective: what is the good/bad ratios for this in the environment (many scientist claim that CO2 increase is actually beneficial to the environment), by how much, where and who is affected and how they are effected and to what degree and then to ask how much is manmade and how much influence do we have that is ALSO on the side of evolving humanity. We may not even have power to control the macrocosm (oceans and volcanoes are much much bigger than the little human carbon unit). Even if CO2 isn’t solely responsible for temperature rise it may be responsible for other negative effects (as well as positive) to the environment. Are we advanced enough answer these questions? And of course there will always be a tradeoff (give/take) to human evolution and its influence on nonhuman habitat.

And from what level of awareness are we answering these questions? Gotta include the interior.

Again, if we are NOT looking at exteriors from turquoise interior then we may not be adequately dealing with the situation. I am certainly NOT qualified.

If we cannot find a mechanic that has developed to the RATIONAL level of consciousness then we are going to have some problems. Let's say the only mechanic we can find is pre-rational (who knows rational rhetoric) and he says our car trouble is based on a negative frequency pull from Mars (a magical explanation) and that we have to purchase an expensive part to filter out Mar's bad rays.

I think I would fire this mechanic. How about you?

[Note: Orange rationality is sufficient to understand a mechanism such as a vehicle that works on static mechanistic principles. However, when understanding the global ecosystem, orange rationality is NOT sufficient because this is a living system with constantly changing variables (the squiggle lines of LIFE in contrast to the linear man-made lines of artificial LIFE.]

Here are various perspectives on the good and bad of CO2 rise (again, just a start):

http://uplink.space.com/printthread.php?Cat=&Board=environment&main=206078&type=post

 

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA334.html

 

http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

 

http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/globalchange/global_warming/03.html

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0715_040715_oceancarbon.html

 

In flew-flow awareness, nothing is purely good or purely bad (infinite depth and span). Good and bad comes from everything including temperature rise and CO2 rise. Below is a good and bad tree (that grew a little crooked) [a better representation is in 3-D]:

                                                    GOOD/BAD

                                                       ^      ^

                                        GOOD/BAD        GOOD/BAD

                                        ^          ^           ^           ^

                          GOOD/BAD    GOOD/BAD   GOOD/BAD   GOOD/BAD

                           ^         ^         ^       ^      ^       ^        ^       ^            ^           ^

  good/bad good/bad good/bad good/bad good/bad good/bad good/bad good/bad

                                             

           DUALITY TO MULTIPLICITY

OUCH! Says the binary mind where one thing can be entirely good and another entirely bad.

The above picture I created illustrates that (yin-yang within yin-yang eternally). In flex-flow there is the flexibility to see the varying ratios/degrees of good/bad production as manifested (karma) and as probability (creativity) in varying dimensions (net effect and specific/local effect), constantly taking in more and more data/information. (To be clear, there can be more good than bad (and visa versa) manifestation in any section of the tree, I am not saying that everything is cut into two equal halves).

Here is a really crappy Haiku poem:
 

Temperature rise is good and bad.

CO2 rise is good and bad.

Al Gore is good and bad.

Here is Al Gore's poem:

Temperature rise=BAD BAD! oh, my god horrible.

CO2 rise=BAD BAD! oh, my god so horrible.

ME = GOOD!!! More applause please ;-)

In closing, a 2^nd tier perspective is not necessarily good: good and bad potentials exist on all levels. And this is a sloppy attempt. We must also keep our eyes open to 2^nd tier cognition combined with 1^st tier self system (center-of-gravity) in ourselves and each other. For example, I have the 1^st tier desire to preach this article to 1^st tier, which is meaningless and arrogant, an expenditure of energy for my ego (sadly, I'm a first-tier asshole and fortunately life is being a good teacher beating it out of me ;-) ). A major facet of integral theory is that you cannot move a subjective perspective with objective facts.

UNHEALTHY 2nd TIER and FLATLAND spots in VISION-LOGIC:

2^nd tier cognition combined with 1^st tier self system may be analogous to the puppet masters in Plato’s cave that see the chained 1st tier folks. The puppet masters have not gone outside the cave (1st tier self-system) and fuck with the 1^st tier folks by creating the 2-D images on the walls for the folks to identify with. This manipulation stems from 1^st tier needs (i.e. power, dominance, control, money). Could the Global Warming debate be a partly fabricated crisis of turquoise puppet masters (with their 1st tier self-systems) in media and politics (the New World Order)?

Check out this article, that discusses how the proposed solutions are the carbon tax, which is already in the process of legislation in Britain. Remember, to the politicians, this debate is over and they have no need to synthesize the information of the "other side."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5086

Can we take the ROLE of the OTHER?

Yeah!....let's cause some anxiety about the weather while we rape and pillage the world and then make some money off of it, while looking like green saints, tugging at all needs in the spiral! A brillant strategy. Many powerful individuals are so good at being bad. Higher consciousness has the potential to create evil TOO! (We seem to forget). Take a look at the devil, the closest to God. Never lose sight of the behind-the-scenes (faceless) evil geniuses.

I don't know much about politics, but it seems like the middle East is the current hell hole NOT temperature rise. People die of heat a lot these days....they are called bomb explosions.

The truth is that worlds are exploding daily in ways that we cannot imagine.

Isn't a HUMAN-BEING a WORLD? Or is the WORLD just something "out there."

(And ironically considering the good/bad tree if global warming was a catastrophe to end all life, well for some people that would be a REALLY good thing...like all the prisoners of war (w/ multiple meanings), who could be freed from their pain and suffering. You gotta lose an "I" to get that one!

