WHAT ---> HOW : A Look at Paired Subphases of the Evolutionary Spiral - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-28T19:47:48Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/what-how-a-look-at-paired-subphases-of-the-evolutionary-spiral?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A51080&xg_source=msg_com_forum&feed=yes&xn_auth=noThere does seem to be a sense…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-25:5301756:Comment:513702013-08-25T01:37:09.398ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>There does seem to be a sense in which some theorists are looking to see WHAT regular patterns exceed linear description, while other (often more philosophic thinkers) want to see those types of patterns as restricted instances of the general WAY in which complex processes have their being. </p>
<p>Deacon (mentioned in my previous comment) would point out that the initial equilibrium condition is actually already engaged in a form of asymmetric work which are counting as "zero" because it is…</p>
<p>There does seem to be a sense in which some theorists are looking to see WHAT regular patterns exceed linear description, while other (often more philosophic thinkers) want to see those types of patterns as restricted instances of the general WAY in which complex processes have their being. </p>
<p>Deacon (mentioned in my previous comment) would point out that the initial equilibrium condition is actually already engaged in a form of asymmetric work which are counting as "zero" because it is relatively stable and available to be influenced by an external form of work. There seems to a parallel between anticipating the same "what" of the fractal repetition & neglecting how the initial system is operating prior to the thermodynamic or morphodynamic process we are screening for. </p>
<p>Self-similarity, of course, can only go up to the maximal limit posed by the mutuality of sameness and difference. That is often ignored in favor of WHAT (appears to be) equal to itself. <br/> <br/> <cite>theurj said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/what-how-a-look-at-paired-subphases-of-the-evolutionary-spiral?page=1&commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A51288&x=1#5301756Comment51082"><div class="xg_user_generated"><p></p>
<p>In the pomo/complexity and real/false reason threads complexity was differentiated between restricted and general varieties. This includes fractal chaos in the former variety, which it seems Ross is using. In the quotes fractals go from "self-similar" patterns to "exactly the same way." As I've explained elsewhere, actual fractals are themselves non-linear and while each iteration is similar it is also different, so not nested in "exactly the same way."* Not just the <em>what</em> of the content is behaving in a non-linear fashion but so is the math itself iterating non-linearly. While Ross wants a non-linear math to explain this process, i.e. the fractals and attractors of dynamic systems, she is still using the more restricted varieties of Bertalanffy and Mandelbrot instead of the more general versions of Prigogine and Cilliars (and DeLanda and Deleuze).</p>
<p>* Hence those pretty and symmetrical computer-generated pictures of fractals using formal bifurcations. Real fractals generate a self-similar yet novel iteration at each temporary equilibrium.</p>
</div>
</blockquote> The missing description might…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-25:5301756:Comment:510852013-08-25T01:23:05.517ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>The missing description might be generally provided in Deacon's recent book "Incomplete Nature". At the very least it addresses it to thinking through this issue:<br></br> <br></br> <cite>theurj said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/what-how-a-look-at-paired-subphases-of-the-evolutionary-spiral?page=1&commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A51288&x=1#5301756Comment51367"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>How about…</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>The missing description might be generally provided in Deacon's recent book "Incomplete Nature". At the very least it addresses it to thinking through this issue:<br/> <br/> <cite>theurj said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/what-how-a-look-at-paired-subphases-of-the-evolutionary-spiral?page=1&commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A51288&x=1#5301756Comment51367"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>How about <a href="http://adultdevelopment.org/Ross2012.pdf" target="_blank">this article</a>, which takes the MHC's inter-level transitional phases and adds fractal sub-phases?</p>
<p>"Currently, MHC explains <em>that</em> discrete orders of hierarchical complexity are constructed by coordinating lower order actions, but does not yet explain the <em>how</em> of those coordinations. Those coordinating actions are discrete for measurement purposes yet occur during continuous living system behaviors. Thus, the MHC does not yet describe transitional orders of complexity. Consequently, no formal theory yet accounts for the continuity of actions’ emergence comprising behavioral development" (7).</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> See this post for a critique…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-23:5301756:Comment:512882013-08-23T13:41:02.796ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>See <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/complexity-and-postmodernism?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A40017" target="_self">this post</a> for a critique of Mandelbrot's kind of complexity. And <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/complexity-and-postmodernism?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A39777" target="_self">this one</a> with Morin discussing the two varieties. From the latter:</p>
<p>"Restricted complexity refers mainly to the mathematical…</p>
