Bill Hamilton Four Path Model - Discussion
I generally agree, but sometimes I think trying to unify maps is a lost cause. For example, the early stages of 1st path/POI clearly can happen much earlier in life. And it seems like some rare people have SE without really cleaning up a lot of their underlying developmental stuff, they have a "Stategist" view of things despite seemingly going through SE. The world is a wacky place.
(Ultimately, that's why I think "tipping point" makes the most sense --- it allows for those odd outliers. Just like maybe a atom in your morning cup of coffee can statistically reach escape velocity, the universe seems to allow for these rare events. But that said, there is also an underlying stability which dominates so, most of the time, progress really does require dedicated effort and sequetial/incremental development...)
I also think that there is some relativity to the maps, for example construct-aware might look different in a traditional society than a modern society. Maybe not, too.
But it is interesting to read biographies of the Therevada monks and hear the language/metaphysics they use to describe their experiences... it's still very mythical in flavor. But that could simply be the way I hear it rather than the way it actually was for them.
And of course there are problems at the other end of the map. While POI is fairly well established, there are a lot of different views on the essential aspects of 2 though 4 it seems to me... and Cook-Grueter Stage 6 still has the I/I, or Watcher, or creative ground of unified consciousness -- ideas like that -- so that kind of Atman-ish map is contrary to the Anatman insights of 3 and 4 path especially...
Honestly, my thoughts on this really aren't grounded in enough data for my liking. I still think my map is mostly suggestive at best, at least by the standards I have for data/evidence, and that's why people should only consider it if seems useful. I think we're still quite away from "the one right map". There are lots of perfect maps... if you allow them to throw away the outlier data.
(Ultimately, that's why I think "tipping point" makes the most sense --- it allows for those odd outliers. Just like maybe a atom in your morning cup of coffee can statistically reach escape velocity, the universe seems to allow for these rare events. But that said, there is also an underlying stability which dominates so, most of the time, progress really does require dedicated effort and sequetial/incremental development...)
I also think that there is some relativity to the maps, for example construct-aware might look different in a traditional society than a modern society. Maybe not, too.
But it is interesting to read biographies of the Therevada monks and hear the language/metaphysics they use to describe their experiences... it's still very mythical in flavor. But that could simply be the way I hear it rather than the way it actually was for them.And of course there are problems at the other end of the map. While POI is fairly well established, there are a lot of different views on the essential aspects of 2 though 4 it seems to me... and Cook-Grueter Stage 6 still has the I/I, or Watcher, or creative ground of unified consciousness -- ideas like that -- so that kind of Atman-ish map is contrary to the Anatman insights of 3 and 4 path especially...
Honestly, my thoughts on this really aren't grounded in enough data for my liking. I still think my map is mostly suggestive at best, at least by the standards I have for data/evidence, and that's why people should only consider it if seems useful. I think we're still quite away from "the one right map". There are lots of perfect maps... if you allow them to throw away the outlier data.
I know nothing about this stuff total dummy over here but in my experience the Watcher or Witness disappeared after the cessation. ( as in SE in June 2019)
It arrived after my thinking/discursive mind fell far into the background back in 2010 which predates the 2011 fall into DN territory. But the watcher was still there. It has no comments. It just knows it all. It can feel like a "true self". Even like "the true awakened Me".
Yeah. not sure if this info can be used by some but here we have it.
total dummy over here but in my experience the Watcher or Witness disappeared after the cessation. ( as in SE in June 2019)It arrived after my thinking/discursive mind fell far into the background back in 2010 which predates the 2011 fall into DN territory. But the watcher was still there. It has no comments. It just knows it all. It can feel like a "true self". Even like "the true awakened Me".
Yeah.
not sure if this info can be used by some but here we have it.
shargrol
I generally agree, but sometimes I think trying to unify maps is a lost cause. For example, the early stages of 1st path/POI clearly can happen much earlier in life. And it seems like some rare people have SE without really cleaning up a lot of their underlying developmental stuff, they have a "Stategist" view of things despite seemingly going through SE. The world is a wacky place.
(Ultimately, that's why I think "tipping point" makes the most sense --- it allows for those odd outliers. Just like maybe a atom in your morning cup of coffee can statistically reach escape velocity, the universe seems to allow for these rare events. But that said, there is also an underlying stability which dominates so, most of the time, progress really does require dedicated effort and sequetial/incremental development...)
I also think that there is some relativity to the maps, for example construct-aware might look different in a traditional society than a modern society. Maybe not, too. But it is interesting to read biographies of the Therevada monks and hear the language/metaphysics they use to describe their experiences... it's still very mythical in flavor. But that could simply be the way I hear it rather than the way it actually was for them.
And of course there are problems at the other end of the map. While POI is fairly well established, there are a lot of different views on the essential aspects of 2 though 4 it seems to me... and Cook-Grueter Stage 6 still has the I/I, or Watcher, or creative ground of unified consciousness -- ideas like that -- so that kind of Atman-ish map is contrary to the Anatman insights of 3 and 4 path especially...
Honestly, my thoughts on this really aren't grounded in enough data for my liking. I still think my map is mostly suggestive at best, at least by the standards I have for data/evidence, and that's why people should only consider it if seems useful. I think we're still quite away from "the one right map". There are lots of perfect maps... if you allow them to throw away the outlier data.
I generally agree, but sometimes I think trying to unify maps is a lost cause. For example, the early stages of 1st path/POI clearly can happen much earlier in life. And it seems like some rare people have SE without really cleaning up a lot of their underlying developmental stuff, they have a "Stategist" view of things despite seemingly going through SE. The world is a wacky place.