Wilber once commented on how Carl Rove, Bush’s brain, who has recently dropped out from the public (a promoted puppet master??) is a turquoise thinker in discussing integral politics… I wonder, what other politicians and people in power are turquoise thinkers?

Don’t you! Hmmmmmmm……

He mentions that at the end of this video on Integral Politics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQRUu_4W2j8

One last thing about the shadow here in VISION-LOGIC (a very limited interpretation). One can look at one situation with v-logic and look at another situation in Flatland (i.e. like if we are bright and alert in one moment and tired and exhausted in the following moment).

Ken Wilber reveals a Flatland SPOT of vision-logic when he says that to have an interest in integral theory and to read it is to have turquoise cognition.

Here is where he makes that claim: http://www.kenwilber.com/blog/show/51

This is a CLEAR violation of integral semiotics, going AGAINST his own theory; where are the quadratic truth tests? as this is a 1st tier assertion/assumption of an individual's level of consciousness (does Wilber know all his readers and shines a light into their interiors?). Such a statment is based on ASSOCIATION NOT ACTUALITY.

Green and its 'faddish spirituality' can be drawn to integral theory just as it is drawn to fluffy mysticism and can memorize all the "integral" signifiers without the signified worldspace. Green loves the word integral because integrative is a good thing, more flatland expanse and eclectic pluralism to play in.

What's wrong with this? Well telling people that they are at turquoise when they may not be can actually work against growth, removing geneology (the growth process). In such a case certainty, arrogance, and image can superceed the reality. But this is not ALL bad: this may draw more people in the theory and eventual transformation may occur as the cognitive dissonance increases for the break-out phase of growth. Actually some of Ken's carrots drew me in! And I LOVE KEN!!! especially his HUMANITY!

Never forget the good/bad tree. hehe :-P It truly reveals the stuckness of the mind.

And then one asks, but how could Wilber, the MAN himself do this? V-logic is a multiplex space that we can occupy in one moment and then fall out of in the next, I'm rarely there in the mornings and I'm barely there in certain moments of a day (let's keep a day-to-day/moment-to-moment perspective on ourselves, if grounded and geniune growth is our priority). Without a stable v-logic culture to support individual growth it may be a bumpy lumpy ride, as is such on the cutting edge.

Thanks sincerely for your time and energy and I hope you found this interesting.

With love,

Jana

brought to you by
        eye see productions
 
NOTE: FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY R[adically] Rated

Requirement for Reading: a sense of humor ;-)
 
Mara: Greetings friends. Glad you could make it. We have a new member. Let’s have her introduce herself and welcome her to the group.
 
G. Sparkle: Hi, my name is General Sparkle; I’m BOTH tough and radiant! I am currently changing the world on zaadz with my radically divine posts that attract 50 new friends a day: there’s a sparkle of orange status for ya (grins; bounces her bubble boobs). You can find me there under my cosmic superhero name 2MuchYIN and you can meet the REAL me on 2nd LIFE. I believe all women are goddesses, radiant beings of magnificent light and love exploding out of our vaginas; you ladies feel it RIGHT! We are fullness the entire manifest, hoorah! I think we should call this group the Divine Goddess Circle as Goddess “transcends and includes” well, EVERYTHING (shakes plastic doll-like head with exuberance).

Tinky: Objection your honor (embodies lawyer persona playfully), theoretical viola----
 
Mara: Hold it Tinkster, A UL truth over-ruled by LL politeness, amber IN the court! (makes a flexible and graceful switch.) Thank you for joining us General Sparkle. We can allow a few minutes for multi-dimensional hermeneutic analysis of the content of what you have shared; we can’t get into the juicy structure just yet… that would be contextual inappropriate at this particular point in time...we are just getting to know each other (a barely detectable grin and a polite warning eye cast upon the crowd).

Tinky: ----tion (coughs); nice to meet you General! (a swift recovery)

Hipsy: Nice suggestion as it would be nice to explore the goddess as an archetype, a high altitude potential, a type (i.e. yin), the sexual line and as it has manifested in different psychographs and various cultures in various time periods and perceived from multiple perspectives vertically, both immanent and transcendent. Geez; that could take an eternity.
 
Sunny: (grumbles with existential dread) Not if it already happened and is always happening. Our lives are just a blink of the Kosmic Eye. That's eternity. (says with an unexcited tone)

Lixy: Excuse mah, I gotta comment on that “fullness/manifest” Deida shit. Come on now, ladies (cocks eyebrow) does a meta-sexual perspective well-suited, as-if-made-for the nerdy-horny-alpha-male sound a wee bit 1st-tier AGENDA based, ehem (clears throat) BIASED? And we know where agenda takes us on the spiritual path....agenda=pain, suffering, conflict, dissociation, rationalization, asserting an I over it and we! DUH!!
 
Pinky: Yeah heiffen-happy one, it’s like when is the universe going to stop hitting ITSELF in the head! ...agenda leads to the absence of the good, true, and beautiful: a.k.a hell...

Lixy: ...or heaven from the perspective of high-quality evil in which absence is merely tasty emptiness, (makes a devilish grin) hehe; do I smell burning? Oh, no...I’m just exploding into a Beautiful supernova (says like hollow bimbo)! Let’s keep it RELATIVE girls...and also consider the temporal payoff to agenda (role plays: holds out hand for dollars and sticks out tits for sex)...
 
Sunny: Hell, if the devil attended our group with LL manners, I’d probably learn a lot from her. The devil wears lipstick, right? and I’m sure the best quality too! (Giggles) Hell, she might be one of us right now (first sign of cheer crosses her face)!
 
