Some food for thought: the whole person paradigm

Note:  Simply a useful, ancient view, not a rejection of Gardner or any other modern identifier of intelligences.

Yes, but why should we require one leap of everyone?  Are you advocating one-size-fits-all?  If so, is it because of perceived urgency (we're pushed), perceived attractiveness (we're pulled), some combination (in what proportions?) or something(s) else entirely?

I believe that if most can achieve voice, unique balance and integration of the four intelligences, the satisfactions will fade and disintegrate the circle.  Thank you for helping me articulate that, which had only been an encouraging sense.

I love models.  Circles, no circles. Borders, no borders. Triangles, squares, spirals, dynamic, static, moving, fixed...

Blank.....emptiness......

Perhaps the best model is the one that speaks to where you are with an appropriate signpost for where your heading next.

Occupy Wall Street = unaware people believe the lie that we are separate from The Oneness, from One another, Earth, all Kingdoms.

And who is the liar?

We represent universal power of the oneness, but consciousness has been rising in us - individuals, experiencing themselves as separated from it!

50 000 years has passed and we are here (I mean planet Earth, 2011) with neither the signpost, nor one common model within conscious reach...

How can we occupy the thought?

My logic tells me it can be only by one common thought, mimicking oneness. On the other hand thinking is a process....

"And who is the liar?"

In the version of the story I'm working with the liar was a school of thought.  The source is Lewis Mumford, who wrote:

The very notion of a universe independent of man was itself a peculiarly human achievement, dependent upon human history and human consciousness.  Plainly, it was not the new truths that astronomy disclosed about the vastness of physical nature, but old truths man neglected about himself that diminished his stature and importance.  Those who looked upward and outward and forward, and were prepared to traverse astronomical distances, forgot to look downward and inward and backward:  the Sun God had dazzled and blinded them into conceiving scientific reality as a landscape without figures -- forgetting the artists who had spent countless generations painting it, and without whom the universe in its vastness was literally unthinkable.

The new world that astronomy and mechanics opened up was in fact based upon a dogmatic premise that excluded from the outset not only the presence of man but the phenomena of life.  On this new assumption the cosmos itself was primarily a mechanical system capable of being fully understood by reference solely to a mechanical model.  [H]ence the chief end of human existence was to confirm this system by utilizing and controlling the energies derived from the sun, reshaping every part of the environment in conformity to the Sun God's strict commands.

The Pentagon of Power, 1964 & 1970

I commend the book to you.  Members of the school of thought are identified and the Sun God is described, among much more.

How cool is that

I was too young, too "unlived" when Lewis Mumford was a key reference in my undergrad thesis  to grasp or notice  the beauty of his thought as it shines out from this quote..

The "Age of Reason" and the kind of science which we have embraced in the center of that has cut us off from our  other faculties , impaired our seeing, limited our understanding, narrowed what we allow as possible.

I love the collider because it is pure phenomenological science..seeing what is and in seeing that understanding how little we know, how much more there is to see and know.

But few of us in the 99% have the luxury of delving deeply into these ideas, as you & I and other membes of this and other communities do.  These are all useful and beautiful ideas for those of us who have that luxury but sharing these ideas is not going to create one voice in the 99%  .  I think that is what Jitendra was pointing to in his post this morning about the paradox of our missing  or un actualized "innerstructure " of politics and economics.

We need to learn how to "put on the mind of the 99%"..speak from our hearts in that language; stand in witness and solidarity on that ground, be in that moment as it presents itself to us moment by moment, build opportunities where we can live in such moments together.

(I'm only sayin')

"We need to learn how to "put on the mind of the 99%"..speak from our hearts in that language; stand in witness and solidarity on that ground, be in that moment as it presents itself to us moment by moment, build opportunities where we can live in such moments together."

I'm going with authenticity, Lindsay.  I'm not much of an actor.

David,

I don't see that as unauthentic..I agree we are completely ineffecetive if we are not always speaking and acting from our own authenticity.

I don't see it as "being an actor"

( I am allowing that I may have missed your point here or that mine was not appreciated)

By "Putting on the mind of the 99%".iI meant standing in witness, solidarity, compassion with  others where they are.

Living and speaking  from "I as thou, thou as I "( Raimon Panikkar)

I'm sorry. "Put on" reminded me of fashions, masks and pranks.

I mean that we cannot have a world that works for all if we don't know each unique person as a unique person.  Of course, no one can know everyone, but each can be known by some.

Imagine economies built on and responding to such dynamic knowledge.

