Integral Theory in Action

1st Biennial Integral Theory Conference

The theme of the conference to be held August 7th-10th, 2008 is
Integral Theory in Action: Serving Self, Other, and Kosmos.

The conference will:

* Showcase how scholars and professionals are using Integral Theory to impact the lives of individuals and communities.
* Highlight emerging lines of Integral scholarship and research.
* Include 100 individual presentations, 12 panel discussions, and 30 poster presentations.
* Feature presenters from 10 different countries, including Spain, Brazil, Canada, New Zealand, Jamaica, South Africa, Norway, the United Kingdom, Australia, and all regions of the United States.

Why should I attend?

Attendees will gain:

* An unprecedented opportunity to network within a global community of Integral scholar-practitioners and pioneering Integral thinkers.
* A focus on community, discourse, and dialogue.
* Multiple forums in which to engage in critical reflection and debate the current state of the Integral field.
* A deepened capacity to apply Integral principles in their own lives and professional work through a conference focus on application.

What topics will the conference address?

* Psychotherapy and Coaching
* Community Development and Activism
* Global Warming and Sustainabilty
* Spirituality and Religious Pluralism
* Business and Economic Development
* Cultural Diversity
* Politics
* Health and Embodiment
* Feminism
* Gay and Lesbian Issues
* Theoretical Challenges and Modifications to the AQAL Approach

Come join us for this historic opportunity to participate to in the growth of Integral Theory and its application!

Visit website for further info.

Discussion ad hominem

Not long ago I decided to effectively leave the Zaadz community and abandon my post there for several reasons. First, I felt the promised transformative platform was being pampered and traded for an irritating LOHAS chic, soon to be confirmed with Zaadz (a Friend of the I-I) being sold to Gaiam (origin: "Gaia+I am", OMG) and then adequately renamed to Gaia dot com (on the web, semantics is everything). Second, it was becoming obvious that even the best discussions at Zaadz are inescapably tainted with endless and painful logical and emotional circularity, defended as PC tolerance at this crucial time when the unsophisticated, deeply narcisistic sensitivity of so many is assaulting every trace of authenticity to be found in so few. Other reasons seem to stem from these two. You know, anybody is equally entitled to anything, and the only sin is a violation of That. Not of duty, not of privilege, but of an absurd entitlement. Basically, I wasn't dissapointed or disheartened, but have come to conclusion that Zaadz was a herald of a project that will be progressive enough to boldly proclaim standards that go beyond sheer egalitarianism, to usher a new standard of communal excellence and depth, immune to the extreme of uncritical acceptance otherwise celebrated as a cardinal virtue. In short, Zaadz was somewhat a hype.

Recently Julian Walker (see here) and Bruce Alderman (see here) both contributed remarkable posts to their blogs. The discussions themselves tended to blur the points made in original posts, and eventually seemed to neutralize the potential opened by the posts themselves. I wouldn't and couldn't take part in the ensuing discussions, since I have already left the tribe. It doesn't hurt to peek, though, right? Yes, the discussions can be fun and entertaining and even empowering, but so can many other things in life, while some things, some ideas, some practices, some phenomena etc. deserve a special treatment, because of their explicit transformative potential. Meanwhile, Julian became annoyed after taking so much "flak from everyone", Bruce felt that Julian doesn't stop long enough to actually understand what someone else is saying, and others - with few exceptions like Jim and James and David - mostly used their combined authenticity to chip in with anything from admiration to agreement to self-promotion to ill-hidden sarcasm to childish f*ck yous to simple gratitude. Despite all that, Julian and Bruce, with a little help from some friends, did manage to make at least some differences stand out rather clearly.

However, I was now in position of an onlooker, an intellectual peeper, as most readers of such discussions are by definition, and I discovered how frustrating discussions can be for the most part, and often useless. In order to have a meaningful discussion, participants must share a common purpose, that implicitly transcends their respective views or agendas. An example of such purpose is given in the dialogical notion of Raimon Panikkar (e.g. see Balder's take on Panikkar).

