Meta-Integral has just sent out the call for papers for the upcoming 2015 Integral Theory Conference.  The theme for the conference is Integral Impacts: Using Integrative Metatheories to Catalyze Effective Change.

See here for details.

Views: 2916

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The saying that "the conference in the hallways is where it's really at" I found to be true. Though I would say it was in the dining hall, and in our suite late at night for me. I was delighted to find such a wide diversity of personalities and viewpoints - it was refreshing to have confirmed that the integral community is not one monolith represented by the voices that appear in the Integral Life emails and Daily Evolver episodes, and that the independent thinking that appears in this forum is not alone in the integral community.

I found most people to be open and engaging, with genuine interest to get to know and communicate with those around them - a very warm environment, and there was common point of discussion about the common observation of a high level of energy and intersubjective connection at the conference, which made it easier for more introvertedly oriented people like myself to engage.

I did also observe a subtle (and sometimes less subtle) heirarchy of integral celebrities that tended to attract greater attention and interest. I think this is entirely natural - not a criticism (I myself  had desires to connect more with certain individuals, for good reasons I think). But I do think this reality should be acknowledged. And there were a couple of integral celebrities that came off to me as a tad snobbish, but it really could have been my own projection and the particular circumstance of the situation, so no final judgements can be made.

It was great to meet in person Ambo, Balder, and Layman! I regret that we did not set up a time where we could all hang out together. I had numerous experiences where I would meet someone, and then later figure out who it was, such as Layman, Bonnie (Roy), John (Dupuy), and Marco (Morelli).

I didn't know what I was getting myself into when I set up suite mates of Trevor Malkinson, Tim Winton (and Gabby), Chris Dierkes, and Jeremy Johnson. I didn't know I was setting up the party house for the conference. It was a mixed blessing, but mostly positive, creating opportunities to meet a lot of people. I didn't know integrals could drink so much alcohol.

Hi David - nice report. I nod my head in recognition.

It was a pleasure to have lunch with you that day and to hear about some of the wise decisions and serendipity that has extruded and braided [smiley emoticon] you into a fine lifestyle and life.

Yes on the integral celebrity - it may be, as you allude, that people cluster in ways that have been around for centuries, following interests, normal human psychosocial attractor grooves, and sometimes slightly mysterious biological resonances, like isomorphisms. I know I can get my panties in a momentary twist when my desires for connection (for whatever motives, 'base' or 'noble', get thwarted), but I have been working for decades to ease the chips off my shoulder, transcend my defensive reactivities, and accept what is [big smiley emoticon.] It has been a rich exploration for me. As Ken has said, something like, 'hurts more, worries you less.' So how's that working for you, ambo? :)

And the ETOH, the ethanol, a young man's (and woman's sport) sport. Age and energy has played a part with me. Early to bed, early to rise, way to avoid, a headache surprise. Hah.

On the integral life site, young Layman Pascal mentioned his sort of balls to the walls approach - ah, the youth and the adventurous. (Notice #2.)

"Layman's Conference Rules:

1. Run Everywhere.

2. Drink Everything.

3. Hug Everyone.

 

That list is half facetious but only half. 

 

Really the rules, for me, were:

 

1. Be Happy to See Everybody & show them that.

2. Trust the intersubjective vibe more than the schedule.

 

PS - I want to give a bonus shout-out to Ambo & Jane were just such a pleasure to be near..."


[I am sure he would include you in this pleasure, as an IPS member!]


DavidM58 said:


I did also observe a subtle (and sometimes less subtle) heirarchy of integral celebrities that tended to attract greater attention and interest. I think this is entirely natural - not a criticism (I myself  had desires to connect more with certain individuals, for good reasons I think). But I do think this reality should be acknowledged. And there were a couple of integral celebrities that came off to me as a tad snobbish, but it really could have been my own projection and the particular circumstance of the situation, so no final judgements can be made.

It was great to meet in person Ambo, Balder, and Layman! I regret that we did not set up a time where we could all hang out together. I had numerous experiences where I would meet someone, and then later figure out who it was, such as Layman, Bonnie (Roy), John (Dupuy), and Marco (Morelli).

