Maps of Meaning

Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief

by Jordan B. Peterson

We think we live in the "objective" world, but we do not. The objective world is something that has been conjured up for us recently - absurdly recently, from the perspective of evolutionary biology - by the processes of science operating over a span of five centuries (or, perhaps, to give the Greeks their due, over the last thirty centuries). This does not mean that the objective world is not real, even though theories about its nature are in constant flux. What it does mean is that the environment of human beings might well be regarded as "spiritual," as well as "material."

It is of course virtually impossible - even forbidden, at least implicitly - to use terms such as "spiritual" in a serious scientific discussion. How could it be that reality is "spiritual," rather than material, given the overwhelming practical success of the experimental sciences?

There are perhaps two answers to this question. The first concerns our capacity to categorize. It has become increasingly clear, at least since the time of Wittgenstein (1968), and perhaps also as a consequence of Piaget's work, that the categories we use to orient ourselves are at least as much action or significance-predicated as they are descriptive, which is to say contra Augustine that words are not labels for things as much as they are tools for the obtaining of goals. Since it is not precisely clear where the "object" ends and the "category" begins, perhaps it is the case that even those things we naturally perceive as "things" might be better regarded as tools for the obtaining of goals rather than as absolute entities in and of themselves.

The second answer is somewhat more abstract, but is related conceptually to the first. It is clearly the case that our concept of situation or thing is context-dependent. What we parse out of the exceedingly complex "environment" that presents itself to us is always only a limited subset of that environment, and perhaps precisely that subset which serves our present purposes (as we attend to some few things, and ignore a multitude of others). We might say, then, that different purposes require different "objects", and that the highest and most general (and also therefore necessarily the most abstract and "long-term" and least immediately evident) purposes require us to parse out the highest and most general categories, tools, or conceptions. If what we extract from the environment are things more like tools than objects, it might be possible to take a radically fresh look at conceptual systems other than those of science, on the chance that what they are talking about are things which are more like tools than objects.

As a consequence of adopting such a perspective, it may be possible to posit that we are no better at understanding our own past than we are at truly coming to grips with the conceptual systems of other cultures, and to remember or at least hypothesize that we really do not understand what our forebears meant when they used categories such as "spiritual" (any more than we understand what they meant when they said "virgin birth," for example, or "holy Trinity," or "resurrection of the Savior", or even "Tao"). If that is the case (which is the only alternative to presuming that everyone unfortunate enough to live prior to the dawn of the scientific age was pathetically ignorant, despite their incontrovertible success at surviving), then things may still be seriously other than we presently presume.

Read More: Here

An Evolutionary Mind

From Metanexus:

An Evolutionary Mind

By Alice Andrews

"Close your Deleuze; open your Darwin."
—Robert Storey, Mimesis and the Human Animal

Not that long ago, for about a year, I dated a cute, left-wing economist off-and-on (though mostly off). We found each other attractive and exotic and perhaps even fascinating, but we didn’t get along or get each other one bit. It was a frustrating and futile experiment in the chemistry and mathematics of pairing with someone so different in every way—even our horoscopes said we were disastrous for each other. (That I would even mention the word horoscope in a piece for public consumption would no doubt make him cringe and clear his throat a few times.) But in the process of going toward something so foreign and at once attractive and repellent, I solidified my worldview that there really are two different kinds of minds.

Recently, the New York Times ran an article titled “The Political Brain.” The piece suggested that the liberal mind and the conservative mind are quite different, and that this difference is related to the differences in the way their limbic systems (in particular, the amygdala) respond to particular stimuli—particularly suffering and violence. The author made clear to point out that it was difficult to parse if liberals were born with more sensitive/reactive amygdalae or if their experiences, etc., shaped the patterns of response; and that indeed it was probably a little of both, as these things often are.

Read More: Here

When Minds and Machines Become One?

From Google:

Ray Kurzweil visits Google's Mountain View, CA headquarters to discuss his book "The Web Within Us: When Minds and Machines Become One." This event took place on July 1, 2009, as part of the Authors@Google series:



At the onset of the 21st century, it will be an era in which the very nature of what is means to be human will be both enriched and challenged, as our species breaks the shackles of its genetic legacy, and achieves inconceivable heights of intelligence, material progress, and longevity.

The paradigm shift rate is now doubling every decade, so the twenty-first century will see 20,000 years of progress at todays rate. Computation, communication, biological technologies (for example, DNA sequencing), brain scanning, knowledge of the human brain, and human knowledge in general are all accelerating at an even faster pace, generally doubling price-performance, capacity, and bandwidth every year. Three-dimensional molecular computing will provide the hardware for human-level "strong" AI well before 2030. The more important software insights will be gained in part from the reverse-engineering of the human brain, a process well under way.

