Yellow vs green

[tsuki]

I came up with the following distinction and would like to hear a second opinion.

Green sees that everybody has their own point of view and sees them as a part of society that should ideally work towards a common goal.
It sees that everybody is essentially equal by the virtue of emotional response to transgression of personal values.
It tries to harmonize and align their value systems so that they can account for everybody else in cooperation.
The means through which it harmonizes people is by subjecting them to common good, the society.
It is different from blue in the sense that rules of said society are not established by authority.
The rules are established as the path of least resistance through various value systems and optimize mean happiness of an individual.
They are not good or bad in the absolutist (blue) sense, but are at best good enough. They are established by consensus.

Yellow on the other hand sees that not only everyone is equal in the green sense, but also every single one of them is always, strictly speaking, right.
It sees that there is no common ground when it comes to comparing perspectives. Every single human has his own, disjoint world.
A perspective is a self-contained universe that responds to stimuli in a way that makes sense for this particular perspective.
When one person speaks, the other hears his own interpretation. The interpretation that is predicated on his perspective.
When Green tries to subject Red to common good, Red sees common good as something else than Green.
They may even agree on what to do (verbally), but go about it in opposite ways with benevolent intent.
It makes no sense to judge Red from Green's perspective. All perspectives are disjoint.

The key difference is that Green fails to see this crucial distinction that there is no common ground to compare perspectives.
You cannot put people on a single playground and expect them to follow common rules, as they understand them differently.
You have to treat each person as playing its own game, and construct society as a mechanism composed of different (living and feeling) parts.
That's a whole different level of complexity that requires systemic thinking.

Edited June 21, 2018 by tsuki

[d0ornokey]

this is going to be one awesome month cuz of spiral dynamics 

[RichardY]

Green - Ego Inflation. (Common Good). Possibly increased through Yoga, Psychedelics. 

Yellow - Ego jacked more into the person's empirical self. Less dualistic. The self observing Ego.

I'd imagine there's possibly ways to feed various stages or to come to discredit or embrace various aspects.
 

[tsuki]

7 hours ago, d0ornokey said:

this is going to be one awesome month cuz of spiral dynamics 

I agree! Can't wait for the next video!

[tsuki]

7 hours ago, RichardY said:

Green - Ego Inflation. (Common Good). Possibly increased through Yoga, Psychedelics. 
Yellow - Ego jacked more into the person's empirical self. Less dualistic. The self observing Ego.
I'd imagine there's possibly ways to feed various stages or to come to discredit or embrace various aspects.

I like the way you've put it. The self-observing Ego.
Are you aware of the vast difference between the two? It is not that yellow is just less dualistic.
To yellow, dualism is a miscommunication. It is not that dualism does not make sense.
Dualism is when two people speak the same words, but talk about two different things and still come to agreement (without understanding each other).
Dualist perception of the world is a misunderstanding that constructs different levels of consciousness.
It does not make these levels wrong however, but right! This thing runs sooo deep! I'm going to cook a post sometime in the future about that.
It may become a journal about nonlinear perception.

[White]

12 hours ago, tsuki said:

Green sees that everybody has their own point of view and sees them as a part of society that should ideally work towards a common goal.
It sees that everybody is essentially equal by the virtue of emotional response to transgression of personal values.
It tries to harmonize and align their value systems so that they can account for everybody else in cooperation.
The means through which it harmonizes people is by subjecting them to common good, the society.
It is different from blue in the sense that rules of said society are not established by authority.
The rules are established as the path of least resistance through various value systems and optimize mean happiness of an individual.
They are not good or bad in the absolutist (blue) sense, but are at best good enough. They are established by consensus.

A special case of pluralism is the academic discipline of deconstructive postmodernism. It beliefs that it is impossible to defend any belief by proclaiming that all views are subjective and therefore legitimate since everything is relative. When relativism is carried to its logical extreme no view or interpretation is better than any other. All are equal.

Postmodernists believe that any metanarrative succumbs to the same subjective arbitrariness. They deny the legitimacy of all hierarchies and all hierarchical ordering. When Pluralists adopt this belief, they may be hypersensitive to perceived 
instances of judgment as “better” or “valuable” in human terms. According to Wilber, radical 
postmodernism leads to what he calls “Boomeritis (2003).” In the extreme case, postmodernists assert with absolute certainty that there is no position from which to judge anything. They do not yet recognize the inherent self-contradiction in their assertion. It is, of course, a form of judgment and hierarchical ordering of values as those who disagree clearly have a less evolved view from theirs.

