Spiral Dynamics Stage Yellow Examples Mega-Thread

[Sockrattes]

@Taylor04

"Green want's more taxes"

 

This is everything i need to know to realise, that your view on green is still an orange one. You haven't even integrated green yet. Therefore you shouldn't try to chatter up orange-rothbardian-ideology the spiral ladder. This won't work, because for everyone who is or was at least in green, this is obvious.

Edited September 24, 2018 by Sockrattes

[Key Elements]

The key word here is "detachment." When used to self-reflect/self-inquire, it's to help in understanding a successful relationship/building successful relationships, life itself, and the deepest truth(s).

 

[Arthur]

Great modern day mathematician Edward Frankel .

Shows that stage Yellow is very spiritual, and when you take mathematics to the limit, you have a small gimps of Infinity.

@Leo Gura Leo, check him out.
 

 

Edited September 28, 2018 by Arthur
wanted to tag Leo

[petar8p]

On 28. 08. 2018. at 3:32 AM, Serotoninluv said:

This seems like orange to me. The intention is personal development to attain personal goals.

Have you watched some of his other videos and seen his work? I think he's yellow but aiming at orange audience to deliver this to a wider audience, no?

[Hamertijd]

 

[Key Elements]

 

This goes for any type of relationships, including intimate relationships. To me, he forgot to mention that a person could develop from a root to trunk. That's when a person is very independent, well-rounded, and is capable of solving many types of problems effectively for himself/herself and his/her loved ones, esp in very challenging times.

 

[Wiijuu]

@Hamertijd Beautiful. 

[In Sterquiliniis]

 

[petar8p]

I think this is really good content. Do you think this guy has passed green? 
 

 

[Taylor04]

On 9/24/2018 at 0:46 PM, Sockrattes said:

@Taylor04

"Green want's more taxes"

 

This is everything i need to know to realise, that your view on green is still an orange one. You haven't even integrated green yet. Therefore you shouldn't try to chatter up orange-rothbardian-ideology the spiral ladder. This won't work, because for everyone who is or was at least in green, this is obvious.

That is is all you need to realize that I dont agree with green assumptions, not that I must be orange. Keep in mind that memes next to each others tend to disagree with each others. That I dont share green assumptions just means I am one of the warm colors. So my disagreement with green can come from below or above. I might be above, and a you as a green might just not properly conceptualize what's above you. I might already have incorporated some healthy green aspects and moved past it.

You are somewhat right that being green-phobic is a bit unintegrated. That is something I have to work on. But you are wrong in thinking that I have to agree with the green perspective to have integrated green into my thinking. I incorporated plenty of the underlying assumptions of healthy green, such as the notion that material accumulation is not the source of happiness, and I am an (authentic) egalitarian. But I do not have to agree with all th ideas of mean green to be integrative. Mean green is actually an obstruction to moving to tier two.

One doesnt have to be completely neutral about all memes to posess some yellow. Integrativeness means mixing different tier one memes, but you can still have your heart in one of them. I suspect it evens out more later, but one can be a bit polar. That I dont like some aspects of (mean) green doesnt mean I couldnt be integrative. You imply that one cant be yellow without agreeing with the core of green. The irony in that is that the core of green is green monoperspectivalness, i.e. that green beliefs are reality and that therefore tier two continues with a green mentality and political beliefs. The book Spiral Dynamics specifically warns of this "green talking turquoise" type. They are unwilling to accept that green ends, that they have to change, so they project greenness onto the rest of the spiral.

Whatever yellow truly is, green is a low consciousness meme and we can expect it to react violently against it. This is precisely the reaction greens to show against voluntarist ideology, which greens perceive to be orange. Do you really think the future of humanity on tier two is to rely on authoritarian green solutions? Nah. Its ugly. Green authoritarianism is on its way out, it hasnt been the leading edge for decades. In its fight for survival, you can expect the green meme to throw any barrier in its members path to keep them from moving up to yellow, including disregarding post-green as orange and projecting green onto the later tiers.

Another hint is that Rothbardian liberalism fits with yellow chronologically. It is not classical liberalism, even though many misidentify it as such. Classical liberals were orange. Rothbardian anarchism was only formulated in the seventies and only got big this century. It fits with when yellow is supposed to emerge, and with the proportion of the population being of that bent. The world has been moving steadily in this direction, fitting with a predicted growth of yellow. Liberalism (19th century) was followed by collectivism (20th century) and is now followed by liberalism (21st century). Do you see the oscillation? Like in the spiral.

