Guides For Integrally Informed Practitioners : 2 Advanced

Guides for
Integrally Informed Practitioners
Walking in the world not talking of the world
ADVANCED
Paul van Schaik
integralMENTORS
www.integralmentors.org

integralMENTORS Guides - [Advanced]
2
Copyright © 2016 Paul van Schaik
All rights reserved
ISBN-13: 978-1535313261
ISBN-10: 15353132691

A Broader Framework
3
For the integralMENTORS Fellows and Directors of Integral Without Borders

4

A Broader Framework
5
Guides Volume 2 - Advanced
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION to the Integral View : [How to use] 06
Paper 01: AQAL SUMMARY – Ken Wilber 08
Paper 02: AQAL FRAMEWORK 10
Paper 03: INTEGRAL OPERATING SYSTEM (IOS) – Ken Wilber 13
Paper 04: INTEGRAL METHODOLOGICAL PLURALISM [1] – Ken Wilber 14
Paper 08: DYNAMIC CONCEPTUAL SCAFFOLDING – Part 1 20
Paper 09: DYNAMIC CONCEPTUAL SCAFFOLDING – Part 2 26
Paper 10: ZONES# in Development – ‘Insides and Outsides of Dimensions of Experience’ 28
Paper 11: INTEGRAL COMMUNICATION - Integral Report & Documentation Preparation 32
Paper 12: INTEGRAL COORDINATION 36
Paper 13: INTEGRAL PECKA KUCHA - Micro Presentation 40
Paper 14: MORPHO-GENERATIVE DEVELOPMENT 42
Paper 15: SNIPPABLE SEQUENCES 46
Paper 16: KOSMIC ADDRESS, MYTH OF THE GIVEN and more 50
Paper 17: INTEGRAL PARTICIPATION 53
Paper 18: INTEGRAL GOVERNANCE AND POLITICS – Ken Wilber 54
Paper 19: SELF-AS-INSTRUMENT 56
Paper 20: SHADOW and DEVELOPMENT 58
Paper 21: AGENCY AND COMMUNITY in Structural Stages of Development [Maps improved] 60
Paper 22: GLOSSERY OF TERMS 62
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS - BIOGRAPHY 65
DISCUSSIONS SERIES
‘What Do You Think’ D 05
‘Worlds of Inclusion’ D 45
‘Worlds of Praxis’ D 69
‘Worlds of Action’ D 75
Worlds of Theoria’ D 87

6
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE INTEGRAL VIEW and Working Guides
"We move from part to whole and back again, and in that dance of comprehension, in that amazing circle of
understanding, we come alive to meaning, to value, and to vision: the very circle of understanding guides our way,
weaving together the pieces, healing the fractures, mending the torn and tortured fragments, lighting the way ahead --
this extraordinary movement from part to whole and back again, with healing the hallmark of each and every step, and
grace the tender reward." Ken Wilber.
Introduction
This series of guides are intended for practitioners with some experience of integral theory.
Each paper can stand alone or be used with others in the series – they are not intended to be dogmatic or
prescriptive but to be used as reminders of a more extensive and developed theory. They are designed to be used
as part of a workshop process and as such have limited value outside this process.
Used with caution, with flexibility and a light touch, the papers are a rough guide to the territory - a ‘Third Person’
map of a highly complex and inter-meshed world.
Part One covers basic theory – but at sufficient detail for an integral practitioner to use in the design, planning and
implementation of projects or programs. The series will be added to as and when appropriate.
Series 20 is more advanced and covers more detailed uses of Integral theory [See separate documents].
Key
These guides are divided into four interspersed sections - identified by colour banners as followers:
Part 1: WHITE - theoretical guides – these give simple guides for the use of Integral theory in praxis in
international development whether it be the design or implementation of programs or projects. [White sheets are
the main content of this document].
Part 2: TEAL – commentary on the theory set out in the WHITE pages.
Part 3: YELLOW – Simple examples of how theoretical components have been used in praxis.
Part 4: BEIGE Introductions and summaries.
Health warning - Guides
THESE GUIDES ARE ALL LIVING DOCUMENTS AND WILL BE ADDED TO OR UPDATED AS REQUIRED.
These papers are to be used with a light touch and as a rough guide to action.
They are designed for people who have a degree of experience in the field of development in praxis and are
intended only for use following a workshop process for which they are designed.
Nothing in life will be as clear-cut as it appears in these guides. People and groups straddle stages and give
preference to the thinking or working-out of favoured quadrants and zones#. Altitude - though similar for individuals
will be made up of different line strengths or weaknesses.
Self-as-Instrument is key in their use - as an individual’s Kosmic Address will determine how the guides are perceived
and used.

A Broader Framework
7
What one ‘sees’ is determined by your stage of development. Or more correctly by one’s AQAL altitude.
Part Two is a hold-all for on-going discussion and ‘theory in praxis’ development.
These guides are a third-person rough map of a highly complex territory. But they help one to view the complexity
beyond the chaos of ‘current’ life. That is - to work with the complexity beyond the simplicity offered by lesser meta-
theories.
So to be used with care.
‘Theoria in praxis as praxis’
Background
IntegralMENTORS was asked by an International Development consultancy we have worked with most over the last
few years if we would develop a manual for project designers and implementers to help with a more integral or
broader view in their work. Thinking about it, it could, if used carefully, make some sense. So we started to collect
all our pieces from recent integralMENTORS and iSchaik Development Associates work and put them into a series of
loose-leaf sheets.
Included are some commentaries to go with the guides and a few ‘worked’ examples from the past – not case
studies but short - 'we did this in that situation' type of pieces – in order to contextualise them.
The way they are being used is to introduce each guide and work through them at a series of short workshops
covering some items at each, and then a final bringing all together at a day-long working session.
There are already a number of versions of 'what is Integral' produced over the years including some by the Integral
Institute and AQAL Journal that explain Integral Theory in simple language. The intention here is to aim for a
guidelines/checklist and thus a kind of manual to be used by people who already have at least a simple grounding in
Integral Theory and a lot of experience in International Development.
The problems with manuals – as has often been discussed - is that in themselves they are of little use UNLESS:
1) people have a grounding in Integral Theory and in this case International Development, and
2) they are initially used as part of training material to broaden consultants' or practitioners' skills and following that,
for training and use in the field. In other words manuals without training and context is problematic - if not useless.
Working with Integral Theory by practitioners in the field does take effort on their part:
1) to understand the complexity of the system and thus it's great advantages in praxis, and
2) to transform themselves sufficiently, with personal work, to a level of development in order to carry out item 1.
It has been our experience over the years that practitioners often looking for, in this Facebook age where people
think that all they have to do is click 'Like' or 'Share' to achieve a result, a simple 'if you do 'X" the results with be 'Y''.
But as we have stressed many times, Integral Theory, in itself, is no 'silver bullet' in fact far from it.

8
AQAL Summary - Ken Wilber [Working Series 020] Advanced
AQAL Summary
“We have covered a lot of ground in the first three parts of this essay. Here is a quick summary of the central points
to date:
Each holon has at least four major dimensions of being-in-the-
world: subjective, objective, intersubjective, and interobjective.
In the subjective dimension (UL), the moment-to-moment nature of
flowing existence involves prehension—or this moment’s feeling of
the previous moment—which is a holarchical transcendence-and-
inclusion of the previous moment. This is one example of the fact
that each dimension of being-in-the-world inherits a type of
influence (or Kosmic karma) from its predecessors.
In the objective dimension (UR), the moment-to-moment nature of
flowing existence involves, among other things, morphic resonance
and formative causation, where the objective form of a holon
resonates with similar forms across spacetime, influencing them to
some degree (just as a vibrating string causes other similar strings to
vibrate at the same frequency. The two strings vibrating together is
called morphic resonance, the one string causing the other to
vibrate is called formative causation). In the UR dimension, this
inheritance appears most essentially as the past forms of an
individual holon influencing its present form. This UR influence, as
we will see, also appears to involve various types of subtle energies.
Another equally important form of UR inheritance is autopoiesis, whereby living holons self-organize and self-
reproduce.
In the intersubjective dimension (LL), the moment-to-moment nature of flowing existence involves the inheritance
of a cultural background of shared meanings and mutual prehensions. In essence, this is the basis of cultural
memory.
In the interobjective dimensions (LR), the moment-to-moment nature of flowing existence involves collective
morphic resonance and collective formative causation that sets up various morphogenetic grooves that will
strongly influence, and sometimes directly guide, the unfolding development of individual holons that arise in
mesh with those grooves. This is simply a subset of the general phenomena of systems memory.
Thus, all four dimensions of being-in-the-world are influenced to some degree by their predecessors.
Put differently, each holon inherits, as a given or a priori ground, the AQAL matrix of the previous moment.
These inheritances involve deep patterns of being-in-the-world that are not archetypal givens but Kosmic habits.
Kosmic habits are not rigid concrete structures but probability waves of finding a particular type of holon in a
particular spacetime locale in the creatively unfolding AQAL matrix.
In order to survive, each holon must tetra-mesh with its AQAL inheritance or face extinction. This tetra-evolution
involves selection pressures in all four dimensions of its being-in-the-world (truth, truthfulness, meaning, functional
fit).
If the AQAL matrix of this moment inherits the AQAL matrix of the previous moment, it also adds it own spark of
creative novelty and transcendence. Each actual occasion is “transcend and include,” giving rise to the
Whiteheadian holarchical nature of each moment.

A Broader Framework
9
Therefore, evolution is marked not just by the inheritance of past forms in tetra-mesh, but the emergence of new
forms in transcendental leaps of creativity. As Jantsch summarized it, evolution is “self-organization through self-
transcendence.”
These emergent leaps therefore create new niches in the AQAL matrix marked by probability waves of greater
depth, consciousness, and inclusive capacity.
These niches take on specific forms as Kosmic habits when that space is quadratically enacted by a sufficiently
large number of holons (which then pass on this inheritance to subsequent holons, who will transcend and include
it).
Higher potentials become concrete actualities—and higher states become actual stages—through this process of
creative enactment in tetra-mesh. At no point are pregiven levels, structures, or stages required.
Whenever a new niche is in the process of tetra-emergence, the old niche is thrown into a legitimation crisis,
which can only be resolved by an increase in authenticity—or a transformation to the new niche of greater depth,
consciousness, culture, and complexity.
Authentic vertical transformations to greater levels of depth do not automatically spell progress, however, because
higher developments in some lines can be accompanied by lower developments in other lines (a phenomena
called levels and lines, whether in individuals or societies).
For this reason, historical development is always a painful mixture of “good news, bad news,” as individuals and
subcultures in the society span the entire spectrum of consciousness in all of its available waves, in both their
healthy and unhealthy forms.
Thus, the greater the depth of any individual or culture, the more potentials and pathologies available to it.”
“An AQAL or integral analysis of all of those factors very likely represents the best chance of increasing the good
news and diminishing the bad news in any AQAL configuration (in an individual, family, society, species, planet, or
Kosmos), because only an integral analysis takes into account the widest variety of evidence from the greatest
number of sources, and is therefore the least exclusionary and least violent approach to self-and-other
understanding.”

10
AQAL framework – Ken Wilber [Working Series 020] Advanced
What does it mean to operate in an AQAL framework
Here it is useful to make a distinction between what might be called “an integral approach” and an “integrally
informed approach.” As we will see, both of these play an important role in integral Practice, although the former
applies more to the clients/Communities etc., and the latter, to the ID professional. While an integral approach can
more effectively help the client/Community etc., an integrally informed approach can more effectively help the ID
Consultant/worker.
An integral approach means, in a sense, the “view from 50,000 feet.” It is a panoramic look at the modes of inquiry
(or the tools of knowledge acquisition) that human beings use, and have used, for decades and sometimes centuries.
An integral approach is based on one basic idea: no human mind can be 100% wrong. Or, we might say, nobody is
smart enough to be wrong all the time. And that means, when it comes to deciding which approaches,
methodologies, epistemologies, or ways or knowing are “correct,” the answer can only be, “All of them.” That is, all
of the numerous practices or paradigms of human inquiry—including physics, chemistry, hermeneutics, collaborative
inquiry, meditation, neuroscience, vision quest, phenomenology, structuralism, subtle energy research, systems
theory, shamanic voyaging, chaos theory, developmental psychology—all of those modes of inquiry have an
important piece of the overall puzzle of a total existence that includes, among other many things, health and illness,
doctors and patients, sickness and healing.
Again, it is not necessary that if you are, say, a health practitioner, you must be able yourself to treat all of the issues
in all of the quadrants or levels or states. Specialization will always be necessary to some degree. But if you aspire to
be an integrally informed practitioner, you will at least be familiar with the issues and tools used in the other
quadrants and dimensions. An “integral practice” is a practice that makes room for the entire panoply of effective
treatments/inputs/issues across all quadrants and dimensions of human health and illness.
There do indeed appear to be physical and emotional and mental and spiritual waves of being and awareness, each
of them possessing an “I” and a “we” and an “it” dimension. And through those waves of existence appear to run
cognitive streams and self-identity streams and value streams and artistic streams, all rushing and roiling across that
extraordinary spectrum from subconscious to self-conscious to super-conscious. And it now appears more than likely
that every single one of those variables is at work in every single case of health and illness, sickness and recovery,
healer and healed.
But the crucial ingredient in any integral practice is not the integral tool bag itself—with all the conventional tools,
and alternative tools—but the holder of that tool bag, the integrally informed practitioner, the consultants, workers,
advisors, etc. who have opened themselves to an entire spectrum of consciousness—matter to body to mind to soul
to spirit—and who have thereby acknowledged what seems to be happening in any event: body and mind and spirit
are operating in self and culture and nature, and thus health and healing, sickness and wholeness, are all bound up
in a multidimensional tapestry that cannot be cut into without fatal haemorrhaging.
The one thing that you will have changed if you adopt an integral approach is your own awareness, your own
consciousness, your own map of human possibilities, a map that has dramatically expanded from organic
interventions to caring for a human being in all of his or her extraordinary richness across an entire spectrum that
runs from dust to deity, dirt to divinity, even here and now.
An integrally informed practitioner is one who has let the most amount of the Kosmos into his or her mind, finds
thereby the most potentials for understanding and healing and compassionate care, and brings that Big Mind to his
or her practice in a way that inculcates both more confidence and more humility, all at once.
An integral approach is adopted by an integrally informed practitioner.
Wilber describes three ways that theoretical frameworks can be employed:
1) Indexing existing knowledge; 2) Diagnosis; and 3) Prescription.

A Broader Framework
11
Paradigm
Of course, virtually all of today’s “new paradigm” theorists—including all of the authors just mentioned, and literally
hundreds of others—claimed that they had a new paradigm, when in fact they had no such thing. All they had was a
new theory, not a new base, not a new set of injunctions to generate new data, not a new exemplar at all. The wildly
popular version of “paradigm” had the cart before the horse, and simply presented a new theory with no new
paradigms at all—that is, the “new paradigms” were entirely a boomeritis version of Kuhn’s important research
“… a paradigm is a social practice or behavioural injunction, not simply a theory or intellectual edifice (although, of
course, they tetra-evolve together). Accordingly, any new paradigm will include a set of exemplars and practices—
practices that, if they contain more depth (or Eros) than their predecessors, will throw the old approaches into a
legitimation crisis that can only be resolved by a vertical (‘revolutionary’) transformation—as we said, the crisis in
legitimacy can only be resolved by an increase in authenticity. Thus, a new integral paradigm will therefore be a new
set of injunctions and practices, not simply theories, not worldviews, not Web-of-Life notions, not holistic
concepts—but actual practices.” P. 6-7, Excerpt B: The Many Ways We Touch—Three Principles Helpful for Any
Integrative Approach
Transcend & include
If “internal” means any element or sub-holon that follows the agency of another holon, then external simply means:
anything that does not. Sometimes the external element is at the same level of development; sometimes at a lower
level of development; sometimes at a higher level. As Varela often points out, a molecule is internal to a cell, but
the cell is external to its own molecules: all of the molecule is in the cell, but not all of the cell is in the molecule.
The cell is “over the head” of the molecule, it transcends it in many important ways (for example, the molecule is
following the agency of the cell, but not vice versa).
These external event-horizons signal transcendence. Transcend-and-include means something new and higher and
external to the present entity comes into being (transcendence), but the present entity is taken up, included, and
enfolded in the new occasion as an internal thread or strand in its makeup. (Some people would call that Eros and
agape, respectively, but those people probably think geese have feelings.)
Thus, transcend-and-include means external-and-internal. The “many become one” (which means, the many
become internal to the new one) and “are increased by one” (which means, the new one is external or beyond the
many, although it is in turn transcended-and-included).

12

A Broader Framework
13
Integral Operating System – Ken Wilber [Working Series 020] Advanced
Integral Operating System (IOS)
Once an individual downloads and installs IOS in their own worldview,
they begin more conscientiously attempting to include all views, all
approaches, all potentials in their own sweep of the Kosmos. IOS
initiates a self-correcting, self-organizing outreach to all aspects of the
universe previously marginalized by worldviews that were too narrow,
too shallow, too self-enclosing to serve as more transparent vehicles of
Kosmic consciousness.
An AQAL matrix, or an Integral Operating System (IOS)—that allows us
to do several things at once.
First, we can account for existing stable structures (from bacteria to
ecosystems to levels of consciousness) without resorting to pre-given
archetypes, structures, or independently existing ontological levels—
that is, we can begin to replace metaphysical speculation with
reconstructive inquiry.
Second, even existing structures are not viewed as independently
existing concrete entities but as probability waves for finding particular
occasions in a certain vicinity of the AQAL matrix at any given time.
Third, the very nature of any actual occasion intrinsically contains at
least three or four major dimensions (the four quadrants), each of which embodies an intrinsic mode of being-in-the-
world (first, second, and third person modes).
Fourth, an Integral Operating System (or a theoretical framework that explicitly honours and includes all quadrants,
all levels, all lines, all states, all types) is very likely the only framework that can help to inaugurate an integral age at
the leading edge. Although any IOS is merely a third-person, abstract, theoretical, it-language construction, any
authentic IOS nonetheless explicitly draws attention, not just to third-person “its,” but to the other important
realities of first- and second-person modes, including personal feelings, experiences, phenomenology,
hermeneutics, and collaborative inquiry.
Therefore, any genuine IOS helps to continually remind individuals that they should be touching bases with all of
those realities—with all of the quadrants, all of the levels, all the lines, all the states, all the types—even if the simple
IOS map itself can never replace the actual territory of any of those (nor was it meant to). Moreover, unlike most
other maps (from the Web of Life to the postmodern paradigm), which believe themselves to be the actual
territory and the only correct one.