YELLOW

Because of its global understanding and the long-term sense of oneself as part of ongoing history, this stage parallels the “integral” or yellow stage in Wilber’s AQAL theory. As mentioned earlier, the LMF 
emphasizes the cognitive move from linear to systems thinking as a watershed in meaning making while Integral theory focuses on the qualitatively new capacity to see the world and oneself through an evolutionary lens. The Autonomous stage is the first level that fully recognizes the need and value for the existence of all stages both in terms of diversity in society as well as in terms of one’s own development. At least, in the ideal. The human tendency to want to be among similar people and to affirm one’s own worldview can easily lead to new forms of feeling superior and pride as a member of a chosen or special “tribe.”

Autonomous persons realize that they may notice different conflicting aspects in themselves at different times and in different contexts. However, -- unlike Individualists, who may despair about ever knowing who they really are -- they are capable of “owning” and integrating many disparate parts of 
themselves. This includes integrating previously compartmentalized sub-identities, and rejected or 
marginalized parts of themselves. The experience of being part of interlocking systems rather than a 
bunch of separate agents changes one’s sense of responsibility in conflict situations. One sees how one 
inevitably is part of and contributes consciously or unconsciously to them. The self and the other can be
seen as both perpetrator and victim, giver and taker, product and process as actions, thoughts and feelings can no longer be isolated as was the preferred way of dealing with difficulties at the Achiever level. Instead they form a dynamic interplay. 
Loevinger called this stage “autonomous” because individuals can now make meaning autonomously, independent of conventional ideas. While one cannot change reality, one has the freedom to interpret it to serve one’s own preferences and to make choices about life and who one wants to be. This is possible now precisely because one fully understands that interpreting and evaluating is what human beings do to make sense of experience. We all tell stories about what is 
happening, who does what to whom, how we see life overall, and why we believe that we matter. 
Autonomous persons consciously commit to create a meaningful life for themselves and for others in the world through self-determination and self-actualization. They realize that the way they tell their life stories changes with additional experiences and insights. 
The crucial new capacity is to realize one’s power to generate meaning and to tell a coherent self-story by creating it. Unlike people at Stage 4/5 who are not able to integrate various parts of themselves, Stage 5 representatives feel empowered to do so. Thus, Strategist possess a relatively strong, autonomous self sense that is both differentiated and well integrated. It is different from the Achiever sense of authorship because it is much more aware of the limits of one’s control. At the same time, Strategists embrace the options for self-realization they have and see the limits to their power as part of 
what it means to be alive. With their sense of transformational mission comes set of broader, human principles one must uphold such as the right of all human beings to be treated with justice and mercy. 

Autonomous persons worry most about having failed to observe those universal principles they value 
deeply such as the right of all people to self-determination and for being treated with dignity and respect.

With their expanded awareness, Strategist use even more channels of information to make their moves. They are often conscious of energy dynamics (physical and otherwise), and notice underlying patterns that only emerge over longer period of time. They also have a deeper appreciation than any prior stage of how challenging it is to be a mature, responsible adult and how rare their own capacities 
are compared with most other people they are in contact with. Thus, they may pride themselves of being in the know about themselves and about the larger issues facing the world. Whatever their personal 
expertise, it is likely enhanced by interpersonal skills and worldly savvy based on having learned from experience.

Strategist are often motivated and infused with a grand purpose and a vision of what could be. Unlike Pluralists and Individualists, however, their enthusiasm is based on high ideals as well as on a 
more realistic view of what it takes to change old patterns in self, in organizations, and in society. Strategists want to hone themselves therefore as instruments of change. They realize that they need to 
be the most they can in order to be of most service to others. Both servant and steward leadership are part of one’s care for the larger system and future generations.

Wanting to help others evolve is one of the strongest motivators for Autonomous persons. 
Humanists, developmental psychologists, coaches and consultants often inhabit this stage. So do Strategist executives and leaders who see human beings as precious capital and who take multiple bottom lines into account in measuring their organizations’ success. In the best work place scenario, 
tangible as well as intangible outcomes are taking into consideration by paying attention to the physical 
and mental health of the staff, to an aesthetic work environment, to a good work-life balance, as well as to serving the wider community. Strategists conceive of developing people as a valuable contribution to the individuals themselves 
as well as to society. When this need to have others “become the most they can be” encounters 
resistance, Autonomous persons may feel impatient with others’ pace of development and frustrated with their “unwillingness” to grow despite their efforts and support. This need to have others transform is one of the central flaws of this stage along with an attachment to knowing and being coherent. 
They also tend to be among those who are most convinced that higher development is “always” better and should be fostered at all cost. Higher is believed to be better because the more autonomous 
and insightful about their inner dynamics individuals become, the more they can claim that they have an objective (non-distorted) and realistic self-identity (Kegan, 1982). This is the case even though this is 
also the first stage that can see how all people have had to move along the developmental trajectory through the various stages to be where they are now. Autonomous individuals also understand, at least theoretically, that this happens at a different pace and to a different degree for different people 
depending on life circumstances and appropriate challenge and support. Developmental thinking is now an aspect of cognition, of being able to look back and see how one evolved from a totally ego-centric 
and self-protective, to an ethnocentric, to a global or world-centric perspective. 
Many Autonomous persons see life as an open-ended journey. They believe that there is no 
predetermined way to follow for all human beings. Each individual has to find and create his/her own life style and is responsible for his or her own self-fulfillment. Autonomous individuals are interested in 
psychological questions and how to come to terms with inner conflict. Unlike individuals at the 
conventional stages, seeking therapy, advice, or consulting from others, is not seen as a weakness, but as a necessity and an actual strength. Autonomous persons have faith in their own and other people’s capacity to make meaning out of challenges and difficulties. They can construe their own personal sense without having to impose it on all others. They may also invite others’ solutions to conflict and respect their needs for autonomy. 
Sometimes Autonomous persons find ordinary constraints of life stultifying such as making a living and working an eight-hour day. They see themselves as being destined for bigger tasks with a far-reaching impact different from ordinary folks. They would prefer to enjoy their passions for influence and 
power on their own terms with maximal freedom or a mandate to do so for the benefit of all. If leading an organization to greatness is one of those passions, it may be a fortuitous match.

Cognitive: With the expansion of the 4th person perspective in time (historical) and space (global) Strategists are able to operate from multiple levels and perspectives. They have fully shifted to a systems awareness while appreciating the benefits of a traditional scientific linear view of reality. They can value and apply both conventional and postconventional practices without having to reject the 
former in order to feel like themselves. They also recognize natural hierarchies in life. They are no longer afraid of acknowledging that some members of society are better equipped for certain tasks, or more cognitively differentiated than others. The Strategist embraces the notion that all human beings deserve respect, but also knows that not all opinions and all perspectives deserve the same attention. 
Unlike Pluralists, Strategists can now prioritize among multitude of voices because they recognize that 
some views are based on better evidence as well as being more comprehensive and fruitful than others. 
Making informed strategic decisions is part of the Strategist leader’s power. She chooses who of the pivotal stake holders to involve when decisions have to be made on an issue that requires others’ input. Society sometimes recognizes as valuable the capacity of the Strategist to make difficult 
decisions and to compare and integrate multiple perspectives. Furthermore, Autonomous persons have become aware of the performative contradiction of the postmodernist’s position and assertion that there is no position from which to judge anything. They realize that assessing, evaluating and choosing are vital aspects of functioning and making sense of life. They distinguish between biased judging and wise 
discernment. Whereas one has to be on the alert to avoid bias and notice one’s evaluative preferences, judging itself is crucial in human affairs. 
It is at the Strategist stage, that individuals begin to see paradox and ambiguity as an inevitable 
dimension of living and to increasingly tolerate these. Autonomous persons become aware and fluent in using polarity thinking in order to examine issues and tensions. Complex and sustainable solutions often require that one pays attention to opposing but interdependent values. The most effective and healthy designs foster the wisdom aspects of both poles and the minimize their downsides.
However, the belief that one can at least approximate an accurate picture of the territory with
diligence and through dialogue and collaboration is still prevalent. Autonomous individuals are aware of 
multiple interrelated systems and how influences are circular, cyclical and often tapestry -like. They have beginning access to an understanding of life that can integrate psycho-logically paradoxical elements. Therefore, less energy needs to be spent on “defending.” This then allows Strategists to be more accepting and spontaneous than adults at earlier stages.

