INTEGRAL REVIEW

A Transdisciplinary and Transcultural Journal

for New Thought, Research, and Praxis

 

http://integral-review.org

Published by ARINA, Inc.

__________________________________________________

 

IR’s Occasional Newsletter

#1 February 2007

 

Welcome to IR’s first newsletter! Our objective for these periodicals is to keep the growing IR community abreast of what we are doing and thinking. In addition to IR news, this first installment introduces a regular feature, IR Editors’ Voices. We invite "Letters to the Editor" that might be posted in a Journal issue or in a Newsletter (send to ireditors@integral-review.org). Archives of IR’s Occasional Newsletter will be available on IR’s web site.

__________________________________________________

 

Starting this week: IR’s first online dialog forums are open. These are based on selected articles in Issue #3. Three are open-to-the-public forums, two are invited forums. The invited forums are viewable by others, as guests. We invite such guests to join the meta-dialogs about the intended process of integral dialog as they observe invited forums-in-progress. Discussion “umbrellas” are:

 

-     Open forum: Toward Integral Dialog (including but not confined to Murray & Ross article, Toward Integral Dialog: Provisional Guidelines for Online Forums)

-     Open forum: Anderson article (Of Syntheses and Surprises: Toward a Critical Integral Theory)

-     Open forum: Laszlo article (Rationale for an Integral Theory of Everything)

-     Invited forum: Anderson article  

-     Invited forum: Laszlo article  

 

Starting mid February:  Invited and open forums on Roy’s article, A Process Model of Integral Theory. 

Starting early March:  Invited and open forums on Commons’ article, Measuring an Approximate g in Animals and People.

Contact us at integral.review.forums@integral-review.org if you want to be one of several more participants in these upcoming, invited forums.

 

You’re warmly invited to participate in any of the topics discussed within the open forums. Read our dialog guidelines at http://integral-review.org/forums/guidelines.asp so you have some ideas of what to expect—and of what we expect. Then come join us via the login instructions on the forums webpage http://integral-review.org/forums/. We look forward to seeing you there!

 

Sponsorship of the initial IR forums is underwritten by ARINA, IR’s publisher. We hope you find these to offer unique and hopefully integral communications and knowledge-building opportunities. Part of our experiment with online forums will be evaluating how much effort is required to create and maintain them. We welcome offers of time and funds to help us continue the forums! These IR forums are powered by iCohere.

 

Contributions earmarked for Integral Review and its programs are tax-deductible. Its publisher ARINA, Inc. is a US 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Secure transactions via PayPal or credit/debit cards can be made at http://www.global-arina.org/otherpages/supportarina.html.

 

Have this kind of experience? IR could benefit from some additional volunteers with a keen sense of IR’s mission and the ability to (a) review funder descriptions we provide from database searches, (b) compare funders’ program interests to IR’s, and (c) draft components of funding proposals to funders. If this may fit your ability and a bit of available time, please write to us: ireditors@intergral-review.org.

 

Frequently Asked Questions about IR forums are posted at http://integral-review.org/forums/faqs.asp.  

 

Integral Review’s Issue #4 is coming out in early June with a great lineup of works and more coming in! Remember, we publish a variety of works in addition to peer-reviewed articles. We welcome your submissions year-round.

 

IR’s statistics are growing!

Month

Unique

Visitors

Pages

Visited

January 2007

598

2,239

December 2006 – Issue #3

887

4,582

November 2006

332

1,066

October 2006

265

848

September 2006

263

966

August 2006

231

752

July 2006

321

1,385

June 2006 – Issue #2

715

3,440

 

 

IRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIR

 

IR Editors’ Voices

 

What's exciting lately & why, and things to read


Jonathan Reams

My life is currently undergoing a major transition, as I take up a position as an associate professor in the Department of Education at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim. It is a half teaching, half research position in a Masters in Counseling program where I will focus on organizational counseling, coaching and leadership issues. I was somewhat skeptical at first of my ability to feel comfortable in a counseling program, but as I went through the program’s core introductory textbook, I recognized that I have been immersed in this world for much of my life already.

 

In addition, much to my delight I found that as I went through this text, (Theories of Counseling and Psychotherapy, a Multicultural Perspective. Ivey, D’Andrea, Ivey and Simek-Morgan, 2007), I noticed a distinctly integral undercurrent of contextualizing the main forces in psychotherapy. Their descriptions of the development of each approach to counseling and psychotherapy situated them both culturally and historically, as well as in relation to the other branches of thought in the field. This was furthered by adding in sections on how the continued use of such early theories has been modified and adapted into multicultural situations. While all of this was good, near the end the authors presented their own approach of developmental counseling and therapy. I was further impressed by the skillful way they brought in the concept of development using a Piagetian framework and situated the other theories accordingly. What emerged was a framework for understanding how to assess where a client is at developmentally as well as culturally and how to address their issues using a combination of developmentally and culturally appropriate therapeutic methods.

