Thanks for the challenge Lee (and that's a wonderful link you have shared from Wikiversity). Remarkably, I sent out a post to my small cadre of Facebook friends late last night that bears on the questions you have posed. Our weekly Zoom meeting with Peter Limberg actually inspired the decision. I have never had the self-confidence or certainty of folks like Gregg, Deepak, and many others who have much to share from their different perspectives and with their special gifts. Rather, I've always felt much more aligned with some of what Peter described last night and, indeed, from what Rob Scott talked about the week or two previously. Learning the systems of knowledge, much like I learned my katas to obtain a black belt in Shotokan karate or learned my field to obtain a PhD, were always the prerequisites - I thought - for true wisdom. But what would that look like if one could not trust one's own voice, or, even worse, if one's only experiences and memories of sharing one's voice involved abuse and violence, or a threat to one's very existence? One learns to be quiet, or to protect oneself as best one can. On the other hand, there are those such as Peter and Rob who have been able to find and express their voices, share their gifts, and inspire us with their talents and genius. And I believe that everyone has a voice and special talents to be shared. And wisdom. But how many of us cannot see the deeper truths or share what we have to offer because we have been hurt deeply, or convinced for whatever reasons to pursue that which may be hurtful and destructive - to ourselves, to others, and to the planet? Deepak's reminder of the full quotation surely deserves our most serious consideration:
"Don't believe, don't believe and adopt it because you have been told; or it has been transmitted to you by tradition; or you have thought of it on your own. Don't believe what your Guru (teacher) has told you because you hold him in high esteem. Examine it, adequately analyze it, and when you discover a thought beneficial to all, good for the majority, in welfare of all living beings, believe in it, adopt it. Such thought will be path revealing, because that belief will be self-made and hence resolute."
As mentioned, I shared a post last night with my FB friends - and even then experienced such anxiety in standing naked before those whom I have long known and trusted. I do not usually even have the confidence to display my image publicly on Zoom or keep the light on in the bathroom, because I long ago learned I am "ugly" and should keep myself out of sight, kneeling down with my face covered in the presence of others like an Untouchable in the traditional Indian caste system. But even beyond feeling worthless, I could never "discover a thought beneficial to all (etc.)", for who am I? I am not Gregg. I am not Deepak. I am not Siddhartha. I'm just a guy who as a small child couldn't understand why we were polluting the water, destroying the natural habitats of many species, and allowing - and often contributing to - our fellow humans to suffer so tragically, with mass starvation and poverty in a world of plenty. And that was before I studied or really knew much about the Holocaust, genocides, and factory farming!
So, here's my response to Lee's challenge, which ironically I chose to convey less than a half day ago in that semi-public FB forum. I guess I'm only now finding my "voice", but better late than never!
Michalski's Facebook message (posted at 1AM on October 20, 2020):
If you are reading my message, then you are not among those who are perhaps hopelessly and hence pitifully trapped in a worldview that matches tribe against tribe, and, even worse, humanity against nature. If you are reading my post, then you know that I am sharing my message with you because I trust you and believe in you and, indeed, love you. Should I die tomorrow, that would be the final thought I should wish to share. But I'm still alive, so here's my thought for October 20, 2020.
If I could convince you to do one thing only in my remaining time on the planet, please consider watching the film I've linked below. I certainly cannot tell you what to do, or what to believe, or how to vote, or what changes might be required. But as frustrated as I have been with myself (personal responsibility starts at ground zero!) and with humanity after a half century of study, I have no choice but to believe that we still have the capacity to recognize true wisdom. I thought that maybe a couple of PhDs would help me understand better, while allowing me a university platform to share the key information acquired. Alas, but that's not exactly true. The thirst for knowledge, after all, can never be sated and the selfish, single-minded pursuit depletes the energy that could be committed elsewhere.
Not merely do we have remarkable intelligence as a species, but we can translate that knowledge into the pristine wisdom that transcends ego and selfishness to animate our souls. The source of that wisdom derives from those individuals and cultures - past and present - more enlightened than ourselves. And thenceforth only shall we be able to complete our journey to once again become a species in balance with nature. What choice can there possibly be, if we are to create a sustainable planet and future for our grandchildren? At the very least, you already know that every decision you make has an impact. Deep within your bones you understand, even if the words fail you (as so often they do me) in our harried lives. Yet we must decide and perhaps commit to alternatives heretofore unimagined or deemed impossible. I'm an "old dog," but blessed to be able to still learn "new tricks" - and change that which I should have changed long ago. Or, harking back to a 1970s classic, "There's still time to change the road you're on... And if you listen very hard, The tune will come to you at last, When all are one and one is all..."
