The spiral dynamics framework seems flawed

[Carl-Richard]

@dlof You're using dogmatism in a rather loose way. Dogmatism is much more central to how the Stage Blue mind operates. In Blue dogmatism, you have some concrete rules that cannot be questioned (e.g. the 10 commandments) and that's it – no more questions, no more nuances.

Stage Orange adds a level of nuance and says: "we have these rules right here (scientific principles and methodology; experimentation and observation; empiricism), and we can use these rules to test other types of rules (theories)." In that sense, dogmatism is only a small part of how the Stage Orange mind operates.

Piaget's cognitive developmental model can be useful to understand the difference. It has 4 stages: sensorimotor, pre-operational, concrete operational, and formal operational. Here the two latest stages are the most interesting:

Stage Blue thinking relies much more on Concrete Operational (CO) while Stage Orange relies more on Formal Operational (FO). The difference lies in the ability to use abstractions, see nuances, predict, plan and scheme using symbolic thought.

If you want to teach a CO child to behave, you would give them simple rules to follow – no questions asked (Blue dogmatism). If you were to teach a FO child how to behave, you would also give them rules, but maybe rational arguments are needed as well. You see that both follow rules, but the latter adds an added level of nuance (the need for rational justification).

That is essentially what scientific theories are: a set of rules with a rational justification (empiricism). The rational justification then becomes the hidden assumption that locks them into the materialist paradigm. Just like Blue stops asking questions at the first rule they're given, Orange stops asking questions at a later rule (the justification).

Now, that is not to say that Stage Blue people are children, but this model is actually formally recognized to correlate with SDi:

->

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/51a0ef99e4b0673a4c034ab8/1373221911253-I9CKMOFPCM86G3TNULLF/Screen-Shot-2013-03-29-at-7.07.30-PM.png?content-type=image/png

Edited May 15, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[blackchair]

going to Ironist its gonna be a bitch

[Moksha]

1 hour ago, dlof said:

I'd usually think of it in the framework of chakra development. Like stage red sounds a lot like people being focused primarily on the lower chakras without any higher chakra activity. Blue as open throat, the beginning of the opening heart and slight opening of the crown chakra, but closed 2nd and brow chakras. Orange as similar to red with powerful lower  chakras but also with a strong brow and throat chakra activation. Green as opening of the heart chakra and weakened lower chakras and maybe less powerful brow chakra than orange.

Any framework, whether spiral dynamics or chakra development, is vulnerable to ego identification. The ego loves to feel superior to others, regardless of the model it climbs. It is all so silly, when you realize that everything is the same Consciousness 

[dlof]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

@dlof You're using dogmatism in a rather loose way. Dogmatism is much more central to how the Stage Blue mind operates. In Blue dogmatism, you have some concrete rules that cannot be questioned (e.g. the 10 commandments) and that's it – no more questions, no more nuances.

Stage Orange adds a level of nuance and says: "we have these rules right here (scientific principles and methodology; experimentation and observation; empiricism), and we can use these rules to test other types of rules (theories)." In that sense, dogmatism is only a small part of how the Stage Orange mind operates.

Piaget's cognitive developmental model can be useful to understand the difference. It has 4 stages: sensorimotor, pre-operational, concrete operational, and formal operational. Here the two latest stages are the most interesting:

Stage Blue thinking relies much more on Concrete Operational (CO) while Stage Orange relies more on Formal Operational (FO). The difference lies in the ability to use abstractions, see nuances, predict, plan and scheme using symbolic thought.

If you want to teach a CO child to behave, you would give them simple rules to follow – no questions asked (Blue dogmatism). If you were to teach a FO child how to behave, you would also give them rules, but maybe rational arguments are needed as well. You see that both follow rules, but the latter adds an added level of nuance (the need for rational justification).

That is essentially what scientific theories are: a set of rules with a rational justification (empiricism). The rational justification then becomes the hidden assumption that locks them into the materialist paradigm. Just like Blue stops asking questions at the first rule they're given, Orange stops asking questions at a later rule (the justification).

Now, that is not to say that Stage Blue people are children, but this model is actually formally recognized to correlate with SDi:

->

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/51a0ef99e4b0673a4c034ab8/1373221911253-I9CKMOFPCM86G3TNULLF/Screen-Shot-2013-03-29-at-7.07.30-PM.png?content-type=image/png

 

I'd say there's no doubt that your average atheist is much more intelligent, in say IQ, than a bible-thumper.

But intelligence or IQ doesn't seem to be a great measure of spiritual evolution in the higher realms according to my NDE research. For example there was this one guy, Howard Storm, who was a very intelligent atheist professor at a University. Died of liver problems, got brought back to life. He was shown the greatest achievement in his entire life was comforting his sister when she had a nightmare when they were both kids. Other than that the beings considered his life pretty fucked up and unevolved, they didn't really care about his academic success etc.
 

Taken to the extreme, there are hyper intelligent beings who have completely devolved in terms of spiritual evolution and would be more akin to demonic entities, known as the "Grey aliens". They have intelligence beyond our comprehension, yet they are completely spiritually devolved and more akin to AI than sentient beings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2021 by dlof

[Carl-Richard]

Just now, dlof said:

I'd say there's no doubt that your average atheist is much more intelligent, in say IQ, than a bible-thumper.

But intelligence or IQ doesn't seem to be a great measure of spiritual evolution in the higher realms according to my NDE research

IQ and cognitive development are not the same thing. You can be stage yellow cognitively with 120 IQ and stage orange with 170 IQ. The point was that Blue is more or less limited to dogmatic thinking. Higher stages become progressively less dogmatic, and you can see this by Orange incorporating alternative ways of thinking.

[dlof]

Ok that's interesting actually, thanks for the clarification. I'll give it some thought

[Leo Gura]

Also don't forget that stage Blue is mono-cultural and ethnocentric whereas Orange is multi-cultural and more worldcentric. Racism only ends with Orange+

[BipolarGrowth]

5 hours ago, dlof said:

I completely agree, NDE's disprove the dogmatic thinking and many other elements of stage blue.

My point though was that in several of these experiences it was shown that people who follow and love God are more evolved and developed than materialists. Referring to my original post, in one particular experience, a group of "bible thumpers" were shown to have a good heart as they love God and wanted to spread the message. It was shown that they were more evolved than those with just a materialistic paradigm. He was also shown that this Yoga guy who was thought to be crazy was actually more developed than the 'bible thumpers' as well which shocked the atheist NDE experiencer. 

So I wasn't saying that NDE's are equated to stage blue at all, instead I was pointing out that in many of the experiences, stage blue people are shown to be more developed than stage orange people, if you take dogmatic religious people as stage blue and atheist materialists as stage orange. But from what I gathered from Leo's replies, it seems my understanding of stage blue and orange may not be entirely correct... what I've taken from that is that perhaps the 'bible thumpers' weren't stage blue after-all and perhaps the atheist wasn't stage orange. I can't say I completely understand that yet, but that's my take-away so far.

You can be a loving idiot or one authentically egotistical genius. I used to tend towards the latter at stage orange. The materialist view is always one of separation. It brings some nihilism and hate with it. It’s generally a closing off of the heart. In this way, in cases which follow this — not all will, stage blue could be seen as still better than orange on that kind of level if you want to take it that far. 

[Inva]

@dlof when we study ants, we build a model of understanding. 

when we study humans we build a model of understanding.

as we get better model turns into models and back again to a better model.

 

[One Day]

12 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Mysticism is superior to atheism, but atheism is superior to fundamentalist dogma.

I have seen you use this word "Mysticism" in a way to describe a worldview before, it confuses me a bit.

do you truly mean this: "belief that union with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender." (Definition of Mysticism on Google)

Does the worldview of Mysticism also have to do with Infinite Imagination and the premise that reality is a dream?

I once had a lucid dream where it became shown to me that the Universe is an Infinite palace of dreams, seams of dreams sown together appearing separate at times, while there is actually only one Infinite dream going on forever. Does this description ring any truth in your experience or is this just some New-Age bullcrap.

Another question now that we are on the subject, do you think astrology & zodiac can have a real influence on your life as a person? It might be imaginary but so is your dick, let's not reductionistically shove all this shit to the side. (same with past lives etc)

Edited May 16, 2021 by One Day

[Depersonilized]

@Leo Gura Growing up in a Christian household in a non-denominational church I can definitely say that a lot Christians in the environment are more stage green than you think; especially the ones that leave the faith and then come back later. This is a VERY common thing which I believe is associated with being stage blue, rebelling into stage orange, and then coming back at stage green but with stage blue/orange values still there. I've seen it for myself. There is an opening of the heart that happens. Just wanted to point that out because I think that's missed. Spiral dynamics is more complicated than the model would have you believe; of course you've pointed this out for yourself. Just because someone loses certain dogmatic beliefs and moves into stage orange does not mean that it won't come back later in a different way as they move up the spiral in some areas. 

[tuckerwphotography]

8 hours ago, Moksha said:

I had never heard of spiral dynamics before joining the forum. My immediate instinct was that it is just another puzzle trap of the egoic mind. We want to gauge our spiritual progress, against some model, which is such a joke from the ultimate perspective. Stages are nothing more than cloudy staircase steps within the dream.

Yeah but it's fun. Let us play!!