And finally I would ask why you think yellow is a new tier if nothing changes. Why should it be so hard for greens to become yellow? Does spiral dynamics agree with your view that yellow is compatible with green beliefs, that they have to give nothing up, make no difficult admissions, and just have to be a bit more spiritual to be turquoise? No. What you green-wanting-to-be-tier-two people all misunderstand is that spiral dynamics is not about spirituality. They are separate channels, much like your work and private life are separate areas of performance. You can be good at one and bad at the other. Tier two is not green politics plus spirituality. You can be spiritual on all stages. Yellow is a new tier precisely because greens dont want to admit that what they currently believe is being overturned and what they hate the most is the next stage. Of course greens dont want to be replaced by their political enemies. Should we expect them to like yellow? Spiral Dynamics says green reacts violently to tier two. Yet you think somehow the disagreements between green and yellow are less than the disagreements between orange and green? The hint on who is right in this entire argument is: Whatever yellow is, greens will not like it.

Edited October 13, 2018 by Taylor04

[Taylor04]

To sum it up, what the greens in this thread are saying is that green beliefs are objectively true. That the green reality is reality. And that the other views of reality are wrong. In their view, the spiral works like this: there are those who dont understand the green reality yet (stage 1 to 5), they get to have their views but they are wrong about reality, then there's green which somehow got it all right despite being low level consciousness, and then theres all the stages after green that agree with green beliefs, such as warmism and socialism, and just add spirituality to it. There could be no stronger expression of having one perspective, of monoperspectivalness, than to equate ones perspective with reality, and then fancying oneself "integrative" because all the stuff one is dogmatic about is reality and therefore it is ok to objectively believe in it. After all, one mixes a few ideas from different sources. But as long as they all are compatible with green, thats not "integrative". This is even worse than traditional religion, where a similarly narrow belief is held to be true, but at least the believer knows his faith is a faith.

As Ken Wilber writes, spiral dynamics is not about spirituality. The spiral and spirituality are separate channels of development much like work life and private life are separate areas of performance. You can be good at one and bad at the other. You can be spiritual on all stages, its just more visible in greens who are the first to have the luxury to obsess about it, thanks to orange having created all that wealth for them. (But to get anywhere with it, it is best to be on the leading edge of the spiral. That is why so many eastern philosophy dedicated greens havent been getting many results since the seventies, green is not leading edge any more.) The spiral is your underlying heuristics penchant, your energy-saving mental shortcut for arriving at your beliefs. The book Spiral Dynamics never describes the tier two memes as overtly spiritual, and it would be odd to read that into it. How likely is it that with every stage change politcal beliefs change, but somehow yellow has exactly the same beliefs as green? But thats what greens are saying! (Name something that you think green and yellow disagree about.) The greens then insert spirituality as a replacement, and pretend tier two is about that. This is not the case. Political stances change, greens just dont like it. The book practically describes yellow as free market, and newer writings make it more clear. I suggest that all tier two memes are anti-authoritarian, which is the future of humanity.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Taylor04

[In Sterquiliniis]

'I suggest that all tier two memes are anti-authoritarian, which is the future of humanity.'

It may be worth noting that with voluntarism (the idea that all human interactions should be voluntary/free of coercion) and free market anarchism (the consistent application of the non aggression principle) you are welcome to have any social, religious and economic structure you desire as long as you don't initiate force on other people to get them to do it.

This would include green style feminist communes, cooperatives, voluntary socialism, eco communes, religious based communities, ranches, cults, tribes whatever, the whole philosophy is 'we don't know which perspective is best so do whatever you like: just don't initiate force on anyone else, if you do the individuals involved may find non coercive and innovative means of dispute resolution, gaining restitution, negotiation, communication or ostracism'.

I see many voluntarists who promote eco conscious and innovative ways of living such as seasteading or permaculture homesteading too.

Edited October 16, 2018 by In Sterquiliniis

[SFRL]

 

[Cudin]

 

Peter is definitely a great systems thinker. Not even close to a libertarian. 

