Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
On the development of beliefs vs. capacities: A post-metaphysical view of second tier skillfulness.
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

On the development of beliefs vs. capacities: A post-metaphysical view of second tier skillfulness.


Published on

Murray, T. (2010). On the development of beliefs vs. capacities: A post-metaphysical view of second tier skillfulness. Presented at the 2nd Biannual Integral Theory Conference, John F. Kennedy …

Murray, T. (2010). On the development of beliefs vs. capacities: A post-metaphysical view of second tier skillfulness. Presented at the 2nd Biannual Integral Theory Conference, John F. Kennedy University. Pleasant Hill, CA, July, 2010.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • Not about AQAL….or this is the foundation of AQAL; underlies; Makes philosphers of us all…Metaphysics is about what is real or what exists.
  • These are some of the general questions in my mind that lead to the paperI’d like to engage you in some of them so we can think about this together…More about questions than answers or models; I will talk about questions vs models under themes of positive epistemic capability vs negative capability
  • Beliefs define a communityWhat do we have to offer the wider world? Models? Skils/capacities? Methods; wayts; princilples?(offer the second tier world?)
  • How we FRAME devel narratives…- realtionship TO beliefs (values)- PM is a perspective on belief and knowledge itself…
  • We distinguish oursleves form prior memes…How important are some of these beliefs to you or others?How do we articulate what’s unsettling (or unjustified) about some beliefs? LATER: talk about mythical, magical and metaphysical thinkiing…its ROLE
  • And why does it matter??
  • Looking at epstemology; ways of thinking, capacities; not values/needs.
  • Many ways we talk about it; all the models wilber mentions- stage based models…STRAW man spectrum!- not critique of existing narratives/projects; an exploration into where next
  • Ref Kurt Fischer Skill Theory…
  • Ref Stein on is/ought conflation; naturalistic fallacy; myth of the xxx
  • puts humans at the forefront of the evolution of consciousness - deeply experience ..access to the motivation (ecstatic impulse) to break free of our egoic and narcissistic tendencies and align with a moral and spiritual sense of purpose and service - more than a surface belief system for its adherents—it is a lived experience that deeply implicates self identity
  • puts humans at the forefront of the evolution of consciousness - deeply experience ..access to the motivation (ecstatic impulse) to break free of our egoic and narcissistic tendencies and align with a moral and spiritual sense of purpose and service - more than a surface belief system for its adherents—it is a lived experience that deeply implicates self identity
  • not meant to be fair representations of the core content of the articles they are taken from, but are selected to illustrate a common theme - A story/narrative (vs. a theory/model)
  • alludes to skills and capacities, but does not describe them sufficiently to allow them to be evaluated or directly supported - a model set of principles; a philosophy
  • This is about the BOOK only- describes each meme in terms of response to life conditions (p. 56), concerns and priorities (p. 65), decision making style, education modes, family dynamics, community interactions, and life space structures (p. 332). - imply skill sets. -- missing a sufficient description of exactly what these ways of thinking are, as opposed to what they are like.- Asssesment: most/leat like me; about values and beliefs, not thinking skils
  • can’t blame others for not having these skills or focus; point is to bring more of this in to what we do…- and there are informal non-research ways to orient to skills and capacities over belief systems- in workshops by Cohen, Beck, McIntosh skill building IS happening; but not explicitly…
  • - I’m particularly interested in second tier skills (not only sequence of development but the FOCAL GOAL)-“look and feel” is it about skillful means or what is believed?- communication (including dialog, deliberation, and written communication), problem solving (including planning and design), decision-making, collaboration (including group dynamics), leadership (and parenting), and learning (including adaptation and self-improvement)
  • So far, just argued for the different narratives; next argue for problems with beliefs and need for more skills-based; moving along that spectrum- If I had to choose between a Turquise belief system and skills set… “Mean Green Meme” is actually a cultural identity grouping that does not reflect green skill development Think of intelligent/evolved integral non-believers; are hey second tier?
  • Wiping up the crowd; extreem states; - partial, always wrong-
  • Its both- at second tier
  • what do you think of as 'higher self' 'true/authentic self':is it 'higher and overseeing" rest of self; UNDERpinning/fundamental?; Encircling/embracing?