Lixy: pulls out imaginary lipstick and pretends to read: Blackwidow champagne color. (everyone laughs)

Pinky: Yeah, evil only gets more subtle the higher you go in consciousness, NOT less! High-quality evil looks good! And the agenda for spiritual power…oooooooooh, that’s a scary one!

Pookie: Hey now, what about the agenda for the Good, True, Beautiful. That’s the side I’m on. And I think your spirituality line is quite amber Lixy and Pinky, just an observation!

Lixy: That’s exactly what it would sound like to amber (winks)

Hipsy starts to pull out her holographic Wilber-Combs lattice.

Pinky: REMEMBER (says with haughty tone) heaven and hell are merely signifiers, the meaning is created in the signified worldspace of relative-genealogical perspective, Come on now, Pookie we’ve covered this in integral semotics.

Tinky: Alright you 2nd tier posin’ bitches (says with humor), I see a red agenda to beat Pookie with some high-quality assertions here that need better contextual grounding; however I could be mistaken, we’ll hash it out with some hash at the Electromagnetic Rave, this evening. But let me reveal my agenda, which is to get my hands on those delicious cupcakes with visible light sprinkles Mara always makes. (everyone giggles)
 
Lixy: Infrared HAPPY! joy, joy, joy! (in bubblegum little girl voice)

Hipsy: Cute Tinky, love the call for UL authenticity and LL clarity.
 
Loopy: The agenda to have no agenda is quite hilarious in its play-out. I was watching the other day in meditation, how agenda seems to fracture the Whole continuously in the arrow of time...you gotta love the ride! Like now you have the duality of cupcake and no-cupcake to reckon with and it will continue to spit into multiplicity of dualities, dividing you further and further from the center-of-contraction...like a big CRYSTAL growing in angles and edges and dimensions!
 
Sunny: Loopy, you're queefing big time....reality check ladies: how about the multiplicity of being sliced and spliced into a million pieces by a serial killer eating you one piece at a time ALIVE. Hello? I’m I the only one human here willing to incorporate how the “ride” is also steaming ass. I can’t believe shit like that happens while I’m eating a damn cupcake (frowns).

Loopy: Wait, I see it: We are BOTH trapped in a dual in the Dual, ONLY seeing one side of EVERYTHING. We are CRYSTALIZING positions, YIKES!!!! Holy shit, I just saw something…like order and chaos BOTH increase with time ahhhhhhhh! Imagine the rise of an integral serial killer and his crystallized killings along with an integral goddess and her crystal awareness, AHHHHHHH!!!!! Now I’m going to vomit.

Sunny: Yeah, how about in the same body, Loopy.

Pinky: Shut it, Sunny. I think you used all the puke bags last time. But that’s good Loopy, when you interior peak states are accompanied by exterior pain…I have to say that’s more evidence of it being real growth because sometimes I wonder about your mindless ramblings.
 
Hipsy (puts on reading glasses, sorting through files, mumbling): Inside, outside complexification….Appendix A in Integral Spirituality.
 
Tinky: You and your pedantic antics. Look, Pinky. Loopy is also spinning out too, she’s got major drama queen probability waves and distorted high-level visions with NO fundamental grounding, let’s not forget genealogy…and I say that Loopy with LOVE…
 
Pinky: Yeah, Loopy like that last time you restricted your vocabulary to “nothing” and “everything” “both” and “neither” and no one could communicate to you for weeks. That was a tad regressive, NOT nondual in the least (says with authority)

Sunny: Yeah. It took us hours to understand whether you wanted mole enchiladas or  halibit steak and then when we got you both you said neither...come on Loopy, you are trying to skip stages for attention.
 
Lixy: solipsism-fallin’ in the Zone#1 hole-pre-rational rationalized as transrational, Loopy go loopdydupe minus the other quadrants...oh, my dear!
 
Loopy: Sorry everyone! (looks down) But just when is my nervous system gonna be able to handle (Belches the word vision-logic?)
 
Tinky: Just take your time, little schizoid-mystic. Only a fool believes it happens over night.

Lumpy: And she needs to get rational first! Well, returning to our pre-tangents all I have to say is that after reading that Deida shit, me and my man be breaking the china like Big Bang KOSMIC loving, with a capital “K” my gals followed by a “uming” and a shitload of !!!!!!
 
Lixy: Lumpy's creating earthquakes in China too...I read the news (gives her high-five).

Mara: Thanks for sharing Lumpy. There’s good and bad in EVERYTHING; nothing exists as purely one or the other except in a digital mind. We are here to learn awareness of BOTH the unhealthy and healthy contexts/content, these being multiple and holarchically arranged.... and not attach to one in identification and hide from the other with selective blindness.

In the CONTEXT of a healthy relationship that Deida shit can bring a lot of goodness; in the CONTEXT of an unhealthy relationship that Deida shit can bring a lot of badness. But you need the EYE TO SEE AND THE STANDARD TO CHECK that comes from WITHIN. Structural awareness is the key and part of 2nd tier growth.
 
Loopy: Yeah…but...but (starts to studder) bbbbad is good to bbbad and good is bad to bad. Blahhhhhhhh!!!!!!!! (her eyes start to rotate and jiggle in relativistic horror)
 
Sunny: Your right Loops and you have an eye to see but no STANDARD to check. Don't worry, we love you. Nice closing Mara. O.K. General Sparkle, with that said let me broaden your suggestion: Let’s call this the Souless Cunt slash Divine Goddess Circle, gotta keep it full-spectrum and nondual. The Sting of Reality keeps me Awake.
 
Lixy: Yeah, that’s sizzling, oooooh, tell it SISTA!! There is no one without the other, so simple and yet so forgotten!! Cheers, to our humanity.
 
