The Swedish Response to the Refugee Crisis from a Spiral Dynamics Perspective

[The following paper is a draft intended as a basis for a presentation with the title above at the Integral European Conference. It should be regarded as work in progress and, regretfully, contains typos, and lacks hyperlinks and a reference list. The text will probably be corrected as errors and typos will be found. Read with caution, feel free to hyperlink to the blogpost, but please do not cross-post.]

Abstract

The Swedish response to the refugee crisis is analysed from a value system perspective, using the Spiral Dynamics model. The analysis gives an overview of the conflict between the traditional, modern, and postmodern values. Due to the crisis and changes in life conditions, traditionalistic and nationalistic values and perspectives have challenged the dominating postmodern values. Two defining aspects were the sheer volume and its economic consequences that made Sweden substantially reduce its intake, and the sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, along with similar incidents in Sweden. The first aspect entailed a conflict between a postmodern emphasis on global human rights and tolerance, and traditional stability and national interest, as well as a modern emphasis on economic aspects and a preserved welfare state. The second aspect led to two expressions of the postmodern value system coming into conflict with each other, namely gender equality and multiculturalism. It is discussed whether the conflict leads to a regression of values or progress towards post-postmodern values.

Introduction

 ”Instead, bit by bit, the entire house behind the façade is torn down. The façade remains until the crucial moment. At a given signal the old façade falls. Behind it there is already a new one. It seems to always have been there. In one stroke, everything changed. Politicians, journalists, everyone, follows.

Now it’s this corridor that apply. ” [The author’s translation]

The description came from Swedish columnist Johan Hakelius as a consequence of the dramatic shifts in the discourse and debate around the migration and refugee crisis in October 2015. The “corridor” refers to the space of acceptable opinions that you need to keep within if you don’t want to have a diagnosis of your mental health, a Swedish version of an Overton window. The term was coined by political scientist Henrik Oscarsson, director of the SOM-institute at Gothenburg University, that studies public political opinion. In Sweden, the opinion corridor, in relation to the issues of immigration and the refugee crisis, can be seen as the space within which you express tolerance, acceptance and a general positive attitude towards migrants, a generous immigration policy and multiculturalism. But do this opinion corridor really exist? If so, how can these values be characterised and how did they arise? And why did the shift in acceptable opinions that Hakelius describes occur? Into what?

The present analysis takes as a frame and general perspective a view where values, value systems and the value systems landscape as a whole are seen as complex adaptive systems. They are seen as systems, since they consist of clusters of opinions and preferences in many issues; they are complex, since they cannot be fully understood or controlled; and they are adaptive, since they change when the outer circumstances and life conditions change.

The analysis begins by describing the values ​​and value systems landscape as a complex adaptive system. Then the model Spiral Dynamics will be introduced and discussed with other models for studying value systems based on other assumptions and with better scientific support, such as the World Values ​​Survey, Shalom Schwartz’ value system model, the GAL-TAN dimension applied by e.g. the SOM Institute surveys and a value system test developed by the author and colleagues. There are three main reasons to employing the Spiral Dynamics model for this analysis. Firstly, its explicit development perspective. It is sometimes argued that the postmoderna values are more mature, and that traditionalistic and nationalistic values that are progressing, should be seen as a regression. Hence, there is a need for a model with a developmental perspective. The developmental perspective and approach are also motivated due to the assumption of values as complex adaptive systems, and in order to understand such, they need to be seen as part of a process leading up the the current state (see e.g. Laske). Secondly, the value systems of the Spiral dynamics model can be linked to corresponding perspectives, or general view on what is mature and rational behaviour, and what is not. And thirdly, the value systems can be linked to the cultural and societal development in terms socio-techno-economic progress throughout the history. I will apply the Spiral Dynamics model in Sweden with a brief historical overview leading up to today’s debate with the refugee crisis as central concern. Finally, the implications of the analysis, regarding the continuing shifts in discourse around the refugee crisis and the value system landscape as a whole, will be discussed.

Theory

The analysis will employ the model that is popularly known as Spiral Dynamics, or as the author Clare W. Graves (1914-86) called it “the emergent, cyclical, double-helix theory of adult biopsychosocial systems development”. The model describes how the value systems or vMemes developed mainly on the cultural level and was further developed by Beck, Cowan and others. The model is sometimes included among the adult development theories and have an indirect support from AD theories such as model of hierarchical complexity, Loevinger’s ego development theory and Kegan’s subject object theory. It also shows similarities with frameworks for social or organisational development, such as Scharmer and Kaufer’s framework for socio-economic development, and Laloux’ framework for organisational structural development. Graves, a professor of psychology from Union Colleague in New York, sought a synthesis between different psychological schools, represented by Maslow, Skinner and Rogers. Graves was inspired by new ideas about systems theory, general systems theory, formulated by von Bertalanffy. This systems theoretical connection and description of the value system as complex adaptive systems is later articulated by Hamilton (see Christensen, 2015). Here follows an introduction of some key assumptions and concepts of the Spiral dynamics model.

vMeme

A key concept in Spiral Dynamics introduced by Beck and Cowan’s vMeme which refers to the value system. The concept of meme, coming from Richard Dawkins’ book The Selfish Gene, is an amount of information, an idea, an -ism, a value or the like, that is spread through the population like a virus. Thus, a vMeme is a coherent set or cluster of basic beliefs and values ​​based on one or more core assumptions. If a person, for example, shows a high tolerance for different cultures and advocating gender equality as one can expect that s/he also advocates human rights. Another person who advocates conformism and obedience can be expected to enjoy the traditions and security are important. Similarly, it is possible to identify 8 different value systems in a developmental order.

The different value systems describe how the value system developed in different cultures. A value system is a collection of opinions and attitudes on various issues that are related to each other. They describe what people consider to be healthy, rational and desirable in various situations. Value systems are not just collections of opinions, but also perspective on the world. One can say that it is not only a way of seeing the world, but also a way to not seeing the world. Further, the development of values and value systems is a very slow process and these perspectives have evolved throughout history. Thus, the current value landscape is considered to be a consequence of a developmental process of the culture.

A further assumption is that the value systems and their historical as well as individual developments, oscillates between two polarities, those of individualistic and collectivistic. It is, however, not a pendulum motion going back and forth without any progression, but rather a spiral movement, that for each turn also moves upwards – hence the name of the model. Each new level or stage builds on the previous one, but is also a reaction against it and tries to solve the problems that the previous fails to address or creates.

Life conditions

Graves had as a basic hypothesis that the value systems are fundamentally a consequence of how the individual (or culture) perceives the world around them. Thus, a value system can be seen as an agent’s response to its life conditions, which comprises:

• Locations and physical environments, for example in the inner city of Stockholm, in the suburbs, or in rural areas,

• Problems and challenges faced, such as working conditions or safety in the neighbourhood,

• Social circumstances as governed by social status, gender, education and family situation.

Thes life conditions should not be seen as objective truths, but rather, we experience them from different perspectives. We do not see the world as it is, but we see it largely as we want to see it and from the perspectives that are associated to our respective value systems. The notion of life conditions is therefore central to the model and one of the main points of the analysis is the following: if life conditions change, we can expect that the value systems landscape on a cultural aggregate level will change accordingly. This is in accordance with the adaptive aspect of the complex value systems.

Spiral Dynamics Integral

In collaboration with Wilber, Beck elaborated on the model, now referred to it as Spiral Dynamics Integral, and thus further relating the value systems to the development of a psychological as well as a structural level. For instance, by linking the different value systems with different forms of structural complexity in terms of governance, organisational logics and techno-economic development, as well as in terms of meaning-making or mindset, i.e. frames of reference and ways that individuals take perspective on the world. An example of the application of the structural plane is on the evolution of economic systems (Dawlabani). Other applications are as a framework for organisational development (Cacioppe and Edwards), in post-apartheid South Africa (Beck) and on the development and conflicts of the Middle East (Maalouf). The model has as an advantages in its popularity and applicability. It is also fairly easy to relate to the development of scientific paradigms and history of ideas, megatrends, and technological breakthroughs.

A main assumption of the model is that all cultures passes through the same developmental stages or levels. However, the model does not give any characteristics of individual cultures. Therefore, the uniqueness of, in this case, the Swedish culture will also be explored in this analysis. Therefore, some alternative models need to be shortly introduced and discussed.

Comparison with other value systems models

In the following section, some other value systems models will be discussed and compared with Spiral Dynamics. These are the GAL-TAN dimension from political science, Shalom Schwartz’ value system theory (also referred to as Common Cause), the World Values ​​Survey, as well as a value system test developed by the author and colleagues. Finally, the Spiral Dynamics model will be summarised along with a discussion of the more or less normative assumptions that the model is based on. Another aim of the analysis is to clarify the scientific support of the Spiral dynamics and thus, contribute to its further development.

The GAL-TAN dimension: In the analysis of the most recent Swedish parliamentary elections a new perspective was introduced to the public. Besides the classic right-left scale previously mentioned Oscarsson advocated a vertical scale, GAL-TAN, with the former indicating Green, Alternative, Libertarian and the latter Traditionalist, Authoritarian, Nationalistic. The parties that were successful in the election positioned themselves at different extremes of the dimension or scale, mainly the Feminist party and the Sweden democrats. The analysis gives that parties and persons with a general positive attitude towards immigration positive tend to have libertarian values ​​(GAL) and immigration critical parties correspond to authoritarian values (TAN).

A brief comparison with Spiral dynamics shows that GAL should correspond to the postmodern values, although the libertarian values also could be associated with the modern values. The latter seem to correspond quite clearly with traditional values. This would be a reasonable conclusion, but a future work is to show that this connection really has empirical support.

Shalom Schwartz value systems: Another commonly used model to describe value systems was developed by Shalom Schwartz and popularised in contexts around the environmental and transition town movement as Common Cause. Schwartz’ model is inductive, meaning that it is primarily based on empirical data. The values and value systems emerge as the respondents’ preferred values ​​are grouped into different clusters. The Spiral dynamics model, however, can be viewed more as a deductive model with levels formulated early on and subsequently empirical date are assimilated into the existing model. A drawback with inductive methods is that they don’t disclose any underlying mechanism or logic, they only describe the distribution at different times. However, both approaches should not be seen as mutually exclusive, rather they can complement each other, and can be shown to be consistent with each other. Correspondingly, Loevinger’s ego development theory and Kegan’s subject-object theory can be seen as mutually complementary to each other in a similar way as Schwartz’ and Spiral Dynamics. An analysis by Strack (2011) demonstrated that they are based on the same structure, and Schwartz himself suggested a continuing work where the value systems are arranged according to a development dimension.

World Values ​​Survey: The most influential measurement of cultural values is the World Values ​​Survey (WVS) led by Ingelhart. WVS has since the 80s studied the values ​​of socio-cultural, moral, religious, and political issues among a representative sample of the populations of many different cultures in five year intervals, resulting in different cultural value maps. These maps are usually used to illustrate how values ​​differ between different cultures. The data is openly available and can also be used to study how values ​​are distributed within cultures, and can also be analysed from a development perspective. Such an analysis was carried out by Sjölander, where the value systems of the dates 1996 and 2006 in both the USA and Sweden were compared, where USA during the period showed a regression towards traditional values on the expense of the postmodern ones (Sjölander & Stålne, 2012).