  • reality is not out there waiting to be seen; not simply as it appears
  • From Cooke; fact/value convolution
  • Zone == how x what?Who, how, what enact each other (conascent)- Seean EH:Object’s [altitude & quadrivium] XSubject’s [>= devel level & quadrant]
  • - In people & in philosophers…
  • We do these things with a vengeance! We are wired to do us accurately understand the world but can create biases and errors- we also have the opposite drives… (just like we have aggression and nurturance drives in us)See it in yourself. See it in great philosophers….Embodied mind -- Lakoff & Johnson, 1999; Clark 1996; Varela et al. 1993- abstract concepts (e.g. democracy, African-American, god, ego, compassion, spirit, evolution, formal operational thinking, left hand quadrant, green meme, or Eros)
  • OK for Wilber! That certainty and precision creates a force; but WE don’t have to copy it…How can we bring both of these into play?- everybody is partially RIGHT; vs Everybody is (partly) wrong
  • Reflective abstraction; subject/object; hierarchical complexity;
  • --need seqqay to post-metaphisics
  • Transcript

    • 1. On the development of beliefs vs. capacities: A post-metaphysical view of Second tier skillfulness
      Tom Murray
      Integral Theory Conference
      August 2010, JFK University
    • 2. Integral as EpistemicsMethodolgcl. Pluralism | Perspectives | Post-metaphysics
      Integral theory (esp. “Wilber-5”) is fundamentally about Epistemology and Method
      How do we know? What can we know is true/real?
      How do we discover and justify what we think is true or good?
      Epistemics: knowledge, belief, method, certainty, theories, concepts…
      Includes emotional, social, ethical: uncertainty, unknowing, assumptions & worldviews, communication, decision making…
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 3. An inquiry into belief-holding
      Exploring what an integral or second tier approach to belief and knowledge could mean
      …what integralists believe (and don’t believe)
      What do we think it is important for others to believe/know/do based on integral theories?
      Our relationship to what we believe:
      How certain can we be?
      How do we explain, promote, critique, justify?
      How do we respond to other belief systems?
      Epistemological and ethical implications…?
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 4. Portability of integral ideas
      Beliefs, values??
      US (integralists)
      beliefs, knowledge, values…
    • 5. Overview
      Development described in terms ofbeliefs and world views vs. skills and capacitates
      Post-metaphysicsas part of second-tier enacting & skill
      Positive & Negative Capability(and ethical implications)
      …Audience deliberation…
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 6. In groups of 3 or 4 (10 min.)
      Reflect on an idea or “truth” from integral theory/practice or evolutionary spirituality that you have tried to explain to friends/colleagues (with limited success!).
      How do you know/explain it is true or valid?
      How certain were/are you?
      Why did you want them to understand it?
    • 7. Some New Age vs. Integral Beliefs
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
      mythical, magical or metaphysical thinking??
    • 8. Integral/Evolutionary Beliefs and Concepts
      How do we know/prove what is true/”real”? How sure can we be?
      • Eros & Agape influence (or cause) evolution
      • 9. The universe is evolving – through us
      • 10. All objects/events/perspectives fit in 4 quadrants
      • 11. The True, the Good, the Beautiful..
      • 12. Gross, Subtle, Causal, Non-dual states
      • 13. Subtle energies and chakras. Synchronicities
      • 14. Over-soul; Spirit; Authentic Self; Omega Point
      • 15. Collective consciousness? Intuition? Flow? Morphogenetic field? Ground of Being? Involution?
      • 16. Higher meditative states/truths (oneness, wholeness, light, love, emptiness…)
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 17. Belief and certainty/commitment
      We take integral ideas seriously — believe they are useful to us and to others
      What exists (metaphysics) vs. what is true
      Habermas: to believe an idea is to be prepared to justify it
      But belief has a spectrum of certainty/commitment
      What is most important to commit to? Vs. be laissez-faire or hypothetical about? (why?)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 18. Interdependent modes of justification/critique— which did you use/observe? —
      First hand experience
      Deep intuition (or gut feeling)
      Reasonable assumptions/bases/premises
      Logical inference (supporting truth)
      It is ethically right
      It is pragmatically useful (it works)
      Consistent with other knowledge
      Support of experts/authorities
      Trusted sources (journal, NPR, etc.)