I love the thought-fullness here.  About that world "out there"...

Earth and our 4D reality is a remarkably accurate feedback system for our consciousness.  In order to know what is constellated in our consciousness, and unconsciousness...just look at what assembles in our awareness, what we see.  I am that. 

BTW, we don't get to do the Advaitan shuffle - I am not that  (refute identity with or discount any level of reality as not being real) without first knowing fully that we are the source of that-and digesting it.

First there is a mountain

Then there is no mountain

Then there is. )))

Does everyone here understand the difference between this comment wall and creating discussion threads?  I'm not being rhetorical here.  I haven't really used the group forums before now.

These wall comments are up front and visible yet we can't really build  discussions except in one long, linear thread.  The discussion forum that David just used will allow us to build particular conversations...with tags, so that we can Mind Map them as I build out that function, which, by the way, I may have up by next week.

Yes, the comment wall is ideal for random 3 - 5 sentences, quotes, links, photos.  However, one can't always foresee a discussion that wants to happen.

Good morning Jitedra  from the silvery light of an east coast morning on the ocean.

yes your observation :

"The systems we seek to transform are held in place by something vast and powerful below our awareness, our own individual and collective subconscious"

The implied question "what is that something vast that holds it in place; how do we engage that "from the inside out" to bring baout that transformation" obviously struck a chord that lead, to a spotansuous and very fruitful conversation.

Reaffirms our first premise here at Occupy that asking the right question is always the key that opens up new insights and new possibilities.  (iei asking a question that does not contain our pre formed idea about that the answer is or should be)

This path (thread) should continue here to retain all that was said as a whole in context as it evolved..

This emphasis on "harvesting: I find often misses or loses this texture and context that is so important to truly harvesting what the exchange was about, the journey that was taken and where the partcipants are on the path.  I learn much more reading and entire conversation than from "harvests" which are cuts an d pastes "  There should be more of an effort I think, to summarize the entire conversation rather than harvest individual ideas from it..mor emphasis on capturing the evolution of underlying emerging themes or collaborative insights

I'm only sayin'.  

Doreen: I'd say the liar is a thought, a thought that limits us.

David: In the version of the story I'm working with the liar was a school of thought.

Doreen, I could have agreed with your first answer, quoted above. If not the second post, after David’s one – clearly demonstrating true thought as opposed to the “liar”, deceitful thought. David is more direct, addressing schools of true thought and lying thought.

If the thought was a liar, we our whole person would be the victim. We (all, equally, in common) could then try to understand the nature of the thought and nature of the lie (occupy, reset, eliminate the limits).

If there is true thought opposed to deceitful thought we can only continue the fight between believers in one and believers in other.

Unless you know the absolute, ultimate reference system to preordain which is which…

“The very notion of a universe independent of man…”  is not true. That does not necessarily means the antithesis is true. There is a third possibility: we are all and each interdependent with the universe.

P.S. to avoid misunderstandings:

I share your belief in “something” (vast and powerful), which might be called the Spirit, the Absolute or the Infinite Creator or whatever. I do not believe there are some “very deep insiders” allowed to ask question and deliver answers from “there” (or from “him”).

Pawel

Your comment :"There is a third possibility: we are all and each interdependent with the universe" resinates with me.

"Infinite Interpenetration" is the specific wisdom tradition that makes sense to me..it is from the Flower Garland School of Buddhism,  a tradition, in contrast to other Buddhist traditions, looks out in service to the world..is about stewardship for humanity and the earth.

 I can't possibly do it justice in a little blog in this context (or perhaps at all) but the gist of it is that each of us is completely unique and critically needed in the universe..that that uniqueness of us..what we do with it how we use is constantly radiating out and affecting the condition of all other unique individuals who are doing that back to us..infinite interpenetration.

It implies that when we act and grow and seek to be in service to humanity and the earth we actually do uplift or contribute to the wellness of the whole ( and of course vice versa)  We might not see or know the effect of our service..of our outward offering to humanity to the earth but it actually happens. So we keep doing it..keep reaching out in service to life, in service to humanity, in stewardship for the earth.

Pawel ( all) apolgies for my many typos ( neuropathic damge to both hands)..plus I am used to TED where I can edit.

So that's

"infinite interpenetration"

Doreen, If you can give something a title and some tags, the best posting, in a group, is a discussion (section above the Comment Wall).  Hope this helps.

The diagram of the whole person would have been posted as a discussion if I had even faintly anticipated the sort of conversation that developed after your comment.

