Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘integral model’


The Inner intelligences of the human condition relates to a person’s subjective sense of wellbeing and happiness. The Subjective I is the psycho-emotional-spiritual way I experience the city. The Subjective I feels inspired and uplifted by the personal pleasure of walking down a street lined with cherry blooms, imagining the excitement of expressing ideas, with friends and colleagues, at the community coffee shop.

When I have done research into the subjective sense of happiness, people identify a trajectory of factors that contribute to happiness including: having the simple basics of life, being able to bond with their families, experiencing a sense of personal power or expression, living with others in a way that embraces respect and order, the opportunity to work and support themselves and their families, tolerating diversity while creating the conditions for inclusion in community.

Interestingly these happiness factors seem to emerge as a kind of personal contribution to the “wisdom of the crowd”, where individuals identify one or two of the factors being important to them. However, when we look at the full spectrum of factors we can see the hierarchy of values that emerge from the research of Clare Graves (which focused on how to describe a healthy human being) and has become the trajectory mapped by Beck and Cowan in Spiral Dynamics and by Ken Wilber in the Integral Model.

The value of examining the wellbeing and happiness aspects of the subjective experience of a single life, is that it gives us the container to appreciate the emergent qualities of consciousness. It seems to create a kind of container for me to consider my attention and intention – even my personal purpose – related to this trajectory of inner intelligence. In doing so I open the door into “the examined life” and I gain the capacity to make life worth living precisely because I choose to examine it.

In doing so I can discover that my happiness and wellbeing have ever-widening spheres of consideration. I start with the ego-centricity of focusing on my own happiness (delight at the cherry blossoms). Then I discover that happiness is embedded in the ethno-centric circle of my family, clan and neighbourhood (sharing cherry blossoms with others). When I cross the street away from the cherry blossoms, I experience a wider connection with the city, where happiness embraces the attention and intention I engage through the purpose of my work place, educational and healthcare systems and communities outside my own. Perhaps when I progress from ethno-centric to city-centric experience, I create the platform for an awareness of how my wellbeing and happiness also derives from an intuitive sense of the wellbeing of my city’s eco-region and the planet as a whole (opening into a world-centric sense of wellbeing)? When I contemplate this circle of happiness and wellbeing it often leads to an even more profound sense of happiness and purpose at a deep spiritual level (which has been called by Wilber a kosmo-centric sense of awareness) – where I experience my evolutionary unity with the cherry blossoms.

Ultimately all attention and intention in the city is experienced at the level of the individual. Almost magically, when the coordination of multiple individuals seeking happiness along the trajectory of values aligns, a political will or purpose emerges (the vestiges of hive mind?).

The challenge we now face as a species is not only to define how our individual bio-psycho-cultural-social purpose aligns with the purpose of our city, but how can my personal happiness be balanced in support of achieving my purposes at the same time that others are experiencing and unfolding happiness for themselves?

On the broadest scale, we need to create a life-long learning system that optimizes human potential with appropriate attention and intention. Developing our citizen intelligences will determine the extent to which our cities will be sustainable. To do this in an evolutionarily respectful way, we must design our education system(s) so that it allows individual, family and cultural variation. Such variation needs simple rules that allow

learners to experience learning unique to their potentials (ie. not one size fits all) while at the same time creating citizens able to contribute to the achievement of city, in ways that we can each and all enjoy the happiness that cherry blossoms bring.

References

Hamilton, M. (2008). Integral City: Evolutionary Intelligences for the Human Hive. Gabriola Island BC: New Society Publishers.(pp. 61-64)

Hoornweg, D., Ruiz Nunez, F., Freire, M., Palugyai, N., Villaveces, M., & Herrera, E. W. (2007). City Indicators: Now to Nanjing: World Bank  Policy Research Working Paper No. 4114.Wills, E. H., Hamilton, M., &

Islam, G. (2007). Subjective Wellbeing in Bogotá (B), Belo Horizonte (BH) and Toronto (T): A Subjective Indicator of Quality of Life for Cities. Bogotá: World Bank. Wills, E. H., Hamilton, M., & Islam, G. (2007). Subjective Well-being in Cities: Individual or Collective? A Cross Cultural Analysis. Paper presented at the Wellbeing in International Development Conference.

===

This blog is a prologue to the Integral City webinar conference  City 2.0 Co-Creating the Future of the Human Hive . We are inventing a new operating system for the city.  Click to get more details re the Free Expo and eLaboratory membership  scheduled September 4-27  2012. You are invited to attend and participate.

Read Full Post »


Integral Intelligence arises because the city, is a whole system, with multiple simultaneous realities that reflect – how people act, how people think, how people relate and how people create/produce. Integral Intelligences can be mapped into the four quadrants explored by the AQAL model developed by Ken Wilber.

The four quadrants are a beautiful fractal pattern of how the realities of the city emerge through individual actions (Upper Right), individual intentions and beliefs (Upper Left), collective cultures and relationships (Lower Left) and Social Systems and Institutions (Lower Right).

The four quadrants also situate the voices of the city: the City Manager’s Operational Direction (UR); The Citizen’s views of Quality of Life (UL); Civil Society’s Care and Compassion (LL); and the City Developer’s Innovations and Systems (LR).

So Integral Intelligences sweep into our conversations the whole system of the city’s discourses, engagements, interactions and productive capacity. When looking at a city through the Integral Lenses all of a sudden we can see why we have to embrace the qualities of Place Caring (the left hand quadrants) with the qualities of Place Making (the right hand quadrants). By embracing the realities and voices from all the quadrants, we embrace a city’s wholeness as a dynamic, adaptive  living system responding to internal and external life conditions.

An Integral City acts much like a complex adaptive human system that concentrates habitat for humans like a bee hive does for bees. As a natural system it faces all the same issues, factors and challenges that affect the concentration of life anywhere: sustaining flows of information, matter and energy for the survival of human life. The four quadrants help us to see how beautifully that occurs through the interactions of individuals and collectives and with both qualitative and quantitative capacities.

As Ken Wilber points out the Integral Model allows us to see that every one of us brings a true but partial view of life to life’s table. When we combine all the partial views into the meta-view of the Integral City, a vitality and wholeness emerges as the city’s spirit!!

===

This blog is a prologue to the Integral City webinar conference  City 2.0 Co-Creating the Future of the Human Hive . We are inventing a new operating system for the city.  Click to get more details re the Free Expo and eLaboratory membership  scheduled September 4-27  2012. You are invited to attend and participate.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 780 other followers

%d bloggers like this: