Roe, Roe, Roe Your Leaky Boat


Conflating resource warfare, self defense with abortion is a pretty big stretch @LaWanna.
I can see execution as not completely dissimilar but still a bit of an unusual conflating between an adult with some agency and a fetus/human with no agency. I was hoping that was NOT where you were going even though that’s how it came across.

I didn’t want to point out that taking things into the level of agency realm regarding worthiness of life has been the basis for extreme genocide on the planet.
Personally I can’t buy into agency as level of worthiness to live. Maybe I’m too ideological in this regard (to be trusted?) or don’t see your point.


I think we’ve reached a common landing area if we were to write abortion laws.

This question is an excellent example of a moral dilemma but does it relate to the realm of legislation or regulation? Are you implying that we bake in worthiness to live in our laws?
To answer your question, which comes across as a bit of deflection, I’m fairly certain I would grab the baby staring at me and crying.
Just as the case if I had to swerve the car to avoid killing either a mother with baby or 2 elderly people.
Thank God that we don’t have to make these either/or trade offs in our governance system.

Here’s a real world real time real in my life scenario. My 90 year old mother in law that speaks no English and a mother tongue completely foreign to me has just moved in with us.
Is this an unacceptable inconvenience, a negative impact on my psyche, a burden, a death blow to the vibrancy of my life, the end of my happiness?
Is this a moral dilemma that I must struggle with and live perhaps resentfuly with the rest of my life? Am I simply a sheep feeding at the trough of my inherited culture?


Here’s a real world real time real in my life scenario. My 90 year old mother in law that speaks no English and a mother tongue completely foreign to me has just moved in with us.
Is this an unacceptable inconvenience, a negative impact on my psyche, a burden, a death blow to the vibrancy of my life, the end of my happiness?

Children need to be raised. This is a life long commitment, not a few years. If you really had your way the 650,000 yearly abortions were all brought into life, what’s the plan to handle that? Within my daughter’s life of 14 years you now have a child crisis that is comparable to Ethiopia. My daughter would have most likely been sold into sex slavery. If the conservative plan, which will most likely be to set a federal ban in place, were to happen there will be very real word consequences to it and only framing it as “little bundles of joy” is dismissing the wholeness of human life and the very serious issues that happen to children who cannot be raised.

This is not an issue to be so flippant about. Life is more than biology. These are very tricky waters to navigate and yes we can use this to justify many crazy things, but that’s why amber boundry setting matters. My initial point is these amber boundaries are now being coded by two differing systems in the US, one by religious/Christian doctrine and one by social justice and psychological and social health. Both codes have value and flaws as all codes do. I think we need to recognize the new code as that, not wokeness, not regression but a new set of coded values and boundaries. Are continuing efforts to ignore, dismiss, belittle this new code is just creating unnecessary problems.

I think of the old commercial, how many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsies roll tootsies pop…it’s how many years does it take for a new level of consciousness to recode earlier stages of it’s children…1, 2, 50. The 60’s brought forth green consciousness and voila by the 2010’s kids were expressing that consciousness from their amber stage. Recognizing this pattern matters. Your post was flippantly framing this as a religious issue, and I agree, it is. This stage matters. We need social boundaries. Your framing of assisting trans children with their psychological health as the same thing as mutilating a woman’s clitoris to prevent sexual pleasure is a great example of these differing boundaries that need to be explored. Yes, both may involved alterations of genitalia but the focus and intent is being establish by differing coded boundaries. It’s time for integral to start to pull in some construct awareness, see these codes, and bring some understanding to the coding process which is in no way linear or set in time.

It’s all about raising children…we seem to forget that, we really forget their world is not the same as ours, their stages are not the same as ours, and it’s their world that matters more so seeing this through their coded stage construct is critical.


