Originally published at: https://integrallife.com/the-metacrisis-is-giving-rise-to-the-transformation-age/
How can we contribute to the rise of the Transformation Age? We first need to understand what’s driving the emergence of the Transformation Age out of the Information Age: a global metacrisis, occurring amidst a great release of global power, which as it becomes more acute is exposing the limitations of the current era’s structures, sensemaking, key contradictions (all pluribus, little unum), scarce resources (meaning), and the sources of power themselves (convening power).
1 Like
Great discussion guys, thanks for sharing. I concur with the 5 pillars that you explore and elaborate upon. I tend to frame it under 3 pillars: Economics, Sustainability, and Governance. I use the term ‘Sustainability’ because I think that the term ‘Environment’ is too closely associated with the general impression that human beings are part of the environment, which is partly true, but we are also the environment and the environment is in all of us (I wonder where the idea or impression that humans in the environment and somewhat above it came from…). Also, as you state, the meta-crisis is at the level of the globe, therefore Sustainability defined in principles is probably a better frame to tackle the environment pillar as we have sufficient and robust empirical ground to back it up at such a level. For education, I usually refer to “capacity building” as continuous methods of transfer, exploration, and learning how to learn and grow up (Or Ken’s conveyor belt but perhaps we need a better term/frame here). Each new generation needs to be brought up to speed so to say. Nothing new here.
Spirituality is probably among the most influential source of the meta-crisis unfolding as it is at the root of the ongoing meaning crisis. Although it is a touchy subject, the spiritual crisis can partly be ascribed to some of the negated aspects of modernity and post-modernity (e.g. the sacred or intra-subjective realness that can get negated by hyper-objectivity or further flattened by hyper inter-subjectivity and the confusion regarding methodologies of knowing/experiencing).
When I try to explain the unfolding of the current crises, in short, I say that 3pp negated 2pp, and 4pp negated 3pp and went back to the absolutistic view of 2pp in doing so. All were more or less reactionary moves it seems and probably unavoidable at that point. Add a compromised 2pp/3pp governance and economic structure, the blind spots/contradictions of 4pp, technology and the resulting culture wars to the mix and you have the mess we are in. A century or more in the making (not to mention the deep influence of all previous structures). (pp = person/people perspective)
All 5 pillars are definitely and closely interrelated. I would be curious to know more about how you frame the hierarchical order of these 5 pillars.
1 Like
Just a small point: Robb mentions people going to the streets to demand a carbon tax in the same way they are going to the streets for Black Lives Matter.
I cannot imagine this happening anytime soon. Didn’t the Yellow Vest movement (in France) start exactly as a movement AGAINST a carbon tax? The transformation necessary to get emotionally as riled up about a seemingly abstract and collective issue, as about a purely personal one (“Why should I pay more at the gas pump?”) or a tribal one (my tribe under attack–black lives matter), I think, is very far off in a large enough portion of the population.
1 Like
TVB would you mind drilling down & elaborating more around the 2pp, 3pp, 4pp stuff? I’m not familiar with any of that but sense you’re saying a lot there. Thank you
Sure, so 2pp maps to a more ethnocentric, absolutistic mythical view, 3pp maps to a world-centric, liberal view and 4pp maps to a pluralistic, more culturally, and context-sensitive view. You can also map them loosely to pre-modern, modern, and post-modern eras. In integral color: amber, orange, and green. The interplay between the 3 and how they came to be in this current unfolding is an important distinction to make. All moves were somewhat reactionary from one rung to the next which brought a peculiar dynamic between theses 3 main stage worldviews. In a different context, this interplay might have played out differently but this is what we got in this day and age.
It’s also important to note that 4pp is not well established in the structure and it’s attempting to find its ground so to speak. But since modernity (3pp) neglected a big part of its make up by moving mostly towards empirical science/evidence, an overly inflated objectivity and everything is a commodity, 4pp (post-modernity) came about in disenchantment land, looking for meaning in all this (it might have found a temporary replacement in images of a show business era but a rather flimsy one). Flirting with going back to what might have appeared to be a better ancient time (pre-trans fallacy), it fell deeper into a reaction move. It’s like trying to function in a highly dysfunctional environment. It doesn’t work.
Another layer to all of this is: legal structure and siloed organizational structures and the geo, political and economical landscape that favored a certain stagnation when it comes to innovation and further fragmentation of the social human fabric in the last 50-60 years while going through the great acceleration of what might become the Anthropocene. In short, communal de-responsibilization became normal, pain a problem to fix or distracted from at the cost of not growing up, and meaning was further at lost in a flatland deprived of depth. Seeing all this at play became the next stage’s playground. This time around, it needed to respond, and not so much react. Here we stand.
Again, I’m overly simplifying but it’s a quick rendition of the dynamic at play between these worldviews and why the current social structures and world order can’t hold them much longer.