. . . I didn't know integrals could drink so much alcohol.

Regarding the content of the presentations...

I confess I had difficulty tracking many of the presentations, due at least partially to the late nights and the consequent lack of sleep. I almost always felt conflicted about which presentation to attend and whether I made the best choices. Looking back, I only attended one presentation by a best paper or honorable mention award winner (Theresa Silow).  Glad I bought the mp3 recordings, and I look forward to when they will appear.

The most memorable presentations for me were:

Chandana Kulasurya on "Recognition of Emergive Reality" and the need to go beyond subjective and objective and have a place for consideration of "emergive" or "quantum reality" that emerges through the interaction between subjects and objects.  An interesting alteration of Ken's quadrants and use of pronouns. The new word to express this reality is "Soham" - I am  He/It/That.

Karen O'Brien's keynote address: Karen is a Nobel Prize winning contributor to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). She spoke about the Adaptive Challenge of climate change - that we need to go beyond addressing the technical aspects ("If we continue to treat this as a technical problem, we will continue to fail"), and look to the shared beliefs and how we relate, challenging the myth of the given, and to launch alternatives, and to increase collaborative power. Karen learned the integral approach through volunteering to work with Gail Hochachka on one of her projects.

Ed Sarath on Jazz as Integral Lens and Change Agent. Fascinating. I bought his book: "Improvisation, Creativity, and Consciousness - Jazz as integral template for music, education and society." He teaches at University of Michigan, and initiated a new degree program - you can now actually major in Jazz and Contemplative Studies in his Creativity and Consciousness Studies program.  The book looks to be quite detailed and rigorous in how he lays this all out, and I think as significant a contribution to integral thought as those addressing other domains, such as Integral Ecology. 

Theresa Silow on Somatic Development and Gebser's Structures of Consciousness. "Embodiment is the foundation for human consciousness - our body shapes our mind." A VERY interesting correlation between Gebser's mutations, Bonnie Bainbridge-Cohen's work on developmental movement, and Polyvagal theory (the vagus nerve and vagal tone have been getting an increasing amount of attention - "a novel index of stress vulnerability and reactivity").

There were a number of interesting panels/debates. Very hard to choose which to attend.  I split time between the one about the need to "abandon spirituality to have a mainstream impact" and the one about "catering to corporate interests."  By splitting my time, I felt I missed out on fully grokking the full impact of either one.  I especially appreciated Jeremy Johnson asking the question at the corporate interests discussion about how it would even be possible for infinite growth (the capitalist model) to occur on a finite planet (possibly influenced by having read my paper).

My presentation went fairly well I think, though the short time allowed (20 minutes) felt a little ridiculous, requiring very fast talking, and cutting out significant parts of what I wanted to communicate. Only 7 or 8 people attended - a bit disappointing, but not totally unusual. Even some of the better known presenters sometimes had this small number. I heard about one presentation that had zero people show up, and it was an honorable mention award winning paper.  In my time slot I was competing against two award winners, and a number of better known names (including the formidable Layman Pascal).

Morning Meditations: I only made it to one session on Sunday.  There were zero people in the Meditation Room, a few people in the Yoga room, and just one other attendee with me (plus the facilitator) in the We Space room.  Hmm, what does it say about us - lots of desire to stay up late and drink together, but not as much interest in meditating together.

Best Paper Award Winners:

UL: Chris Dierkes

Honorable Mention (HM): Terry Patten

LL: Kate McAlpine

HM: Carter Phipps & Steve McIntosh

LR: Randy Marten, Jeff Cohen, et al.

HM: Zak Stein (Desperate Measures)

UR: Elliot Ingersoll

HM: Teresa Silow

Alternatives to Meta Theories:

Bruce Alderman

HM: Michael Schwartz

HM: Uma Narayama

Research:
Deborah Kennedy

Niki Vincent

HM: Howard Drossman & Shanti OmGaia
HM: Steve Schein

 

B, though I may have recalled some of his talk, I can tell you have a grasp on the material generally - my grip is tentative and tenuous.

