tuckerwphotography

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    594

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by tuckerwphotography

  1. Posted · Edited by tuckerwphotography

    47 minutes ago, Fearey said:

    If you'd want to read more about my understanding of and experience of Coral, you could check out one of the first posts I wrote on this forum, linked below. I should add that I don't really like using the Spiral Dynamics model for modelling stages past Turquoise, as that's not what it's intended for. For this, I prefer using Ken Wilber's Integral Theory model, as it's a lot more accurate in portraying later stages past SD Turquoise.

    When I wrote the post above I believed myself to be centered in early stage Teal, now I consider myself centered in mid to late stage Teal, and starting to have glimses of what comes next, although it'd be very difficult for me to put into words what that's like, or what that would be fully.

    One thing that started happening to me that has never happened before is an underlying, permanent state of inner peace, or happiness if you will. A happiness that is present regardless of what happens around you, 24 hours a day. It's been like this for about 3 months by now, and as I've never experienced anything like this before, my conclusion is that this most likely comes from entering into an early state of the color that comes after Teal.

    The stage after Teal, converted to Ken Wilber's Integral Theory would most likely be the stage named Ultraviolet.

    As to how many human beings there are in Coral, Teal and the stages after, there is no good way to know, the best we can do is guess. While rare, I really don't think they're as rare as they're believed to be. Eckhart Tolle, for example, is someone I'm 99% sure is firmly centered in Teal or higher. 

    @Fearey Thanks for sharing! I'm not sure what you're referring to as Teal. In the Integral Theory map, Teal is the alt term used to describe SD Yellow. So it wouldn't make sense to go from Coral to Teal? 

    I'd suggest looking into STAGES which is a synthesis of Integral Theory and Susanne Cook-Greuter's stages of adult ego development. STAGES includes the MetaAware tier (5.0+) and goes into detail about each stage. Attached are two PDFs that you might find helpful to read. One is an overview of STAGES and the other is a deep dive into the later stages and how they map with nonduality and the Buddhist maps of Enlightenment. 

    In STAGES, a rough outline could be:

    4.5 Strategist = Yellow 

    5.0 Construct Aware = late Yellow / early Turquoise

    5.5 Transpersonal = Turquoise 

    6.0 Universal = late Turquoise / early Coral

    6.5 Illumined = Coral (but again, Coral isn't even really a thing, so it's hard to name this a true stage at this point in time)

    The_STAGES_Matrix_Roadmap_GEN_10-18.pdf

    Here's a link to the more in-depth PDF: https://www.integral-review.org/issues/vol_16_no_1_churchill_and_murray_integrating_adult_developmental_and_metacognitive_theory.pdf

  2. Posted

    3 hours ago, DocWatts said:

    From my own vantage point, I've found that Spiral Dynamics is much better used as a sociological model for looking at the interplay of different meta-ideologies.

    The model becomes less interesting and useful when SD is used as a proxy for an individual's overall level of development, since it collapses several different lines of development down to a single axis (that of the meta-ideology which that person has been imprinted with) when used in that way.

    People can be at a level of complexity and depth significantly above or below the SD-Stage they've been imprinted with. To see how the model falls short when used as a proxy for someone's overall level of development, consider that both Ben Shapiro and Marcus Aurelius are roughly SD-Blue...

    @DocWatts Yes, agree. I prefer the STAGES model which is based off a synthesis of Integral Theory and Susanne Cook-Greuter's work. I'm doing a course with Terri O'Fallen right now which has been a great way to integrate all the stages including the later MetaAware tier ones which Susanne's model does not cover (she bulks later stages after Construct Aware into a catch-all called Unitive). 

    I just did SD because it's what's most commonly used as a map on the forum. Not enough people would know what Achiever, Pluralist, Strategist, etc would mean so there would be no point in creating that poll. 

    Which stage of ego development do you resonate as your COG using the Cook-Greuter model? 

    The_STAGES_Matrix_Roadmap_GEN_10-18.pdf

  5. Posted

    11 hours ago, Fearey said:

    There are higher and lower stages missing.

