Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

This is so classic I just have to share it, for educational purposes and to get a reality-check on my interpretation, and perhaps for a wry smile of recognition or two from others.

This is an email interaction following a conversation with another older lady in a spiritual group I belong to. She has some familiarity with the color spiral/levels ideas through interacting other places with Wilber readers, rather than her own reading. She said she was totally put off by the “charts and graphs” in Integral Spirituality, [duh, I can imagine the nearly insurmountable challenge of a Green CoG person trying to understand the whole spiral idea and understand what he is saying, from that book] and I opined a better place to start getting acquainted with Ken Wilber was One Taste. Especially as she asked if I thought Ken Wilber was “enlightened.” To which I responded that there are a million definitions of that, but I consider him so by my definition.

In our conversation she had asked me something about what of use the spiral is, in dealing with people. I responded that people tend to have clusters of characteristics, and if I find a few of a cluster in a person, I look for the others that might also be there, and I do this to get to know the person better. I also emphasized that people are more than any cluster, and that the Integral viewpoint and KW et al regard people as mosaics of the “colors.” I told her that the more I know about a person, the better I can communicate with them, the more helpful I can be, the more I can resonate with them, understand where they are coming from as they behave toward me, etc.

So here is our email exchange. The quintessential Green response to Integral perspective, as near as I can tell. And she tends to call something “semantics” when she doesn't want to do precise thinking about something, to make distinctions.

From B—–
Hi OM,

I just wanted to say I enjoyed our discussion last night and I
am happy to know you.

I got to thinking about it and have a couple of questions.  If
we assign clusters to people so we can relate to them, are we
not labeling them and also limiting our own natural instincts?
It seems to me that if we stop labeling ourselves and others we
remove any blocks to communication and relating.

Happy weekend,

B—–

From OM:
Hi B—–, ditto!!

To me the answer is that it's not either-or. We don't need to hold the
labels tightly and peer out at the world only through our labels. They
can supplement our natural instincts and we can realize that the
labels themselves cannot capture all that's important about people.
That's one of the many things I meant by saying Wilber and people who
are truly at the Integral level of expanded awareness see folks as
mosaics.

I see labels or categories as aids to communicating and relating, not
as blocks. They can be blocks if we let them be, if we see nothing but
our labels, but that's our use of them, not intrinsic to their
nature….

Humorous warning: ALMOST any question asked of me, the answer will be
“It's not either-or. It's both-and.”  LOL !!!!

Hugs, OM

From B—-
Thank you.  I am also a middle of the roader. However, I am very much into experiencing and enjoying the core of whomever I am with.  I bypass the symantecs [sic] and labels to do this.  This way I am up the creek with two paddles.:)

B——.

From OM:
Hi B—–, I am laughing as I say I am not a “middle-of-the-roader,” I
am a “the entire road and both sides” - er !!!!! LOL !!!!

———————————————–

I doubt the dialogue will continue. Am I correct that she didn't at all grasp my “both-and” approach, and went right back to her “either-or?” That she didn't at all “get” the potential usefulness of “labels?” Or maybe she is just more right-brained than I?

Feedback? Comments? Suggestions?

Namaste, OM Bastet

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

OM: I doubt the dialogue will continue. Am I correct that she didn't at all grasp my “both-and” approach, and went right back to her “either-or?” That she didn't at all “get” the potential usefulness of “labels?” Or maybe she is just more right-brained than I?

Feedback? Comments? Suggestions?



Sounds like healthy green to me. ;)

While I remain passionately agnostic about integral as a whole, were I to step into a yellow (or is it teal, these days?) perspective and imagine myself in relationship or in conversation with this woman, I'd ask myself how I might appreciate and support her in realizing her vision and her dreams and on her spiritual path–whatever that might look like for her. I'd want to ask what her needs might be and how I might help fulfill them. I'd want to explore what it would take to keep the dialogue flowing and the connection open. I'd want to gently feel into why she felt uncomfortable 'labeling' things, and what she might have experienced in the past that caused her to believe that 'semantics' necessarily got in the way of 'experiencing the core.' And I'd want to learn more about how she sees things and to inquire into why she felt curious about the spiral and what was driving her questions, in hopes of helping her feel safe and supported and comfortable in moving deeper.

I mean, isn't that what the spiral is 'for'?

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Heres a cool dialogue between Ken Wilber & Andrew Cohen debating the whole 'transcend & include' - 'transcend & exclude,' issue. Food for thought a'plenty when it comes to movement in la forward direction.

 

“COHEN: Even though, as we agreed before, the complete picture of evolutionary development includes both transcending and including and transcending and excluding-including is going to have a slightly different emphasis than excluding. For example, when Jesus said, “Let the dead bury the dead,” that to me was a clear expression of “transcend and exclude” that was passionate, ferocious, uncompromising-an unrestrained expression of the evolutionary impulse that cares not for the past but is only interested in creating the unknown future right now and in every moment.”  (p.3 of dialogue)

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

I am very much into experiencing and enjoying the core of whomever I am with. I bypass the symantecs [sic] and labels to do this.

