Lyssna

Listen

215.4 MB · ladda ner / download

Transkription

Transcript


The Highest Stages of Human Flourishing


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CBLyyA5_2c


Search in video
0:00
So what we've been exploring is this entry into a new world space into a new tier. This is a new ontology. Remember
0:08
ontology is the study of what is reality, what is real. Each world space,
0:14
each tier is unpacking that question in its own unique way. So when we enter
0:19
into the the metaware, we're entering into a whole new sense of what reality is. And some of it involves melting away
0:28
some of the previous certainties. [Music]
0:36
Welcome everybody to another episode of Integral Edge hosted by Integral Life.
0:42
My name is Keith Martin Smith and I am the author most recently of When the Buddha Needs Therapy. I work as a
0:49
developmental editor for people who are writing um usually pretty complex books
0:55
on complex topics and I'm very excited today to have my friend and colleague
1:01
here Alexander Love. Uh Alexander is an acupuncturist and a developmental coach
1:06
and a facilitator. He's the director of curriculum development at the Newfield network uh which is an international
1:13
coach training organization. He's the creator of the luminina process which is a shadow work modality shadow work and
1:20
eastern wisdom and integral theory. And he's currently working on a trilogy uh evolutionary gestures which uh is is
1:28
really sort of a combination of a personal memoir um a deep dive into
1:33
Chinese uh medicine and and wisdom and philosophy and integral theory and
1:38
developmental psychology. So Alexander, it's great to have you back on the show. Welcome. Yeah, thank you so much. So glad to be
1:45
here with you. Awesome. Awesome. So the last time we talked we took a pretty deep dive into
1:52
the stages model which was developed by Terry Fallon and it's one of oh I don't
1:58
know maybe a dozen or 20 developmental models that are in the world today maybe
2:04
more than that that I know of. And um you know you and I have both been students of Terry's for a long time and
2:11
her model offers some really kind of unique contributions and unique insights
2:17
into developmental psychology. And so in the last one we really took a deep dive
2:23
uh going through her entire model basically from birth up until what inner
2:29
would call teal or um or the integral viewpoint which is the point at which we
2:35
can sort of you know see some differentiation see the frame that we're using see development you know all these
2:41
sort of interesting things that come online and uh today the promise is to go into
2:47
tererry's 5.0 know or what would be kind of turquoise in the integral model um
2:52
where some of the spiritual states and the ego stages begin to coalesce.
2:58
Um but before we go there I thought it would be helpful to um just give an overview of the stages model again sort
3:06
of what makes it unique and and maybe just do a little drive by of the different developmental levels that
3:11
she's come up with and I'll go ahead and share a map for everybody so this isn't so abstract.
3:16
Yeah. So, why don't we uh why don't we take a just as as Keith said, let's just take a brief a brief move through
3:24
through these uh these stages to get a sense of um you know what what this
3:31
model can open up for us. And to begin with, what I want to do is is start with looking at person perspectives. So, what
3:37
is a person perspective? You know, we can look at this word epistemology which is essentially
3:43
looking at how do we know things? What are the lenses through which we know? How do we make meaning? And there are
3:50
multiple ways in which we make meaning. But a person perspective, I like to think of it as um sort of the deep
3:57
structure of how we make sense of things. And of course, in an evolutionary context, this
4:04
deep structure of how we make meaning, it grows up. And as it grows up, we're
4:11
able to take more and more perspectives. We're able to hold more complexity. And and I want to be clear that also when we
4:18
say perspectives, we're I'm not just talking about sort of a cognitive perspective because we can't separate
4:23
the cognitive perspective from our entire being, the way that we feel, the
4:29
the the the depths of our direct experience. And so I just want to have us keep that in mind as we're exploring.
4:35
And so the way that this model uh numbers each of the developmental waves
4:41
is in relationship to a person perspective. So what Terry found in her research is
4:47
that there are six person perspectives. We can speculate that there are more,
4:53
but what we have research on from real people um not just a select few that are
5:00
sort of writing their pontifications on a stage, which is beautiful. I mean I I
5:06
love doing that. I think a lot of us love doing that. But what Terry's done is she's gathered um data from many
5:15
human beings and exploring patterns in their language which I think uh it
5:20
offers a more collective approach to understanding like what what are these waves and so what she's discovered is
5:26
that there are six person perspectives and each perspective has an emerging
5:33
aspect to it where it's just beginning to discover what that person perspective is and then it has a maturing aspect to
5:43
that person perspective. So they as we've uh sort of grappled with this new
5:48
way of making meaning, we start to get more proficient and we start to mature. So when we look at the numbers, we can
5:54
see that 1.0 is indicating that it's the first person perspective. The 0.0
6:01
indicates that it's an emerging relationship to that person perspective.
6:07
1.5 is indicating that it is also part of the first person perspective. The 0.5
6:14
indicates that it is a maturing expression of that person perspective.
6:21
Great. So that's like I mean sometimes you'll hear uh integralists you know or
6:26
or certain developmentalists say things like you know uh orange entrance mature
6:31
orange orange exit you know green entrance those sort of things which I think are trying to sort of get to some
6:37
of these ideas. Exactly. That's right. So for example if we just take 2.0 and 2.5 for example 2.0
6:45
and 2.5 you know 2.0 I know is like magic mythic, you know, which is going
6:51
to be in the in the um the blue or the the amber domain. 2.5 is going to be
6:59
mythic and then 3.0 is going to be mythic rational and then 3.5 orange is going to
7:06
be rational. And so yes, we see that with the entry and the exit. Sometimes
7:11
we hear it if we're using the language like magic, magic, mythic, mythic, mythic, rational, rational. We can kind
7:18
of hear echoes of what this is what this is pointing to. And the other thing I'll
7:24
say here is that we can we can look at at at the this stages model as really
7:32
the sort of the exploration of self-reflection which is happening
7:37
through human beings. So we have the world of matter and we have the world of life which doesn't yet for the most part
7:44
have a sophisticated that we know of a sophisticated capacity for self-reflection. And so what starts to
7:51
happen is as we enter into the human world we begin to reflect on who we are,
7:58
what we are as an extension of the cosmos. And this includes the fact that
8:05
we are in space and we are in time. And what this looks like in the stages
8:13
is that when you see a point, we're exploring more of the space
8:20
dimension of being human. That means we're more in the moment. Think about 1.0. A little baby. They're just in the
8:28
moment receiving the world. Whereas 1.5,
8:34
the 0.5s are going to be more time oriented. There's more an
8:39
actionorientation. There's more of a trajectory that begins to unfold. And so
8:44
we start to see through all the person perspectives, there's a continued sort of moving back and forth between
8:51
developing our relationship to being in the moment. 0 and developing our relationship to
8:57
more being in time, recognizing that we're unfolding in some way in a more
9:02
active trajectory like way. Right. Okay. So, great. So, maybe you could just give us two examples of that
9:09
to just illustrate it. The movement from 2.0 to 2.5 and the movement from uh 4.0
9:15
to 4.5. I think that might be interesting for people. Sure. And these because because one is concrete and one is subtle and maybe
9:21
just touch on those two distinctions as well. So we see that the first person perspective and the second person
9:27
perspective are both part of the concrete tier. Okay. So 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
9:36
they're part of an entire world space. And that world space makes meaning in a certain way. It sees more concrete
9:43
objects. Third person perspective and fourth person perspective. They're part of the subtle world space. They're going
9:49
to see a whole new ontology. they're going to see a whole new sense of what is reality and they're going to have
9:56
different perspectives in relationship to that reality that they're perceiving. So if we look at for example 2.0, you
10:04
can think about this like um uh sevenyear-olds, eight-year-olds. So they're more in the reciprocal dynamic
10:11
of friendship, right? They're they're kind of in the moment with each other. like Sally is, you know, told on me and
10:17
and Mark, you know, I had a crush on him, but now, you know, like I mean kids have crushes really early, you know,
10:24
it's like it's different than a high school crush, but it's like they the language comes up. Oh, like I have a cr
10:29
like he doesn't like me and someone stole my shoes and like they that's not nice and that's against the rules and
10:35
all that kind of stuff. So, they're in the moment they're in the relational dynamic. Whereas 2.5,
10:43
they're going to start recognizing um a hierarchy. They become more mature. And
10:49
so they're like, "Oh, okay. Well, um in this system, the pope is at the is at
10:55
the top, and then there's the next person in line, and then there's the next person in line, and then I figure
11:02
out where I fit within that system." So now I'm able to see a hierarchy implies
11:07
that there's a sense of trajectory. like I'm starting to sort of rank um
11:13
what's higher on the trajectory, what's lower on the trajectory, whereas 2.0, they're more sort of in in the flow of
11:20
it, more and so it's hard to tell which rules are you need to follow all the
11:26
rules at 2.0, but this but they're not really understood very hierarchically.