Value System test: Sjölanders analysis of data from WVS could reasonably accurately capture the traditional to postmodern values, where the modern where differentiated into two groups. However, the interview questions in WVS is not optimal to describe the development dimension. Therefore, Sjölander and colleagues have since been working on alternative formulations that can better differentiate between different developmental levels. A central aspect of this ongoing work, which is based on an inductive approach, is to find statistical measures to show that a certain value system should be seen as being more developed than another.

Summary of Spiral dynamics and some critical remarks

Spiral Dynamics can thus be seen as a deductive framework for how values ​​develop throughout history, as well as describing at least three of the most currently dominating value system and their corresponding perspectives. The model provides a rough and simplified view of the value system landscape of a typical industrialised Western country from a developmental perspective. These simplifying assumptions are beneficial to the models applicability and its popularity. A further assumption is that all cultures move through the same stages. Hence, there is a need to complement an analysis of a certain culture with a discussion of cultural uniqueness.

One obvious criticism that can be directed towards the model is its normative elements. A model or theory being normative means that it not only describes how the world or a part of it is constituted, but it also prescribes how it should work. Normativitity can be more or less explicit and can in this case imply that certain value systems are more desirable than others without demonstrating why. One way to avoid this normativity is thus to clarify the underlying argumentation or by referring to the empirical data. Another way is to be transparent with the assumptions and axioms on which the model is based. Here the model of hierarchical complexity can be seen as a good example.

In the comparison with, for instance, Schwartz’ model and WVS, Spiral dynamics describes value systems as being more or less developed. This was an assumption on which the model was constructed rather than an empirically based conclusion. It is not explicitly normative in that higher levels are better or more desirable. Nor is it deterministic, progress is not predestined to happen. Temporary setbacks, more permanent regressions or collapses are always possible. Thus, it can function as a taxonomy for cultural values. Graves’ own position on the normative question can be regard as weakly normative on the cultural level, which is explicit in the following quote:

“I am not saying in this conception of adult behavior that one style of being, one form of human existence is inevitably and in all circumstances superior to or better than another form of human existence, another style of being. What I am saying is that when one form of being is more congruent with the realities of existence, then it is the better form of living for those realities. And what I am saying is that when one form of existence ceases to be functional for the realities of existence then some other form, either higher or lower in the hierarchy, is the better form of living. I do suggest, however, and this I deeply believe is so, that for the overall welfare of total man’s existence in this world, over the long run of time, higher levels are better than lower levels and that the prime good of any society’s governing figures should be to promote human movement up the levels of human existence.”

Another normative element is the “momentous leap” between the postmodern and the integral values, which are a direct consequence of the description of the previous value systems not differing in complexity. They are just different perspectives with the same complexity of structure, a system of values ​​occurring as a consequence of the perceived life conditions. The integral values ​​of the model includes, integrates, all former value system. This big qualitative shift and leap have no support from the other theories from that AD field, with each stage or level being more complex in structure than the previous.

Further such an assumption is the advocacy that the spiral should be balanced and therefore “healthy”. This means that a culture needs a representation of all value systems ​​up to the highest existing level. From this assumption follows, firstly, that cultures cannot skip a step, but need to pass all levels. And further, that value systems that is further down the spiral will never disappear or should be fought per se. This idea can possibly find support in view of the value system landscape as a complex adaptive system. Values ​​and value systems do to allow themselves to be fully described or controlled.

In the discussion of these normative aspects it should be noted that one of the main points of the model is the part that is all but normative. The different value systems and their corresponding perspectives can also be seen as different kinds of rationalities. Rationality, or action-logic, mean frames of reference, an understanding of what are desirable behaviours, goals and values. Assuming that there would be a single set of correct, rational and good values, ​​where other values ​​are irrational and based on fear or malice, would have been normatively, if anything! Here lies a strength of the model, where it can complement the other models and contribute to interesting discussions.

In the following section, the Swedish culture and history to be discussed from a Spiral dynamics perspective, in which the different value systems will be introduced.

An Overview of the Swedish Value System Landscape with a Historic Context

Here follows an introducing description of the dominating value systems ​​or perspectives, and how they emerged in the Swedish culture, starting at the Viking Age and its dominating pre-traditional values. The value systems was colour coded by Beck for pedagogic reasons, which will be inserted here.

The pre-traditional (red) values emerged in the Viking Age in A.D. 800-1100 as a consequence of, among other things, a technological development in a marine revolution that opened the way to the oceans with the conquest of new lands and plundering of places which lacked proper defence and countermeasures for several hundred years. The Swedish voyages eastward were probably driven mainly by trade with Baltic and Russian coast, and further down the rivers toward the Orient and Constantinople (Istanbul). At the end of the Viking Age the Swedes consisted of a number of loosely connected and practically autonomous regions with their own provincial laws. They worshiped and sacrificed to the Norse pagan gods of Odin, Thor and Frey.

Vikings can be considered as a clan culture where blood ties and honor were very important for the identity. Retaliation and vendettas were common elements according to the Icelandic sagas. According to pagan religious beliefs, the bravest and best warriors were brought to Valhalla after their death to fight in glorious battles at the end of the world, in Ragnarök. This warrior mindset, lacking fear of death, was very effective in combat.

From a Spiral dynamics perspective, the prevailing cultural, political and structural organisation was well consistent with the pre-traditional value system. The Viking Age was put to an end on the battlefield, the rest of Europe got better at defending themselves. But also, Christianity was introduced by Danish king Harald Bluetooth (yes, same as in your phone) in the late 900s, who were baptised to become part of the Christian political sphere, which guaranteed him protection from other military powers within the Christian realm.

The pre-traditional values appear today to a very small extent and has a little influence on the debate, although some extremists on the nationalist and islamist sides, seem to gain momentum. They can be seen as a form of extremely individualistic self-assertion, where the outside world and social context are seen as fundamentally threatening. Purpose and meaning of life is given by acquiring power at the expense of others. The means to achieve this are threats, force and violence. This simple rationality or action logic is: the strongest will win! It is a mindset well suited in contexts of more or less organised crime.

The traditional (blue) values emerged in the shift from the Viking to the Middle Ages when the Swedish state emerged, roughly in the 1100s. This new Sweden was in essence a feudal society, with a strict hierarchy with the king at the top, with static roles and with a ruling elite that exerts top-down power. Although the feudalism was not that pronounced, since the farmers had political power to a large extent, compared with those on the continent. During this time the church grew up as an increasingly important player on the scene, although in comparison with other cultures it has always had a relatively weak position in the Swedish society.

Martin Luther’s Reformation movement in Germany spread to Sweden, meaning that the sermons were conducted in Swedish, the Bible was printed in Swedish, and literacy of the general population became a concern for the church. Sweden began to function better as a country and administration of a functioning judicial system, and the use of raw materials such as iron and copper with subsequent trade took off. Another important aspect of the functioning of the internal politics was the political development towards a photo democracy and parliamentarianism. The establishment of the Riksdag of the Estates, consisting of nobility, clergy, burghers and farmers, had a real impact in the 1600s. This ancient tradition is commonly cited as unique in international comparison. Here, the farmers had a real political influence. Historians and ethnologists usually point to this order to explain both our preference to negotiate and reach a consensus in various discussions, and also our trust in the state and that the societal system is ultimately beneficial to us. This tradition, according to many, is manifested in today’s political and organisational culture. We are described as a culture of cooperation and consensus, and according to WVS we rank highest in the world in terms of trust in social institutions, and among the lowest in corruption.

In terms of Spiral dynamics, in the Middle Ages, Sweden operated according to a traditional logic. It relied on a conformist and authoritarian logic of a hierarchical, feudal social structure, in which you are born into your place in the hierarchy. Agriculture accounted for the dominant share of production and employment. The traditional logic are associated with order, justice and stability.

Today the traditional value system and perspective is characterised by conformism, collectivism, and a traditional view of e.g. faith and knowledge, national identity and traditional gender roles. In the political landscape, the traditional values are associated with the former working-class movement, and can today be seen in the Sweden democrats. Institutions that operate on a traditional logic are those who are connected to the core task of the state of guaranteeing stability, such as the military and the police forces.

The modern (orange) values are associated with the transition into modernity and capitalism that emerged in Sweden around the 1750s. Philosophers, such as Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon, and scientists such as Isaac Newton, who formulated classical mechanics in the 1600s, paved the way for modern science. Along with the extraction of fossil fuels, the Enlightenment paved the way for the Industrial Revolution, and the French revolution with the development of democratic ideals of human equality and the right to vote, even though women’s suffrage would take another hundred years. Enlightenment ideals can be seen as the triumph of reason over the traditional collective authority, science liberation and victory over the church and religion, and the liberation of the individual from the law of Jante. From a financial market perspective, the man later came to be regarded as a rational being whose highest purpose is to maximize self-interest, homo oeconomicus.

The Enlightenment and modernity also meant a redefinition of the individual, on the cultural as well as on the psychological level. The modern Swedish society was constructed according to a principle that is referred to as “state individualism”, which is characterised by an accented individualism, mostly from family ties, sponsored and supported by a strong welfare state that guarantees economic security, e.g. if you lose your income or get divorced. Thus, the Swedish modern individualisation project can be said to be an emancipation from the family and the collective that would replaced by the state. Public schools were inserted in 1842, which contributed to Sweden in 1850 having the highest literacy and the highest number of university students per capita in Europe. This is a obvious example of how the state supports the citizens’ education and personal development, although the school also had as a mission to foster the pupils into good obedient citizens.

In the late 1800s industrialisation took off with large successful engineering companies, such as LM Ericsson, Asea, Alfa Laval, SKF, Electrolux and steel companies such as Sandvik and LKAB. With this followed a rapid urbanisation and a new working class quickly grew to 30 percent of the population. In 1880, 85 percent of the population were still farmers, which decreased to 50 percent at World War I. Sweden kept outside of the war but was still one of the poorest countries, and many chose to emigrate to America. This wave of emigration, which peaked in the second half of the 1800s, due to population growth combined with a crop failure while many positive reports in the form of letters and newspaper articles came from the United States.

Finally, it should be noted that the strong industrial development in Sweden during the mid 1900s, largely due to a strong Swedish tradition of engineering and the ability to collaborate within and between companies. But it also had a cause in Sweden keeping outside World War II and could thus produce and export while the rest of Europe were being rebuilt. This created a demand for labor, which was a strong incentive to the women for entering the labor market. Further, immigrants from southern Europeans could be put to work, primarily in the engineering industry. From being one of Europe’s poorest countries, from where people emigrated from, Sweden quickly became one of the world’s richest, where people immigrated from all over the world.

Today, the modern values ​​are most evident in the business sector where companies and individuals compete on a market logic. Economic liberalism and capitalism developed as a consequence of the deregulation of banks and trading on the free market, as opposed to a state-controlled planned economy. Continuous economic growth and a positive future outlook are at the core of the modern value system. Technological and scientific advances are key and defines a culture’s success from this perspective. The scientific ideals are seen in the positivism of natural sciences, with the scientific hypothetical-deductive method.