(Great apologies forgetting I logged in as admin earlier)

"Interdependent with the universe" and "Infinite Interpenetration" are elegant descriptors.  

Someone at our Occupy Marin GA was saying how they felt they didn't know enough to speak.  I suggested that it doesn't matter what you think you know, just that you speak what's authentically there for you.  

You serve the whole, even when you can't see the whole. Which is never.  We can never see the whole, because manifest reality expresses in infinitely nested holarchies.  It is like a hall of infinitely reflecting mirrors.  There's always the next fractal iteration of the pattern in endless iterations.  

Bucky Fuller talks about precession, the effect that occurs at a 90 degree angle to where you think you're headed—or the effect you think you're having, just beyond the periphery of your vision.  The bee is focused on the nectar and the hive, unaware that it is also pollinating and supporting the life of an ecosystem.  

Each and every action and nonaction has an effect.  One of the most fascinating phenomena used to occur when I would present an experiential introduction class.  Every so often, someone would show up that "only wanted to sit on the side and observe."  They had no idea of the magnitude of the gravitational force they exerted on the room and everyone else's experience simply by existing in the room.  It's not possible to exist and not be an influence.

Of course Occupiers aspire to more than merely existing.  The question that emerges is then, "To what degree am I a conscious and deliberate influence in my world?"  "What is the range and scope of my effect?" "How/can I be sure?'

OK Got It Jitendra..here you are my dear anonymous friend

Eloquent and wise, my dear anonymous friend.(reference Valentin Tomberg)

The bee is a good analogy for the many dimensions of Occupy and the awakening of the 99%.  If you saw Microsmos ( the beautiful un narrated  1996 phenomenological documentary on what bees and other creatures actually do) it seems that the flower also has intention and deposits its pollen on the bee.Occupy has been the bee..building its own hive in an inward looking way..but in the process the flowers of the field have self pollinated from Occupy taking actions that are outwardly directed and positively taking up the resposibility and very hard work of engineering change, naming what the change must be, holding that up and doing that, some times taking the name of :Occipy" as in Occupy Harvard  but standing and speaking much more powerfully and effectively than Occupy itself has..showing Occupy in these actions what its intentions might become and how much more could be accomplished  if it stopped beng the bee building its own hive and intentionally started making the spreading of pollen its work.

We are equally conscious and deliberate when we act and speak wisely as when we act and speak reactively..the range may even be the same.

To become the bee, intentionally pollinating the flowers of the field, Occupy needs to turn outward to the world in witness, in solidairity,speaking only in what shows solidarity, shows true witness.The hallmark of Occupy, in the words of someone I much admire and hold in affection, must be in every word and action, to serve life

If that is  the internal gyroscope of Occupy, to speak and act only in ways which serve life, then its words and actions will automatically do that and be that.

The ordinary work of the bee is important too..the products of the hive also serve life. Honey is one of the great healers..it actually rebuilds, regenerates tissue, is a natural anti-biotic  that wards off infection.  We need the bees attention to its hive, we need its honey to heal  a broken world.

The hive will continue its operations, the honey will still be made, but the bee is needed to include in its intentions pollinating the withering fields and orchards.

"The question that emerges is then, To what degree am I a conscious and deliberate influence in my world?  What is the range and scope of my effect?  How/can I be sure?"

How about more today, around here, than yesterday?  How about by observing, around here, and by listening to feedback from neighbors?

I think I understand what you're aiming at, David—not certain.  Are you saying we can measure our effect by our present experience in our immediate surroundings?

My question regarding effect is aimed at larger time-frames relative to sustainable large scale systemic changes.  Let's say I've made measurable changes in my community and impacted quite a few lives in dramatic ways. Maybe I founded a homeless center and cleaned up drugs on six street corners and started a community garden with a wind turbine in place of a scarecrow.

Can I tell the degree to which I am making an impact on the whole?  Actually, all of those things I just listed, as you know, have taken place over and over again in many communities with varying levels of success and longevity over the course of many years.  They certainly make local impacts on the surface.

My question for contemplation is this: To what degree have these immediate "controllable" changes impacted meta systems, to date, as a whole (i.e.-economic structures at large, social justice at large, etc.)? 

So far, corporate energy, corporate food, corporate land seizures, corporate police, corporate congress, corporate control has actually been going backwards (relative to improving freedoms and justice).  The question on every occupiers lips, whether conscious or not, is "How do we actually change this system?"

