Artsu

The Thematic Hierarchy, Spiral Dynamics and MBTI

91 posts in this topic

47 minutes ago, thisintegrated said:

Thanks for reminding me.  I'm way up on my doge.

You'll be reminded of this day a long time from now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Artsu The two models are not being merged, they are being correlated using stereotypes.

Any cognitive function can be used at any SD stage and any MBTI type can be at any SD stage.

Functions are questions the subconscious mind is asking itself. Yellow is going to use Te questions from a holistic perspective to find root problems and root solutions that only a systems thinker can see. But in your model as you said “Te = success  = Low orange”. Also Te is a thinking process so why call it success, you need Te to succeed in The business world but that’s only one use of it.

The two models multiply when they come into contact. It’s a many to many relationship between functions and stages, each function looks different at every stage, tools are used differently depending on who is wielding it.

Edited by integral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@integral "any MBTI type can be at any stage".

I said exactly that?

You clearly don't get it.

Stereotypes? WTF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Artsu said:

I said exactly that?

You clearly don't get it.

If you said exactly that how do I not get it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the appeal of this particular game// hierarchy of consciousness? As in, what are the ACTUAL prizes for "winning"? What... because it's "the truth"? Please... that's literally what everyone says. He said, you said, we said, etc.

What.... so that you inevitably get to place yourself at the very top (or near it)? That's pretty boring (and also, very predictable).

At the end of the day, you're stuck in your head just like everyone else who is playing their little games with themselves, by themselves. So what I'm asking is... is it a good game? Why would I either want or be compelled to buy into it as an ideology?

As for any issues you have with people stem solely from you being "too advanced"? lol. (Even if it might be a legitimate concern in some cases, it's a real easy cop-out in many others. For example: a lot of the problems that people say are a result of being "AM SO SMART NO ONE UNDERSTANDS ME" is squarely a result of being """emotionally underdeveloped""" and not being at other people's bandwidth (emotionally speaking) for whatever the reason, and often not wanting to be either. Often it's the result of people who wanna be so special.

Everyone, no matter their ideology/ cognitive models at hand: it's way too easy to fall back on your models whenever you hit snags with dealing with reality/ people and to get defensive like your life and identity depends on it. Rather than to think... hey. It might be something else entirely off-the-map. Or: maybe my attitude and approach is not that productive with people (But also: that really, you just don't care anyway.)

Without a certain kind of detachment from your models (as a scholar at least theoretically should have), without the ability and willingness to toss it out and start over if need be, without the willingness to at least sometimes see "raw reality" the way it is first, openly and in all ways, in all its complexity and messiness and unfathomability (at times), without pre-emptively shoving it into boxes (inevitably to serve one personal agenda or another)... what's it all worth ultimately?

We got all sorts of people shoving all sorts of theories together for varying agendas. Some of them more well made, and some less. Some legitimately accounting for more factors, and some far less (regardless of actual claims made).

In some cases, consider this: there might actually be a good reason why no one wants to buy it.

Edited by eos_nyxia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, integral said:

If you said exactly that how do I not get it? 

Because you were seeming to say that what you said contradicts me?

Don't worry about it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@eos_nyxia

Do you not get the appeal of developmental models?

This model is very useful.

I've been using it to map out my future, look at areas I need to work on, see how advanced someone is etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2022 at 11:12 AM, Artsu said:

@eos_nyxia

Do you not get the appeal of developmental models?

This model is very useful.

I've been using it to map out my future, look at areas I need to work on, see how advanced someone is etc.

the openness to raw reality + the willingness to be wrong and to adapt your perspective >>> models.

If you get this backward, I think you can't avoid reaping what you sow, you are chained to your models forever like a slave. You cannot dispense with it that easily even when it truly does not serve you anymore: say that you've truly outgrown whatever the original use is. And so the thing which originally gave you meaning and value quite freely, it now binds you. Eventually, you get less and less fresh value in return, but you do keep getting a meaning that you're addicted to.

It functions like an addiction.

And if you can't (at least theoretically) dispense with your models, it actually also limits how well you can work with them. I think a lot of flexibility and adaptability are required to best make use of any sort of mental construct or mechanism. Detachment and "having some space" from any of your models of use frees you up to make use of them in a more creative, ingenious way.

 

Also: people's attachment to hierarchies and what it means, and has to mean.... this is also straight-up a sort of mental/ emotional slavery. You may not feel it at first, but it does bind you. Keeping things a bit looser/ open-ended at least clears up your path of movement a bit, including in the RIGHT NOW.

From this perspective of needing models: There are rules about ascending through hierarchies. And they MUST be obeyed. I tend to think of it as a sort of game with a bunch of rules, the rules may be anywhere from very explicitly said, to being so implicit that the people playing it barely see it at all.  Hierarchies... are ultimately also a mental invention or construction (that may or may not be relatively well-built for its purpose). But is it ever the fastest, most efficient way to do anything? Very rarely is this the case. The nature of its construction makes this so.

This isn't about "skipping steps in development"/ attempts at spiritual bypassing (which is a valid issue in the sense that people do end up less developed in certain ways), but about the whole structure of mental hierarchization being super-rigged by nature. We call this "reality" and this keeps us in our place.

Along with that, there is also this urge to impose meaning onto others by telling people what it means, and thereby restricting other people's pathways as well... isn't there?

Great, now we're all enslaved by our models.

Edited by eos_nyxia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't be responding to any more posts.

The definitions/descriptions won't ever be posted due to lack of interest.

The replies in this thread are saddening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Artsu I think your model is interesting and shows unique thought. I think it needs to be fleshed out a bit more to be useful though. It's a fascinating take, I think spiral dynamics and the Mbti cognitive functions are the two best models currently for understanding your consciousness and personality type so merging them is a great undertaking. 


What is the meaning of being alive? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now