Plotinus
Sri Ramana Maharshi
Note that Ken was not asked to list “teal/turquoise” examples, he was asked about desert island books. Ramana, for example, was not chosen as an example of high stage development, but rather as an example of advanced spiritual state realization/transmission.
Yeah, on a desert Island I probably wouldn’t even bring 1 Integral Author, lol. My top three book choices would be edible desert Island plants, boat building and ocean navigation. 
Any recommendations for Integral authors to read, listen too?
A hollowed out book filled with a sat phone and fishing tackle, book of matches, and a copy SES.
Thanks a lot! I wasn’t aware of the differences. I thought Integral corresponds to Yellow in spiral dynamics…
Might be worthwhile to review definitions for the terms being bandied about, as it’s very easy for us to let our language languish into our own meanings.
And yes, I’m smiling when I see JBP’s talks map directly into each of these definitions. 
The Green altitude began roughly 150 years ago, though it came into its fullest expression during the cultural revolution of the 1960s. Green worldviews are marked by pluralism, or the ability to see that there are multiple ways of seeing reality. If orange sees universal truths (“All men are created equal”), green sees multiple universal truths—different universals for different cultures. Green ethics continue, and radically broaden, the movement to embrace all people. A green statement might read, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal, regardless of race, gender, class….” Green ethics have given birth to the civil rights, feminist, and gay rights movements, as well as environmentalism.
The green worldview’s multiple perspectives give it room for greater compassion, idealism, and involvement, in its healthy form. Such qualities are seen by organizations such as the Sierra Club, Amnesty International, Union of Concerned Scientists, and Doctors Without Borders. In its unhealthy form green worldviews can lead to extreme relativism, where all beliefs are seen as relative and equally true, which can in turn lead to the nihilism, narcissism, irony, and meaninglessness exhibited by many of today’s intellectuals, academics, and trend-setters
The Teal Altitude marks the beginning of an integral worldview, where pluralism and relativism are transcended and included into a more systematic whole. The transition from green to teal is also known as the transition from “1st-tier” values to “2nd-tier” values — the most immediate difference being the fact that each “1st-tier” value thinks it is the only truly correct value, while “2nd-tier” values recognize the importance of all preceding stages of development. Thus, the teal worldview honors the insights of the green worldview, but places it into a larger context that allows for healthy hierarchies, and healthy value distinctions.
Perhaps most important, a teal worldview begins to see the process of development itself, acknowledging that each one of the previous stages (magenta through green) has an important role to play in the human experience. Teal consciousness sees that each of the previous stages reveals an important truth, and pulls them all together and integrates them without trying to change them to “be more like me,” and without resorting to extreme cultural relativism (“all are equal”). Teal worldviews do more than just see all points of view (that’s a green worldview)—it can see and honor them, but also critically evaluate them.
Well, you’re sort of right. What is marked as Teal Holistic in the Integral chart is the first stage of Integral (and does correspond to SD’s Yellow), with Turquoise being the second stage of Integral.
Teal worldviews do more than just see all points of view (that’s a green worldview)—it can see and honor them, but also critically evaluate them.
So yes - both are required. Not one or the other. So with me, for example - it is necessary to both admore and criticize people and groups according to the merits of specific things.
I would also add that the criticism has to come from a place of emotional freedom, not from reacting to emotions. This is even more an alarm bell when people claim to be “visciously attacked” as the reason why they are attacking others instead of criticising them with an appropriate level of emotion. This is even more the case when we see the tendency to exaggerate an argument to make a point (a shadow of Orange).
Given we are in the Peterson thread, I will share a few of my observations on the good Dr.
In my estimation the Leftist/Integralist disconnect with Peterson are his conclusions, not so much on altitude or regression.
I’ll just point out that your estimation is obviously skewed and much like JP, you are a perpetual debate looking for people and groups to be against. Of course you see this as “Deep Levels” because you share some of the same faults as him.
There are LOTS of content creators who do the same thing as him with far greater skill and less personal drama constantly interjecting into their discussions. Hundreds of them. In a 2 hour speech or interview on a given topic he is almost guaranteed to spend a considerable amount of time on his personal drama with the left, lol. Feminists wrote things that hurt his feelings, lol.
Lets take someone simple like Joe Rogan. Has he been attacked by feminists? Yeah, probably. I’m sure he has. Do we have to sit and listen about him crying about it every single interview? No. lol. He’s not scarred or traumatized just because some feminists said something about him. I could name others as well. Actually, JP is kind of a baby (though a rude word that begins with P comes to mind). That’s pretty much why I don’t listen to him anymore - I can’t stand grown men crying about how they are emotionally scarred by a few bad words, lol. Holy cow, talk about sheltered life in an Ivory tower. oooohhh … someone wrote some negative opinions in an academic paper about him. What a vicious attack … lol
Bit of truth here on Peterson being a bit emotionally. Shows his humanity or that he’s a defective?
Only comparable creators I know of would be Lex Fridman (excellent) and perhaps Tim Ferris (don’t care for). Who are all these other LOTS you are thinking of?
There are more options than that. What it suggests to me is that despite being a Phychologist, he has a blind spot with his own stuff. Kind of like a Doctor who refuses treatment from other doctors, or the old addage that the shoemakers wife goes without shoes, etc.
One thing I find interesting is that when I do a youtube search for “Jordan Peterson” - a lot of content comes up about him being in conflict with people. Well over hald the search results are drama. This is his own followers highlighting his Drama. and placing him as their icon in the culture war.