    I guess I could just say I'm centered at Turquoise, but as the stage has so little in common with later stages, that wouldn't be accurate.

    @Fearey I'm aware that there's other stages missing - that's intentional on my part. Nobody who is chilling on Actualized.org has a center of gravity below Blue. In fact, I highly doubt anyone here is at Blue. My guess is the vast majority of folks are at Orange and Green with some Yellow and *maybe* a couple of people peaking into Turquoise. Coral is not a real stage yet and basically doesn't exist beyond likely a small handful of people on the entire planet. If you're at Coral, I highly doubt you'd be responding to this forum post. But maybe lol. I'd be curious to hear more about your experience and understanding of what stage you're at and why.

    5 hours ago, Matt23 said:

    Ya... more options needed.

    Also... this assumes people know their center of gravity.  As they talk about, it's not something easily see for oneself. 

    Like I doubt there's 8 people on this forum who would take part in this questionnaire who would be at a Stage Yellow center of gravity.  

    There's also the assumption are even centers of gravity, which has been debated.

    @Matt23 See response above about more options needed. 

    Agree, it's not a scientific poll haha just put it out there for fun.

    Center of gravity, like ego development itself, is a construct. Of course it doesn't exist. It's just a label describing an experience in the relative world that some people identify with. I try not to take it too seriously while also not overlooking its utility. 

    What stage do you feel you most often orient from in your day-to-day life?

  9. Posted · Edited by tuckerwphotography

    What is your Spiral Dynamics center of gravity? Curious to get a sense of how most Actualized users see the world. 

    As a reminder, this is about ego development and is not related to how many nondual insights you've had :) 

    Your "center of gravity" is the stage that you most often occupy, not the highest stage you occasionally dip into.

    I purposefully scrambled the poll choices so that people don't just pick the "highest" one unconsciously ;)

  12. Posted

    On 10/6/2021 at 4:52 AM, Godishere said:

    As per the question, for example there are supposedly close to 8 billion people on "earth" and who knows how many sentient animals. Does God live through every human being and sentient creature for infinity? Or is God just imagining 8 billion perspectives from 1 perspective. Therefore only 1 perspective exists, all other perspectives are imaginary and not lived through consciousness? Because when all dualities collapse into one, it's clear there's only 1 dreamer. But how can the dreamer know that the dreams are overlapping for infinity? I mean this is a significant question and can this actually be answered from the dreamers POV?

    @Godishere I’ve been contemplating this question a lot recently. Thanks for asking it so articulately. I can’t say I found much clarity in the responses above, but perhaps it’s not something my limited ego mind can wrap its head around in this state of consciousness. Perhaps @Leo Gura has some insight. 

  14. Posted

    Felt spontaneously called to write this essay the other morning. Sharing here. I wrote it as a way to guide myself through these teachings. Hope it can be of help to others. https://tuckerwalsh.medium.com/this-66ef86798794

     

    All there is, is This. 

    “This” represents the unspeakable Nothing which transcends and include Everything. 

    You are always a part of This because you are This in its infinite totality, even when you believe you are separate from This.

    To better understand This, close your eyes and drop all thoughts, even the subtlest ones. What’s left is absolutely Nothing. 

    “But what do you mean, I hear birds and my breathing, and I feel my body and see these words that I’m reading?” you might ask. 

    These are all thoughts. If you drop all the thoughts, what’s left is whatever Is, which cannot be named, because, naming it is thinking it, which then separates Nothing into Something. 

    But how can it be Nothing when it feels so full of Something? It’s Nothing because it’s prior to the finite mind (aka “your” mind), which means it’s unfiltered Awareness prior to any labels, stories or identifications. When the mind no longer labels and identifies (creates stories), it no longer separates. When there’s no longer separation, there’s no longer boundaries. When there’s no longer boundaries, there’s no longer Something. Everything becomes simply Nothing. 

    And yet even the word Nothing is saying too much, for Nothing cannot be communicated, only experienced. And guess what? You’re experiencing it right now, forever and always. 

    Nothing means there is no time, no space, no you, no me, no past, present or future. So, in a sense, Nothing is infinite, for there is no boundary between here and there, before or after. 

