Is meta-theory necessary to an integral life? - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T12:16:33Zhttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/is-meta-theory-necessary-to-an-integral-life?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A66147&feed=yes&xn_auth=noIt is a common tenet in devel…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-03-03:5301756:Comment:755622019-03-03T16:49:26.495ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g" style="font-family: inherit;">It is a common tenet in developmental models that one must frame an issue to…</span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g" style="font-family: inherit;">It is a common tenet in developmental models that one must frame an issue to the target audience that one intends to influence. Hence just throwing the AQAL model at people does not in itself connect with and/or influence them to change, often to the contrary. This is also something Cambridge Analytica (CA) and Russian spies are well familiar with, framing very specific messages for very specific target audiences right here on Facebook, and their effectiveness in the 2016 election was apparent.<br/><br/>Going back to my comments above about my blog, I have learned from the above and decided to frame messages in a way that target two key demographics that statistically decided the last election: 1) those well meaning working folks who voted for Dump, not racist or hateful generally, who rightfully feel they're getting a raw economic deal from a rigged system, and; 2) those progressives who fell prey to the Cambridge Analytica and Russian frame machine and chose to vote not for Clinton but a 3rd Party, or not to vote at all. <br/><br/>I think so-called mean green framing works in both cases, in that it shames the first demo because given what they're learning about Dump they realize they were fooled and are ashamed to be further identified with him. The second demo are shamed into realizing that indeed Dump is far, far worse that Clinton ever would have been, even given her own negatives. Polls are showing both demos are now shifting back toward authentic, progressive candidates and away from Dump. The last election adds weight to this claim.<br/><br/>So if one wants to categorize me as mean green given my conscious strategy of winning elections for the betterment of everyone, have at it. What someone claiming to be integral thinks of me is irrelevant in this literal battle for democracy, itself a prerequisite for providing the necessary foundation from which to launch the collaborative commons, itself necessary to move people along the network of development.<br/><br/>PS: See my paper "<a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/from-capitalism-to-the-collaborative-commons" target="_blank" rel="noopener">From capitalism to the collaborative commons</a>" for more. Yes, a shameless plug, you know, 'integral' marketing.</span></span></span></p>
<p></p> The Stein study unequivocally…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-03-03:5301756:Comment:752812019-03-03T16:48:50.970ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="UFICommentBody" style="font-family: inherit;">The…</span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="UFICommentBody" style="font-family: inherit;">The <a href="http://www.zakstein.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2010_0718JFKUreport.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2pTFaTEGTaG1FntSP3nwTofnKAxsD57LxQ5fF5SUp--aEs6D0vW4-_0p4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stein study</a> unequivocally answers my inquiry in the initial post. It was done with JFKU graduate students in the integral studies program. Just knowing the AQAL model does not in any way jump one to postformal (or so-called integral) cognition, as one's prejudices are carried into the study of AQAL.</span></span></span></p>
<p>As I note in this thread all of that complex metatheory is not necessary to enact a so-called integral perspective. My main concern at this point is trying to enact a socioeconomic system that provides the base from which people can develop to their higher needs and cognitions. <br/><br/>And that starts not with meta-theory but with working with what we got politically, which requires using whatever means work best to effect that change. Intellectual meta-theory, IMO, doesn't do the trick. Yeah, it might have some effect on shifting the intellectual community toward a more comprehensive view, which might or not eventually 'trickle-down' into political enaction. But we probably don't have time to wait for that.</p>
<p><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g" style="font-family: inherit;">Along these lines, I often get 'integral' criticism that my blog is simplistic, that it doesn't build complex arguments, etc. Hence I'm not displaying integral cognition. Maybe even being mean and green.<br/><br/>My blog's purpose is not to provide complex arguments. Such arguments do not win the heart of the average voter but in fact repel them. My blog's purpose is to use the framing necessary to effect voting behavior. While such framing can be rationalized in complex terms, the actual practice is really quite simple and requires simple, emotional framing. Use what works to reach your target demo. The smart, caring people are already voting for scientific climate policy and don't need my convincing.</span></span></span></p>
<p></p> I'm reminding the forum of th…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-02-27:5301756:Comment:755612019-02-27T16:16:31.385ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><span style="display: inline !important; float: none; background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">I'm reminding the forum of this thread, as it seems that often one is considered…</span></p>
<p><span style="display: inline !important; float: none; background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">I'm reminding the forum of this thread, as it seems that often one is considered 'integral' if they engage in AQAL or some other metatheory. And if one doesn't engage such theory they are often considered not so integral.</span></p> More from the Stein study a f…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2017-09-05:5301756:Comment:699192017-09-05T16:35:57.998ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>More from the Stein study a few posts up (<span class="timestamp">July 1, 2017 at 9:12am</span>), which unequivocally answers my inquiry in the initial post. Recall this study was with JFKU graduate students in the integral studies program, not your run of the mill online troll.</p>