Do you have a source for a transcript of his talk? Can you, would you share the link or text with me? Or the video.

I wish I wasn't in a continuing ed seminar during your presentation - I'll bet it was good.

Did I hear you won an award for your paper? If not, you should have :)

And good to be back home and into the ocean - warm warm warm at 69-70 degrees F.

Balder said:

Hi, Ambo, your summary of Ken's keynote sounds good to me -- at least it rings familiar notes in my ears.  I was taken by surprise by the keynote topic (I was expecting a discussion of Integral Ukraine), but I was interested in it because my task the following day, at the Critical Realism / Integral Theory symposium, was to give a 15-minute presentation on the epistemic fallacy and discuss its relevance to IT.  So ... it was immediately relevant to me, and I was sort of kicking myself after the keynote because I was not recalling it clearly enough to engage it in much depth at the symposium.  I did gather that he was stating, firmly but respectfully, that he felt any charge of 'epistemic fallacy' was misplaced because epistemological and ontological orientations are accounted for, or included, in the inside and outside zones, respectively.  However, his argument was also a little confusing to me (or unclear), because he defined the epistemic and ontic fallacies as privileging or exclusively relying on either inside or outside zone orientations, and then defined IT as an inside view / enactive orientation, and CR as an outside view / objective orientation.  So, he is making a gesture to include both on the AQAL map, but doesn't show how both are actually integrated in Integral Theory (if IT is understood, as he said, as fundamentally an enactive approach).

There's much more to the talk, and there are a few other points I'm thinking about in relation to it, but I really want a chance to hear it or read it before I say more about it.

(About his prolific writing output:  wow!  Yes, I'm impressed.  He's done a ton of work in the last couple years, which is exciting.)

Ah, your reply above, David answers yes to the award - Congratulations, Bruce!

Ambo Suno said:

Did I hear you won an award for your paper? If not, you should have :)

Yes, congrats to Bruce!  Because I already get a fair amount of exposure to Bruce's ideas here on the forum, I decided to expose myself to one of the other Integral Pioneers. Which was nice, but in retrospect I wish I had attended Bruce's presentation instead, especially when I heard the positive buzz about it afterward

Hi again David, I went a bit on an analytic route in distancing myself from the feelings you were describing in a very low key manner. I know that feeling left out or however we want to call it has been difficult for me in my past. I haven't resolved this human problem, but I have coping strategies that seem to deal with not getting more hung up in uncomfortable feelings as I used to.

It's probably worth at least acknowledging that this phenomenon can be described as garden variety grade school/high school dynamics. It can have to do with personalities, sure, but also on the part of in-group people, insecurity, fear, and petty attractions to popularity and social currency. Etc.

Hah I'm sure books have been written about it so I'll stop now :)

DavidM58 said:

I found most people to be open and engaging, with genuine interest to get to know and communicate with those around them - a very warm environment, and there was common point of discussion about the common observation of a high level of energy and intersubjective connection at the conference, which made it easier for more introvertedly oriented people like myself to engage.

I did also observe a subtle (and sometimes less subtle) heirarchy of integral celebrities that tended to attract greater attention and interest. I think this is entirely natural - not a criticism (I myself  had desires to connect more with certain individuals, for good reasons I think). But I do think this reality should be acknowledged. And there were a couple of integral celebrities that came off to me as a tad snobbish, but it really could have been my own projection and the particular circumstance of the situation, so no final judgements can be made.

Ha! "Garden variety grade school/high school dynamics." Well, that puts it in a nutshell, doesn't it?

But really, I had a great time, and am grateful that you and I had a chance to sit down to a meal together.

Hi, Doug and David, thanks -- I've appreciated your reflections on the conference.  I like Layman's rules, too, but as a non-drinker and more of an introvert, Doug's rules are more my speed.  (I did get in a few really good hugs, though).

