.jpg)
Please Log in to Vote.
8 out of 8 members found this useful.
Chapter 7 - A Miracle Called "We"
Contributor: Ken Wilber 
So important is the distinction between individual and collective that Ken Wilber recognizes it as one of the most fundamental of all (together with the interior/exterior distinction), thus resulting in the four quadrants. Wilber contends that you can’t have singular without plural; nor can you have exterior without interior. The quadrants are correlative dimensions of the same thing; in the Lower-Left quadrant, we approach the interior, collective dimension of reality.
It’s not a stretch to see something miraculous in our evolution—our dizzying trajectory—since matter was scattered into space 14 billion years ago. Along the way, matter emerged, seemingly from nothing; then, life emerged from matter; then, life became conscious of itself. But beyond these, perhaps the deepest miracle is that we have found one another.
The relationship of individual holons to social holons has been the source of no end of confusion, one of a dozen or so major, recalcitrant issues that thinkers have been grappling with for millennia. The notion that reality is composed of holonic sequences is appealing; there is, for example, a self-evident quality to the sequence: atoms to molecules to cells to organs to organisms.
But if we attempt to posit a single, grand holarchy that is central to the universe, we begin to run into problems. Consider what happens, for instance, if we add—as is done in a popular version—families, communities, nations, species, ecosystems, biosphere, and universe to the above holarchy. The implications is that ecosystems cannot emerge until nations have! Initially, the sequence holds, but the problem occurs as soon as we attempt to jump from an individual holon (e.g. organism) to a social holon (e.g. families) in the same sequence.
So important is this distinction that Ken Wilber recognizes it as one of the most fundamental of all (together with the interior/exterior distinction), thus resulting in the four quadrants. Wilber contends that you can’t have singular without plural; nor can you have exterior without interior. The quadrants are correlative dimensions of the same thing; in the Lower-Left quadrant, we approach the interior, collective dimension of reality.
This allows us to make some important conclusions. Once we allow that societies are not made from organisms in the same way that organisms are made from cells, once we understand that the “we” is not a “Super-I,” we can observe that, while an individual holon has a dominant monad, a social holon has a dominant mode of discourse. Where individuals go through mandatory stages, social holons do not.
We can further examine the “we” by looking from the outside (3rd-person) and the inside (1st-person). This provides us with the “look” and the “feel” of the We. The look of a we is described by zone-#4 methodologies such as semiotics, and the feel of a we is described by zone-#3 methodologies such as hermeneutics.
Ken introduces the "Miracle Called 'We'" conference call. The Great Chain of Being, thought to be the core of the world's religious traditions, posits a holarchical view which starts to break down when jumping from "I" to "super-I." But AQAL, which makes the crucial distinction between the individual and the collective, demonstrates that everything in reality has four aspects, including the interior of the collective, the mysterious and miraculous "We" space in which we come into mutual resonance with one another.
Keith Witt points out that it is skillful means to begin spiritual discussions by pointing out how someone's favorite methodology and zone naturally leads to God. This makes the other methodologies seem less threatening. But while this works well with orange, green, and even red, it does not seem to be effective with amber. So, how to converse with someone with turquoise cognition and an amber worldview, regarding Integral spirituality and I/we/it interfaces to Spirt?
If the four quadrants give a snapshot of a holon at any given moment, asks Erich Gerl, how can we begin to look at holons in terms of progression through time? What beautiful thing happens between the transition from a lower "we" to a higher "we?" Is it Eros? What is Eros other than a We with a monad in motion?
Liz Stevenson, discusses intentional communities with Ken. If there is no dominant monad, how exactly do groups develop, and what is the relationship between the level of the group and the level of its participants? With respect to the sex-positive movement (at a green level of development), how can it be integrated into the Integral movement?
Brit Miller asks what skillful means exist to have a "We" in the company of mixed altitudes? Taking, as an example, the failure of green to adequately convey environmental concerns in terms that impact other altitudes, how can we proceed differently from Integral? Also, is there an integral approach to communication with the mentally ill?
Dennis Wittrock asks whether there are structural preconditions for the enacting of certain zones, whether zones unfold with respect to increasing cognitive development, whether certain zones were even available at earlier times in history, and whether there are "premodern," "modern," and "postmodern" zones.
Default Series:
Contribute
Blog Posts
In this talk Ken explains that in addition to individuals; cultures, groups, and... (more)
10 Comments
External Links