      Someone I know and trust believes it
      Most people (peers in my group) believe it
      I used a trusted method
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 19. Second tier transcends & includesmagical, mythical, conventional, modern modes of justification
      Q is when and how to we use these modes?
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 20. Magical thinking
      All is one; there are no boundaries; we are all connected
      Nonliving things have an animate life force; intentions, can hurt & bless
      Powerful beings (gods, spirits…) can punish or reward; we are vulnerable
      I have the psychic power to effect the world; bless or curse; pray, manifest; (omnipotency)
      I hear inner messages; I use special objects and rituals to access divinations
      Impulses and emotions and power dynamics determine my actions (not abstract ideas or plans)
      Wishful thinking (the unwanted is unreal)
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 21. Magical/mythical thinking
      How do we know: What to believe or do?
      -- same criteria for the true and the good: --
      Authority figures and charismatics
      Magical or sacred books and objects
      Social norms, habit, they way it has been
      Peer pressure; what everyone else does
      My own experience
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 22. Magical/mythical thinking (2)
      Little differentiation between:
      Inner vs. outer (ideas & imaginings vs. reality)
      The true and the good/right
      Thoughts and feelings
      Self and group
      Past, present, future
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 23. Then comes Blue/Amber, Orange…
      • Blue meme: ideals, rules, principles, predictable patterns
      • 24. Orange meme: systematic, possibilities/probabilities, logic; rigor, efficiency & perfection drives
      • 25. Differentiating/discriminating:
      • 26. Feelings vs. thoughts
      • 27. Interiors vs. exteriors (self reflection)
      • 28. True / Good / Beautiful (scientific method) (what is vs. what should be)
      • 29. Self vs. group/culture
      • 30. Belief vs. truth
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 31. Integral/Second Tier thinking?
      …more exploration later…
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 32. Theories/narratives of human development
      As shared and promoted within the integral community…
    • 33. A heuristic spectrumof developmental narratives
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
      WHAT one believes
      HOW one believes/thinks
      What on does/can DO
      Skills &Capacities
      Beliefs &World Views
      (Virtues, Habits)
      (Values, Identity,)
    • 34. “Skill” =
      Higher order skills, capacities, capabilities, "skillful means"
      Cognitive, social/ethical/emotional skills
      E.g. systemic thinking, ego awareness, construct awareness, leadership, communication, empathy
      The beliefs in focus are meaning-generative:cultural, metaphysical, spiritual, philosophical… (not concrete facts)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 35. Tentative Assumptions
      Value of stage-based theories of development for (is and ought):
      Descriptive models of human development
      “Health of the spiral”; “Greatest depth for greatest span”
      More “second tier” capacity in general
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 36. E.G. belief & world-view basedNarratives of human development
      Cohen & Hamilton’s Evolutionary Enlightenment
      Kosmos Journal
      McIntosh’s Integral Consciousness
      Beck & Cohen’s Spiral Dynamics
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 37. Belief & World-view basedNarratives of human develpment
      Cohen & Hamilton’s Evolutionary Enlightenment:
      An "evolutionary context" in which "who and what God is can no longer be taken as fixed—that from a developmental perspective, God is also evolving, just as we are"
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 38. Kosmos Journal(Nancy Roof, Ed.)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 39. McIntosh’s Integral Consciousness
      Promotes an "integral worldview" and
      “Integral consciousness [that is] a new perspective on the world that expands our perception of reality and provides fresh motivation…arises from and enlarged set of values framed by an expanded understanding of cultural evolution"
      "[if] you read and consider the ideas in this book, they will literally raise your consciousness"
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 40. Beck & Cohen’s Spiral Dynamics (text)
      A sequence of core intelligences or memes, that each "reflects a worldview, a valuing system…a belief structure, an organizing principle, a way of thinking or mode of adjustment"
      But: talks about and around skills without getting sufficiently specific about exactly what they are, and focus more on human drives, needs, motivation, and values
      Skills implied but not fleshed out in a teachable or measurable way
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 41. Skill & Capacity approaches to development
      Action Logics (Cook-Greuter & Torbert)
      Kegan’s Subject/Object Theory
      Skill Theory & Hierarchical Complexity Theory (Fischer, Commons, Dawson, Stein)
      Many “developmentalists” past and present
      (Wilber – covers both ‘sides of the fence’)
      Psychologists/sociologists focusing on describing, understanding, measuring, supporting human capacity
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 42. Second Tier Skills/Capacities(integral, post-formal, post-post-modern)
      • What does it look and feel like to be in a second tier collaboration, inquiry, deliberation, or organization?