The postmodern (green) values ​​emerged roughly half a century ago with political movements such as post-colonialism, feminism, and the peace and environmental movements. One of the three big postmodern political movements that has had a strong impact in Sweden’s is the environmental movement with sustainability as central concern. This can be seen as a reaction to modernism’s belief in technological and scientific advances, the view of nature as inexhaustible resource, which were triggered by advances in systems theory applied in Limits to Growth simulations from 1972. Climate change and its consequences have subsequently emerged as an increasingly influential and defining issue for the civilisation. Since the early 70s environmentalism and sustainability perspectives went from being a marginal alternative movements to have a widespread acceptance in the population as a whole, but particularly in the media and the political establishment. Climate change and sustainability issues are obvious examples of how new values ​​are emerging as a consequence of changed living conditions.

In the transition to modernity, it was primarily man’s emancipation that were of central concern, but with time the awareness of women’s situation were increasing. Feminism is usually described in three waves: the first involved a quest for equal rights and suffrage in the early 1900s, the second in the postwar period that focused on the upgrading the status of the woman with gender equality and against discrimination, and a third wave that can be regarded as postmodern feminism, which instead focused on how gender is constructed by means of cultural beliefs that are inherited as we raise our children differently depending on the sex. The strong impact of the feminist movement in Sweden is reflected in Hofstede’s cultural studies, where we rank as the world’s most feminine culture.

If environmentalism and feminism can be seen as two major political postmodern movements, then post-colonialism and anti-racism is the third. In different value studies Sweden is described as one of the world’s most tolerant towards other cultural expressions and towards immigrants, due to several reasons. First, we have an own history of emigration, exemplified by travels to America in the 1800s. We also only need to go back a few generations to find starvation and poverty in our own country. We also have many positive experiences of immigrants having enriched the country, for example in the form of post-war labor immigration. In addition, it should be emphasised that tolerance towards other cultures tend to increase with the level of cultural development. Postmodern values ​​are often associated with tolerance and care for all people, regardless of ethnicity and sexual orientation. It is a lot harder to be homosexual, for example, in a culture dominated by traditional values.

On the political arena multiculturalism has been dominating, which means the view that foreign cultural expressions are seen as enriching and worth preserving instead of immigrants having to abandon their previous cultural expressions and identities, and assimilate into the Swedish culture. Immigration policy has long been Europe’s most generous relative to population size, but has strong support from politicians and the established media in which the postmodern values ​​has the strongest foothold. Politicians and the mainstream media have strived for being in the frontline of cultural development and advocating tolerance, feminism and anti-racism. There is a logic in that the state and the elite is more progressive in terms of development, which have been a recipe for success during the last 1000 years. But the debate about the refugee crisis has gradually become increasingly polarised, from the time the Sweden democrats entered parliament in 2010.

Now the stage is set for an analysis of the debate and response to the refugee crisis. But before that, another quite recent change in life conditions will be described.

Analysis of the Refugee Debate

The review of the Swedish historical development through the value systems showed some unique cultural features, such as the ideal of consensus and the high trust in the state. They have been the reasons to our cultural success and strengths when our sparsely populated country have competed on an international market and developed through value systems. But what were the strengths and success factors for Sweden has increasingly turned into weaknesses. This is seen in the postmodern values, which dominates among established politicians and the media, which is evident from e.g. surveys of political sympathies and values of journalists. All are expected to be feminists and anti-racists, if not they are anti-feminists and racists, which have created a polarisation of the debate. Thus, it has not been generally accepted to discuss limitations in volumes, economic aspects, security concerns, and national identity, in relation to refugee issues. Arguably, this has contributed to the growth of immigration critical Sweden democrats party. The opinion corridor can from the developmental perspective be understood as the combination of the ideal of consensus and high trust in the government and the establishment, and the postmodern values which are presented as democratic, just and tolerant. Many who have questioned or opposed these values ​​have been declared undemocratic, hateful, and intolerant.

Recent changes in life conditions

At the same time as the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi the Euromaidan revolution in Ukraine took place and shortly thereafter Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula. Separatists in Eastern Ukraine started an uprising and was supported by Russia, first in the form of military equipment, then with “volunteer” troops, while all official involvement was denied. This is a new type of warfare than previously conventional war, such as World War II. USA:s war against terrorism in the Middle East is often described as asymmetrical warfare, with a large military force against a technologically inferior force that responds with terrorist operations against civilians. Russian interference in Ukraine is usually referred to as hybrid warfare and includes irregular troops, disinformation, psyops, aggressive military exercises over (and under) the Baltic sea, cyber attacks and a generally threatening rhetoric, with the intent to destabilise the opponent without direct military measures. This development has triggered a broad discussion and concern around security issues, military spending and a possible joining in NATO. The increase concern over security issues can be seen as part of a rise of traditional logic and perspectives, and henceforth in traditional values.

In the summer of 2014, just before the national election, Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt held a famous speech where he urged the Swedes to “open their hearts” to the refugees. The Migration agency asked for increased funding and discussions on the economic perspectives in connection with the refugee crisis made it clear that the refugee crisis was not an economic opportunity to Sweden, but rather a cost. However, references to volumes or costs were still not considered as valid objections to the generous refugee reception. The reference to human rights and having a moral responsibility to help those who are fleeing across the Mediterranean trumped all other arguments. A very powerful, and for the debate defining, image became the drowned three-year-old Alan Kurdi, who was washed up on the Turkish shore in the summer 2015. The picture made the debate even more emotionally charged, and the polarisation between the postmodern and the other values ​​increased. These objections are described in the following section.

Critique towards the postmodern view on the refugee crisis

Firstly, there are objections from a traditional perspective that primarily emphasises law, order and security. This is in relation to the lack of integration and suburb areas populated with high fraction of immigrants that are seen as outside the society and where the police are unable to maintain order and security, a breeding ground for radicalisation and hundreds of people traveling from Sweden to Syria to fight with ISIS. In connection with those issues the work situation of the police force with heavy workload and many defections are discussed to a greater extent. A large part of the police’s resources have been allocated to handling the influx of refugees, a large share of which have disappeared and gone underground before being registered as asylum seekers.

Then, from a national perspective, the multicultural society are seen as a threat towards the Swedish culture, a line of reasoning of the Sweden democrats. The objections have not had any great impact among the mainstream media or the other parliamentary parties. In the debate on immigration a common perception has been that the traditional values ​​and perspective have been equivalent to the Sweden democrats. But rather, the Sweden Democrats have been allowed to usurp the traditional values, ​​where other parties have abandoned them and instead indulged in modern and postmodern values.

Objections from a modern perspective has mainly focused on the economic aspects. Famous professor of public health Hans Rosling argued that our prime measure should be to donate money to the UNHCR, to which Sweden has reduced considerably in aid to fund the substantial increase costs for the refugees managing to reach our border. Rosling argued how much more cost effective it is to help those in place than those who come here. Rosling then highlighted a conflict between refugee costs and the cost to help those who are unable to leave the refugee camps, for example, by not having the money to pay the smugglers.

Another criticism has come from Tino Sanandaji, a Swedish economist with Kurdish background. He has time and again exposed how the mainstream media uses the wrong numbers and giving overly optimistic numbers on costs, education levels and times to get immigrants into employment. We are the ranked as lowest in Europe to integrate immigrants into the labor market, mainly because the job marked consists of so few low-wage jobs. Sanandaji have argued that the welfare state cannot be sustained should the large influx of refugees continue.

Another argument has come from the professor of history, Lars Trädgårdh, who described the Swedish culture and development into modernity. Trädgårdh has described the debate about the refugee crisis as a conflict between two different perspectives, one based on human rights (postmodern) and one based on a social contract that can be likened to an insurance company (the modern). We work and pay taxes, and we expect to utilise the welfare when we get ill, have children or retire. If the social welfare erodes and with that the trust in the state to be able to keep its part of the contract, then our work and willingness to pay tax will be reduced and the system cannot be sustained. But Trädgårdh also linked the argument to a traditional logic of the social contract are also based on a common vision and sense of national belonging. These are lines of reasons that also have been shown in established media. Leading critics of the postmodern values ​​has also been the bourgeois editorials, and their perspectives on the issues of immigration and integration that have challenged the culture of consensus and opinion corridor. Four examples are Anna Dahlberg, Ivar Arpi, PM Nilsson and Alice Teodorescu. Still, the postmodern values were dominating among the politicians in the parties the Social democrates and the Environmental party, that were in office.

But the life conditions in the new security situation in the area around the Baltic Sea, the internal security and the maintenance of law and order, the Euro crisis and the EU’s major internal tensions, has made the traditional and national values ​​become increasingly prominent, in Sweden, as well as on the EU level. The factor that had the greatest impact over the past year is probably the rapidly increasing flux of refugees last autumn.

ID controls on the Öresund bridge

In April 2015, Prime Minister Löfvén answered a direct question regarding the volume of refugee flows, “No, there is no limit. We will keep receiving according to the conventions we are bound.” But in October, the government and parties from the political opposition (not including the Sweden democrats) made an agreement on how to handle and reduce the large refugee flow. There was a limit, and the volumes had reached unsustainable proportions. And here we are at the time described in the introduction. The previously unthinkable had suddenly become the new reality. And virtually all media that has campaigned towards tolerance and human rights, and upholding the opinion corridor, quickly adapted to this new order. In the blink of an eye, the cultural values had shifted like two tectonic plates releasing their mutual tension in a sudden earthquake.

This can be seen as an aspect of the value system landscape as a complex adaptive system. According to dialectical thinkers such as Basseches and Laske, a complex system can be described in terms of characteristics such as stability, change, internal relations and transformations. Stability aspect can manifest when trying to influence the system and it responds by resisting and pushing back. Correspondingly, any attempt to attack and defeat the traditional values ​​have only contributed to them fighting back and even growing stronger. The transformational aspect can be seen when the system departs from its original equilibrium and find a new one – or collapses. When it comes to ecosystems or the climate system, it is said that the climate is stable up to a certain point, referred to as a threshold or ‘tipping point’. In the values landscape, such a threshold were passed this autumn. However, the new equilibrium should prove to not be that stable.

In November ID controls were introduced at the Öresund Bridge, which had the immediate effect of a substantial reduction in refugee flow. The police could not maintain order and register those who came, costs soared, and the Migration agency could not manage to administer and arrange short term accommodation for all that arrived. The ID controls can be seen as a great defeat to the postmodern values ​​and perspectives. One can say that the postmodern values ​​and ideals not only came into conflict with the other value systems, but also with the reality and the practical aspects. Idealism was defeated by realism and reality constraints, at least for now. But new problems awaited.

The sexual abuses in Cologne

The introduction of ID controls created a change in the political reality, the media followed accordingly. But one event, or actually several, that would shake the media even harder were happening in Cologne on New Year’s eve, when over 600 women were subjected to sexual abuses. It would take a few days before it was reported in media, where most of the perpetrators were from North Africa, and many of them asylum seekers. When the media reported on the Cologne showed that similar events took place in Stockholm, albeit on a smaller scale in the We Are Stockholm Festival where foreign gangs molesting girls. This triggered an intense discussion on to what extent media had not reported on crimes, or new in general, that can have a negative effect on the opinion on immigrants. But why the events have come to the surface now? Of course it is complex, but a couple of reasons can be discussed.

First, the opinion corridor has shifted significantly during the autumn, which Hakelius described. It has become increasingly accepted to debate and criticise immigration policies and issues. Discussions about We Are Stockholm has very clearly illustrated the cost of not reporting on this type of events. Similar incidents had also occurred the year before, and not reporting on the problem has contributed to that it hasn’t been resolved. The Cologne and We are Stockholm-abuses illustrates when the two groups, women and immigrants, both of which are assumed to be subordinated and oppressed according to the logics of the two postmodern ideologies, feminism and anti-racism, come in conflict with each other. Thus, it can be said that two aspects of postmodern values come in conflict with each other. This way, the postmodern values have proved to be inadequate, at least to be able to claim to be “the only true and good values”.