Emotional: For the Autonomous person inner processes are fascinating, complex and demanding to explore. As much as they need others, they also need privacy and time for self-reflection. The self is 
experienced as in transformation and constantly reappraised. Watching this “unfolding” of things is one of the main satisfactions at this stage. One’s precious life work consists in trying “to become the most 
one can become” in contrast to the goal of Achievers hoping to be the best one can be. In the 
Strategist’s eyes, good company, good questions, intimate relationships, and a meaningful occupation as well as chances for self-actualization and self-fulfillment are essential for a meaningful existence.
Others are valued as ongoing, vital co-actors in one’s own fascinating life drama. 
Autonomous persons become fine-tuned to their own psychological well-being and inner workings. They take responsibility for regulating their thoughts, feelings and behavior. They are responsive and 
adjust when required as part of different life contexts and career phases. Deeper life purpose and 
legacy issues become an important topics of concern. How does my life and my contribution matter beyond my life time and my immediate realm of influence? 
Relativism changes into personal commitment and responsibility for creating one’s own personal 
meaning. Individuals are now capable of rediscovering and owning parts of the self which have previously been disowned for being too confusing or too threatening. The shadow side of the self can be acknowledged to a greater degree and therefore a new integration and wholeness is possible. Although 
Autonomous folks experience role conflicts and dilemmas strongly, they recognize that these are inescapable and that ambivalent feelings are natural. Based on this capacity to integrate and take a 
metasystematic view of different parts of experience, they tend to be quite certain of themselves and their cognitive and emotional capacity for synthesis and integration.

Unlike individuals at the later, the postautonomous stages of meaning making, Autonomous 
persons try very hard to keep their act together and to come across as reasonable, mature, and knowing themselves well. They feel responsible for being able to orchestrate conflicting needs and different subidentities and generally appear more balanced than earlier stages. 
Strategists sometimes present themselves as exemplars of humanity giving off a whiff of 
superiority. Now even failures and missteps are presented as positive aspects of learning. While reframing and retelling one’s story in a more positive, self-sustaining light is a great strength of this stage, the capacity of owning some of one’s failures and foibles, can be used by the ego to bolster its 
sense of achievement and importance.  We call this the whitewashing tendency of the Strategist. “Look how well I know myself. I am not afraid to share even my less than stellar sides so you can learn." Although not inevitable, feeling powerful and insightful because one understands so much about human nature and the world can lead to self-inflation. The focus on “humility” that several leadership studies mention as an important aspect of good stewardship is likely a response to this observation. On the 
other hand, it is a great triumph over earlier stages, that at this level one can recognize that flaws are part of being human. Getting a perspective on them is a life-long invitation to deepening one’s self-
awareness and connection to others. 

Interpersonal: Even more than at the Individualist stage, experiences of all kinds can be welcomed and accepted for their immediate qualities. Distressing emotions become more tolerable and offer insights that can be heeded. Strong positive and negative feelings can be acknowledged within oneself 
and shared with others. 
Self and others are accepted as complex human beings with both positive and problematic traits and dispositions. There is an infinite variety of unique expressions of being a self. Only the dynamic and intimate exchange with others makes it possible to get in touch with aspects of one’s behavior one 
would otherwise tend to overlook. Good feedback makes one aware of what one is defending or blind 
to. Feedback is vital for continuing development and for gaining ever deeper self-knowledge and wisdom. One needs both the caring and the critical presence of others to optimize oneself as an 
instrument of change. The deep sense of interdependence creates a need to be mutually supportive and challenging. Strategists may feel responsible to help others transform in order to fulfill what they intuit as other’s potential.

The “transformational” or “evolutionary” fervor of this level is occasionally blind to the transformer’s own identification with and self-importance in being a “transformer.” Many well-meaning change agents 
are not aware of the potential disregard for the needs and capacity of the recipients in their efforts to help others grow. Strategists can sometimes show impatience with others’ slow development, and frustration with their perceived resistance to grow. Notwithstanding, many seasoned Autonomous persons are ever more capable of expressing tolerance and non-possessive love (or being love) because of their profound appreciation of other 
people in their own right as unique individuals and as adults with a growing consciousness as well as fellow human beings with whom one shares the human plight. Others are seen as actors in their own life dramas, which are deeply moving and fascinating to participate in. Beginning with this stage, 
benevolence towards others and increasing compassion for oneself can become an abiding attitude. 