      • 43. Thinking skills & social/emotional skills:
      • 44. Communication & Collaboration
      • 45. Leadership & Conflict resolution & Parenting
      • 46. Knowledge building & Systems design
      • 47. Self-awareness & self-directed learning
      • 48. Epistemology—one’s relationship to belief
      • 49. Wisdom skills — relates belief to action
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 50. Wisdom Skills
      Egoawareness (self/ego/will and being/spirit/essence; "I" dimension)
      Relationalawareness (emotional/social/ethical/interpersonal intelligence; "We" dimension)
      Constructawareness(cognitive; "It" dimension)
      Systemsawareness ("Its" dimension; also a cognitive capacity, but reflecting on dynamic systems and networks of relationships as opposed to mental constructs)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 51. Memes as Beliefs vs. Skills
      Critical mass to establish a meme
      Then people from any level can be attracted to it
      “Mean Green Meme” is actually a cultural identity grouping that does not reflect green skill development
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 52. Some Problems with Development as a Worldview or Belief System
      Beliefs: perspectival, culturally bound, fallible
      Attached to identity and support in/out group
      Beliefs can “clash” in struggles of power and identity; skills are “cognitive tools”
      Beliefs-systems can be ideologies/dogmas (manipulation/misconception/misuse)
      Charismatic propaganda, peer pressure (inculcation/adoption vs. teaching/learning)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 53. Supporting Belief vs. Skill
      Design of skill/capacity support is more difficult
      Persuasion/argumentation are ancient arts
      Articulating & supporting skills is new
      Requires special knowledge; more precision
      Skill acquisition:
      Instruct, model, practice (practice!), feedback
      Support and challenge
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 54. The value of belief systems
      Motivation, intention, vision!
      …when and why to USE skills/capacities
      Power of story, myth, narrative
      Shared world-view 
      Synergetic action, solidarity, meaning-generation
      Stable base for new levels of cultural evolution
      Need shared beliefs (community) to create skills?
      “Beliefs” can be stable useable knowledge of “how things work”
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 55. A post-metaphysical approach to belief – holding?
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 56. Integral & post-metaphysical injunctions
      Don’t confuse map with territory
      Avoid the Myth of the Given
      Take a post-metaphysical perspective
      Good goals – but can we enact them??
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 57. Post-metaphysics
      How we hold or beliefs
      Level/type of certainty & importance (emotional)
      How we explain or promote beliefs (cognitive)
      Who should believe them and to what ends? (ethical)
      Involves second tier skills/knowledge of “how the mind/ideas work”
      concepts, models, communication, ego…
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 58. …some useful distinctions…
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 59. Further deconstructing my argument
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
      Skills &Capacities
      Beliefs &World Views
      Models & Theories
      (Values, Identity, Virtues, Habits)
      Facts &Knowledge
    • 60. Belief/knowledge structuresa useful framework
      Experience (phenomena; what happens)
      Linguistic / symbolic
      Concepts (categories; what exists; is real)
      (concrete … > … abstract)
      Statements (propositions; what is true/right)
      Model/Theory (system of related beliefs)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 61. Belief/knowledge structures (2)
      Linguistic / symbolic
      Taste of chocolate; gut certainty;
      meditative state; being a parent;
      a baseball game; (intuitions…)
      Tree, democracy, interior, consciousness…
      Trees are…; We should…; the cognitive line leads…
      AQAL, SD, Einstein’s, ….
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 62. Concept Indeterminacy(Lakoff)
      Abstract Concepts:
      Graded (fuzzy)
      Metaphorical (limited by embodiment)
      Have “metaphorical pluralism”
      Generate polarities, paradoxes
      A fragile house of cards used to build up (abstract) statements
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 63. Interdependent modes of statement justification/critique— (revisited) —
      First hand experience
      Deep intuition (or gut feeling)
      Reasonable assumptions/bases/premises
      Logical inference (supporting truth)
      It is ethically right
      It is pragmatically useful (it works)
      Consistent with other knowledge
      Support of experts/authorities
      Trusted sources (journal, NPR, etc.)