During the past week or so, we’ve (or at least I have) seen a pro life activist confront pro choice activists by screaming her regret in a public confessional: “I murdered my baby!” We’ve seen the state of Louisiana propose for the lawbooks that women who have abortions be charged with homicide. We have decades of pro life folks throwing about the phrase “baby killers.” So in that context, yes, I do think a discussion about the act of killing itself is a legitimate topic of discussion.

I do not believe that women who have abortions who some people (a minority in this country) claim are committing ‘murder’ should shoulder the whole burden of society’s ignorance, confusion, self-contradiction, and some hypocrisy and probably a little guilt and shame around the taking of life, or preventing a life, any life, from the fulfillment of its potential. We can of course put abortion in a box and tackle it as an issue whole in itself, and get into all the politics and differing cultural perspectives, but if we’re going to label it as murder, then it becomes also just a part of a larger discussion about killing in general in society, as well as issues around the metaphysics and sanctity or non-sanctity of life.

No, I am very big on divine nature. But from where I sit, you, Fermented Agave, are every bit as divine in essential nature as any newborn. “There is no place where Spirit is not” (Upanishads)-- One Consciousness and Energy–not separate, the same, identical in everyone. And that ‘One Thing’ does not die, which is how I can hold killing in my consciousness without going at least a little insane. Heck, I even say to insects when I kill them “one day I too shall die.” And I speak to plants and trees when I prune them as I was doing this morning, and thank those branches and stems I’ve just killed for their loveliness and contribution to the whole. Yes, I’m pretty big on divine nature.

I recognize my beliefs/truths/experiences are among the less than 1.5% of religious views in this country. I recognize that yours are a much larger percentage, and I am personally in support of some compromises to accommodate yours and others who share your views around abortion. But that does not mean you are totally or more “right” than others, or more right than those of us in the lower percentages of religion affiliation type, nor does it give your religion the right to impose its strict views on the entire nation. Not all Christians, let’s not forget, are against abortion. 56% of Catholics for instance, I recently read, are in favor of maintaining all or some of Roe v Wade, despite the views of the church fathers. There is major disagreement among Christians as to when ‘life’ or ensoulment actually begins: at conception? at the quickening? at birth? some other time?

So as I say, there are so many things about which we are in the dark or are confused. Which makes taking bodily autonomy and the science around viability into account as important, as well as issues around forced birth and meaningful support for mothers and families such as @Michelle speaks of, and also placing a little more trust in women to make these choices. These are areas we have at least a little actual knowledge from which to make decisions.

I will admit I share a little bit of that visceral recoil and sometimes feel a momentary little flare of anger somewhat akin to the rage some of the pro choice activists are feeling around the possibility this SC will overturn Roe. This must be how some men have felt who have been drafted into the military, as Margaret Atwood pointed out. We allowed for conscientious objectors during the Vietnam war, allowed that men have a moral conscience; do we not think that women have a moral conscience too?

The SC has not made a final decision yet of course, but if indeed it’s overturned and given to the states to resolve, the risk is that the nation will be truly divided, neighboring state against neighboring state. The abortion issue has an excessive intensity to it, given it has such existential, spiritual, political, economic, cultural issues connected to it. The same kinds of issues that are relevant to climate change and war, and the same kinds of issues that will most likely within this century become relevant to the world’s declining population. Who knows? Foregoing abortion and having as many children as possible may become a woman’s ‘patriotic duty,’ like the way many men perceive going to war, for the good of the nation.

But I don’t think that particular moment is here yet, and if the SC justices are smart, they’ll cool down this issue a bit.


The Louisiana bill was struck down by a 2/3’s majority vote, just as most “no restriction” (aka late term) bills are also struck down. Charging abortive mother’s with murder I don’t think has any significant widespread support. Maybe only slightly more support than legalizing religious sacrifice of children. I also think the Texas law regarding facilitation or coaching goes too far, but I can see the need to get “public servants” out of the abortion evangelization business.
I to have seen some very concerning things. The tacit approval of fire bombing pro lifers and threats and harassment isn’t something I can support.

If we were to write amongst ourselves abortion legislation, what might it look like? Would this be acceptable?

  • 1st trimester - No restrictions for adults. Minors require both parents approval 2 weeks before the abortion. No government funding. No mandate to perform any procedures.
  • 2nd/3rd trimester - No abortions with the only exception being a mothers life being endangered. Perhaps make an offense to this a misdemeanor requiring say 9 months jail time and basic reproductive biology training?
  • Since the birthing person will have complete decision authority, the sperm donor will no longer have any mandatory support obligations.

Might not be everything and each person wants, but would it pass overwhelmingly in each state? Thoughts?

The sanctity of life as you’ve laid out is interesting. While I might have a spiritual/mystical relationship with the trees, grass, flowers, agave, cacti, birds, dogs, fish, buffalo, and even insects, I seem to have created a delineation between humanity and not humanity. As an example I might sharply yell at my dogs to STAY, but would never yell at a human this way unless they were about to suffer or cause harm. I also seem to have a delineation between cause and at the effect of, agency and lack of agency. There is likely a strong Orange responsibility of right action in this as well. The libertarian in my would seeming map to strong Green.
Can I be Orange and Green and Teal and Amber and Red, while also respecting that the majority of humanity is Amber? Can I journey with birds and fishes and bears and streams and winds as well go to church and practice Christianity?

In one of the Man for Man interviews (can’t find the specific discussion), Ken discussed “choose to be Teal” in specific settings or interactions. It was in relation to managing ourselves and our state or stage when each of us has every stage and state contained within. It reminded me of the Christian view that “everyone is a sinner” so keep choosing the transcendent.


No. I would limit abortions to 1st trimester only. If abortion were not “just a simple outpatient procedure”, do you think people would figure out how to use contraceptives or go for hand jobs or abstinence or oral or … I’m fairly certain adults and kids have the information and contraceptives at hand to manage things.

Take away the support obligation for men (and perhaps government) incentives, along with any decision inputs, and birthing persons might make somewhat different choices. Or are our kids literally just young humans running around in heat with no agency?

How can we understand things like short term desire, long term health, egoistic rationalization, contemplative understanding particularly when it involves minors?
Should we treat minors as adults and let them do whatever they want? Seems like a bad idea on the surface even in 2022. I spin forward into all sorts of not so positive outcomes for the kids, or society at large.


Bundle of joy - sometimes. And also real horror show. Most of the “criminally insane” were unwanted births, and I had the joy to work with them for almost a year. It was a joy for me because I was in a certain state. Believe me when I say that 99.99% of the population would not last a day. Chatting with murderers, diagnoses psychopaths, diagnosed sociopaths, convicted rapists and child molesters.

Yes, all “bundles of joy” - that went really, really wrong. Some even had padded helmets because they’d randomly bang their heads against a wall, even when they were medicated to the gills. The women had mostly all of them been raped at some point, and most had trauma of having their children taken from them. Women who are low functioning can still get pregnant, but most of them will never ever see their children again. And, another generation to fill the State Mental hospital. Some families join the military generation after generation, while some families are committed as a family tradition.

Then there are the zombies - sitting in a wheelchair in their own piss for hours at a time because well, if a staff notices it, they have to change them. Or standing and staring into space with looks of horror on their faces, seeing something we can’t.

You see, I can handle them, but society can’t. Society locks them up in remote locations of all 50 states and nobody talks about them. Nobody even wants to know they exist. Nobody I know even wants to hear anything about them.

Many of these bundles of joy could be released if they had foster care. I wonder how many conservatives are ready to invite these bundles of joy into their homes? Actually, I don’t wonder. I know they won’t.

That’s what I call hypocrites, every one. Oh yes, bundles of joy - but eeewww, for someone else.


Again, if we look at how we are coding understanding of our humanness it helps. Conservatives tend to focus on extrinsic motivation and downplay intrinsic motivation. “should we treat minors like adults and let them do whatever they want?” Well, that depends, what are the internal drives? If what they want is to be a fuller, truer version of themselves…sure. I don’t know that it is about “treating them like adults” as much as it is treating them like humans who have their own interiors that they have better access to than the adults around them would. If they were raised within coding systems that value intrinsic motivation over extrinsic motivation they very well might have a great deal of access to their interiors and understanding what is better for themselves.

This is where is does get tricky when we have both multiple coding systems at work and a new coding system finding its footing. This is where the pre/trans fallacy argument is limiting a more holistic understanding of the events of today would be helpful

If we look at development through this coding idea I see a few things happening

  1. Coding can have “bugs” and not work within a system because of the bugs (pre/trans fallacy)
  2. Old coding can not work well within a system because the system was upgraded (MAGA)
  3. Coding can be updated and working well within the updated system but the users don’t know how to operate the new code or new system effectively yet. There is a learning curve. (wokeness). Add to this that new systems and new codes can start to reveal other codes that no longer work and will need updating. This cannot always be predicted and will need to be discovered once operating.

I think if we look at all of these that are in play right now it helps to see these issues better but it matters if we are dealing with “bugs” in the coding, dealing with old coding or user learning. Conservatives tend to want to get the old system back that their code operated in. Integral and integrally minded thinkers are all looking at user error and discussing it like bugs, so they are creating space for a conversation to just “throw out” the new systems and codes.

My mom hates updates with computers…“just leave it like it was” is her motto. This, to be, is MAGA. The problem with MAGA is there were updates and short of nuclear war the updates are here to stay, so let’s get on with learning how to use the new system and update the codes that dont work in the new system anymore.

What do abortion and trans have in common…SEX. Man do we need to both update the code and get some user education going. Conversation at every dinner I am having with my girlfriends right now is dominated by how confused we are with our kids gender/sex development. We do not know how to function yet with these new codes or the new system. Do teens still need parenting? Of course, but doing this from the perspective of pulling them into the old systems and codes will not work for OUR kids. They were not raised in the old code or system. What do we do…we talk and learn from each other.

Conservative communities are not doing this. They are trying to strengthen the old codes and system’s, which I have now made peace with. The US, for the time being, will be running multiple codes and systems, we no longer have political differences, we have full blown cultural differences. This too will be better to recognize. We have the SC that has a majority of its members referencing systems and codes from the 1600’s in it’s decisions. Trying to pull the systems back to 1868. It is what it is.

For myself I would like to scream to those who are in the new system and have them open their minds to the idea that “wokeness” is more than just bugs in the code, it’s the byproduct of parenting, a greatly overlooked topic in Integral. I think if we spent more time discussing #3, less on #1 we would be making more progress for our culture. If we did this we might seem less threatening to conservative culture too. Yes, the role of government will change now the US in not really one country. I don’t know how it plays out but I know it will.


I think you might be misjudging the conservatives, in their Ms of variations, view of themselves and humanity.
With a passion for individual liberty and freedom, I see conservatives or perhaps more generally non-collectivists as looking for everything to first come from the individual intrinsic then flowing to collective extrinsic.

Frank Ferudi discusses in detail your “cultural coding” ideas. Might be of interest.

Your coding vs bugs is interesting. We always joke that “it’s not a bug, it’s a feature”. Guess it depends upon perspective.

Your recommendation on how Integral should approach has merit.


Individual liberty and freedom (orange) should be guided by some collective organizing values. From our conversations, my guess is yours are guided and constrained by Christianity (amber). The point I have been making is the fight you are having with “new liberals” is ours are being guided by evolutionary ideas emerging from social science, social justice, inclusionary values born from the green (and transcended orange) level of development. Amber infused with green/orange values they were taught by their parents. The fight against this newly emergent amber, is a fight against evolution itself. This is what I have made peace with, it makes little difference what people’s minds can see, evolution is a process that’s larger than either one of our interpretations.

