Evolving Brains in Quadrants - A 3-D model of Integral?

I looked at the picture and skimmed the article the best I could. I have a few questions:

Here's an example of someone having "an experience". I've watched him tell this story several times, this is the shortest version I can find. From skimming your paper, it looks like it was a 3rd Tier State experience altho I can't quite believe he is there as a Stage. Hearing him talk in his other videos, he also seems to commonly describe his thots and feelings as objects that "he" looks at but he does understand the content. He emotes more directly now since he endured several months of imprisonment for various media stupidness. 

Here is a drawing I copied from one I saw him do on a video (it may not show up). Does this correspond to your section near the end on States of Consciousness?

I predict you're gonna have a rough time selling the idea that sex is the main Type difference and that Males and Females develop different Lines of Intelligence based on those Types. Have you considered that your own Orange expression is going to see this and necessarily filter out other options? 

In the diagram, you say the gray parts are "unconscious" but that wouldn't be right in the early development, right? Higher brain functions are not "unconscious" during early brain development, they simply don't exist yet or they are not available or controllable yet (it would be interesting to talk to Sperry Andrews about this, however...). The unconscious is usually used to designate stuff that used to be conscious or has been pre-conscious such as involuntary and somatic functions and is now not available to the conscious mind without some kind of intervention. 

It's cool that you used the "Witch" Archetype in describing the MB stuff, since I studied that, because that shows me what kind of integrating work I did. It's hard to get anyone to talk about that stuff. In your diagram of 1st Tier, Magenta hasn't even been reintegrated back in yet and it is obvious now that that is what happened. 

I have also, since I started studying that, been undergoing other kinds of integration of primal stuff, prolly more the Infrared sort. This has proven extremely difficult and I feel as fragile as a snowflake basically all the time now. Completely irrational survival drives are becoming explicit and able to move with attention and intention and I just feel mostly out of control all the time. I'm guessing that this may be what some call Spiritual Emergency or Kundalini Awakening - but I've been using the term Mentally Ill for a while now and when it no longer serves the purpose, I'll drop it. All that to ask, will your diagram of 2nd Tier fill out the circles more completely again or will you have to draw something completely different? 

I like the way you did this. I think it can be improved but its a good way to show the information. 

--

For just $14.95 a month, YOU TOO can reduce your Karma Footprint by becoming a Member of Integral Life!

[has that already been done?]

I thought of it... it just connects to ways to test your model using third-person empirical testing. Have you put much thought into methods of doing this. One hypothesis off the top of my head would be something like... given the areas of the brain thought to be equated with particular interior experience (physical, emotional, mental) you hook individuals up to EEGs and see if the brain lights up exclusively in those regions of the brain at the different developmental levels (and you may expect some activity in non-physical areas of the brain despite interiorizing life in the physical brain for example, but the vast majority of neural activity is occurring there). In other words, you're connecting the paradigms of developmental theory and its empirical testing with neurological tests with the explicit goal of seeing if there are patterns between the different brains and your theory here.

Hi Lincoln

I'll respond to both you and Brent with this post, since you both ask similar questions.  It hard to say how "the scientific communities" see the triune brain as that would be like saying "what is the USA take on socialized health care?"  I've read both support and disdain for it.  It is one of many ways of conceptualizing the constituent components of the brain, such as "right and left hemisphere specialization", or "the frontal lobes are the seat of executive control".  I prefer the Triune brain construct because it maps so well onto 1st person experience and that's important when working clinically and experientially.  The triune brain construct maps nicely onto three major ways of being in the world - physical and body oriented emphasis, emotional emphasis, and intellectual or rational emphasis.  It also maps on nicely to the spiritual 4th way teachings of three centres of man.  Saying there are three brains however does not negate the reality of their awesome interconnectedness.  While modules exist and can act somewhat independently, I believe that part of our personal evolutionary process and responsibility is in getting them to work together more seamlessly (see the 2nd tier discussion in the EBIQ paper).

In terms of mapping correspondences between the upper left and right quadrants, that's a grueling and tedious work which to me rarely provides much insight into upper left phenomena, other than "making them real" to our upper right biased scientists.  That being said however, I do believe that our conceptualizations of upper left phenomena should be informed by the anatomical realities that generate the phenomena - carving nature at its joints so to speak.  I'm not sure how much more detail we are ready to map on beyond the three brains though.