      Someone I know and trust believes it
      Most people (peers in my group) believe it
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 64. Model/Theory indeterminacy/fallibility
      (Rob Smith: “integral is the mother of all escapes”)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 65. Group reflections onthings said to Exist (concepts)
      OBJECTS / Concepts
      Does it exist?
      In what way?
      How sure are you? (sure enough to commit to…)
      How would I explain/argue for (against) it?
      Who should believe me?
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 73. Perspectives on “Post-metaphysics”
      When something exists metaphysically, it claims freedom from rational justification and dialog.
      (it is beyond both physical and neural/psycho/social laws)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 74. Post-metaphysics (1)
      • Is not anti-metaphysics (there are non-physical ‘things’)
      • 75. No view from nowhere (privileged perspective), beyond myth of the given; map is not territory;
      • 76. Perspectival: all truths/experiences come from a perspective and are partial
      There are no fixed eternal forms, structures, or archetypes, because everything is evolving
      Phenomena are enacted/co-constructed (makes no sense to say things exists(ed) unless (until) perceived)
      (there is no ideal, transcendental, essential, or primordial in the metaphysical sense)
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
    • 77. Post-metaphysics (2)Habermas
      Procedural/formal/method conceptions of rationality (“a rational person thinks this” to "…thinks like this")
      Replaced foundationalism with fallibilism with regard to valid knowledge
      Contextualized or situated reason in actual practices, historical contexts, & world views
      Sees knowledge and truth as strongly related to ethics (affected by notions of rightness, sincerity, and authenticity) [and emotion]
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 78. Post-metaphysics (3)Integral PM
      Kosmic address: altitude + perspective (of S,O)
      Who x How x What
      Who: adequatio (developmental level(s) of perceiver)
      How: method / tool; relationship of S,O; zone
      What: quadrant (I,we,it,its)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
      the dog, Santa Claus, √-1, Emptiness, ecosystem,…
      - where/how do the referents to these signifiers exists?
      - “ecosystems exist only in a worldspace of turquoise or higher”
    • 79. Post-metaphysical Validation(Wilber’s “three strands” of knowledge, plus)
      • 1. Injunction — If you want to know this, do this.
      • 80. 2. Experience —Beyond concepts/words.
      • 81. 2.5 Conceptualize, Infer, & Communicate —A “truth” from the experience & everything else you know.
      • 82. 3. Dialog (with a community of the adequate) — What do others who followed the injunction think?
      Tom Murray | | May 2010
      — and Indeterminacy Analysis —
      • What are my/our biases, assumptions, capacities?
      • 83. Describe alternatives; limitations; fallibilities…
      • 84. What is the knowledge for and what level of certainty is needed/called for?
      • 85. Other perspectives to invite? New Qs? — Iterate!
    • Positive (epistemic) capability vs.Negative (epistemic) capability
      Negative not as in destructive/deconstructive, but as awareness of limitation and fallibility
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 86. Post-metaphysics (4)as an ‘epistemic turn’
      • What we now know (bio-psycho-social) about ideas, knowledge, language :
      • 87. Knowledge is socially constructed
      • 88. All abstract concepts are “graded” (fuzzy) and metaphorical
      • 89. Rationality is “bounded” & embodied
      • 90. Concepts and language are indeterminate
      • 91.
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 92. Misplaced Concreteness(Whitehead)
      • Abstractions (ideas) treated like concrete/physical realities
      • 93. Fixed, external (objective)
      • 94. Solid conceptual boundaries
      MP is not just an avoidable error: its hard-wired in embodied cognition
      Subject / “Object” development
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 95. Misplaced Concretenessthrough developmental levels
      Magical thinking
      imagination/dreams seem “real” and concrete
      Mythical (and conventional) thinking
      We believe the “stories” we hear/tell ourselves
      Myth of the given
      Rational thinking
      Abstractions treated as realities
      Map/territory confusion
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • “Epistemic Drives”(in beliefs, ideas, knowledge)
      Concreteness/reification (of abstractions)
      Seeing connections, patterns
      (over-) Generalize & abstract
      Attribute sharp boundaries to concepts (ignore the grey areas)
      Foundationalism, essentialism, universality
      Unity/oneness, totality/wholeness, integration
      …proto-fascism, grandiosity, hegemony, elitism…?
