A particularly engrossing, meritorious, and timely episode of IJW; thank you Corey, Mark, and Chris.

*I definitely agree with the specific frame of “transforming” the police and addressing interiority more–of officers, police departments and administration, and the justice system (and also of course, culture as a whole). Big Job, but necessary, and already, I think, we’re on our way, slowly but surely. Some things in policing are in dire need of transformation, such as:

I was struck by the contradiction that while most recruits say “helping people” is why they want to become a police officer, at the same time, per Chris (and others who I have read here and there),
" aren’t interested in psychology." This is a major problem, and a logical inconsistency that needs to be confronted at every step of the way, starting with recruitment. How do you help people in almost any field without some interest and knowledge of human psychology and behavior, including one’s own?

**On another subject but related: yes, there is the “blue line of silence” and there seems to be groupthink and apparent gang-like behavior where peer pressure and peer permissions play a role in some police misconduct and killings. As Bill Maher questioned, wasn’t the Tyre Nichols beating and killing a little like “Lord of the Flies?” I can see or imagine some similarities–lack of supervision, groupthink vs. individuality, emotionality superseding rationality, issues of morality, desires for dominance/power/control, and of course the ‘unreal beast’–given that Nichols was a thin unarmed man against five guys much larger than him armed with weapons and the badge, he was not a threat to them at all.

But one still has to wonder about the psychological make-up of individual officers who commit such acts. I’ve read that some police officials are calling for regular mental health assessments of officers, instead of a typical evaluation upon hiring. Maher interviewed the former chief of police of Minneapolis who basically said there’s been more weight given to “camaraderie (among officers) than to individual character,” which he thinks needs to change.

Journalist Tom Nichols writing in The Atlantic about mass shooters (in the article “The Narcissism of Angry Young Men”) reported on them as having a “stubborn immaturity and towering narcissism.” He used other phrases: a dangerous insecure masculine identity, fantasies of power and dominance, a sense of a special mission, etc. I wouldn’t be surprised if some officers who have brutally assaulted and/or (criminally) killed someone in the course of duty were found upon assessment to have similar traits.

***Fortunately, both mass shooters and “killer cops” are outliers. We shouldn’t forget that. But they do have a significant impact on how the population perceives society and governance and law and order, and how safe and sane they feel. A term I’ve recently come across–cultural betrayal trauma–comes to mind. Used originally (I think) by a black feminist to discuss black-on-black rape, it’s also been discussed in relation to the Memphis officers and Nichols’ death. But it’s also a term that can be used unrelated to racial issues, a term that Vietnam veterans relate to, for instance, having returned from war to find so much societal hostility against them. Families of mass shooting victims relate to it, when little to nothing is done to prevent future mass shootings.

Betrayal is no small thing, sapping as it does one’s trust. So getting a handle on these two situations–mass shootings and unwarranted police abusive or murderous conduct–might go a long ways in helping society.

****Again, a great program. It was nice to hear from a former officer who is also integral-identified, quite the rarity in the world! The IAM project on the policing initiative sounds full of “star-studded talent,” as they say, and this discussion seems like it will be very helpful.

@LaWanna, your excellent response underlines many substantive issues. It would take the thread in a million directions to go after the details, so I thought instead about methods. What is the right method to investigate your many questions and examples? Also, what is Integral-specific about such methods, beyond normal academic social science?

Here is an idea, for which I would welcome feedback. It occurred to me that a Four Quadrant approach must incorporate on some level an element of autobiography. If not, Quadrant I has been sidelined. This need not be the autobiography of the author of every study (although disclosure of that in a preface would be very welcome). Rather, it means before we bring the theories, the frameworks, the ideal types, etc., we need to listen to actual stories of real people. From there, we can work our way around the Quadrants.

In social science, this type of approach is sometimes called “grounded theory”. I’ve been leaning that way lately for my own reasons. It just now dawned on me that my own reasons were favoring holism anyway, and that the Quadrant model reinforces why those instincts are indeed holistic.

Robert, that is a great idea. The “I” in all of us needs to be seen and heard. People can find themselves feeling invisible and irrelevant in the hustle and bustle of existence. When that is combined with a poorly developed sense of “We” disaster can result. I’ve spent some time over the years going out on the street and having conversations with people struggling with drugs or homelessness and I noticed that they can really light up if you just let them talk and don’t judge them. I think it’s truly therapeutic to some degree to let them feel seen and heard.