Communitas Philosophy 7
'Integral' is a term used by Ken Wilber to refer to an all-inclusive holistic philosophy which integrates the plethora of maps of reality into an over-arching meta-model. This is not some bland uniformity which homogenises and erases differences, but does find a shared reality within diversity and differentiation. Wilber has been developing this model over the last 30 years and it is now in its 5th major re-vision. Here is a short introduction by Wilber himself.
What do we mean by 'holism' ?
"Reality is not composed of things or processes; it is not composed of atoms or quarks; it is not composed of wholes, nor does it have any parts. Rather, it is composed of whole/parts, or holons. This is true of atoms, cells, symbols, ideas. They can be understood neither as things nor processes, neither as wholes nor parts, but only as simultaneous whole/parts." Wilber:
Integral philosophy has been applied to leadership and organisations for some years now, see http://www.integralleadershipreview.com/. One particular branch of integral philosophy is Spiral Dynamics (based on original work by professor Graves and currently propagated by Don Beck and Christopher Cowan). This is a sophisticated, if somewhat over-hyped, model of organisational evolution and change, based on a theory of evolving levels of human values and consciousness. (PS: Michael has done some training with Don Beck).
We will write our own introduction to integral philosophy at some point, but in the meantime here's a short piece from a couple of years ago:
Integral philosophy
Precious knowledge and practices, important for human wellbeing and development, exist in all kinds of disciplines, communities and professions. However, much of that wisdom and understanding fails to be translated into action because these disciplines, communities and professions remain fragmented and disconnected from each other, thus perpetuating limited and partial experiences, languages and maps of reality. This form of separation and split runs through all kinds of systems, at all levels of size, affecting social and collective as well as individual dynamics, materially and psychologically, objectively and subjectively. As long as we are caught in maintaining such limited and partial notions of identity as habitual stances in relation to others and the world in general, we are bound to generate repetitive patterns of distress and suffering. As long as we are trapped in habitually absolutising and privileging certain features of reality over and against others, we are subject to restricted connection and communication with each other and with ourselves, caught in endless cycles of polarisations, splits and dualisms.
When we recognise the degree to which disintegration, fragmentation and polarisations are rife in our culture and dominate individual and collective consciousness, affecting and informing our interpersonal and intra-psychic experience, we may feel shocked, helpless and resigned. But recognising that disintegrated, fragmentated and polarised state of affairs, we believe, also calls forth an integral response.
Such a response, for all its dangers and potential fallacies, looks for the common thread as well as the conflicts, the unity in multiplicity, the self-organising tendency in evolution and development. It does not deny disintegration, but - by appreciating its creative and developmental potential - is capable of sustaining a gesture of engaged interest and generous embrace of disintegrative and apparently destructive processes. It does not fall into the illusion that integration can be forced or imposed, but trusts that it will emerge, given the context and support and sufficient attention.
What is 'integral facilitation' ?
An integral understanding calls forth an engaged and facilitative response - we believe it is possible to take a facilitative attitude and position in response to the pain and evolutionary potential we are confronted with, in ourselves, in others, in our communities and in the world at large.
Facilitation is different from directing or imposing change, but works by providing a particular kind of space and engaged attentiveness, a presence which can become a catalyst for transformation and re-organisation. But for a facilitator to be invested or attached to such an outcome, however desirable it may appear to everybody involved, is a double-edged .... A facilitator, first and foremost, needs to be capable of lovingly attending to 'what is', to embrace the fullness and wholeness which always already exists in the system that asks to be facilitated. It may then become possible, for emergent processes, impulses for change, forces of evolution to be noticed and followed, by recognising relationships, connections and links between segregated and divided aspects of that implicit wholeness.
A facilitator, therefore, does not change anything, but allows process to occur, whether this results in deepened stability or intense transformation.
A facilitative intention does not need to be rooted in a vision, in knowledge or a precise image of a 'solution', let alone an action plan or strategy. It is simply a commitment to process, but not merely to a process 'out there', but to involvement in a participative universe, co-created moment-to-moment by a sense of response-ability. In the language of therapy: all facilitation hinges on a creative and skilful and appropriate 'use of self'. This willingness to risk oneself in the encounter is not necessarily based on 'knowing oneself' as a fixed and static entity, even as a 'wounded healer', but can equally arise out of a more postmodern view of the self as opaque, shifting, de-centered, multiple and contextual.
Facilitation in this view requires much more than traditional leadership skills. It always already implies self-development, and a continuing process of reflection both on one's own identity as a person and as a facilitator taking a particular role.
Posted by Michael Soth in