David, thanks for your summary of the presentations you attended.  I also had a hard time choosing and had to console myself with the thought of the forthcoming recordings.  My presentation, and Layman's, both seemed to have a similar number of attendees to yours -- probably between 8 to 10 people.  (At just a couple minutes before my scheduled time, I think there were zero people in the room yet, so in the end I was very grateful to all those who showed up at the last minute!)

I'm not certain if I'll do it yet, but I'm considering doing another "ITC Paper Review" series, for anyone interested.  If I do, I'll host it here and link it on the FB forum.

Best wishes,

B.

After the last ITC in 2013, we sponsored an "ITC Paper Review" in which several of us read and commented on each of the papers submitted. I'm thinking of doing something like this again this year, but perhaps in a looser way (not following a systematic order, but just picking papers that stand out for us and reading and commenting on them). Would members here be interested in IPS sponsoring an event like this again, once the papers are posted publicly?

Yes, very interested in paper reviews.

The latest issue of Integral Leadership Review has just been posted, and it includes a beautiful and powerful essay by Tim Winton on ITC 2015. Initially intended to be part of the "Notes from the Field" section of this journal, it instead became a feature article entitled "Notes On the Field: Thoughts on Integral Leadership Post ITC 2015."

As with much of Tim's writing, there is so much embedded in each paragraph that would be worthy of expansion into multiple articles of deeper exploration. Notes can be taken to be a musical flow of artistic improvisation and aesthetic expression, and Field is defined in PatternDynamics as "resonant shaping forces, some of which may be difficult to explain given our current level of understanding."

There is a fair amount of PatternDynamics implicitly embedded in this essay, but I think the context of the essay does not require an explicit discussion of it for it to be followed and understood. Tim's passion and enthusiasm is palpable.

In the course of the essay, Tim discusses politics and power demonstrated over the years in the integral community (for context, see his previous critique here of the "appalling" power and politics expressed in the past); the possible shift happening from an emphasis on masculine, vertical growth and UL quadrant to a more horizontal, feminine, LR quadrant embodiment; the nightly socializing, alternately described as "the flip side–the underworld dimension–of the more serious daytime activities," and as "this somewhat raucous den of sleep deprivation and uninhibited nocturnal dialogics" (apparently "masterminded" by me in Tim's story, but I would point to Trevor M!); highlighting the papers and presentations of Chris Dierkes and Eric Towle, with the comment that the feel of the conference was "closer to earth–more of the Subtle capacities that come from deep integration with our mytho-biological selves, personal and natural." And with a neo-shamanistic sensibility.

All of this, he says, seems to mark a generational shift from the initial "Boomer" wave of integrals to the 2nd generation of Gen Xers.

In a final important point before concluding, he writes, "The intensification of what is important in our field through the aesthetic act, is what amplifies the field. Art is not a nice-to-have extra in the emergence of an Integral world–it must lead the way. At the conference it very much did so."

His conclusion sounds a pattern of notes that has become a familiar motif in his writing and teaching, which resonates with me: "My agenda is to recommend that we stick with a commitment to nurturing the whole. The present process of collective integrative inquiry is what gave us the conditions for the wonderful blooming that was ITC. The emergence of this kind of space in the world is truly profound. It is a powerful act, and where there is power there will be politics. I’m recommending a commitment to an integrative ecosystemic generativity as how we move forward with our politics. What I mean by that is that a wholistic/systemic health–not evolution, nor any other principle–should be our central normative commitment. If we can build out horizontal health in our world, there is less likelihood that the ends can be used to justify the means–the means is the end. If we focus on increasing the more horizontal richness of connectivity and functionality in our communities, evolution will happen naturally."

Reply to Discussion

RSS

What paths lie ahead for religion and spirituality in the 21st Century? How might the insights of modernity and post-modernity impact and inform humanity's ancient wisdom traditions? How are we to enact, together, new spiritual visions – independently, or within our respective traditions – that can respond adequately to the challenges of our times?

This group is for anyone interested in exploring these questions and tracing out the horizons of an integral post-metaphysical spirituality.

Notice to Visitors

At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members.  We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join.  In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.

© 2024   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service