David Pakman is yellow?

[Mezanti]

hes understands self-bias and how green is not aware of itself bias. 

[loub]

He's great and I enjoy his political commentary a lot. smart and precise and aiming at a greater good. Lacks some qualities that I would say are crucial for yellow in how he reacts against people. Respectfully and rationally yet there is an inability to actually consider what is said and make an effort at truly understanding where someone is coming from.

Watch this video from about 09:00 minutes on.

[Apparition of Jack]

Most high-end Green thinkers (both young and old) will have shades of Yellow, in my estimation. Even Bernie Sanders - a very healthy Green candidate - obviously has some of the meta-cognitive and self-critical elements that characterise Yellow thought, which he uses to great effect.

The thing that prevents them from fully leaving Green and embracing Yellow is their lack of serious inquiry into epistemology, metaphysics, ontology, and so on. Most high-end Green thinkers in the West will still usually subscribe to a materialist metaphysics, either consciously or unconsciously, for instance. Don't mistake this for thinking that they're metaphysically "inferior" to Blue however; a subscription to empiricist scientism is still closer to the truth than the shallow "fire and brimstone" monotheism that characterises Blue.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Apparition of Jack

[Emiliano]

Nah Many of his videos have this us vs them mentality.He's green I believe.

[Leo Gura]

Hard to say. He's definitely a very intelligent, highly developed stage Green at least. Probably some shades of Yellow, but also probably held back by the lack of knowing Spiral Dynamics and what Yellow even is.

To really get into solid Yellow it's extremely important to learn Spiral Dynamics so one can explicitly see the whole Spiral at work in society.

[Scholar]

I would not say he is even fully green yet. He has a very reasonable and calm appearance, though the values from which his mind operates internally seems to me very orange.

This is a very telling sign. He comes off reasonable just in terms of the way he structures his speech, but the actual logic and justifications he uses are pretty basic stage orange dismissals. He is using higher level memes to justify his lower level values.

Notice his system of values that determine the way he justifies his response. He has no concern for the well-being of other beings, rather he already has a firm position on the topic which he disguises by appealing to ignorance and some lofty principles that in this context don't even make sense to use.

It is crucial that we understand that most reasoning is done post-hoc, meaning they justify values one already holds, which in this case are clearly individualistic "freedom" values. He assumes the position of killing animals for food unnecessarily is acceptable, from there he comes up with a rationel to justify that value system.

 

A person who has evolved morally to stage green will argue the other way around. They will come from a position of already being certain that killing other beings for unnecessary reasons is wrong, and they will structure their arguments that way. You don't need to convince someone who inherently values other beings that they are valuable, they will require no justification, no reason to do so. A stage orange person you have to convince with logical consistency, because they do not actually value animals whatsoever, they are dismissable as long as they do not affect them directly.

 

Don't look at how Pakman appears, look at the value system his appearence represents. He clearly does have some stage green positions, and even stage yellow positions, but they are integrated in a stage orange value framework.

It's like a stage blue person can use stage turquoise memes but yet it would not mean he is stage turquoise at all. You cannot fake being another stage, and Pakman is a clear example of that.

 

No person who has evolved to stage green on the moral line will ever answer the question of whether animals deserve rights by saying: "I don't know, I never thought about it."

Edited August 20, 2019 by Scholar

[Leo Gura]

@Scholar I think you're nitpicking a bit.

Not every Green person is some animal rights activist. Plenty of Green people eat animals and don't think much about animal rights. That's not what defines Green.

[Scholar]

38 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Scholar I think you're nitpicking a bit.

Not every Green person is some animal rights activist. Plenty of Green people eat animals and don't think much about animal rights. That's not what defines Green.

It's not about whether they eat meat or not, it's about how the confront the problem. Plenty of "green" people are not even green at all in the moral line, even the entire LGBTQ community is not.