This seems like the big blocker, and here's how I would answer it: Whenever we engage with the world, we enact a perspective. If we didn't, the world would just be a wash of pure, undifferentiated experience that's not very meaningful to us.

For example, in order for you to get through a door, you have to differentiate between a wall and a doorway, and we do this automatically, without even thinking about it or using words. And even if we stop using words, we are still able to draw a useful distinction between wall and doorway.

You probably have never noticed yourself doing this, even though its a very simple type of perspective-taking that happens thousands of times a day, because that's often the way it is with perspectives: 99% of the time, we don't have a perspective, the perspective has us! And that's true regardless of whether we use labels or not.

Since we can't really avoid taking a perspective (nor would we want to), the integral perspective is one that tries as much as possible to bring into our awareness all of our different perspectives so that we can get insight into them, and hopefully choose the most compassionate, most effective and most beneficial one that we can. Knowing how other people see the world helps us to communicate more effectively and compassionately with them too.

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Hey, thanks for the thoughtful responses.

I meant I didn't expect that particular email exchange to continue. I do expect to continue in dialogue with her for quite some time, because we belong to a spiritual group together.

But she is not someone I would pick as a friend. I have to disagree, Siona, I don't see these aspects of her as “healthy Green.” She is unable to stretch to other viewpoints. That might be typical Green, but I don't think it is healthy. When exposed to a new idea, she will label it “semantics” and thus DISMISS it from her consideration. She has the classic Boomeritis attitude of being intolerant of intolerance, angry about anger, dismissive toward those who are dismissive. Etc. Dogmatic. And she never really seems to connect with what I say, to engage in true dialogue, responding, not just getting triggered into the next thing about her own views.

(IOW I feel very little motivation to engage in dialogue with her, either to try to be helpful and supportive to her evolution, or to learn anything, or to just enjoy one another, because she doesn't enjoy me, really, because she can't hear me. And I don't feel an inner call to do whatever it might take for her to hear me.)

I feel those characteristics were displayed in her part of our dialogue.

But I am open to why you see her as “healthy” Green ! Very open. Maybe I will learn something !!!!!!

And there are other disresonances, too.

But, Siona, I loved your description of what you would do. That is such a complete description of an Integral (or higher) approach to someone. There are people I would do all that with. But to carry out the entire thing would require some motivation and interest in her that is beyond what I have…. That doesn't feel like transcending and excluding, thanks for the info about that, Lisa, it just feels more like degree of resonance, personal preference, a matter of interest.

Mr. Teacup, I need some clarification. Did you mean to be saying that you see such folks as actually far less distant from semantics and labels than she thinks she is? That she has them but is relatively unaware of their operation? I found your description/teaching quite clear, and especially resonate with the last paragraph, which is very similar to what I was trying to convey to her.

Siona, I am very curious what this means

 passionately agnostic about integral as a whole

Does that mean you don't think there are people who fit the KW-SD description of the Integral Worldview? Or that it's not an accurate description of certain kinds of people? Or you don't think it is a distinguishable phase of the evolution of human consciousness?
 
Siona, you might move me to ask her what she means by semantics and labels…. :) I can pretty safely predict they will mean something very different from what I am meaning and saying…. But she is not open to seeing the difference; I conclude that from our dialogue.

At my age with my experience, I do tend to ass-u-me I know what people mean, because when I do bother to ask, I am rarely wrong in my assumption. But I realize I am assuming. When you've heard a zillion people say the same thing for decades, and the ones you have delved into all said the same things when you asked, it's easy I guess to get lazy about the possibility that this time there might be something different going on…. At least I know what I am doing….

Thanks again for expanding my awareness, all of you. And I am really exposing a lot of my own inner processes here…. Not all of it my best and highest !! :))

Blessings, OM Bastet

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

She is unable to stretch to other viewpoints. That might be typical Green, but I don't think it is healthy. When exposed to a new idea, she will label it “semantics” and thus DISMISS it from her consideration. She has the classic Boomeritis attitude of being intolerant of intolerance, angry about anger, dismissive toward those who are dismissive. Etc. Dogmatic. And she never really seems to connect with what I say, to engage in true dialogue, responding, not just getting triggered into the next thing about her own views.


OM: Forgive me for saying this so bluntly, but reading this makes me feel that you aren't really taking (or trying to take) HER perspective. Perhaps she's at a point where 'tolerance of other viewpoints' and 'equality for all' is as far as she's willing to go, and the actual 'taking up' of a different point of view or bracketed 'stepping into' a different set of values is too challenging. She might not be open to taking your view, but what prevents you from taking hers? I imagine that by asking or pushing her to drop her worldview for another you must be scaring her a bit and causing her to cling even more tightly… and speaking personally, I've found the easiest way to help people to open is to ensure that they feel safe and held and understood. From there they're far more likely to feel comfortable stepping into new territory with you. :)

But perhaps you're expressing a need to be understood, too? You wrote a few times that you didn't feel she “connected with you” or that she “can't hear you” and I imagine that must be difficult, and leading to a bit of the block between you.