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.netflix.com_watch_80216393-3FtrackId-3D253628477-26tctx-3D1-252C3-252C9a18193e-2D7942-2D4423-2Dbb34-2D0a35b1f04949-2D9608350-252C4a7ca63c-2Dad0a-2D4439-2Db956-2Db92f06b527a7-5F34860857X94XX1603164131772-252C4a7ca63c-2Dad0a-2D4439-2Db956-2Db92f06b527a7-5FROOT-252C-26fbclid-3DIwAR3HvKGSkKReer40dg-2DVrtP2ir8Vx-2D3b6Ap9FUNTsu9QNe3CGM82si5X-2DKc&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=Zt4fwGmmOArhZLFlXfIfQ3ymlt7GEmRLSY_5PqeEX-U&e= >
A broadcaster recounts his life, and the evolutionary history of life on Earth, to grieve the loss of wild places and offer a vision for the future.
[https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__external.fybz2-2D2.fna.fbcdn.net_safe-5Fimage.php-3Fd-3DAQB0LO15Tks5780y-26w-3D540-26h-3D282-26url-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Focc-2D0-2D294-2D3933.1.nflxso.net-252Fdnm-252Fapi-252Fv6-252FE8vDc-5FW8CLv7-2DyMQu8KMEC7Rrr8-252FAAAABfeHO0TVQ1kAmwBrRQwvSAtDwwRUbdp3p-5FkuawtyloAl7HeyJU4z-2DBPL58B3ihV-2DTWWmDiERGLwp3UmMn79yi5wdPLJX.jpg-253Fr-253Dc1c-26cfs-3D1-26upscale-3D1-26fallback-3Dnews-5Fd-5Fplaceholder-5Fpublisher-26-5Fnc-5Fcb-3D1-26-5Fnc-5Fhash-3DAQBvqtcuVUe9pkmb&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=4Tuyc2fy2R121omMJHLJ_xd4YkJCqQATSvbWwqtnXQ8&e= ]
About this website
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_joseph.h.michalski-23&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=YIOi4IGonKPPmt-bdm1cLUKMK4uD5JmvAlzhj7_Tguk&e= >
NETFLIX.COM
David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet | Netflix Official Site<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__l.facebook.com_l.php-3Fu-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fwww.netflix.com-252Fwatch-252F80216393-253FtrackId-253D253628477-2526tctx-253D1-25252C3-25252C9a18193e-2D7942-2D4423-2Dbb34-2D0a35b1f04949-2D9608350-25252C4a7ca63c-2Dad0a-2D4439-2Db956-2Db92f06b527a7-5F34860857X94XX1603164131772-25252C4a7ca63c-2Dad0a-2D4439-2Db956-2Db92f06b527a7-5FROOT-25252C-2526fbclid-253DIwAR1dIcHi7RsfnuH-5FACCz6z69QAKsLx4v-5FAJ-5Ff7pqtWDYUZZWKu72E3hgsxA-26h-3DAT10HHyt3VxDTlp8UrOl6A17tGvWGNue350hckPjDvNnKdwPa2cZMI0BHfAMiSFgGM4KVlxH6eDrO8lghPoC5KgJL7KTFZ7Ww0FqTqtWO4gcLLCSOy9YjUo6mMu01ikS5Lk0CLUbt112XX1B9r4EWg&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=u4Rh0XCSNN2ALyTL5C9FmpCnGemwY-IFd1p9GdzpPiw&e= >
A broadcaster recounts his life, and the evolutionary history of life on Earth, to grieve the loss of wild places and offer a vision for the future.
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.netflix.com_watch_80216393-3FtrackId-3D253628477-26tctx-3D1-252C3-252C9a18193e-2D7942-2D4423-2Dbb34-2D0a35b1f04949-2D9608350-252C4a7ca63c-2Dad0a-2D4439-2Db956-2Db92f06b527a7-5F34860857X94XX1603164131772-252C4a7ca63c-2Dad0a-2D4439-2Db956-2Db92f06b527a7-5FROOT-252C-26fbclid-3DIwAR0VA-5FoxXBA86-5Fb-5F1iRHPkHDnm9dfXzKQQSadq9mtQYWWd2YRVXihmGR7Kc&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=VhdS9rtXYkCIwPz7KWREXlh2eRcMtB2indiHLOOdC0w&e= >
Dr. Joseph H. Michalski
Professor
King’s University College at Western University
266 Epworth Avenue, DL-201
London, Ontario, Canada N6A 2M3
Tel: (519) 433-3491
Email: [log in to unmask]
______________________
eið + 1 = 0
________________________________
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Leland Beaumont <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 7:40 AM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: TOK 8 Key Ideas
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
Gregg,
Thanks for all of this.
The question that motivates engineering is:
Based on what we now know, what can we build, what problem can we solve?
Some time ago I collected an inventory of the great problems and opportunities facing humanity into a list of the grand challenges.
See: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Grand-5FChallenges&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=2w5hFh0r6C8n-TPx4Ku-Ocvk5RBywY6IOL4RZU27NvI&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Grand-5FChallenges&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=r6ImlwaRCYgH8ilBA6K2e6TMRHFgmJ8Kx_cDYOA3m5A&s=rBMcY_hQjT3sMM5L5Zho8JQYqB3G26YiJqufSs-Tbe8&e=>
I suggest using this list to set priorities for our actions.
How can we use what we now know, specifically the 8 ideas you present, and apply them to solving the grand challenges?
I would like to work to answer that question.
What can I, you, we, others, the man on the street, society, politicians, academics, institutions, cultures, do differently today to accelerate solutions to one or all of the grand challenges?
What is the most good we can do?
See: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Living-5FWisely-23Do-5FGood&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=V0zDGTGkZgRknI7chmVdiWYXIQGMb_Maf8YeQ7E4CXk&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Living-5FWisely-23Do-5FGood&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=r6ImlwaRCYgH8ilBA6K2e6TMRHFgmJ8Kx_cDYOA3m5A&s=BatcmaoWgD2IStHiRg-rx4WGm-Fj1WgLGlqXmGRD8eA&e=>
Thanks,
Lee Beaumont
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 6:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: TOK 8 Key Ideas
Hi Brad,
Thanks for this note, I think many folks who are familiar with Integral have these kinds of issues putting the two systems together. In the recent Stoa Sensemaking Series, I was asked: “What is the difference between UTOK and Integral? Here is the link: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DcPiSjWIY-5FmE-26t-3D266s&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=wGhyNm8-zoqNDJSUCGc6K1_b8iHZFFqJHkz0tsPZCLU&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DcPiSjWIY-5FmE-26t-3D266s&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=r6ImlwaRCYgH8ilBA6K2e6TMRHFgmJ8Kx_cDYOA3m5A&s=tar8rAdlgRbMvc9OGXTOQdVncFeEPWzSOQ9anaZXCV0&e=> The Q & A takes place at minute 42. That gives a basic frame. As that exchange notes, there are lots of places of similarity and healthy complementarity. That said, there are foundational differences.
In more direct response, first and foremost, Integral, as laid out by Wilber is ultimately grounded in a spiritual ontology. UTOK is agnostic about the ultimate nature of reality. It is most directly grounded in naturalism, science, and humanism. The spiritual is interpreted as being oriented toward the transcendent, defined in terms of ultimate concerns. [side note: I am intrigued by Bhaskar’s MetaReality…]
Second, the ToK System provides the language system and map of reality and science. It is a behavioral ontology, not a physicalist ontology. This brings me to point three…
Third, the quadrants are interpreted as a great map of human epistemology. However, from a UTOK perspective, they do not work as a coherent ontology. Namely, the left interior is framed as spiritual, whereas the right is physical mechanistic. Attached is a diagram depicting the quadrants via tools of the UTOK. Notice that it redefines the Upper Right with what is called the Periodic Table of Behavior<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.gregghenriques.com_uploads_2_4_3_6_24368778_periodic-5Ftable-5Fof-5Fbehavior4b.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=r6ImlwaRCYgH8ilBA6K2e6TMRHFgmJ8Kx_cDYOA3m5A&s=_EHUvPKMZ0Qw_cm8P5aExttHyzeE8aXHJg74-rSJ6qg&e=>. As this blog notes, the difference between physicalism and behaviorism is crucial<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201911_scientifically-2Dsay-2Dyes-2Dbehavior-2Dno-2Dphysicalism&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=r6ImlwaRCYgH8ilBA6K2e6TMRHFgmJ8Kx_cDYOA3m5A&s=xg7gdgMBEV9M9nod3bZQV7QCh7dAeO51r2pVA7UQACQ&e=>.
