One of best ways that I've found to think about integral theory, is to
think of it as a series of typologies. After all, in integral
theory, we have:
a. States
b. Stages
c. Levels
d. Lines
e. Quadrants
But because so much is involved in the various TYPES of consciousness - this ends up being a static map.
And a lot of the further analysis is also based on types, or being static.
While there is nothing wrong with this - life occurs "in the flow", so to speak.
It's dynamic. It's process. The ongoing moment by moment now.
In that vein, I thought I would forward on this work on Towards an Integral Theory of Process Dynamics.
The metaphor mainly used is the tango.
Premise 1, It takes (at least) two
(of something) to tango, reminds us we cannot regard any individual or
system of any kind as isolated in its own orbit, but rather seek out
where the reciprocity dynamics are happening, and expect to find layers
of them, like ripple effect interactions. -
Premise 2, Whatever we don’t tango with directly (but could), we put
“out there,” has significant implications. It reminds us we need to
learn how to recognize projections, to keep an eye out for those that
get parked on Saturn, to be alert to look for and reclaim them, and
consider the conditions and potentials for projection dynamics in all
our human undertakings. It highlights projection because it seems
little-known or recognized outside the field of psychology, even though
it plays phenomenal roles wherever human beings are concerned. If this
premise gained traction, supportive human development methods that help
people and societies recognize and reclaim their projections, along
with the creation of healthier holding environments so fewer
projections develop, might become higher on social change agendas. -
Premise 3, There are limits to what we can tango with, and they
diminish as we develop, calls our attention to learning about and
applying some basic understandings of structural limits germane to
human and social functioning. The adult developmental psychology and
transformative learning fields, which are as instrumental in this
premise as complexity sciences, demonstrate their own limits in various
ways, yet they are some we need to keep referring to, developing
further, and integrating with other fields of research and practice. -
Premise 4, There are common dynamic processes involved in dancing the
tango, encourages us to learn how to adjust our zoom lenses
appropriately to look for and notice the dynamics going on all the
time. It encourages us to decenter our attention enough to notice
fractal patterns that can help us transfer our learning about how
things work in black boxes at many human scales. It gives us some ways
to start noticing our own “inner” dynamics, which can help us discover
our own projections, assumptions, etc. This premise can help us make
sense of how these dynamics affect what we want to learn, understand,
or support, because the processes are what comprises whatever we
consider our focus. Nothing is standing still inside the black boxes. -
Premise 5, Something new emerges from each and every tango, emphasizes
the massive co-creative learning laboratories in which, with which, and
as which we exist. It reminds us we need to find ways to identify and
consider the complex range of environments interacting and/or coupled
with anything we study. It challenges us to take a dynamic,
processually-integrated approach to all phenomena, because all
phenomena are dynamic processes in an ongoing pattern of co-creative
evolution.
Now, this particular article is lacking in terms of depth. But
processes, vibrations, energies - the timeless now is never still, but
always flowing, breathing, expanding and contracting.
Has anyone seen any other pointers to a "process-oriented" integral?
|
|
||||||||
|
This Month
Recent Articles
Integral Views
Month Archive
Recent Photos
|
Taking the Integral Typology and Making It Dynamic
Comments
No comments found.
Trackbacks
TrackBack URL: |
|||||||
|
|
||||||||