A cultural identity crisis?

On a cultural level, we seem to have reached the point where the prevailing postmodern perspective and values ​​fails to properly address the very important, of not defining, situations described above. The refugee agreement and ID controls have shifted the opinion corridor and the postmodern values have ​​come into conflict with what was possible to implement in terms of the refugee crisis. And the abuses in Cologne and the We Are Stockholm-festival illustrated how the postmodern values ​​come in conflict with themselves and the established media’s postmodern bias in reporting. Thus, they have failed to offer a coherent story of the world and how to act in it. Thus, the postmodern values ​​can not be seen as the only real and desirable, but on the other hand, neither can they be seen as completely incorrect.

The events illustrate a significant shift in the valuation landscape and ultimately in our self-image. We have gone from seeing us as the humanitarian superpower, top ranked on gender equality, environmental issues, tolerance and refugees, to … well what are we really? What should be our new self-image? And which are the new stories we should gather around?

Discussion

Can this shift in the value landscape mark a shift from postmodern to the integral (yellow) value system, also denoted integral, flex-flow, meta-modern, teal, integrative and reconstructive postmodernism? This value system can be understood as a synthesis of all previous value systems and their corresponding perspectives. The term integral, coined by Jean Gebser, indicating that it will integrate and bring together the previous value systems in a synthesis instead of seeing them as different truths, of which only one can be right and the others are wrong. Rather, they are seen as important perspectives which all have different features and fulfil essential purposes. A central principle of the integral values ​​is the emphasis on the development dimension, where instead of economic development, the development of the psychological, cultural or social aspect is of central concern.

Often it is assumed that development takes place by one paradigm replacing the previous, with the agricultural society having been replaced by the industrial society, which then has turned into the information society. But this is not an accurate description, we still live in an agricultural society, even though agriculture represents only two percent of the population and two percent of GDP in Sweden. We also live still in an industrial society, rather than all working in the postmodern knowledge sector.

Similarly, from an integral perspective it can be said that a value systems of a culture does not replace the previous one, but rather, they build on each other. Although the different value systems criticise each other from their respective perspectives, and although they have largely arisen as a reaction towards the limitations of the previous value systems, from this perspective all value system needs to perform their functions. For instance, a functioning market economy requires stability in terms of law and order, for example so that property rights are respected and trade agreements are followed. High levels of corruption and crime makes it difficult to do business. They require both postmodern values ​​of the modern as they require previous technological and scientific progress.

Returning to the initial question of the discussion, it has been stated that the Spiral dynamics model could be seen as a taxonomy for socio-cultural development (or even biopsychosocial according to Graves), and not as being deterministic in any way. Thus, there is no guarantee that the identity crisis described in above will result in a progress toward more complex values. At the IEC in Budapest 2014, I presented a piece together with prof. Svein Horn from Norway, on integral perspectives on Peak oil and introduced a collapse perspective to the integral discourse. The main conclusion from our work was that it is difficult to differentiate signs of collapse with signs of transformation, since both entails some sort of breakdown in current structures, logic and identity. To grow and transform is to some extent to die. So, is this crisis a sign of collapse or transformation and progress?

My answer is, to some extent, probably both. We will see some parts collapsing and some other parts thriving. Typically, there are some groups that will benefit, learn and develop from this new situation and crisis, while others will suffer economically, socially and psychologically. As previously stated, some suburban areas already suffer from, for instance islamism and radicalisation, or extreme nationalism, while others may thrive. So the question should rather be, how can we contribute to a development where as many areas and sectors as possible can thrive and develop in a healthy direction, should integral values be that direction, or to a higher degree of cultural complexity according some other measure, rather than towards decline and decrease in complexity?

Tasks and competences for Spiral wizards

This is of course an extremely complex question, but I’d like to address a few aspects in terms of competences that are needed for change-makers or “Spiral wizards”, as well as for the culture as a whole. This is taken with the Swedish context in regard, but could to some extent possibly apply to other cultures in similar situations.

First, the debate around the immigration and refugee crisis has been very infected and the tone and debate climate have suffered severely. The debate has torn the country apart, and families and friends have separated due to this conflict. The crisis has, so far, cost us dearly, both in economic terms as well as in terms of cultural capital, trust and cohesion. There is tremendous amount to be learnt from this experience, for instance about who we are as a culture, where we came from and where we might be heading, and what defines a culture. But first there must be some healing of the wounds. Thus, the first concern should be to rebuild the public debate climate. Different public arenas must give room for a multitude of voices, not only those who have said the “right” things. When so, a lot of repressed anger is likely to emerge. In some discussions the pendulum have swung over to the other side. The environmental party, that previously have been almost immune from critique from mainstream media, now suffers enormous critique due to problems with members and officers with islamist contacts and agendas, and poor crisis management. Therefore, there is a great need for facilitators who can hold such arenas and allow for a certain amount of previously silenced critique, but also for new voices to emerge. This is truly shadow work on a cultural level that is required.

A more specific aspect or skill that is needed in the public debate is the ability to differentiate between healthy and unhealthy values. So far, the postmodern values have been declared to be the correct values and the traditional, and later the modern, as problematic per se. It needs to be acknowledged that there are healthy aspects of nationalistic values and perspectives, such as upholding the law and defending the country, as well as having a healthy and balanced cultural integrity and identity, what that might be. Further, there are of course healthy aspects of modern values, emphasising the importance of having a functioning welfare state in the future as well. And also being able to direct the economic help were it can be most useful, to most people. Also, unhealthy aspects of all value systems need to be addressed, even postmodern. The most obvious one being the conviction that the other ones are wrong.

It has been argued that the Swedish attitude towards immigrants and refugees has been characterised by having a big heart, but the mind also needs to be included. The refugee crisis is part of larger mega-trends where security issues, climate change, food security, financial crisis and the rise of right wing nationalists can be seen as being interlinked. Complex thinking is an essential skill in order to see the connections and see the world transforming, and to be able to have an own impact on it. Complex thinking is also needed in order to assess different arguments. An experience from the Swedish debate is that arguments based on the “right” values have been more influential than those from the “wrong” side. Now, let’s give the more complex arguments and thoughts more room, regardless of who’s side they’re on. Let’s direct our focus on those who see a more nuanced and complex problem instead of those who see in black and white, and simple solutions.

A cognitive competence besides complex thinking is perspective-taking and an ability to see the world through the eyes of different parties and stakeholders in this situation, from those with different values and perspectives, to those who are fleeing across the Mediterranean, and to those who cannot afford. Thus, we still need a big heart as well as a sharp mind, but also some guts. Guts as in the courage to stand up for what one believes to be the way forward, even though it might be inconvenient for some who still see the issue in black and white. So far, a high price have been payed by those who have stepped outside of the opinion corridor, but the price is getting lower as time passes, and as life conditions continue to work against the postmodern values.

The recent decade’s cultural development in Sweden has been characterised as a fragmentation in terms of media intake, use of social networks (or lack of), and of opinions, most notably in the issues around immigration. In a culture with a 1000-year history of emphasising consensus, we need to accept disagreement and even conflict as the new normal condition. Even though integral values emphasise that everyone’s perspective and opinion are needed, not everyone will agree to this. And some will use foul play and not hesitate to destroy the debate climate in order to win, this has been an experience from the increasingly polarised Swedish public debate. Thus, in some cases a conflict with the postmodern values needs to be taken by the integral perspectives and values.

Finally, suggestions on how to address the actual issue of the refugee crisis is beyond the scope of the current analysis. The only conclusion in this matter is that all perspectives need to be considered and that they all have important functions and parts of addressing the crisis and related complex issues.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

An Everyone Culture by Kegan and Laskow Lahey

Robert Kegan and Lisa Laskow Lahey just released the book An Everyone Culture – Becoming a Deliberatively Developmental Organization. Here are some quick thoughts on it along with some background.

In 1982 Kegan wrote The evolving self where he took departure from Jean Piaget’s stage theory and introduced his subject-object theory, SOT, on how we make meaning in increasingly complex ways (this article offers some background on Kegans work). According to the theory a measurement instrument, subject object interview, was created by Lisa Lahey, Kegan and colleagues. In 1994, Kegan released In Over Our Heads – the Mental Demands of Modern Life, where he elaborated and applied the SOT in different dimensions of our lives, such as parenting, partnering, school, work life etc. Here Kegan connects the different orders of consciousness or meaning-making with the demands that modern life exposes us to, and argues that a significant proportion of the population does not live up to this. These two books have since been very influential in the field of adult development, rightfully so.

In 2009 Kegan wrote Immunity to Change, ITC, together with Lisa Laskow Lahey, where they introduce the Immunity to change process. ITC builds on the insights from the SOT and the dynamics of stage transition where meaning-making can be seen as frames of reference based on certain assumptions that are invisible or taken for granted by the person. Moving from one order of consciousness to the next one means being able to see these assumptions and thus making them an object. So, you go from being the frames of reference and identifying with them as a subject, to having them as an object. The ITC process doesn’t necessarily induce transitions of orders of consciousness of the individual that performs it, but can help in getting rid of some blockings and unproductive assumptions on the way. The ITC process was also introduced in a MOOC and several instructors have been trained in facilitating it. Thus, Kegan can be said to have moved from being a researcher to dealing more with applying the insights with the process tool, foremost in organizational settings and to a mainstream audience.

In order to introduce the main scope of the book, imagine that you are interested in personal development and apply the ITC process on yourself. You succeed, make progress and then go back to your organization where you soon find yourself reverting back to your old habits. This can also be observed in therapy when you back in your social environment tend to go back to your old behavior. Therefore it can be a point in involving family and peers so they can accept and support the new version of you, so to speak, instead of resisting the change.

But what would it look like if an entire organization has a culture where it is not only accepted for you to grow and change, but even expected of you to develop as a person and expected of you to consciously take measures to make that happen, e.g. by using the ITC process? And not only in the work role but as a whole human being. An Everyone Culture introduces the notion of a deliberately developmental organization, a DDO, where the company culture is based on that exact assumption.

A central aspect that Kegan and Lahey is putting forth is vulnerability, and refer to Brené Brown’s work. In typical work settings we are doing two jobs, they argue, one of doing what we are supposed to do at work and then one of covering up our weaknesses. Vulnerability in this context means being open and transparent about your limitations, failures and weaknesses. If not, you won’t be able to learn from your mistakes. And not only do you want to learn from them, but also see them as a source of personal development. In relation to this, leadership has as a main function to ensure a holding environment so that people that expose their weak sides won’t get a lower salary or get backstabbed, the fear of which is probably the main reason for us not to be more vulnerable at work or in any context.

This focus on failures and mistakes may sound counter intuitive, we are often told that in groups we should primarily focus on and build on peoples’ strengths and positive aspects, while focusing on weaknesses can be a way of putting the employees in place and exert power over them. Kegan and Lahey argue, from the three companies they have studied, that no one there is safe from exposing their own failures and that anyone can provide negative feedback to anyone. Thus, the leaders need to go first and set examples with exposing their own “backhands”. This way, the company culture and view on personal development involves everyone in the organization, not only handpicked talents. I find this interesting and a useful discussion. Being able to be vulnerable and expose your limitations, I believe is a very important factor of becoming a learning organization. If everyone covers up their mistakes, no one will learn anything. And I think the organizational culture sets the bar for how much you dare to expose yourself.

