ITC 2015

[Balder]

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.

[Ambo Suno]

Pascal, I just got into your paper this morning and haven't finished it. There is so much in here - I think it is a great exposition! No surprise. And it should not be a surprise that much of what is in this whatthefucker bible-like treatise you have been unpacking on forums for a few years. I am glad I have been semi-prepped for it.

It is a nice surprise when I recognize that in some 'mysterious' way I have been expressing by form and content, in my own glitchy vernaculars of interaction, some of these principles and a sense of schemata of sets that you mention. Thank you, thank the in-betweennesses, the gaps, the mysteries, the life that allows for feeling some pleasure in recognition and resonance.

Here below I paste a couple of quotes that I enjoyed - among the numerous that could be highlighted:

"We can be cognitively redeemed by the principle of a hole in Metatheory . We build metatheory from this hole, out of this hole. We use the bricks of 'gaps'. Our mortar is incompleteness and mystery. [This is such an interesting way of visualizing the invisible and ephemeral.]" p.6

"This kind of conceptual fusion dissolves the need to complain that our integrative model is “just a good explanation” which must be counterbalanced by non­explanatory experience and other good explanations. Unless the basic exceptions to the meta­model are assumed to be included within the meta­model then it is NOT a meta­model (but merely 'a' model). Our attitude must be that it is only an integral metatheory if it is strengthened by every act of consciousness that compares potential alternative models . This concept is the ally and argument for a common heart that can be turned pragmatically upon the world." p.7

Wonderful bold stuff that feels very simpatico in me.

Layman Pascal said:

Here is my ITC 2015 Paper WHAT THE FUCK IS METATHEORY???

[Balder]

Hi, Ambo, thank you for your feedback.  I intend to go back and read the paper again myself, once I've let enough time pass that I can see it freshly; for now, I had to rush to finish it by the deadline without a lot of time to go back for editing, revision, etc.  But I'm not surprised -- in fact, I'm pleased -- that you find resonance in it with Pascal's work.  The paper is an outgrowth of several previous papers -- Opening Space for Translineage Practice, Sophia Speaks, and Integral Religious Pluralism -- but it also is intended as one angle on the views that we have been exploring and working out on this forum over the past couple years.  The emphasis on "co-presence" has not been much of a theme here, but the general integrative sensibility that underlies "pre-positional" thinking has been.

Regarding the wild knot image that appears at the end of the paper, I was pleased to hear from a friend (who is a monk) that he found the image to nicely mirror his own experience and understanding of the process of intermonastic dialogue.

Best wishes,

Bruce

[Balder]

On a general note about the conference, I heard this weekend that registration is running behind what was expected or needed -- even significantly so.  Perhaps the European Integral conference last year is a contributing factor.  Several workshops, including mine, are also in danger of being cancelled, if more folks don't sign up.

I also heard that Wilber has changed the theme of his presentation for Sunday morning.  He was going to talk about impact, but has changed the topic to integral postmetaphysical spirituality.  I'm interested to see what he'll have to say there.

Here is an interview of Mark Fabionar (by Jeremy Johnson) on the upcoming conference.

[DavidM58]

Bruce, I hope your workshop isn't cancelled - I'm looking forward to it! This is probably the only ITC conference I'll ever be able to attend, and I don't want anything cancelled. So c'mon folks, sign up for the conference and Bruce's cutting-edge, ground breaking workshop that will make the future of integral post-metaphysical spirituality tangible. 

[Balder]

Thank you, David!  I hope not, too.  We're close to having the requisite number ... just one or two more needed, I think.  An issue is that some free workshops are being offered, also, and those are attracting the most attendees (understandably).

[DavidM58]

OK, without further adieu, here's my paper. I've made a couple of small edits since the official submission, hence v. 1.2. There's at least one parallel with Bruce's paper, in which I briefly (but importantly) discuss the concept of polarity, referencing Morin's dialogic Method. 

The paper is narrower in scope than originally intended, in terms of the range of Patterns discussed. I have another half or 3/4 written paper that for some period I was thinking would be the one I would submit, in which I spend much more time on the various polarity patterns; then there would potentially be one or two additional papers focusing on Patterns that would be useful in discussing more detailed response options to energy descent (adaptation, creativity, complexity, etc.).

At some point I would also like to really delve into the use of subtle energies to offset the declining gross energies (note that I say "offset" and not "substitute"). 

[Balder]

Thank you for uploading this, David.  I will read it this weekend (together with LP's).

[Edward theurj Berge]

Thanks for posting the papers. I have other life priorities right now so can't spare the time and focus required to read and comment on them.

[Ambo Suno]

Hi David - I liked your paper a lot, and the truth is I was a little afraid I wouldn't be interested - I was surprised in a nice way this morning. I was worried my eyes would glaze over from one of my least natural inclinations towards economics and politics but your balance of addressing and continuing to refer back to basic energetic and root dynamics helped me touch in where my personal interests most easily light up. For my tastes, well done, brah.

