Caring/Compassion/Sensitivity/Tact vs Lying/Faking

[Oceania]

goatee.

[zenmaster]

Prerequisites exist to provide free-will choices. Progression is part of the learning process.

And yet, one need not know algebra to perform calculus. The idea of a linear progression through school appears to be attached to the Blue Meme.

It's more due to convenience. I definitely had to know algebra before calculus. Keep in mind that Spiral Dynamics is addressing core values - what is drawn upon for evaluation, how intuition is used, the filters, etc. There are many lines of development that are more specific. For example, in relation to cognition. Here's a good summary: http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/p...odel1.cfm/ .. As far as SD goes, no stages can really be "skipped", but that does not imply linear development.

People are "at" different stages of development based on learning needs.

And the primary role of an educator should be to identify the appropriate stage of development in the student, and teach from there, rather than to attempt to cram the whole class into their limited view (or worse teaching to some state-mandated "standard") or to squash creative thinking because it is nonconformist and/or makes the other students uncomfortable.

Your point is taken, but by learning needs I was not implying formal education. The educational system can be improved in many ways, of course.

Individuals who are themselves stuck at the blue/orange level should not be educators. Certainly not to anybody who is working with higher memes.

It depends on the subject matter. There are many practical skills, for example, which do not require anything more than blue/orange valuing. Also, keep in mind that these levels tend to be centers of gravity when averaged over different circumstances - some may draw from higher values, some from lower - just as Ra says when particular catalyst happens people regress from an average "yellow ray" to "orange ray". There are both healthy and pathological ways of being at each level. Possible "greed" and reductionism at Orange, when in search of self-fullfilment but also the start of egalitarianism.

In the SD system, dogma is learnt as part of 'blue' conformist ideologies - it usually has its support in religion with promise of transcendence and reward to the faithful.

Does the SD system allow for the presence of souls who have never passed through the subsistence value memes? Does it allow for a child's awareness to be at the Turquoise level, or does it insist that is not possible for a child?

SD may have drawn from developmental models, but I think its purpose is more to point out the needs of individuals at each level of development, as opposed to saying "this is how development will occur". Those needs must be addressed in order for progress to be made. The needs can be seen as "questions" they are asking themselves.

There either is no original thought, or all thought is original. Truly. There are naturally just as many approaches with products are 'pearls' as there are anti-system approaches with products of projection.

Ehhh. I do see what you are saying, to a point. What I mean here by "original thought" is original for earth humans. A unique perspective. I am attempting to draw a distinction between true and false creativity, and somewhat griping about all the "systems" out there being pushed that in some way represent a return to the past, or doing what was done before (and failed).

Example: A presidential candidate whose basic "plan" is to "do what Reagan did". Um.. that is not a "plan" that is mimicry.

The needed system is one which addresses everyone core needs, on up the spiral. That's what they are calling an "integral approach". This involves promoting healthy expressions of those values so that learning can take place in a more cooperative manner. No vMeme, be it higher or lower should be allowed to stifle this healthy progress through their pathological misunderstandings. Unfortunately, this requires a "2nd-tier" understanding for such leadership, which "Green" rejects as impossible (their can be no heirarchies). We should be attempting to optimize the social system by providing more freedom in general.

That's called 'identification' in the West and 'attachment' in the East, which is the basis for survival-oriented consciousness. It is important in its own scope, and, as you are learning, no so important in another scope.

Yes. The scope in which it is not so important is in the realm of spirituality and personal development. 15 years ago, there was an explosion of writers in these fields. Instead of comparing notes and finding out what was in common, each chose to go the "copyright" path, do the "lecture tours" and "workshops" and so on. Branding. So it is more than a little ironic to me that all these so-called gurus and experts can't see past their own attachments to the systems that they "created".

It is essential for spirituality and personal development to at some point have the honesty required to see what needs to be abandoned (as Ra said).

Perhaps, perhaps not. On an individual basis, people can recognize credibility through commonality of experience. The more well-trodden paths can be a shared foundation for exploring something more novel.