But in DDO:s it’s not only being able to expose your weak sides, you are obliged to do something about them and develop. Therefore the third dimension of a DDO, where the two first are the individual aspect of developmental aspiration and the communal holding aspect, is developmental practices, i.e. a set of tools and methods that will help the employee, the group as well as the organization to develop.

In the end of the book, the authors give some further context and limitation on their scope by applying Ken Wilber’s quadrants of interior/exterior and individual/organizational. From this they argue that their main scope and interest have been on the interior quadrants of development psychology (interior and individual) and organizational culture (interior and organizational):

“We confess, as the authors of this book, that collectively our natural bent has been toward the [individual interior] and from there, to the [collective interior]. We have long been interested in the way the less visible issues [the interior aspects] have been omitted from the leadership agenda and from the responsibilities management must take up if organizational life is to become what companies and their members need it to be.” (p 244)

It’s great that they are explicit about this limitation, and given my introduction on Kegan’s work, this focus is understandable. However, and here follows my main criticism, when I started reading the book I expected to find some further connections to the structural dimension. For instance, I would want to know if there is any correspondence between a DDO and a Teal organization in Laloux’ terms. Or correspondence with organizational structures described by Sociocracy or Holacracy, or the structural aspect of Spiral dynamics. One common denominator is the notion of “evolutionary purpose” and “bringing the whole person to work” described by Laloux. But this connection is not discussed or referred to by Kegan and Lahey at all. It seems that they have focused only on applying their own research and not so much reviewed others. The research around ITC is recent, but the adult developmental aspect they refer to is 20 years old.

Regarding the structure of the three organizations that have been studied, I get the impression that they are based on an orange meritocratic and modern logic. Two questions that I would be interested in learning more about are:

What are the connections between teal/yellow organizations, the level or complexity of the organizational culture, and the meaning-making and complex abilities of the employees? This book can offer some pieces of this puzzle, but not an overview. This is a blind spot in Kegan and Lahey’s book, if the organization demands that I develop my whole being, then correspondingly, I would expect to be able to influence the organizations structural logic as well as purpose.

And regarding the organization’s purpose. Here the three organizations claim that they have the two main goals of profit and employee growth, and that they are not mutually exclusive, but rather reinforcing. Being a DDO and investing so much effort in the employees to grow is not a means to the end of making more money, but an end in itself, they argue. This sounds great, but I would be even more appealed to these organizations if they did something of relevance for the world or if CSR or sustainability were central concerns. These aspects are however absent from the discussion. The three organizations chosen could be in any industry, which is intended since it demonstrates a point that it’s possible for any company to be a DDO. Ok so, but Bridgewater – a hedge fund?!?

Concluding, nevertheless I find the book interesting and useful for me. As Kegan, my interest is shifting from the interior individual quadrant to the collective ones. Hopefully, the next book by him and his colleagues will make further progress into the structural quadrant, and relating with more recent developmental research within the organizational realm. I believe that’s where their growing edge lies.

Addendum 11/6: In relation to this book and my review, a further critical perspective can be added based on the ethics of promoting adult development exercises and development of the whole person. See this excellent article by my kolleague Sofia Kjellström from 2009, with special attention on Kegan’s and Lahey’s Immunity to change process, ITC:
http://integral-review.org/the-ethics-of-promoting-and-assigning-adult-developmental-exercises-a-critical-analysis-of-the-immunity-to-change-process/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Dialectical thinking at the 2016 ESRAD symposium

Next spring, in 23-25 May, we will arrange our fifth ESRAD symposium in den Haag in the Netherlands. For this symposium we have formulated four adult development research areas that are of particular interest, one being dialectical thinking. The other areas are wisdom, ego development and transformations in the adult life. To some degree these areas can be said to overlap, see the call for proposals for further details. We can gladly announce that prof. Michael Basseches has confirmed that he will give a keynote speech. Basseches is one of the pioneers of the research in dialectical thinking, DT, described in his book Dialectical thinking and adult development from 1984.

How do DT relate to other AD theories, e.g. stage theories such as the Model of Hierarchical Complexity and Robert Kegan’s subject object theory (both those theories contain references to DT)? As other AD theories, such as the previously mentioned, DT describes a type of post-formal thinking that transcends formal logical thinking as described by Piaget, although it can be traced back to the first process model of thesis-antithesis-synthesis according to Hegel.

A common distinction among stage theories is the one between cognition and meaning making. Cognition refers to cognitive capabilities or tools, such as the ability for complex reasoning and problem-solving demonstrated e.g. by the Model of Hierarchical Complexity, whereas meaning making in Kegan’s terms can be expressed as frames of references, subject-object balance or self-other coordination. Another proponent of DT, Otto Laske, refers to Kegan’s theory as one regarding socio-emotional development, which together with King and Kitchener’s reflective judgment model constitutes the person’s stance towards the world. Cognition, as in DT, is for Laske the person’s tools with which s/he uses to resolve problems such as social dilemma.

Both MHC and DT can be seen as measures of cognitive abilities or complex thinking, but how do they differ? MHC is a formal theory based on axioms that prescribe how higher order elements are created by means of a coordination of elements from a previously lower order. The orders of hierarchical complexity are ideal forms according to which behaviour can be evaluated and from which the person’s stage of hierarchical complexity can be assessed. The transition process of a person moving from one stage of hierarchical complexity to the next higher one can be seen as a dialectical one, which is described by e.g. Sara Ross. Typically, the person goes from arguing from a thesis at stage n, deconstructing the thesis, constructing an alternative antithesis, deconstructing that one too, on to relativism which is followed by process leading to a synthesis, which constitutes the thesis at the higher stage n+1.

From a MHC perspective, when DT is assimilated into MHC, DT is the nature of the thinking process and movement between the stable stages. Stage transitions can be characterised as the process of being able to coordinate seemingly opposite or paradoxical elements, a thesis and an antithesis, into a new and more complex synthesis. Thus, the dialectical process can be said to have as its goal more complex thinking. The transition process between the stages is considered to be a learning one and doesn’t necessarily reflect that the world would be dialectical in any sense. Rather, it is seen that we as thinkers perceive the world as being full of paradoxes, contradictions and processes as a consequence of us not being able to see it complexly enough. But when we reach the next stage the fog lifts, confusion resolves and we can see more clearly and complexly. Until the next paradox and contradiction arise, which will be resolved at the next stage, ad infinitum (?!)

In contrast, from a DT perspective the world is in itself considered to be full of movement, chaos and processes where things emerge from the void, flourish, transform and perish back from where it came. Including ourselves. DT marks a shift not only in perception and understanding of the world, but also entails a shift in attitude where one, in Basseches’ words, “trade off a degree of intellectual security for a freedom from intellectually imposing limitations on oneself or other people”. From a DT perspective, recognising paradoxes and contradictions are not signs of an incomplete synthesis, but rather normal conditions in a world that is fundamentally filled with paradoxes and contradictions. As Laske describes it in his recently released book Dialectical thinking for integral leaders – a primer:

“In other words, if you want to understand the “real” beehive, the beehive as it occurs in the real world, you’ll need to see it as a transformational entity that to describe you will need all four classes of thought forms provided by Table 1.1, certainly Ce [structure and stability of system], Pl [embeddedness in process], and Rl [patterns of interaction and influence], if not also Te [developmental movement]. If you are not prepared or able to use these, you can forget about understanding a beehive (or organizations in real world, for that matter).”

So what is DT, how does it work and what tools or models are there to help us see the transformative nature of the world? According to my understanding of dialectical thinking, which comes from Vurdelja, Laske and Basseches, as well as from Jordan and Andersson here in Sweden, dialectical thinking is not a coherent theory in the same sense as most AD theories or theories in general. Rather, it’s a collection of thought forms that can be used as mind openers, or as Laske puts it “somewhat mechanical logical tools for thinking beyond logic.” In integral terms, the concepts of “transcend and include” and “pre-trans fallacy” could be regarded as integral examples of thought forms as they describe evolutionary as well as epistemological patterns.

The thought forms are organised in three groups, process, context and relationship, according to Basseches. Laske adds a fourth group or quadrant, transformation, and places seven thought forms in each group. In a simplified version, presented in the recently released primer Dialectical thinking for integral leaders, Laske uses three thought forms per quadrant, i.e. twelve in total.

The aim of using the thought forms, separately or in a more developed way by combining different ones, is to be able to perceive and facilitate change and transformation in different domains. Basseches is more focused on the personal and relational domains whereas Laske and Vurdelja work mostly in business and organisational settings, although these domains should not be treated as separate:

“It will also have become clear to the reader of the Primer that what initially appears as a tool for boosting one’s own thinking is an even more powerful tool for transforming organizational, political, and educational cultures.”

An individual’s ability, or fluidity, in using and combining the thought forms can be assessed, which can give support for coaching and development. Besides fluidity, such an assessment gives a profile of the individual’s thinking style also in terms of predominately used quadrants. Perhaps this shift in attitude of DT makes this approach more suitable than the stage theories of the AD field for those who are more interested in activism and facilitation of change and transformational processes!?

For integrally interested readers, I think that a shift in focus from stage theories to DT can be compared to a similar shift in interest from Integral theory and AQAL to complex thought and Critical Realism according to Morin and Bhaskar, respectively. Obviously, stage theories such as MHC and DT should not be seen as contradictory, but rather as being complementary and even compatible to each other.

This is of course only some very brief introductory thoughts. To find out more, join us at the ESRAD symposium in den Haag next spring!

Some further reading for those interested in dialectical thinking:

Michael Basseches’ Dialectical thinking and adult development from 1984, his introductory article on DT in Integral review:

http://integral-review.org/documents/Development%20of%20Dialectical%20Thinking%201,%202005.pdf

Otto Laske’s Measuring Hidden Dynamics of Human Systems (2009) and Dialectical thinking for integral leaders: A Primer (2015)

Iva Vurdelja’s doctoral dissertation (2011), How Leaders Think: Measuring Cognitive Complexity in Leading Organizational Change: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/10?0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:antioch1309564744#abstract-files

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The disowned moon

Why do I have a moon? What happened?

I’m not certain, but I think I suffered a severe trauma as a very young planet. A trauma caused by an impact with another celestial object. I was one and I was whole. But in that impact I lost a part of myself. A part that became disowned from me. Slowly drifting further and further away.

With time, life on me grew more and more complex – I grew more and more complex. A chemical soup, an atmosphere, water, life, plants, animals, human civilizations. But the moon, my disowned shadow, stayed in the same condition. A saddening lifeless rock, frozen in its development.

Still, I feel you. You affect me physically when you pull my oceans towards you and away from you. We are entangled in a dance, bound by gravity. And your light affects life here. But why do you have one face always turned away from me? Are you hiding something from me on your backside?

I travelled out in space. And I decided to go to the moon. I don’t know why. Perhaps out of curiosity. Not because it was easy, but because it was hard. Still it seemed that the distance was feasible. I wouldn’t have gone that far away hadn’t you been there.

So finally, after 4.5 billion years of separation, I landed on you. A tiny part of me, one of my species, walked on you and reconnected with you. Touched you. And what did I find?