<p><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span>Note the chart on p. 5 of the l</span></span><span><span><span>evels, then the chart on p. 10 on the range of interpretations of the AQAL model…</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p>More from the Stein study a few posts up (<span class="timestamp">July 1, 2017 at 9:12am</span>), which unequivocally answers my inquiry in the initial post. Recall this study was with JFKU graduate students in the integral studies program, not your run of the mill online troll.</p>
<p><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span>Note the chart on p. 5 of the l</span></span><span><span><span>evels, then the chart on p. 10 on the range of interpretations of the AQAL model in stages 10 through 13 (aka formal, systematic, meta-systematic, paradigmatic; or orange, green, teal, turquoise). The notion of a 'center of gravity' for levels is, irony of all ironies, GREEN relativism! And typical sophomoric interpretations of quadrants and levels are ORANGE! Just knowing the AQAL model does not in any way jump one to postformal (or so-called integral) cognition, as one's prejudices are carried into the study of AQAL.<br/></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p> Fischer's "constructive web"…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2017-07-03:5301756:Comment:691062017-07-03T14:40:30.322ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>Fischer's "constructive web" and inhibitory-control theory's "overlapping waves within a dynamic system" remind me quite a bit of image schema and Edwards' various lenses, how they relate and interact. It seems the strict ladder of stages metaphor is not apt to handle such interactivity. The reality is that we are a hot mesh.</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>Fischer's "constructive web" and inhibitory-control theory's "overlapping waves within a dynamic system" remind me quite a bit of image schema and Edwards' various lenses, how they relate and interact. It seems the strict ladder of stages metaphor is not apt to handle such interactivity. The reality is that we are a hot mesh.</span></span></span></span></span></p> Also see this article on the…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2017-07-02:5301756:Comment:689042017-07-02T20:17:47.931ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Also see <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369641/" target="_blank">this</a> article on the inhibitory-control theory, which has in common with Fischer's dynamic skill theory the italicized text in the following quote:</p>
<p>"<span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>Piaget underestimated the rich precocious logical knowledge already present in infants and young children, and he overestimated the logical abilities of older children, adolescents and adults,…</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p>Also see <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369641/" target="_blank">this</a> article on the inhibitory-control theory, which has in common with Fischer's dynamic skill theory the italicized text in the following quote:</p>
<p>"<span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>Piaget underestimated the rich precocious logical knowledge already present in infants and young children, and he overestimated the logical abilities of older children, adolescents and adults, who commit systematic errors even in very simple logical tasks (Houdé, 2000; Kahneman, 2011). These logical errors usually occur when older children, adolescents and adults rely on prepotent responses, illogical intuitions, or misleading strategies (such as heuristics) rather than on logical algorithms. Importantly, the ability to overcome those errors is directly related to the ability to inhibit these intuitive forms of thinking (Houdé, 2000; Kahneman, 2011; Houdé and Borst, 2014). Consequently, today the discrete Piagetian stages theory is replaced by an approach of cognitive development which is analogous to <em>overlapping waves within a non-linear dynamic system</em> (Siegler, 1999). In such a system, at any point in time and at any age, different strategies with different degrees of complexity and sophistication might be in conflict in the brain. According to this theoretical framework, the progressive ability of the prefrontal cortex to inhibit irrelevant or misleading strategies to activate the most logical one sustains the conceptual development of children and the shift from one Piagetian stage to the next (Houdé and Borst, 2014). This constitutes the central assumption of our new neo-Piagetian theory of reasoning development."</span></span></span></span></span></p> Do stages belong at the cente…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2017-07-02:5301756:Comment:691052017-07-02T20:03:19.522ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Do stages belong at the center of developmental theory? Good <a href="https://dts.lectica.org/PDF/StagesCenter.pdf">2004 article</a> with that name by Dawson, Fischer and Stein. Some excerpts:<br></br> <br></br> <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>"We argue that placing stages at the center of Piaget’s developmental theory</span> <span>undermines its coherence by displacing the central theoretical constructs that give rise to a concept of stages. Stages should be a vehicle for…</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p>Do stages belong at the center of developmental theory? Good <a href="https://dts.lectica.org/PDF/StagesCenter.pdf">2004 article</a> with that name by Dawson, Fischer and Stein. Some excerpts:<br/> <br/> <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>"We argue that placing stages at the center of Piaget’s developmental theory</span> <span>undermines its coherence by displacing the central theoretical constructs that give rise to a concept of stages. Stages should be a vehicle for analysis, not a core process at the heart of the theory of development" (256).</span><br/><br/> <span>"[W]e certainly value Piaget’s stage theory. However, we strongly</span> <span>question whether his stages can justifiably be placed at the center of his theory. In fact, Feldman himself briefly acknowledges that some Piagetian scholars consider stages of cognitive development to be ancillary to Piaget’s central theoretical claims. However, he fails to adequately consider their justifications for taking this position, neglecting even Piaget’s own claim that his stages were a heuristic device rather than a central component of his theory" (258).</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p></p> Thanks for sharing Edwyrd. Ve…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2017-07-01:5301756:Comment:690022017-07-01T18:04:06.048ZDavidM58https://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/DavidM58
<p>Thanks for sharing Edwyrd. Very interesting quotes you pulled out.</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing Edwyrd. Very interesting quotes you pulled out.</p> And speaking of the Mascolo a…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2017-07-01:5301756:Comment:691042017-07-01T15:17:34.283ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>And speaking of the Mascolo article linked in the last post, this is from <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span>p. 6 discussing Fischer's dynamic skill theory:</span> <br></br><br></br><span>"It follows that individuals never operate at any single level of development. Instead, they operate within a developmental range – a series of levels that vary with task,</span></span> <span><span><span>domain, context, emotional state, and so forth. Given such dynamic variation,…</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p>And speaking of the Mascolo article linked in the last post, this is from <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span>p. 6 discussing Fischer's dynamic skill theory:</span> <br/><br/><span>"It follows that individuals never operate at any single level of development. Instead, they operate within a developmental range – a series of levels that vary with task,</span></span> <span><span><span>domain, context, emotional state, and so forth. Given such dynamic variation, there can be no broad-based stages of development. It is thus not helpful to think of a person or a person’s abilities as being 'in a stage' of development. Development does not move through a series of fixed steps; development operates more like a constructive Web."</span><br/><br/><span>If so for an individual, how less so for an entire culture?</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span>And this from p. 9, which reminds me there is no sky hook, even if it is a nebulous morphogenetic gradient. And that there is no predetermined way for everyone to develop along a single pathway or by following a single metatheoretical model. To paraphr</span></span><span><span><span>ase an old but accurate adage: the metamap is not the territory. Helpful, but when you walk it there will be ideosyncratic variations not seen the the map. And in the case of human development, just knowing the map doesn't substitute for, or help with, actually working the skill tasks.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span><span><span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody _1n4g"><span><span><br/><span>"Psychological structures self-organize in both real and developmental time. To say that they self-organize implies that there is no single, fixed or isolated genetic, psychological or sociocultural plan that directs the course of development. The pathways of development are neither fixed nor predetermined. Instead, they emerge over time as a product of richly interactive person – environment interactions. Novel skills coevolve with the formation of novel forms of cultural life. Rather than thinking of development in terms of fixed pathways, it is better to think of developmental pathways themselves as emergent outcomes. That is, while we sometimes walk along pathways that have already been paved for us, in development, we typically forge our own unique paths as we walk."</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p></p> Getting back to the topic of…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2017-07-01:5301756:Comment:688022017-07-01T15:12:58.077ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Getting back to the topic of this thread, Zak Stein did a <a href="http://www.zakstein.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2010_0718JFKUreport.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">measurement study</a> of how JFK graduate students in integral theory and practice programs thought about AQAL. <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>This from p. 8 is interesting: "Also examined was the relation between Integral Life Practice and Lectical Level. Level scores were neither correlated with…</span></span></span></span></span></p>
<p>Getting back to the topic of this thread, Zak Stein did a <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.zakstein.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2010_0718JFKUreport.pdf" target="_blank">measurement study</a> of how JFK graduate students in integral theory and practice programs thought about AQAL. <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>This from p. 8 is interesting: "Also examined was the relation between Integral Life Practice and Lectical Level. Level scores were neither correlated with with any meditative, body, or shadow practices, nor the number of Ken Wilber books read."</span></span></span></span></span> <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>The following indicates that knowing the model itself does not generate higher order understanding. E.g., from p. 15: "There are clear developmental differences in the ways in which individuals in this sample understand integral theory and practice." <span><span><span><span class="UFICommentBody"><span>And akin to the <a href="https://www.academia.edu/27442379/Neo-Piagetian_Theories_of_Cognitive_Development_Mascolo_2015_International_Encyclopedia_of_Social_and_Behavioral_Sciences_2nd_Edition_Major_Reference_Works_Elsevier_" target="_blank">Mascolo article</a>, one area of the study was significant: Those who stereotype individuals, or worse cultures, within a particular level or color is antithetical to higher cognitive complexity, and if fact inhibits it (18).</span></span></span></span></span><br/></span></span></span></span></span></p>