11:32
Right. Exactly. And so I remember Terry giving the example um in her experience as a teacher where they tried this thing
11:38
where they would have um the kids come up with their own punishments and the kids that are in 2.0 they would come up
11:44
with the craziest punishments. You know they'd be like oh like you stole a pencil so you have to sit in the corner
11:50
for eight hours whereas in 2.5 they can recognize oh well the punishment should
11:55
fit the crime. And so there's more of a hierarchy there that um it's not there's
12:01
more of an an ability to sort of rank well you did this you stole someone's pencil then you need to apologize and be
12:08
in timeout for four minutes whereas you know stole someone's rabbit or hurt someone's cat like there's
12:15
another there's another thing needed there right and we would see that culturally maybe in some of the what would seem to
12:21
be very unfair and arbitrary harsh punishments of some cultures you know versus a more mediated did punishment,
12:27
right? Stone someone to death because they did something, right? That's, you know, what did they do?
12:32
Yeah. They they weren't wearing the right outfit, so we're going to stone them to death. Well, that seems a little that seems a little intense of
12:38
punishment, doesn't it? Exactly. Exactly. So, now if we look at this in the next iteration, as you were bringing
12:44
up, we look at 4.0 and 4.5. So, remember 4.0 is green. Four is the fourth person
12:51
perspective. 0.0 O implies that it's the emerging fourth person perspective. And
12:57
just like any of us, when we're emerging into a new territory, we tend to be more receptive in the moment. Like, I don't
13:04
know what's happening. I don't know what's happening. I I can't really be active until I've really learned
13:09
something. And then I can say, okay, I'm going to do something with this. But in the beginning, we're kind of had by it.
13:15
So, we can see that in 4.0, it's also a collective a 4.0 green. It's
13:21
also a collective stage, but now we're able to see the subtle self. Whether
13:27
it's parts of the self that are in me or I'm sitting in a circle with my friends
13:33
or my community and I'm hearing the parts of my friends or the This is the fourth person. Then
13:38
this is the fourth person perspective. Exactly. And that that is the four that's the difference between the three and the four is seeing the subtle self. That's
13:44
part of the four. That's right. Right. So we're moving beyond in the third person perspective.
13:50
we have uh the individual self, the individual subtle self that's beginning
13:56
to emerge. Right? So we see that in Terry's model, she's uh incorporated the
14:02
four quadrants, right? And so we what what I'm talking about here is the difference between the
14:08
individual and the collective. So in the third person perspective, the uh individual
14:14
um subtle self is beginning to come online. 3.0 to it's the emerging of this
14:23
subtle self, the emerging of the third person perspective. But then by the time I move into 3.5 orange, I have more
14:31
maturity and I can become more active. So I'm going to create a a course on
14:37
like, you know, the seven steps to becoming happy, the the the the sevenstep process. I just got a YouTube
14:44
advertisement that was like the sevenstep process to business success. Right.
14:50
Right. Whereas where whereas 3.0 would be more focused on answering the question, how
14:55
am I different from the group? Right. Exactly. And a 3.5 it's I know I'm different from
15:02
the group. What does that mean? Yeah. So, right. 3.0 is who am I?
15:07
Right. As is the question of 1.0 and 5.0. Right. They're going to share that. It's
15:12
just who am I in the diff it's in a different world space. Right. Right. So 3.0 is asking who am I? 3.5
15:19
says well I know who I am and then what am I going to do about it? Well I'm going to create something. I'm going to
15:25
I'm going to do something in the world with this active subtle self. I'm going to figure out how to how to do genetic
15:32
modification because I can I I have an ownership of this this subtle individual mind. I'm
15:38
going to create a constitution that radically defines individual rights.
15:43
Exactly. Exactly. Now, this is going to differ from fourth person perspective which is
15:48
now developing the collective. Right. So the third So the first person perspective is developing the individual
15:55
in the concrete world. The second person perspective is developing the collective
16:00
identity in the concrete world. The third person perspective is developing
16:06
the individual identity in the subtle world space. The fourth person
16:11
perspective is developing the sub subtle collective identity in the subtle world
16:17
space. So you see how there's a way that the four quadrants are being built out a
16:23
little bit at a time in the self-reflective world as a human being. Who am I as an indivi? Adams aren't
16:30
asking who am I as an individual? Who are we as a collective? As we enter into self-reflection through
16:35
the human world, we start asking those questions and then the answers to those
16:40
questions evolve through time and space. And so then we have uh the fourth person
16:47
perspective green 4.0. Now we're going to be also had by the
16:53
collective just like 2.0 was because it's a point. 0. So it's more sort of
16:59
being had by the situation. It's an emerging perspective. But now I might be
17:05
had by all the parts of the self that are talking to me and are in conflict with each other.
17:11
I might be had by all of the sharing that's happening in the group. I don't really want to take a stand. I might I
17:18
might uh sort of fall into the group flow or maybe the group think, but the
17:24
group think is now much more nuanced, right? consensus sort of sort of leadership by consensus which you know
17:30
people that try to lead here it's like right it's like let's let's make sure everyone has an opinion and every opinion is considered
17:37
right exactly now 4.5 teal what we see here is it's still the fourth person
17:43
perspective right but the.5 lets us know this is the maturing aspect so now instead of being
17:49
had by the fourth person perspective or the fourth person collective
17:56
instead of that now I'm able to see a new hierarchy, but now if it's healthy,
18:02
I can see a natural hierarchy. Right? So, this is really just like 2.0
18:07
and 2.5 where that the point.0 is by definition non- hierarchical because
18:12
you're swimming in it. So, we talked about you can't make those distinctions in punishment in 2.0.
18:18
And in 4.0, You know, as we know at green, it can be difficult for people to make hierarchal hierarchical
18:25
distinctions around meaning, purpose, you know, rights, equity, these kinds of
18:30
things. They can get lost in the soup. Exactly. And so where 2.0 might be like, hey, like Sally stole my shoes and that
18:38
makes me really sad and I'm going to tell the teacher because that's against the rules. 4.0 green, it's you don't see me. You're
18:46
gaslighting me. I feel hurt and unsafe. I'm gonna tell the teacher
18:54
because that goes against the rules. And so it's a it's a different iteration of
19:00
a similar deep structure. The difference being we're now in a subtle world space.
19:05
Now 4.5th person perspective.5 means maturing.
19:11
Um remember that means now I can see trajectory because it's more time.
19:16
There's more of a time capacity here. So, I can begin to see, oh, um, perspectives grow up. Person
19:23
perspectives grow up, people grow up, and they have all these parts in them, but these parts also have different
19:29
ages, and those ages need to be met differently. So now I'm still playing
19:35
with context, which is a huge thing that opens in the fourth person perspective as a whole. But rather than being had by
19:42
the context, I'm now able to actively recognize that there are contexts that
19:49
shape us, but I can also shape who I am and how I am being in relationship to
19:56
those contexts to best me at the moment. So if I'm hanging out with people chill,
20:02
let's say I'm at a school with kids at, you know, somewhere in 2.0 2.5, I'm
20:07
going to modulate how I'm connecting with them for the sake of of understanding them and loving them
20:13
deeply so that they can grow and mature in the way that's right for them rather
20:18
than a top-down kind of hierarchy, which is I know what everybody needs. they need my, you know, sevenstep process on
20:25
business success. And so now you all need to take that course because that's the way. Um, instead here there's a
20:32
there's a dynamism to 4.5 teal that allows us to shift with contexts
20:38
and address different contexts all at once, respond differently in different moments to these different clusters.
20:45
right now is there seems to be something that emerges at 4.5 teal integral um
20:51
that again it can make these hierarchal distinctions but then what about the idea that it appears that this is the
20:57
first stage that can actually begin to see and acknowledge and honor different
21:03
developmental levels themselves. Yeah. So the right so you know this is
21:10
an interesting question because I I've seen people learn about
21:16
development before entering into even the subtle tier and so I think similarly to the um
21:25
territory of parts work where we can say that someone's not going to probably come up with a parts work system until
21:32
4.0 green or or 4.5 teal. We can say that people can learn about development.
21:40
I mean my daughter who's 16, she understood at 10 that like you know for
21:46
her Santa Claus doesn't mean the same thing that it used to but that the little kids they still need to be
21:53
allowed to believe in Santa Claus in the way that she used to. So I think there's a way that developmental literacy can
21:59
show up in healthy ways in very probably as early as 2.0. Mhm.
22:05
But in terms of the complexity of understanding nested contexts
22:12
that we have nested contexts inside of us that are these ways in which our um
22:19
person perspectives to use what we've been saying here our person perspectives are growing up that each one is a
22:25
different context and that they're nested along a continuum of the whole um
22:30
that begins in 4.5 teal. Now also
22:36
we can hear that 4.0 green will sometimes reject that. But I've also
22:42
heard Terry say and I've seen this also that if if someone is introduced to
22:47
development in a healthy way prior to 4.0 green when they go through 4.0 to
22:56
green. It's not necessarily as uh punchy
23:01
and um acidic as sometimes we make it out to be. Yeah.
23:07
Yeah. Yeah. I And I have a colleague David Orel who who talks about something which I think it's a really interesting idea
23:13
that he's beginning to flesh out. But he talks about there are three different value stacks, traditional, modern,
23:18
postmodern, and that you can actually go through this whole process of development inside of one of those value
23:25
stacks. Absolutely. So you're not going to go through what integralists think of as
23:30
green in a way that looks anything like it if you're in a traditional or a modern value stack because you're going
23:36
to because you're not going to come up with like we need to have equity and justice and we need to be tearing things you know like that's not going to occur
23:42
to you because that's not in those value stacks and the value stacks are independent of development essentially.
23:48
Oh that's absolutely right and I see that with my clients. I I have over the years I've had a number of clients that
23:54
have a very deep um relationship to their spiritual tradition or their
23:59
religion and some of the sound of it is quite traditional, right?
24:05
But they're not if you listen to their language and their the way in which they make meaning, they're not making meaning
24:10
from from 2.5 uh amber. They have that in them as a note of a larger chord, but
24:19
they're often making meaning through the third person perspective, the fourth person perspective. Um, maybe even
24:26
later, and it looks differently. Sure. Yeah. I mean, it makes me think of
24:32
like the 15-year-old atheist, you know, who's going to be in that modern value stack, but then holding it in a very
24:39
sort of 2.0 0 or 2.5 amber amber entrance amber mature amber way which
24:44
you know atheism is there is no god it's like well that seems a little inflexible doesn't doesn't it
24:50
how are you so sure yeah exactly um okay great so so that I think that's a really great overview and sort of
24:57
walks us up to you know this idea and this is you know as far as I know a unique contribution of tererry's again
25:03
which is this idea of a metaware tier so this is you know one of the one of the
25:09
three um one of one of the three tiers that she talks about. And so, so maybe
25:14
you could sort of walk us now as we're moving from 4.5 into a 5.0 and and how
25:19
you understand that. Yeah. So, so to just, you know, summarize, we're looking here at the
25:27
self-reflective human world. And these 12 waves of development are
25:33
different aspects of how that human world unfolds in terms of its deep
25:39
structure. The the the ways that we're our the deep structure of our epistemology is growing
25:45
up. um how we are interacting with what our sense of reality is.
25:51
We've seen that the first world space is the concrete world space. The second world space or the second tier is the
25:58
subtle tier and then the third is called the metaware. Now
26:05
this metaware tier I've seen has a certain amount of confusion around it
26:12
because one of the things that needs to begin to arise as we enter into the
26:18
metaware tier is a relationship to some of these deeper states.
26:25
And so what happens is because stages and states begin to come together as a
26:31
necessity for the structure of the actual wave itself.
26:36
Um it means we have to start talking about stages and states and this is
26:42
notoriously confusing. And so what I would love to bring up
26:47
here is that what I want to offer is uh just an opening for a conversation
26:55
because I find that there's a lot of ideas about this, a lot of confusions
27:02
about this and um what I'm going to offer in our conversation is not like
27:09
like what I think the truth is. It's just trying to open up ways that we
27:14
might look at what's already there and then some other things that maybe aren't already out there in the integral world
27:21
as strongly. Um so that for like the next 300 500 years we can have a
27:26
conversation about this. Mhm. And I think we'll need that much time to sort out, you know, um, you
27:33
know, Wilbur and Alan Combmes, they were, according to Wilbur were confused about this, too, until they came up with
27:40
the Wilbur Combmes lattice. Um, and so what I'd love to do is just set up a little bit of context around how we
27:48
might look at states and stages as kind of a preamble to talking about the
27:53
Metaware tier. Great. So
27:59
when we're looking when we're looking at altitude, developmental altitude, we're
28:04
looking we can look at it like a vertical axis. I would invite that we don't look at it like a ladder, but more
28:12
like a stream that's moving upward and downward. Um but we can say that it's running
28:18
along the vertical axis. We are beings in space. So we have height, we have
28:24
width, we have uh we have breadth and so and we have depth. And so what
28:31
I'd like to talk about here is the difference between height or altitude
28:37
and depth. Great. Okay. Now we see this in the Wilber Combs lattice. If you are if the
28:42
listeners aren't any of you aren't familiar with this, basically what Wilbur and Alan Combmes came up with was
28:48
that we have a developmental dimension that's moving upward and downward. We
28:54
have a vertical axis, but then we also have a horizontal axis, which I would
29:00
call the depth axis. Um, I would encourage that we sometimes folks will
29:05
think about depth as down. I I think it's a little a little misleading. If you step back from from the planet Earth
29:12
and you look at the ocean, when someone goes deep into the ocean, they're going in. They're not going down. It feels
29:20
like we're going down, but it's actually going in like an avocado.
29:26
So now, when we're looking at states, we're looking at the depth axis.
29:35
When we're looking at stages, we're looking at the altitude, the height axis.
29:43
When we're looking at states, we're turning towards origin
29:50
and we're talking about what we find there. Any,
29:56
for the most part, anybody who has the capacity to look towards origin
30:03
will find things that are outside of time and space. They'll find the timeless, boundless.
30:12
Uh, Buddhism likes to call it empty. It's not the best word. Some people call it open. It's also not the best word,
30:20
but it's an ineffable experience of um we might call the absolute dimension.
30:28
It doesn't change. So when we're looking at that,
30:34
we can look at that and be at a number of different developmental waves.
30:41
Okay, that's the territory of states. We're looking towards origin and we're describing what we see.
30:47
When we turn the other way and we look at the world,
30:53
what we see is in a world a world that's evolving. So that world that we see and our
30:59
perspective on it, it grows up. So that is what tells us about the
31:06
developmental stages. States I'm looking towards origin.
31:12
Stages I'm looking towards the evolving world. Mhm. Now
31:18
we can be in a 2.5 2.0 2.5 domain and
31:25
engage in practices that help early amber. Amber. Yeah. Thank you. Yes.
31:31
Right. Amber, early amber, magic, mythic or mythic.
31:36
We can be in those waves and turn towards origin
31:41
and find it. But when we turn around and we look at
31:48
the world and we start making sense of our experience rightation
31:53
interpretation of our experience interpretation of the world now we're looking through a person perspective.
31:58
So, we can go into a completely non-dual awakening experience and then come back
32:05
out and say, well, here are all these rules about who's allowed to give the teachings, who's not allowed to give the
32:12
teachings, how people should be dressed, how they should eat,
32:17
all those kinds of things, right? It's like some somebody quipped maybe it was Ricky Derves but you know
32:22
interesting that you know Krishna appears to Hindus Jesus appears to Christians Buddha appears to Buddhists
32:28
you know but making fun of the idea that you know there there's the interpretive lens will always take something and then
32:35
sort of cram it into how you understand the world. That's right. Now what Terry discovered
32:42
is that there are certain states that need to start arising in order for
32:48
someone to enter the metaware tier. Now this is where often confusion starts
32:55
to emerge because someone will say something like timelessness
33:01
and the listener is like oh you must be talking about the metaware
33:06
but they're not. They're talking about origin right now. Someone who's moving through the
33:13
metaware will start using that language a lot because those states are necessary
33:19
but not necessarily sufficient but they're necessary to enter into those places. There are plenty of people in
33:26
the fourth person perspective, green and teal, that can have timelessness
33:31
experiences, boundlessness experiences, non-dual experiences, fullbridled heart
33:37
of heart of existence bursting through me. All those kinds of things can happen
33:43
and speak very eloquently and passionately about them. Eloquently, passionately about them.
33:50
What we need to look at is when they see the world, what are the evolutionary objects do they see?
33:56
So when they look back at the world from source. Yeah. Exactly. And that and that's what
34:02
will help us understand begin to understand the difference between someone having an awakening experience
34:08
and someone having uh a developmental um expression.
34:15
It's just in the metaware we start to see both. So it gets really wonky because we start thinking that if
34:21
someone uses the word timelessness, it must be later. And then the folks that are sort of not so sure about that,
34:29
they start challenging, oh well, why this person said timelessness, how are you saying that they're in the Metaware?