 

I came away feeling refreshingly at home in the field knowing that the evolution of thinking there has begun to move into a multi-perspectival approach to integrating the strengths and contextualizing the weaknesses of all the various approaches to helping relationships. Integrating this foundation with its application in organizational and leadership issues will be a natural fit for me.

 

IRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIR

 

Thomas Jordan

 

One of the most fascinating things I do is coaching a leader with a considerable capacity for integral awareness. She is leading a secretariat for crime prevention and safety promotion in Gothenburg, Sweden's second largest city. As an integral leader, you have an ability to perceive and understand how specific problems and tasks are weaved into intricate and systemic interrelationships between institutional structures, societal trends, different individual frames of reference and cultural patterns of meaning, etc. You have a commitment to work for the realization of fundamental existential values and what is good for the whole. The ability to understand different people's actions and attitudes as a consequence of their embeddedness in particular perspectives certainly helps to use one's energies more efficiently, but it can also be really exasperating to encounter resistance and inertia due to a widespread lack of awareness of complexity. There is also an acute lack of fellow integralists among which to distribute the responsibilities for working with system-wide issues . . . It is great to see how a "natural" reasons, reacts, strategizes and manages intricate transformative processes, taking care to adapt communication to the meaning-making structures other actors have. This person never read a book by Wilber or any other theorist in the field of integral studies. She has simply found her own way into an "integral worldspace." Our field of knowledge could be greatly enriched, I think, by directing more attention to such people and how they make sense of what they are doing.

 

IRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIR

 

Tom Murray

 

Over the last couple decades as I was engaged in R&D in educational software, I was also a casual but earnest student of "the big questions" of life (truth, justice, beauty, parenting, and dancing) which, regardless of the conundrum posed, always seemed to lead me down two compatible roads.  Along one road I was drawn to perspectives that elegantly and graciously incorporate seemingly discordant views, which, of course, lead me to an identification with integral theories.  Calling me down the other road was the strong impression that so many of the complications, tragedies, and debacles that befall us (from family life to work to international politics) are created or exacerbated by flaws in the ways that people process information that conflicts with one's beliefs or world view.  So for years I have also dabbled and played in the fields of contemplative practices and conflict resolution theories. And, at a still deeper causal level, where movements of heart and movements of mind intertwine, I can glimpse the critical importance of a set of skills that I call "epistemic sophistication." That's a fancy term for wisdom in how people can understand and deal with questions of what is true or right in situations of uncertainty, disagreement, emotional charge, or socio-political complexity—with insight and compassion.

 

Of the authors whose works have thrilled me as I try to tie all of this together (regarding the psychology, ethics, sociology, and epistemology parts, not the technology part), two stand out. First is philosopher Jürgen Habermas, who's texts can be a bit dense, but who's brilliant works exude a warmth and hopefulness for the human condition that is rare in critical theorists.  I've been so inspired by his explanations of how ethical constructs such as freedom, equality and justice necessarily form the very foundation of communication, knowledge building, and political-economic realities. I'm really enjoying reading Postmetaphysical Thinking at the moment. The second author is George Lakoff who's book Philosophy in the Flesh (co-authored with Mark Johnson) has had a significant impact on my understanding of the mind/body/reality relationship, and what it means to search for meaning (or truth or justice or beauty).

 

IRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIR

 

Sara Ross

 

One of my perennial global interests was in the foreground of my attention the week just before writing this. Given my commitment to developing healthy methods for how people and institutions can address troubling aspects of many socio-cultural-political-economic-environmental realities, this week I particularly wished we had time machines to move paradigmatic work forward and bring back its tools to serve our present day. I was one of over 3,200 individuals who submitted comments to the World Bank on its proposal for anti-corruption measures in developing countries. My small effort was to outline why and how such policies need a systemically-developmental re-framing and to supply and offer papers to explicate my points.

 

Concurrently, I was in conversation with two people (strangers to each other but not for long!) whose patented work I view as paradigmatic and exquisitely complementary. Integrated with such analyses as I sketched to the World Bank and with the power of the integral computer modeling the inventions will support, methods for how to design wiser policies and conditions for healthier behaviors on micro to meso to macro scales are within reach. When I wear my analyst hat, I wish I were a computer modeler, because complex integral analyses need that tool. Computer modeling to-date has not used integral, developmental, scalable programming that can address the layers of human development’s complexity.

 

Crucial foundations are showing up. In addition to his other work, John E. LaMuth’s U.S. Patent 6,587,846, dating from 2003, is a metaperspectival, developmental system that is an “inductive inference affective language analyzer simulating artificial intelligence [AI].” LaMuth currently has a second patent for AI under examination. The 2003 patent elucidates how ethical behaviors dynamically develop in interpersonal interactions. In December, Michael Lamport Commons (author of Integral Review’s issue 3 article “Measuring an Approximate g in Animals and People) and his colleague Mitzi Sturgeon White were granted U.S. Patent 7,152,051, which uses the Model of Hierarchical Complexity. Its formal theory elucidates how structures of reasoning (and any other tasks) develop in increasing complexity. Thus this newly patented work is a content-free metaperspectival system, using the Model as foundation in the design of stacked neural networks. This results in a new method for “intelligent control with hierarchical stacked neural networks.” Why am I excited about the implications of such inventions? They can underlie the development of ethical, complexly layered-and-integrated developmental analyses and predictions at different social scales. In turn, such tools can inform human endeavors at all scales, such as the World Bank’s and the finally-catalyzed worldwide attention on climate change—without waiting generations for enough humans to conceive, by themselves, genuinely integral approaches. This future now is full of potential for new methods—the hows—for fostering healthier local, national, and global social change and development.

 

IRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIR

Bonnitta Roy

I am an avid and eclectic reader of philosophy, and so one of the roles I play in IR is giving the initial feedback for the theoretical articles, and checking articles for consistency of argument with respect to established philosophical theory. This can be very abstract. However, when  I read an article, the most important thing for me is to try to get at the root cause of it—what is generating the enthusiasm and energy in the author for this work? I try to establish a connection with the author there, in the root cause, in order to be a better partner in helping the author to improve the work. Feedback of this sort often requires something more of the author—to reconnect with one’s basic intuition, or re-examine one’s fundamental view.

 

This is also the focus on my own work in Integral Theory—examining the basis or view from which the spectrum of perspectives arise. I am currently reading the collected works of Chogyam Trungpa alongside Sri Aurobindo’s, The Life Divine—and it’s the same process for me, trying to establish connections with these thinkers at the most basic level. Reading them through thousands upon thousands of pages, there is a parallel process that goes on in my mind—on the one hand I try to keep up with the complexity of their meta-systemic understanding, on the other hand I try to cut through that complexity to that place of clarity from which they have written.

 

Here are some examples of what I see as cutting through to that place of clarity, both accessible at: http://www.noetic.org/publications/review/issue33/main.cfm?page=r33_WrenLewis.html:  I Don’t Know: A Dialogue on Intuition, Interview with Rob Rabbin by Lourdes Billingsley, and Tongued with Fire: Personal Reflections on the Eternity Vision of T.S. Eliot, John Wren Kewis. And, a visual expression, Spirit Growing in the World, at http://www.patternlanguage.com/leveltwo/spiritframe.htm?/leveltwo/../personal/jungrep.htm

 

IRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIRIR

Russ Volckmann

In preparation for a forthcoming interview for the Integral Review, I have been reading articles by Basarab Nicolescu (renowned physicist and leader of an international transdisciplinarity movement; see Basarab Nicolescu, Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity, Karen-Claire Voss, tr. Albany: State University Press, 2002). The relevance of his work for an integral theory, perspective and approach seems bursting with possibility. He lays out the logic for multiple levels of reality and the connections between them. He notes, “…no one level of Reality constitutes a privileged place from which one is able to understand all the other levels of Reality.” Consequently, he makes a cogent case for multiple ways of knowing, multiple elements for making meaning. He shows the existence of levels of perception and how the flow of consciousness occurs across different levels of Reality. For now, I hope that this amount of information might stimulate your appetite for more and I am sure the interview will be extraordinary, not only for theory, but also for its implications in how we develop knowledge and meaning as a society.

 

IRIRIRIRIRIRIR  E N D  RIRIRIRIRIRIRIR

 

IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE ON IR’S MAILING LIST, PUT “UNSUBSCRIBE ME” IN THE SUBJECT LINE OF AN EMAIL TO IREDITORS@INTEGRAL-REVIEW.ORG