Fourth, re the difference between animal and human culture, yes, animals have small “c” culture in that they engage practices that are shaped by the group, and different groups take on different flavors. But this is different than the Culture plane of existence mediated/networked by systems of justification upon which human persons operate. It helps to use the capitals to be sure we have the proper meaning (i.e., to differentiate the technical ToK System meaning of the Culture-Person plane from other meanings that might be used for culture). As you note, Mind is the third plane of existence. Notice, though, the capital. We need this word as part of our language system. It can be differentiated from “the mind” (no capital), which is a different meaning. The UTOK uses the standard neurocognitive meaning of “the mind” as the information processing activity of the brain/nervous system. See here for an educational video<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1olZfwzDP3yuj877SXcBX7m5EmKJNH6I4_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=r6ImlwaRCYgH8ilBA6K2e6TMRHFgmJ8Kx_cDYOA3m5A&s=QmEfVsojxH-3hWsNB6drxGr-cwxCZP9nQBLlKFAF7o0&e=> on why it is so tricky to define behavior and mental processes, which is at the heart of the problem of psychology—which, BTW, Wilber does not touch, which is a big problem for a coherent “integrated” theory.
Finally, here is a video<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1xdUa1btq588F6aXGKexUBVoVH7FKhns0_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=r6ImlwaRCYgH8ilBA6K2e6TMRHFgmJ8Kx_cDYOA3m5A&s=g9u3lb1KRcQ93mVY1-q347cHDSEIfS-2pfAzPzzHgZ0&e=> that links the Periodic Table of Behavior with what is called “the iQuad Coin”, which suggests a “quadrant epistemology and a quadratic ontology” that allows us to locate our unique idiographic souls on the cosmic coordinates.
If any of this catches your interest, I can explain more. Would be happy to set up a zoom, as it has been a while.
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Brad Kershner
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2020 3:39 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: TOK 8 Key Ideas
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
Hi Gregg,
Thanks for this (and everything you are manifesting these days!). Seeing these 8 ideas spelled out is a confirmation of how much this system is taking on, and each area is rich and worthwhile in itself. But my issue is that I get hung up from the start at the planes of existence. I have not been able to resolve/integrate your framework with integral theory/AQAL in a way that is satisfactory or natural to me. It just doesn't click with my background AQAL OS. Maybe you can help? Maybe others have felt this tension/confusion? (Apologies if you are not familiar with integral theory - but if not, please allow me to humbly suggest that you should be! ;-)
Your sequence of entities makes sense to me (objects, organisms, animals, people), since these are all physical entities of increasing complexity. This is similar to a sequence of increasing complexity in the upper right quadrant (yes?).
The systems of justification make sense to me (physical, biological, psychological, social), though they may not map onto a quadrant. I think I can appreciate how this ties into important conversations about science and knowledge, and I wouldn't suggest that it needs to map onto AQAL. (and if it does in a way I don't see, let me know).
The 4 planes are where I get confused (matter, life, mind, culture), because the word culture points me to the collective domain of mind. I see that you are not equating culture with the lower left/interior collective across planes (which I have to keep reminding myself), and that you use 'mind' to denote the mind of animals that humans transcend and include, but I find this terminology counterintuitive and can't seem to shake the notion that animal mind has its own realm of collective mind/culture, as life has a collective/shared realm of life-interaction (as does matter), and that culture means more than just human reality.
Would you say that all 4 planes tetra-arise in all 4 quadrants? It seems to me that in the plane progression (matter - life - mind - x), x would refer to the plane that includes matter, life and mind, as mind includes (emerges from) matter and life, as life emerges from matter. X would be some synonym for human mind. Is that what you mean by culture - human mind, in all 4 quadrants?