I discovered myself. Through the eyes of this species, for the first time I saw myself. I couldn’t see me from myself, but only from a distance. A pale blue dot in space.

Traumas are a natural part of development and life. We lose a part of ourselves. And sometimes, this shadow becomes the strongest force to our development.

Thank you moon. I can let you go now.

Earthrise

#selfie

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

To which question is Integral the answer? A report from the IEC.

Having arrived home from Budapest and the first Integral European Conference I thought I’d share a few reflections on my experiences. The emphasis here will be on the two sessions I participated and presented in and the keynote that I was mostly interested in.

The focus and emphasis of the conference, as I perceived it, was more on total experience rather than on theory and academia, as well as putting Wilber’s AQAL theory as central rather than following the development of the ITC and broadening to other similar meta-theories and theorists. My impression was that the aim was integration and unity in the community-building rather than differentiation and diversity of ideas.

I submitted two abstracts, one together with Svein Horn on integral perspectives on Peak oil and the other one was a proposal for a workshop on adult development. The first was accepted in the first round and the latter was accepted as an academic presentation instead, which I think was a good choice.

I arrived in Budapest and to the IEC with slightly mixed feelings. Perhaps it’s part of my cultural secular heritage to be skeptical or at least sensitive towards any forms of movements and community building, especially with an integrated spiritual dimension. Although I have previously seen myself more as being part of it. But the stronger the shared identity, the harder it is to scrutinize, criticize and to transform if necessary. The tighter you hold a community with a shared set of values, ever so evolved, the more it will exclude people and the more it will stagnate in the long run.

After some keynotes it was time for the first session. Each session contained several presenters that talked about roughly the same theme, and one of the presenters had also been chosen to facilitate the session as a whole. My first session was on adult development, one where I was both presenting and facilitating. Chairing or facilitating a session and at the same time presenting is not optimal and some other uncertainties around the content and forms of discussion added to the stress. Our session drew a large audience, the room was packed with about 50 persons, some sitting on the floor. I suspect that Susanne Cook-Greuter added some star quality and of course the topic of exploring the highest stages of development likely had some allure, despite our focus on a critical discussion and on problematizing.

My presentation had the theme of differentiation and stepping out of embeddedness, e.g. of an integral meaning-making, and on introducing MHC. The last half-hour we formed a big circle in the room and shared our thoughts on development vs crisis, development vs suffering, enlightenment vs psychosis and so forth. The topic was quite heavy and when we did a final round of formulating wisdom questions to bring with us, the last one: “How do we not forget to have fun in the process?” was relieving and could bring us back to a more playful mode.

The conference schedule contained several organized and facilitated group processes, but I preferred the evening activities that allowed for more spontaneous socializing, such as the boat party and the gulash party, where I made the following recording that I could use for next day’s presentation on energy as an illustration of how the first energy revolution, the domestication of fire, has shaped us:

The following morning Suanne Cook-Greuter gave her keynote speech titled “On being human” that addressed problems, concerns and beauty of a more universal human nature rather than specific for high stages or integral. Interestingly, she mentioned the new “Superhuman potential” marketing campaign as a good example of how one should not relate to or promote development. And among other things, I noted that she has good taste in art (using the same piece of art that use as a header image for this website).

To me Gauguin’s painting Where Do We Come From? Who Are We? Where Are We Going? represents humanity’s quest for meaning and is formulated as three questions. In relation to this Integral can be seen as an answer that addresses those very questions. Or in Wilber’s words:

“to explain why dirt would get right up and eventually start writing poetry.”

To which his answer became integral theory or AQAL. After the forming of Integral Institute, Integral became more of a movement and the answer AQAL started to look for new questions, such as what economy, education, politics, psychology, medicine should look like or how various theories should be organized, or even as a theory of everything and also as foundation of meaning-making.

When Svein and I worked on our paper we had as our primary aim to introduce Peak oil to an integral audience using integral perspectives. But when we took a broader energy perspective we concluded that AQAL was an insufficient answer even to the original question on dirt writing poetry. The sun gets far too little credit for this process! And we can also say that the future does not look quite as bright with this energy and collapse perspective introduced, to say the least.

The audience for my presentation and the ecology/sustainability session as a whole, was significantly smaller than the adult development session, but it rendered interesting discussions afterwards and also during the evening.

The following morning I was approached by “Jack Wolfskin” who had participated in the ecology/sustainability session and he thanked me for my presentation and for our work on the energy issues, which he thought was important. However, he said that it had been a bit hard for him to follow and get all the information. I agreed that I may have packed one or two diagrams too many in it and that the scope of the work ranging from history/anthropology, engineering to philosophical aspects of human development did not easily allow itself to be introduced in 20 minutes, although I personally felt quite pleased with my presentation and the feedback I got.

But no, although I had given a very enthusiastic impression, I hadn’t really connected with the audience to make sure that they followed and received my message. My eyes had been directed more above rather than having direct contact with the audience, he claimed. After a few moments reflection I agreed that there might have been some fear involved in presenting something that I thought would be controversial in this context.

- But now we connect, he said.

- Yes, we do.

Beyond what can be achieved by means of strategies and practices, a shared set of values or life purpose, and beyond politeness and psychological defenses, we were just two human beings meeting. We met in a long embrace and a space that allowed me to admit to myself that it had been quite a stress for me. Although I had many interesting, stimulating and enriching discussions and meetings during the conference, this was my most intimate one.

But what was there to fear? Perhaps fear of being rejected by a community!? But mostly I think I feared that someone would react the way I did when I first discovered these perspectives five years ago – my world fell apart.

It was a relief to find that there were several participants that welcomed these new perspectives. And it was also a pleasant surprise that we received official recognition by being awarded Best academic paper!

Svein and I are grateful for this recognition and I would like to personally thank the organizers for all their hard work in creating and hosting this conference!

Edit: One of the main organizers, Dennis Wittrock, wrote in his report from the IEC the following on our award:
Our Academic Advisory Board consisted of Prof. Marzanna Kielar and Dr. Aneta Gop from Warsaw, Poland. Of all of the academic papers we had received two stood out in particular. We awarded the authors Kristian Stålne (Sweden) and Svein Horn (Norway) for their paper “An Integral Perspective on Peak Oil and an Energy Perspective on Integral Theory” because of the quality of constructive criticism it brings to the field. The second academic paper award went to Simon Sirch from Germany for his paper “Extreme Sports: An Integral View and Quest for Applications” for his novel and thorough integral approach in the field of sports.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Peak Oil at IEC in Budapest

Next week the first Integral European Conference takes place in Budapest, where I will make two presentations: one about Adult development and one about Peak Oil: Here is the abstract. This post will focus on the second and introduce the crossing of an energy perspective with an Integral or AQAL perspective. I have been engaging in Integral theory for almost ten years (here is an introduction in Swedish), I was introduced to the issue of Peak Oil almost five years ago and now seems to be the time to aim for a synthesis between them.

I have written a few earlier blog posts on Peak Oil and its relation to Integral theory and worldviews: Here is an introduction to Peak oil, here I give some Adult development perspectives on Peak oil and here I reflect on the difficulties on integrating Peak oil (or Collapse) perspectives into Integral theory.

The conference paper and work is the fruit of a joint effort together with Svein Horn from Norway, who was first on the integral scene to give perspectives on Peak Oil in an own book chapter in 2009. Although we wish that we’d have a lot more time and energy (!) to put into the work, we think that can give a significant contribution to introducing energy perspectives in integral contexts and into integral theory.

The preliminary outline of the presentation, which will follow the outline of the paper, is as follows:

First Peak oil will be introduced. This is outlined in the recent blog post. This can be seen as the engineering and scientific part of the presentation. Next we move to the historical part where we review the human history from an energy perspective and its importance and necessity for human evolution. This is a perspective that up till now has been omitted in Integral theory and AQAL according to theorists, such as Ken Wilber and Sean Esbjörn-Hargens.

But why is it so? Why hasn’t the Peak oil issue gained more attention in integral contexts and by Integral theorists? First it can be said that they are not alone. The energy perspective is often overlooked by economists, historians and anthropologists (although they seldom claim to be integral and all-embracing), although the issue seems to gain in attention now that we are facing problems and disturbances in our energy supply.

Here we turn to the more philosophical or meta-theoretical part of our work. When we try to assimilate an energy perspective to the AQAL theory and the quadrants we face two problems. The first is that it simply doesn’t seem to fit into any quadrant. Intuitively, it would perhaps fit into the lower right structural quadrant, but that is not how Wilber describes tetra-evolution in this quote from Excerpt A:

“With regard to the LR social system and its techno-economic base, what generally happens is that a technological innovation begins in the mind of some creative individual (UL)–James Watt and the steam engine, for example. This novel idea is communicated to others through the inventor’s verbal and cognitive behavior (UR), until a small group of individuals eventually understands the idea (LL). If the idea is compelling enough, it is eventually translated into concrete forms (e.g. the building of actual steam engines), which now become part of the socio-economic base (LR).”

Thus, the lower right quadrant according to Wilber’s description of evolution and human development is the structural or techno-socio-economic aspect of that which is developing. Tetra-evolution in this sense is the interplay between the four quadrants’ development. And of course, we could see the different systems for extracting energy as significant for a certain stage of development. But not energy itself. Energy comes from the sun (except for nuclear and geothermal), we don’t produce it – we harvest it from our surrounding environment.

It is interesting that Wilber uses the industrial revolution as an example without addressing the influence of energy and that industrialization would not have taken place hadn’t we found coal and then oil and gas to burn in large scale. We conclude that the quadrants given by the AQAL theory do indeed include many useful perspectives, but also limit our view on evolution so that we can overlook important aspects such as our energy dependence.

When we discuss the consequences of peak oil with an integral lens, and an “energy addendum” so to speak, we come into the issue of possible decoupling. Decoupling between energy and the lower right quadrant and between the lower right and the other quadrants.

And we also go one step further and investigate the view on the future according to the integral and the energy perspective. What is the direction of the universe according to these two perspectives? And here we find some conflicting conclusions, to say the least.

But that can be left as a cliff-hanger and reason for joining our presentation, session and discussion. See you there!

Oil platform Holly

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

A short introduction to Peak Oil

We need to transition the community away from fossil fuels!

This is a message we hear often today, too often according to some. But still, it seems to progress slowly. Climate negotiations stalled in Copenhagen and since then not much has happened on the scene of world politics. People generally seem not interested enough to assert pressure on their leaders or for that matter themselves reduce their transportation and other energy consumption. And now we also have an economic crisis to take care of. We first need to get back on track with our economic growth before we can consider reducing carbon dioxide emissions, it is typically stated. And global warming is, after all, something that happens to someone else, somewhere else and some other time…

But if we again ask us why we should transition, there is another answer. Instead of focusing on the waste product of fossil fuels, the CO2 emissions that are causing global warming, there is a very good reason to look at the resource side, how much fossil fuels is left to extract and consume. And that is exactly what Professor Kjell Aleklett has done with his research team at the Division of Global Energy Systems at Uppsala University in Sweden, the last decade or so. In 2012 he released his book Peeking at Peak Oil that summarizes the results of their research and of his own experiences of the issue.

It is a somewhat different physics book to read, with historical views, anecdotes, own reflections, comments on and sometimes criticism of other experts and politicians, meetings with intelligence services(!) and some economics. But it is primarily a physics book, which is a very important point to make and the reason why you should listen more to Aleklett in the future. Energy and oil extraction, more often referred to as “production”, primarily regards physics and geology. But today it is mainly economists who “decides” the extent of future oil extraction and consumption. But no economic model contains any scenario where oil extraction will decline, after what is referred to as Peak Oil, the time of maximum global oil extraction.

But how can Aleklett and his colleagues be so certain that oil extraction will decrease in the future? The most straightforward way to estimate this is to study how much oil is found throughout history, where one finds that the largest discoveries were made in the 60′s and that it is increasingly difficult to find new sources of oil, despite investment and new technology. New oil reserves are usually found in places that are hard to access and that require hazardous deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico or the Arctic when the ice melted. The easily accessible oil, the so called low hanging fruit, have already to a large extent been extracted and consumed.

By making inventories of the size of the world’s oil reserves, calculate how fast these can be exploited, make realistic estimates of future discoveries and account for other unconventional fossil energy sources, such as Canadian tar sands or natural gas from fracking, and renewable energy sources, such as biofuels, Aleklett concludes that we have major problems and not much preparedness.

So when does Peak Oil occur? You can’t really tell what the maximum extraction is until you have past the peak, but it seems that we may already have done so. Since 2005, the global extraction of oil remained at a constant level. During this plateau phase, the domestic consumption of the exporting countries increased, which means that the nations that must import oil has had to make do with a steadily declining export market. In addition, the importers China, India and Southeast Asian countries increased their consumption, a trend that is expected to continue (see the diagram below where the global oil extraction optimistically is assumed to be constant).

What then can be expected in the wake of Peak Oil? One could as well ask what consequences it already has had. Oil accounts for over 90% of the fuel to the transport sector which will be affected in the first place, which is evident at the gas pump when you fill up your car and for the airlines companies that are struggling. But it also has a significant impact on the world economy. Oil demand during the 00s has steadily increased while the extraction has not been able to follow the increase as the leading economic analysts have predicted. If supply can’t follow the demand, the price will go up and on 11 July 2008, the oil price peaked at 147 US $/barrel, which most likely was the trigger for the global economic mayhem and crisis, starting with the US subprime crisis:

”In the United States before the financial crisis in 2008 it was noted that it was these poorer, fringe-dwelling households that were the first to be affected by high oil prices. The more than doubling of the oil price from 2005 to 2008 took a huge toll on the budgets of these households. One way for them to cope was to abandon their mortgage payments and give their house keys back to the banks. Thus, Peak Oil and the financial crisis were intimately linked.”

The relationship between oil consumption and economic growth is complex, but the two do correlate to each other. And that is of course not consistent with the constant economic growth that is a prerequisite for the current economic system to stay healthy. Some would argue that oil extraction can always be increased through economic instruments such as increased investment and technological innovation, should the economy so require. Aleklett, on the other hand, regards the economy as something that has to adapt to the physical reality. Economy does after all mean “householding”.

Peak Oil also has some major political implications. EU (as a whole), and the US leads the consumption league and both have major economic problems, which implies a global shift in power that now also starts to have social consequences. Also consider that the two, by far, largest oil exporters Saudi Arabia and Russia, one can understand why Western politicians prefer not to offend them unnecessarily, such as calling them dictators or the like. Not even Obama complained when Saudi Arabia went into neighboring Bahrain to crack down on democracy activists. And this spring we have seen Russia using the “gas-weapon” as a means of gaining political influence on its neighboring countries, such as Ukraine, as well as on the EU. So it really is an inconvenient truth that Aleklett delivers.

But is it really a truth? Because it is far from all who agree, for example most economists, analysts in the oil business and political advisers. But unlike others Aleklett’s group have produced a solid body of research in the form of a large number of peer-reviewed articles and doctoral dissertations. Neither are they funded by any oil company or allow themselves to be influenced by political interests. Above all, they base their estimates on calculations that they present openly instead of making guesses that the world’s energy policies until now have been based on. So if you disagree with the conclusions or if you believe that the alternative energy source X will solve everything and save the day, the obvious counter-question should be: “How many millions of barrels of oil per day do you anticipate that X can replace and how quickly can X be developed?” A useful overview of alternative energy sources is given in Richard Heinberg’s short booklet “Searching for a miracle”, that is available online.

After this very limited and at most incomplete summary, it can be concluded that we must adapt to a future with less energy and we must do it quickly. Not because we should, but because we have to. Our inability to transition primarily affects ourselves and in a very near future. It is difficult to say how soon, but a lot has happened to the economy in just the last five to six years after the beginning of the economic crisis. Here a 5 to 10 year horizon is typically discussed, rather than the 50 to 100-year perspective of the climate change issue.

A final reflection from Aleklett on the future:

“…but what the world needs most is a global leader who understands systems thinking.”

I would put it this way : The world needs many leaders who can step out of the conventional “business as usual” thinking, that are at least meta-systematic thinkers and that can take perspectives on physics, economics, politics, security, etc. and their interrelatedness.

Here follows some psychological perspectives on Peak oil, and in particular an adult developmental perspective.

Illustrations from the book are by Olle Qvennerstedt and one from Wulffmorgenthaler.com.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Human-nature relations in Czech Republic – Part 5

In this final part I would like to offer some conclusions, evaluations and perspectives on the course we gave. You can read about preparation of the course and how it was carried out more explicitly in the previous parts:

Part 1 – The preparation process
Part 2 – Introduction and energy
Part 3 – Food production, material flow and the big history of values
Part 4 – Solutions, principles of sustainability and who we are in relation to nature

Firstly, the core principle and aim of our teaching can be summarized in one sentence as follows:

Introducing knowledge, overview and perspectives on our global and grand challenges and balancing this with tools, insights and embodiment on what it means to grow as human beings and to engage with these challenges we face.

The ambitions of the course have certainly been greater than what has been possible to achieve in 48 hours. The ambitions have been about bridging gaps:

  • bridging the personal/local scale and the global,
  • bridging the concrete issues and the complex perspectives,
  • bridging abilities and tools with challenges and their solutions (or way of dealing with them),
  • bridging seriousness of the future outlooks, the playfulness of the present and fascination of past achievements,
  • bridging integral and sustainability

The last point has been one of my strongest motivations. I am quite familiar with integral theory, especially with the vertical or developmental perspective that you find in the adult development field that I perform and publish own research in. But my engagement in issues of sustainability, e.g. energy perspectives such as Peak oil, has only been for the recent four years. I still feel like a beginner in this field (and I really am!) and despite all complexity scaffolds, such as MHC and AQAL, and abilities for perspective-taking the learning process has been very hard for many reasons.

One is that a broad view on sustainability has not been easily assimilated into any integral framework, at least according to my understanding (although it has been pointed out that there are not one integral theory but several, e.g. Morin and Bhaskar). Even if you have the ability to take several perspectives and is a complex (e.g. metasystematic) thinker, you still need to dig into the concrete issues with all their details. My sidekick Stina, with her several decades of experience of environmental and sustainability issues, made sure that I was aware of this. It takes decades to build up true expertise and abilities in these types of issues, even if you are a complex thinker in other domains.

One example to my difficulties to assimilate sustainability issues into to the integral framework is the following: When you learn about sustainability you sooner or later realize that we are not sustainable. It is not only one perspective or way of looking and engaging in the world that is unsustainable, it is our entire modern civilization and our societies. Evolving to the next stage in complexity or meaning-making, whatever that might be, does not necessarily solve any issue.

Engaging in issues. Photograph: Stina Deurell

The most central or core question that integral aims to answer is typically “How do we grow/develop/evolve?” and a core question in sustainability is “How can we keep on doing whatever we do sustainably?” From this very simplified (and anthropocentric) way of looking at it one can realize that if we’re not developing sustainably, we can’t develop more than temporarily. Therefore, I find it easier to see integral as something that should be assimilated into sustainability, or at least in this context.

Despite my difficulties I certainly believe that integral models and theories can offer important tools, insights and perspectives that we absolutely should make use of. And those I have tried to introduce and employ in my course. A common question in integral settings is how to introduce abstract and challenging models such as the quadrants and levels such as those given by Spiral dynamics. Here I’d like to propose some lessons and guidelines I have discovered during the process:

  • Most importantly, the main focus of the integral models and the way they were introduced, were as tools for solving or addressing problems. The models themselves were not the goal of the teaching or holy in anyway – they are means to achieving something that is more important – addressing the problems of sustainability we work with.
  • Therefore, I try to introduce them at the right time, when they can be successfully applied and even better as support and confirmation when students are “already there” or to illustrate what they may be missing.
  • The integral models are typically complex meta-models, so they need to be built up piece by piece. The more the students are involved in this process the better and the easier for them to make it their own. This was the strategy behind creating the Big history timeline.

When it comes to important and useful principles I think that Wilber’s concept of transcend-and-include is central, and in our course we gave more emphasis to the latter. We have transcended nature and now we need to re-integrate and include it as well. We need to move from the anthropocentric view of integral to the view that emphasizes that we are still nature. Although integral typically give more emphasis to the transcendence it still contains the inclusion. And this shift, we could also see it as the shift from Eros to Agape, is something that perhaps is a trend in the integral discourse nowadays.

For me personally, the demanding process that led to the course and carrying it out felt like a journey with a happy ending. On a whole I’m very pleased with how it turned out and I think that we have a concept that works as it is or can and should be further developed. But on the other hand, when it comes to sustainability, so much is going in the completely wrong direction.

Course evaluation
Here are some voices from the course evaluation we did, where we asked what they thought was good, what was missing or needed improvement and what they take with them.

“I can’t really say that I missed something during this workshop – lectors were really nice, the topic was interesting and the way of learning new information was really well-made and well-prepared.”

“Also it is a pity that so few students attended this workshop because we need more you people to know about is! THANK YOU REALLY MUCH!!!”

“…sharing ideas, inspiration, discussion, global view, connection atmosphere, space for everyone to discuss…”

“I found very interesting and inspiring the cross [the quadrants]”

“I was surprised how enjoyable this course was. I understood almost everything, I gained lot of new info and it raised lot of questions as well.”

“I don’t have any suggestions for improvement. We had enough space for discussions and own opinions which I normally miss in those courses. It was dynamic and interesting.

The most important things I take with me

Using of energy (I didn’t know we use so much oil)

What is Earth Stewardship and Anthropocentrism -> how they relate

And with other topics about which we spoke I already heard before but I got some new ideas.

=>  VERY INTERESTING, AMUSING, USEFUL”

“The things that could be improved was to have more time to dig into the issues.”

On the question if the students would recommend the course or the teacher(s) to other students all students answered “definitely yes” on a scale ranging from Not at all, rather not, partly yes and definitely yes. This was also the case for questions regarding if the teachers could transmit the essence of the subject to the students, if the teacher used the latest research and knowledge within the field, if the students were treated with respect. The only negative opinions that were expressed was that some wanted to have more time to engage in the problems that we had introduced.

The overall rating of the course from a scale ranging from 1 to 10 (1 – a waste of time; 10 – a life changing experience) two students gave the highest score 10 and the mean value was 8.75.

As a final comment I just want to say that Stina and I had a wonderful time with the students who really contributed and engaged with us, and with the environment and culture in lovely Olomouc. We certainly hope to return some day and meet again!