Pookie frowns.
 
Pinky: Sorry Pookie, I was a condescending cunt earlier about theory.
 
Pookie: No i disagree. You just forgot that you were a goddess. That’s okay. Okay. Pinky. You JUST FORGOT!! I just want to be a goddess like in general.
 
General Sparkle: (stands up abruptly) Pookie, let’s start our own group. I don’t feel any RESONANCE here and my sparkle is feeling dull! But you and me, we gotta multi-prismatic connection to establish and you're right there is too much amber here (bounces her bubbles again).

Pookie: You're right!

She attaches Pookie to the hip like some sort of accessory whore doll and frolics down a yellow brick road, “see ya bitches, haha!”

Tinky: Let’s have a moment of compassion

All pause and bow.

Tinky: Pookie and G. Sparkle will grow-up and discover they are no longer innocent little girls in lala sparkeland of good-evil fusion, where goddess is a prerational dream and mythical fancy....once you become aware of choice....there is no turning back the clock.
 
Hipsy: If they discover….projecting a metaphysical given my friend!

Mara: I’d toast to Humanity as well, if we all had some. I gotta another reality check here: We are all not even TRUE subjects, but 1-dimensional objects of a fragmented dream slash shadow projection in that narcissist Integirl’s head. Sorry, but as facilitator, I gotta keep it REAL.
 
Everyone is in shock and says: Damnit we are neither cunts nor goddesses?!? (Gasping in existential horror)
 
Integirl wakes up, “Tinky? Did you find the puke bag? I’ve just been slimed by meaningless fairy dust from a specific sparkle.”
 
No one responds. Integirl is surprised that she is alone sleeping on yellow bricks.
 
Integirl: Oh. I must have been dreaming. Now which way do I go? (scratchs head).. to the Enlightened Wizard of Ahhhhhhhs. I am looking for my SOUL.
 
She continues onward….and the spontaneous chant comes to her mind to guide her: WITHTHE EYE TO SEE AND THE STANDARD TO CHECK. WITH THE EYE TOO SEE AND THE STANDARD TO CHECK.....
 
to be continued...

I dedicate this to my BELOVED, Eliot…the LIGHT of my LIFE, who ROCKS my world ;-). 

I am in a community that believes it is “changing the world” and that it is integral. Hmmmmm. ? I have questions.

I am in between a cognitive quantum leap, exploring the territory.

The wide expanse of the collective and its“global” pursuits in 1^st tier (green) turns into the depth of the individual in 2^nd tier (yellow vMEME/teal altitude). In Spiral Dynamics this is the polarity move from we-communal to I-individualistic. From the inside it almost feels like the spiral is inverting as the infinite lateral reach of Flatland flips inside-out (rather than coming from the outside-in), becoming the multi-dimensional spectrum WITHIN the individual. “What is within me?” becomes the question, not “How can I change you/the world/society.” The very “act of changing something OUTSIDE the self” is trapped within the dualistic mind producing mental viruses and mind-body fractures (the “I” unseen [no Zone #2] and “the world” ONLY seen). As of such, the proposed solutions from unseen I always breed further fragmentation from the whole (as I am learning from Krishnamurti, a “spiritual/nondual teacher up to the Wilber-5 standard”, Eliot once pointed out in sharing his work with me; I now deeply feel that Wilber and Krishnamuriti are a complimentary pair, and encourage the "Integralites" to explore the truth in this).

This notion of “changing the world” literally becomes nonsense, an abstraction at best, a distraction at worst. There is only ONE thing any one of us can change and that is the self at the ROOT-of-BEING. The individual. The emphasis is on the individual/human being. The 4 Quadrants outline the structure of consciousness of an individual holon. LL contextual and cultural embeddedness are WITHIN the individual, while the collective IS in itself NOT an INDIVIDUAL.  Important. Therefore I turn within. Do I have the COURAGE to look within? Can I accept that the “world out there” is the “world in here?” Krishnamuriti said: "I am the world and the world is me."

Jumping into A theory of everything from the inside-out takes EVERYTHING I have to evolve; is EVERYTHING I am. One may ask, what the fuck am I getting into here?

In such a developmental transition, one becomes fully aware that one cannot change another (exterior information does not move subjective perspective PERIOD!) and these “crusades” and “isms” and “this versus that” propositions and “ideologies” in which we “fight” for change, peace, happiness, love, etc. becomes let go of as we can see through the false promises of salvation (war will always make more war/separation will always make more separation/simple and quite deep). For to the superficial mind, they appear to be “creating” wholeness and yet a deeper mind can see that I CANNOT CREATE WHAT ALREADY IS. If I cannot BE WHOLE, how can I create WHOLE? It would be artificial and unsustainable and it would not be REAL. The more we try to create order the more viruses we spread in the mindspace by feeding 1^st tier partial, compartmentalized perspectives. Can we examine the action-based limitations of 1st tier? 2^nd tier is the awareness of those impulses (limbic/reptilitan brain) and the extracted truths from all perspectives (can we keep the baby and toss out the dirty bathwater!! LOL/w/ prefrontal cortex). The “action-man” of 1^st tier (as SD theory calls it) are actions from fragments of the whole merely creating more fragments in the midst of blindness and confusion (there is all this doing with EYES shut). Can we lift the veil? Can we SEE our own fragments? Like the work of Byron Katie, can we stay in OUR business with self-inquiry? as individuals; microcosms of the Whole, a Whole in ITSELF. Or are we too interested in joining the “save the world” campaign, focusing on the collective, to make ourselves feel  AMAZING, avoiding the interior inspection? Hmmmm.

These dead-end pursuits are merely a distraction from the self and BEING. Every urge to point the finger, to manufacture another duality is the urge to escape the self, and this only becomes more subtle as development ensues, rationalizations get sharper and narcissism evolved. In 2^nd tier you can no longer hide in identifications and mental constructs that bias WHAT IS to an absolutist, contracted perspective, for the very act of hiding does not promote consciousness as something will come to bite you in the ass later. Looking carefully at the ‘movement of hiding’ is an opportunity to become more AWARE, for the who that is looking becomes a greater subject to an object that was previous subject (ala Keagan). That very act of looking requires objectivity.  2^nd tier is about BEING, not about DOING, for doing is effortless, in natural accord with Nature when being is prioritized. Doing is no longer done out of unexamined anxiety, childish/dissociative needs, self-image and ego identifications. Doing, in this context, perpetuates the wheel of karma, the serpent chasing its tail saying “do, do, do!” [behind-the-scenes: to not SEE, SEE, SEE!].  Can EYE SEE? Exterior behaviors distracting interior pathologies (Krishnamuriti-Wilber). slamming against the walls of a linear dimension (duality) and embedded holographic proclivity (self-destructive patterns). I cannot know what to do until I become self-aware and can see the WHOLE and this takes time, dedication and commitment. I create more bad than good when I create in blindness; when I become self-aware there is no I create for "I am the world and the world is me". This makes sense intuitively, but it takes a moment outside of time to comprehend (peak state) and the messy process of growth to live outside of “psychological time” as an acquired stage. Authentic nondual perspective transcends and includes genealogy.

It is difficult for me to discuss anything outside of consciousness, such as "global" concepts and mental abstractions, when I attend groups where the average mode is green. And prior to transformation, I said too much not really saying anything at all. I really can’t say a whole lot in the midst of “cutting edge” speak where everyone supposedly knows a lot about everything and in the midst of looking within, which is totally blowing my mind away, quite literally in fact. I see a lot of bright colors and whimsical dreams, but on some level it is meaningless to me, because I am only interested in what I can directly experience and what I can directly experience I can talk about in the we-space (mutual resonating signifieds), otherwise where is the Good? I have to pay close attention to the spreading of viruses in the LL. I have outgrown being a social parasite, but what I have transcended is still within and included. I want to be a human-being in communion with other human-beings more than a fragment of human feeding of off fragment off of another human. Direct experience is what I know, NOT what I claim to know; otherwise knowledge is not grounded in the UL. So, while I speak less, I grow more. I know so little. Like Tao Lzu said, "I am stupid and dull." (I have also learned such from Krishnamurti and my Beloved.) I ask myself, How would a child use this model, before the stain of ego. For the innonence of spirit is required, to LOOK when guilty ego says DON'T LOOK. This is only after going through "the hell of self-knowledge" that Kant once talked about, for innocence is not a backwards journey.

It takes a lot of authenticity to make this move and I have been blessed by my supporting life conditions (including being around the higher consciousness of my Beloved), I literally cry to life in gratitude. Many people become so entrenched in their identifications and mental constructs  that all of LIFE’S energy is about supporting this and sustaining that (I call it the this-that prison), essentially the lie of separation, rationalizing stuckness. I know because I did. This pattern soon becomes a mold, crystallizing over time (the sedimentation of time-bound constructs [that escape reality]). There is no freedom in this, yet there is freedom in seeing it. To make a vertical advancement, the entire structure disintegrates and this involves a lot of instability and chaos before a higher order can be established, the crisis before the dawn, the Dark Night before the light. It is much easier to remain embedded and speak integral rhetoric, lip service always the short cut, yet there is only one person we ever cheat.

Many people do not have the life conditions to support growth from 1^st to 2^nd tier, which is why we must meet people where they are at, acknowledging the exterior limitations (external pressures and demands from the environment) for interior growth (staying true to what we learn with SD; prioritizing the health of the spiral and NOT merely the height of the spiral). When we do not acknowledge this we are “forcing” people to change unrealistically and irresponsibly, lost in an idealistic utopia where consciousness is flat, a representation of our consciousness (narcissism) and the collective is a homogenous solution. And although green talks a lot about “growth/change” it does not understand subjectively the principles behind transformation, for if it would not try to “sell it” and “force it” or “preach it,” with such arrogance. Green, confined to a 1st tier stance, cannot be sensitive to what is required in all quadrants to nurture subjective death (the living 2-p), as that sensitivity may not support 1-p attachments. Green does not see the responsibility in it, for if it did it would not be so mindless about promoting growth as an “end all solution” biased towards the positive (growth=good exclusivism/partial truth), without ability to see the alpha and omega (Big Picture). When a baby is born, the mother feels a lot of physical pain and there is a lot of blood, we need a doctor, a healthy mother, there are requirements for a healthy birth; can we see rebirth and the miracle of life with balanced perspective (good and bad and transcendence of both).

Life has to be able to support the chaos/disorder that structural change breeds in all quadrants, if it does not “forcing” someone to grow can do more damage than good stemmed from more agenda then actual goodness. Agenda does not have its sight on the whole. And of course, back to the beginning forcing someone to grow/change outside the self is a distraction from the self, anyhow; it is normally based on the addictive seeking nature and self-worth issues of Boomeritis that is plagued with selfishness (when I help you “grow” [when I am not sure what that is] I get to feel AMAZING and then we get to be AMAZING [isn't that the point of life, LOL!]). Boomeritis can NOT admit its own selfishness in the midst of service (authenticity?) and it rarely checks (with 2-p & 3-p feedback loops) if in ACTUALITY growth has occurred in any grounded and stable way without its 1-p biases (essentially because it doesn’t understand what vertical growth is until 2^nd tier; growth is the mere addition of content/translation [I just learned a new word superceeds I just understood an old word more deeply]). With the limitations of its structure it cannot discern authentic growth in REALITY; it merely uses the concept to enhance self-image. This is how Boomeritis has manifested within me. How about you? Can we see the disease with compassion while also not feeding it? And every time you see it, you see what is within you.