34:35
And actually, from a scoring perspective, from sort of like the deep
34:40
perspective of the model itself, that's not what's being said. When we're looking at someone's writing, we have to
34:47
see the the the the the states that are present, but we also have to see the
34:52
evolutionary objects that are present. If those objects are not metaware objects, then this person is at an
34:59
earlier developmental wave having state experiences.
35:04
Okay. So, so then let's maybe talk about what that fifth person perspective is. Yeah. Okay. So,
35:12
we're in 4.5 teal. Things are going great.
35:18
You've become an insufferable intergalist. You're lecturing everybody about the model. You're right. You're and and and if
35:24
you're at 4.5 teal and you haven't found integral, you're probably lecturing somebody about something
35:32
because it's the final wave of the subtle tier, which means
35:38
it's the five. It's a 0.5. It's the final stage. And what that means is
35:44
you've developed a mature individ subtle individual. You've developed a mature
35:50
subtle collective. Those are starting to interpenetrate. You feel like you own
35:56
the world in a way. And I and I mean that in a positive way. I mean it can have its shadow, but it can feel like
36:02
I've arrived. I know what matters. I feel purpose. I I I know what I want to
36:09
do with it. I'm teaching people. There's a there's a solidity and and not
36:14
a not much doubt. That was certainly my subjective experience. Yeah, absolutely. Now, of course, we can
36:21
take into account um each individual is different and there's shadows and all kinds of stuff, but yeah, there's a
36:27
there's a sense of stability there. Now, um as we move into 5.0, know we're
36:34
engaging in a tier transition. Anytime we engage in a tier transition, um it
36:41
can be a little bit intense because as I just mentioned,
36:48
we've come to a mature sense of individual and collective identity by
36:53
4.5 teal. All of that starts to dissolve to make room for a new meaware
37:00
individual. So that's that's a that's a huge thing to have dissolve.
37:05
Right. Right. Well, if we if we look at the chart that's pulled up there, we can see that 4.0 to 4.5 only one thing is
37:12
changing reciprocal to interpenetrative. Right. But then as we go to 5.0, all three things are changing. It's now
37:18
metaware, it's individual, and it's receptive. So, it's a it's um it it's a
37:24
it's as big of a change as when we move from being conformist to coming out of a strictly conformist thing, which most of
37:30
us remember really well because it is a really big shift. Yeah. Exactly. So, okay.
37:37
So, as we move into the meta world, one of the states that starts to come
37:43
online is a a transpersonal awareness.
37:50
an awareness that is beyond the personal sense of self. Now, you can have
37:56
transpersonal experiences prior to 5.0. It's just in order to go into 5.0
38:03
if you never had those before, they're going to start occurring here.
38:09
Now, it also does not have to be a blinding I went to a great retreat kind of experience. It's it's pretty common
38:17
in 5.0 know that there's a transpersonal awareness that's coming online, but they
38:23
don't actually know what's happening. It's not like, "Oh, look at that transpersonal awareness." That doesn't
38:30
happen until 5.5, the next one. In 5.0, it starts to stream in just like for the
38:37
infant in 1.0. Uh what's streaming in there is the concrete world, and they don't know what
38:43
that is. So they're receiving these sensory experiences, but they don't have categories for them. They don't have
38:49
names for them. They don't have meaning around it. The same thing is happening now, but with transpersonal awareness.
38:56
So it's not that it's it's really not necessarily like when you go to a retreat and then all of a sudden you're
39:02
like, "Wow, it's there and it's impacting the
39:07
person, but it may not be clear to them what's happening. Things are starting to dissolve." And
39:14
one of the first ways that that begins to um show up is with a kind of a
39:20
dissolution of boundaries because remember we're in time and space. I talked about how the 0's are
39:28
more in the- moment oriented, spaceoriented. The 0.5s are more trajectory oriented. Now all of a sudden
39:34
in the Metaware, this is going to start to dissolve. it's starting to dissolve, making room
39:40
for the sixperson perspective, which we can we'll talk about in a little bit. So, in 5.0, what they might notice is
39:47
that um people's words are kind of an illusion.
39:53
They're they're, you know, uh like if I think of a client, they're like, "Oh, I went to work and I'm listening to everybody talk and I'm just like
40:00
everybody's just making the whole thing up." And this is different than
40:05
fourth person perspective. green and teal because language is a construct lang where the as a social construct
40:12
right we have socially constructed our and that has that has bias and power and
40:20
privilege embedded in it you know all that all that sort of which is all obviously there's invested truths in
40:25
that right right and so like you gave the example of Ricky Jervves when you say like a a Buddhist sees Buddha and a Christian you
40:32
know sees Jesus and he's talking about the socially constructed
40:37
subtle world and how we're being impacted our subtle world of archetypes
40:43
are being impacted by that social construction. This is contrasted with 5.0 which is uh
40:50
now a new individual an emerging a new meaware individual is emerging. They
40:56
don't know who they are. Who am I? And so now they're seeing that other
41:02
individuals they're projecting other individuals are making up stuff not social construction
41:10
that person individual is individually make those words are empty
41:16
and so what you'll start to see is they'll start making up weird definitions for things
41:22
you know so like um if I said if I asked someone to finish the sentence life is,
41:30
you know, maybe someone in 2.0 might say life is good, you know, or maybe someone a little bit
41:37
later might say, you know, life is a really good challenge and an opportunity for learning. Maybe that's orang-ish,
41:44
like an orange kind of thing. Yeah. Right. So, those are kind of in the realm of
41:50
generally socially agreed upon normal definitions where 5.0 know might be like
41:55
well you know life is you know a um an unfolding pattern of history and it's
42:04
also um you know the emptiness of
42:10
something and then they'll go on and so they'll start saying these things that are not typical definitions. They're
42:17
either unusual or there's many of them. Yeah. which lets you know that they see
42:22
that oh definitions are kind of fluid right and and like in my understanding
42:29
of it there's also an an idea that you know starting at 4.5 we can see that
42:34
projection plays a big part of the human experience emotional traumatic etc but
42:40
at 5.0 you know, you begin to appreciate that in essence we're projecting a human
42:45
experience onto reality everywhere we touch it and it's kind of uniform.
42:50
Well, and therefore in a sense arbitrary, right? It's without being without being nihilistic
42:56
and without being um therefore devoid of meaning because that's not really the way that I understand the insight,
43:02
right? Although one of the shadows of 5.0 can be nihilism.
43:08
It's not baked into the healthy flourishing of that wave, but it is a
43:13
place where people can go. Some people's experience in 5.0 is um eventually they
43:19
sort of come to like a deep peace where nothing really has meaning, but there's an embodied piece along with it. whereas
43:27
others can fall into well nothing matters and they can kind of be more of a nihilistic
43:34
um experience especially if there's not um uh people around them supporting
43:41
them and you know the other thing I'll mention is that as the person is projecting this um this dissolution of
43:49
boundaries sometimes what they do is they throw a a a bomb into their life
43:56
and they, you know, they quit their job, they get a divorce, they they they want to travel around, you know, India or
44:03
some somewhere. And the thing is, I'll often tell clients that I work with that
44:08
are moving through this particular wave, I'm like, you know, well, you know, you can deconstruct all of reality in a
44:14
bubble bath. Like, you don't have to get the divorce. You know, it's like when I work with people,
44:21
I don't give them advice, but when I see them moving into 5.0,
44:28
there's typically a conversation that we have around that impulse to just destroy everything is a natural dis. It's a
44:36
natural inclination because boundaries are coming down. But the thing is is they're going to get
44:41
active again when we move on and talk about 5.5. Sometimes they regret that their whole
44:47
life has been burnt to a crisp because now at some point they want to do
44:52
something, right? And they have to start from the ground up sometimes. And um there's ways to
44:59
lovingly deconstruct everything but not have to dissolve all of the structures
45:05
in the external world. Right. Right. Yeah. Yeah, I mean I I from my
45:11
personal experience I recall pretty deeply the the sort of idea of feeling um
45:17
sort of deeply a drift. There was a lot of opening for sort of trauma to come up. There was fear over um am I going to
45:26
be okay because I actually can't find a self like that's concrete to point to. So it felt very disorienting and at
45:34
times terrifying. Um, and then the the real kick in the in in the caboose was
45:40
also being kind of okay with all that at the same time. So it was this sort of terrible paradox of
45:48
panic and okayess that was just impossible to explain to other people
45:53
like are you okay? I actually am okay but I'm actually not okay at all. Right. Yeah. you know, ask someone who
46:00
has, you know, some of the metaware stages as a part of their experience of
46:05
being human. Ask them like, "How are you doing?" And they look at you like you're crazy. Like, how how could I even start?