(Also, what do you mean by “being supportive of her evolution?”)

As to “being agnostic about integral”… gah. That could take ages to get into. I wasn't referring to SDi (I like the original conception of Spiral Dynamics far better than the integralized version, but that's beside the point), but Wilber's integral as a whole–AQAL, the spiral, etc. And while I don't want to veer violently off topic, I'll just say quickly that it when it comes to consciousness, the 'theory' seems fraught with confusion between evolution and development. To my mind, you can't have it both ways.

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

I love this conversation. Yes, you are running into typically Green behaviors and cognition, no doubt about it. I wouldn't say, “she's green,” as that can be inaccurate, but these are definitely green thoughts.

I do understand Siona's point about creating an environment in which this woman can open, but that always brings up a question for me, did she ask you to be a “teacher”? Of course we can be open and relaxed with anyone, but the agenda about getting someone to open is actually a bit tiring for me, or coaxing them along to develop… maybe she doesn't want any of that. I'm fine with people who don't want to open.

In these cases, I'm friendly and just enjoy the person as they are (unless I don't enjoy them, which is certainly no war crime–some people we like more than others), but I've found it somewhat condescending to try and help someone develop, unless they have specifically asked you to perform that function.

To go out on a limb, I also don't believe that everyone needs to open nor that every social interaction needs to go well. I learn a lot from misunderstandings and conflicts.

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

I do understand Siona's point about creating an environment in which this woman can open, but that always brings up a question for me, did she ask you to be a “teacher”? Of course we can be open and relaxed with anyone, but the agenda about getting someone to open is actually a bit tiring for me, or coaxing them along to develop… maybe she doesn't want any of that. I'm fine with people who don't want to open.

Annie: I think we're saying the same thing here, or you've expressed what I was trying to get at–namely, the dropping of agenda or interest in helping 'evolution' (whatever this means) for a stance of equanimity and curiosity about who the person is and the inherent sweet value of whatever perspective they do hold–better than I did. 

I think one of the things that troubles me about the SDi approach is how people can sometimes use it to position different memes as 'steps' along the way to their more enlightened perspective, looking at other vMemes as instrumental means to a final end, instead of using it to appreciate and hold the value inherent in each 'phase' and to recognize the contextual importance of each.

And I agree about the implied condescension; if someone's asked for help, of course it makes sense to be supportive, but if not, I'd rather look at how they can help ME grow (which I know for sure is something I'm interested in) rather assuming they want the same. :)

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

It's so nice to hear about this! This is where the 'tires meet the asphalt.' It seems you care very much to communicate with your friend about integral! That's good, but it's a challenge. Or maybe as you say you don't really care about this conversation / person in particular, but are just accepting the challenge it presents.

It seems like your friend is sick of labelling and the negative things that happen with labelling. After a while, maybe she will get sick of not-labelling and come to a synthesis of the two and ' “get” the potential usefulness of “labels?” ' on her way to 'both-and.' Maybe if you lie in wait of a moment when she 'labels and not-labels' something you could use that as an example of what you mean. Like you said, we're all mosaics, so perhaps you could encourage the parts of her that are already being integral and smile patiently at that annoying greeniness. It sounds like your gut is right in that she's not ready to do that. It's not easy to do. It's hard to see something with a label and without it at the same time.

I'm thinking to myself as I read “It's so much easier to deal with people when you don't care about them so much!” … and I try to be 'in the middle' and be with my frustration that someone can't take the next step and have compassion for them and for me too. I usually do about what you did: put integral out there, explain it once, and if it goes it goes, if not then I let it go.

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Did you mean to be saying that you see such folks as actually far less distant from semantics and labels than she thinks she is?

Yes, that's exactly right. We have decades of conditioning behind our perspectives, you can't just turn that off like a light. If you do, it's called repression.

I think we all agree that there's not much you can do, though I don't think you were pushing her to drop her worldview. She initiated the dialog, asking you to explain and justify your integral worldview and I think you did that very well. Considering your feeling that she is not engaging in a real dialog with you, it's possible that, despite her question, she's not really interested in the answer. She might believe that she holds the more evolved viewpoint, and this is her Green way of telling you that, in a “I'm not judging you, just speaking from my experience” kind of way.

It is really interesting to me that she has a committment to removing blocks to communication and relating, and yet you describe your experience in the exact opposite way: as the absence of true connection and engagement. I really think that this is one of those things that gets Green to transition, when they discover that despite this committment to openness and sharing, this only happens when everyone in the room is also Green. They can't really tolerate people with other viewpoints, and end up blaming them for the disconnection. This is pretty isolating for anyone who's not Green.

