Multiplex: What's New | Site Map | Community | News My Multiplex Account | Sign In 
in Search

Integral relationships

Last post 05-15-2008, 6:43 PM by caveman1. 8 replies.
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  03-21-2007, 3:32 PM 20930

    Integral relationships

    Have recently been sliding my way through 'Way of the superior man' by David Deida, bloody marvelous.  Sucking it up, totally changed my perspective on masculinity and femininity.

    What I'm also interested though is a more UR focused approach to relationships.  The stuff coming through Integral circles seems to be more UL focused (from what I've personally seen anyway).  Are there any books people can reccomend?  Is there anything coming though IU in this area?  Have yet to wade properly through the AQAL journals but I didn't notice anything when I skimmed the contents (sorry, don't have it front of me currently).

    I'd be very interested in any reccomendations.

    Ewan

    P.S. The activity on these forums seems to be at a rather low ebb, why so?  (Been a while since I visited).


    www.ukinext.com
    • Post Points: 50
    • Report abuse
  •  03-22-2007, 6:34 AM 20946 in reply to 20930

    Re: Integral relationships

    I'm not entirely sure how to put relationships into UL, maybe you have something specific in mind?

    The best I can come up with right now is the marriage expert Dr. John Gottman, who's spent thousands and thousands of hours studying microexpressions (subliminal facial muscle movements) in couples to discover if he can predict the success or failure of the couple.  He's damn good, apparently.  And he's discovered that the perfect ratio of agreement to disagreement in a happy, healthy couple is about 5:1, no more, no less!

    Also the communication techniques promoted by I-I's own Fred Kofman, as well as Marshall Rosenberg, seem to be fairly good at bringing both the UL and the UR quadrants into a relationship, by focusing on the real physical/emotional/intellectual needs behind behaviors, and then restructuring behavior, and making specific requests, to fill those needs.

    Oh, and, yes, this place is practically a ghost town.  Hopefully I-I will start up some interesting interactive conversations and maybe some projects for us I-I groupies to get things hopping again!

    Bicycle!
    -Turtle
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  03-24-2007, 8:02 AM 21021 in reply to 20930

    Re: Integral relationships

    ewantownhead:
    P.S. The activity on these forums seems to be at a rather low ebb, why so?  (Been a while since I visited).

    Hi,

    I suspect that there are too many competing interests on the same threads, and a little organization needed.  In my interest in success for everyone, I'm submitting some ideas on organization and categorization, in case it would help people more quickly find their interests, at least in I-Psych:

    There are now two places for people to post about I-Psych.  The first is this one,
    started by Gail Taylor in '06 (http://multiplex.integralinstitute.org/Public/cs/forums/default.aspx). 

    The second is just begun by Elliott Ingersoll, Co-Director of  I-Psych's Center in  IU:
    http://multiplex.integralinstitute.org/Public/cs/forums/thread/20274.aspx),called, "An Introduction to Integral Psychology".  I think he was inviting conversation about his and other I-Psych. articles in the AQAL Journal, so that's under AQAL Journal forums. 

    Here's the present overall forum structure:

    Integral Institute Forums… (we are here)

    Integral Naked Forums…

    Integral Spiritual Center Forums…

    Integral Training Forums…

    Integral University Forums:

       General Discussion

       Sustainability

       Education

       Integral Art

      (No I-Psych)

    AQAL Journal Forums, incl.:

       (Elliott's forum: "An Introduction to I-Psych")


    What would you'all do?  I suppose in academia, people in departments (like IU Centers) use the journals like artifacts.  Maybe I'd only have one forum topic under AQAL Jl, for comments on the journal as a whole.  But instructions could be that people should post on the IU forums and if multiply-relevant, reference them with a post in other relevant centers (?).

    Then, within I-Psych, since there seem (to me) to be such a variety of interests, and overlap of subjects, there could be big category baskets:

    -Scholarly (intermediate and advanced theory development and research)
    -Professional applications (incl. therapy, coaching, consulting, and other emerging models, etc.)
    -Personal and general applications (apply neat theory to messy life)

    People could join all of it but would have to follow norms for that group when posting (whatever that turned out to be.  Local salons have experience with this).

    Personally, I have another suggestion for norm setting to prevent a certain kind of snag that repels the general public.  I-I forums have to accommodate tens of thousands of participants.  If people don't like the way a person posts (e.g., hostility, spamming (infinite digressions), proselytizing, etc.), ignore it and move on.  If hooked, write the person outside the forum, or write the Admin., who will only entertain the larger picture.

    We've never been in a family made of tens of thousands. Anybody have any other ideas for holding the world and keeping the material interesting?

    Best,
    Joanne










     

     

     

     


    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  04-02-2007, 4:30 AM 21369 in reply to 20946

    Re: Integral relationships

    Hi Turtle

    Yes, should have been clearer!  What I meant by it, is the emphasis put on the UL/UR of the reader.  Deida is actually being pretty Integral of course, but there is more of an UL emphasis in my opinion, byt that I mean it is concentrating on the internal issues about masculinity/femininity; how to approach them in your 1st person. 

    By UR I meant more of a behavioural approach - how to react in situations, how to model better habits.  I've been reading some of Paul McKenna, not sure how famous he is in the States, but here in the UK, hes sort of our version of Tony Robbins.  He has a strong NLP dimension, but is more rounded than that I think.  I find his stuff very useful.

    Will check out the stuff you mention, I love what I've seen on Fred on IN, and really enjoyed the therapia dialogues they did a while back, which he did a few of, what ever happend to them?  Maybe they got wary after the whole Marc Gafni thing - perhaps ironic that he coached a guy on pornography adiction in one of those talks!

    The zaadz I-I pod seems to be more active than this place, there has even been suggestions that it might have a higher CoG too!?


    www.ukinext.com
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  04-02-2007, 9:33 AM 21380 in reply to 21369

    Re: Integral relationships

    ewantownhead:
    The zaadz I-I pod seems to be more active than this place, there has even been suggestions that it might have a higher CoG too!?


    I haven't really checked it out, since I'm not really interested in the whole socializing thing.  It's great that people who were unhappy here managed to find a place that they felt met their needs.  Now hopefully the I-I team will figure out how they want to use these forums for bringing more Integral theory into the world, and improve upon it.  I'm guessing that in another month or so, we might hear something about their plans.  If not, I think it will just go on quietly serving the more intellectual pursuits of critiquing Integral ideas.

    And on the original topic, I recently got Fred's Conscious Business audio book, and I'm hoping that it will give me some good pratical ideas on how to have better relationships in all quadrants of my life. 

    Bicycle!
    -Turtle
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  04-04-2007, 7:05 AM 21419 in reply to 21380

    Re: Integral relationships

    Hi Turtle

    I gave Consciouss Business to my dad for Christmas.  He said (if I remember correctly) it was good, but at quite a basic level.  He felt it was aimed at more of a corporate/orange altitude.  I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on it when you've read it.

    Ewan


    www.ukinext.com
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  04-17-2007, 11:29 AM 21818 in reply to 21021

    Re: Integral relationships

    Dear Joanne:  I am reading this almost a month later.  Thanks for this run-down. I would like to see something like this also.  Pattye
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  05-15-2008, 6:37 PM 50818 in reply to 20930

    • caveman1 is not online. Last active: 12-05-2008, 12:31 PM caveman1
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on 05-15-2008
    • Atlanta, GA
    • Posts 22
    • Points 380

    Re: Integral relationships

    Hi Ewan,
    Let me start by saying that I am completely new to this forum and integral theory in general.  The terms UR and UL are unfamiliar to me, and a Google search revealed many a college sports team but not much else.  So please forgive my ignorance.

    However, having stumbled upon Ken's books a few months ago, I have come to realize that he has codified many of the loose thoughts that I've been expressing for years.  I am only now taking on the task of placing these ideas into an AQAL framework.

    In any case, let me point you to a series of posts I wrote regarding relationships.  Three of the four parts were written more than two years ago.  The last was written only a couple of days ago.

    Part 1
    http://www.enlightenedcaveman.com/cavemanblog/2005/12/relationships_101_part_1_ident.html
    Part 2
    http://www.enlightenedcaveman.com/cavemanblog/2005/12/relationships_101_part_2_bridg.html
    Part 3
    http://www.enlightenedcaveman.com/cavemanblog/2006/03/relationships_101_part_3_betwe_1.html
    Part 4
    http://www.enlightenedcaveman.com/cavemanblog/2008/05/relationships_101_part_4_quant.html

    There's a lot there, but the gist is that our focus should be determining what we want and then working backwards to get there - all the while acknowledging the realities of our species (top right, bottom right) and the way we're programmed to feel in certain situations (overlap between top right and top left, and a little bottom left). 

    Just as a disclaimer, I'm very much interested in integrating myself and my ideas into this Integral framework and community.  But that'll take time, and the most expedient means I have of getting my points across is to point to my existing work.  So please don't infer that by linking out to my work elsewhere that I am trying to fragment things.  That is not my intention. 

    Cheers!
    Chris Wilson
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  05-15-2008, 6:43 PM 50820 in reply to 50818

    • caveman1 is not online. Last active: 12-05-2008, 12:31 PM caveman1
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on 05-15-2008
    • Atlanta, GA
    • Posts 22
    • Points 380

    Re: Integral relationships

    Ok, so five more minutes of reading and I might have connected the UL and UR to the quadrants.  My bad. 
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
View as RSS news feed in XML
 © Integral Institute, 2006. all rights reserved - powered by enlight™ email this page del.icio.us | terms of service | privacy policy | suggestion box | help