46:12
And so, and so one of the things that'll happen with 5.0 know is they'll have
46:17
because transpersonal awareness is starting to sort of be in the background sort of streaming in. They'll start
46:25
having thoughts that are kind of quicker than typical thinking and you'll ask them a question and like five different
46:32
thought streams will will kind of drop at once and smash. And so often not
46:40
often it's possible. I've seen it be like this. I've seen it not be like this. um where language can get a little
46:46
stuttered. Yeah. And a little wonky because
46:52
everything is happening all at once and they haven't yet sorted out what is all
46:59
what what all of this is, right? Because it's that point0 stage. So like the other ones, you're a wash in
47:05
it and and and so you you are you are what's arising rather than having what's
47:12
arising. And what's arising is this is this. Yeah. And so using the metaphor of
47:17
like turning towards source or turning towards self or or this hierarchy,
47:23
it sounds like then at 5.0 you're they're both you're beginning to see source through self.
47:31
So one way to say this is like the the transer the beginning of the absolute is
47:37
starting to arise without state training. Right? So it's not it's not this it's
47:43
huh there's something coming in that they may not they when they they may not be
47:49
looking directly at source if we're just talking about this developmentally and not as if someone's gone through like a
47:56
rigorous state training right they're just bumbling along in the world being a person they haven't found all of the integral
48:02
somethings they're just they're they're just being a person in the world all of a sudden
48:08
the absolute begins to waft ed in, but they don't know what this is yet. So, the source is coming in, but they don't
48:14
know what it is. But when they look at the world, they start seeing that there's uh a bit of a um the the melting
48:21
of boundaries that what seemed to be solid and fixed. It's starting to soften
48:27
in in the colors. Wilbur when he uses the word turquoise and then he describes
48:34
it. Sometimes in my listening he's describing advanced
48:39
4.5 and sometimes he's describing 5.0. He puts it together.
48:46
Yeah. Um also sometimes early 5.5
48:51
also can fit within some of the turquoise. Okay. So, so it's kind of one of those
48:56
places where um Wilbur's colors don't exactly line up and there's a bit of an
49:03
overlap and we one of the beauties I think of Terry's model is it helps us get really precise. Yeah.
49:08
What do we mean? Do we mean advanced teal that has a capacity for really like
49:13
nuance systems thinking? What about and maybe having powerful state experiences of both witnessing you know
49:21
Toria or Toriata you know beyond when the witness actually collapses just pure
49:26
witness excuse me pure subjectivity with no witness right these are very very advanced states right
49:32
could if they're probably if they're training or they have some sort of a inclination we could say
49:38
a karma we might say yeah I was going to say karma and then I was like well
49:44
or inclination depending on how you know, um, but then in but 5.0 can also
49:49
be a turquoise. It's just it's not complex though. They have complexity. They have more complexity than 4.5 teal,
49:58
but it doesn't sound and this is also really important to bring up. It doesn't often sound more complex. And so this is
50:06
this is where Teal, who sometimes will put themselves at the frothing edge of
50:14
uh evolution. They're like, "Whatever the highest stage is, that's where I must be." They'll see 5.0 in its
50:22
unstable boundary weirdness and they'll say, "Oh,
50:27
you're just green." Four. It's a 4.0. You're a wash in multi-perspectal madness. Clearly,
50:33
because they're like, "Well, nothing matters. Yeah, cuz and in a sense they are
50:39
in well what's happened but the one of the differences is that is that it's sorry I was say one one of
50:45
the differences is that it's individual not socially oriented. Yeah. What we can say is that in the
50:52
point's there's more of a relativism view. This could be 2.0 3 whatever it
50:59
is. And so 5.0 know is a um a more advanced relativism.
51:06
Oh, I like that. Right. And so it's a it's a it's it's building on the relativism that we might
51:12
see in 4.0, but it's it has more capac it's it's a different kind of
51:17
relativism. Um I like to use the word awaring and and this comes from GPS. Um, when he
51:24
uses the I play with it a little bit like when he uses the puts the the the prefix a he doesn't mean like negative
51:32
like if we were to say amoral it usually means like no morals. When Ger uses the
51:37
word a like a perspectival he means it in the positive sense meaning free from.
51:43
Yeah. So I like the word awaring that it's like it's it's free from a particular perspective. You could say aperspectal.
51:49
It's just a wearing is prettier, but it's like you're you're freeer
51:54
from from perspectives, which to 4.5
52:00
teal, which really likes to rank perspectives. Yeah. If they don't really understand 5.0 know
52:07
because they haven't touched it yet or they haven't listened to this conversation or a conversation like this
52:14
instead of understanding it as yet a different perspective that requires being met in a new way. it can drop them
52:21
into the sort of teal shadow of, oh, you're just being so green. Like, you can't like take a stand on anything. And
52:28
they're like, well, that's because everything is made up. And, you know, life is like an unfolding, you know,
52:34
wonky like turkey. And they're like, I don't even know what you're saying, dude.
52:40
Like, there's structure in this world and like things matter. I've been fighting for it because of my purposeful
52:46
heart. And they're like, you're making that up. And they're like, you're so green. And it's like, well, actually, they're not.
52:52
They're they're at a different uh edge of unfolding and discovery. That's fascinating. Yeah. And I I mean,
52:58
I remember my younger days in the integral circles, you know, certainly running into people that in hindsight
53:04
were clearly at 5.0. And the hallmark I would say was a sense of feeling sort of
53:09
a little confused initially you know which now I know when I meet someone and
53:15
I feel confused to slow down and pay attention because they may be making meaning beyond my capacity.
53:21
Um but it's that confusion and then the compulsion right to get on top of it and
53:27
understand it which is sort of a drive of 4.5 teal. Exactly. So, is there anything
53:34
else you want to explore about 5.0 or do you want to move into the next one? Let's let's Yeah, let's let's move it up. Let me pull up the uh pull up the
53:42
little graph again. But yeah, I I think that's good. So, what we've been exploring is this
53:48
entry into a new world space, into a new tier. This is a new ontology. Remember,
53:54
ontology is the study of what is reality, what is real. Each world space,
54:00
each tier is unpacking that question in its own unique way. So when we enter
54:06
into the the metaware, we're entering into a whole new sense of what reality is. And some of it involves melting away
54:14
some of the previous certainties. Now, as we move into the fifth person
54:20
perspective, what we said was that 5.0 O is the emerging expression of the fifth
54:28
person perspective. 5.5 it's now the maturing aspect of the
54:34
fifth person perspective. So what starts to happen here is we're
54:40
able to uh begin to get active
54:45
with this notion that things are constructed. Whereas in 5.0 I know there's this uh
54:52
the echoes of transpersonal awareness is re-organizing
54:59
our whole experience and things are falling like melting and boundaries are
55:04
uh melting away. 5.5 now has meta awareness. They're able to
55:11
now look at that transpersonal awareness and say, "Hey, look, I'm witnessing awareness.
55:18
I'm witnessing awareness. Now, you can take a course
55:24
and they're going to talk about witnessing awareness. Like you can take a meditation class and they're going to talk about witnessing awareness. So, we
55:30
have to be really careful here. I could be in 4.0 green, take a a Buddhist
55:36
retreat and the teacher is talking about witnessing awareness and I can start
55:42
using those words witnessing awareness. But what am I talking about? Well, I'm talking about source. I'm talking about
55:47
a state. And so 5.5, the maturing fifth person perspective.
55:53
It needs to have the state of being aware of
55:59
awareness. You can have that experience earlier with training or grace or karma or
56:07
karma. Dumb luck. Hits you on the head. Yeah. Hits you on the head. Right. You can
56:13
have that earlier. The difference here, and I really hope that this becomes clearer for for all of
56:19
us, it's that in 5.5, you need that. Yeah, you don't need it in 2.0. That doesn't
56:26
mean you can't have it, right? It's just when you look out into the world in 2.0, you're going to see a 2.0
56:31
world. Now, 5.5, when they look into the world, they're going to build upon
56:38
all of this boundary falling away that 5.0 I know began because this is
56:43
the maturing fifth person from perspective. They're going to start saying, "Okay, so there's that Chinese
56:49
medicine thing over here. There's this Buddhist tradition over there. There's
56:55
uh developmental theory over here. Um there's this other system of understanding emotions over there. And
57:02
all of those boundaries of all of those systems that take themselves so seriously and really want to keep their
57:08
teachings pure, 5.5 can be like, well, but all those boundaries are fluid
57:14
constructs. They're constructs. So in in a sense relatively arbitrary,
57:20
right? So I want as from I as 5.5 I want
57:26
to begin weaving these things together. Right. Right. Because because they're all like threads in a tapestry that you
57:32
said. They're all threads in a tapestry. And what you're getting in 5.5 is the mature
57:38
individual meaware. The the mature meaware individual and it's active, not receptive,
57:44
right? Because it's a.5, right? And so you have 1.5.