The more interesting conversation, (if one were to accept my interpretation for a moment), is if we accept that “wokeness” is a new and legitimate “religion” so to speak, and if we believe there should still be a separation of church and state, what does that mean? Individual liberty and freedom, if to remain activated by orange and not red must still be informed by amber controls but not controlled by it. If we want to evolve as a society we need to allow more space for the newly evolved amber to exist as well. Trying to destroy it, from both the conservative side and the integral side, is not going to work, but working to evolve it, transcend and include it, into a new orange, new ideas of governing, new ideas of commerce/capitalism, education, that is not controlled by it but is informed by its wider boundary creations and value inclusion. That is the conversation we should be having, IMO.


I think you have very accurately described Wokeism. I think a more accurate characterization is emergent Red/Amber. The religious aspects perhaps being Amber with the violence being basic Red. We should consider if Wokeism isn’t more Red based upon the IL definitions (below).

I think you’re recommending the Integralists focus on enfolding this emergent Red/AmberWokeism into our current Orange/Green/emergent Teal society. Is this correct interpretation?

Do you know of any organizations that are trying to up level Wokeism from it’s Red/Amber foundations into Orange, Green, Teal?

# Red Altitude (Ego-to-Ethnocentric, Power)

The red altitude began about 10,000 years ago, and is the marker of egocentric drives based on power, where “might makes right,” where aggression rules, and where there is a limited capacity to take the role of an “other.” Red impulses are classically seen in grade school and early high school, where bullying, teasing, and the like are the norm. Red motivations can be seen culturally in Ultimate Fighting contests, which have no fixed rules (fixed rules come into being at the next Altitude, Amber), teenage rebellion and the movies that cater to it (The Fast and the Furious), gang dynamics (where the stronger rule the weaker), and the like.

# Amber Altitude (Ethnocentric, Mythic)

The amber altitude began about 5,000 years ago, and indicates a worldview that is traditionalist and mythic in nature—and mythic worldviews are almost always held as absolute (this stage of development is often called absolutistic). Instead of “might makes right,” amber ethics are more oriented to the group, but one that extends only to “my” group. Grade school and high school kids usually exhibit amber motivations to “fit in.” Amber ethics help to control the impulsiveness and narcissism of red. Culturally, amber worldviews can be seen in fundamentalism (my God is right no matter what); extreme patriotism (my country is right no matter what); and ethnocentrism (my people are right no matter what).


Here is the real trick, no they will not evolve into OUR Orange/Green/emergent Teal society, they will evolve those levels as well, it will be THEIR Orange/Green/emergent Teal society. Another way to see this is waves within the spiral. A new consciousness emerges and then there are waves that flow from childhood to adult hood, reshaping each stage, generation after generation. It’s like who is more evolved, you or your child? It’s your child because they went through each stage being informed by a higher stage. They still need your guidance as they grow up, just like the woke need to continue to grow up, but through their turn around the spiral, not ours. The more we recognize this, the less we want to hold our children back inside our stage construct, the healthier the flow of the spiral becomes.

Tha’s not to say that holding the spiral at one level is wrong either. There are many cultures and societies that today look very similar to 100’s or 1000’s of years ago. There is something quite magical about that. This is what, IMO, for some, conservative Christianity will become, like other traditional religions you may find throughout the world. But for those cultures more centered around evolution we need to see the waves within the spiral.


I enjoy your ongoing reminders that these universal deep structures can have multiple surface structure expressions, and in fact those surface structures are constantly evolving as our conditions evolve. There is no single path through any of these developmental sequences, though there are common qualities shared among multiple paths within any given stage — in many ways, Amber today has the same deep structures it had 2000 years ago, but in many other ways, it is a completely different beast. Especially when we are comparing a stage that acts as a dominant force within a given society, versus a stage that has been enfolded by later stages. That is, amber-dominant societies are very different than societies where we see amber enfolded by orange constraints.


Violence is not limited to Red. In fact, Amber is capable of inflicting violence on a far greater scale than Red ever was, because the “us vs. them” mindset offers a wider social justification for violence than the Red “me versus the world” mindset. I think history has taught us some very painful lessons around just how violent Amber can be.

That said, yes, almost all social movements have a Red underbelly somewhere, as opportunists flock to the chaos like a moth to a flame. The same was true of the civil rights era, but I don’t think we have come to regard that as a red-driven (or even amber-driven) social transformation.


How would you characterize the current Woke movement or if decoupled Woke/Antifa/BLM/etc movements?


Much of wokism, as I see it, is green content being enacted through an amber structure. It’s what happens when a) social media reinforces the “soft absolutism” of all first-tier stages, and b) green views are wielded by individuals who are themselves not capable of “doing the math” that generates those views in the first place.

However, there is also some healthy green in there, some very important perspectives emerging from the green stage that very much need to be salvaged and included in a more integral embrace. Which relates to your question:

“Do you know of any organizations that are trying to up level Wokeism from it’s Red/Amber foundations into Orange, Green, Teal?”

At least on a conceptual level, yes, we are right here at Integral Life. Which is why I try to have discussions like this one:

…as well as things like my 8 Zones of Racism talk with Ken, which I hope to publish this week.


Abortion is a difficult topic to discuss. But I am going to press a little more around the issue of killing, terminating life. You are right that the LA. bill was struck down, but the lawmakers there who introduced the bill do believe this, that abortion is murder, and frankly, isn’t that the belief of anti-abortionists as a group within particular religious communities? Why else would there be opposition? And this again is why I say the general topic of taking life, any life, is pertinent to one’s thinking and discussions around abortion.

Nor can I support such behavior, although I’m not sure who you’re saying has given “tacit approval” for firebombing prolifers. Violent and harassing behavior on either side is not constructive. Don’t forget, health clinics and physicians who provide abortion have been subject to such behavior for decades, including the killing of doctors. While it may have happened, I am not aware of any instance in which a pro choicer has killed anyone because they were against abortion, are you?

Sanctity of life, along with the taking of another’s life, is also one of those BIG topics that is pertinent to the discussion. What has to be taken into account is who defines it and how sanctity of life is defined. Some Protestant denominations, Catholicism, and Evangelical Christianity (since the mid-to-late 70s) “set apart” humans from the rest of life as more sacred and holy, based upon the belief of humans having been created in ‘God’s image.’ This sounds like your belief, no? That’s fine; I can appreciate this is your and others’ belief.

However, again, we should keep in mind that not everybody believes in anthropocentrism, or dominionism. In many Eastern philosophies/schools of thought, animal life is sacred. Ascetics/avatars of India, practitioners of Ahimsa (non-violence, of which Gandhi was a practitioner), the religion of Jainism in particular hold this belief; there are many stories of people from these traditions sweeping the path in front of them so as not to step on an insect. While that may sound extreme to the Western mind, if we really want to think comprehensively and inclusively and deeply and integrally about these matters, it seems we should consider other views of what defines sanctity of life.

Perhaps if our view included more than humans, we would not be facing major animal extinctions and loss of biodiversity and other degradations to life forms, both human and other-than-human, on Planet Earth. It is one thing to hold that humans are the most complex and conscious life forms as far as we know; it’s another entirely to say humans are more inviolable, for without water, air, the biosphere, animals, etc–humans couldn’t even exist.

Well, you can be Teal and respect that, but the other stages, per Integral Theory, are First Tier, and largely respect and find ‘correct’ only their own view. This question too of “majority of humanity is Amber”–what does that mean to you? Are you suggesting because Amber is the majority, that the preferences of Amber should predominate?

You know you can. Silly question.

