No awareness of the arbitrariness of colors, just “wrong”. Where you see “an eloquent discussion of the topic” by Wilber I see a hasty ad-hoc argument, careless and full of self-congratulation (“they got the colors wrong”, “it can easily be addressed”). You may personally be put of by the reference to chakra colors but Wilber makes a big point of it in RoT. That gives them an initial intuitive appeal that Wilber’s colors lack (but of course that might be subjective). It’s all a matter of the better argument.Īre the SD colors really arbitrary? They are evocative and follow the simple rules of color psychology. I understand the pragmatic reason for not changing your color palette every decade or so, but “a more adequate spectrum of colors” can in principle be replaced by “an even more adequate spectrum of colors”. So if the choice of colors matters, it is important to do it well, in my opinion. He even provides energetic considerations to ground his own choice of colors. So for him they are not empty placeholders at all. You seem to downplay the relevance of ANY choice of colors, in contrast to Wilber who argues it matters very much (that was his whole point of leaving the SD scheme). Regarding your take on your colors, which represent your own opinions, not Wilber’s. The posting of links to Integral World was done at the request of the person I replied to, because he didn’t have “infinite time” to go through a website that wasn’t really “user friendly” (take that). You can more easily teach these stages as “types” for people who are not yet ready for the full integral download, which expands your toolkit for stage-appropriate introductions to the material. no need to figure out what to use between “teal” and 'turquoise" if later research discerns a new stage in there, as Susanne Cook Greuter and Beena Sharma seem to be discovering between “amber” and “orange”.) Newly identified stages between already known stages can be more easily added to the holarchy (e.g. That said, here are a couple advantages for each model that come to mind.Īligning with the natural light spectrum helps convey the hierarchical (holarchical) nature of development.Ĭreates some critical distance between the AQAL and SD models, each of which include/emphasize different methodologies and make different claims.Īllows us to come up with cool titles like “Full Spectrum Mindfulness” But I also understand why Ken was going for the overall symmetry of the natural spectrum, and I loved his eloquent discussion of the topic in RoT despite the fact that, again, it all feels so inconsequential to me at the end of the day. Which is why I personally find myself resistant to involving chakra colors into any naming convention, and also since that would immediately turn off certain segments of the potential audience that may otherwise be very amenable to integral ideas. So you can’t use terms like “magic, mythic, rational” for overall altitude, because wtf does “mythic-level kinesthetic” even mean? They need to be “empty signifiers”, if you will, or else the signified meaning of whatever term you settle on would need to apply accurately to every single line of development at that stage. Which is cool, I love poetry.Īnd that is kind of the point - these labels need to be arbitrary. Orange representing “the fires of industry”, for example. The SD colors were just as arbitrary, of course. But I think the colors can easily be replaced by something equally arbitrary like “fulcrum 1, fulcrum 2, fulcrum 3, etc.” Hell, Ken could have used “polka dots, stripes, and paisley” and it would have no significant bearing on the notion of altitude itself. We can make broad generalizations, sure – this set of altitudes are “pre-conventional”, this set is “post-conventional”, etc. The colors simply denote “comparable altitudes” across a number of developmental lines, and do not (and should not) convey any meaningful data in and of themselves. I mean, “amber”? Hell, “magenta” isn’t even in the natural spectrum! I understand why Ken wanted to reconfigure the colors so it is arranged in more of an intuitive and natural spectrum - but even that feels somewhat arbitrary to me. Let’s be careful about that.Īs for your question, it all just seems so… inconsequential, I guess? Like the integral version of arguing about what color labels to use in your file cabinet, or how many angels can breakdance on the head of a pin. Hi Frank, just a quick heads up to say that I notice that a number of your posts and comments seem to be linking back to your own website, which is skirting fairly close to our “no spam” policy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |