This article supports the claim that there is substantial agreement within the discipline that criminology (and criminal justice) is in need of a change in approach. This article maintains that a framework is needed to organize the contributions and partial truths of existing disciplinary knowledge. It is argued that criminology needs an “orienting perspective” or a “meta-theory.” The article proposes that the Integral model provides a functional and apposite framework for addressing these problems. An in-depth, AQAL-based justification for this proposition is provided.
RANDY L. MARTIN, Ph.D., is a Co-Director of the Integral Criminology Center at Integral Institute. He has been a Professor in the Department of Criminology at Indiana University of Pennsylvania for the past 18 years where he has been developing integral applications for all his courses. He received his M.A. and Ph.D. in social/personality psychology from the University of Nebraska. Randy has been working in higher education for 22 years, initially in the psychology department at a small liberal arts college and then into his current position at IUP. This interdisciplinary perspective has enhanced his interest in and commitment to the Integral model.
Become a member today to access this Journal article and support the global emergence of Integral consciousness
Membership benefits include:
Receive full access to weekly conversations hosted by leading thinkers
Receive full access to the growing Journal of Integral Theory & Practice library
Stay connected by participating in Integral Life live events and discussions
Courses & Products
Get unlimited 20% discount off all products and courses from our friends and partners
Free Bonus Gifts
Download The Integral Vision eBook by Ken Wilber (worth $19 on Amazon) & The Ken Wilber Biography Series
Support of the movement
Support our mission of educating and spreading integral consciousness that is more critical than at any time in its history
I think what we need is a kind of test or process to determine and place people into one of four categories:
This is one of those things that you can just kind of “feel” in human interaction, but coming up with an iron clad methodology is beyond our current sociopolitical environment.
On a side note, a similar classification might be appropriate to “Integral” organizations - especially the “gaming the system” classification. I’ve seen many organizations or communities fail when a few “posers” entrench themselves and play the game of appearing to match the community values but actually do not - then when they get a following or into leadership positions it often destroys the community.
Continue the discussion at community.integrallife.com