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 100. Belief and Emotion(embodiment, ethics, enaction)
      Certainty / importance / emotional intensity
      Fear, risk, urgency, ecstasy… (states)
      Risk of misplaced concreteness
      Magnification of epistemic (and other) drives
      Regression to
      black & white (us/them; either/or)
      Reliance on authority, peers & norms
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 101. Positivism/certainty vs. fallibilism/indeterminacy
      Positivist attitude: clarity, certainty, action
      knowledge/meaning-generative; problem solving, theorizing
      Negative capability: awe, humility, curiosity
      Limits of language & knowledge & method
      Tolerance for ambiguity, uncertainty, unknowing
      Dealing with the above
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
      Espoused fallibility vs.
      Stylistic (or illocutionary/enacted) fallibility
    • 102. Palliatives:from “ontological humility” to “epistemic wisdom”
      How do we hold beliefs post-metaphysically (with second tier epistemics)?
      “I believe in reincarnation”
      “Non-dual states are beyond mind, matter, time, space”
      “the universe is constructed of holons” (or consists of perspectives)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 103. Experience (phenomena)
      Continuously ground abstractions in phenomena (experience) and shared intuitions
      Face it: reality and phenomena are:(infinitely?) messy, complex, codependent, deeply detailed…
      ideas like to be pristine, singular….
      Indeterminacy => vulnerability => ethical implications
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 104. Concepts:Epistemic language games
      Positivist epistemics:
      It IS… (foundational, essential, ultimate)
      It always is/was (eternal, given, primordial,..)
      Negative (epistemic) capability
      It is as if ; (what if; suspension..)
      “Chances are”…“as far as we can tell,”
      To the extent that… (in this context)
      In this sense/way… (from this perspective)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 105. Statements:A 4th Validity Type
      Beautiful (sincerity/authenticity)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 106. Models
      “Indeterminacy analysis” – deliver models with a “wrapper” showing assumptions and limitations of concepts (what falls in the grey area)
      Not just “Caution: this map is not the territory”
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 107. Certainty & Commitment in Belief & Action
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 108. In sum
      Understand the mind and limits of thought/language (Epistemic-turn)
      • Re-integrating all developmental levels, including magical & mythical thinking
      • 109. Ontological humility => epistemic wisdom
      Compensate for fallibility
      Expect and forgive fallibility
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 110. End
      Tom Murray –
    • 111. Extra slides
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 112. Second Tier - going “meta”(from ITC-2008)
      Meta-cognition (thinking about thinking)
      Meta-knowledge (knowledge about the nature and limitations of knowledge); META-BELIEF!
      Meta-learning (learning how to learn, also called triple-loop learning)
      Meta-dialog (dialog about how we engage in dialog)
      Meta-decision making (making decisions about how we will go about making decisions)
      Meta-affect (investigating the feeling of our feelings; somatic awareness of feeling states)
      Meta-leadership (supporting leadership in others)
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 113. Calls for higher level thought
      David Bohm: "underneath [humanity's dilemmas] there's something we don't understand about how thought works" and that what is needed is a "very deep [and] very subtle" awareness of thought itself.
      Albert Einstein: "the significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.”
      Cultural development as skill of understanding mind, thought, language, knowledge, belief…=> the “post-metaphysical turn”
      Tom Murray | | August 2010
    • 114. Some Polarities in Epistemic Drives
      Abstract (ideas) vs. concrete (tangible, sensory, real)
      General (generalization) vs. specific (specialization)
      Integration vs. differentiation
      Universal vs. relative (or contextual)
      Fundamental (essential, central, root) vs. consequential (peripheral or subordinate)
      Permanent (unchanging, fixed, predictable) vs. changing (transient, unpredictable, chaotic)
      Simple vs. complex
      Oneness/singularity/unity vs. multiplicity (the many)
      Whole (holism; integration) vs. part (differentiation)
      Completeness (comprehensiveness; totality; systemic) vs. partiality (details, deconstruction)
      Similarity vs. difference (diversity)
      Transcendence vs. immanence
      Perfection and purity vs. imperfection
      Tom Murray | | August 2010