14
Integral Methodological Pluralism [1] – Ken Wilber [Working Series 020] Advanced
Integral Methodological Pluralism
Integral Methodological Pluralism (IMP) has two main
parts: paradigmatic and meta-paradigmatic. The
paradigmatic aspect means a careful compilation of all
the primary paradigms or methodologies of presently
existing modes of human inquiry--which means, the
major methodologies that are presently accepted within
their own fields or disciplines.
… Excerpt A (gives) an overview of many of those
fundamental paradigms--and we will continue to
explore those "need-to-be-included" paradigms as we
proceed--from hermeneutics to phenomenology to
behaviorism to systems theory to meditation to
collaborative inquiry to vision quest to quantum physics
to depth psychology to molecular biology. All of the
major modes of human inquiry possess general
practices and injunctions that bring forth and illumine
various types of experiences, revelations, data, and
phenomena held to be legitimate by those disciplines,
and an Integral Methodological Pluralism quite literally
makes room for all of those major modes of inquiry.
At this point, no attempt is made to judge whether a
particular practice or paradigm should or should not be
included in the mix. The fact is, these paradigms or
practices already exist, they are already being practiced
by human beings around the world--by men and women
who are sincerely convinced that these practices bring
forth something of value for themselves and others--and
practices that accordingly deserve a fair hearing in the integrative forums or salons now nascently self-organizing.
The first or paradigmatic part of IMP is thus a respectful compilation, without judgment, of the major methodologies
for enacting, illuminating, and bringing forth various world-spaces or ways of being-in-the-world. These are the
various paradigms or methodologies that already exist and are already being practiced by caring and concerned
men and women around the world.
The second part of any integral methodological pluralism, and the part that prevents it from being a first-tier
eclecticism, is a meta-paradigmatic set of practices that conscientiously relate the various paradigmatic strands to
each other. Put simply, integral methodological pluralism includes a compilation of the most important, time-tested
methodologies, as well as a set of practices that weave them together or integrate them into ways of being-in-the-
world that are radically non-exclusionary. This aspect of IMP can be summarized as, "Everybody is right."
(Put technically, such a meta-paradigmatic practice enacts a new domain upon the individually-enacted
paradigmatic domains, such that their individually-enacted phenomena overlap, their brought-forth horizons merge
to some degree, and there is enacted upon the enacted phenomena--and accordingly there is brought forth,
illumined, and most fundamentally disclosed--a new territory or domain of integral interrelationships. In other words,
this is a paradigm of paradigms, which means, as we now know, a practice of practices and not a theory of
theories.)
These types of meta-paradigmatic practices--as they apply to an individual, a group, a research setting, a society--

A Broader Framework
15
will be outlined as we go along, but here is a quick preview of what might be involved.
On a more personal side, IMP involves things like Integral Transformative Practice (ITP), wherein a full range of
human potentials are simultaneously engaged and exercised in order to enact and bring forth any higher states and
stages of human potential, leading individuals through their own personal legitimation crisis to an increase in
authenticity. On a societal scale, it involves approaching social ills with an integrative tool kit, not a piecemeal series
of ameliorations that often create as many problems as they solve.
Second-tier solutions to social problems involve sustained inquiries into ways that will allow each wave (e.g.,
Magenta, Red, Amber, Orange, Green) to freely explore its own potentials but in ways that those waves would not
construct if left to their own exclusionary practices. In academic settings, integral methodological pluralism allows
the creation not so much of more cross-disciplinary studies (which confirm each other in their first-tier prejudices) but
in trans-disciplinary studies (which enact a new territory of integral displays between old rivalries).
In general, to put it in Orange terms, any sort of Integral Methodological Pluralism allows the creation of a multi-
purpose toolkit for approaching today's complex problems--individually, socially, and globally--with more
comprehensive solutions that have a chance of actually making a difference. Or, to say the same thing with Green
terms, an Integral Methodological Pluralism allows a richer diversity of interpretations of life's text to stand forth in a
clearing of mutual regard, thus marginalizing no interpretation in the process.
On an individual scale, the same approach can be applied to one's own profession, converting it into a practice of
integral law, integral medicine, integral business, integral education, integral politics, integral ecology, integral
psychotherapy and family practice, and so on. We will see examples of many of these as we proceed. Most of the
tools to do all of the above already exist (i.e., the MP of the IMP are already out there). All that is required, at least to
get started, are a few integrating principles to initiate the "integral" part of the IMP.
These heuristic principles suggest simple ways to practice on those practices already out there, thus quickly
converting any given practice into an integral practice. Let's look at three such integrative principles as examples.

16
The Essence of Integral Meta-theory: Everybody Is Right
In a research setting, for example, a meta-paradigmatic
practice might involve "simultracking," where phenomena
in various domains are simultaneously tracked according to
the accepted methodologies of those domains. For
example, during collaborative inquiry (which enacts the
Lower-Left or intersubjective dimensions of being-in-the-
world), simultaneously track the participants' brainwave
patterns (which discloses aspects of the Upper-Right or
objective dimensions of being- the-world), and then look
for correlations between them. This practice of
simultracking is not something that would ordinarily occur
to the postmodern pluralist (who does not believe in
objective science) nor to the scientist (who does not believe
in pluralism). Caught in their respective quadrant
absolutisms, they rarely talk to each other.
In that particular case, the paradigmatic aspect of IMP
includes both of those practices (not just theories, but the
actual practices of engaging in collaborative inquiry and of running an EEG flow pattern), and then IMP adds the
second or meta-paradigmatic practice, that of simultracking (or running them together and actively noting any
correlations), which is a practice that can enact, bring forth, and illumine the integral interrelationships between
various holons originally thought discrete or even nonexistent. In other words, this practice on a set of practices (or
this meta-paradigm on the individual paradigms) brings forth and illumines the mutual interactions between actual
occasions, and it does so only from a space that theory would later call a secondtier probability wave. That is, meta-
paradigmatic practices stand forth only in the worldspace of second-tier consciousness, which discloses holonic and
integral relationships that were operative but not visible at first-tier waves.
In short, around social practices, paradigms, or methodologies, theories or worldviews grow. Paradigms bring forth
new territories, which new maps attempt abstractly to reflect. Integral Methodological Pluralism is no different. It is a
series of concrete practices; engaging these practices enacts, brings forth, discloses, and illumines a series of
phenomena, data, experiences, and mutual or intersubjective prehensions--and around this entire set of disclosures
and new experiences, various theories and worldviews grow, theories (and meta-theories or super-theories) that
attempt to elucidate, explain, and codify the plethora of phenomena (subjective, intersubjective, objective, and
interobjective) thrown up by the social practices.
With regard to IMP, we can put the crucial point very simply: what if an individual (and right now we are still talking
mostly about elite academics) accepted the basic validity of hermeneutics AND systems theory AND introspective
phenomenology AND empirical science AND shamanic states of consciousness AND developmental psychology
AND collaborative inquiry AND ecological sciences AND postmodern contextualism AND neuroscience.... Well,
perhaps the point is annoyingly obvious. If the basic legitimacy of all of those time-tested methodologies is allowed,
then the experiences that all of those social practices enact, bring forth, and illumine become grist for the mill of a
new super-theory or meta-theory that accounts, or at least attempts to account, for all of them in a believable,
coherent fashion.
At this time, one such meta-theory is AQAL (pronounced ah quil), which is short for "all quadrants, all levels, all lines,
all states, all types." This meta-theory did not precede integral methodological pluralism, but, as usual, vice versa.
That is, the ingredients of the AQAL meta-theory are the phenomena (subjective, intersubjective, objective, and
interobjective) enacted and brought forth by literally dozens of time honored methodologies, injunctions, paradigms,

A Broader Framework
17
and practices. It is the existence of these many paradigms and social practices--and the phenomena they generate--
that are some of the crucial ingredients of Integral Methodological Pluralism (i.e., the "paradigmatic" part of IMP).
The novel component of AQAL is the meta-paradigmatic aspect, or the practices on the practices (which generate
theories on the theories, or the meta-theory or super-theory known as AQAL). This component can be most simply
summarized as the assumption that "Everybody is right," which generates a meta-practice of honoring, including,
and integrating the fundamental paradigms and methodologies of the major forms of human inquiry (traditional,
modern, and postmodern). In other words, the experiences enacted by all of those methodologies are given a
legitimacy by the AQAL assumption and are actively cultivated by the meta-paradigmatic practices--that is, are
actively cultivated by an integral methodological pluralism, whether in the research setting of simultracking, the
personal setting of an Integral Transformative Practice, or the social setting of revolutionary reforms that actually
have traction because second-tier potentials are effectively tetra-engaged. AQAL, then, is a meta-theory that
attempts to integrate the most amount of material from an integral methodological pluralism, thus honoring the
primary injunction of an integral embrace: Everybody is right.
Subjects do not perceive worlds but enact them.
Different states of subjects bring forth different worlds. For AQAL, this means that a subject might be at a particular
wave of consciousness, in a particular stream of consciousness, in a particular state of consciousness, in one quadrant
or another. That means that the phenomena brought forth by various types of human inquiry will be different
depending on the quadrants, levels, lines, states, and types of the subjects bringing forth the phenomena. A
subject at one wave of consciousness will not enact and bring forth the same world-space as a subject at another
wave; actually brought forth and enacted by practices (injunctions, paradigms), then we have an entirely different
situation: we put all of the phenomena (scientific and meditative) on the integrative table, we accept all of them as
true but partial, and then we ask, What meta-theory can believably accommodate both sets of data?
These three regulative principles--nonexclusion, enfoldment, enactment--are principles that were reverse
engineered, if you will, from the fact that numerous different and seemingly "conflicting" paradigms are already
being competently practiced all over the world; and thus the question is not, and never has been, which is right and
which is wrong, but how can all of them already be arising in a Kosmos? These three principles are some of the items
that need to be already operating in the universe in order for so many paradigms to already be arising, and the only
really interesting question is how can all of those extraordinary practices already be arising in any universe?