Well, these are not necessarily people I listen to myself - but if we are looking at comparable quality in similar topics - we mentioned Ken, Rebel Wisdom and Joe Rogan. If we are looking for non-perfect publishers and if we are not limiting ourselves to only people who we think are Integral it’s quite easy. Academy of Ideas, any one of a dozen Yogis, Awakened Insight, Neil Degras Tyson, any one of a dozen publishers of Stoicism, Philospohy or Psychology, and so on and so on.
I think everyone needs a different type of teacher depending on the problem they are facing. JP’s teachings are certainly valuable for those who haven’t really strived for long-term goals and need to learn self-discipline or those who are too agreeable to assert themselves. On the other hand, the content of his teachings and his serious tone might not be to your taste if you’ve already mastered these skills and got past that stage. Personally I prefer teachers who are more playful and not too serious like Alan Watts and, for a currently active teacher on Youtube, Eric Dodson.
Is not this thread itself, as well as Rebel Wisdon and Ken Wilber looking to create conflict with Jordan Peterson? Are you saying that Peterson is not used by Ken as a strawman for Integral Altitudes (and upcoming book)?
Benefits can be great using JBP as a strawman. Peterson in the title and RW landed SIX TIMES their average viewers over the last 2 months. You don’t think RW and KW were “motivated” to drag Peterson into their cultural jousting match to get the clicks?
It does look like KW in a RW title (or Future Thinkers or …) gets about a 2X uplift on views.
This modus operandi is no secret in the world of social media “views”, “likes”,… Culture Wars continue. RW and KW, like everyone else, wanted a piece of the pie that JBP has created.
Thanks for the reference to Eric Dobson. He’s very good and entertaining - I very much like his style and focus on empowering yourself personally, not looking for external validation or external fixes. I would characterize what I’ve seen so far as he’s Individual Interior focused, where as most Integralism today has progressed into focus on external quadrants.
No, I don’t think you understand what straw man means. Again - you are the only one trying to expand this out to say something about anyone other than Peterson, Rubin, Sowell. I am talking specifically about them. You are the one who in some kind of paranoia make up that I am talking about someone else or another group of people. Can you identify the group I am using JP as a straw man for? I haven’t mentioned any group, so you would have to make something up that I haven’t said (and wasn’t said in Ken’s discussion, either). Your problem is that YOU are so hell-bent on using JP as a representative of a larger group or as some kind of leader or whatever. I am just talking about JP, Rubin Sowell.
LOOooool, Jordan Peterson was late to the stage. He didn’t create youtube, lol.
Yes, for sure people need different teachers, but also just different voices to listen to. The type of audience typically attracted to JP are men who feel they have been somehow wronged or injured by feminism, or at least feel threatened by it.
There are also those who find some value from integrating rational thought into mythic religion (in Integral Orange and Amber, I believe). If a person is trying to make sense of Christianity in a modern Rational world, then they will of course gain some constructive benefit from it.
What is unfortunate is that the first subject seems to be driving out the second. As years go by he attracts more of the first audience and less of the second and so spends more time on the second.
Also unfortunately, JP doesn’t offer a solution or “way out” from the first subject. This is what is actually harmful about him as a speaker. He doesn’t offer a solution except to feel as a victim of feminists and liberals, in order to feel that attacking them is deserved. But this isn’t a solution, and this is why JP is falling apart more and more each year. Attacking others is never a solution to one’s own internal problems of lacking within oneself. By saying this I am not attacking JP, just stating a fact that he doesn’t offer a solution for other men out of their own internal problems.
Instead, he makes a lot of money off of feeding the problem and encouraging men down a dead end path. But this isn’t necessarily his own fault. Just he doesn’t have the right answers for this group unless they want to just make their own internal situation worse.
Funny enough, the second item in a youtube search for Eric Dobson was “Dealing with rejection”, which is exactly the type of content JP’s first category of audience should be listening to instead of JP on the issue of being “attacked” by liberals and feminists.
What do you think focus for his books “12 Rules for Life” and “Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life” might be?
There might be a better term than straw man.
For what it’s worth, I have found Ken speaking with (of course every single one a fawning proponent) multiple other speakers. Oddly YT algos don’t push them to me. Is it coincidental that the one recent discussion targeting JBP “critique” has more views than all other posts combined?
Perhaps the real discussion isn’t about JBP, but should be framed around societal reaction to Mean Greenism, Wokeism, Identity Marxism which would be identified as Integral Regression.
Could we consider this as a “collective cleaning up” or “external quadrant growing up”?
I believe Corey has those discussions in here already if you want to contribute to those.
Some of them are great. They would be even better if he followed his own advice. #6 would be a god place for both you and him to start.
Rule 5 is a bit weird to me. I can’t imagine disliking my own child, or anything that would force me to dislike them. Liking or disliking people is purely one’s own choice. Nothing external can “make” you like or dislike them.
Rule 12 - I don’t pet feral cats for several very sensible reasons.
Of course I recognize that others may find these books more useful than I.
Then there is this gem in Beyond Chaos: Do not allow yourself to become resentful
No, not coincidental - JP is a dramatic figure who brings his personal drama into the public square and people like to rubberneck at such things. It’s human nature and why Youtube is full of terrible content that often overwhelms the better content.
For me it’s definitely a “theirs” issue. I don’t really have a dog in the fight, being neither a feminist nor wounded by feminists or progressives. I’m neither Christian nor do I need anyone to validate my spiritual beliefs. I know to strengthen my posture without needing to see it in a book by JP. And so on and so forth.
