“In order for any sort of genuine transformation to occur — or any sort of real “revolution” — not only does the revolution have to be led by an elite, that elite must possess a new paradigm, which means that it must possess, not a new theory or worldview, but a new type of social practice, mode of production, concrete behavioral injunctions, or experimental exemplars. These social practices, injunctions, or exemplars — these new paradigms and methodologies — generate, enact, bring forth, and illumine new types of experiences, occasions, data, phenomena. Around these new experiences, data, or illuminations, there do indeed then grow new theories, new worldviews, new superstructures.””Ken Wilber

re you concerned about things like social justice, wealth inequality, and the continuing cultural inertias of racism and bigotry? Have you ever wanted to, say, reform a police department or two? Are you interested in things like protecting voting rights for disenfranchised groups of people? Are you naturally inclined to want to relieve suffering for people by “bringing the most depth to the most span”, as we say here in Integral Land?

Congratulations, you might be woke!

But are you equally concerned about the sorts of extremism that we are seeing on the Left — performative virtue signaling, growing illiberalism and intolerance for conflicting perspectives and free speech, a backslide away from healthy Green pluralism and toward totalizing Amber narratives?

Well, maybe you’e not so woke after all. Maybe you are actually “post-woke”, and have been waiting for discussions like this one to eventually come down the line.

Which is why Ryan and I wanted to have this conversation, and invite all of us to inhabit our own most embodied “post-woke” leadership, allowing us to recognize and rescue the most important babies of “social justice” from the bathwater of political extremism.

How do we do so? By getting “wokeness” (and the Green altitude as a whole) out of our shadows, while bringing more caution and discernment to the inherent shadows of the woke movement itself.

And one of the best ways we can get the Green altitude out of our shadows is to simply shift our frame just little bit:

Rather than thinking off the Green altitude as “post-modern”, let’s simultaneously think of it as being “pre-integral”.

There is something about that reframe that reminds us of our obligation to properly transclude the Green altitude in our integral embrace and get it out of our own shadow. Because at the integral altitude, all of these previous stages become part of our own interior anatomy — which means that if we are engaged in unconscious warfare against the Green altitude, we are denying one of the highest stages of our own being. It’s like walking around with your head cut off.

The Green altitude, after all, is also associated with “early vision-logic”, which is why a great number of important green terms, concepts, and deep structures are maintained and updated at the integral altitude — concepts like “pluralism” (which, for example, then ripens as “integral methodological pluralism”), as well as “constructivism” and “perspectivism”.

Even the woke emphasis on “identity” is taken up again at the integral stage, which simply offers a broader spectrum of identity to draw upon beyond our typologically-based “intersectionality of identity”, taking us all the way to the Supreme Identity itself.

This reframe may also help better facilitate “post-woke” discussions, while helping us to better regulate the green altitude by reminding it of who and what it is actually supposed to be (pluralistic, empathetic, and tolerant).

We hope you enjoy the discussion. Is this reframe from “postmodern” to “pre-integral” as helpful for you as it is for us? Let us know what you think in the comments below.

Written by Corey deVos
Music by Justin Miles and Stuart Davis