It was good to get clearly that you are coming from the discipline of Pattern Dynamics that I have known, formally, almost nothing about. (As often, there is lot more to glean from this paper than my quick perusal imbibed.)

On this small-wave and high-tide morning, I chased some ripples on the ocean. Some of these undulations of vague peak and trough unpredictably coalesced with the complexities of other less visible and invisible wave components and sprung now and again to usable size for my surfboard and me to ride. Eehaw.

So sweet to have manifestation of the natural condition and phenomenon made somewhat palpable and knowable and enjoyable at a scale we can comfortably play with. Surfing is one sweet activity, and metaphor. When the summer rolls around to California some people feel the adjustment difficult as the quantity of wave energy lessens - the usual northwest swells peter out. The economic, energetic, expansionary/contactionary crises and mini-crises are on a scale and of a quality to worry us more complicatedly and more emotionally excoriatingly, eh.

I didn't notice you mention specifically any wild-hair factor in technological discovery where suddenly, doubtful at this point though it be, we might have relatively cheap or unlimited energy. Maybe I missed it. Maybe you left it out because it doesn't seem realistic. Maybe you don't wish to induce any more complacency than already is our collective lot. I wanted to just mention this.

I like your quotes and I paste several of them below. I nod my head to so much of this.

I hope my nattering here now in the coffee shop coheres sufficiently. Thanks for sharing this. Cool.

I look forward to meeting you at Sonoma State in a month.



The answer will be an integral answer only if we have approached the integral in ourselves (Gebser, 1985, p. 141)

Chaos in the mathematical sense is the property of large pulsing flows passing through small storages so that one pulse shoves the storage very high—which causes the outflow to be very large so that in the next interval of time the storage jumps to very low. Chaos in this sense really has nothing to do with disorder. Mathematical chaos produces exactly the same result each time you run it; it just looks random (personal communication from Mary Odum, April 30, 2015, quoting her father from a 1995 personal communication).16

All the great transformations or creations have been unthinkable until they come to pass...All the happy events of history have always been a priori impossible...[but this gives] no assurance. Life may accidentally meet death. The unthinkable will not necessarily come to pass. The improbable is not necessarily felicitous. The mole may destroy what ought to have been preserved. Rescue may be unequal to the peril.
The adventure remains unknown. The Planetary Era may possibly come to naught before it has even begun to bloom. Perhaps humankind’s struggles may lead only to death and ruin. However, the worst is not yet certain, and the game is not yet over. In the absence of any certainty or even probability, there is the possibility of a better world.
The task is huge and unassured. We cannot eschew either hope or despair. Both holding of and resignation from office seem equally impossible. We must have a ‘passionate patience.’ We stand on the threshold, not of the last, but of the early stages of the battle (Morin, 1999, pp. 148-149).




DavidM58 said:

OK, without further adieu, here's my paper. I've made a couple of small edits since the official submission, hence v. 1.2. There's at least one parallel with Bruce's paper, in which I briefly (but importantly) discuss the concept of polarity, referencing Morin's dialogic Method. 

The paper is narrower in scope than originally intended, in terms of the range of Patterns discussed. I have another half or 3/4 written paper that for some period I was thinking would be the one I would submit, in which I spend much more time on the various polarity patterns; then there would potentially be one or two additional papers focusing on Patterns that would be useful in discussing more detailed response options to energy descent (adaptation, creativity, complexity, etc.).

At some point I would also like to really delve into the use of subtle energies to offset the declining gross energies (note that I say "offset" and not "substitute"). 

[DavidM58]

Hi Ambo,

Thank you for reading my paper, and posting your comment here!

I really appreciate your sharing of the surfing metaphor, which demonstrates you grokked the paper. My wife tells me I should use more real world examples like this that people can more immediately relate to.

Regarding the "wild hair factor in technological discovery":

I very consciously wanted this paper to be about "basic energetic and root dynamics," as you put it; and NOT about trying to make a full argument for why I think peak oil and the resulting energy descent are issues to be concerned about...and then to defend against all the "But what about...?" questions.

These are legitimate questions, but those arguments have been going on in earnest for at least fifteen years, so there's a lot of info out there that is relatively easy to find. Stalne and Horn's paper for the Integral European Conference last year made the case for peak oil to the integral community, so I was happy to reference that paper. What I'm wanting is to be able to get to the bigger question, "Well, if that is true, then what?"

Even so, I feel my paper barely had the space to set up the context to be able to deal with this bigger question.

Although I fully expect the first reaction of many will be to think about why they think peak oil is not an issue, or why their favorite alternative will save the day, I'm hoping that we don't have to spend the entire discussion (which will go by very quickly) debating peak oil or technological solutions.  What I'm really hoping for is for people to be able to set aside for a moment their objections, and to consider for a few minutes the possibility that we may indeed experience energy descent, and to consider whether we (either personally or as an integral community or as a society) are up for the challenge of dealing with a scenario in which we are not saved by technology.

Again, that's not to say these are not legitimate, and even important questions. I'm preparing a page on my blog to support why I think "peak oil is not dead." I'll probably also prepare something to anticipate many of the objections that technology or other alternatives will save us.

Originally, I had a section near the beginning of the paper acknowledging my own limited perspective, how I might be wrong, etc., but that had to be cut in the interest of space.

I do have Appendix C which gives a short overview of the peak oil argument, and within that I quickly address objections/alternatives (pages 41-42):

"Among other sources, a survey of the last 10 years of World Energy Outlook reports from the International Energy Agency (MacLeod, 2014) leads me to believe that we will be moving off of the “undulating plateau” of the peak any time between now and 2020, beginning the downward slope of energy descent. Keep in mind that the Hirsch Report for the U.S. Dept. of Energy (2005) warned that a 10 to 20 year period of focused preparation before the peak would be needed to ensure a smooth transition away from the dependency our economy currently has on oil [in other words, any 'wild hair' technological discovery will need 10 to 20 years to be able to implement the infrastructure of the new energy alternative].  We no longer have that luxury of time, and will need to adapt quickly to big changes. Alternative sources of energy are not easily substitutable for oil, and there are many additional challenges associated with all current alternatives [my catch-all statement that I didn't have space to elaborate on]. One primary concern is the Energy Return on Investment (EROI), where we see dramatically lower returns for non-fossil energies (Hall, 2013). Since it takes energy to get energy, EROI evaluates systems for net energy gains (or losses).

Civilization requires a substantial energy return on investment. …A big problem we have facing the alternatives is they're all so low EROI. We'd all like to go toward renewable fuels, but it's not going to be easy at all. And it may be impossible. We may not be able to sustain our civilization on these alternative fuels. I hope we can, but we've got to deal with it realistically (C.A.S. Hall, quoted by Inman, 2013).

                Ted Trainer summed it up: “Renewable energy cannot sustain a consumer society” (2007).  For a review of the current and possible alternatives, see Heinberg’s essay Our Renewable Future (2015a), and be sure to follow all of the links."

Finally, one last comment: Suppose the wild hair technology, against all odds, becomes quickly available and quickly implementable, and "saves" us from energy descent. If so, I believe it would be a temporary reprieve. In my paper I place a fair amount of emphasis that economic and population growth is a problem. This growth has been made possible by cheap energy, and if we have more cheap energy it will be extremely difficult to find the wisdom to voluntarily curb economic and population growth. Since we live on a materially finite planet, this is a huge problem. It's not just peak oil, it's peak resources in many areas that will not allow for infinite expansion. So the new technology will need to be such that it allows for the colonization of other planets.

[Ambo Suno]

I follow your explanations about reasons for what you are addressing in the paper. Makes sense. I happen to like the proportion and degree of detail - it matches quite well with my sensibilities. Excellent. See you.



DavidM58 said:

Hi Ambo,

Thank you for reading my paper, and posting your comment here!

I really appreciate your sharing of the surfing metaphor, which demonstrates you grokked the paper. My wife tells me I should use more real world examples like this that people can more immediately relate to.

Regarding the "wild hair factor in technological discovery":

I very consciously wanted this paper to be about "basic energetic and root dynamics," as you put it; and NOT about trying to make a full argument for why I think peak oil and the resulting energy descent are issues to be concerned about...and then to defend against all the "But what about...?" questions.

These are legitimate questions, but those arguments have been going on in earnest for at least fifteen years, so there's a lot of info out there that is relatively easy to find. Stalne and Horn's paper for the Integral European Conference last year made the case for peak oil to the integral community, so I was happy to reference that paper. What I'm wanting is to be able to get to the bigger question, "Well, if that is true, then what?"

Even so, I feel my paper barely had the space to set up the context to be able to deal with this bigger question.

Although I fully expect the first reaction of many will be to think about why they think peak oil is not an issue, or why their favorite alternative will save the day, I'm hoping that we don't have to spend the entire discussion (which will go by very quickly) debating peak oil or technological solutions.  What I'm really hoping for is for people to be able to set aside for a moment their objections, and to consider for a few minutes the possibility that we may indeed experience energy descent, and to consider whether we (either personally or as an integral community or as a society) are up for the challenge of dealing with a scenario in which we are not saved by technology.

Again, that's not to say these are not legitimate, and even important questions. I'm preparing a page on my blog to support why I think "peak oil is not dead." I'll probably also prepare something to anticipate many of the objections that technology or other alternatives will save us.