While the social and philosophical ramifications of these changes will be profound, and the threats they pose considerable, celebrated futurist Ray Kurzweil presents an inspiring vision of our ultimate destiny in which we will merge with our machines, can live forever, and are a billion times more intelligent...all within the next three to four decades.

Wilber-Combs Lattice Revisited

The Wilber-Combs Lattice Revisited

by Jan Brouwer

Wilber V is definitely an improvement on earlier stages. In Wilber III-IV there always lurked in the background of his theory some slight uneasiness. For it remained somehow a puzzle how psychological development stages (structures) are to be matched with (higher) states of consciousness. The relative simple answer to this question at the time was: higher states of consciousness, like the ones exhibited by the mystics of world culture, are merely higher stages/structures of psychological development. You first have to go through all of the lower stages of development before the ripeness settles in to realize some of the higher spiritual states. Second tier development can only begin after consolidation of first tier growth. And so it is with third tier development: it can only come after first and second tier development and not before or in between.

This solution to the problem of how states and structures were to be related ('stack the first on top of the latter' as Wilber himself now describes this earlier theory rather derogatively, making higher states of consciousness somehow equivalent to higher stages) was in itself the outcome of a deep crisis in Wilber's philosophy. For Wilber I-II still adhered to Jungian and neo-Romantic notions of spirituality being a return to the glory and innocence of childhood. Enlightenment in this phase was seen as a kind of home coming to 'the trailing clouds of glory' (Wordsworth) of our golden childhood. Children were seen as still possessing spiritual treasures we adults somehow seem to have lost. In this earlier view spirituality is to be defined as the art of finding those lost treasures again. This was Wilber at the beginning of his career.

But this made Wilber himself (and others) rather uncomfortable at the time. For the data of zone #2 research about psychological development did not match this theory. Researchers like Piaget, Baldwin, Loevinger and others had busted the myth of childhood spirituality being a higher kind of realization. The 'trailing clouds of glory' were proven to be rather chaotic meteorological phenomena, with archaic dark thunderstorms and sudden magical lightings, instead of enlightened celestial glory all of the time. Childhood was proven to be more of a tentative beginning within a gradual spiritual process than the acme of it.

Read More: Here

JAN BROUWER is webmaster of "The Mystical Site" and editor of the online forum Integral Mysticism. He lives in the Netherlands. He can be contacted at archimysticus@planet.nl

Integral Spirituality and Personhood

Integral Spirituality

By Terri O'Fallon

Integral spirituality is the experience of a Sacred, embodied, evolutionary “now”, speaking through us in multiple voices. It incarnates all facets of our lives, inviting past and future into one moment. Integral spiritual practice, then, seems to be a consummate, persistent inquiry of many shades and shadows extending throughout life. Though our assumptions about reality restrict and bind us, they also protect us from tumbling permanently into those amazing states into which we “peak”, but do not yet have the energetic capacity to live in consistently. As the formless universe awakens to itself through form, like a sleeping child, our incarnated being begins to know the Sacred as the Sacred simultaneously knows us.

Living fully into our earthly personhood as we “peak” into the transcendent, two prominent, implicit questions seem to be “Who am I?” and, “Who am I not?” Our embodied, immanent experience is with us in awareness from the day we are born. How can we wake up in consciousness to the everyday sacredness we hold within our flesh, skin, heart and bones, and unite it with the transcendent within which we are coming into being?

A question that arises in more comfortable times is “Who am I?” Steeped in the confidence of our own incarnate measure of knowing, there seems to be no other truth. “This is who I am!” In this full exploration of our knowing, we envision everyone else as having, or needing to have, these same beliefs. “Yes! This is the way the world works”!

But inevitably, a disorienting dilemma arrives; we tremble, wondering how we can survive this torturous and ghastly occurrence. We have no way to make sense of this experience. We flail, squirm and wish we could do something to get out of this agonizing space. Our assumptions and beliefs do not make sense any more. There is a discomfort in every cell in our bodies, for our beliefs are not large enough to make sense of the anguish we feel so deeply. Mind numbing fuzziness creeps into our ordinarily cogent mind; the simple task of making a “to do” list seems impossible; let alone the capacity to carry out a plan. We find ourselves living suspended in this liminal space where the being we once were no longer makes sense, and the being we are yet to be, has yet to emerge.

Read More: Here

Integral Life Coaching

From Integral Life:

Integral Life is launching our brand new coaching service in July. One of the questions we are being asked is why Integral Coaching is different from all the other coaching programs out there. This week we are pleased to let you listen in to a conversation between Joanne Hunt, co-founder of Integral Coaching Canada and her client Huy Lam. If you are interested in what the Integral Coaching method is like, this set of four videos is a must see.

