The previous post brings up a recurrent curiosity for me: the relationship between projections and levels of development.
Spiral Dynamics and projections
When I see the descriptions of the Spiral Dynamic levels, one way I see it is as different quantities of (blind) projections. At the lower levels, I notice huge shadow areas, and as the spiral expands the shadow areas appear smaller. (Although can still be strong of course. This has more to do with apparent quantity than quality – or intensity.)
But the reason I love the blogosphere is for the 2% that are not predictable, that do not merely rant against the moment of discomfort (and its cause), but rather stand above the herd mentality and post from second tier.
Where I (most readily) see someone who has integrated a good deal of the shadow, and is comfortable in that area in general, he (in this case) sees someone at second tier. And it seems to make sense.
Second tier is marked by an appreciation of any and all levels, seeing them each as part of a natural and apparently neccesary development of individuals (and reflected at a collective level).
And for there to be any genuine appreciation of anything, we have to have befriended it in ourselves. We have to have found some measure of peace with it, as it appears in our own life. We have to have seen, recognized, befriended, famliarized ourselves with, found peace with most of the qualities that we see in any of the other levels.
Projections and widening circles
Another way to look at it is widening circles of concern, compassion and care. Who and what do we see as us?
As we familiarize ourselves with more and more projections, we recognize ourselves more in others, and in more of the others as well.
And as we move up the SD levels, more is included in what we see as us – in our circle of concern, compassion and care.
Until, at some point, so much is integrated at our personal level that it grows to include the transpersonal – all the way to a recognition of Big Mind. Or rather, to Big Mind awakening to its own nature of no I anywhere. Of I everywhere and nowhere.
Including Other into I
We start with a small I and large Other, and gradually more of Other gets included in the I (or us). Until it all pops open and there is only what is with I everywhere and nowhere.
What is explores itself with a wide range of identities and a wide range of inclusiveness of identity, until it awakens to its own nature of any and no particular identity.