Originally, I had a section near the beginning of the paper acknowledging my own limited perspective, how I might be wrong, etc., but that had to be cut in the interest of space.

I do have Appendix C which gives a short overview of the peak oil argument, and within that I quickly address objections/alternatives (pages 41-42):

"Among other sources, a survey of the last 10 years of World Energy Outlook reports from the International Energy Agency (MacLeod, 2014) leads me to believe that we will be moving off of the “undulating plateau” of the peak any time between now and 2020, beginning the downward slope of energy descent. Keep in mind that the Hirsch Report for the U.S. Dept. of Energy (2005) warned that a 10 to 20 year period of focused preparation before the peak would be needed to ensure a smooth transition away from the dependency our economy currently has on oil [in other words, any 'wild hair' technological discovery will need 10 to 20 years to be able to implement the infrastructure of the new energy alternative].  We no longer have that luxury of time, and will need to adapt quickly to big changes. Alternative sources of energy are not easily substitutable for oil, and there are many additional challenges associated with all current alternatives [my catch-all statement that I didn't have space to elaborate on]. One primary concern is the Energy Return on Investment (EROI), where we see dramatically lower returns for non-fossil energies (Hall, 2013). Since it takes energy to get energy, EROI evaluates systems for net energy gains (or losses).

Civilization requires a substantial energy return on investment. …A big problem we have facing the alternatives is they're all so low EROI. We'd all like to go toward renewable fuels, but it's not going to be easy at all. And it may be impossible. We may not be able to sustain our civilization on these alternative fuels. I hope we can, but we've got to deal with it realistically (C.A.S. Hall, quoted by Inman, 2013).

                Ted Trainer summed it up: “Renewable energy cannot sustain a consumer society” (2007).  For a review of the current and possible alternatives, see Heinberg’s essay Our Renewable Future (2015a), and be sure to follow all of the links."

Finally, one last comment: Suppose the wild hair technology, against all odds, becomes quickly available and quickly implementable, and "saves" us from energy descent. If so, I believe it would be a temporary reprieve. In my paper I place a fair amount of emphasis that economic and population growth is a problem. This growth has been made possible by cheap energy, and if we have more cheap energy it will be extremely difficult to find the wisdom to voluntarily curb economic and population growth. Since we live on a materially finite planet, this is a huge problem. It's not just peak oil, it's peak resources in many areas that will not allow for infinite expansion. So the new technology will need to be such that it allows for the colonization of other planets.

[Ambo Suno]

Hi David - I insert here a photo of the ocean close to shore on a small wave day. From this photo it appears to be mainly mid to short period waves, so a combo swell of mixed interval lengths, and also mixed directions. Scientific and systems-based forecasts look at so many factors, and still it is difficult to predict sometimes the quality and nature of waves for surfing.

In this photo, look at the main peak further out - one would want to ride one of the sloping corners heading right or left from there. Notice some mini peaks closer in. Why do peaks happen where they happen and to what extent can a surfer, through observation, knowledge, and inner computing and 'intuition' paddle in advance to that spot so as to benefit? Not just knowing right to left where to be, but how close in/far out.

The sea floor may be playing a significant role there where the earth rises and the water mounds up. It also relates, however, to wave and wave component size and directions - how the 186 degree 2' wave moving at 8'/second, interacts with the 198 degree 1' at 5 second and the 1' at 257 degrees at 15'/second, etc - and interact at this exact location here, and a foot next to that and a foot next to that, etc. Vaguely visible perhaps on the surface are lines but much is going under water and the inner formulation of all of it is far beyond complete knowing. There is wave amplification, neutralization/cancelation, and quirky local behaviors that surpass most of our precise surfer's grokery.

Today in another locale, as often, a wave line and peak would head towards me waiting and begin to shift quickly to the south so instead of being on the right shoulder going right, I might be on the left shoulder going left, or it could be missed all together. Of course, it might jack up because of coalescence of subwaves and sea bottom further out and crash on your head. Or it might pizzle out with a short period wave bulge that it merged with and you paddle like a wild man and still can't get over the sudden new bulge and can't be driven forward for a ride.

I choose this photo below partly because it shows smaller, less organized lines that hint at the complexities of wave convergence and divergence, and also because there is factor x kelp clumps that modulate and interfere with 'what might have been'. Forget for the moment, that your feet and leash and fin might get hung up in the kelp :)

This is just some of what is involved with fairly gross, mechanical forces (leave alone the subtleties of other systems, micro and macro, elsewhere). I hope I haven't gone on too long in what is obvious or trivial. Hah.

DavidM58 said:

Hi Ambo,

Thank you for reading my paper, and posting your comment here!

I really appreciate your sharing of the surfing metaphor, which demonstrates you grokked the paper. My wife tells me I should use more real world examples like this that people can more immediately relate to.