I have noticed that small scale changes tend to be contained.  They get to a certain level where they seem to magically lose steam, get diverted, co-opted or simply plateau.  I strongly suspect this is by design at a higher level of organization invisible to most of the masses.  Conspiracy?  That's one way of putting it.  I think it's more like chess masters playing against rank novices.  My uncle was a highly accomplished chess player.  Playing against a high level opponent will make you swear they're getting inside information or somehow reading your mind.  We simply have not achieved a framework for understanding the nuances of strategy nor the experience from having encountered endlessly more scenarios and responses.

The "conspiracy" we face re: dominators of the world has more to do with an exponentially more complete understanding of the rules of the system, coupled with the power to adjust those rules of the system to accommodate their will as they go along, along with a fairly coherent idea of where they want to end up. 

Acknowledging this does not a victim make.  Ignoring, complaining or collapsing in the face of this game makes victims of us.  There is also  outright exploitation and overpowering that makes bona fide victims (human slavery).  That gives us, who still have a wide range of choice, that much more responsibility to change the game.

I say all of this to come back to the illusion we can sometimes adopt of making a difference, not realizing that difference is allowed within a prescribed domain to pacify change instigators.  However, we are exposing the edges and boundaries of control, making them more visible day by day.

All this considered, we need to be sober and grounded in our assessments of just what, and to what extent, change is actually being implemented, to what depth changes we see have actually penetrated.

This is one reason encampments were allowed initially to exist to a point. When they reached the edge of what was deemed by a certain cadre safely allowable, they were shut down—in concert, globally, in the same manner, with the same tactics. 

I recommend we, Occupy participants/brain stormers, step way back to get as high a perspective as possible.  To get as much of the playing field, in as many dimensions as is accessible, into view.  Study the system with all its feeders and drivers.  Understand the core dynamics in play before another significant move is made.  Blind rebelliousness, even informed rebelliousness, is still coming from a place that is less powerful than is required to make the shift we envision. 

rEvolution comes from a different place.  It moves toward rather than away from; it's an embrace more than a resistance.  It digests and incorporates all that has come before.  Certain things do die, but rarely at a significant scale without taking the bulk of the living system with it. 

I don't believe we want to kill the existing system, we need to heal it.  Of course, we need to assess what "the system" actually is.  What we call the system is actually a tangle of principles, regulation and human attitude. 

Why has nonviolence been the hallmark of the most memorable and significant movements?  I'd say it's our own consciousness registering the signpost most appropriate/useful to follow.

"I don't know." is my current answer to my own question regarding the extent of my influence to change a system. The gap between the theoretical answer and what we actualize is the territory we now traverse. This is the grand experiment—exploring the parameters/potential/possibility of our evolving personal and collective creative capacity and influence. 

I see we are children at varying stages of development, stepping up to the threshold of the manifest world and wondering what is possible, in our bodies, now. 

When I think about how we go about making real change in the system, (other than doing our personal work and nudging the big game closer to the tipping point), I feel like I'm in a surreal movie like Inception or the Adjustment Bureau......having to play chess on a 3 dimensional chess board when all  I've ever played on is a normal board.  I suspect that in some cases we can't fix anything, that we just have to create the new along side the old so that people have a choice.  Feels like a pretty huge task...but like a kid stepping up to that threshold, I do feel a sense of excitement as well. (kinda like the first time I jumped off a cliff with a hang glider. I suspect if we weren't up to the task, we wouldn't be here now.

Consumers of stuff from anywhere and everywhere, and of services performed by specialists, practically all are trapped in the idea that it's feasible to live in and have effects on the world.

Freedom is right outside that idea!  Contemplate human scale and living systems.

Jitendra,

I am not coming from the mindset of making the world a better place, as did many of those nice projects you mentioned.  I am striving for the reversals that can restore a life affirming balance.

Jitendra,

You are right that local initiatives aren't yet feeding or changing the  big system..because the big system..all of us the 99% are still feeding the corporatocracy tapeworm by consuming more than we can afford ( iei incurring debt again)..look at the Black Friday Sales!!!

Last time around..my time on watch over 3 decades we did it wrong I think..we advocates for human dignity ( freedom from poverty, freedom from hunger, safe and santiary housing, clean air, clean water, child protection , banking consumer protection etc. etc. were top down..we adocates were lobbyists..we added these layers  but the values they express never were the "innertructure of the nation"   .