Emotional: Autonomous persons have now access to a wide range of different emotions and 
different states of awareness. Their emotional tone is different from that of Individualists. It is often less cynical and distrusting, more upbeat and also again more certain about oneself and knowing. Feeling into various sensations and emotions is one of the ways one approaches any experience. Rational 
deliberation and objective analysis are fully integrated into a comprehensive approach to problem definition and solving. Strategists can also recognize subtle distinctions among similar feelings. Thus, they would likely distinguish between various kinds of sorrow, grief, regret, disappointment etc. Overall, 
they seek to claim an authentic, truthful and adaptive self. Authenticity, is therefore an important value in the Strategist’s value repertoire.
The greater awareness of their inner depth also allows Autonomous persons to use dreams, fantasy, and imagination much more freely than earlier stages. Their thoughts are allowed to take off. 
Strategist seek creative, integrated solutions to large-scale and long-term problems. More even than Individualists, they can think outside the box. Their imagination is no longer constrained by conventional 
approaches while these are taken into account and not ignored or resisted as at the previous stage. 
Strong feelings are becoming of interest as indicators of something important to observe in oneself and others. Autonomous persons can see difficulties as a natural part of the human condition -- inherent 
in the dynamic interplay of multiple systems and of complex human interactions. Thus they are often more skilled at negotiating impasses and conflicts because they are not as likely as all earlier stages to 
use blaming as a defense. They can identify with others and appreciate their vulnerabilities as well as their unique strengths. Because they are aware of their own many shortcomings, hang-ups, preferences and less than ideal habits, they can express light-hearted humor directed at our general folly as human 
beings. 

Moral: Strategists genuinely feel principled anger and righteous indignation towards the injustices of the world. They will stand up against society to express their personal convictions or to uphold their 
higher, overarching principles regarding human rights and well- being. They are willing to go on the barricades and risk their lives and reputations in order to fulfill the aims of their convictions. Their anger does not usually seek a victim but is geared towards rectifying perceived ills. Because of their capacity 
for the long-term view and they often express a deep concern for the well-fare of future generations. 
They feel a challenge and the obligation to make wise decisions that will serve beyond their own time and region. Self-less sacrifice for the greater good can thus be part of an Autonomous person’s positive 
self-identification.

A Strategist’s standards for living a meaningful life are elf-evaluated and internalize. “To walk the talk” becomes an expression of one’s moral character and authenticity. One’s behavior becomes an 
expression of one’s moral principles and convictions. When irreconcilable role conflicts are discovered, there may be a deep unease and yet also a greater tolerance for feeling dissatisfied, ambivalent or confused than at earlier levels. 
One must qualify this statement because total acceptance of what is, is not yet part of the 
Strategist mindset. A serious effort towards even greater self-knowledge and self management skills remains a facet of an Autonomous person’s ideal self-image and drive towards human perfection. When they seek to become enlightened, they may make an enduring effort to “achieve” that goal with great 
seriousness and diligence. They may spend years in regular meditation practice, attending retreats, and following a particular spiritual leader or contemplative school. They may not fully realize that their very 
efforting is in contradiction with accepting what is. The tension between effort towards achieving a goal, 
even a spiritual one, and acceptance of what is may intensify at the next level of development. 
Some Autonomous persons become charismatic moral leaders who inspire others to follow their great vision of an ideal world order and a world fit for generations to come. When they defend what they 
believe to be a worthy cause, they can be courageous and disregard negative consequences for 
themselves. But they may also be overly forceful with their convictions especially when they are fueled by principled anger. The combination of charisma, moral conviction and interpersonal skills can be a dangerous combination if not kept in check. Followers often do not have the wherewithal to see the limitations and possible self-serving aspects of such a leader and his or her inspiring ideas.

Depression: Autonomous individuals become dissatisfied with their lives when they feel they have not fulfilled their unique human promise or when they have not lived up to the greatness they expect of 
themselves. Loss of courage as well as loss of a sense of self-agency and power can become great stressors. When using defenses, healthy Autonomous persons use mostly mature ones such as suppression, altruism, humor, and reframing. When they use less mature defenses, they may realize it as momentary fallback. They may therefore be able to see this behavior as context-dependent and are 
able to forgive themselves and move on. However, when they think they have failed in their precious life work and mission, they can despair and feel a deep sense loss of self. 
This shift from feeling in one’s full power to feeling no longer needed is especially common when Strategists approach retirement. There has been much ongoing gratification in being successful in their 
métier, in having raised a family (whether as a personal one, as a thought leader, or as a leader of an enterprise), and in feeling one has made a difference in the world. The question of one’s worth in one’s older, less engaged years looms large. Did one get the rewards and appreciation one was hoping for 
and if so, will it remain? How does one relax and trust that the next generation will reign as well and as consciously and learn from their mistakes along the way? One way of dealing with these questions is to 
take on the role of mentor or steward of younger leaders or an organization. When less well navigated, the perceived lack of engagement with others and/or the lack of a sense of being as loved and admired as one expected, can lead to sadness or even bitterness. Ideally, the sense of disappointment can be 
mitigated with self-compassion and an understanding of life’s whole trajectory – with its inevitable ups and downs, triumphs and losses, and with its beginning, middle and end. 