When the emphasis is on being, a lot of shit comes up…childhood/family issues, regressive pathologies, pre-cognitive disabilities, stage stuckness, kinks of consciousness, polarized pathologies, shadow, etc. as you cannot hide in the exterior world anymore, with exterior behaviors. We have to understand this all within us individually and we must dive into our own territory before we can start preaching to the choir. And I can see some of the self-contraction/performative contradiction in what I am saying almost immediately, to some extent I am “preaching to the (imaginary) choir” in this blog. Call it 2^nd tier insights with a 1^{st tier} center! Because that is what is going on (differentiate cognitive from self-line). ;-) hehe. I learned the hard way, when you identify yourself as “integral” you gotta a bitch slap waiting for ya...and my bitch slap literally killed me! Let’s be authentic; if we can never accept that we are 1st tier (and the statics back this up: only 1% of the population is there unless we believe we are the exception/anomaly (which is ususally a form of narcissism), LOL!) then we have ABSOLUTELY no chance to evolve! GAME OVER. I speak with love, how far does a theory of everything go? Just to the edge of the ego? Ken Wilber is quite smart...he appeals to ego on some level (come and be a turquoise thinker, the height of humanity) and then...if you go deep enough that very ego that lead you to his work must come undone.

Until we can acknowledge and own our 1^st tier impulses in the interior and balance them appropriately to our life conditions as INDIVIDUALS, not DOING but BEING the GOOD, TRUE, and BEAUTIFUL can we stop feeding all the 1^st tier wars in the world manifested in collective and exterior. SOCIETY IS BUILT ON THE INDIVIDUAL, Krishnamurti reminds us. The emphasis is on the individual and the radical transformation of the individual. When we observe a war outside, we must be willing to reflect the origin of that war inside first before we can come up with any type of holistic/global solutions (I mean global in the turquiose sense, not the green; SD warns us that green hijacks turquoise rhetoric in its "global" speak).

But it is quite interesting when you look. 1^st tier is NOT about solutions, even though it speaks of solutions. When one deeply looks one can see that 1^st tier is interested in selling its perspective as the best and biggest perspective and it is quite smug about that, it will not look at a bigger perspective, because that means death, little perspective must die within bigger perspective. If the “solution” doesn’t support its perspective then it is automatically excluded for the motive is to validate perspective and NOT BE free from it in order to be the good, the true, and the beautiful. I am learning to not give my peak state yellow solutions when they are not wanted, and this is specifically when 1st impulses hijack 2nd tier (I am like, I have a 2nd tier answer, hello! Listen to me (ego/savior complex-1st tier). Quite funny indeed.

From content-bound awareness to structural awareness is the quantum leap, that Clare Graves calls the MOMENTOUS LEAP between tiers.

1^st tier perspectives posing as 2^nd tier perspectives are the high-quality virusES of the INTEGRAL AGE. WELCOME TO HUMANITY AND FREE WILL! It's a jungle out there! Ooops, I mean in HERE ;-)

The QUESTION BECOMES: ARE WE "CREATING" MORE FRAGMENTATION OR BEING MORE INTEGRAL? Keep your EYES open. When you see it, it is within you. The integral perspective can SEE BOTH when arises. 

Some people confuse looking within as self-involvement/self-absorption. The former requires objectivity/subjective death and the latter is mere embedded subjectivity/subjective attachment. We must keep our eyes on both for narcissism can be rationalized as "looking within.".....hmmmmm. My eyes see that all in HERE.

Jana [Integirl]

An Extended Critique

[of Stuart Davis’ Critique of The Secret: http://www.stuartdavis.com/node/1138)]

 
July 10, 2007

By Jana Espiritu Santo (Integirl, LOL!)

     INTERIOR                      EXTERIOR

 

UPPER LEFT QUADRANT (UL); ZONE-# 1 & 2; I, 1st person-perspective (1-p) [SIGNIFIED*]	UPPER RIGHT QUADRANT (UR), ZONE-#5 & 6, IT, 3rd person perspective singular (3-p) [SIGNIFIER*]
LOWER LEFT QUADRANT (LL); ZONE-#3 & 4, WE, 2nd person perspective (2-p) [SEMANTICS*]	LOWER RIGHT QUADRANT (LR); ZONE-#7 & 8, ITS, 3rd person perspective plural (3-p) [SYNTAX*]

 

 

 
INDIVIDUAL

 

COLLECTIVE

                                

 

 

Diagram 1: IMP/AQAL model, Wilber-5

 

One of Stuart Davis’ criticisms of the movie The Secret is that it doesn’t differentiate between ego and Self, the mortal, small, and contracted “I” and the immortal, BIG, ever-expansive “I,” thus confusing the two. He proposes that this fusion is a manifestation of narcissistic (low-level) spirituality rather than authentic (higher level) spirituality, which incorporates that differentiation. I am going to stretch this discussion just a bit further using the integral model (Wilber-5) and then return to a critique of the above premise at closing.

We will begin with a philosophical inquiry of the perspective: I know the difference between ego and Self from an unknown/hypothetical subject as an exercise, using the basic definitions that Stuart has: ego as the “frontal structure/personality and Self as “an unbounded, unlimited reality which transcends but includes all qualities.” We ask: What is the truth to this assertion? One thing that I am learning from Wilber’s approach is to gather and listen to data with openness and receptivity, rather than to start with a perspective (bias) and then make the data fit (1^st tier excluding of data [content] that does not fit perspective [structure]).  The following is the introduction to the first step of that process: data collection using integral methodological pluralism. Please refer to Diagram 1 to locate terminology.