And what happens when one has no direct experience (from within this lifetime) to draw from? They have no credibility. Especially a child couldn't possibly have credibility because they "haven't lived long enough to know anything". And so on. The problem in this case seems to be the notion of "Tabula Rasa" that is one of those theories that is presented as a fact.

Catalyst is going to steer a person in some direction of learning.

The marking of the stones is something an individual learns for themself. It's obviously counter productive to annotate relatives vs absolutes with regard to declarations, and the more discerning reader can always do this for themself - which is infinitely more desirable.

What would be infinitely more desirable is for authors to provide a Quo-like disclaimer on their works, and to include at least one chapter at the end outlining the shortcomings of their system and suggesting ways that it can be improved. THEN, if and when somebody else comes along and improves the system, this would actually be welcomed and accepted, and no copyright infringement battles would ensue.

The way copyrights must be used for protection is unfortunate, but not sure how there could be a better way when people are not yet on the same page.

By the way, a fully functional approach to this issue is represented among the open-source and hacker community, whereupon information is freely shared with the specific intent that others add to, and improve upon, the existing knowledge base.

I understand the situation very well.

If it's true disguise, that's what Ra referred to as a negative polarizing attitude. Because in order to disguise, there has to be acknowledgement. In order to not apply honesty to that acknowledgement, there has to be repression. There is great potential being done through such clever working.

Perhaps disguise wasn't the ideal word choice. The point is that all spiritual seekers, including myself, should be reaching for what is next. Not pulling people back into the past.

I don't think people to reach or to look very far at all, either into the past or the future. Those things do not exist.

I will say it again differently. For a person who goes through life getting offended at the drop of a hat, flipping out because somebody said retard instead of mentally challenged, and/or losing their cool because somebody told them they are "wrong", it should be obvious that THEY are the ones who need to grow into a new understanding.

Depending on the level of discomfort one is willing to tolerate with themselves, it will become obvious.

Actually the green vmemers are the very ones pointing it out with such fervor. They see healthy vs pathological behavior with respect to green (where they are still learning the scope and propriety of egalitarianism). Unfortunately their ideology is strongly colored with a rather 'absolute', universal, idea of valueless relativism/pluralism, so this is what they unconsciously reference with no solutions (which would require valuing).

I see. Then who are the ones that flatly deny that such people exist? Who believe that "everybody is just doing their best" and "nobody would ever commit such heinous acts against humanity"?

I don't think it's really an important question.

These would be the same ones who dismiss any non-mainstream view as "rubbish" or a "conspiracy theory". Or who seem to feel that conspiracies happen in other places, or in other times, but NEVER here/now in the USA. (No American would EVER sell out his countrymen to make a fast buck!)

Orange/blue is "the fast buck", for sure.

[BrownEye]

I only come to the thread to look at the pictures.

[Namaste]

I only come to the thread to look at the pictures.

Here's one for you...



Oddly enough, this is exactly what's happening today with dentists recommending fluoride toothpaste :¬)

[BrownEye]

I love old ads. Seen the one advertising tapeworms for losing weight?

[Namaste]

I love old ads. Seen the one advertising tapeworms for losing weight?

I have now, haha!

[3DMonkey]

How about the one advertising protests against other humans as a way to love them?

[Tenet Nosce]

It's more due to convenience. I definitely had to know algebra before calculus.

Convenience for... who? The teacher? The "system"? Education should be based on what it effective rather than what is convenient.

Algebra. Tabula Rasa. From where (or more importantly when) did these ideas originate? Interesting how willing some people are to take certain things for granted as useful or necessary.

As far as SD goes, no stages can really be "skipped", but that does not imply linear development.

Then how would SD explain this?

Your point is taken, but by learning needs I was not implying formal education. The educational system can be improved in many ways, of course.

Then perhaps this is one of the areas in which we have been talking past each other.

It depends on the subject matter. There are many practical skills, for example, which do not require anything more than blue/orange valuing.