57:50
I want what uh this like toddler like kind of red toddler. I want what I two-year-old. I want what I want when I
57:56
want it. And then you have 3.5. Oh, I'm genetically modifying that stuff because
58:01
I want to change the world. Right. Right. And then 5.5 is like, oh, you want me to
58:07
like keep those traditions separate? Well, I'm the cosmic dreamw weaver. I'm going to I'm the weaver of dreams. I'm
58:15
going to take this cosmic e floresence and I'm going to weave it into this other thing. And so what you start to
58:20
see is um the language gets a lot more
58:26
complicated. It's probably some of the most
58:31
complicated language that you'll hear in all of the metaware
58:38
because it's an active.5 because it's an active individual.5. And it kind of it can it doesn't always but
58:45
it can have this feeling of like well let's take this like you know metagenetic you know cross structure and
58:52
like melded in with the unfolding of an infinite like you know floral mousse and then I'm going to take that and I'm
58:57
going to it's just there's such um um an ease
59:04
with bending constructs and whereas whereas the 4.5 would
59:10
although they they're aware They have a frame that they're looking through a frame. What will we say? They're they're
59:17
attached to their frame. Well, there there's not it's not as loose
59:22
there. It feels structury. It's like there's levels and there's lines, but that's actually not up for
59:28
negotiation. That's actually that's a that's almost a fixed reality.
59:34
Whereas whereas at 5.5 be like developmental lens too.
59:40
Yeah. I mean, I think it depends on the person. Yeah, there's a feeling to it. In 4.5,
59:46
it's like there's levels, there's lines, there's structure stages, there's state stages, there's quadrants,
59:54
you know, it's like there's a kind of like, so if I was looking through that lens, I'm like, okay, I want to
1:00:00
understand Keith. So, I'm going to look at the structure stage lens. I'm going to look at the state lens. I'm going to
1:00:06
look at the four quadrants. there's a kind of like a this all fits together in
1:00:11
a perfectly sort of elegant system. 5.5 is like oh yeah man all that's made
1:00:17
up but if it's useful if it's useful let's go with it because 5.5
1:00:24
they start to understand and this is something that I think Ken Wilbur has brought forward that's sort of become
1:00:30
lesser known or lesser explored is his integral post metaphysics.
1:00:36
Yeah. And at the beginning I think integral post metaphysics really starts
1:00:41
to arise at a 5.5 perspective. And what I mean by this in case listeners don't
1:00:46
know what that is. Integral post metaphysics recognizes that epistemology
1:00:52
the lens through which I know the world and the very real world the ontology
1:00:58
arise together. It's you'll see some philosophies that
1:01:04
will favor the knower. They'll say, "Oh, it's all coming from the knower." You'll have other philosophies that'll favor
1:01:11
ontology. Well, if you like there's a real world out there. You just have to trip over it and like look through the
1:01:16
right microscope and you're going to find the real world. 5.5 says, "Yeah, no, it's more fluid than that." Your
1:01:23
epistemologic your your knowing lens gives is is born simultaneously with a
1:01:32
reality. As the lens broadens and deepens, the reality broadens and deepens. It's not just the looker. It's
1:01:39
the looker and the real are are closer together than in the earlier stages,
1:01:45
right? Sorry, ju just a fusion of ontology and epistemology is what you're saying.
1:01:51
Whereas ontology really would be the hallmark of 3.5 and the epistemological point of view is really going to be the
1:01:57
hallmark of 4.0 you know, generally speaking, if you're an academic and philosopher and that kind of things,
1:02:02
right? Right. And so here we start seeing those come together. And so back back to your question, it's like they'll be able to
1:02:09
look at integral theory and they'll be like, well, I mean, it's all made up, but is it functionally useful? And
1:02:16
because it's all made up, and I can ask if it's functionally useful. I can also ask the question, well, it's like 80%
1:02:23
functionally useful. So, I'm going to take in these three other systems that don't really are not usually included in
1:02:28
integral theory, and I'm going to weave them in in this really creative, exciting way,
1:02:34
and that's going to create a new a new set of constructs
1:02:40
that's going to then help the world in a in a new kind of way. Now, I'm speaking from a very verbal perspective that
1:02:51
um is inclined to teach people things, right? So, it's it's a it's a it's a
1:02:57
projection of my own like what I do. But I I want to be clear because often 5.5
1:03:02
it's of all of my clients when people are moving through 5.5 the
1:03:08
comment that they feel unseen by a particular developmental model
1:03:13
that's trying to describe them is the highest. It's very common for the fifth person
1:03:18
perspective to not feel seen because they don't have a reciprocity that's going to come up at sixperson
1:03:24
perspective. And so I want to say just to speak to that, not everyone moving through 5.5 is this
1:03:32
active verbal weaving meta models together. I know people that are that are artists
1:03:39
that their speaking is quite simple, but if you ask them their relationship to
1:03:44
art, right? They're going to show you how they're weaving all of these art systems
1:03:50
together, but not conceptually, visually, from their heart, intuitively.
1:03:56
And so I just want to I just want to make sure to mention that because sometimes
1:04:01
the written descriptions of 5.5 are a little can be misleading for some people and I don't want to make the same
1:04:08
mistake in our conversation. No, I appreciate that. To to me it goes back to, you know, Wilbur's idea and I
1:04:13
don't know if he if he was the one that first proposed this, but the lines of intelligence that, you know, there can be
1:04:19
this these insights can arise in different ways that are not just the cognitive.
1:04:25
That's right. That's right. And you know, some people are less verbal just in general. You know, like I've been
1:04:31
always been a very verbal person. So, right, no matter what I do, it's been very
1:04:36
verbal with lots of words. I have some clients where, you know, they they move into 5.5 and
1:04:43
they're not like they don't talk funny. Like sometimes 5.5 like it just sounds
1:04:49
like you talk funny. You talk funny. I mean, it's really and it's like when we're looking at stages
1:04:55
inventories and we're reading 5.5 like there sometimes it'll be this, you know, it's just this rolling this thing into
1:05:02
the next thing into the next thing like the the the infinite doors is like a mirror of like your own true face which
1:05:09
is like falling through to the you know the rising of the e you know e floresing
1:05:15
and you're one of the things that Terry talks about which is so true is sometimes with 5.5 by the time you get
1:05:21
to the end of reading what they've said or listening to what they've said, you have no idea what they're they said in
1:05:27
the beginning. Sure. Makes total sense. And and I want to say that to contrast
1:05:32
it with I've also met folks in 5.5 that just don't do that. Yeah,
1:05:38
they just don't do that. But if you press them on how they make meaning, it's all the deep structure is all
1:05:44
there. And this is one of the beauties of Terry's model is that it doesn't require that you show up in a certain
1:05:51
way contentwise. The deep structures are what we're
1:05:56
listening for. And so the more textural somatic heart-c centered human,
1:06:03
they may not have all the words, but you'll still be able to hear the structures if you listen closely.
1:06:09
Yeah. And the emphasis I just I remember years ago I met with a guy named Father Thomas Keading who is sort of a was
1:06:16
Trappist monk I guess here in Colorado and very luminous heart and uh the only
1:06:23
way I could describe the energetic and the way that he experienced the universe was entirely through his heart.
1:06:29
Yeah. And so the his language was okay but it was more of his it's very hard to
1:06:34
describe. It was more of his presence. It was more of his his profound profoundly evolved love of and
1:06:41
relationship with God. And it just it blew all my circuits out because it was completely beyond my capacity
1:06:47
to understand what the hell he was beaming at me. But it but it he wasn't giving me a lecture. Right. It was
1:06:53
something else entirely. Exactly. And and it really helped in some ways change changed the course of how I understood the universe
1:06:59
which is that I'm very head-entered but oh some people are deeply heart-c centered and some people are deeply body
1:07:05
centered and to your point this evolutionary unfolding can happen through any of those centers
1:07:12
and probably more. Yeah. And also what you're describing with him is a depth dimension you know.