Before we embark on this journey, I must lay a few parameters to ground our context. Some may claim that the nondual perspective asserts that Self is ever-present (Atman, I-I); that it is ALL there is and ever will be (alpha-omega) thus negating such an exercise, yet we can hold the nondual perspective (it’s kind of ridiculous to talk about!?) AND also look at a relative perspective in which there is the placement of boundary (the Self and the non-Self; quote from Stuart: “I also have to say: The ego is not the Self.”). Thus, we speak of evolving awareness in the Relative; Self-as-pre-ego, Self-as-ego, and Self-as-Self. Another point is that while 1^st tier would determine, in such an exercise, if this perspective is true OR untrue arriving at rigid conclusions (linear/digital), 2^nd tier would discover multiple open-ended truths (holding the space for contradictions when they arise), general holistic patterns, and probability waves (analog/integral-aperspectival). Also, we are NOT attempting to discover the ontological pre-given reality of ego and Self (awareness of the myth of the given) but to extract truth from as many perspectives as possible about this perspective.

The IMP/Integral model is the most adequate model up-to-date for our purposes of gathering data from as many perspectives as possible to determine the validity of this claim in an individual holon. Let’s begin with language (integral semiotics*) since we are presented with a chain of signifiers, material words in the exterior: the English sentence “I know the difference between ego and Self”. {*For further exploration of semiotics see p.168 of IS}

Beginning with the LL structure (Zone-#4, outside LL; linguistic codes), this sentence is grammatically correct using proper semantics, borrowing rhetoric and meaning from perhaps Zen/Eastern philosophy and Western transpersonal psychology. So this perspective has functional fit within the integral community; we can read and make sense of it, structurally speaking. However, even though the map/model being used is culturally grounded, it may be dissociated and fragmented from the UL territory of the individual who thinks something and says this as a 1^st person perspective OF 1^st person (1-p X 1p). A mental distinction that follows the contextual “rules” of the theory doesn’t necessarily point to the immanent reality of the individual interior, which involves the act of looking within to SEE that distinction in one’s self (quadrant differentiation: LL map and UL territory). Now we turn to this individual’s UL.

For the material words, signifiers: “ego” and “Self” to have a referent, an actual reality that the words point to, one who has this perspective must have developed the worldspace (structure) that can hold the signified (content), what comes to mind when the signifiers are registered.

To me, the perspective that asserts one’s own knowledge of ego and Self requires a high altitude in the identity/self developmental line. If this person has not grown past the ego stage in identity then this statement is most likely coming from the self-as-ego. In such a case, “Self” is a signifier without a signified. The embedded ego can not differentiate itself from itself (not yet an object to a greater subject) and so the “signifiers” even though pointing to that which is beyond the ego can ONLY be used to further the ego’s agenda and its separation from what is. The irony is that when this perspective is merely conceptual, it can actually prevent growth as one can rationalize their stuckness with it: I can be an egomaniac (stuck in identification) as long as I don’t confuse Self with ego (as long as I have the right “spiritual” position to defend it). This occurs when transrational rhetoric is used to remain identified with the ego, a self-defeating trap. The question of vertical depth becomes, WHO is differentiating between ego and Self? And as data collectors, are we qualified to answer such a question?

A valid and present signified requires subjective authenticity and objective accuracy in the UL, keeping in mind that authenticity and accuracy are on an analog scale (not digitally on or off). First of all, authenticity is NOT sincerity; one may mean well and have good intentions and yet not be authentic. It is important to know whether the individual with this assertion has checked her/his authenticity and truthfulness from within. One form would be through self-inquiry/contemplation, asking such questions as “do I really know the difference between ego and Self? Or do I just say I do for a particular payoff (i.e. it makes me hot and gets me laid, LOL!).” Part of authenticity is being true to what arises in consciousness (Zone-#1, inside UL; phenomenology & experience), even if it doesn’t gain the approval of others (image). Any distortion of this due to unacknowledged interior movement such as repression, neglect, denial, fear to look, unwillingness to admit weakness, defensiveness etc., constitutes some degree of self-deception and inauthenticity.

Even if the authenticity test is sufficiently passed, it may not be accurate. One can be authentic and be WRONG. One way of being wrong is with incorrect meaning assignment (LL) by inadvertently attaching a signifier to the inappropriate signified. One may mistakenly attach the pre-ego signified with the trans-ego signifier, and likewise confuse the embedded unconscious as the Self, the universe-sized ego as God, a nondual ego state as a transcendent stage. The use of syntax with the inappropriate semantics can be revealed in what Wilber terms a “collective reality check.” A person can simply learn the calculus terminology yet Calculus professors will discover (Zone-#3, inside LL; hermeneutics) whether there is actual understanding behind the arrangement of words and its connection to reality. 2^nd perspective (2-p) corrective feedback loops from those who have attained the worldspace of the signified can help correct errors in meaning and understanding (i.e. teacher-student relationship).