Yes, this is true. What I mean to say is that it would be an improvement if the context of education (formal or informal) were to be expanded to acknowledge the existence of all these viewpoints. The problem, as I see it, is too many educators not only teaching from blue/orange, but also refusing to acknowledge the existence or validity of higher memes.

Also, keep in mind that these levels tend to be centers of gravity when averaged over different circumstances - some may draw from higher values, some from lower - just as Ra says when particular catalyst happens people regress from an average "yellow ray" to "orange ray". There are both healthy and pathological ways of being at each level. Possible "greed" and reductionism at Orange, when in search of self-fullfilment but also the start of egalitarianism.

Yes, I can see how this works. The main issue I see here is when those stuck in pathological and lower-level memes are put into positions of authority and are given decision-making power over others.

According to this scheme, the blue "Purposeful/Authoritarian" meme started 5000 years ago, around the time of the Old Kingdom in Egypt. (For the moment, let's set aside that the Ra contact with Imhotep offers evidence that higher memes were actually introduced way back then.)

The focus of my frustration/beef is that those who are still operating out of the blue meme appear to be "in charge" where societal institutions are concerned. The people who can demonstrate a healthy appreciation of the higher memes should be the ones "in charge". People who are overexpressive of blue/orange should be disqualified from taking positions of authority, in my opinion.

The needed system is one which addresses everyone core needs, on up the spiral. That's what they are calling an "integral approach". This involves promoting healthy expressions of those values so that learning can take place in a more cooperative manner. No vMeme, be it higher or lower should be allowed to stifle this healthy progress through their pathological misunderstandings. Unfortunately, this requires a "2nd-tier" understanding for such leadership, which "Green" rejects as impossible (their can be no heirarchies). We should be attempting to optimize the social system by providing more freedom in general.

Agreed. Any ideas on how to better achieve this?

The way copyrights must be used for protection is unfortunate, but not sure how there could be a better way when people are not yet on the same page.

Well again, this gets back to how the majority of society's institutions appear to be held hostage by those stuck in pathological blue. I understand that people need to make a living and all, but really this concept of "information ownership" is patently absurd. (Pun intended.)

This is the sort of thing where I am not satisfied to fall back to "well this is just what we have" or "it's all we know". The ownership of information is really a ridiculous notion. Information is simply light. I know many would call this an "oversimplification" yet it is true.

So, will somebody please explain to me, exactly how does one "own" light? How can we possibly expect to continue our own evolution in a context which says this is "my" light and that is "your" light, and we need to exchange little green pieces of paper in order to transfer this light from one to another?

I don't think people to reach or to look very far at all, either into the past or the future. Those things do not exist.

I said "reaching for what is next". Life develops and evolves- it does not reach a certain stage and declare "This Is It". Really... no higher memes should be necessary for this. It is built into the DNA of all living things. Only earth humans (whose DNA appears to have been jacked with) declare that they are at the top of the evolutionary pyramid, and consider themselves the pinnacle of Creation.

I see. Then who are the ones that flatly deny that such people exist? Who believe that "everybody is just doing their best" and "nobody would ever commit such heinous acts against humanity"?

I don't think it's really an important question.

Interesting that you chose not to respond to this. It seems rather pathological to blindly accept the "official" story on anything, out of a misguided appeal to authority. It also seems pathological to offer a fabrication as the "truth" in the first place.

For example, we may never know what really happened with JFK's assassination. What we can say with 100% certainty is that the "Magic Bullet" theory defies the known laws of physics. Yet, this theory remains as the "official" view, and is presented in textbooks and documentaries as "fact".

For example, we may never know how exactly the pyramids were built. What we can say with 100% certainty is that moving around 1000-ton stones and fitting them together such that a sheet of paper cannot slide between them, is WAY beyond anything which could be fabricated by slave labor with levers and ropes. Yet, this is what is offered as the "official" view, and is presented to the public as "fact".

For example, we may not fully understand how the chemicals we put in our processed foods affect human health. But what we can say with a high degree of confidence that the human body does not respond well to foreign chemicals being put inside of it. Yet, the "official" view says that processed foods are just fine, and that their safety is backed by "science".

However, putting extra nutrients into the body via dietary supplements... now THAT is something that people should REALLY be "concerned" about for their own safety. Now is that so? Really, this is how people are taught to think? Nothing wrong with a Diet Coke, but watch out for that vitamin C tablet?!

Shall I go on? Will you even respond to this? :-/

[Tenet Nosce]

Oddly enough, this is exactly what's happening today with dentists recommending fluoride toothpaste :¬)

But to speak out on this subject makes you a "cook" or a "quack" or "tinfoil hat club member". This is despite:

Low-levels of fluoride in plaque and saliva and their effects on the demineralisation and remineralisation of enamel; role of fluoride toothpastes.

Fluoride incorporated into enamel systemically does not reduce enamel solubility sufficiently to exert an anti-caries effect. Fluoride has the potential to exert an anti-caries benefit largely through three mechanisms; inhibition of demineralisation, promotion of remineralisation and interference with bacterial growth and metabolism. However, the low levels of fluoride thought to influence caries are insufficient to have a significant effect via the latter mechanism.

What's that the scientists say? Fluoride in toothpaste acts by disrupting the biofilm created by harmful bacteria? Hmm... then I wonder what the fluoride in the water is doing to the biofilm created by beneficial gut bacteria. I don't mean to sound derisive but of all places to proclaim "doublespeak" the scientific pulpits seem the most hypocritical to me.

... and still few ask... why fluoride? Why not iodide, for example? It has chemical properties similar to fluoride, and actually supports endocrine function, rather than inhibits it.

[Oceania]

eh, i think if we had spring water it'd fix the teeth.

---

aren't we supposed to be talking about something else?

[apeiron]

... and still few ask... why fluoride? Why not iodide, for example? It has chemical properties similar to fluoride, and actually supports endocrine function, rather than inhibits it.

I was reading this article and I find it interesting. Regarding iodine/iodide. Instead of the attachment I post link since I'm not sure about these rules.


www.jpands.org/vol11no4/millerd.pdf

[Namaste]

I take an iodine supplement, upon the recommendation of a well versed clinical ecologist.

[Plenum]

I take an iodine supplement, upon the recommendation of a well versed clinical ecologist.

I take B5 because it is good for acne

I take Vitamin C because most other animals (other than primates) can produce it themselves, but we can't. 2x1000mg per day.

I take Vitamin D3 because I do shift work, and don't get nearly enough sunlight that I should. Preferable to cod liver oil

and I also take liquid shots of minerals because most of our food is grown in denatured soils.

- -

I honestly don't know how this thread started with Steve Jobs and ended up here ... but hey, I'm willing to roll with it lol

- -

oh Steve ... you could have tried non-allopathic treatments for your condition.

[Plenum]

to get back on track ...

reading through most of this long thread reminded me of a quote from Mary Angelou:

people will forget what you said,
people will forget what you did,
but people will never forget how you made them feel.


people will never forget how you made them feel.

[Diana]

It's more due to convenience. I definitely had to know algebra before calculus.

Convenience for... who? The teacher? The "system"? Education should be based on what it effective rather than what is convenient.

I did not need the hierarchy of learning in math. I have a very developed creative side, which served me there. I seemed to just know answers and to understand algebra, geometry, trig and calculus in a holographic way, which combined with the learning of formulae and process; but the knowing was there first with the formulae supporting it later. I could be in class and read the problem when called on and know the answer by the time I was done, without doing the work (I am not autistic or a savant; it just seemed there was some open channel). It was not a matter of building up skills, it was a matter of being attuned to the math, if that makes sense.

I am now developing learning modules with a partner which utilize the whole brain and include creativity, while subduing the limbic responses. We've been working for over a year on this. It is our intention to be part of a new wave of education, which does not rely on memorization but rather develops fluid intelligence.