I have a related reflection that is based on my recent personal experiences, and I'm not even quite sure if it's true, but I think you might be able to tell me if you think this resonates with you at all:

The problem that we're facing here is not, as has been suggested, that you are inappropriately aggrandizing yourself as this woman's teacher or something to that effect. In fact, it might be the exact opposite - the problem is that you have avoided taking on the role of teacher. Why? Because being a teacher can be isolating, the first-tier kids don't completely relate to you or understand you, and you can't really be yourself, or at least, not your whole self, not your integral core. But nonetheless, you feel a kind of affinity for Green, a glint of recognition, that maybe they are close to understanding, and if you can only explain it well enough, maybe they will understand you. This never bears fruit and you are frustrated; you redouble your efforts, but continually bang your head against a wall of incomprehension. Perhaps the frustration is ultimately a product of your inability to accept the role of humble teacher? And the way out is to somehow open yourself up to this pain of misunderstanding instead of resisting it.

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Hello All,

I love this conversation & I think it is really important to integrate all of these perspectives.

I'm going to save this offline as reference. This has brought out a great deal of clarity & compassion for one of the very prickly areas of 'Integral' communication.

Thanks much & Cheers,
Doug

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Wow, I am really impressed at the wisdom being expressed here, and honored that you all would take the time to think and share about my situation. I have learned a lot from each of you !!

There is so much food for thought, I don't know whether I can do justice to it all, but here goes whatever.

Siona, blunt is good. I knew my words opened up that exact objection, and in fact was just too tired to address it proactively yesterday here. There are two levels of response, at least, and probably more if we were conversing in a leisurely fashion about this, and it weren't late here already.

One, her viewpoints are pretty well known to me, and this is partly an age thing. I have been hearing these viewpoints for 20 or 30 or 40 years more than you, I'm guessing, and prolly the same wrt most others here, so as I think I said, I am always alert for a new twist or angle, but I rarely hear one.So that's one response to Am I making the effort to understand HER instead of complaining she doesn't understand me?

And I don't need to make any effort to take or try to take her viewpoint about labels and semantics. I am intimately familiar with it and have been for years. I feel the validity in her perspective, passionately. But I also see its limits, which she doesn't, and here's the kicker: I also DON'T see her being even, as you say, tolerant of other views, let alone stepping into them. Her intolerance takes the form of essentially ignoring what I say, as if I had not even spoken. Despite the fact that she asked me !

I don't think I asked her or pushed her to drop any of her perspectives. I simply described my own. Really. I didn't suggest or imply or recommend that she change, in any way that I am AWARE of. I just said “Here's how I see it.”

But, the other, second, level of response, is, am I concerned about or making an effort to understand her as a person, to grok where she is coming from? And yes, at this time, I am. I feel enough resonance with her that I am open to being supportive and to learning from her. Despite any implications or statements to the contrary above. If this weren't the case, I wouldn't even bother. There are many worthwhile folks I could teach and learn from, but I have to pick and choose among them, so I do choose on the basis of something new or worthwhile for my growth, and/or an openness to growth on the other person's part.

And she did come back (via the email) and was asking me further about the topic, so I was responding to a request for elaboration of my own perspective, so I gave that.

I do love the caring and approach you describe, Siona, and I do that with plenty of folks. I feel my way into their experiential world, and help them feel valued as who they are, and support them lovingly and affirmingly in whatever inner movement or momentum I can detect, or just honor the value in what they currently are. I do that A LOT here in this Community.

Sometimes I do that extensively, and sometimes very briefly. I believe in fact I am doing that with her, not extensively, but I am, viewed over the longterm. In the short term, I was just, here, venting some frustrations.

Teaching. I am rarely doing something with another which is not directly or indirectly teaching. It's who I am. It's my talent and mission. My ministry is teaching/writing/radiating  and it's actually 24/7. However, it is not always obvious that I am teaching. I often just talk about myself, but my motive is teaching (defined here as offering someone an influence which can be beneficial if they accept it.)

By teaching, I mean primarily offering another perspective for those who are shopping for other perspectives. But sometimes, giving precise How Tos, when that is asked for or called for. Sometimes teaching is evoking potentials in others. 

Am I one of those people who views each level as only a step with no intrinsic value of its own? Only a means to an end. Not hardly. Not the Tantric view I teach. We need the contributions of each level, or we are not a full, whole, healthy, mature person. Or society. Or world. 

And I do believe she does feel safe and held and understood and comfortable with me. The way she started her email suggests that, and I have made sure to always convey only the friendliest and most accepting vibes. She recently asked me to listen in as she described a dilemma of hers to someone else, asking me for my take on it as well. That
is pretty comfortable !!!!!! 

When I said I had little motivation to engage in dialogue with her, I meant I will not initiate anything, but I will respond, with alacrity. .

You asked, Siona, what does “supportive of her evolution” mean. In view of your differentiation between evolution and development, I guess I can't answer that yet, as I don't think I make that differentiation, but am open to new ideas on the matter. I hope you will elaborate. And thanks for answering my query to whatever extent you did !!!