Something like this has happened already, and will happen again. For example, when the Integral Institute launched its forums, the Road Rules were set forth to "not just regulate traffic, but to call all participants to their own highest awareness." The guidelines were all variations on the simple dictum: "Let the next words out of your mouth (and into this forum) be from your Highest Self as you understand it." Well, it was an attempt, that didn't work very well. I haven't visited the I-I Forums for a loooong time.

On the other hand, hardcore discussion can only take place in protected spaces (online or real world), far from anything resembling universal entitlement. Instead, deep discussion is delineated by merit and realization. Whether in business, politics, or spirituality, deep dialogue is sustained by those who are willing and capable to embody that which is being aimed at by discussion with a common purpose and an open mind, or else to remain silent and respectful. Is that too much to ask? Fortunately, there are such places. But we need more hybrids, where some of that deep conversation can be joined by the public in a meaningful way. Any thoughts?

Here to go

Fortunately, I got my US visa approved with no questions asked. I'll be flying to Denver for the first Integral Buddhism seminar, organized by the Integral Spiritual Center, to be held from 21st to 23rd May. No doubt, some familiar faces will be there. Hey guys, if you read this and plan to attend this event, drop me a note in comments.

Partial Dreams

I haven't really addressed the issue which prompted me to write the "Integral Dreams" article. In effect, what I feel the critics and objectors are doing is not something I can comfortably put in a simple statement. But I don't like leaving anything hangin', so being an obsequious sycophant I'll do my best here, even if I should fail.:-)

By the way, today I just found out that in 2004, simultaneously to my publishing of Croatian edition of KW's TOE and BHE, a graduate thesis was done entitled "Integral Culture and Its Enemies" by a student of sociology in Zagreb. I feel that this title is in fact quite appropriate to start my formulation here.

In stark opposition there are enemies, and there's strife and conflict. In short, war. It's the emergence of integral culture that we're witnessing. The whole first tier is trembling, and the active resistance stems from all its levels. Magical, mythical, rational and relativistic resistances are manifesting simultaneously in individual and collective spheres, from within and without.

Authentic integral culture is a promise, yet to be realized. A promise most eloquently laid out and argued by Ken Wilber. But for some, the more impatient, integral culture is also a present millieu of so-called cultural creatives, a special strain of postmodern optimists, who believe that happiness is indeed something real to be achieved. Most of objectors and critics in question clearly argue their views from a precarious point of autonomous ego (in Loevinger's meaning). "Precarious" because this level is unstable in them for reasons I cannot know. A specific problem at that level is a conflict of needs and duties, which seems rather obvious, but specifically there is inability to transcend and exclude certain modes of reasoning and justifying, making it impossible to accept the radically impersonal nature of emergent unfolding. Therefore, all objectors and critics show inability to deal with true paradox in a stable fashion.

An "enemy" here is not someone "bad" or an open adversary, but actually someone good and smart and responsible, someone sympathetic to the cause, a benefactor even. "We have met the enemy, and it's us." Or, as H.H. the Dalai Lama would say of Chinese, "My friends, the enemy." It's simply that, at this point the integral project, namely Integral Institute, needs more than our personal integrity. What EACH of us involved does, will contribute in either way to the eventuality of the integral promise being fulfilled - or not.

It's not really about KW's leadership and management skills. And it's not about his writing genius being more than "enough", as Steve Frazee suggested. He also argued about first-tier vs second-tier. First-tier organizational design is not a foundation for a second-tier organization. "Second-tier content" is not enough. Doing great in first-tier terms is not enough. People who consider joining I-I should not think "What's in it for me?" This time it's not about you. It's not about your next step. It's about the Next Step. Ken is publicly looking for a Turquoise CEO? So what? How do you want it phrased? Do you want him to say "I'm looking for the most efficient and most motivated and most authentic soul-developed person to come and work for the I-I for years without ever thinking in terms of needs vs. duties while constantly giving everything s/he's got to me personally and to the vision of I-I"? But he did say that. He obviously needs more than an employee. He desperately needs an inspired genius creative "beyond-world-class" in all CEO-things. A genius-pandit is looking for a genius-CEO! Where is your application? The "enemy", at this point, is complacency and tendency to look for opportunities and excuses, when we ought to be building and actualizing a new type of organizational value-structure devoted to supporting an interior emergence which may very well remain just a promise for the time being (it's definitely not just another "organization"). It's up to us. Well, some of us.