For a better rendition on person perspectives, I recommend Susanne R. Cook-Greuter article on ego development:
Also, I recommend reading Ken’s Excerpt A as to better establish some of the philosophical ground to all this.
http://www.kenwilber.com/writings/read_pdf/83
Another take on hyper-individualism that is worth looking into is Adam Curtis’s Century of the self. It’s not so joyful and certainly tainted by interpretations but it reminds of a few key historical juncture of the last century. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-npoz1SgRQ
I am new to the Integral family and wanted to ask this question from those commenting on this post.
Could it be that the evolution of humanity does not replace the lower levels but that consciousness as a whole is reaching these higher integral states?
Most of us here are pursing an integral intelligence and developing an integral map of reality. As we reach new heights of integral understanding perhaps the lower stages remain in tact? Maybe we will always maintain all the older, lower structures as spiritual tendons holding our collective reality and development in place?
Could it be that we as individuals climb this ladder of integral understanding to becoming the driving edge of exploration on what comes next? Does the collective intelligence or consciousness of humanity have an agenda of it’s own?
It is innately human to strive for grow and develop. It only happens in a mature sustained way when include/integrate is actually done in a healthy way ~ yes, all levels remain present. Otherwise it can remain as a peak experience or insight.
Also we must not forget that Integral Theory is a representative model of the world. There are many models being practiced by perhaps Billions (not thousands as with Integral Theory) that are striving for and are lead to transformation.
1 Like
Is there a collective intelligence or consciousness for humanity?
Yes. We see humankind striving to consciously guide, integrate with, understand, grow, and develop this collective intelligence/consciousness throughout history. Is Integral Theory another “completely new and better” attempt to do the same thing humanity has always been doing?
Do you see it as a new and better” attempt to do the same thing humanity has always been doing? Humanity consciousness is a collective that works organically through us all. We as individuals can attain understanding of this as we climb the spiritual ladder of understanding within ourselves.
I think Integral Theory is just another map to perceiving reality, A non-theist’s scientific approach to wrapping the magic and mystical traditions into a format that is easier to accept. Rather than the religious, occult or more esoteric traditions. To me it seems they are all required to reach an inclusive integral perspective and understanding as individuals.
The collective human consciousness is beyond my pay grade but I hold to the idea that it is always working for the good of the whole. What do you think about these ideas?
Yes, in the terminology of Integral - Waking up is only part of the equation. Cleaning up is absolutely necessary to waking up and both are interdependent with growing up. We can’t pick one side or the other and call it integral. In contrast to this, traditionally humanity has separated rationalism and science from religion, occult, and esoteric traditions. Atheism is usually “against” mystical explanations and interpretations, and religion has traditionally gone to the extreme of executing scientists who suggested religious explanations were not factually accurate.
Integral is a “new and better” attempt because by definition it isn’t either - or, but yes - and.
1 Like
Also, what we are seeing is that the solution isn’t grand power structures and governments or organizations that will be the solution, but millions upon of microsolutions that people have to come up with themselves and do the work themselves (show up) - if I read this correctly:
Indeed yet another mapping with its benefits and pitfalls. I would question if Integral isn’t somewhat religious in nature. Scanning the articles, blogs, interviews and discussions I see quite a lot of religious hijacking, as well as mystical and supernatural in the rhetoric. And then we swing directly into a religious (Hindu or Buddhist usually) rationalization for the decomposition and judgments.
I do think the Integral movement does speak well to many. But sadly that community is extremely small relative to the entire world. it would also seem to me that many Integralists have a very cursory understanding of the Religions of which they speak so freely. Let’s look at Christianity. Worldwide that’s over 2B humans. As one of the eggheads (or I wouldn’t be here LOL), I’ll question that do a couple dozen/hundred/thousand eggheads really think they’ve got more figured out the entirety of 2B humans? Their aren’t say 1%, 5%, 10%, 20% or so of those 2B that are at an Integral altitude? Yet the Integral community has all 2B sliced, diced, pureed, juiced, dehydrated packaged into little packets of Reddish or Orangish with maybe a tinge of Green. 
This “Coming of 2nd Tier” does sound somewhat similar to me to some religious practices that offer the hope of the 2nd coming of Jesus/Buddha/Shiva to provide people with the freedom from anxiety, ability to persevere in the face of life to working the way we want, or think of it as the Peace of God.
In both cases, “just hang tight, carry the flame of the cause, do the work, etc” and you’ll eventually “be free”. This equation has proven to work better than any other we have found so far, so why not hijack a bit for Integralism? I say do more of it!
The only thing I would add to this original summary paragraph is, “and then we’ll show them just the right advertisements so we can maximize monetization.” LOL
The amount of wisdom, deep thinking and sharing that takes place among the members here is quite inspiring. I do hold a positive outlook that this transformation age will be equally as majestic and grand. Continuing to reflect all the diversity as our experiences thus far have been as individual micro-consciousnesses that together reveal an ever-better experience overall for humanity as whole. ~ Peace