Annie, thank you for your thoughts. I totally and passionately agree we should avoid labelling a person as a color. If I did that, it was shorthand.

Did she ask me to be a teacher? Sort of. I think she has said she is learning a lot from me, or something to that effect. But there are plenty of folks who have asked more explicitly, and I am totally on board with your view that it's condescending to try to help someone who has not asked. I got enough bruised shins in my younger days from being kicked for butting in, and am now super-sensitive re that invitation. I have learned to “let people make their own mistakes,” haha.

And yes, that is a wise perspective, that not all interactions need to go well, or people be open, and that conflicts and misunderstandings are great learning opportunities. Amen !!

Siona, you said

the dropping of agenda or interest in helping 'evolution' (whatever this means) for a stance of equanimity and curiosity about who the person is and the inherent sweet value of whatever perspective they do hold-

and in fact I am not very good at this. I am getting better, but everything within me is aimed at Improving things. Helping people reach their own goals, not necessarily improving them toward my own goals for them. At least I have progressed that far.

Again there is the age factor. The “inherent sweet value of whatever perspective they do hold” wears thinner with the decades. Or at least, I am so used to it I no longer find it an object of awe or fascination….. I can appreciate the value, as I described a few paragraphs ago, but I am not inclined to hang out there. But I am glad you and others have that valuing !!

So we could have a long conversation about “everything within me” and what “improving things” is about, but not by typing……

Dmitri, thanks for understanding so well. I was stretched nicely by contemplating the labeling-not labeling development you described, and this was a new possibility I probably would have done, but not anticipated being able to do, namely:

Maybe if you lie in wait of a moment when she 'labels and not-labels' something you could use that as an example of what you mean.

I would have responded in the moment I spotted that, but now I can “lie in wait.” Haha.

Or maybe I could point out that she is labeling things “semantics” and dismissing them thereby !!! oooooooohhhhhhh !!!!! I would do that jokingly, the next time she says Oh that's just semantics, so it's not important, I can say, Oh, is that a label, “semantics?” while laughing, and I bet she “gets” that.

Mr. Teacup, indeed I resonated with all you said, including the last paragraph. For many decades.

You said

…if you can only explain it well enough, maybe they will understand you. This never bears fruit and you are frustrated; you redouble your efforts, but continually bang your head against a wall of incomprehension. Perhaps the frustration is ultimately a product of your inability to accept the role of humble teacher? And the way out is to somehow open yourself up to this pain of misunderstanding instead of resisting it.

What I have come to understand, and what makes much of my teaching nonverbal and even non-behavioral (aka “radiating”) is that “explaining it well enough” never really moves anyone anywhere. You are right it “never bears fruit.” That understanding I have is hard-won, and I still fight and resist that truth, and daily find myself assuming that if only I say it right, they'll “get” it. But that brings nothing but the bloody head.
 
I didn't understand the next to last sentence, about humble teacher, could you explain that more? I have learned a fair amount of humility as a teacher, but again it's a daily challenge. Well, less and less so.

Open self up to the pain of misunderstanding instead of resisting it. Been working on that for only approximately half a century. It's being dissolved, slowly, but ever-faster. We MUST move beyond that resistance, if we are to be of any help at all…… IMO

Dugaum, I am thrilled you have found this useful. It only scratches the surface of this issue, which is addressed at great length in some of the later chapters of the Spiral Dynamics book, by Beck and Cowan.
 
I am humbly grateful to you all for expanding my awareness, and am delighted if others find this thread useful !!!!!

Blessings, OM Bastet

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

There is a lot of food for thought in here ~ some enlightening reading thus far.

Something comes to mind ~ the “reflection of nature paradigm” often used as a shorthand to describe orange has some commonalities to yellow (teal) insofar as labels ~ reflecting on nature… describing nature (The 3rd person reality) using labels is a common practice in orange. Whereas, in green (particularly MGM) I think labeling, (this notion that you are able to semi-accurately describe nature at least to get points or shared ideas across) is picked up again with yellow (teal) whereas, with green there is a tendency to deconstruct (and particularly with MGM deconstruct everything). This labeling capacity is seen by that green (even healthy) system as a process of orange and they know the worldview they inhabit is more embracing… So one is hard pressed to get  any kind of reflection of nature paradigm in that green worldview with maybe some exceptions. That said, the biggest transformation I had with this integral stuff was by a viewing a solid outline of what this is all about (in other words a mostly heard an outline of “What is Integral” (Maybe, a particular mushroom trip had some affect too). So, there is at least one person out there that can be (somewhat) moved into an integral worldview through the use of mostly the head alone. (I think there was very little outside forces of the heart affecting my move into integral (although I could be wrong about that ~ maybe I'm not integral, maybe cats really can fly. hell, maybe I'll even have rock soup for breakfest tomorrow ~ how do you like that GREEN? Eat it up!!! Beautiful green).

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

OM: I think there's a difference between understanding her viewpoint (and “seeing it as valid”), and understanding HER. No matter what her spiral color is at the particular point of time you're engaging, her own unique point of view is the result of countless influences and decades of personal experiences. It's not her 'point of view' that I was urging you to consider, but the blunt reality of her human subjectivity; what it's like to BE her, not what it's like to adopt her values. Maybe it's a subtle distinction.

I'm not sure how better to put it. Even if someone is completely off the wall batty insane, and they're hallucinating voices and their reality doesn't mesh with anyone else's (that is, it's an entirely “invalid” perspective), there's still a benefit in attempting to meet them where they are, to take up their world-AS-their-world (not as some abstract “point of view” that is or is not “valid”, but as a perspective that is real and provides value merely in BEING a perspective). You, unlike them, as a mature and stable individual, can feel secure in temporarily bracketing your own view of the world and being with them in theirs, without feeling you'll lose yourself, and (hopefully) the love and compassion and courage and care you'll demonstrate in purely and willingly BEING with them will be transformative.

But I'm preaching to the choir, I think; you're brilliant at this, OM, and I've seen you do it time and time again. :)

I do choose on the basis of something new or worthwhile for my growth, and/or an openness to growth on the other person's part.

I stick to number one, mostly because I can ALWAYS find something new and worthwhile (maybe I'm just slow ;), and because I've found that in being wondering and curious in my own heart it's usually true that the other person discovers something as well.


And because I didn't elaborate before…

I see evolution and development as very different. Development has a direction, and is finite. Evolution does not have a direction, and is (potentially) infinite. To my mind, the two are not the same; all living things develop, and all living things evolve, but development is a process affecting individuals (and which necessarily includes the inevitable 'other side' of senescence and death), while evolution is a process that affects the collective and has no such implied direction or cyclicality.

I don't know that I'm RIGHT in this. Still, I have yet to have been presented with an argument, or personally experienced anything, such that the inferences made from one might be applied to another, or vice versa, without truly including the 'truths' of both. That is, if evolution is directional, it ought include the 'developmental downside' of aging and death, and if development is infinite, no direction can be implied.

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

It's not her 'point of view' that I was urging you to consider, but the blunt reality of her human subjectivity; what it's like to BE her, not what it's like to adopt her values.

This is a wonderful explanation Siona. I think I'm starting to understand better how to do it.

~MrTC

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

MrTeacup. Aw. Thank you. I think for too long I tried to 'think my way' into the point of view of another, and it took me ages to realize that perspective-taking is as much about that felt-sense of empathy and the emotional experience of relating or understanding as it is being able to, say, defend that person's point of view or grasp the legitimacy (or lack thereof) of their arguments. Sometimes I can't for the life of me understand WHY someone thinks something, but I can usually figure out what those beliefs are causing them to feel, and starting at that level can save so much frustration. I'm glad it helped.

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

OM, I'm glad that you could confirm some of my intuitions in this area. With your experience as a guide, I feel more confident that this is a fruitful line of inquiry for me :)

When I talked about being a humble teacher, I was again speaking from my own personal experience. Some have suggested that taking a more evolved perspective is a source of pride and arrogance, but I wonder if in my life, pride actually prevents me from taking on the role of teacher.

My hope is that people reflect carefully on the implications of this idea, if it is true. It is all too easy to aggressively quash any negativity towards Green, but that kind of action only brings into sharper focus that which it seeks to cover up.  In addition to dialog of “ought” and “should”, I think a dialog of understanding, clarity and skillful insight is also necessary.

~MrTC

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Found this link (thanks Balder).  Its an interesting article on MGM and worth the read (imo)

http://www.spiraldynamics.org/documents/MGM_hyp.pdf

and sorry you will have to copy/paste into your browser, my link function is not active for some reason.

++++

On a personal note, I will say that whatever rainbowriffic person I encounter who I find prickly gently nudges me to look within at my own  __________.

In this case it feels like a walk along the line of open/closed.   It's a line we a have all walked  (for me, several times a day)

Here's to the tight rope!  (now where's that net?)

Gina

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

After posting, I realized my post may have looked a bit 'drive by'

Not my intention at all.  

What I would really like to say is, I feel there are folks, say angry environmentalists, that do fit in the category of a green centered person where exchanges of ideas can be difficult.  The exchanges tend to take on a Blue/Amber texture in that they are overtly structured to win the case of their cause.

Generaly, imo, folks centered in green are pretty easy to get along with.  These folks are smart, involved, creative, passionate, kind, and fun and usually interested in new and different ideas and things.  Generally conflict arises when the pressure to convince, change or 'tell them what to do' gets into the exchange that their resistance flares.  Or when I get pissed because of my own shit.

I too have friends and people who at first seem interested in Integral and then ultimately get turned off because of the 'charts and graphs and/or their impression it is  head centered vs heart centered.   The minute I try to push my agenda, is the minute they are lost in sticking to their own.