People only know and feel the circumstances in their lives..they unite nationally as the 99% only on a few things like "millionaires should pay their fair share of taxes" or "too many subsidies and tax breaks for the rich:"..they don't feel a betrayal of any core values shared by the 99% beyond that.

The key to the inside out transformation is to discover a true innerstucture and govern from that..build that into our constitution..it was never there you know.

Do Americans consider the dignity of every living person a national priority?  Do they consider  it as given that  some may always require governemnet programs and asistance or some form of support beyond means ( in whatever form that comes?)  My sense is no.  the 99% just wants things to be like they were..they want the higher standard of living , the standard beyond their means that is only possible.  If we are going to build a transformation..we have to start with these realities and the realities of what is about to happen to all of us when the next derivatives bubble bursts.

I think Gail points to osmething valid with her "teach-ins"..I don't know if teach ins are a way to connect the dots but our work right now is connecting the dots.helping people to connect the dots themselves.  Right now they can't make that connecton between their lives in New Hampshire and the Keystone Pipeline.

Thought of a simpler way to express the above.

people got addicted to the benefits of what we advocated for and achieved..but they never attached, to internalized , the underlying/ implied values.  So there never really was a true "innerstructure" in what we achieved ( and have now lost and are still losing inch by inch every day) 

Once upon a time

"A long time ago, in this galaxy but far, far away... the sky is packed with bright stars and glowing nebulae, far denser than today's tame heavens. But this scene is not to last. A great curving wave of stars picks up the solar system like a scrap of flotsam, sweeping it out into the empty galactic fringes, far from its forgotten homeland."

This from current New Scientists felt somehow grounding to the work we are trying to takeup together..to the odds we work against.

“The purpose of Occupy Cafe is to serve and expand the Occupy movement and to support the conversation it has ignited into the wider world”. 

As the front man of the wider world here I posted some questions to Let's Get the Problem Definition Right, flabbergasted at no interest in the discussion there.

"We now do crown you with the sacred emblem of the deer's antlers, the emblem of your Lordship. You shall now become a mentor of the people of the Five Nations. The thickness of your skin shall be seven spans -- which is to say that you shall be proof against anger, offensive actions and criticism. Your heart shall be filled with peace and good will and your mind filled with a yearning for the welfare of the people of the Confederacy. With endless patience you shall carry out your duty and your firmness shall be tempered with tenderness for your people. Neither anger nor fury shall find lodgement in your mind and all your words and actions shall be marked with calm deliberation. In all of your deliberations in the Confederate Council, in your efforts at law making, in all your official acts, self interest shall be cast into oblivion. Cast not over your shoulder behind you the warnings of the nephews and nieces should they chide you for any error or wrong you may do, but return to the way of the Great Law which is just and right. Look and listen for the welfare of the whole people and have always in view not only the present but also the coming generations, even those whose faces are yet beneath the surface of the ground -- the unborn of the future Nation."

Article 28 of the Constituion of the Iroquois Confederacy.

Innerstructure

Built Right in.

This particular section is the "oath of office" for the Lords of the Counsel

( A wonderful ceremony and beautiful language  too for Lords who are "disbarred" for straying from this path, betraying this trust)

Doing research for a TED project, and inspired by Jitendras call for "innerstructure" I had ocasion to reread the Iroqouis Nation  Constitution and a bit about how they governed their confederacy of 5 nations.

As most of us no doubt now, that Consititution and it greatr success in governance of  a large population in 5 distinct nations .  Redaing it now I see they tokk the procedures alone from the Iroquois as if the process somehow explained the great success of the Iroquois Cofederacy.  They didn't understand that it was the "innerstructure" all these values we have been talking about here at Occupy Cafe as the Heart of Sustaianable Economy of the radically different economic, social and political world we hope to co-build.  They ddnt understand the mystical balance of feminine and masculine in the Iroquois gyneocrcay (yes they are all matrilineal tribes..as wisdom, the divine feminine, was with God at creation ( according to that beuatiful psalm and our common musline,judaic,christian heitage) the women held title to all land and possessions, the women enforced this innerstructure, the women appointed or banished the Lord's of the Counsel.

The famous orator and diplomat Red Jacket was merely a "speaker of the women" carrying words written by elder woman of this tribe, a mere messenger.

Sour founding fathers took only the process of the Iroquois nation, not the true heart that made it work, its innerstructure .  They strip process only out of a beautiful "conviviocracy" also a "gyneocrcay" and  created not a democracy but an androcracay.. a boy's club for plunderers and exploiters.  That androcracy has degraded relentlessly, steadily, continuously, inevitiably  for 324 years to the "corporatocracy", the "kleptocracy"..the aburd, catastrophic extreme of the "adrocracy" that brought us to this precipice.