1:07:18
Yeah. you you know I didn't talk about this but um you know states and stages
1:07:24
can unfold interdependently that's something that I think Terry has beautifully sort of discovered and then
1:07:31
the Wilber's lattice it shows that states and stages are independent
1:07:37
and what I'd like to invite is that they're both true it's a both end there's there's ways in which states and
1:07:42
stages are independent but there's also ways in which they they have an interdependency and there's a there's
1:07:48
a way that they can grow together in a healthy person. Yeah. So, it's just like in um Chinese
1:07:54
medicine, we first learn the pulse. We learn what a healthy pulse is so that we can then reference everything else in
1:08:02
relationship to that. We can look at well, what would healthy development look like? There'd be a a an
1:08:09
interdependent growing together of growing up and growing deep. Yeah, that would be the the the the healthy
1:08:16
ideal. And then we look at what's actually happening. I've met people that are in the fifth person perspective that are quite at the surface because they're
1:08:22
jacked up on coffee and they're overworking. And hey, hey, I'm sitting right here. Come
1:08:28
on. Not here. And then and then and then there's people that are, you know, in a
1:08:34
very early earlier developmental wave um as their primary way of making meaning,
1:08:39
but they've cultivated great depth. So we can see the independence of it but then we can also see how they can uh
1:08:45
work together. Yeah. Be beautiful. Oh yeah. Go ahead. No, go ahead. You had a thought. You
1:08:51
want to finish? Yeah. I was just wanting to just review to just kind of come back. So in 5.0 we
1:08:57
feel the the impressions of the absolute but we don't really know what's happening yet. And then when we look at
1:09:04
the So when we look at the world, what we see in the world is there's there's things are starting to to the boundaries
1:09:11
are starting to fray. The the things that used to mean everything now are starting to melt. 5.5 is now the.5. So
1:09:20
it's maturing fifth person perspective. It's now able to look at the absolute a
1:09:26
little bit more fully as a feature of the structure of the stage. Right?
1:09:32
And so now it can see trans. It's aware of awareness. It can witness awareness.
1:09:37
And then when it looks at the world, it can start to see a world where multiple
1:09:43
paradigms can be woven together. Cross paradigmatic, metaparmatic. And
1:09:50
even if they don't use those words or walk in circles that use funny language
1:09:55
like you know the transpost meta model of you know infinite becoming
1:10:02
you'll see that they're seeing a world where those things can be woven together
1:10:07
even as they might not be speaking like like that.
1:10:14
Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So I want to hit two
1:10:19
more things relatively briefly here and and one is a question which is that it
1:10:26
seems to me and I'm curious if you would agree with this that these spiritual traditions of history
1:10:32
by and large when they are talking about versions of awakening or enlightenment or um you know coming into full contact
1:10:40
with Christos or any of these sort of ideas um Atman and Braman become one or
1:10:45
toita or Ians and all these things um
1:10:50
that really they're they're really speaking to the maturation of a state
1:10:55
experience where it matures into sort of a state stage as Wilbur would say and um
1:11:02
we would know that because when they that's them in your words looking at the absolute or looking at source and when
1:11:08
they turn and then explain to us through their writings and teachings
1:11:15
it's easier for us to gauge that it's coming from uh a particular state
1:11:21
particular stage that is not 5.0. So set another way awakening
1:11:27
enlightenment seem to occur. It doesn't seem like the the masters of old are
1:11:32
talking about 5.0 or 5.5 or 6.0 at all. Right. I I don't know.
1:11:38
Yeah. But this this is a guess, right? But what I would what I would sort of take from what you're saying is that yes, we
1:11:45
don't want to assume that when someone is speaking about these absolute states that it automatically means we're
1:11:52
talking about these later stages, right? And and this is where I I see a huge
1:11:58
confusion that occurs a lot. Yeah. Um what we need to to know is well, what
1:12:04
reality do those sages and mystics see? Yeah. What's the what are they or what are they seeing
1:12:10
through might be another way to see it. Sure. And exactly what's empty? What? Yeah. What's empty? Or the roles
1:12:17
empty or my persona is empty? Right. Is the whole construct of a human world
1:12:22
empty? Is awareness itself empty? What's empty? Right. Right. So, exactly. So, just to kind of
1:12:28
build on that, it's like, okay, I I turn towards source. I'm in touch with the timeless, boundless. I can see that
1:12:35
that's the ultimate reality if I'm going to use that kind of language, right? And then I turn towards the world and I say
1:12:40
the mountain is unreal. And that's all I that's what I say. The mountain is unreal. The um
1:12:49
uh my my role is unreal. My role as a parent is unreal. That's all concrete stuff,
1:12:55
right? Can I see that context are unreal? I have to see the context before I can see
1:13:01
that it's empty. I have to see the uh cross paradigm
1:13:08
cross paradigmatic meta model of like you know multiple interweavingings in order to see that that's empty
1:13:16
otherwise I'm seeing a mountain and I'm I'm in the concrete world and I have an
1:13:21
awakening experience maybe I've stabilized it like that
1:13:28
yeah I mean that was one you know as as a longtime Zen practitioner you know I would A lot of their writings really
1:13:34
speak to seeing through the concrete, you know, seeing through the rules themselves. Seeing through the the oh, it's adorable that you think that I'm a
1:13:40
teacher up on this pedestal and we're supposed to do all these, you know, and they they really cut.
1:13:45
What do they do? They It's sort of the idea of I mean, it came from Zen. If you see Buddha on the side of the road, kill him. Right? That's that's a very
1:13:52
concrete way to show, right, that it's like, you know, don't trust teachers, don't trust teachings. What do you
1:13:58
trust? Your experience. That's it. Right? It doesn't say if you see Buddha, you know, in a contextual field of
1:14:05
prosperatic interweaving, you know, slicing all the bits. Doesn't say that. Right. Right. Right. Okay. I just I
1:14:13
wanted to just touch on that at least a little bit. And then maybe I don't want to get too much into this because I
1:14:19
think there's a there's a risk of this generating more confusion than clarity, but maybe just touch on 6.0 0 and 6.5
1:14:26
just so we have a sort of a sense of of what this Metaware tier ultimately has
1:14:31
the potential to grow into. Exactly. So we've been seeing that all along we've been an unfolding of of a
1:14:39
human world which is um uh characterized by self-reflection. We experience
1:14:45
separation in the way that most other things that have arisen over the last 13.7 billion years don't experience. And
1:14:54
as a part of that, we've been grappling with these questions of what does it mean to be an individual? What does it
1:14:59
mean to be an to be a collective? And we've been exploring that also through
1:15:05
these six sixperson perspectives. So far we've talked about five of them. Each
1:15:11
person perspective has an emerging aspect and a maturing aspect. In that we've been exploring what does it mean
1:15:17
to be in space. What does it to be mean to be something unfolding in time? And
1:15:23
then we get into the metaware and we start dissolving space in 5.0. And then
1:15:29
one of the things that comes up in 5.5 that we didn't talk about yet is they start uh deconstructing time
1:15:37
first as a as a evolutionary object. time is this thing and it's not real.
1:15:42
And you'll start hearing like they'll say, "Oh, the past, present, and future are all arising right now
1:15:48
because they're deconstructing time." At the end of 5.5, what starts to occur is timelessness,
1:15:56
which is an experience of the absolute, right? It's different than time as a construct. It's experiencing
1:16:03
timelessness starts coming up at 5.5. Now, as we move into 6.0, 0 now because
1:16:11
of the the the dissolution that's occurred in 5.0 opening the opening us to the
1:16:17
possibility for boundlessness that's where there is no space
1:16:23
right and 5.5 deconstructs time and then opens us into the experience of the timeless
1:16:31
right now we enter into 6.0 know and we're going into a collective stage. So now
1:16:37
there's a metaware collective. One aspect is the absolute
1:16:46
one aspect is the relative. So these are primary polarities that the whole
1:16:51
meaware tier is exploring. It begins to be sort of opened through the fifth
1:16:56
person perspective. But in the sixperson perspective now we can more fully see
1:17:02
these two different um polarities in our direct experience because of the
1:17:07
dissolution process that's occurred in 5.0 and 5.5. Mhm. So
1:17:14
we have when we're looking at the absolute we're now able to see more clearly and cleanly. We're able to see
1:17:21
timelessness and boundlessness. Mhm. Timelessness is the direct experience of something that does not move.
1:17:28
It's crystal clear. Mhm. And it doesn't have uh it doesn't move
1:17:34
in time. Boundlessness there's no change. It's unchanging.
1:17:43
It doesn't have any boundaries. It doesn't have any location. So we can experience timeless
1:17:49
boundlessness. It's not like I'm experiencing timeless boundlessness inside me.
1:17:54
It's it's everywhere because there is no insides or outsides. That's the
1:18:00
it's another construct, right? It's another construct. But now they're feeling it.
1:18:05
Yeah. Right. They're feeling it because if 5.0 says that's that is a construct. 6.0 is
1:18:13
going to start touching it again. You can do it earlier, but it's going to have to start coming up more on its own,
1:18:19
right? From a developmental perspective. And when you say touching it, touching it in a in an experiential, felt,
1:18:25
embodied, like a knowing a knowing. How do you know that? I just I just know
1:18:30
it. It's Yeah, it's a direct experience, right? Because the senses are growing up
1:18:36
the whole time. They start with 1.0 and they grow up and get more and more refined. So there's a there's a subtler
1:18:42
very subtle sensor that starts to come up here. Now that's the absolute side.