Thanks Om Bastet for starting this thread.  I too have found some fantastice jewels of wisdom in this exchange.

with love,
Gina

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

I have appreciated this exchange as well.  If anyone is interested, I invite you to visit my recent blog, where Gina found the link to the essay on the MGM.  I'm exploring Integral-Other interactions, with a nod to Green and Orange, so I think it is relevant to this discussion:

Integral and Inclusivism

Best wishes,

Balder

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Thanks for that link, Bruce. Now I have to go read it…getting out my dictionary…

Anyway…

I'm just getting to read this thread, after being totally preoccupied, and the thing that keeps coming up for me is the notion of what is a teacher? This is one of those things that is being redefined as we speak, isn't it?

I think of Robert Masters and his wife, Diane Bardwell-Masters, and I don't know how to categorize them in my life. My psychotherapists? Far too narrow. My teachers? A little inaccurate and narrow. My friends? Well, in a sense, yes. They trust me and Arthur with information that is sensitive in nature and we have casual interactions with them outside of workshops and therapy sessions. But I wouldn't likely have them be a part of my everyday life. Their boundaries are impeccable, yet I'm not sure what the territory is that those boundaries define. It's a new morphogenetic groove, a far as I can tell.

The same applies to many of my friendships, though the boundaries are even less clear. You'll see people on Gaia all the time who list as their teacher “everyone.” What does that mean? It's not a contract between you and everyone in the world, certainly. That's a decision one makes for herself, to be open to teaching from everyone. I think it's a bit disingenuous as well. Sure, ideally we know we can learn something from everyone. But in practice, there are some people whose only teaching is to make sure you give them a wide berth. Or who have so little to teach you that it wouldn't be useful to try to figure out what that is, in terms of cost/benefit to either of you.

I've been the parent of a child on the autism spectrum for 17 years. I've been in support groups and various organizations for many years, and I can tell when someone is really serious about taking action. They keep asking questions, even if they don't like the answers. They respond to an email, or call you-those are the really serious ones. I'll spend as much time on the phone as I can with the parent of a newly-diagnosed child with autism. Once they call, they are ready to hear what I have to say. Although I am on a published list of parent mentors, I get maybe one call a year. I will pour a lot of energy into that parent who calls.

For every one of those who are really ready to take on the full mantle of this struggle, there are multitudes who are not. I would say the same applies to Green growing into Integral. There is actually very little effort that needs to go into this. If they are ready, they'll practically drag the information out of you. Follow that energy. Learn to tell the difference between someone who has genuine interest and someone who is really just looking to confirm their own worldview at the expense of your time.

Liz

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

Glad I didn't wait til I got Notifications tonight or tomorrow morning to check back here. Thank you all so much.

Liz, I really resonate with everything you talked about. I too will pour heart and soul into anyone who decides I will be a useful tool for their growth. And everything else you said.

“What is a teacher?” Man, we could write a book about that, eh? The tricky thing is, not everyone we could or do learn something from is necessarily someone we might label as “teacher.” I'd have to ponder that some more.

There are indeed those two categories of “teachers” you describe ! Love your descriptions ! (The wide-berth folks and the not-cost-benefit-to-figure-out folks, though I let Spirit do that analysis, not my conscious mind.)

And yeah, welcome to 2nd-3rd Tier, the “new morphogenetic groove” creators. Creating a groove ain't always easy on the chisel !!!  :)  (KW has a technical term for morphogenetic groove, but I think I like this one better, forget his right now.)

Siona, thanks for pushing on me, and thanks for your affirmation. I get the distinction you are making between grokking a viewpoint and a person, of course. In the present case, I think I am probably doing only the former. I know I can do the latter, and do it, but I guess I am not aware enough of the process to “label” it or describe it as you do. I'm not sure I do it deliberately, I think it happens within me when appropriate for both parties. Thank you for making me more conscious of it. Of course it is beneficial (to both parties) and of course I endorse that approach, that happening, very highly !!!!!

It is, of course, a very feminine approach, the communion/embrace approach, and my soul/Spirit is actually more masculine, the doing, directed at, making changes from the outside rather than getting within, resonating within the person, and changing them via the embrace/inclusion. So that's just a type or style difference related to what you are describing….. IMO, FWIW

Oh and FWIW there are times when I am aware I have merged with someone on the upper energetic levels very thoroughly, for at least a period of time, and these are usually folks I feel are learning from me on those levels, without much conscious involvement from either of us. The merging is pretty thorough, from cells on up. I can feel them AS me, co-inciding with “me” in my psychic (generic use of the term) space. I don't ever ask for this or seek it, but I have noticed it happening a few times. It is rarely unpleasant, and rarely pleasant. Just a way of exchanging upliftments, increases in vibration.

Siona, I love your distinction between evolution and development. Just never really thought about it. I see a lot more teleology in evolution than you do perhaps, but I basically accept the distinction as very useful. Henceforth I shall use it. One might say development is along a given line or path, like a seed-to-flower-to-fruit-to-decay path, while evolution is much larger-scale and vaster in both content and scope. Is that so? As part of the difference……

Gina, I would not have gone into judgment about your post as “drive-by.” Thanks to you and Balder for the links, will explore later.