    All there is, is This. 

    “Okay, that’s all fine and good. But I do have a mind. I do think thoughts. I do feel I am a human.”

    Let’s just pretend for a moment that you are not the one thinking these thoughts. What if these thoughts were just arising as Something in the infinite Nothing? What if “you” were Nothing creating thoughts that created Something? 

    “But how could this be possible? How can Nothing create Something if it’s Nothing?”

    This presumes that Nothing has limitations and is unable to create, which would mean Nothing is not infinite rather a separate object which can and cannot do certain things. But that would be mistaking Nothing for Something. Nothing is infinite, meaning Nothing includes every single possible Something. Anything less would no longer be infinite, and that would make it Something, not Nothing. 

    So Nothing creates Something called thoughts which create Something called thinking which create something called a thinker which creates something called you. When there is a thought that there is a you, there by default creates another thought that there is a not you. This is the birth of Separation. 

    Once there is a you who thinks you think thoughts, entire universes of infinite potential open up. Notice how “your mind” has created layers upon layers upon layers of abstractions and thoughts and identifications and stories, and yet, you’ve been looking at the same screen for the past five minutes sitting in the same room having barely moved. Your mind, however, has traveled endless miles through Something. 

    This realization creates the experience of multiple dimensions of Something. There’s the physical dimension of the felt senses. And now the subtle dimension of the mind. 

    But wait, is there? Drop all the thoughts again. Is there really anything other than Nothing? 

    “Well, there’s these thoughts arising, so there must be something other than Nothing.”

    Okay, but who is aware of these thoughts creating Something out of Nothing? 

    “Well I am, of course. I am the one aware of these thoughts because I am the one thinking these thoughts.”

    Technically, that’s right. But not the “I” who you think you are. 

    If you know you are Something (in this case, “I”) because a thought says you are, then you cannot be only that thought, for that “I” thought arises and falls as Something back into Nothing. The thought is here. Now it’s gone. But “you” are still here, right? 

    “Yes, but I feel that ‘I am.’ I can feel my body.”

    You can feel your body, but you can also feel the seat that you’re sitting on and the ground beneath your feet. So how do you know that you’re not also the seat and the ground? 

    “Because I am my body, not the seat. This seat isn’t reading this. I’m reading this!”

    The only way you know that is because you believe a thought that you are you, and that you are thinking these thoughts. And because everyone else around you is appearing to also think these thoughts, you think this is all crazy.

    “Yes, I do. But to answer your question, if I stand up from the seat, I no longer feel the seat. So how can you say I’m the seat?”

    You feel your arm, right?

    “Of course.”

    What if you had it amputated? Your arm is gone now. Would you still exist? 

    “Yes, but if I had my head amputated, I would die. Then I would no longer exist.”

    That’s an interesting thought. 

    “It’s called a scientific fact, not a thought. Maybe, possibly, I could exist in Heaven or something. I’m not sure.”

    Let’s drop the thoughts again. Let’s simply rest with what Is for a moment. 

    Let me ask you something: when you close your eyes and let the thoughts drop away, do you still exist? 

    “Yes.”

    What is your felt experience of This?

    “I just feel here. Like everything is arising and falling, coming and going.”

    Who is the one witnessing all of This? 

    “Me. I am.” 

    Who is the ‘me’? Where is the ‘me’?

    “I’m just...here. I just...am.”

    For the purposes of communication, can you give this experience a label? A name?

    “Hmmm. Not really. It just feels like...nothing.”

    Did you say…Nothing? 

    “Wait, you tricked me! No, it’s not nothing cause there’s lots of stuff happening. I can hear things and feel things and smell things.” 

    Yes, if you, as Nothing, think you are Something, you can have an infinite number of experiences, including smelling, feeling, hearing, living, dying and, of course, thinking. 

    But if you be with all these Somethings as Nothing, you may come to realize that the “you” who you think you are is simply that: the you who you think you are. This “you” has died billions of times before. 

    “Are you talking about my soul or something?”