I guess I am checking to see if my confusion is semantic or conceptual, since in my familiar language (collective, interior) culture does not emerge from animal mind or human mind, it is co-extensive with animal and human mind, as the collective domain of being. (I think Deepak raised a similar issue with different language, but I don't remember it being resolved in language I grasped).
If the 4 planes all arise in all 4 quadrants, then instead of culture, I'd think we'd be referring to the plane that transcends and includes matter, life, and animal mind - the plane of the human, individual and collective, interior and exterior, epistemic and ontic. But if by culture you mean the collective/shared domain of human mind, isn't that an orthogonal move away from the sequence of holonic complexity (matter-life-mind) into a different kind of distinction? And if you mean the domain of the human plane in all 4 quadrants, why not say: matter, life, animal, human?
(I see a problem here with linguistic overlap with the sequence of objects. [Objects, organisms, animals, people] refers to bodies (yes?), where [matter, life, mind/animal, culture/human] refers to the plane of epistemic/ontic reality in which those beings live. Yes? If this is the case then I guess it comes down to word choice).
Another way of asking: are the 3 progressions you name (planes, systems, entities) all holonic? Or some are and some are not? Is 'mind' a synonym for the animal-level-complexity-perspective-reality, individually and collectively (which would include animal culture/LL)? And by 'culture' you mean the human-level-complexity-perspective-reality, individually and collectively? If so, I guess it is a semantic problem, and I just wish we could use language that does not denote differences in individual vs collective signification. If not, I'm curious how TOK fits with AQAL - or if it does not, perhaps intentionally.
Sorry if this is not helpful to others. But if I can get beyond these language blocks, I sense that I'll be able to get more from TOK and better integrate its various insights with other frames and models.
thanks,
Brad
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 8:32 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi TOKers,
A confluence of different variables oriented me this morning to craft a summary statement of the Unified Theory as 8 key ideas.
The three main forces were (a) the Stoa presentation yesterday and (b) the COVID exchanges and (c) listening to this Stoa event with Daniel S on converting Moloch to Jedi<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DhKvVdGNzCQk&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=e5MJ_tkY74tygLgvYWREFkn2rimZ7VKMmyJ2xl39-EE&s=Y0KDgXjuvx3BAic5wxQeXfVhM4fAHLQV7xkSNmAAnNg&e=>. The linkage is that I/we need to find a way to streamline the frame to help people “grok” it. The connection with the COVID is “what is it that binds us here in the TOK society?” The connection with the Stoa was that I went to offer the Garden Tour, but that is “so much” that we back tracked into the ToK System. I had decided not to start there because I had already done a ToK System talk. When I told Andee that I started with the Garden, she basically said, “You still don’t really get how hard it is for people to get your system do you?” When I listened to Daniel’s brilliant systemic analysis of Game A theoretic considerations across the incentive landscape, I wanted to reach out and help deconstruct the difference between power and influence and social influence and relational value and then generate a fractal map of human psychology into social systems that allowed for a more coherent analysis of the landscape and the way actors act on it and how we might foster the kind of beautiful change he was envisioning. These three converged to orient me to get a crisp statement on at least what is grounding the vision I operate from and am trying to plant seeds and spread and also engage and network and see.
So I produced this blog: Eight Key Ideas<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_202010_eight-2Dkey-2Dideas&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=e5MJ_tkY74tygLgvYWREFkn2rimZ7VKMmyJ2xl39-EE&s=2W3pFROyunLQBSPiNa8h_eQpMBQxePw8aQmSRl1wdik&e=>.
Welcome thoughts, per usual.
Best,
Gregg
___________________________________________
Gregg Henriques, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Graduate Psychology
216 Johnston Hall
MSC 7401
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
(540) 568-7857 (phone)
(540) 568-4747 (fax)
Be that which enhances dignity and well-being with integrity.
Check out the Unified Theory Of Knowledge homepage at:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org_&d=DwIF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=hj5o_vUd7T4pqONIP35sFpjzgIow0zauZSlviHtWXV4&s=PBjPk0WCv3Liss45Ogmx7Fk0lba-nnEUeY8tVfS648s&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=e5MJ_tkY74tygLgvYWREFkn2rimZ7VKMmyJ2xl39-EE&s=mpdOuMNTQncQtl67wCd-GPsV1WyIg9CrlFRWlQMUFgs&e=>
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1