What are the odds that you, an average dude, is Tier 2? Not very high.

[Carl-Richard]

4 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

I understand you insist that I've "likely" mimicked green or yellow after being exposed to the SD model I get it. That it's a concern you have about people who learn about the model.

That said, I don’t feel it applies to me in this case.

It always applies. It's not "likely". It's a constant. The only way it doesn't apply is if you were already solidly Yellow before learning about the model. This is in fact a core assumption of the model, that the individual evolves as a response to societal, and more generally, external conditions. The claim I'm making is that this evolution happens at the level of relatively empty and shallow mimickry as well, as a stereotypical, dumbed-down version. And it's hyper-charged when learning about SD which exposes you to the concepts of the very highest stages. The fact that this mimickry happens is a truism that doesn't have to be elaborated on, but the most funniest example of it is maybe the cargo cult phenomena if you have heard about it.

 

4 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

I’ve simply gone through a number of internal and external transformations over the past five years

I'm the same age as you. What do you think I would answer to that question?

 

4 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

If knowing Spiral Dynamics makes all self-reflection invalid, then the entire model becomes useless. Just intellectual gatekeeping dressed up as theory. No one passes your purity test.

It does not make all self-reflection invalid. Mimickry can help you develop, but it's still not the real thing. You see, "if you were a real Tier 2 thinker", you would not think about this like a black or white thing — that's real gatekeeping.

The concept of wisdom is useful even though it's hard to grasp. People chase Enlightenment even though they are not enlightened.

Edited Wednesday at 03:52 AM by Carl-Richard

[Reciprocality]

There are patterns of behaviours in various societies, these implies a state of mind where intentions resides.

These consciousness models describe several of these patterns and predict that if one of them occurs in someone then a certain set of other behaviour patterns is likely to occur in them too.

All roads leads to Rome, whichever pattern your behaviour exhibits it will be insufficient in certain contexts if you dear to challenge yourself sufficiently, the psychological evolution and trajectory that follows is similar across cultures. 

 

We age into these patterns of thinking and acting, we find people similar to ourselves who went through the same phases, the same phases they went through thousand years ago and will do in a thousand years from now. When we observe others we may infer which developmental phase they are going through and maybe even realise that they are exactly like us. 

 

All this were clear throughout history in every society, the macro-level intellectualisation is just a repetition of the immediately obvious in our perceptive field, because we went through some of the phases, just like the others.

@Carl-Richard You speak about people on the forum not having <lived> the "tier 2" paradigm they spout, and suggest that only 2% of the population reaches this level, but what do you really know about most of the population? What is even the distinction in your mind between 1. who most of the population are and 2. that about them which is stuck in tier 1? How many 40 and 50 year olds (who may actually have lived a little bit) have you stared in the eyes after a thorough conversation and deemed to be "undeveloped tier 1"? I would certainly pay good money to actually rig you with a camera and speaker setup and see how straight your face would be as you spout that evaluation. How could you even evaluate whether someone were tier 1 or 2 if you don't even have the slightest clue the level of thought patterns they go through as they evaluate you?

[Carl-Richard]

55 minutes ago, Reciprocality said:

There are patterns of behaviours in various societies, these implies a state of mind where intentions resides.

These consciousness models describe several of these patterns and predict that if one of them occurs in someone then a certain set of other behaviour patterns is likely to occur in them too.

All roads leads to Rome, whichever pattern your behaviour exhibits it will be insufficient in certain contexts if you dear to challenge yourself sufficiently, the psychological evolution and trajectory that follows is similar across cultures. 

 

We age into these patterns of thinking and acting, we find people similar to ourselves who went through the same phases, the same phases they went through thousand years ago and will do in a thousand years from now. When we observe others we may infer which developmental phase they are going through and maybe even realise that they are exactly like us. 

 

All this were clear throughout history in every society, the macro-level intellectualisation is just a repetition of the immediately obvious in our perceptive field, because we went through some of the phases, just like the others.

@Carl-Richard You speak about people on the forum not having <lived> the "tier 2" paradigm they spout, and suggest that only 2% of the population reaches this level, but what do you really know about most of the population? What is even the distinction in your mind between 1. who most of the population are and 2. that about them which is stuck in tier 1? How many 40 and 50 year olds (who may actually have lived a little bit) have you stared in the eyes after a thorough conversation and deemed to be "undeveloped tier 1"? I would certainly pay good money to actually rig you with a camera and speaker setup and see how straight your face would be as you spout that evaluation. How could you even evaluate whether someone were tier 1 or 2 if you don't even have the slightest clue the level of thought patterns they go through as they evaluate you?

Yes, it's hard to evaluate someone's stage. That is my point.

Edited Wednesday at 03:45 AM by Carl-Richard

[Reciprocality]

38 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Yes, it's hard to evaluate someone's stage. That is my point.

@Carl-Richard Seems more likely that the point is to maintain very strong and clear estimates of the percentage of the "others" are developed to a meagre tier 1 stage and then it becomes conveniently unclear and hard to determine whether particular people actually are in a given stage.

It is almost like one could expect there to be some form of relationship between 1. conceptualising conscious development in society in general and 2. how many people in the real world one have evaluated to be of a certain conscious development. 

[SwiftQuill]

Or, hear me out, you just read the model and ask yourself how many traits you possess from each stage. And how many values you embody from each stage. And you assess yourself according to what makes the most sense.

One more thing you can do is NOT impose your assessment on someone else, like Leo does all the time here. Maybe give people the autonomy to self-assess without derailing discussions all the time by saying someone is stuck in stage orange or stage green or whatever.

[Ulax]

1 hour ago, SwiftQuill said:

Or, hear me out, you just read the model and ask yourself how many traits you possess from each stage. And how many values you embody from each stage. And you assess yourself according to what makes the most sense.

One more thing you can do is NOT impose your assessment on someone else, like Leo does all the time here. Maybe give people the autonomy to self-assess without derailing discussions all the time by saying someone is stuck in stage orange or stage green or whatever.

Yeah I think that is a reasonable pov.

[Carl-Richard]

4 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

Or, hear me out, you just read the model and ask yourself how many traits you possess from each stage. And how many values you embody from each stage. And you assess yourself according to what makes the most sense.

Yes, this is what most people do, and it's perfectly ok to have this naive approach to it. But I also like to ask questions about epistemology and criticize the limitations of our assumptions, etc. And they're not mutually exclusive. If you can't carry both, that's on you. I do this with everything: MBTI, SD, Cook-Greuter's 9SEDT, science, spirituality, yet I also partake in all of them.

 

5 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

One more thing you can do is NOT impose your assessment on someone else, like Leo does all the time here. Maybe give people the autonomy to self-assess without derailing discussions all the time by saying someone is stuck in stage orange or stage green or whatever.

That's very Blue. But I generally don't label someone with a SD stage unless it's as a joke or unless in the abstract while I'm making a point while both are talking about SD. But I will also say that people on this forum are actually more Blue than they think.

[SwiftQuill]

@Carl-Richard I guess we just agree to disagree. I trust my own assessment of SD. You don't.

I don't think it's naive at all to use models this way. It's a rough indicator of where you are.

[Carl-Richard]

13 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

@Carl-Richard I guess we just agree to disagree. I trust my own assessment of SD. You don't.

I trust them on one level but not another.

 

13 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

I don't think it's naive at all to use models this way. It's a rough indicator of where you are.

Look, you understand what I mean by "it's naive" in the context of what I said. It's not like "naive" in an absolute sense. This is more Blue 😂

If you want a lesson for "self-identifying" where you are on SD, see how often you interpret things as "either/or", or treat things as absolutes, or say that things must be done just one way and not another, or whether you can hold two different things at the same time, or whether you tend to use one approach for all things or tailor the approach to the specific situation, etc.

Edited yesterday at 06:21 AM by Carl-Richard

[SilentChronicl3r]

By the logic of the beginning post I would be somewhere between stage blue and stage Orange. 

 

However I want to share something I used with the help of a large language model. And I just wanted feedback on what kind of thinking this would betray. After all any kind of self-assessment here would just be self biased. 

And honestly I just want to expose some of these ideas to more people.

 

Unified Strategic Framework: The 2nd Bering Bridge

 

Building Economic Stability, Sustainable Industry, and Integrated Workforce Mobility Across the Americas

 

I. Executive Summary

 

The 2nd Bering Bridge is a continental trade and infrastructure initiative designed to realign economic strategy, stabilize migration, and modernize industry across North, Central, and South America. By integrating mobile modular trade hubs, sustainable manufacturing, and a structured workforce mobility system, this policy ensures economic expansion and geopolitical stability without relying on tariff wars or restrictive border policies.

 

This framework outlines:

 

Mobile Modular Trade Hubs – A climate-resilient trade network optimizing supply chain efficiency.

Mexico Canal Partnership – Strengthening hemispheric commerce by expanding the Tehuantepec shipping corridor.

Green Factories & Industrial Expansion – Sustainable manufacturing to drive long-term economic growth.

The Continental Passport System – Structured workforce mobility stabilizing migration pressures.

Funding Optimization & Cost Reduction – Repurposed assets, redirected funding, and strategic trade agreements.

 

II. Core Policy Pillars

 

1. Mobile Modular Trade Hubs: A Dynamic 

Infrastructure

 

Deploy relocatable port cities along strategic coastal trade routes, adapting to climate risks and economic demands.

Establish a Panama Canal alternative, positioning modular ports for optimized North-South commerce.

Implement floating platforms, AI-driven logistics, and decentralized docking systems to ensure supply chain resilience.

 

2. Mexico Canal Partnership: Strengthening Trade Routes

 

Support Mexico’s Tehuantepec Canal, expanding direct shipping connections between the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific.

Integrate U.S. logistics expertise to ensure seamless cargo transit and reduce reliance on Panama.

Align trade agreements with North, Central, and South American partners for mutual economic benefits.

 

3. Green Factories & Industrial Expansion

 

Develop eco-friendly manufacturing hubs using solar, wind, and geothermal power to reinforce sustainable growth.

Optimize factory construction costs through repurposed ghost town infrastructure and liquidated government funding.

Train skilled laborers for sustainable industries, ensuring long-term employment stability.

 

4. The Continental Passport System: Workforce Mobility & Immigration Stability

 

Establish multi-nation labor registration, granting amnesty to undocumented workers while ensuring lawful employment.

Provide passport privileges for U.S. citizens seeking affordable living and job opportunities abroad.

Strengthen immigration stability, reducing illegal crossings through structured migration pathways.

 

5. Strategic Cost Optimization & Shared Investment

 

Liquidate frozen federal funds from stalled infrastructure projects to finance modular ports and green factories.

Repurpose seized corporate assets and underutilized industrial zones for economic development.

Lower tariffs and trade barriers, reducing overall project costs through cooperative trade agreements.

 

III. Implementation Timeline & Growth Plan

Phase

 

Estimated Duration

 

Key Milestones

 

Phase 1: Diplomatic & Economic Alignment

 

1-3 years

 

Establish agreements with Canada, Mexico, and South American partners. Secure funding and policy frameworks.

 

Phase 2: Modular Port Deployment & Industrial Expansion

 

3-5 years

 

Begin mobile port testing, integrate Mexico’s canal into trade routes, and launch workforce training programs.

 

Phase 3: Large-Scale Industrial & Trade Corridor Implementation

 

5-10 years

 

Deploy full modular port networks, expand green factories, and establish hemispheric trade corridors.

 

IV. Economic Impact & Cost Breakdown

Factor

 

Projected Impact

 

Comparison to Other Initiatives

 

Job Creation

 

10M+ jobs over 10 years

 

Comparable to China’s Belt & Road Initiative, but with less debt burden

 

GDP Growth

 

1.5-2.5% increase across participating nations

 

Higher than USMCA, lower than full Eurasian trade integration

 

Trade Efficiency

 

30-40% reduction in shipping costs

 

Competitive with Mexico’s canal expansion, superior to Panama

 

Industrial Expansion

 

500+ new green factories

 

Stronger than traditional trade agreements, but requires private sector buy-in

 

Infrastructure ROI

 

$3-5 return per $1 invested

 

Comparable to large-scale bridge projects, higher than tariff-based trade wars

 

Projected Cost Reduction from Trade Agreements

Cost Factor

 

Estimated Cost Without Trade Deals

 

Estimated Cost With Integrated Trade Deals

 

Savings Potential

 

Modular Port Cities

 

$200B+

 

$150B (leveraging shared trade hubs)

 

$50B+

 

Green Factories

 

$100B+

 

$75B (joint industrial investment)

 

$25B+

 

Continental Passport System

 

$50B+

 

$40B (shared labor mobility programs)

 

$10B+

 

Mexico Canal Partnership

 

$75B+

 

$50B (joint infrastructure funding)

 

$25B+

 

Total Estimated Cost

 

$500B+

 

$315B+

 

$185B+ in savings

 

V. Legislative Pathways

To ensure successful policy implementation, legislators must enact multi-tiered trade, infrastructure, and labor mobility reforms:

 

1. Trade & Infrastructure Legislation

🗹 North American Trade Expansion Act – Establishes funding for modular port networks and aligns trade policies with Mexico’s canal development. 🗹 Continental Infrastructure Resilience Initiative – Secures investment for mobile ports, ensuring adaptability to climate risks.

 

2. Labor & Immigration Reform

🗹 Workforce Mobility & Continental Passport Act – Provides structured registration for cross-border labor, reducing unauthorized migration. 🗹 Green Industry Employment Incentive Bill – Expands worker retraining programs for sustainable manufacturing.

 

3. Investment & Funding Alignment

🗹 Federal Asset Reallocation Act – Redirects frozen government funds from stalled projects toward modular port development. 🗹 Industrial Sustainability & Innovation Tax Incentives – Encourages corporate investment in green factories through fiscal benefits.

 

VI. Stakeholder Messaging & Political Viability

For Policymakers & Legislators

✅ “The 2nd Bering Bridge enhances trade security while reducing dependency on adversarial economies.” ✅ “This initiative modernizes immigration policy, providing structured labor mobility.” ✅ “Green factories ensure sustainable job growth and long-term industrial stability.”

 

For Private Investors & Industry Leaders

✅ “A shared investment model reduces costs while ensuring strategic trade expansion.” ✅ “Mobile modular ports future-proof supply chains, increasing profitability.” ✅ “Green factories provide tax incentives and ESG compliance for corporate sustainability goals.”

 

For Labor Unions & Workforce Advocates

✅ “The Continental Passport System guarantees lawful labor mobility, strengthening wages.” ✅ “New industrial zones create millions of skilled trade jobs.” ✅ “Infrastructure investments benefit local economies, ensuring long-term workforce demand.”

 

VII. Conclusion & Next Steps

 

The 2nd Bering Bridge is a strategic, financially viable initiative that strengthens hemispheric trade, stabilizes migration, and modernizes industry. Its success depends on policy advocacy, stakeholder engagement, and structured investment planning. Supporters

of long-term economic development, workforce integration, and industrial sustainability should push for legislative frameworks and funding alignment to make this initiative a reality.

[Oppositionless]

I thought I was tier two, but then I got sucked into the Christian apologist rabbit hole. I seem to be lacking in yellow hierarchies of perspective, stuck in green flat hierarchies struggling to distinguish low and high perspectives. Afraid of going to hell. I wish I could just dismiss Christianity as easily as Leo , but the mind virus has infected me somewhat.

what I can't seem to get over is how bizarre it is that so many people, within a few years of Jesus death believed he resurrected. Leo said he believes in remote viewing because there wouldn't be so many people talking about it if there wasn't something to it. I don't know how to not apply that same logic to Jesus and  hell.

anyway I think I'm late-stage or deficient green with a lot of unprocessed blue coming in . I recognize that there's something wrong about not being able to distinguish low vs high perspectives , but I'm unsure how to progress, unable to fundamentally grasp why one perspective is lower consciousness than another. The best antidote to my particular problem I've found is bingeing atheist content to try to counteract it.

Edited 23 hours ago by Oppositionless