    No. I’m talking about the “you” who you think you are. One moment you think you’re awake. The next moment you think you’re tired. The next moment you think you’re hungry. The next moment you think you’re intelligent. The next moment you think you’re Tucker. The next moment you think you’re anxious. 

    Each thought arises as Something and falls away into Nothing. Each “you” lives and dies for precisely as long as the thought exist. When the thought dies, you die. Until a new thought is thought, and a new “you” is born.

    “That sounds pretty philosophical. But there is a me that is here for all of these passing thoughts. That’s the real me.”

    Yes! Exactly. There is a You prior to any thoughts of a Something called “you” arising. That You is…

    “Wait, let me guess...Nothing.”

    Exactly! Well, not exactly, for the word Nothing is just a label we are giving that which cannot be labeled. But I think you get the point (literally, I think you get the point).

    “Okay, but how do I stop identifying with the passing thoughts that make me feel I am Something rather than Nothing?”

    First off, let’s be clear: you are also Something. Nothing is infinite, meaning Nothing includes Something, which includes the thought that you are Something and not Nothing.

    My suggestion is to spend as much time with Nothing as possible, as if it’s your dream lover that you desire to spend every moment with and get to know as deeply and intimately as possible. Until one day you realize that you are this Lover, and you as Something and your lover as Nothing get married and become One. 

    “And then what?”

    Then you do what most married couples do, you have kids. You as Nothing create lots of Somethings, and you love them unconditionally as if they were you. And in this case, the very literally are You. 

    “How does the story end?”

    How can Nothing end? It never began...

     

  21. Posted

    8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    Yes, of course. All this means is surrendering ego to God. The more ego is surrendered the more God acts through you with less impurity. If ego is totally gone, God can take over your body and act flawlessly. But this doesn't guarantee your body will survive.

    If God was to fully take over control of your mind and body, all your actions would be in accordance with the highest possible intelligence and love that your mind and body are capable of. You would max yourself out as a human organism. You would become a super-conductor of God's Will on Earth. You could literally be God in human form.

    Of course the biographical self would be completely annihilated at this point.

    @Leo Gura I get what you're saying and don't mean to be parsing words, but isn't it also true to say that my limited ego form is also God's infinite intelligence acting in accordance with God's will? If Tucker does not exist beyond a thought construct, then isn't God already in full control of my life and creating me from a place of total Love? 

    So yes, as God allows Tucker's ego to further dissolve, more Love can be expressed through this vessel, but in reality it was all infinite Love all along?

  24. Posted

    6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    You are talking about survival. Within the domain of survival there are win-win-win scenarios and loving actions that we should aspire to.

    If Hitler was alive, I would be okay with assassinating him.

    In the Absolute domain, all is Love no matter what happens. But humans don't live in that domain.

    @Leo Gura Yes, but there's another perspective often articulated by saints and gurus that there is some sort of objective Goodness out there called Love that's can guide our actions, bypassing the human ego. Almost like any action can be guided by Love or Fear, and if we choose Love it's because we're acting on behalf of God's will. I see this as different than the Stage Yellow win-win-win stuff, though some overlap perhaps. And I'm not sure if it's distinctly about survival, as often the examples used are doing something that risks survival for the sake of Love. Is this just because it's pointing to the survival of the human species (and/or nature), or is there actually some objective Goodness out there that our hearts can feel and be guided by?

  25. Posted

    9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    Everything IS pure Nothingness.

    Your question assumes a difference between form and formlessness.

    @Leo Gura Thanks for your response! Often a rebuttal I hear from my "spiritual" friends is that we must align our actions to morality (morality being that which Love wants to manifest through our unvarnished Souls), and that if we can follow the light of Love than goodness will prevail. A lot of Stage Yellow spirituality is about this: morality and ethics reign supreme, and there are omni "win-win-win" scenarios that are the most Love-oriented and therefore should be held in the highest regard. 

    Even David Hawkins and his scale of consciousness says some actions are higher on the scale than others.

    Your "worldview" seems to point to something much simpler and more radical, that everything that Is...is Love, and any differences between Hitler and Mother Theresa are just a bias from our ego's subjective POV.

    How do you reconcile the two philosophies, or are they fundamentally different at their core?