Huy is also launching his Coaching blog later this week on Integrallife.com. Be sure to check it out!

The Coaching Topic

In this first clip Joanne and Huy talk about the topic he chose for his Integral Coaching experience.

Metaphors Aid in Transformation

In this piece, Joanne and Huy explore the power of metaphor in the Integral Coaching method, devising analogies to describe our "current" and "new ways of being."

Current Way of Being: White Crane

In this piece, Joanne and Huy discuss his current way of being metaphor… White Crane!

New Way of Being: Braveheart

In this piece, Joanne and Huy discuss his new way of being metaphor… Braveheart!

Science, Society and The Merchants of Light

From the Origins Symposium at Arizona State University:

A conversation between Roger Bingham and Richard Dawkins, AC Grayling, Brian Greene, Lawrence Krauss and Steven Pinker on science, consciousness the the future of humankind.



April 5, 2009 Run Time: 58 minutes

Of Faith and Science

From the World Science Festival 2008:

Prominent clashes - both historical and contemporary - have led to the widely held conclusion that science and religion are fundamentally incompatible. Yet, many scientists practice a traditional faith, having found a way to accommodate both scientific inquiry and religious teaching in their belief system. Other scientists are bringing science to bear on the phenomenon of religion and spiritual belief - neuroscientists are studying what happens in the brain during religious experiences, while anthropologists are investigating how religion is linked to cooperation and community.

This program provided an intimate look at what scientists have to say about their religious beliefs and what might be revealed by scientific studies of spirituality:

Faith & Science from World Science Festival on Vimeo.

Integral Future Scenarios

Two Papers by Chris Stewart:

Towards Integral Scenarios: Creative suggestions for translating AQAL integral theory into scenario methodologies

by Chris C Stewart

This paper outlines a range of methodological suggestions for approaching the design of scenarios from an integral theory perspective. The integral theory used is based primarily on the work of Ken Wilber, and his AQAL meta-theory. As an integral approach to scenarios, and Futures Studies (FS) generally, is only just beginning in the 21st century, there are few examples to draw on that example the promise of integral scenarios. Accordingly this paper is largely a creative exposition of potential. The suggestions herein will need to be tested, refined and will undoubtedly evolve in quite different ways as the realities of practical application shape their forms into value adding, repeatable, grounded methods and practice insights. There are also many areas where further development are identified as being possible and beneficial for scenarios and FS more generally.

Building on the contributions of [two former] papers the purpose of this third paper is to use the scenario worldview competencies, quality maxims, and Integral Operating System to develop a framework for methodological renewal of scenario development processes. Given that a developmental history of scenarios invites the investigation of an integral worldview approach, and the presentation of an integral worldview level theory provides the means for this investigation, the first new task of this paper is to provide an explanation of how the theory meets the worldview quality maxims and can incorporate the core competencies of the previous worldviews of scenarios.

Read More: Here


Integral Scenarios: Reframing Theory, Building from Practice

by Chris C. Stewart

Australian futurists have been working with a range of integral theories over the past decade to inform new approaches to scenarios. Chief among the integral theories explored is Wilber's All Quadrant, All Level, All Lines, All States, All Types (AQAL) meta-theory. This emerging and diverse set of scenario methods, falling under the term ‘integral scenarios’ as reviewed in this paper, have mostly been developed in practice and to date, have not been represented in futures journals.

This paper contextualizes integral scenarios with a summary of the theoretical background to their development before arriving at a generic scenario generation process together with a set of utility and quality criteria. This generic framework and criteria are then used to situate a range of case studies of integral scenarios, outlining their features, benefits and limitations. Finally, the areas of potential for further development are highlighted—for both refined and wholly new types of integral scenario methods.

Learn More: Here

CHRIS STEWART is a consultant with Emergent Insights in Australia. As a futurist, integral theorist, and public affairs and strategy consultant, Chris attempts to enable individuals, teams and organisations to act with more comprehensive strategic foresight.

What It Means To Be Human

Below is part 1 of 5 of 'What it Means To Be Human' - an interdisciplinary exploration of how discoveries in areas like fundamental physics, anthropology, and genomics are challenging our understanding of human nature.

This event happened on May 31, 2008, at the 2008 World Science Festival - and was moderated by Charlie Rose. Participants include philosopher Daniel Dennett, artist Jonathan Harris, anthropologist Ian Tattersall, geneticist Francis Collins, neuroscientist Antonio Damasio, philosopher Patricia Churchland, sociologist Nikolas Rose, embryonic stem cell biologist Renee Reijo Pera, and Nobel Laureates Harold Varmus and Paul Nurse.