1:18:48
The relative side is looking at very big holes.
1:18:53
All of existence. Oh, very big holes. W
1:19:00
very big. A big hole. No, there's it's there's a big interdependent vast existence.
1:19:08
Yeah. I'm less interested in like the interweaving of meta models and like all this complexity. All of a sudden things
1:19:14
get really simple and vast and all of a sudden you know you see some churches
1:19:19
are called like sacred heart church you know all of a sudden you know someone is like oh that's what you mean because
1:19:26
there's a quality of love that's permeating the field
1:19:33
that's pouring through this being that doesn't have boundaries. So they they're now what happens is the
1:19:40
absolute and the relatives start having a reciprocity together. People start saying like um um things are being are
1:19:49
like soaked by this love soaked by this timeless boundlessness.
1:19:55
Things are saturated. There's a relationship that's occurring. They still have them separate though.
1:20:02
They're still two things that are in in reciprocity with each other. Right. Right. They're it's it's they're
1:20:09
flowing between the two like a polarity kind of. Yeah. And the key is I just want to keep coming back to this because I feel like
1:20:15
it's so important. Yes, you can be in 2.5 and open have a heart opening and
1:20:22
experience big love. 6.0 it's going to happen without that.
1:20:29
You don't need to have a a a heart sacred heart of the all you know the
1:20:36
right. You don't need that for 2.5 to be healthy.
1:20:42
In order for 6.0 to have its deep structure, we need that,
1:20:48
right? Part of it, right? Part of it. Because what's happening is the absolute and the relative are going
1:20:53
to get closer to closer together. So in 5.0, the boundless starts to become
1:20:59
possible. In 5.5, the timeless starts to open. Right? So now we're we're
1:21:05
beginning to be able to clarify a little bit more as we go into 6.0. Okay, now we have the absolute and the relative.
1:21:12
We're in direct relationship with both as a regular feature of our meaning
1:21:18
making and direct experience. That way they can start to come together so that um in 6.5 they begin to uh
1:21:26
interpenetrate. So the absolute and the relative start to interpenetrate more and more. Um in
1:21:35
6.5 it's a um uh a.5 stage. So it's the maturing and there's a trajectory. So
1:21:42
now the person is able to see again. 6.0 is not really focused on like the
1:21:47
details of like there's a pebble and like there there's a flower like yes
1:21:52
they can see that stuff but sometimes it's just this big love that's like oh my god. Well, they're swim they're
1:21:58
swimming in the soup again. They're swimming in a soup that's like, "Oh, oh my god, it's the most, you know,
1:22:05
sacred." 6.5, they start to see trajectory again.
1:22:11
Yeah. They start to see that within that loving field, within the timeless,
1:22:16
boundless awareness, there is an evolving cosmos
1:22:23
that starts the ground of the cosmos is the world of matter. the the flowing emergence from matter is
1:22:30
the world of life. Then comes the world of the self-reflective mind.
1:22:38
This is the world of humanity. And and the the key of humanity is that
1:22:43
there's a looker. There's an observer. And so it's possible that, you know, 6.5
1:22:49
is coming to terms with all of this collapsing into itself, preparing itself for whatever comes
1:22:55
next, where there's no longer a witness. Right. Right. The collapse of the witness where there's just pure
1:23:02
there's just pure rising. It's pure rising. And again, we can speculate about what comes later. The research we have is up to 6.5.
1:23:09
Yeah. Um, those I presume are rare as hens teeth, as they would say.
1:23:14
It's rare. Yeah. six the sixperson perspective is fairly rare and I would say even further
1:23:21
that the sixperson perspective is very rare in a robust way also even rarer
1:23:26
that would make sense because well for one developmentally you're kind of a bit out on a limb by yourself so you're not
1:23:31
going to cocktail parties the 6.0 cocktail party, right? And and this is where I find
1:23:38
throughout the whole Metaware actually um often when I have clients that are going into the Metaware, I'll invite
1:23:43
them to explore, you know, really good systems in state training because just
1:23:48
as you want to clean up uh shadow, it's really helpful to clean up relationship
1:23:55
to states because interesting in 6.0 0 and 6.5 it becomes really
1:24:01
important that the balance between the absolute and the relative is really solid and you have a really robust
1:24:08
relationship to timeless boundlessness which is on the absolute side and you have a really robust relationship to
1:24:14
eternity and infinity time that goes on forever space that goes on forever which is part of the
1:24:20
relative right you want to have those really well balanced just like any polarity if both
1:24:26
polarity if both sides of the polarity are balanced Then when they go to integrate, it doesn't integrate in a weird lopsided way.
1:24:32
Yeah. No, it makes total sense. Makes total sense. And it's at the edge. Just to be perfectly candid, it's like I can
1:24:37
feel myself getting fuzzy. Right. Right. As I'm listening to you, it's like it's it's like I have to keep focusing back in because I can literally
1:24:44
feel that you're talking over my head and and so I I can I can con conceptually get it.
1:24:50
Yeah. But I I have no felt sense of what you're talking about. So it's an interesting interesting to sit here and
1:24:56
go, Keith, pay attention. Um, and I just want to reflect that to anyone who's watching this that that's
1:25:01
part of the humility of this process is is um recognizing when someone is
1:25:07
speaking over our head and just celebrating that. Oh, wonderful. You know, more things more places to go in
1:25:13
the future maybe, you know. Yeah. And you know, and what I would encourage along those lines, which I think is really, you know, it's
1:25:18
important what you're bringing up, I tend to look at development as distributed.
1:25:23
Yeah. Whereas in integral world a lot of times the focus is on like where am I at where are you at are you
1:25:29
leading edge like like who's above me who's below me and it's like that that kind of thing.
1:25:36
Another way to look at it is like you know the world has all of these these
1:25:41
waves of development expressed in some aspect of us as a collective
1:25:48
body of human beings. And just like if even if somebody's over
1:25:54
your head, you know, for the most part, six person perspective, things change
1:26:00
there a little bit. They want to belong. So even if someone's at, you know, 4.5 teal and we're talking about 5.0 or 5.5
1:26:08
and that feels over their head, those folks, they still want to belong. Yeah. There's still people that even if
1:26:14
we don't understand the contours of their experience, it doesn't mean that they're like better or they're just
1:26:21
fine. I know this because people come and see me and want help and there's
1:26:28
suffering, you know, there's there's suffering in 5.0, there's suffering in 5.5, there can
1:26:35
be suffering in 6.0, there can even be suffering in 6.5. Things change there.
1:26:41
But I'm just saying that this this is like it's not a ranking. The purpose isn't for ranking. Yeah.
1:26:46
It's like how do we how do we love the person we don't understand? And that can happen both ways.
1:26:52
Yeah. Yeah. And there's a surrender to just being on at least for me there's a surrender to just being on the this
1:27:01
wheel of unfolding. Yeah. You know, and the freedom for me is is is knowing that
1:27:08
I'll always be on the wheel. Yeah. Until the whole wheel goes away. Right.
1:27:16
Right. Right. Anyway, okay. I think we've covered enough. Quite a
1:27:21
comprehensive We did everything in just Well, we did a lot in a short time. We covered a lot of territory. Um, okay.
1:27:28
So, Alexander, if people want to know more about you, they want to work with you, they want to, you know, hear more
1:27:35
about what you're up to, where would they find more? Yeah, there's two places. They can go to uh eosarnarningcollective.com.
1:27:42
Yeah, eosarnarningcollective.com and then people can also find me at the
1:27:48
newfield network.com. Um that's where I do most of my teaching um and
1:27:54
facilitating others. And so and I also uh once a year usually I do a um a
1:28:00
recognizing stages course uh with Stages International where you know Terry's Terry and Kim Bart's organization. And
1:28:07
so um I also do that there which I I took last year and it was it was very helpful because uh you you go
1:28:13
you sort of go through each stage and sort of deconstruct what that stage is
1:28:19
all about and how to recognize what that stage is. So it's it's it's very cool and very helpful. Wonderful.
1:28:24
So wonderful. Okay my friend. Well thank you everybody once more for for joining
1:28:30
us and we will see you in two weeks time. Bye for now. Yeah. Thank you so much everybody. Heat.
1:28:35
Heat. [Music]
1:28:41
[Applause] [Music]
1:28:48
[Applause]
1:28:53
[Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause]
1:29:00
Heat. Heat. [Music]

text/TheHighestStagesofHumanFlourishing.txt