(Ultimately, that's why I think "tipping point" makes the most sense --- it allows for those odd outliers. Just like maybe a atom in your morning cup of coffee can statistically reach escape velocity, the universe seems to allow for these rare events. But that said, there is also an underlying stability which dominates so, most of the time, progress really does require dedicated effort and sequetial/incremental development...)
I also think that there is some relativity to the maps, for example construct-aware might look different in a traditional society than a modern society. Maybe not, too.
But it is interesting to read biographies of the Therevada monks and hear the language/metaphysics they use to describe their experiences... it's still very mythical in flavor. But that could simply be the way I hear it rather than the way it actually was for them.And of course there are problems at the other end of the map. While POI is fairly well established, there are a lot of different views on the essential aspects of 2 though 4 it seems to me... and Cook-Grueter Stage 6 still has the I/I, or Watcher, or creative ground of unified consciousness -- ideas like that -- so that kind of Atman-ish map is contrary to the Anatman insights of 3 and 4 path especially...
Honestly, my thoughts on this really aren't grounded in enough data for my liking. I still think my map is mostly suggestive at best, at least by the standards I have for data/evidence, and that's why people should only consider it if seems useful. I think we're still quite away from "the one right map". There are lots of perfect maps... if you allow them to throw away the outlier data.
Of course you don't have a pefect model yourself, Shargrol, but your expert opinion is still invaluable, and imho more nuanced than most other theories in developmental psychology thay I have encountered, including Cook-greuter's model.
I definitely agree that although it has many qualities, including a nice sense of the overall arch and astute observations of the evolution of psychology, character, concerns, orientations, etc., throughout the entire trajectory, Cook-Greuter's map also has various flaws, including: it is a bit too specific culturally, as it reflects values and personality development in very modern western countries, but it is doubtful that the conventional "autonomous adult" looks the same or has the same characteristics in all societies; it is linear; it is not very dimensional, thus quite cookie-cutter with the whole "package deal" thing (ie "everyone goes through the same exact development on all levels in a simultaneous manner and in this order") and thus doesn't really reflect individual variability, does not seem to include an awareness of the challenging phases of such development which are imo too common and important to overlook (which the POI does a great job at describing), does not to my knowledge include descriptions of many of the phenomena and experiences we know can happen along the way, like energetic stuff, archetypal stuff, etc., does not seem to include a cyclical aspect, does not offer so many options as to what to do or not do at each stage, and other problems which you pointed out — in short it is simplistic and idealistic and probably not that practical !
Also, it seems to have been developed based on previous theories of development and sentence completion tests, so, it is somewhat speculative, and likely could be refined by more and better and reliable empirical observations, possibly including aspects like physiological correlates — so, basically low evidence quality and simplistic models.
And then linguistically, it is sort of idiosyncratic in naming the stages, which is an obstacle to a broader diffusion, as only those who are comfortable with such language (like us who don't mind using the term "ñanas") are likely to adopt these terms (the "strategist", etc.), but this sort of jargon seems an obstacle to the diffusion of these ideas.
These limitations seem to have been obstacles to the many recent attempts to scale this (like happened with transpersonal psychology, humanistic psychology [Maslow's stuff], etc.), although the difficulties in being integrated in standard practice and "mainstreamed" seem to be linked with a whole host of other factors beyond just the quality of the research, including financial stuff, political stuff, etc. The whole model of "self-actualization" involving peak, nadir and plateau experiences in Maslow is pretty neat, as is the spiritual emergence and spiritual emergency stuff by the Grofs, but they also suffer from some of the limitations I just outlined.
And as you say, there are other kinds of limitations at the other end of the spectrum, i.e. traditional maps like the POI, christian, islamic, jewish, hindu, or folk models that say something about the elephant, but are also usually very culturally-bound, myth-heavy, etc.
I am not sure it is possible to have a perfect "map" that would account for all possible trajectories either. The history of medicine however, among other disciplines that saw spectacular developments over time, does offer a lot of counterexamples. Genetics was inconceivable in the 19th century, and yet it can now account and predict for a lot of phenomena which seemed imponderable before. A perfect medical theory is probably impossible, but a better theory than the four humors was definitely possible !
I do have the sense that, if a more realisticand nuanced version of this kind of model, inclusive of e.g. Cook-Greuter and POI among others, that would be empirically-backed and represent the consensus of many experts, incorporating the various criteria just outlined, "scaled" or became mainstream — say, a standard part of highschool curriculum perhaps, or at least was taught to all people training to be medical doctors or psychotherapists and the likes, as well as to those teaching emergent practices, then that would likely be transformative systems change and beneficial for the world. Such a theory wouldn't have to provide THE perfect and final description/teasing apart of the highest end of this sort of development (let's say, post 1st/2nd path).
TBH, even if it only gave a reasonably nuanced and practical account of this stuff up to and including "first path", then that would be an incredible improvement, I think, over the basically complete ignorance (overall) of even the most basic patterns that people go through with this stuff that is currently the norm... E.g., a more meaningful and better response, better options, to "I had this peak experience and now am freaking out and my life is going to shit, help" than the standard "you have a pathology, this is abnormal, we will give you meds to treat your symptoms" leaving people isolated and one their own to find underground resources like the present forum (if they are lucky).
In terms of this general research, Daniel wants to refocus current efforts on a few core projects, including the "Expert Opinion Project" and the "Empirical Validation of the stages of insight", which taken together, and including some other things like reviews and theoretical stuff, could actually lead to having something like what I just described — a nuanced, realistic, consensual, empirically-backed, predictive and prescriptive resource with better guidelines for managing difficult stuff and cultivating good stuff than can easily be found anywhere currently, for clinicians and teachers of practices that lead to these kinds of territories — and this could happen within the next couple of years if these projects get funded. The assumption is that such a resource could then likely be scaled more easily than e.g. Cook-greuter's stuff.
What are your thoughts ?