May the Great Spirit somehow come alive in us in time to lead us back from the edge. 

Doreen,

Thank you..I signed as an individual and am pasting to my Facebook.  I have been reseraching and writing abouty the truth of  the Egyptiann revolution and America's evil role in the whole thing, including propping up Mubarak and trying to keep the muslim majority out of government a my blog. (lindsaynewlandbowker@posterous.com)   Ther have been one or two arricles in major media here in the States but most don't see to get it and none are focusing on the U.S. role..or mentioning that our puppet governemnt in Egypt has been costing us $13 billion a year ( the price tag annually for maintining Egypt's compliance with the Camp David Accord and also U.S. strategic access.  It is time this is all spoken in public and unerstood by all Americans.

I am just thrilled to have such a distinguished and large group to add my own name to as an individual.

thankyou..and may I say many blessings . 

http://occupyheartworld.wordpress.com/

http://occupyheartworld.wordpress.com/: 

Seek Wisdom from Nature. Live in Truth.

David Eggleton:

For the time being, the truth of wholeness can serve well as light at the end of the tunnel.

My questions:

Is it the nature at the end of tunnel? What is the nature of the tunnel?

From where I am, the nature of the tunnel is described thus:

Roughly 400 years of Western over-reliance on measurement and analysis (reductionism) produced disintegrations, rearrangements and disorders, from personal to planetary, that deeply concern many.  Beginning with fossil fuel use (alienation from human scale) and increasing with mass production/marketing (alienation from whole-person engagement with materials and processes) that reaches almost everywhere, more and more humans have lost connection and facility with the living life support system, the most reliable source of everything necessary.

Some of that repeats what you've read elsewhere, but it's a very new construction.

As people emerge from that, whether as a reasoned selection or as a leap of faith (conscious is the link), they'll have the option of resuming connection with wholeness/truth.

Roughly 400 years of Western over-reliance on measurement and analysis (reductionism) produced disintegrations, rearrangements and disorders, from personal to planetary, that deeply concern many.

My reasoned selection leads me towards integration as the solution for disorders caused by disintegration. Your idea of integration of the "person" is clear to me. I cannot however understand how we can leap to (faith in) integration, missing the understanding of the disintegration process (cause and mechanism). In particular: what exactly has happened 400 years ago and led to disintegration? Wasn't the leap of western civilization the natural and inevitable consequence of the Middle Ages?

Another question is the relation between the internal integrity (wholeness) of a person and the wholeness/truth of the planet, the universe.

I ask the questions in search for grounds for conscious reasoning (logic) as link between faith and reason.

My 4 years experience (including the initially promising discussion with DB) has led me to the conclusion that they cannot be linked - we will never agree. On what grounds your motivation to discuss with me is founded?

"On what grounds your motivation to discuss with me is founded?"

Pawel,

We must keep going because all this matters a lot and our ways of expression (yours in a second language, thank you) force us to explain and clarify, if not give a new account from a perspective to which the other has recently pushed us.

Case in point:  I did not write about "conscious reasoning (logic) as link between faith and reason."  I wrote about consciousness in selection and in leaping.  I believe both are choices and don't believe a leap of faith is an unconscious act (saying nothing about its rationality).  I believe one is conscious of preparing to leap and of leaping (though, of course, one might faint in mid-air!).

So we continue.

Re your other question:  I believe whole people are/will be more agile and open-minded than fragmented people.  I asked myself how unchanged people can welcome and accept change and guessed that many cannot.  If they could, they would have by now, no?

I notice astonishing disproportion (in all café discussions) between the frequent use of the concepts of “whole” and “wholeness” and avoidance of “integral” and  ”integration” or "integrity".

E.g. ‘Integral Activism’ (group) and 'Integral informed perspective NEEDED!' (discussion), which drifted away from the title subject and died.

Your answer fits the precept. I feel deep inability (or even impotence) to continue the discussion because of that.  All the more since you address disintegrations as first problem of western civilization (your previous post).

Being not sure of my English as second language I verified the meanings in Wikipedia:

The word "integrity" stems from the Latin adjective integer (whole, complete). In this context, integrity is the inner sense of "wholeness" deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character. As such, one may judge that others "have integrity" to the extent that they act according to the values, beliefs and principles they claim to hold.

Can you help me? Has it something to do with "confirmation bias"?