Interpersonal style: One takes responsibility for relationships while also requiring autonomy and personal space. Relationships are seen in terms of inevitable mutual interdependence. One can tolerate and appreciate others’ autonomy and their different solutions to conflict. Non-hostile, existential humor is 
beginning to be available in tense situations. 

Cognitive level:Conscious preoccupation: Strategists are concerned with self-actualization, self-fulfillment, and legacy issues. They are interested in the psychology of self and coming to terms with their preferences and conflicting needs . 

Chief anxiety: a) not to fulfill one’s personal potential, b) not to self-actualize, c) not to live up to or neglect those global principles of justice, tolerance etc. one holds dear above any others, and d) loss of 
courage.

 
Defenses: Mostly mature ones: suppression, positive reframing, altruism, and non hostile humor
When using less mature defenses, one can be forgiving and understanding towards the ego

Representatives: Charismatic individuals who are ready for personal sacrifice in order to defend through personal example the moral principles they believe in. Visionary leaders with the capacity to see 
how systems interrelate and are aware of the long-term implications of their choices.

Language clues: Autonomous persons use a complex, flexible syntax; with a wide array of topics and concerns. They try to do justice to the complexity of life in their verbal expressions. They try to present a coherent exposition of their thinking and themselves. They use differentiated psychological 
vocabulary and understand circular causality in human relations. “Authenticity, evolution, transformation, 
higher principles, life purpose, authenticity and self-fulfillment” are among favored concepts. “Both/and” as well as “either/or” thinking is used in combination or alone depending on the context.

Source: cook-greuter.com 

 

 

 

[tsuki]

@White That is an absolutely outstanding piece of text. Thank you for sharing it. I will definitely go through the book.

I can tell that what I called as Yellow in the OP is a stage that supersedes the Autonomous person.
It is also backed up by @Joseph Maynor 's post. Very interesting.

I'm kind of skeptical about all of this, as I'm trying to map theories onto my own experience. I identified as Yellow and tried to express my perspective, but it seems that I have transcended that as well. Skepticism comes from the fact that I'm only 29 without any formal study of self-actualization.
It seems absurd to me. It's sounds like Ego talk, but for some reason I don't feel disgusted by it.

[RichardY]

Green; Happy as a Hippo. I think Ben Stiller plays a Yellow - Orange Actuary, Character in the movie "Along came Polly". A Yellow -Green Character in "Meet the Parents". 
 

 

9 hours ago, tsuki said:

I like the way you've put it. The self-observing Ego.
Are you aware of the vast difference between the two? It is not that yellow is just less dualistic.
To yellow, dualism is a miscommunication. It is not that dualism does not make sense.
Dualism is when two people speak the same words, but talk about two different things and still come to agreement (without understanding each other).
Dualist perception of the world is a misunderstanding that constructs different levels of consciousness.
It does not make these levels wrong however, but right! This thing runs sooo deep! I'm going to cook a post sometime in the future about that.
It may become a journal about nonlinear perception.

Yeah, as a way of thinking I have an inkling towards yellow, though only scratched the surface. I think very few people are full yellow, and even if they were sometimes, I think there needs to be a kick sometime to jolt someone out of one stage to another, environmental or otherwise.

Not just spoken language, but how the mind itself operates & integrates with the whole, blows my mind. Carving the world up dualistically has it's uses, but to think non-dualistically and successful intergrate that, one major challenge. I think people do it to a certain extent, unconsciously and conscious through God(the unrealised self, or otherwise). 

It's funny how different colour can get associated with different things. Sometimes different colours in nature can mean danger.

Purple: Tend to think of Idol worship associated with royalty, purple being a royal colour.
Red: Ego centric, kind of synthetic. Star Wars Sith!!!!
Blue: Dogmatic morality. Stars Wars JEDI!!!
Orange: I guess there's the Dutch, can't get much more materialistic.
Green: Environmental, Ecological and Relationship based.
Yellow: Tend to think of the Sun (Self), that burns on it's own fuel.
Turquoise: A composite, is a mix of silver and copper. Tend to think of it like plates on a tortoise.