And yes, I have a strong leaning toward the viewpoint that other people are NOTHING BUT opportunities to look at “my own stuff.” LOL !!!!! I just haven't mentioned that aspect of it during this thread, but rest assured it is going on !!!! And I will especially consider “open/closed” in this case, thanks.

Also appreciated your thoughts about Green and what they are like to interact with. I am indeed inclined to push my agenda with lots of folks, but in this instance of this lady, I have NOT felt inclined to do that. I am feeling very laissez-faire. Or maybe her “errors” are not bad enough to evoke my Fixer !!!! Or maybe I don't think I stand any chance of success. Dunno.

Actually, I don't push my agenda at all. I am not interested in convincing anyone of my views. I am interested in seeing people be internally consistent. Where I push is to try to show them their own internal inconsistencies. That is where I get pushy. Very very pushy at times, with definitely some neurotic energies fueling that. My own perspectives, I am pretty laid back about, content to just find kindred souls, not create them.

Bruce, your exploration of Integral-Other interactions sounds scrumptious and I can't wait for time to explore. Again I would like to cite what I consider/see as a grossly, egregiously under-utilized resource re that interface, the Spiral Dynamics book. The back section I thought was total gobbledegook at first, but now I find some of it so profound I choke up, and can't get enough of it. They specifically and in gory (haha) detail explore Integral-Other interactions all along the spectrum, and in a variety of types of situations. It is sooooo monumentally useful as a guide to daily life (for us.)

B Holmes, thanks for your insights. Maybe I will combine some of that with what Siona said and let B—-  know that I do see the downside of labeling and the mis-use of “semantics.” Then she would feel I heard her better, and was “inside” her perspective – but of course, that's still her viewpoints, not HER. I appreciate having my nose rubbed in the distinction, LOL !!!!!

These comments were just the tip of the iceberg of all I got and valued in all the posts so far…..

With gratitude to all,
OM Bastet

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

B Holmes and MrTeacup: I like Hargen's point, even if I balk at the personalization of the word 'Green.' I know it's a 'shorthand,' but it's still an abstract concept, and as such is impossible to develop a true 'relationship' with, or an interpersonal connection, etc. Again, I know I'm preaching to the choir, but I think that sort of (potential) conceptual confusion is something to keep an eye on. Saying there's an 'anti-green-values' dynamic is more accurate, I think, than referring to 'anti-green.'

(OM's friend would hate my semantic quibbling, hm? ;)

And OM: You're so welcome! Awareness is always a gift, I think. And to be fair, there is a huge and aggressively intellectual part of me that LOVES the academic head-stuff and that is far, far more typically agenic in approach. I think for me it goes in cycles; I've just been finding, recently, that the 'feminine' 'being' approach has been so much more paradoxically effective (and so, SO much harder… do you know how HARD it is not to try to change things from the outside??) at creating space for deeper transformation and awakening. Life, hm? So funny.

I'll bite my tongue on the evolution / development distinction. I still get a wee bit too passionate about that. ;)

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

I feel so at home here I sometimes forget people might mis-interpret some of these printed words, so seek to clarify:

I said
anyone who decides I will be a useful tool for their growth

To most folks the idea of someone using someone else as a tool is highly negative.  I don't mean to imply that I am “being used” in any negative way, or being regarded as MERELY an object, or reduced as a person to being merely a means to an end. 

My greatest thrill in life is when I am being useful to someone in expanding their consciousness/Being/Love, and when they are actively USING me that way, I am in ecstasy. So “anyone who decides I will be a useful tool for their growth” is my favrit kinda people !!! (Well, one of my favorite kinds.)

It's kinda like a hammer knows no greater ecstasy than when it is driving in nails, nor a bell no greater ecstasy than when it is ringing….. (But that's another long conversation….)

Maybe no one made that mis-interpretation but I had to forestall, as it would be a serious one.

Blessings, OM Bastet

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

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

     permalink

Re: Prime Example of a Green-Integral Interaction

That's a great quote, and has wisdom. But he's making an assumption that isn't true, or at least agreed-upon: that being “integral” means that your self line is stable at second-tier. Not that he's infallible, but Ken's definition works better for me, and it's a lot more useful: anyone who can truly take other perspectives than their own. He's also said, at times, anyone who understands the integral model. in other words, anyone who is second-tier on the cognitive line.

I realize this includes a lot of people who aren't in any way second-tier in the self line.

But I do prefer the more inclusive model for several reasons, the most important of which is the recognition and encouragement of people's development and growth. If someone had told me when I got involved in this integral stuff that my self line didn't qualify me to be “integral,” (which it didn't) I'd have been extremely put off, no matter how “true.” What would be the point of making this group even more exclusive?

In fact, Ken has changed his model to be more inclusive, not less. Green is seen as the doorway to integral, and rightly so.

But I take his point, and otherwise agree with it entirely.

Liz