18
Non-exclusion
Non-exclusion means that we can accept the valid truth claims (i.e., the truth
claims that pass the validity tests for their own paradigms in their own fields,
whether in hermeneutics, spirituality, science, etc.) insofar as they make
statements about the existence of their own enacted and disclosed phenomena,
but not when they make statements about the existence of phenomena enacted
by other paradigms. That is, one paradigm can competently pass judgments
within its own world-space, but not on those spaces enacted (and only seen) by
other paradigms.
Nonexclusion means that the paradigm of one field can be used to pronounce
on the phenomena of that field, but not on the phenomena of another field
brought forth by different paradigms--and it certainly cannot be used to deny,
exclude, marginalize, oppress, colonize, or otherwise do violence to other
paradigms, other fields, other data domains, other experiences brought forth by
other legitimately engaged injunctions. In short, one paradigm cannot be used,
by itself, to exclude other legitimately enacted paradigms.
This holonic or holarchical pattern of flowing existence--transcend and include--is summarized in the principle of
unfoldment. This heuristic principle suggests that all paradigms, like all moments, are in themselves true and
adequate; but some paradigms can be more encompassing, more inclusive, more holistic than others. This does not
render the other paradigms wrong, inaccurate, stupid, illusory, or anything of the sort--they are true but partial.
How can we believably move from non-exclusion to unfoldment? It helps if we first state the central tenet of non-
exclusion in this way: no human mind can produce 100% error. If you look at the plethora of methodologies in the
human arts and sciences, you will find phenomenology, hermeneutics, structuralism, post-structuralism, collaborative
inquiry, participatory epistemology, social systems theory, mathematical computer modeling, and so on. As we just
noted, innumerable human beings are already engaged in all of those practices.
It is not a matter of whether any of those practices are worthy or not; it is simply a fact that an extraordinary number
of bright, intelligent, caring, and concerned human beings are already, and have been for decades, practicing those
paradigms. This doesn't mean that those paradigms can't be criticized; but it clearly means that those practices of
necessity contain some sort of truth because no human mind can be 100% wrong. Or, we might say, nobody is smart
enough to be wrong all the time. And therefore the only really interesting question is not why post-structuralism is
right and structuralism is wrong, but what kind of universe allows both of those practices to arise in the first place?
Thus, everybody can be right because some views are more right than others. None are wrong; some are simply
more inclusive, more encompassing, more holistic, more integrative, more depth, more transcending-and-including--
endlessly. But the fact that molecules are more inclusive than atoms does not mean that we can get rid of atoms, or
that atoms can be jettisoned, or that atoms have no real truths to offer just as they are. To be a partial truth is still to
be a truth.
The integrative principle of unfoldment allows us to acknowledge the many true but partial truths in any evolutionary
or unfolding display. Notice, however, that unfoldment is not a cross-stream principle: that is, it cannot be used to
violate the non-exclusion principle--it applies only to phenomena in the same general stream or paradigmatic current.
Cross-paradigm or cross-current judgments, as we will see, need to be set in a context that also includes the third
integrative guideline (that of enactment), which we will discuss in a moment.
Such exactly is the principle of enactment. Subjectivity (or intersubjectivity, which we will discuss later) brings forth a
phenomenological world in the activity of knowing that world. At this point, let me jump forward and simply give the

A Broader Framework
19
AQAL interpretation of this postmodern revelation.
Subjects do not perceive worlds but enact them. Different states of subjects bring forth different worlds. For AQAL,
this means that a subject might be at a particular wave of consciousness, in a particular stream of consciousness, in a
particular state of consciousness, in one quadrant or another. That means that the phenomena brought forth by
various types of human inquiry will be different depending on the quadrants, levels, lines, states, and types of
the subjects bringing forth the phenomena. A subject at one wave of consciousness will not enact and bring forth
the same world-space as a subject at another wave; and similarly with quadrants, streams, states, and types (as we
will see in more detail).
This does not mean that the phenomena are not objectively there in a meaningful sense; it means the phenomena
are not there for everybody. Macbeth exists, but not for my dog. Cells with DNA exist, but they can only be seen by
subjects using microscopes (which did not exist until the orange wave, which is why cells did not "ex-ist" or stand
out for magic and mythic worldviews; you can find no account of DNA in any magic or mythic text. This does not
mean DNA wasn't there, just that it did not "ex-ist" in those worldviews). Nirvana exists, but not for a dualistic state
of consciousness, and so on. Phenomena ex-ist, stand forth, or shine only for subjects who can enact and co-
create them (or, more technically, only as they are tetra-enacted).
The point is simply that, in principle, cross-paradigmatic judgments are possible because there is not simply one
world against which paradigms compete for dominance, a kind of king-of-the-hill battle that tosses all losers on the
garbage dump, because there are no losers. There is not one world over which all paradigms are fighting for
supremacy, but many worlds brought forth by different paradigms, worlds that can be eye-witnessed by the same
subjects if they submit to the discipline of the paradigms required to enact those worlds. And while "the" world
cannot contain many worlds, awareness can. And because we already know that there are in fact many worlds,
it follows that we already are standing in an awareness that has cross-paradigmatic capacity, a capacity that
can eventuate in meta-theoretical overview, such as the one offered by AQAL.
In short, for AQAL meta-theory, the basic levels of consciousness are a measure of the "amount" of awareness or
consciousness in any line, but consciousness itself is nothing; it is not a presence but an absence, an opening, a
clearing, a space of perspectives, within which phenomena arise. You can't have more or less of consciousness, but
you can have more or less phenomena allowed to arise in consciousness. When the entire Kosmos arises in your
consciousness, that is Kosmic consciousness—the top of the mountain, so to speak (except there is no top, only an
infinitely receding horizon that nonetheless gets bigger and bigger the more that you can love)

20
DYNAMIC CONCEPTUAL SCAFFOLDING – PT 1 [Working Series 020] Advanced
(DCS) [working with Structure-Stages]
There will be more issues in transcending and including from any given Stage if
there is no reasonable view or ‘level’ of competence at that lower Stage. Anyone
who transverses a Stage too superficially will have more problems at higher Stages
– usually shadow effects or dissociation. Without a significant degree of translation
at each developmental Stage [the process is similar to forced growth in plant life] –
the outcome of the transformation will be weak and weedy in all quadrants.
Grounding in each Stage must be secure before pushing through to transcend and
include to the next Stage.
A close study will usually show that where ‘Mean Memes’ appear it is amongst
those who have almost ‘skipped’ through a lower developmental Stage.
DCS works by a) getting the translation at each Stage to a sufficient level to allow the next phase of transformation
to take place from a strong base, and b) developing specific programs for individuals or small coherent groups that
allow for both this translation and then the necessary transformation if appropriate.
a) above is easier than b) and they both have to take place as AQAL ‘interventions’ – for no matter how designed,
these will always be interventions until the process has taken sufficient hold for those involved to self-organise their
own process.
There needs to be sufficient of a healthy translation at each Stage before a move is made to transformation – to be
certain to include those ‘good’ parts of the existing Stage and not just some half-baked idea of the negative aspects
that are to be transcended.
In any DCS design there is always an attempt to cover all quadrants. It is of little use spending most time working in
the ULQ if there is not support in the other three quadrants. If this tetra-meshing does not happen in a serious way
we end up with a narcissistic self-absorbed individual, no matter what Stage they are at [1st or 2nd tier] – with a
mistaken view that the path and methods they have used to overcome their own issues, including shadow, are the
best or the same for everybody.
DCS is an attempt to determine what support is needed at what level for individuals or groups to let them handle
the new level of complexity at a higher Stage of consciousness. A system that provides support to individual or
group development – whether translational or transformational.
The bits we can do at anytime are supported by this Scaffolding so that the usually difficult process of
change/learning (cf Max Singer) is held and supported during the process. Category level 3 complexity –
represented by throwing a ball back and forth (boss and worker – Robert Kegan) is supported when development
programs require a Category level 4 complexity – represented by the juggling of many balls. The Dynamic

A Broader Framework
21
Conceptual Scaffolding will catch some and allow the individual to concentrate on a few only at each point in time –
this process will still be/feel uncomfortable as Dynamic Conceptual Scaffolding will always ensure that limits are
being pushed.
Translation is what is usually happening when we look at most management development, mentoring, coaching
programmes. It is getting better results by doing things differently. But it’s the same old bottom lines.
Transformation is a completely different ball game.
The developmental matrix and the process of support (also Kegan level CL5 relationship) including the Dynamic
Conceptual Scaffolding have one overall aim - one prime directive, that is: the health of the ‘whole system’ the
overall conceptual framework whether represented by Wilber 5 or any other such system. This is because we can
only work with maps that we ourselves create.
The Processes of Dynamic Conceptual Scaffolding
Part 1 – TRANSLATION [movement of surface structure]
The first step is probably to determine what
support, if any, is needed to help an individual
translate at their present Stage, to relatively
healthy version of that same Stage. If their present
Stage is not sufficiently ‘healthy’ a program is
developed to assist – this program could be
interventions in any or all of the quadrants. It
could be advice to seek help from other
professionals - for example: a psychotherapist for
ULQ, [there would be a different type of
practitioner for each Stage of development] a
dietician for URQ, Cultural groups {again Stage
specific] for LLQ and System advisors for LRQ [the
latter two to help individuals adjust to different
types of Orange groups [worldviews] and system
thinking etc..
These interventions are about making individuals
[or small groups] more healthy at the Stage they
already inhabit. And there are many different
interventions that can be suggested – these will
always depend on the current condition and
context of those involved. This is usually not a
quick-fix, but a long term commitment to ‘improvement’. Many interventions may never go beyond this translatitive
process - where more and more depth is included but no transformation is looked for – this is unusual as in the long-
run many people do seek more, even if they plateau at present Stage for long periods. If there is no perceived need
to change – ‘why make the effort’ is the thought often expressed.

22
[Note for facilitator or mentor: As shown in the graphics – no change can realistically be expected if the mentor is not
‘walking the talk’ or ‘leading by example’. The person or group will give up or change mentors if they feel there is a
disconnect between what the mentor says and how he/she behaves.]
DO NOT rush this first step. It is probably the most important help one can give in many international development
situations. If rushed many issues that are important to connect with and master at this Stage my be badly transferred
to the next structure-Stage. The process of ‘transcend and include’ is damaged or poorly integrated – this then
often means that past Stages are demonised {the ‘mean meme’ syndrome] and also means that future Stages are
more problematic. [dissociation and shadows].
Therefore, in the translation component of DCS the individual is considered from each quadrant and the help given
will be dependent on the ‘relative health of each’ and an intervention planned over time to support actions as
appropriate in each or all quadrants. [Graphics show the support for this translatitive process]
Part 2 – TRANSFORMATION [movement of deep structure] – [transcend and include]
What do we mean by movement of deep
structure – to quote “…we can say that at each
point in evolution or development, a mode of
self becomes merely a component of a higher-
order self.
“This can be put in several different ways, each
of which tells us something important about
development, evolution and transcendence: 1)
what is identification becomes detachment [or
non-attachment]; 2) what is context becomes
content (that is, the context of cognition and
experience of one level becomes simply a
content of the cognition and experience of the
next); 3) what is ground becomes figure (which
releases higher-order ground); 4) what is
subjective becomes objective (until both terms
become meaningless); and 5) what is condition
becomes element (e.g., the mind, which is a
priori condition of egoic experience, becomes
merely an element of experience in the subtle.)
“Each of those points is, in effect, a definition of
transcendence. Yet each is also a definition of a stage of development. It follows that the two are essentially identical,
and that evolution, as has been said, is actually “self-realisation” through self-transcendence. “
The graphics illustrate how once translation is complete to a sufficient level [shown in the graphics by the 4Q in the
ULQ] support to an individual’s transformational process is provided from each quadrant but only from the processes
designed from one Stage above. This support, as far as is possible, covers all quadrants and is NOT limited to the
ULQ of personal inner change – working in ULQ only this is never sufficient to produce real change that actually
shifts the COG – it is through tetra-meshed interventions that the ‘talk’ in time becomes the ‘walk’ and we get real
movement in the deep structure.
There are so many instances where the change has only occurred in the cognitive line of development and the COG
has not made a real shift in transformation. By working in all quadrants the shift to a ‘higher’ Stage is possible in a
shorter time as the support required is there. Working in only one quadrant (usually the ULQ) is no guarantee of
deep structure movement.

A Broader Framework
23
Transformation in the Self-line of development
A quick simplistic guide to the categories views at each level and the changes that will need to be made if
transformation is pursued.
This table describes an individual’s COG or their ‘Walk’ – their ‘Talk’ [cognitive –line] may be from a higher stage and
must not be confused with their actual COG. What is key for any mentor is to determine the ‘Walk’ of both the
people they are working with and of themselves. [Particular in the mentors case this needs a deep understanding of
their development as this type of work is based on the notion of ‘self-as-instrument]
There are many other lines of development that make up an individuals COG or Altitude but the processes of DCS
starts from these basic number and adds more as required including the important element of ‘Types’

24
Dynamic Conceptual Scaffolding
A system that provides support to individual or group development – whether
translational or transformational.
The ‘bits’ we can do at anytime are supported by this ‘scaffolding’ so that the
usually difficult process of change/learning (cf Max Singer) is held and
supported during the process. Category level 3 complexity – represented by
throwing a ball back and forth (boss and worker – Robert Kegan) is supported
when development programmes require a Category level 4 complexity –
represented by the juggling of many balls. The Dynamic Conceptual
Scaffolding will catch some and allow the individual to concentrate on a few
only at each point in time – change will still be/feel uncomfortable as Dynamic Conceptual Scaffolding will always
ensure that the limits are being pushed.
programmes. It ‘s achieving better results by doing things differently. But it’s the same old bottom lines.
Conceptual Scaffolding have one overall aim - one prime directive, that is: the health of the ‘whole system’ (the
overall conceptual framework) whether represented by Wilber 5 or any other such system.
We can only work with maps that we ourselves create.
[Excerpt - integralMENTORS Dynamic Conceptual Scaffolding [Working Series 020] Advanced]
Current Interventions being tested or considered at the moment
URQ
Fast Diet – health mental and physical [tested – in operation]
Fast Exercise - health mental and physical [testing – in operation]
Various types of physical therapy – [use of external professionals]
Various types of nutrition therapy – [use of external professionals]
ULQ
Fast Meditation – health spiritual [mental and physical] [we are data
gathering]
Various types of psychological therapy – [use of external professionals] – see
separate sheet.
Various types of spiritual therapy – [use of external professionals] – there are
so many of these available - various meditation types, Big Mind in various forms etc.

A Broader Framework
25
ULQ/URQ
Chi Gong – Health spiritual, mental, physical [tested – in operation]
Free-Dance - Health spiritual, mental, physical [tested – in operation]
Audio systems – such as
LRQ
Support systems and structures
LLQ
Support groups
State work
Putting some of the lines together

26
DYNAMIC CONCEPTUAL SCAFFOLDING - PT 2 [Working Series 020] Advanced
Mapping and Modelling
To try to determine what support is needed at what level for individuals or groups to let
them handle the new level of complexity – the higher level of consciousness and
complexity.
A system that provides support to individual or group development – whether
translational or transformational.
The bits we can do at anytime are supported by this scaffolding so that the usually
difficult process of change/learning (cf Max Singer) is held and supported during the
process. Category level 3 complexity – represented by throwing a ball back and forth
(boss and worker – Robert Kegan) is supported when development programs require a Category level 4 complexity –
represented by the juggling of many balls. The Dynamic Conceptual Scaffolding will catch some and allow the
individual to concentrate on a few only at each point in time – it will still be/feel uncomfortable as Dynamic
Conceptual Scaffolding will always ensure that the limits are being pushed.
programmes. It is getting better results by doing things differently. But it’s the same old bottom lines.
Conceptual Scaffolding have one overall aim - one prime directive, that is: the health of the ‘whole system’ the
overall conceptual framework whether represented by Wilber 5 or any other such system. This as we can only work
with maps that we ourselves create.
Conceptual Matrix
Mapping takes many forms; from ‘mind’ maps to ‘AQAL’ maps to ‘flux and flow energy’
maps, ‘spiral dynamic’ maps and many more; Learning how to build an understanding
and to use these maps;
“a Mandalic form that uses this to arrange information and ideas at a number of levels.
As one surfs deeper into the site this arrangement slowly metamorphose and breaks
down. No-one’s experience will be the same. Our differences will direct our
interests, but to "learn" -- and to learn ourselves is to change -- we must also explore
those routes in which we think we have no interest or that frighten or bore us.
Change can be either translational or transformative or both. One expands the
existing level -- the other, transcends, includes and moves to a deeper/higher/broader
level. It is this "structured" complexity that allows -- sometimes -- for change and transformation to happen.
‘To understand the whole, it is necessary to understand the parts. To understand the parts, it is necessary to
understand the whole. Such is the circle of understanding’.” van Schaik- the Webtrix site
Brain Room: The need to invest time and energy in any new approach – build maps
integral mind etc.
The brain room was a small room – carpeted and covered with floor cushions. Each
wall had full width pin boards. The initial idea was to pin up papers, articles, reports,
diagrams that seemed to have some relevance to the process. Each wall to reflect a
quadrant. It was about building relationship to the process and to act as a visible
databank.
Levels start with the lowest and work up or down.

A Broader Framework
27
This was our working room where discussions and seminars were held or meditation in quietness. We were lucky
also to have a small gym and a swimming pool in a hotel that formed part of the office complex.
Facilitating (donor) intervention that: Consider:
Support emergence from Magenta
Contain Red
Build Amber
Soften Orange
Open depth in Green
Build openness in Teal
Support growth – especially when forced by others
Understand and adopt a non flatland model of
development
Identify what support from lower waves are missing –
which lines are weak and what quadrants are being
repressed.
Help make each level more healthy (knowing and
understanding what it is for each level to be healthy or
unhealthy (& how to…). Therefore, each level/wave must
be understood, allowed for and functioning at least
partially in a healthy manner.
Have the health of the entire developmental process as
its prime directive!
Write reports, make presentations and policy/practice
recommendations that are truly relevant (therefore being
able to talk/relate to the centre of gravity [COG] and also
inspire an Integral Development vision!
Being pragmatic (ad hoc and have a sense of urgency).
Allow learning from ‘failing’.
While being process/relationship driven, there is a need
for a degree of being demand led also (& learning skills
how to…).
Learning how to mentor, mediate and meditate *
Therefore, being able to: “Map, Mediate, Mentor,
Meditate