What it Means to Be Human (Part 1/5) from World Science Festival on Vimeo.

Watch All 5 Parts: Here

The Biosemiotic View of Nature

Life is Semiosis: The Biosemiotic View of Nature

by Marcello Barbieri

The idea that life is based on signs and codes, i.e., that “Life is semiosis”, has been strongly suggested by the discovery of the genetic code, but so far it has made little impact, and is largely regarded as philosophy rather than science. The main reason for this is that there
are at least three basic concepts in modern biology that keep semiosis squarely out of organic life.

(1) The first is the classical model that describes the cell as a biological computer made of genotype and phenotype. A computer contains codes but is not a semiotic system, and this makes it possible to say that the cell too can have a genetic code without being a semiotic system.

(2) The second idea is physicalism, the doctrine that everything in life must ultimately be accounted for by physical quantities. This amounts to saying that signs and codes do not exist at the molecular level and are but linguistic metaphors that biologists use simply because they are convenient.

(3) The third concept is the idea that all biological novelties have been brought into existence by natural selection, an idea which implies that semiotic processes did not have any creative role in evolution.

These arguments have effectively ruled out the existence of semiosis in the organic world, thus depriving the discovery of the genetic code of all its revolutionary potential, but here it will be shown that there are experimental facts against all of them. More precisely, it will be shown that the cell is a true semiotic system, and that the genetic code has been the first of a long series of organic codes that have shaped the whole history of life on our planet. Biological semiosis, in other words, is a scientific reality because the organic codes are experimental realities.

This paper intends to underline precisely the scientific nature of biosemiotics and argues that the time has come to acknowledge that semiosis not only is a fact of life but is ‘the’ fact that allowed life to emerge from inanimate matter.

Read More (PDF): Here

Integral Education from Next Step Integral

From Next Step Integral:

Integral Education
FROM CRADLE TO KOSMOS
Exploring the leading edge of educational theory and practiceAugust 2–7, 2009 - Whidbey Institute, Whidbey Island, WA

Integral education stands out as one of the most pertinent and practical means of creating positive change in ourselves and the world. This seminar will bring educators of all age groups together from around the globe, educators who are seeking the necessary vision, skills, and processes to fully serve students and the world that we inhabit.

Integral education is an emerging field, propelled by people who seek to push the envelope of what education can be. The seminar will provide an inspiring environment to meet with colleagues and to network with a small but growing community that clearly understands that addressing a more complete spectrum of personal, cultural, and systemic realities at play in education is one of the most powerful ways to begin effecting the changes we hope to see in the world.

Some of the core questions we will be asking ourselves are

• How can education coherently address the whole human being, a being of body, mind, and spirit, immersed in cultural meaning making, social structures, and natural systems?
• How can we embody an integral perspective in all aspects of curriculum, teaching stances, activities, and assessment?
• In a universe unfolding into increasing consciousness and complexity, how can we work not only to develop current capacities, but also to create the conditions for the emergence of more complex perspectives in the future?

<< More about the Seminar Here >>

Krishnamurti on the Human Condition

This documentary clip is the first from an original series of eight made for television in 1966. They were the earliest sound-films of J. Krishnamurti speaking to audiences:



Here K talks about society and human consciousness:



And here K raps on universal human suffering, psychology and responsibility:



In this clip K speaks about life, death, misery, conflict:



Jiddu Krishnamurti (1895–1986) was a well known writer and speaker on philosophical and spiritual subjects. His subject matter included: psychological revolution, the nature of the mind, meditation, human relationships, and how to enact positive change in society. He constantly stressed the need for a revolution in the psyche of every human being and emphasized that such a revolution cannot be brought about by any external entity whether religious, political or social.

See Also: Krishnamurti - The Real Revolution

An Interview with Daniel Gustav Anderson

Below is a transcript of an interview Erik S. Thornquist conducted with Daniel Gustav Anderson by email between 30 April and 26 May 2009, originally published by Integral World.

Daniel Gustav Anderson is a literary scholar, cultural critic and integral theorist currently teaching literature and cultural history in Washington D.C. Along with Mark Edwards, Steve McIntosh and Sean Esbjörn-Hargens, Anderson is one of the most innovative thinkers to emerge out of the integral movement.

This interview highlights the importance of evolving a much more radical approach to integral thinking, being and doing. Daniel and Erik challenge us to reconceptualize what it means to intentionally explore an ever expansive worldview. Enjoy.