I have not responded to your ideas about legislation; still thinking on it.


Administrative Orange can also commit violence. Well, if a concentration camp is deemed as violence. I think it is worse. Cambodia, China, Ukraine & Russia - all these regions experienced millions killed through administrative decisions. Yes, also guns, but it’s important to remember that beaurocracy can be kill without using any guns.


Either we’re playing a critical theory / Straw Manning / Nihilism game on the anti-abortion crowd or I’m completely missing where you’re going. Are you saying that if I’m not a conscientious objector then I have to be pro abortion?
I tried to lay it out above. I do delineate between human life and the weeds I just pulled in the flower beds. I do delineate between actor with agency vs a baby with no agency. I do see the formation of a unique never seen in the history of the universe a human being when an egg (incomplete in and of itself) and a sperm (also incomplete in and of itself) join to create a that new distinct holon.
Am I willing to compromise and say - have at it in the 1st trimester? Sure.
I guess the 1st trimester is the “red line”. LOL

I’m haven’t logged everything I’ve seen in the past, so can’t really say.

Corey ran me through the “if you could only save one” play. Yes, if I could only save either my wife or child, I “think” I would save my child since that’s what both my wife and i would choose if we talked it through. If I could only save my child or my dog, I’m fairly certain I would grab my child. If it were my dog your the asshole 3 doors down, I very well might grab my dog.

If fleas are infesting my dog, I kill all the fleas with flea shampoo and spray the yard. I don’t hate fleas. I don’t wish them harm. And it’s not ok to have them on my dog nor in my home.

I just came in from spraying for scorpions. If I don’t, we have scorpions in the house and that’s no bueno. And I don’t like doing it, because I likely also indirectly kill the lizards that crawl the walls, that the mockingbirds feed on, which are in turn struck down by the Kestrels and Peregrines.
Since I can’t have chickens or other fowl where I live, I’m somewhat limited in my purely natural scorpion control.
While I delay pesticide use as long as I can and try to minimize, we’ve decide we cannot live with scorpions in the house. No, I pray to the Red Moon (which was pretty cool last night) for forgiveness that I killed the momma and baby scorpions. And yet, meanwhile I think they’re really cool and amazing creatures.

And I guess you could say I do or would do all these things with no or only minimal “moral dilemma” machinations. In general, I do have a ranking of the animals and plants of the world roughly aligning with complexity. Humans then cooperative mammals (dogs) then … then scorpions.

Is this what you think others think? Who do you actually thinks the way you’ve just described?
And at what price would be too high to save a baby? A puppy? A falcon? A beetle?
Do you consider humans as part of nature? Are human societies part of nature? If not, how could humans or human society not be part of nature?

I’ll post the the Ken interview if I can find it. You do realize that even if you live say a 20% Teal life yourself, that there is the other 80%. Or once you get a smidgen of Teal, Rapture beams you up, Enlightenment engulfs the world and you don’t have to pay your electric bill anymore?

Amber is just being Amber, right? So of course they will express their preferences.

I think the question for Integralism is how are you up leveling Red, Amber, Orange? I would think that moving Amber to Orange, and Orange to Green would mitigate the attitudinal struggles against 2nd tier Teal (The Rapture?).


I really don’t know how to respond to this. You failed to answer some of my questions directly; for instance, I asked for your personal opinion/view: do you think that because Amber is the majority, their preferences should predominate. You dodged that, simply saying “of course they will express their preferences.” You dodged others, but no matter; I’ve made the points I wanted to make, and if they were meaningless to you, that’s okay.

But you know, it’s not up to Integralism to see that Red, Amber, Orange, and Green or any other stage “up levels” or evolves. Individuals at those stages have to want to develop, to evolve, and be willing to do a little work on their own. Integral can try to help, as it does, but in the end, it’s largely an organic process, I think, that has a lot to do with individual interiors, individual desire. You either wanna, or you don’t.