"There was a dream that was Rome. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish, it was so fragile," said the old Emperor to Maximus Decimus.

I find it curious that people who negatively criticize and/or attack I-I or Ken Wilber, don't seem to show a clearly defined path with a strong allegiance, or other indications they're capable of, or at least interested in, letting go of self-interest in the broader sense, in a deeper sense. Am I talking amber? The problem of denomination and membership may only seem abandoned at the autonomous level, however, we are always-already in debt in ways known and unknown, even when we play our autonomous games. At this point, to whom it may concern, we are in future-debt to Ken Wilber - yes, even personally - for making us believe in the impossible promise of an authentic integral culture, for making us resonate with what is only a possibility, without which all these discussions would never take place anyway. May we never retract from that obligation.

A final caveat. It's quite irrelevant whether I'm "right" or "wrong" or "misinformed" in any respect. This is not about finding the truth. What we pursue is beyond "truth", and certainly beyond personal truths.

To close, let me quote from kenwilber.com blog: "May we all see, fear and tremble, may healing to our shared soul come swiftly, and may this healing encompass all involved and all who are witness, in this and all worlds."

Integral Dreams

"There was a dream that was Rome. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish, it was so fragile," said the old Emperor to Maximus Decimus early in the Gladiator.

After seeing on Numinous Nonsense that a discussion easily turns into a shit-storm (Vince, thanks for the expression) and then continuing into the second part, I was reminded how concerned citizens often just like to gossip. The situation at Integral Institute may be swell or not so well, but those in the know should know better. I admit there are many ways to be a sincere supporter, I just don't see how posting dozens of "funny", very un-fluffy comments is one of them.

Elsewhere, arguments lose compass and humour goes sour. "Open Integral" is having fun, and they actually believe they're being funny - to themselves, perhaps. Frank Visser is also having fun in his "wilberwatch", but being simply ridiculous instead. (You remember his work on Ken Wilber, "Thought as Passion"? Well, the passion is gone, and not much is left.) In their leisure time, these guys have fun at poking their KW-dolls. A chair at the President's Circle, or a tenure at the I.U. would've surely changed their minds...

So what if things at I-I look bad? What are you doing to help? Are you there, giving I-I all you got? Are you there anyway? Are you still there doing your best?

I live in Croatia, a country with so many difficulties on all levels in all quadrants, where anyone with brains would commit suicide RIGHT NOW, if we only had one quarter of bad faith and self-inflation shown by many who consider themselves to be integral "thinkers" in their own right - it's so sad. Like spoiled brats, without any dignity or honor. It takes WILL to stay through the storm. It takes character (being a character doesn't mean you have one). The difficulties are never the ones you'd choose, the pay always sucks.

Without Ken Wilber, most wouldn't be discussing anything "integral" in the first place. We'd be left with a bunch of lousy holisms, bereft of any promise that in the 21st century those big, important words like Spirit and Depth can actually get very fucking real once again...

Give I-I the best you've got, instead of bitter and shallow remarks of dissapointment. Forget the altitudes and perspectives, just do your best. Or, if opportunistic hipocrisy is all you have, do something constructive for change and - simply shut up. Decency, remember? Especially when you're feeling the need to be critical. By the way, what tier is this?

Instead of dreaming integral dreams and making them into nightmares, wake up into our non-integral reality, where anyone can be an asshole, bitching about this and that, and asking to be treated better. Stop whining. Get over it. This is the time to evolve through the barely open crack and usher... Why not BE the change for once?

Maximus Decimus: "Five thousand of my men are out there in the freezing mud. Three thousand of them are bloodied and cleaved. Two thousand will never leave this place. I will not believe they fought and died for nothing."