Nonviolence of Nonmetaphysics
An Interview with Daniel Gustav Anderson

Erik: How did you become interested in integral theory?

Daniel: How I came to be interested in integral theory and integral culture is a separate question from how I came to be committed to an integral project. I'll try to address both of them.

The first has to do with everyday life for me. I am an intellectual by trade and a practicing Buddhist. My politics have always been to the left as a matter of conscience. There are other factors but I don't think my life is interesting. I find memoirs rather dull and, as the great American sage Steveland Morris observes, I don't want to bore you with my troubles. The gist of it: my commitment to this project comes from an unwillingness to endure the sufferings of others when that suffering could be avoided. I don't want to see children who should be developing into responsible adults go hungry and not learn to read, for instance. There's something wrong with me that I can't tolerate it, like you can't just sit there and watch your grandmother trip and fall down a flight of stairs with a disinterested attitude. I can't do that, I'm not that cool, so I have to step in and do what I can. This has meant that I have spent most of my adult life learning how to do certain things, and learning what is possible for me to do well. I read a lot. I am slowly losing my hearing, so I will never be a revolutionary piano tuner, but I have found that I can write American English. So, I write American English.

How specifically did I become committed to integral theory? I was teaching English Literature surveys as a lecturer at the University of Idaho. My students were struck by some passages in Matthew Arnold that I had asked them to read, which reminded me of some materials I had been studying on my own in Aurobindo Ghose. I have long been an admirer of Aurobindo's poetic work, and had some notes on a paper regarding some problems in Aurobindo's poetry and also his theories of time and race. So I put all this together in a tidy package and submitted it on a lark to the Integral Review. The editors at that journal did a remarkable thing: they decided to publish it but more importantly they challenged me.

Read More: Here

Also by Daniel Gustav Anderson: New Theses on Integral Micropolitics

Integral Capital the Global Commons

In the following podcast host John D. Schmidt continues his wide-ranging exploration of the strengths and limitations of our current economic/financial system. His aim: a comprehensive understanding of current socioeconomic realities on the way to realizing desirable and sustainable futures.

His guest and co-explorer in this project is James Quilligan - an analyst and administra­tor in the field of international development since 1975. Quilligan has served as policy advisor to many international politicians and leaders, including Pierre Trudeau, François Mitterrand and Jimmy Carter. He has also served as an advisor for several United Nations programs and international development organizations.

Quilligan has recently been applying an integral approach as an economic consultant to government agencies in 26 countries, including the United States. In this podcast Quilligan introduces a view of the future built upon expanded perspectives of the global commons and what he calls "integral capital". Integral capital, Quilligan explains, includes explicit recognition of private capital, public capital, commons capital, and personal capital—and how they come together as a platform for future transformation.

The dialogue between these leaders intentionally showcases the intricate relationships between systems, structures, and behaviors (the exterior forms of life) and the many dimensions of culture and mindsets (the inner nature of life) that inform them.

Listen to the Podcast Here:
Transformation: The Commons and Integral Capital

JOHN D. SCHMIT is the founder and CEO of Avastone Consulting, an international consultancy committed to the vitality and sustainability of client organizations and the larger global community. He serves as advisor to global corporations and nongovernmental enterprises, and is a thinker, designer, and practitioner in integral approaches to complex challenges and human development.

Integral Theory and Global Developmental Pathologies

A Future in the Balance: Integral Theory and Global Developmental Pathologies

By Mark Edwards

This essay employs three fundamental principles of Integral theory to consider the developmental nature of some of the major pathologies currently afflicting social development at the global level. It has been quite apparent for some time now that there are very powerful global forces which cause immense harm to communities and environments.

However, these very forces are also responsible for some of the most important advances in human welfare and social development. There’s a very deadly race in progress between the developmental potential of these movements to create a worthy future for our planet and their destructive capacity to consign humanity and many other innocent parties to the evolutionary scrap heap.

How might we better understand how these developmental forces can be held in balance? Is it possible to untangle the beneficial side of these movements from the destructive side? How might we better enunciate and work towards a truly healthy form of global development instead of a socio-centric form of rampant “progress”? This essay presents some considerations on these and associated questions from an integral theory perspective.

Read More: Here

MARK EDWARDS PhD. is a registered psychologist with a Masters degree in developmental psychology and a PhD (awarded distinction) in organization theory from the University of Western Australia. He currently teaches business ethics at the Business School, University of Western Australia and metatheoretical studies at John F. Kennedy University in California.

Also by Mark Edwards:

• The Depth of the Exteriors
• Integral Sociocultural Studies and Cultural Evolution
• Integral Theory into Integral Action
• Organizational Transformation and Integral MetaTheory
• A Brief History of Holons