An accurate interpretation of one’s own interior (1-p X 1p) requires some degree of self-awareness (Zone-#2, outside UL; structuralism/constructivism). This question asks: can this person see himself? One component of self-awareness is the ability to objectively see ones subjectivity without total identification to the subjectivity. A technique to enhance self-awareness is to enter into the self-inquiry of the opposite, inverted, or re-configured perspective (like Byron Katie’s turnarounds) to see a bigger picture that includes emptiness: I do NOT know the difference between ego and Self. I only know the ego. I do not know either etc. And then to innocently ask and answer honestly: Are these perspectives as true as or more true than the original? Awareness beyond the identification to thought feels BOTH areas of fullness and emptiness, the space of unknowingness (i.e. “Self” is over my head). If a person has authenticity but not sufficient self-awareness, then the accuracy of such a perspective can still be questioned.

Next we turn the IMP microscope to the exterior quadrants to seek objective evidence for this claim that could possibly reveal the authenticity, accuracy of meaning, and self-awareness of the individual. We could examine this individual’s brain physiology/waves to detect transrational states and stages (Zone-#5, inside UR; neuroscience). As Confusius says, “a man’s character reveals itself through what he takes pleasure in;” our integrally informed interpretation might be: the interior center-of-gravity can be revealed through exterior behavior. We would need to look at behaviors, actions, and the energetic disposition in the gross, subtle, and causal (Zone-#6, outside UR; sensory manifestation).  Also, body language is a big part of communication and so micro-expressions, speech patterns, tone, inflection, and other mannerisms would be pertinent information, taking us beyond the “subject-less” material words. For example, if one says this statement with beaded-eyed cockiness rather than thoughtful self-reflection, we may question the authenticity. Also, in the collective exterior (LR, Zone-#7 & #8, inside/outside LR) we would want to examine the metaphysical law (in a post-metaphysical framework), “we become that which we stand in relation to,” to see the web of relationships of mutual resonance/dissonance.  The collective embeddedness and supporting culture can tell us a lot about the individual if we sensitively listen.

In addition to “Zone viewing,” it is important to ground information in time (the z-axis) and its cyclic and asymmetrical patterns with the genealogical question: when? When do you “know” the difference between ego and Self, while on a lotus cushion, while talking to a boss, when you were a child, for an hour, all the time? State/peak realizations fade, ebb and flow. For example, at one point in time, the signifier and the signified may be accurately and authentically matched yet at a later moment unmatched. Do we hold on to the map even when it ceases to reflect the territory (flex flow or sticky stuck)? Awareness is not fixed and permanent but ALIVE, responding to changing life conditions. For example, when one is being attacked by a polar bear, s/he probably doesn’t know the difference between ego and Self, only between LIFE and DEATH (survival/infrared examples always work best)! Also the frequency and cyclic time intervals could tell us about the stability, solidity, and degree of space-time fragmentation of this realization.

Besides data collection (and this has been a very sloppy start!), we would also need to examine the altitude (i.e. qualifications) and perspective of the data collector/s for a more complete Kosmic Address, among other things, keeping in mind the absolute relativity of all perspectives. For our purposes we can stop here. The point of that exercise was to show how a mental dualism between ego and Self doesn’t have any meaning until grounded in the (AQAL) manifest. (Also, the delicious irony in this whole exercise can be eloquently summed up with this old wise saying: “Those who speak don’t know, those who know don’t speak”, LOL!)

Material/exterior acquisitions using the law of attraction are NOT a substitute for interior work, development, and growth. Stuart is correct in pointing out that The Secret is “low level” spirituality and so his critique is appreciated for its truth/s (and was incredibly entertaining to read; he’s a master at wicked prose!). His mental distinction is important in a meta-model as he sees the Secret trap: “It is dangerous to insert the ego in the place of the Self-the highest Self…as an egomaniac I can attest to its disastrous results.”

 

I also put the caution tape around his distinction, pointing out the next higher trap, offering an extended critique. I point it out because “I can attest to its disastrous results (...you know the rest),” as this trap does not enable growth, healthy transcendence, and freedom, but causes more embeddedness, stuckness, and contraction. So I attempt to speak with more humanity than projection. Each new mental truth also yields a temptation, the play of light and dark. Wilber has often said, and I paraphrase: “increased awareness/rights means increased responsibility.” I am going to focus on the responsibility part for a moment.

It is dangerous to assume that a differentiation in the map EQUALS a differentiation in the territory. Adopting the material/exterior signifiers of “ego” and “Self” is not a substitute for the interior work and development in which those signifiers will have the appropriately matched signified. The next level of spiritual materialism is much more subtle: the accumulation of and identification to a sparkly chain of signifiers. And Boomeritis, giving voice to the pluralistic whore within all of us (LOL!) will put them for sale: I have the signifiers that will “change the world.”

The ego can be supported and rationalized with sophisticated maps and models (mental concepts) just like it can be supported with the previous level of self-absorbed and overly subjective feelings like in The Secret. And in this context, like Stuart said, “the ego is not the Self.” Our minds can be evolving (getting smarter) while we (center-of-gravity) are NOT evolving (the post-postmodern Cartesian Split)! People always say, “Don’t confuse the map with the territory”, yet what if the signifier territory was paired with the signified map, LOL? Interior growth is the cure and one cannot do it for another. Again, a mental dualism and object of thought (signifier) ARE NOT necessarily an object of awareness (signified); the marriage of Ken and Krishnamurti, map maker and territory master!

In short, to connect this with my territory, when I talk about the “ego” and not look at it (signifier without a signified), it is easy to do and doesn’t cause much reaction. Yet, when I LOOK at my ego (signifier with a signified) it is rather painful and difficult as I am beginning to dis-identify, OUCH, FUCK, GEEZES, I scream!. Being crushed and killed by eternity is NOT a picnic, but a LIFE worth living, the endless play of Eros and Thanatos. Gotta always end with on a twisted note when I am BEING FULL-SPECTRUM!!

    Thanks for reading!

03.04.06 Santa Monica @ Palisades Park