<p>See <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/complexity-and-postmodernism?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A40017" target="_self">this post</a> for a critique of Mandelbrot's kind of complexity. And <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/complexity-and-postmodernism?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A39777" target="_self">this one</a> with Morin discussing the two varieties. From the latter:</p>
<p>"Restricted complexity refers mainly to the mathematical and computational approaches to complexity, often strongly informed by chaos theory. This approach, Morin argues, acknowledges the non-linear, relational nature of complex systems, but seeks to tame it in ways which reintroduces positivism and reductionism. General complexity on the other hand, argues for the limits of all approaches to complex systems and urges that we acknowledge these limits and recognise that we need a new language in which to do this, a language which moves beyond Enlightenment ideals of neutrality and objectivity."</p> If you read Ross' paper perha…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-23:5301756:Comment:510822013-08-23T13:22:18.323ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>If you read Ross' paper perhaps you can help me decipher it. For example, these two sets of statements:</p>
<p>"Fractal means the repetition of self-similar patterns at different scales" (7).</p>
<p>"Every transition begins with some temporary equilibrium (A), regardless of when or where a transition occurs. This means transitions nested within transitions are ordered in exactly the same way" (8).</p>
<p>In the pomo/complexity and real/false reason threads complexity was differentiated…</p>
<p>If you read Ross' paper perhaps you can help me decipher it. For example, these two sets of statements:</p>
<p>"Fractal means the repetition of self-similar patterns at different scales" (7).</p>
<p>"Every transition begins with some temporary equilibrium (A), regardless of when or where a transition occurs. This means transitions nested within transitions are ordered in exactly the same way" (8).</p>
<p>In the pomo/complexity and real/false reason threads complexity was differentiated between restricted and general varieties. This includes fractal chaos in the former variety, which it seems Ross is using. In the quotes fractals go from "self-similar" patterns to "exactly the same way." As I've explained elsewhere, actual fractals are themselves non-linear and while each iteration is similar it is also different, so not nested in "exactly the same way."* Not just the <em>what</em> of the content is behaving in a non-linear fashion but so is the math itself iterating non-linearly. While Ross wants a non-linear math to explain this process, i.e. the fractals and attractors of dynamic systems, she is still using the more restricted varieties of Bertalanffy and Mandelbrot instead of the more general versions of Prigogine and Cilliars (and DeLanda and Deleuze).</p>
<p>* Hence those pretty and symmetrical computer-generated pictures of fractals using formal bifurcations. Real fractals generate a self-similar yet novel iteration at each temporary equilibrium.</p> How about this article, which…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-22:5301756:Comment:513672013-08-22T21:10:09.434ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>How about <a href="http://adultdevelopment.org/Ross2012.pdf" target="_blank">this article</a>, which takes the MHC's inter-level transitional phases and adds fractal sub-phases?</p>
<p>"Currently, MHC explains <em>that</em> discrete orders of hierarchical complexity are constructed by coordinating lower order actions, but does not yet explain the <em>how</em> of those coordinations. Those coordinating actions are discrete for measurement purposes yet occur during continuous living system…</p>
<p>How about <a href="http://adultdevelopment.org/Ross2012.pdf" target="_blank">this article</a>, which takes the MHC's inter-level transitional phases and adds fractal sub-phases?</p>
<p>"Currently, MHC explains <em>that</em> discrete orders of hierarchical complexity are constructed by coordinating lower order actions, but does not yet explain the <em>how</em> of those coordinations. Those coordinating actions are discrete for measurement purposes yet occur during continuous living system behaviors. Thus, the MHC does not yet describe transitional orders of complexity. Consequently, no formal theory yet accounts for the continuity of actions’ emergence comprising behavioral development" (7).</p> The five Gravesian change-sub…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-22:5301756:Comment:513662013-08-22T16:23:18.473ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>The five Gravesian change-subphases are closer here than the Wilber fulcrum stages. However these 5 could also be said to apply to each paired-level or each sub-level singularly. It they are taken as describing transition between pair-levels then, for example, the HOW phase of one level would be fleshed out to the point where it established an <em>alpha</em> of balance and homeostasis. Then its own functional self-awareness would begin revealing <em>beta</em> points of contraction and…</p>
<p>The five Gravesian change-subphases are closer here than the Wilber fulcrum stages. However these 5 could also be said to apply to each paired-level or each sub-level singularly. It they are taken as describing transition between pair-levels then, for example, the HOW phase of one level would be fleshed out to the point where it established an <em>alpha</em> of balance and homeostasis. Then its own functional self-awareness would begin revealing <em>beta</em> points of contraction and inadequacy in the way things are being accomplished. At <em>gamma</em> these points achieve parity with the current HOW-mind and a evolutionary struggle and confusion ensues. The struggle is overcome by a energetic orientation toward the new generalized WHAT attractors which solidify. Then be assimilating these, opening them up until their HOW starts to appear, a new <em>alpha</em> is established.</p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/what-how-a-look-at-paired-subphases-of-the-evolutionary-spiral?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A51080&xg_source=msg_com_forum#5301756Comment51080"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> What first came to my mind wa…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-22:5301756:Comment:510812013-08-22T16:16:12.322ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>What first came to my mind was Timothy Leary's 24 subphase model... in which each of his "eight evolutionary neurogenetic circuits" was subdivided into an input, processing & output stage based on the behaviour of neurons themselves. Wilber's three subphases are distinct from that. Beginning in fusion, moving to differentiation then passing to integration. These describe transitions between levels. They would therefore apply to any of the pair-phases or single sub-phases described in my…</p>
<p>What first came to my mind was Timothy Leary's 24 subphase model... in which each of his "eight evolutionary neurogenetic circuits" was subdivided into an input, processing & output stage based on the behaviour of neurons themselves. Wilber's three subphases are distinct from that. Beginning in fusion, moving to differentiation then passing to integration. These describe transitions between levels. They would therefore apply to any of the pair-phases or single sub-phases described in my WHAT>HOW picture. Neither the WHAT nor the HOW corresponds directly to any of the 123 movements which accompany a fulcrum shift. Or, more broadly, we could say that they describe a general movement which is occurring all the way through.</p> And how about this from the S…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-22:5301756:Comment:510802013-08-22T12:50:22.277ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>And how about this from the <a href="https://spiraldynamics.org/change/" target="_blank">Spiral Dynamics FAQ</a>:</p>
<p>"Very simply, the Gravesian change model is a five-phase process: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and on to a new Alpha. The Alpha state is a time of balance and homeostasis. Helix 1 and Helix 2 are aligned. Beta is the point of doubt and anxiety with dissonance present in the field – something is wrong, but what and why are still unclear. At Gamma the apparent problems become…</p>
<p>And how about this from the <a href="https://spiraldynamics.org/change/" target="_blank">Spiral Dynamics FAQ</a>:</p>
<p>"Very simply, the Gravesian change model is a five-phase process: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and on to a new Alpha. The Alpha state is a time of balance and homeostasis. Helix 1 and Helix 2 are aligned. Beta is the point of doubt and anxiety with dissonance present in the field – something is wrong, but what and why are still unclear. At Gamma the apparent problems become clear, but solutions are elusive because the barriers feel insurmountable. External barriers get the blame though it’s often internal barriers which often stop movement. There is often anger and acting out, either inward or outward. With Delta there is a surge through the barriers with insight into alternatives and new ways of functioning which can restore balance. With consolidation and enough support, delta is followed by a next Alpha and a return to a stable state in a new Gravesian level."</p>
<p></p> Compare and contrast your sub…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-21:5301756:Comment:512812013-08-21T20:49:56.261ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Compare and contrast your sub-phases with Wilber's notion (from <a href="http://integrallife.com/glossary" target="_blank">this link</a>):</p>
<p>fulcrum: A developmental milestone within the self-identity stream, or the proximate-self line of development. Fulcrums follow a general 1-2-3 process: fusion or identification with one’s current level of self-development; differentiation or disidentification from that level; and integration of the new level with the previous level.</p>
<p>Compare and contrast your sub-phases with Wilber's notion (from <a href="http://integrallife.com/glossary" target="_blank">this link</a>):</p>
<p>fulcrum: A developmental milestone within the self-identity stream, or the proximate-self line of development. Fulcrums follow a general 1-2-3 process: fusion or identification with one’s current level of self-development; differentiation or disidentification from that level; and integration of the new level with the previous level.</p> Yes, the choice of the number…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-08-21:5301756:Comment:510772013-08-21T18:17:58.498ZLayman Pascalhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/LaymanPascal
<p>Yes, the choice of the number of descriptive phases is often somewhat arbitrary. If we confine ourselves to "human history thus far" then it seems like 6 subphases (dividing pre-modern, modern & post-modern) are a reasonably workable number. Three is convenient for casual discussion and 8-12 gets real technical, real quick. two other advantage accompany this approach. first, it makes clear that superficial forms are not antagonists to depth forms... since they are paired twins. second it…</p>
<p>Yes, the choice of the number of descriptive phases is often somewhat arbitrary. If we confine ourselves to "human history thus far" then it seems like 6 subphases (dividing pre-modern, modern & post-modern) are a reasonably workable number. Three is convenient for casual discussion and 8-12 gets real technical, real quick. two other advantage accompany this approach. first, it makes clear that superficial forms are not antagonists to depth forms... since they are paired twins. second it explains curious phenomenon like the very non-global, non-humanitarian stances taken by putative orange modernists etc.</p>