Notice that LGBTQ activism is a movement that was spawned from people who themselves indentify as LGBTQ, making it an individualistic movement rather than one created by compassion towards out.groups. Most people think LGBTQ people deserve rights because it makes sense that they would deserve right, they have no rational reasons for taking their rights away. But most peolpe also don't care that much about LGBTQ outside of their political identity. They don't actually feel true compassion for them if they are not their friends or somehow are integrated in their own personal identity. You know this is the case because if it was true compassion these people would probably primarily care about homeless people.

This is how stage orange operates, just because they usestage green memes does not mean that the value structure of these people is on all lines stage green.

 

https://consciousevolutionmemoir.com/2013/03/12/the-integral-map-lines-of-development/
 

Quote

What am I aware of? (cognition)

What do I need? (needs)

Who am I? (self-identity)

What is important to me? (values)

How do I feel about this? (emotional intelligence)

What is the right thing to do? (morals)

How should we interact? (interpersonal)

How should I physically do this? (kinesthetic)

What is of ultimate concern to me? (spirituality)

I would say that the vast majority of people, including what we might identify as stage green people, are underdeveloped in emotional intelligence, morals and self-identity. They are stage orange, maybe even stage blue on many of these developmental lines.

 

The problem is not what one's current position on animals right is, the problem is how one interacts when faced with these problems. Again we must look at the internal value system rather than ideological positions.

If I show you slaughterhouse footage and the first thing that comes to your mind is "That's terrible, but..." you are in my opinion on some of these three lines underdeveloped. A human being who is fully integrated at stage green will see slaughterhouse footage and think "Holy fucking shit this needs to stop at all costs", because they have the capacity to put themselves into the shoes of the beings who they are observing. Most people are not, most people get uncomfortable and immediately react by coming up with some justifications for the state of affairs.

 

This is a wonderful example:

 

Look at how archaic the justifictions are some of these people use when confronted. Even though they might be confused as stage green, they are fundamentally not. They only use stage green memes as long as it serves their individualistic agenda, they go so far that they become completely irrational, use justifications that slavers used to devalue black people. There is no true moral evolution here, there is simply an adoption of higher memes to serve ones own agenda.

 

I would say that our estimates of how far people are evolved is very oversimplified and because of how easily high level memes get distributed in the age of the internet, we might get results that we previously would not have, judging people to be far higher than they actually are.

 

 

I think in a culture that is so predominantly orange it is not really possible for green to exist in it's fully integration, because it would be so radical that it would not get along with it's culture. Once we will have a dominating green culture we will have fully integrated green people. A fully integrated stage green culture to me would behave kind of like a mass of Jesuses who help everyone they can, and everything being structured around that goal. They would create small robots that go around to pick insects from the sidewalk so noone would step on them. They would create huge fences and bridges for animals to cross highways. They would make sure that noone is depressive, poor or unhappy in general. They would take care of everyone, in a kind of utopian idealistic scenario.

Like a stage orange culture makes sure everyone is free and has rights, a stage green culture would make sure everyone feels well and is happy.

Edited August 20, 2019 by Scholar

[Scholar]

I think I know what the difference in approach is here.

I am viewing Pakman from a different reference point than you guys do. If we view Pakman from an orange weighted reference point he will appear quite greenish and even yellowish.

It's like if we were to view all people we currently identify to be at Stage Blue from an actual stage Blue culture, they would all seem to be actually stage orange.

If we view all current stage green people from a hypothetical stage green culture, they will all seem to be stage orange.

 

Infact, if we imagine a stage turquoise culture, even people like Sadhguru will seem very stage orangey. A stage turquoise individual from a stage turquoise society will be radically different from anyone who has achieved even the highest level of human developement today. Kind of like how we look back at Buddha and see very clear stage blue aspects in him that he was not able to escape.

Our current bias is to look at everything from a stage orange reference point. We do not recognize the enormous cultural bias within us, as we all exist in a stage orange environment. Look at the entire world, literally our way of living, our institutions, our entire world is structured around stage orange values. Maybe this is the "You can't escape culture" problem.

Edited August 20, 2019 by Scholar