28
ZONES# IN DEVELOPMENT [Working Series 020] Advanced
‘Insides and Outsides of Dimensions of Experience’ – the Zones#:
Each ‘dimension of experience’ can be view from the inside (how it feels or felt experience) and/or from the outside
(how it looks). These are the 8 primal or indigenous perspectives of an individual [holon].
“We inhabit these 8 spaces, these zones, these life-worlds, as practical realities. Each of these zones is not just a
perspective, but an action, an injunction, a concrete set of actions in a real world zone. Each injunction brings forth
or discloses the phenomena that are apprehended through the various perspectives. It is not that perspectives come
first and actions or injunctions come later; they simultaneously co-arise (actually, tetra-arise).
“Each view or perspective, with its actions and injunctions, brings forth a world of phenomena; a world-space that
(tetra-) arises as a result; a world-space with a horizon. The sum total of all of that we simply call a hori-zone, or zone
for short. A zone is a view with its actions, its injunctions, its life-world, and the whole shebang called forth at that
[Kosmic] address. You can think of it as a life-zone, or zone of awareness, or a living space—any number of terms will
do.”
Zone #1 : States of individual consciousness [surface structure] – (the feel)
Zone #2 : Stage-Structure of individual development [deep structure] - (the look)
Zone #3 : States of ‘cultural’ consciousness [surface structure] – (the feel)
Zone #4 : Stage-Structure in communal development [deep structure] - (the look)
Zone #5 : States of individual internal communication [surface structure] - (the ‘software’)
Zone #6 : Structure-Stages of individual control [deep structure] - (the ’hardware’)
Zone #7 : States of communal communication [surface structure] - (the ‘software’)
Zone #8 : Structure-Stage of governance/systems [deep structure] - (the ’hardware’)
The inside and outside of interior ‘Subjective’ [I]
Zone #1: [surface structure] – (the feel)-
As this is how an individual feels an understanding of zone#1 can only be achieved through phenomenological
studies/research – i.e. introspection, meditation, methods for studying intension from the inside.
Because of their unique ability to take perspectives other than first person, humans have developed systematized
methodologies or practices for self-reflexively exploring and charting the interior spaces of zone #1 such as
phenomenology, meditation, introspection, reflective inquiry, and other methods that explore first-person felt-
experience. One of the main concerns of zone #1 is the study of states of consciousness. Zone #1 phenomenal
experience is a series of transient states that pass in time through awareness. The main qualities of states of
consciousness are that they are directly experienced, transient in time, do not show development, and are exclusive
of other states (i.e., you can’t be both confused and clear at the same time).
All first person states have second person components; phenomenology and hermeneutics co-exist and co-arise.
Zone #2: [deep structure] the look of a feeling? Thus, zone #2, or an “outside-view of the interior,” means a third-
person approach to first person or ‘I’ realities.
As this is the look of how an individual feels an understanding of it can only be achieved through structuralism
studies/research – i.e. developmental structuralism, methodologies for studying intension from the outside.
The methodologies of zones #2 include structuralism, developmental psychology, Foucauldian archaeology,
developmental genealogy, semiology and semiotics, cultural anthropology, and post-structuralism. (structuralism is
phenomenology plus history)

A Broader Framework
29
The inside and outside of Interior ‘Inter-Subjective’ [We]
Zone #3: [surface structure] – (the feel of a we) As this is how group feels an understanding of it can only be
achieved through hermeneutics studies/research – i.e. collaborative inquiry, participatory epistemology, etc.
methodologies for studying culture from the inside.
Human enaction methodologies in zone #3 are hermeneutics, interpretive circles, solidarity circles, collaborative
inquiry; methodologies that focus on establishing mutually-shared interpretations of language, cultural meanings,
texts of all kinds, interpretations of law, scriptures, etc. Phenomena apprehended in zone #3 are: solidarity felt,
shared experience, similar signification; what your culture feels like, immediate felt-experience of mutually-shared
meanings, cultural knowledge, mutually shared interpretations.
Zone #4: [deep structure] - (the look of a we - the many ways to touch). Thus, zone #4, or an “outside-view of the
interiors,” means a third-person approach to second person or ‘we’ realities. As this is the look of how a group feels
an understanding of it can only be achieved through ethno-methodological studies/research – cultural anthropology,
neo-structuralism, archaeology, genealogy, etc. methodologies for studying culture from the outside.
The methodologies of zones #4 include structuralism, developmental psychology, Foucauldian archaeology,
developmental genealogy, semiology and semiotics, cultural anthropology, and post-structuralism.
Zone#4 uses third-person terms to describe (in this case) the outside structures of interior culture: collective
structures of meaning such as political, legal, ethical, religious, normative, and scientific discourses; kinship and
linguistic structures, and cultural practices, customs, and habits.
The inside and outside of Exterior ‘Objective’ [It]
Zone #5: [surface structure] - (the ‘software’)
It is still difficult to define exactly the nature of zone#5 and #7 phenomena.
Nonetheless, zones #5 and #7 methodologies enact or bring forth a specific fourth domain of phenomena that is
implicit in the language of cognitive biology, cognitive neuroscience, autopoietic systems theory, biological
phenomenology, and the autopoiesis of social systems, a domain that is best understood as information, biological
information.
Phenomena apprehended in zone #5 can be described as: cognitive structures, cognitive processes, cognitive
knowledge, cognitive information, cognitive “software,” autopoietic organization, autopoietic process, autopoietic
self-organization, enaction processes, and informational structures when related to holons less complex that
autopoietic systems
Because of the dominant monad aspect of individual holons, the term cognition most closely describes the
phenomena in zone #5
Cognition is the information exchange, the signs, between constituent parts of individual holons. In each case the
methodologies of these zones bring forth the view of the organism or social system that sees cognition or self-
regulation as a function of physical embodiment or structure. Ladislav Kovak, a cognitive biologist, explains “the
knowledge is embodied in constructions of organisms, and the structural complexity of those constructions which
carry embodied knowledge corresponds to their epistemic complexity.
Zone #6: [deep structure] - (the ’hardware’)
Typical zone #6 human methodologies are the empirical sciences: physics, chemistry, biology, physiology, neurology,
ecology.
Zone #6 is the world of gross material objects, the world of empirical science. What do you see when you look
around you? You don’t see thoughts, images, feelings, values, meanings, justice, or integrity. You see sensorimotor
objects, physical things, chair, table, book with ink figures on paper; cup, lamp, tree, cloud, and mosquito. The
material objects that surround you is the world enacted by the methodologies of zone #6: individual material bodies,
objects, organisms, material artifacts. Zone #6 represents the hori-zone of any and all material objects regardless of
physical size or weight (neutrino or galaxy), regardless of temporal duration (photon or star), regardless of location (a
dopamine molecule inside your brain or a globular star cluster in the Milky Way galaxy). Experience arises most
obviously around us as the material reality of zone #6.
Matter is not entirely matter: at the very least, matter is also a matter of altitude and perspective, it is partly a
construction, partly intrinsic reality

30
The inside and outside of Exterior ‘Inter-objective’ [Its]
Zone #7: [surface structure] - (the ‘software’)
Because of the regnant nexus aspect of social holons, the term communication is more appropriate to describe the
phenomena of zone #7. Communication is what is constituted by virtue of the exchange of signs between dominant
monads, between members of collective holons using their communication tools.
Zone #7 represents the inside of material systems, their communication pathways, information exchanges, modes of
transfer, e.g., social autopoiesis or network analysis—the “inside” of material systems, i.e., the information
exchanges and communication channels for material ecosystems & social systems that are not themselves material
but informational. Enaction methodologies that characterize zone-#7 phenomena include social autopoiesis; social
cybernetics, communication theory, sociology, cognitive sociology.
… the methodologies of these zones (#5 & #7) bring forth the view of the organism or social system that sees
cognition or self-regulation as a function of physical embodiment or structure.
Zone #8: [deep structure] - (the ’hardware’)
Typical zone #8 methodologies focus on the material and objective aspects of collectives and systems such as
astronomy, earth sciences, ecology, or economics, sociology, and political science. Zone #8 methodologies are also
described as the “rational” systems sciences which focus on empirical study of the structure, dynamics, composition,
and function of material systems such as dynamical systems and chaos theory, self-organizing systems, and
Prigogine’s non-equilibrium dissipative systems.
Whereas a zone #6 perspective focuses on
individual entities or atoms, the zone #8
perspective sees entire systems as entities of
their own worthy of attention and study. Zone
#8 perspectives intuit fundamental properties
of systems that are not reducible to or present
in constituent parts.
Zone #8 sees interconnected and interacting
systems of objects—it sees systems of
physical objects, systems behaviours,
collective structures, emergent properties,
and group dynamics. If zone #4 considers the
interior meanings, values, and motivations for
groups, collectives, and systems, zone #8
looks instead at the exterior structure and
function of groups, collectives, and systems.
Zone #4 asks “what shared meanings and
values drive the behaviours of this group or
collective?” Zone #8 asks “what feedback
mechanisms, energy sources, material
structures, connection points, and dynamic
processes drive the behaviours of this
collective?”

32
INTEGRAL COMMUNICATION [Working Series 020] Advanced
Integral Report & Documentation
“Communicative co-operation presupposes a common structure and common history of development. Only in this
case can the participant be sure that the others have similar understanding of the world as he does, and he [or she]
is able well-enough to anticipate their actions.” Timo Jarvilehto - Machines as part of human consciousness and
culture
Integral Communication:
Integral communication, if it is to be useful, has to ‘talk’ to many levels at the same time. When whole
countries or even communities are labelled as being largely feudal or amber it limits any real
communication taking place. The range of values or altitudes that one has to deal with in most situations
is much more complex and challenging. So communications programmes have to develop well beyond
the simplistic value levels we find in so many of them. They must weave together an understanding that
there are usually 2 or 3 stages of development in any largish group, and then when one adds the
differences between the ‘talk, the ‘walk’ and the shadow we can be dealing with a few more. Add in
types and states and you begin to get an idea of what has to be covered.
This gets us back to the meta-theory [see below]. Used wisely - and with its full potential for keeping the complexity
of the ‘real’ world of praxis - it does allow us to work with a high degree of granularity.
Information Matrix
Even Integral or 2nd tier documenting, so often, messages don’t make a difference because the are written with the
assume that everybody is at the same Stage of development as that of the message-maker, or at least has a rational
Orange or a communal Green understanding or value system.
This is hardly ever the case in development work. So
instead of understanding the worldviews or levels of
consciousness of the different Stages or waves each
group thinks the other arrogant, stupid, lazy or such.
When it is usually a mismatching of worldviews,
language and values. There is so much information
out there which is desperately missing its target
audience.
It is therefore very important to ‘Know your audience’
The Integral Matrix [see diagrams adjacent and below]
is Integral or 2nd tier documenting that structures
information and understanding with breadth and
depth.
A tool to communicate more effectively – much
information is already there, language may need
adjusting and ‘understanding stacks’ prepared
Information Database [understanding stacks]
The concept is, and it is being refined all the time, to produce conference/workshop/report documentation in the
language that can be understood by each Stage/Level. A Green based document on HIV/Aids will not give the
information needed by people operating from Magenta, Red, Amber or Orange values or Altitude. When these
‘stacks’ are prepared there is a need to ensure that any teal prepared documentation comes from a healthy version
of teal or turquoise.

A Broader Framework
33
The information database [information stack] stores documentation in AQAL structure and then are accessed by
either user or coordinator interaction to produce a document where the messages or understanding that the report
is designed to deliver is in the language that each value system understands.
Communication Mapping (for a Amber dominated audience)
These diagrams are indicative of how multi-level and multi-quadrant discussions or reports need to be considered
when being assembled.
The complexity of
life on the ground
has to be respected
– it is only then that
communication
becomes
meaningful.
In a sense, when we
plot centre of gravity
or dominant mode discourse we also have to remember that the State-Structure are present. These are usually less
deep as they rise to Green before deepening again with the move to 2nd tier. Non gross states are not only seen in
spirit or religion but have may ‘subtle energy’ manifestations that are present in the communication process.
Other elements to be included in face to face communication are body language and multi-level spatial and
temporal understanding, both from the deep structure (zones 2, 4, 6 & 8 ) and the surface structure (zones 1, 3, 5 &
7) and image recognition/interpretation.
Integral Communication?
“When both shared depth and shared horizons are present, we can speak of adequate
resonance (or genuinely overlapping intersubjectivity). In order for you and I to be able to
evoke an understanding of each other’s interiors, the tokens (or signifiers) that we exchange
must be anchored not only in a horizontal cultural context (shared horizons), but in a vertical
developmental depth that allows a corresponding phenomenal world (or signified) to be
called forth.”
“The importance of the self as the navigator of the great River of Life should not be
overlooked. It appears that the self is not a monolithic entity but rather a society of selves with
a centre of gravity, which acts to bind the multiple waves, states, streams, and realms into
something of a unified organization; the disruption of this organization, at any of its general
stages, can result in pathology.” Ken Wilber
Genuinely mutual understanding therefore demands the presence of both vertical solidarity
(or shared depth) and horizontal solidarity (or shared horizons). In the AQAL matrix, the need
is not only to share perspectives but the same height or depth of those perspectives, or there
is no phenomenological space in which we can cooperate.
[So the usually need to include the] “textures of diverse cultural realities, background contexts,
pluralistic perceptions, linguistic semantics, and so on, none of which should be unwarrantedly
marginalized, all of which should be included and integrated in a broad web of integral
aperspectival tapestries ”. Kosmic Karma and Creativity - Ken Wilber
Meta-Theory

34
What AQAL does really well is allowing one to hold complexity and paradoxes without having to simplify ideas or
analysis into bland overviews. It is a meta-theory that in a sense organises other theories in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd
person perspectives. It allows us to communicate across so many differing views. In our work as integral
practitioners we have being using it in differing forms for nearly 15 years now.
We have had to ensure that people don’t confuse theories or
processes - be they U Theory, Action Research, Holocracy,
NextD, Cooperative Inquiry, system theory, complexity theory,
etc., to name a few - with AQAL as a meta-theory. Its how
AQAL integrates these that make them more potent and thus
useful. Especially when one relates them to a more complex
understanding of individual’s centre of gravity and
sociocultural groups common mode of discourse. This also
relates to a more mature and granular understanding on
communication.

36
INTEGRAL COORDINATION [Working Series 020] Advanced
Worlds of inclusion – Integral Coordination
“The subject of consciousness is not the body, brain or a neuron, but an "I", a person that may not be
defined on the basis of the structure of his[or her] brain, but rather as a point of intersection in a net of
social [and cultural] relations. The "I" is not an entity in the same sense as a body, but a systemic
relation [a holon]. The thinking and conscious subject is not [only] a piece of flesh, but a set of
relations and processes in the social [and cultural] system. Such relations create a person who is
distinct from all other personalities precisely through those specific relations.”
Maps, menus, and metaphors
With integalMENTORS we are working with people to ‘try’ to set-up programmes that live. The maps, menus and
metaphors are rough guides in this process. No matter how hard one tries not to let the theory define all - there is
a slow (and often not so slow) shift to the metaphor taking over and life ending up being defined by or forced to
follow the map - and not the other way round.
It comes back in the end, to paraphrase Graham Green, “You can learn a lot about Integral in a short time - the
rest has to be lived” and there are really no short cuts! This is also why you find many people talking the ‘talk’ of
Integral without walking the ‘walk’ – it is important to check the words with the actions and then decide whether
there is any real depth there!
It’s not which tools, systems or processes we use that really matter but it is how we use them and from what
Kosmic address we, and they are operating. It does matter how broad is our Kosmos!
Over and over again we think we are ‘communicating’ only to realise that we are really not. See more on
integral communications below.
Worlds of inclusion – Integral Coordination
With integral coordination and Worlds of Inclusion we are working in live
programmes – funded by donors/or development banks with a DMD in the
Orange exit (Og) to Green exit (Gt); international and national NGO’s in the
Amber exit (Ao) to Green exit (Gt), national governments when MPs are included
(as they must be) with a range of Magenta exit (Mr) to Orange entry (aO) DMD -
and with communities of interest with DMDs varying between Magenta (usually rural and peri-urban) and Green
usually in the major city or where government is based. This is the LL. And all with very different surface
structures.
In the LR we have to cover physical
aggregation and disaggregation (not a
social holon) and various organisation
hierarchies that are also aggregated and
disaggregated social holons. These are all
populated by people included in the list
above.
Simplified diagrams of the idea:
Each of these areas/ groups have to be
considered and their impact or influence on
or from other quadrants determined. This
in the expanding sense of becoming more
and more inclusive …….

A Broader Framework
37
……. and in the sense of looking at the situation in greater granularity at smaller and smaller ‘scale’ – again in all
quadrants. That is from 20,000 metres down to an individual, or from a nation down to a community. This may or
may not be holonic
Individuals’ perception/use of time and space change with stage of
consciousness development and state – these have an effect on the discussions
or activities and the operation of social holons.
There are many existing and modified tools for doing this but it must always be
remembered that the process needs to be morphogenetic, generative,
snippable and where appropriate, self-organising or else it will fail to take hold.
Folding Back the Future
"It is not that we aren’t doing anything in our
organisations to influence our future. We are. We do what
everybody does. We know that our actions have
implications for the future and we act accordingly. But
what we fail to do is fold our future back into our present
with any real creativity or power in the course of our day-
to-day activities - and day-to-day activities are where the
future occurs."
"Our future emerges from the interplay of today’s actions.
Enough of the ‘right’ actions and we will survive and
prosper. Too many of the ‘wrong’ ones and we will
disappear. Enough of a fuzzy mixture and we will take a
little longer to disappear, with a few of us waking up to
discover what path we are on and working out a
recovery." Mike McMasters
Integral Coordination [IC]
IC is the need and the ability to work with the many
different levels of social holons with a sufficient depth of
understanding.
An understanding of the situation that allows each level of
the nested social holons to have sufficient freedom to
grow generatively within a morphogenetic process that
works towards a more healthy and creative holon and thus
social holon.
IC uses the nesting of systems and cultures to work at
each higher level to ensure that lower levels can develop
with freedom and creativity within an overall
morphogenetic field.
IC allows each nested social holon to work at the
altitude/level that it finds comfortable - but also is aware
that there will be individuals in the group/community that
are more, and also less, developed than the current
dominant mode of discourse of the group. These
individuals push the group.
IC accepts that all individuals in the nested holarchy have
value and function. That both a bottom up (grass roots)
and a top down (centralised) approach have their place in

38
the process. It is the ability to determine and understand how to use and integrate these that is important to integral
coordination.
IC will use any tool or perspective that is deemed necessary to assist in this generative process. Working at all levels,
quadrants, lines, types and states.
IC uses integral practice from many perspectives.
IC requires that the practitioner is able to hold as much of
the integral theory in ‘mind’ while working with any
particular aspect of AQAL.
Whether working with quadrants, levels, lines, types or
states, quadrivium, zones, or a combination of any or all.
The process will always be filtered through the I, the We
and the It.
The tools one uses to facilitate this process of integral
coordination will be many and varied. Some will be found
in reframing existing developmental or measurement
tools. These will usually be used in one quadrant only but
can often include some levels. Some will be integrally based, working with all quadrants and/or levels and/or lines.
This type of tool has worked well particularly with monitoring and evaluation, organisation analysis and ‘systems’
development.
For larger issues and groups Integral Future Search Conferencing, developed with Unicef in Bangladesh, worked
well to get the whole ‘problem’ in view. Also for early participative analysis an Integral Stakeholder analysis was
found to be useful. This integral version can be used with all quadrants and all levels.
It is often possible to use a tool that you are familiar with and redesign it for integral use.
The process of capacity building with the various groups and individuals involved takes and many forms - most
formal but many also informal. It also takes time and trust.
The initial processes were repeated as and when required - especially once the capacity building inputs were
underway and people’s Kosmos had started to broaden a little.
Many ideas came from the communities and these were developed by them with assistance if required.
Our experience from working with Unicef in the mid 1990s and in many other projects since then has shown us that
trusting individuals at all levels to be capable of creativity and innovation and then to support them when and as
required with a light embrace of AQAL really does pay off in making those small changes with which we can to help
create a more integral world.
Of course many people were not interested or willing to get involved and that was always respected as their choice.
The three strands of any integral project:
If the theory cannot be put into practice and then tested to show that it had an actual impact or result at some point
in whichever quadrant it works, then it is just metaphysics and not a useful and effective tool for development.
In all four quadrants:
• Theory/Injunction (Theoria)
• Practice/Gathering the data (Praxis)
• Verification/Consensual justification (Test)
In each of the four quadrants the methods will be different but each quadrant is equally important and cannot be
collapsed into any other.

40
INTEGRAL PECKA KUCHA (IP-K) [Working Series 020] Advanced
Pecha Kucha: “Get to the PowerPoint in 20 slides then sit the hell down”
Mark Dytham and Astrid Klein, a British and Italian duo, are Tokyo based architects who have turned PowerPoint,
that fixture of cubicle life (or PowerPointless), into both art form and commutative sport. Their innovation dubbed
pecha-kucha (Japanese for chatter), applies a simple set of rules to presentations: exactly 20 slides displayed for 20
seconds each (20x20). That’s it. Say what you need to say in 6 minutes and 40 seconds of exquisitely matched words
and images and then …. sit down. (See www.pecka-kucha.org)
“Suddenly there’s no preciousness in people’s presentations – just poetry” says Mark
Integral Pecha Kucha
iP-K (or integral pecha-kucha) takes this format and uses it as a tool to provide quick and easy
introduction at workshop start.
We have come to the conclusion
that for our type of workshop each
individual can be limited to 10
slides for 20 seconds each (10x20)
- giving a presentation time of say
4 to 5 minutes including set up
time.
Thus 12 to 15 presentations in one
hour. For larger workshops or
gatherings these can be spread
over a number of days for an hour
or so each day.
We have so far only used them for
a max of 6 to 8 people. So plenty
of scope for experimentation!
iP-K has a few extra rules:
1) the presentation subject is – Who am I and what have I been doing and what am I doing now; and 2) the slides
should consider all quadrants and whatever other aspects of AQAL the presenter feels useful. See two diagrams
above for suggested questions/subject matter.
Any reading directly from slides will terminate the presentation. The slides are images (graphics/diagram/photos)
that accompany the spoken works. This type of intensive presentation makes sure that presenters think clearly about
what messages they want to get across concerning who they are and what they have been and are doing. The
presentation should show how the I interior and IT exterior are embedded in the cultural WE and the social ITS.
A few of my slides from an earlier 10x20 iP-K.

A Broader Framework
41
Each slide says something about a time or process in ones life. That is some could be a snapshot of an important
point in ones development and others could show development over time – career, family, interests, passions etc.
The important point is to trying show who ‘you’ are, what has formed you and what excites and frightens you. So
participants get a ‘whole’ picture not just as a job or role but as a person in the ‘world’. Just remember usually
pride and pomposity shows through.
One final point - the slides above were an exploratory early version – its can be just as effective to show only one or
two graphics on each slide – use no sentences but single words or quotes as appropriate can be used.

42
MORPHO-GENERATIVE DEVELOPMENT
“A morphogenetic field is, in fact, a homolog of what psychologists and anthropologists would call
“structure,” which is defined, not by its components, but by its overall form or pattern, and this holistic
pattern governs its constituent components” Ken Wilber
Morphogenetic and Generative Process in Development
Below is a brief description and diagrammatic representation of some of the ideas of a Morpho-generative process -
this is a 3rd
person description for an AQAL process - how one reads this process will be dependant on its and one’s
own Kosmic Address!
Morphogenetic and Generative process [simplistically]
Generative Process – for “Whole” and for each “Snippable sequence”
Step by step
Alignment to the “Whole” – what we call the Morphic-Theme (which
itself is evolving)
At each step/stage – within context at that point/time and aligned to
the “Whole” there must be room for flexibility/creativity
Because the process is generative there is no real need for targets
(that become artificial goals) to obscure the process.
At each step there are a number of activities occurring (some shown
below):
Alignment to the Morphic-Theme
Correcting processes to new and existing context
Changing processes to realign to Morphic-Theme – this is the
Morphic-Pull or developmental dynamic
Defining next step with creative input
Fresh input – from other experiences, research etc.
Checking with wider contexts
Tetra-meshing with other quadrants/zones
Ensuring multi-level communication
Each emergent Sequences transcends but includes its predecessor(s)
The lower sets the possibilities of the higher; the higher sets the
probabilities of the lower. The lower being the sequences, the higher
being the Morphic-Theme. The Morphic–Pull being the dynamic
between the two.
Start new step in generative process.
A very interesting example of this sort of process or idea we have just become aware of is the work of John M. Bunzl
on ‘global governance’ (see reference on page 2). This work shows very clearly a) the ‘Morpho-Generative’ process
with ‘Snippable sequences’, b) the importance of identifying the ‘Morpho-Theme’, and c) the appropriate meta level
for this Theme.
The nature of sequences in a Morpho-Generative process (cf 20 Tenets)
- Programmes/Projects are not composed of things or inputs but of Sequences

A Broader Framework
43
- Sequences display four capacities: self-preservation; self-adaptation; self-transcendence; self-dissolution
- Sequences emerge
- Sequences emerge holarchically
- Each emergent Sequence transcends but includes its predecessor(s)
- The lower sets the possibilities of the higher; the higher sets the probabilities of the lower.
- The number of steps of which a series of sequences comprises determines its maturity; and the number of
Sequences on any given level is called its coverage.
- Each successive level of evolution produces greater depth and less span
- Sequences co-evolve
- The micro is in relational exchange with the macro at all levels of its depth
- The Evolution is directional: Increasing in complexity; Increasing differentiation/integration; Increasing
organisation/structuration; Increasing relative autonomy;
- The greater the depth of a Sequence, the greater its degree of effectiveness
"We move from part to whole and back again, and in that dance of comprehension, in that amazing circle
of understanding, we come alive to meaning, to value, and to vision: the very circle of understanding
guides our way, weaving together the pieces, healing the fractures, mending the torn and tortured
fragments, lighting the way ahead -- this extraordinary movement from part to whole and back again, with
healing the hallmark of each and every step, and grace the tender reward." Ken Wilber.
* Re-working from a piece in integralMENTORS Newsletter 11 May 2009
“Through the review of diverse models, ……….. whether in the domain of nature, social systems, or
individual creativity, the process of transformative change follows the same evolutionary pattern. The

44
process is very much fractals in that it operates in a similar fashion at the level of an individual, group,
organization, but also at the level of society, nature/ecology and at the level of the whole universe. I believe
that by gaining some familiarity with the pattern and its related phases one might be able to identify where
we are in the process at any given time, make sense of the confusion when it arises and be better equipped
to ride the wave of change. In addition, it is critical to learn which specific tools are best appropriate to
facilitate each one of the phases so that to meet their requirements and achieve their respective purposes.
Finally, one must develop the capacity to maintain ourselves, at the edge of chaos, using our unconscious as
a means to access deeper insights. Accomplishing all the above requires commitment and practice. It also
begins with engaging our heart in the process so that to not let us paralyzed by fear. Easier said than done!”
Beatrice Benne in ‘Demystifying the Pattern(s) of Change: A Common Archetype’ - April 7, 2012
Morphogenetic and Generative process (with Snippable Sequences) with ‘Worlds of Inclusion; iMentors 2008
Twenty Tenets – Ken Wilber
1. Reality as a whole is not composed of things or processes, but of holons
2. Holons display four fundamental capacities: self-preservation; self-adaptation self-transcendence; self-
dissolution
3. Holons emerge
4. Holons emerge holarchically
5. Each emergent holon transcends but includes its predecessors(s)
6. The lower sets the possibilities of the higher; the higher sets the probabilities of the lower.
7. The number of levels of which a ‘hierarchy’ comprises determines whether it is ‘shallow’ or ‘deep’; and the
number of holons on any given level we shall call its span
8. Each successive level of evolution produces greater depth and less span
9. Destroy any type of holon, and you will destroy all of the holons above it and none of the holons below it
10. Holarchies co-evolve
11. The micro is in relational exchange with the macro at all levels of its depth
12. Evolution is directional
13. Increasing in complexity
14. Increasing differentiation/integration
15. Increasing organisation/structuration
16. Increasing relative autonomy
17. Increasing telos
18. The greater the depth of a holon, the greater its degree of consciousness
19. Every holon issues an IOU to the Kosmos
20. All IOUs are redeemed in emptiness
References
John M. Bunzl : Discovering An Integral Civic Consciousness In A Global Age Global Problems, Global Governance,
and Denial - (Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, 2012, 7(1), pp. 105–123)
Beatrice Benne : ‘Demystifying the Pattern(s) of Change: A Common Archetype’ - April 7, 2012
Ken Wilber : Twenty Tenets –from Sex, Ecology and Spirituality, Page 35 - Shambhala, 1995

Guides For Integrally Informed Practitioners : 2 Advanced

Guides For Integrally Informed Practitioners : 2 Advanced

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Guides For Integrally Informed Practitioners : 2 Advanced

Similar to Guides For Integrally Informed Practitioners : 2 Advanced (20)

More from Paul van Schaık

More from Paul van Schaık (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Guides For Integrally Informed Practitioners : 2 Advanced