If he sounds green for you, you're orange. 

[In Sterquiliniis]

edit- posting when very tired, will be back later

Edited October 21, 2018 by In Sterquiliniis

[Taylor04]

On 10/17/2018 at 0:48 AM, In Sterquiliniis said:

'I suggest that all tier two memes are anti-authoritarian, which is the future of humanity.'

It may be worth noting that with voluntarism (the idea that all human interactions should be voluntary/free of coercion) and free market anarchism (the consistent application of the non aggression principle) you are welcome to have any social, religious and economic structure you desire as long as you don't initiate force on other people to get them to do it.

This would include green style feminist communes, cooperatives, voluntary socialism, eco communes, religious based communities, ranches, cults, tribes whatever, the whole philosophy is 'we don't know which perspective is best so do whatever you like: just don't initiate force on anyone else, if you do the individuals involved may find non coercive and innovative means of dispute resolution, gaining restitution, negotiation, communication or ostracism'.

I see many voluntarists who promote eco conscious and innovative ways of living such as seasteading or permaculture homesteading too.

Yes. It would even imply that property rights are not enforced by initiation of violence. So there would not be a "capitalist system" as such. The rich would have to buy their own security guards / insurance policies instead of making the middle class pay for it. This is very un-orange. Many stage orange "capitalists" tend to insist that the state needs to impose property rights for the economy to work.

I have no problem with green communes etc., as long as they are not mandatory. (Most greens seem to want to erect a mandatory global green commune.) I would even suggest that in an anarchist world entire cities might agree to engage in some lifestyle that in some sense is imposed on everyone in that area. That means some people who dont like it will have to move away. Initiation of violence? Yes. But it is important to note that in anarchism nobody would enforce the anarchism. It is not a system, but the absence of one. We have trouble comprehending that, because we were only schooled in thinking in terms of competing systems. Anarchism doesnt require that every last person on earth decides to abide by the non-aggression principle. It just means enough people abstain from supporting a centralized system for the initiation of violence for there to not be one. That there is no central system for doing evil does not mean that no human can do evil any more. People could for i stance still form a military club, collect money to buy bombs, and then invade stuff. I imagine they will be a lot more revenue-restrained.

In many ways, such a world would be a lot more socialistic than many contemporary greens assume. True the-workers-own-the-factories socialism can only come about as a consequence of a libertarian world, not by imposing it via fiat. The state-socialists are holding that progress back, because they are unwilling to go through the transition stage.

I also like to point out that I am not against eco-consciousness per se. I very much like nature, and probably spend more time in it than most greens. I want the planet to be more green and be nice to animals. I just dont think statist engineering is a very good means of doing that. Social engineering failed at everything else, so why do we still think it is the best means of providing a clean planet? The empirical evidence agrees with me. The world gets cleaner and greener where people get rich, not where they are the most environmentally activist. Parks, clean power plants and plastics removal efforts are capital consumption, that we can afford more of as we get rich. The theory that poverty is good for the planet is about the wrongest idea that everyone believes. It slows down the decline in birth rates and prolonges dependence of old, dirty technologies.

Edited October 23, 2018 by Taylor04

[Taylor04]

On 10/21/2018 at 0:49 AM, Cudin said:

Peter is definitely a great systems thinker. Not even close to a libertarian.

If he sounds green for you, you're orange.

I think some definitions are in order, because you seem to use the term "systems thinker" in some narrowly specific way. It sounds like you are suggesting that it means "thinking of the entire system", i.e. rationally planning all of society, i.e. not taking any systemically created order into account. This would practically be an opposite meaning to the dictionary definition of "systemic order" aka. having a comprehension of emergent properties aka. appreciating when humans can't rationally plan society. It is the view that society is like a plant that we can put in the right conditions for growth, but not make it grow ourselves. Peter Joseph suggests that anything that isnt centrally planned - such as markets - is just narrow and short-sighted gratification of impulses without order. This is an extremely strong statement of not believing in any systemic order at all. Of being so blind to systems thinking that one inserts its opposite in its place. Actual systems thinking (if my definitions are right) would be an approach diametrically opposed to his "humans should plan everything, and everything that isnt planned is just random disorder" view of things. This kind of hyper-anti-systemic thinking isnt just not tier two, it is specifically anti tier two. It is the complete rejection of tier two.

Please tell me the people in this community didnt just find an elaborate way to re-define "systems thinking" to mean good old communism in order to declare it tier two. That would be really silly.

[Zizzero]

Wow, this thread is very messy. But very entertaining to read through most of it today 

Mainly because basically anyone can post anything that's orange or green and call it yellow. So as it's been pointed out several times before; many examples aren't yellow and so this thread is more confusion than clarification about what yellow looks like. 

Now, after thinking about this spiral dynamics stuff for the last few weeks what I came up with was the following:
Orange mistakes yellows for intelligent orange thinkers. They do this to avoid facing the fact that green values are higher up in the spiral than orange values.
Green mistakes yellow for green/yellow; mainly green people who tapped into some yellow aspects like systems thinking and add this to their green worldview. Taylor04 described this in detail in his posts and it makes a lot of sense to me.

I believe that yellow is just way too complex to grasp it as easily as tier 1 stages. So what yellow looks like is very speculative on a tier 1 stage and very hard to explain even if you understand it. 
While we can more or less assess earlier stages to examples like political believes or lifestyles; blue people are often conservatives, orange people like material wealth and green people want equality, I see a yellow person as too complex of a mind to reduce it to a simple observable variable. What I mean is this; this is my hypothesis: you put all the yellow people who exist in the same room and tell them to design a better structure for the world's society; you hand them all the political power in the world. I don't think they would agree with one another. They probably wouldn't yell and be name calling, but they would have very differing views. Because why wouldn't they? Look at yellow's typical values; those aren't goals, but rathers ways of perceiving / ways of thinking.
I think at yellow you can't assume the conclusions of someones thought process. I don't find it hard to believe that a yellow person sympathizes with anarchy or libertarianism. I also don't find it hard to believe that someone on yellow would prefer left-wing politics. Yellow values go way deeper than this level; yellow's values are about its new attitude towards the other stages, its own beliefs and the thought process and consideration that go into everything. (Obviously me simplifiying yellow here as well)

Yellow means understanding and seeing the previous stages; it doesn't mean liking or disliking a particular stage. In fact; that's the exact difference between it and tier 1. Yellow forms its own believes and values independently. That's what happens when green moves up; he starts to question everything and uses all the tools and knowledge he has aquired from beige to green. He doesn't limit himself to "ah I'm yellow, therefore I have to value this and stay away from that. (that's a very blue or green way of looking at things) This means yellow can form opinions about previous stages, - yellow does not mean liking every stage - yellow can pick sides, deem certain stages as more useful than others and - especially lower yellow - still judge or get triggered by other stages. What makes yellow yellow is HOW it reaches conclusions; not based on simple premises about the world, but by understanding the world and perspectives on a deeper and way more complex level. It sounds very simplistic and tier-1ish to believe that everyone who uses systems thinking and nuanced thinking reaches the same conclusion. Actually the more complex the process, the more unlikely it seems that two minds share the same opinions.

Sooooo,,, maybe I'm completely wrong with what I just wrote. The problem is everyone can say they're yellow and believe it themselves, but how do we know? Most of us are not yet yellow, it is also more complex and rarer than blue/orange/green and therefore more difficult to portray in examples. My thesis is - as stated - that yellow individuals differ a lot from one another.

[Revamped]

Am I correct that this is a stage yellow man who tries to explain more advanced turquoise topics?

 

Download video

 

[Taylor04]

@Zizzero Yes, I would say that is a good way of putting it.

This kind of meta-perspective thats not "for" either "side", but hovers above them is, ironically, kind of yellow.

I might make some arguments at a later time for why my view of yellow as "a more intelligent orange" is correct. Namely, that it is on that side of the spiral. Much like orange is a more intelligent red, green is a more intelligent blue (real historical blue, as in medieval catholicism or fundamentalist islam, not contemporary american "blue" which isnt really that blue), and blue is a more intelligent purple.

These "orange values" are not orange values, but warm-colored values. Red shares these "orange selfishness" (think a viking chieftain). I think the unifying factor is K-selection bias for the warm colored memes (look that up of you dont know what it means) and r-selection bias for the cold colored ones. Thats also where greens desire for equality comes from. They dont like meritocracy.

Edited November 1, 2018 by Taylor04