Exploring Olomouc. Photograph: Stina Deurell

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Human-nature relations in Czech Republic – Part 4

Day 3

Session 7-8 – Own work and presentations. The last day started a bit slow, the students weren’t really sure on what we expected of them. The task was formulated as follows:

“In a short oral presentation of max 5 min, take one problem or big issue of importance and formulate some own principles for sustainability.

Try to formulate principle/s that can address what you can do on a personal/individual level and on a societal level.

What need to be changed in order to address the problem?

We will offer feedback and support and evaluate!”

We had to discuss further what we meant by a principle, but it got clearer during the discussion at the presentations. Typically, what was presented were either stated in negative terms as being against something: “we need to stop…”, “we have to decrease…”, or as solutions to various problems: “if we build…” or “we can invent…” In all cases we pushed them to formulate sustainability principles, not as specific so that they can’t be generalized and not as general so that they became too vague. For example, hyperloops is a proposed solution to transportation problem but the sustainability principle is that transportation systems needs to run on renewable energy, in this case solar panels. The system itself also needs to be sustainably produced, i.e. with circular material flows.

At the presentation we also found the opportunity to introduce another useful tool in the four perspectives or quadrants of the AQAL model. One student had in her presentation already touched upon all perspectives and from that we could introduce the quadrants so they could become a support and confirmation of what she already had found out by herself. If we want to transform a culture it is often necessary to address all quadrants. Therefore, one possible trap with proposed technological solutions is that relying on them doesn’t address what can and should be done on a personal level, e.g. decrease own energy consumption.

At lunch time Stina and I joined with three of the students that showed us a small guerrilla gardening project in the very center of Olomouc! After eating we talked about the results and how to make the final discussion and closing of the course. From a biospheric perspective Stina pointed out that most of the issues, discussions and principles had taken place from an anthropocentric perspective and that this needed to be addressed.

Guerrilla gardening in Olomouc. Photograph: Stina Deurell

Session 9 – Conclusions and closing. The final session started with me writing the course title (accidentally in wrong order):

Earth stewardship or anthropocentrism:

Human-nature relations

First I asked the students what anthropocentrism means?

– Well, when we place ourselves at the center of the world, as the most important thing.

Ok. And about human-nature relation? Why should we care about nature?

- Because if we don’t, we won’t survive! We need to take care of the nature since we are dependent on it!

This is of course correct, some technological solutions that we hear of today, such as artificial and 3D-printed meat or colonization of other planets, can be seen as ways of denying how totally dependent we are on nature to produce its ecosystem services, its half-meter thick layer of fertile soil, the pollinating bees and so forth. We should really acknowledge this fact.

But when we think of it again, isn’t this a purely anthropocentric view? Doesn’t this imply that nature is there for us, for our purpose? What if nature has a value of and in itself and should be respected as such?! In this case we can really have a relation with nature, a respectful one. We don’t talk about animal rights because they will be of better use to us if we treat them better. We do it because we respect them. However, the biologist had a further objection:

- But isn’t this division between human and nature false? We are nature too!

Indeed! From this conclusion we went back to the timeline and traced another theme in our history from stardust to life, to plant, to animal, to conscious human being with a technological, psychological and cultural evolution. The further we have traveled on our journey, the wider the gap seems to have been from us being part of nature to something that is separate. On one hand we seem to again and again have transcended our boundaries and limitations, but we also seem to have lost ourselves and were we came from in the process. In a psychological sense we have transcended nature but not included it.

The way forward that Stina and I argued for, and tried to embody throughout the course, was to emphasize both aspects of the development, the awesomeness of the process that led us here and beyond and the abilities and tools we have cultivated that can aid us, as well as the essentiality to reconnect to our past and the nature in us.

Finally when asked about the meaning of the word “stewardship”, I think that the proposed answer “to serve” best captured the way forward and concluded the course. Nature is not here for us or belong to us, rather, from this perspective we are here to serve nature and take care of that which we at the same time are. Yet one further shift, an even less anthropocentric, is to see nature as taking care of and embracing us, something that Stina explores in her project Wider Embraces (see in below).

A theme from our part was how to balance these perspectives or paradoxes. We needed to get the students understand the urgency and seriousness of the problems we’re facing, but yet give them tools, capacities and empowerment so that they can be effective change agents in an uncertain future.

Stina is enjoying a delicious cheescake after the course was done, and we were pretty done too! Photograph: Kristian Stålne (with Stina’s camera)

We took farewell and parted after a course evaluation and some final reflections. After this last session we went to a café and Stina could have a raspberry cheesecake that was as well-deserved as it was delicious! In the final part I will offer some evaluations and reflections on the process as well as on the outcome of the course.

References and further reading

Can we rely on technological development? TED-talk on the subject matter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZB50BfYlsDc&feature=share

Introduction to the quadrants (and the rest of the AQAL-model): http://integrallife.com/node/37539

Charles Eisenstein reasons about how we have differentiated from nature and as Stina and I argues that we should aim for and reintegration or inclusion of nature. This book is also a lot about economy: http://sacred-economics.com/

Stina Deurell has a project called Wider Embraces that emphasizes the shift from us being there and taking care of nature to us being embraced by nature and the biosphere: http://widerembraces.com/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Human-nature relations in Czech Republic – Part 3

Day 2
Session 3 – Further issues. We started by having a short discussion on the questions we left them with. Most recognize the energy they use in heating, lighting and transportation, but we also came to the conclusion that pretty much all stuff we use need energy to function.

After this we discussed the questions and controversies of climate change, what projections there are of the future and who should cut their emissions first. When we asked them for their view, some doubts and uncertainties were raised on whether human activities really are the cause on the global warming and how certain the future projections are and how reliable the IPCC is. How can I know for sure?

This is a delicate problem in the teaching situation. On one hand it’s tempting to use the authority as a teacher and say “Yes, we are beyond reasonable doubt causing the global warming and we are on a dangerous path. Period!” But on the other hand, I want to encourage them to find out and think for themselves and not to blindly trust authorities just because they are authorities. Obviously, this strategy doesn’t work for convincing everyone in society. And if we are to educate the future change agents of this planet they need to be able to make their own judgments, at least when it’s possible to do so.

I acknowledged their uncertainty by referring to my own understanding of the topic and my own previous doubts when I tried to build my own view and opinion in the matter. We continued to discuss handling uncertainty in information as well as in future projections and value of questioning, but also we emphasized that referring to uncertainty can also be a way of escaping from our own responsibility of doing something about it. I also mentioned that there is a general consensus among the world leaders as well as active climate scientists (see Oreskes in below) that we are the main cause of the global warming and that it’s a real threat. In a discussion on how to find reliable sources of information I listed IPCC and other UN organs as sources I personally considered trustworthy.

Another conclusion from this discussion is how much easier it is to have the energy and Peak oil perspective as a starter instead of the Climate change. Not to say that we should only focus on one and forget the other, even with the remaining fossil fuels we can still heat up this planet a lot beyond the politically agreed target of 2 degrees.

­We then separated into two groups where we analyzed and discussed the two big cluster topics of food production and material flow (stuff we buy and use) respectively. Stina and I participated in and supported one discussion each, she did the food production and I did the material. When the students divided the gender pattern became very clear to everyone’s amusement, and we teachers followed it as well! So for a short moment we could raise a gender perspective, which is really a national sport here in Sweden.

Here it was obvious that we could never go into detail and depth but to keep on a very general and principal level with questions such as: How much food and stuff do we really need in contrast to what we want? Can we produce food sustainably for 9-10 billion people? What are the difference between organic (ecologic) farming and conventional? How do we distribute fairly and stop wasting food? Are there sustainable principles for material flow (see e.g. Cradle 2 Cradle)? Are we running out of anything? What are the interconnections between food, energy and material?

Although we allowed this discussion to expand into the next session we would really like to continue for several more days, as some of the wrote in the course evaluation:

“…more time! For every topic, for whole course, so we could go deeper…”

“…but I still think that such a complicated issue requires more time.”

This was, however, expected and the main purpose of the course was not to solve any problems or view them into detail but rather to get an overview of what problems existed, the status of them and how they relate to each other so they can dig into them deeper on later occasions or on their own:

“What I’m taking with me? A huge packet of topics to think about, new ideas, a lot of information and great references to find out more.”

Session 4 – Economy. The second half of this section we spent on economy, about how different actor’s own economic interests often is an obstacle in sustainable initiatives since the fossil fuels are just free energy sources laying beneath our feet waiting for anyone to extract and how their real costs are being externalized to other countries and generations, how the current economic system that is based on the assumption of infinite growth, the intimate relation to the energy consumption and how it recent decade has been more or less driven solely by debt. This discussion was perhaps not as much of a pressing matter to the students as the Czech Republic has comparably solid and sound economy and is not part of the Euro project. The discussion on economy could perhaps be placed adjacent with the energy session due to the intimate relation between them, but it can also be used as a natural transition to the human side.

Session 5 – Making history. After lunch we made history – Big history! The students received the lunch assignment of each making a top-5 list of important moments in history (of universe, not just human history). We wrote them on Post-it notes with titles and approximate year and placed them chronologically to create a timeline on the wall. Approaching present time I couldn’t fit all the notes before the end of the wall space so I bent the timeline to create an unintended but nevertheless symbolic hockey-stick shaped curve:

Issues at the middle and the Big history timeline at the bottom and continuing up at the right end. Photograph: Stina Deurell

Through this shared process we could follow the trajectory from Big bang to present time with all thresholds and major historic shifts. For each shift we discussed what where the main drivers, the consequences, and the traces from it we can see today. Some themes were followed, such as increase in complexity of life, how energy were being used by humans, major technological revolutions, behavior patterns and increase in complexity of consciousness in what perspectives we took on ourselves and nature and how that shifted throughout history.

The most amusing detail and culture-clash in the process was when we discussed how the technological enterprises of space-travel shifted our view on ourselves when the astronauts turned their camera towards the earth. One student wrote “Gagarin 1978” which was totally unexpected to us Swedes that were thinking about the American Apollo project.

Session 6 – Spiral dynamics. From this exploration it was a short step to turn to an introduction of seven stages of Spiral dynamics which is a model that describes how values and worldviews has evolved in cultures throughout history. It is also a useful model to describe values of today and had a discussion on how to communicate and frame messages towards different vMemes or values.

Before we ended this intense day we gave them the assignment of deciding on an own issue to investigate further the next day and give a 5-min presentation of.

Relaxing after day 2. Photograph: Stina Deurell

Some references and further reading

Naomi Oreskes is often cited about consensus on climate change among climate researchers: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full

Cradle 2 cradle design principle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle-to-cradle_design and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jORau0V62c

Story of stuff gives a simple and useful overview on material flow: http://storyofstuff.org/

The population will probably stabilize at 9-10 according to projection, given a business as usual scenario. See e.g. Hans Rosling: http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html

The relation between energy and economy is explained by Chris Martenson’s Crash course. Here is a shorter version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WBiTnBwSWc

There is something called Ecological Economics. Introduction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZkTlVPgqG4&feature=youtu.be

Big history is a topic that grows in popularity. Here is a MOOC (Massive open online course): https://course.bighistoryproject.com/bhplive?WT.mc_id=08_15_2013_BHPlaunch_fb&WT.tsrc=Facebook

Spiral dynamics is introduced e.g. here: http://www.onefuture.com/commentary/printable/introduction-to-the-stages-of-consciousness/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment