From Integral Spirituality, Fig 2.4¹
THE SIMPLE ANSWER
2nd Tier is a capacity to take on multiple perspectives from multiple intelligences with weighted discernment and weaving them into a complex intricate nuanced understanding. From this capacity, leaders lead with additional abilities to create cultures and systems that honor every individual's point of development in these respective places so that there is healthy expression and an open flow of evolution. From this place, we work towards providing the solutions to the world's challenges.
It encompasses multiple intelligences such as the trans-rational mind, emotional intelligence, somatic intelligence, and intuition to name a few. The word, vision-logic is used to denote this capacity. It is where an individual is capable of seeing the whole with all its parts and grasping this understanding with a holistic flash of intuitive sight.
And from this capacity, you are able to lead and create systems in very novel and powerful ways because it is the first stage where an individual and their corresponding system creations can embrace every stage below it. They see the positive purpose and developmentally appropriate value of every stage that precedes it and if they begin to mature and embody more in these unique emerging capacities, they can begin to weave them into a coherent whole (aka spiral), so that every person and system has a contributing value on this spiral that allows for the open flow of evolution to take place.
More Context
It is the pinnacle of a certain level of perspective-taking (5th-person) since you are capable of seeing the whole with all of its parts and taking on multiple perspectives with weighted discernment and weaving seemingly polar opposites into a complex intricate nuanced understanding. Every individual needs to go thru 1st-4th person perspective-taking to reach this rare pinnacle. To better understand this capacity, it helps to know the preceding stages of 1st Tier and the corresponding levels of perspective-taking. 1st Tier has six levels and 2nd Tier has two (see below section, and this post for further background). Cook-Greuter and her Ego Development Theory² outlines the stages that an individual will traverse to reach this level of perspective-taking.
Zero-Person Perspective. When an individual is born, they have no capacity for perspective, they are completely enmeshed with their mother and their environment. They have a zero-person perspective. Cook-Greuter calls this the Symbiotic stage, which is the first level of 1st Tier.
1st Person Perspective. As they become toddlers and explore their environment, they realize they are separate from the objects and people that are in their sense-making world. They start to develop an awareness of a separate self, arriving at a 1st person perspective, the second stage and third stage of 1st Tier called Impulsive and Opportunistic respectively. They are completely immersed in their self experience; they are unable to reflect on oneself and understand other. They live by impulses and become opportunistic to satisfy their desires. In contrast, I have seen another typology where individuals and adults who are so enmeshed with someone, that this other person is an extension of them and can only take the perspectives of this person. Cults, gangs, and some co-dependent relationships are examples of where this type of 1st person perspective taking can take place.
2nd Person Perspective. As they develop further this sense of self and separation and also become aware of the other, they develop a 2nd person perspective, where they can either understand/accept their view or the other's, but not both at the same time. This marks the fourth stage of 1st Tier, the Rules-oriented stage because it characterizes the individual getting taught the rules of a certain situation like what is permissible from mommy and daddy's point of view, the teacher's in the classroom, rules at work, or society at large. They either accept it or rebel against it. In my experience, most of the world is at these levels of perspective-taking.
3rd Person Perspective. If a person gets curious about these rules and roles that they find themselves in and also start observing others in the same way, they start to develop reflexive thinking via rational thought and this allows them to observe themselves and others from the outside of their 1st person or 2nd person experience in an objective way. They step outside themselves. This capacity allows them to experience a 3rd person perspective and traverse into the fifth stage of 1st Tier, Self-aware. Although they are able to step outside themselves and others in a rational way, their ability to explore the range of perspectives will be limited because most types at this stage are coming from the earliest levels of emotional intelligence. They will have a limited range to feeling their emotions and feeling-states as well as identifying them in a conscious way. They have not explored how their need for certainty is affecting their ability to walk in another's shoes and really understand their point of view. They will not see how this need for certainty is connected to their need for safety and making sense of the world. So they will have a difficult time seeing their own bias.
Although I described the first three stages from the development of a child, adults can also be at any of these stages of perspective-taking.
4th Person Perspective. In 3rd person perspective taking, the individual is usually using one type of intelligence, the rational mind and taking an objective stance. They step outside themselves. They are using reflexive thinking. But as these individuals begin to go deeper into self-reflexive thinking and begin to incorporate other intelligences like somatic intelligence, emotional intelligence, and intuition in addition to their rational intelligence; they not only step outside themselves at times, but they also step INSIDE themselves. They begin to see how truth has a huge subjective variable to it. They see how their upbringing, the family dynamics they were born into, and the culture and culture they live in; shapes how they come to a certain perspective. They see their bias and are beginning to own this as they explore truth with themselves and others.
They also start taking the perspective of their lifetime and also take historical perspective towards self.
5th Person Perspective.³ When an individual is coming from 4th-person perspective, they are seeing all meaning making as subjective. "We create our own truth;" and "All our perspectives are relative" are common at that level. But at this 5th level of perspective-taking, the individual begins to integrate the objective-ness of 3rd-person perspective with the emphasis of subjective-ness at 4th person perspective. They are able to embrace this paradox and unify the seemingly contradiction of these polar opposites; and see the objective in the subjective and the subjective in the objective. They transcend and include these previous stages and operate at a new one. They also transition from only operating from a linear perspective to operating from a non-linear one while including the linear thinking.
The second stage in 2nd Tier brings an individual even deeper into this 5th person perspective that allows the individual to go beyond one's lifetime and global historical perspectives into some preliminary nondual intelligence perspectives.⁴
And just to invite you into possibilities, I have witnessed further nth-person perspectives especially amongst individuals that have stabilized nonduality and gone into other forms of nondual intelligences that the great sage Aurobindo speaks of.⁵
Below is a table that outlines each of these perspective taking capacities and how they compare with the tier, integral color, stage #, and ego development stage of Cook-Greuter's theory.
Tier | Integral Stage Color | Stage # | Perspective-taking | Ego Development Stage |
| | | | |
1 | Infrared | 1 | Zero | Symbiotic |
| Magenta | 2 | 1st Person | Impulsive |
| Red | 3 | | Opportunistic |
| Amber | 4 | 2nd Person | Rules-Oriented / Conformist |
| Orange | 5 | 3rd Person | Self-Aware |
| Green | 6 | 4th Person | Individualist |
| | | | |
2 | Teal | 7 | 5th Person | Autonomous |
| Turquoise | 8 | 5th person + or possibly 6th | Construct-Aware |
| | | | |
3 | Indigo | 9 | n-th person? | |
| | | | |
Table 1
Revealing Statistic. Through her research and others, she estimates that 82% of the adult population is at the first five stages of ego development (ie up to 3rd-person perspective taking).⁶ But in my opinion, this statistical phenomenon only occurs when the individual is NOT experiencing tension or reactivity. My personal experience working with individuals the past 25 years and observing the world; is that when most people hear a perspective that is different and threatening to their own perspective, they revert to the 1st or 2nd person perspective. My gut feeling says it is 8 out of 10 people and I am being conservative with that number; could be higher. Whether you use my statistic or Cook-Greuter's, it's crazy when you really think about it and can help you understand why the world is the way it is.
Another example where I see this 1st and 2nd person perspective taking is people's relationship with the media. The internet and social media has really encouraged a culture of individual expression with emotion (ie venting frustration and anger). In my opinion, most people do not undertake emotional intelligence training (ie experiencing anger at different levels of perspective taking), go to therapy, or some other form of personal development where one could learn how to relate to emotions from these later levels of perspective taking. So when a culture of individual expression with emotion is connected to this earlier level of emotional intelligence, this culture will elicit behavior and level of perspective taking at these earlier levels, thus 1st and 2nd person perspective taking. I believe that is why since the late 1990s (when the internet took off), we have increasingly been more polarized around the world. And from my observation of family members, historical friends, news pundits, and some people of mainstream America, I witness them watching the news from a 1st person perspective taking level and at best 2nd person level. And that is even if they are college educated and developed rational thought and reflexive thinking. It is just not their center of gravity. They might have access to it, but when they are expressing a perspective that has emotion for them, or listen to someone while they are experiencing some level of emotional reactivity, they just can't "hear" them or understand their point of view. They are only in their perspective. This behavior happens because although they learned reflexive thinking, they can't access it because of their lack of training in emotional intelligence. Emotions are deeply tied into your view of reality and truth. Aspects of our brain are designed to seek safety and what we have been certain about up to that point because that is what will ensure our survival. That's why you can't debate someone about their religion if it is tied up to their need for safety, identity, and having a sense of why the world is the way it is. This gives them peace and feeling safe regardless of truth value.
So if someone is watching the news from this earlier level of emotional intelligence and with a news outlet that they have deep aversion to, they are only able to take a 1st person perspective. I won't even listen to their view because my view is the right one. And if they are watching a news outlet that they resonate with, they are able to take a 2nd person perspective and take on the views of that platform without really performing reflexive thinking and asking: is that true?; where could they be wrong or missing something?; or what other perspectives exist out there?
So Cook-Greuter's 82% statistic up to 3rd person perspective is really on a good day in my opinion and when they have neutral emotion around a particular perspective. When emotions get involved, even on a subtle level, 1st and 2nd person perspective taking wins the day. And thus the shit storm that exists out there.
Summary. Answering the question, what is 2nd Tier, can be described in a simple way as an individual reaching the pinnacle of perspective-taking, the 5th-person perspective. They need to traverse each of the preceding levels of perspective taking, 1st thru 4th, to arrive at this pinnacle. They have the capacity to not only understand multiple perspectives, but they are able to "take" it on and experience like the other person can. They can weigh these multiple perspectives and formulate their own position while owning bias through integrating and weaving all the perceived truth values of each perspective. They are able to see the whole picture and its parts from a holistic grasping of the context in a flash of insight and from pre-/regular/trans-rational deliberations.
This simple answer is a trojan horse for a more nuanced understanding of what 2nd Tier is...
THE MORE COMPLEX RESPONSE
It depends.
More Context
It depends because 2nd Tier encompasses many metrics and lines of research.
The simple answer I provided above is an example of a capacity called vision-logic, which is a stage in the cognitive line of intelligence. Vision-logic is usually the capacity that I see emerge first for most people and thus why I define 2nd Tier based along that line first. In addition, as you will soon discover, these 2nd Tier capacities are inside each other. So refining one's capacity and depth in vision-logic requires them to embody the additional abilities to become a more mature and embodied 2nd Tier leader where it becomes possible to collaborate together in powerful and impactful ways.
Some history and where 2nd tier meaning came from - as you might remember from this post, the term 2nd Tier evolved over time. What we understand of what 2nd Tier is today is based on Ken Wilber and the integral community. They popularized Spiral Dynamics, a line of research based on the metrics: values, worldviews, and associated behaviors. Don Beck and Chris Cowan, the originators of this model, were the first to use the term, "2nd Tier." But they got its meaning and their levels of development in Spiral Dynamics from their mentor Clare Graves, who had his own theory of development called the Emergent-Cyclical Levels of Human Existence.⁷
In 2000 with the publication of Theory of Everything and Integral Psychology, Wilber introduced Spiral Dynamics and the 2nd Tier phenomenon to a larger audience.⁸ It was also in the latter book that he introduced tables at the end of the book showing various lines of research in western and eastern psychology. These tables along with his publication in 2006, Integral Spirituality⁹ expanded the notion and vision of 2nd Tier as we know it today. He combined around 100 lines of research ranging from developmental psychology to phenomenological research in spiritual development. Gravesian theory and Spiral Dynamics were just two lines out of all the ones he considered. As discussed in the Origin of the term - 2nd Tier, in the 1960s, there were various researchers in developmental psychology who would compare their stages of development along their variable with other researchers' variables and their stages. They would see similarities in phenomenon even though their variables were different; and would estimate which of their stages were similar qualitatively. Wilber probably got the idea from looking at this research.
So, he compared all of them and assigned them to a particular level of his cognitive structure theory. In Integral Spirituality, he replaced those cognitive labels with colors along a continuum, inspired by the color system of Spiral Dynamics. Figure 2.4 below is a snapshot of those colors and nine levels of research.
Most of the research in developmental psychology has 4-8 stages. As Wilber was considering some of the phenomenological research in spirituality and integrating all these lines of research, he decided to create 12 stages and add the theoretical 3rd Tier. Figure 2.4 shows this outline.
The following table lists his 12 stages with his integral altitude color:
INTEGRAL ALTITUDE COLOR | STAGE # | |
| | |
1 | Infrared | 1 |
| Magenta | 2 |
| Red | 3 |
| Amber | 4 |
| Orange | 5 |
| Green | 6 |
| | |
2 | Teal | 7 |
| Turquoise | 8 |
| | |
3 | Indigo | 9 |
| Violet | 10 |
| Ultra-Violet | 11 |
| Clear Light | 12 |
Table 2
Note: Wilber and Integral Theory don't use stage numbers, but I have found them to be useful in explaining to others the complexity and the difference between 1st and 2nd Tier. So I have added stage #s above for this purpose. In addition, some lines of research use different stage numbers and I have decided just to create a generic numbering that is connected to how Integral Theory places each of the corresponding stages to the integral altitude color. So I will interchangeably use altitude colors and generic stage numbers to explain 1st and 2nd Tier phenomenon.
Here is Figure 2.4 again for comparing to the table above and easy referencing to the following post material:
Figure 2.4 only shows 9 out of the almost 100 lines of research Wilber integrated and weaved together in Integral Theory and what other researchers have compared together. But as you can see, there are multiple categorical lines such as cognitive intelligence and ego development (self-identity).
Here is a comprehensive list of both the categorical ones shown above and additional lines of development research:
Cognitive Intelligence
Ego Development
Worldviews
Spiritual Intelligence
Orders of Consciousness
Values
Moral Development
Emotional Intelligence
Perspective-taking
Aesthetic Intelligence
Hierarchy of Needs
Gender Identity
Psycho-sexual Development
Relational Intelligence
Interpersonal Development
Kinesthetic Intelligence
Leadership Development
Economic systems Development
Organizational Structure Development
There are potentially even more if future researchers want to explore additional lines such as musical intelligence, levels of vision development, and political thought development. The lines of potential research are limitless because there are infinite variables that exist in an individual and systems. So the understanding of 1st Tier and 2nd will be broadened as research expands. I also believe artificial intelligence and machine learning in the near future will have a large impact in this field because they will have the capacity to weave together multiple lines of research very fast and also will have the capacity to explore their own variables and do research at levels of depth we could only dream of.
So as you can see, there are multiple variables in our understanding of 1st and 2nd Tier. And as you might also see, these categorical lines can be furthered grouped into two dimensions: individual and collective. These multiple variables could lie in either an individual dimension such as cognitive intelligence and ego development. Or it could lie within a collective dimension along the lines of values culture and organizational development.
So 2nd Tier is a compilation of various capacities, behaviors, worldviews, cultures, system structures and so on based on these various lines of research and they fall into an individual or collective dimension.
So asking again, what is 2nd Tier? Well, we could answer this question with my simple answer above with vision-logic and a 5th person perspective taking capacity. Or we could answer it based on a line of research that has explored at that level. If it is the values line, we could say that individuals at this level value every level of development that exists in humanity and they see the importance of why each one needs to exist for the health of the overall system of humanity, but with appropriate discernment and boundaries. If it is aesthetics line, we could say that individuals appreciate multiple levels of art perspectives and are able to weave them together for the purpose of 2nd Tier application and seeing the beauty in all forms of existence with weighted discernment depending on the utility metric. If it is ego development, we could say that an individual has embodied ego coherence and is able to integrate her psychological parts, whether healthy or unhealthy types into a coherent whole. Unhealthy or fragmented parts will still exist, but they will be connected into a coherence. They will be in the funnel of healing moving towards full integration into essence, which could take a lifetime or multiple. She has accepted her limitations, but also experiences them as her strengths at the same time. She is able to go into this paradox and know how to ebb and flow with her periods of thriving with her periods of inner challenge. She has a grand vision that encompasses integrating multiple societal dimensions and working towards the solutions to the challenges humanity faces. She exudes humility and owning bias and shadows while also exhibiting paradoxically the opposite sometimes in outward expression, but inwardly she retains this humility. She might recognize that her sense of self is illusionary and has entered into the beginning aspects of a nondual identity. If it is the worldviews line of research, we could say that the individual sees the positive purpose and utility of all the worldviews that exist in humanity while having discernment with them based on certain metrics and life conditions. They attempt to weave them together so they all serve the greater eco-system of the world. If it is organizational development, we could say that a 2nd Tier organization provides the structures so that each individual can offer their capacities and perspectives no matter where they are in their development. The whole spectrum of power dynamics is allowed from top-down, bottom-up, egalitarian, and dynamic mix. If someone is needing a fixed power hierarchy and being dependent on orders and directives, the organization provides that. If an individual is valuing more of a hierarchical leadership style, that is provided. If the desire is egalitarianism and equal voting power, that is also provided. If it is the leadership line of development, we could say they have entered the beginnings of being a spiral wizard where they encompass all the above traits and are able to lead from this place creating systems and cultures that honor every level of existence while also staying in discernment and nuance creating paradox and contradictions.
All this discussion is eluding to the 9 Markers of a 2nd Tier Leader that I have found in researching various lines of development and integrating them into a typology that I foresee could be the evolutionary milestone I am speaking of.
Another important feature of understanding 2nd Tier is that all of the aspects of 1st Tier are inside 2nd Tier. There is a transcend and include or transclude.¹⁰ As you saw from the organization line of development, an organization potentially tries to include all levels of development including the six stages of 1st Tier. There is no elitism in 2nd Tier. Every stage is considered important and valuable for evolution and development. There is no attitude of the highest aspect of 2nd is better than the lowest aspect of 1st Tier. It depends they will say. It depends on the conditions on the ground or current status of the world or designated system. The assessment of the life conditions and the range of capacities of the individual and group determines what enactments are best. One stage is not better than the other. They all offer equal value, but differing value depending on the context. 2nd Tier accepts the intrinsic value of all stages of development while have discernment on the hierarchical value depending on the metric being assessed and what is most useful or developmentally appropriate.
These points could also be applied on an individual level. A 2nd Tier individual will have all the parts of 1st Tier all the way down to scarcity-thinking and fear. The difference is in a healthy expression, they will be able to transclude it and extract the positive purpose of this part and weave it together with other parts of their psyche that are at different levels of development. That would be for someone who is in a period in their life where their center of gravity is at this place. There could be other times where this individual in a time of stress or reactivity regresses down to an earlier stage of development. But this time period would be relatively short, whether a moment or days. The difference is that in these periods, they would still know via meta-cognition that they are in regression and will be able to practice presence and this level of self-awareness. They will intuitively be guided back towards the wholeness that the stage 2nd Tier invites in such situations.
Another example of where reverting back to regression to these earlier levels might be psychologically healthy and further the depth of a 2nd Tier leader, is when someone in their healing and personal development journey accesses a shadow aspect or blind spot within themselves where that sub-personality or part is at an earlier stage of development in 1st Tier (ie early childhood trauma). It would be vital and paramount for this individual to stay at this level so they can fully integrate it within the whole of their system. Otherwise they could go into spiritual bypass where they access higher states, but repress these other parts (ie fear for example); and unfortunately pathological shadows and behaviors occur. I have seen this with priests in Catholicism who practice celibacy and repress their sexual desires. Sexual desires could be considered at the infrared level with the evolutionary positive purpose of propagating the human species. If a system judges this desire and an individual in this system represses it, this desire will transform into pathological forms. 2nd Tier thinking knows that you can't delete these earlier stages within us. They can only be transcluded for higher purposes.
A CONCLUDING REMARK
Most people when they first read about or study stage theory, as briefly highlighted above, they erroneously get three ideas. 1) that development is a "simple" hierarchy with "static" stages; 2) that the levels are types of people; and 3) that later stages are better or "higher" than earlier stages. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I would like to share some brief comments. Regarding the first point, human development is a complex subject with lots of nuances. In integral theory and developmental psychology, we see an individual with various psychological parts that can each express themselves depending on the situation and level of stress. We speak of a center of gravity and sub-personalities. Under normal circumstances, research in ego development has found an individual's center of gravity at a certain stage while also having markers for stages b4 and after that particular level. Their current development is seen as a normal distribution from this center of gravity stage. When an individual is under-resourced or has stressful life conditions, they can be seen to regress to earlier stages with a new center of gravity. So it is best to see this development and these stages as a dynamic flux as an individual interacts with their changing life circumstances. It is not simple or static.¹¹
In addition, stage theory and its research is in its infancy and its theories and empirical data are best viewed as a rough representation while considering its limitations. Despite these limitations, these theories can still serve as a roadmap for transformational facilitators and leaders as they support an individual's or collective's development.
Building off the first point, we arrive at the second point: that these levels of development are not types of people, but types within people with a center of gravity that is constantly in flux depending on the individual's life conditions and growth opportunities/stressors.¹²
On the third point, no stage is better or higher than another. In developmental psychology and integral theory, we speak of developmental appropriateness. Every stage has its milestones that each individual needs to traverse and embody at a particular point in their journey. As mentioned above, sometimes people regress to earlier stages under stress and they need to go on that journey to learn what they need to learn. There is much more to be said here and will write a future article about it. In the meantime, see each stage as developmentally appropriate and having value.¹³
SUMMARY
To summarize, 2nd Tier can be explained by a simple response - it is a capacity to weave multiple perspectives from multiple intelligences into a coherent and nuanced whole with weighted discernment on truth and utility value. It is where an individual is at a 5th-person perspective taking capacity.
Or 2nd Tier could be explained by various lines of research that have explored a variable (ie ego development, moral development, emotional intelligence, etc) and the corresponding characteristics of this variable at this stage of development. In this light, 2nd Tier is a compilation of capacities, behaviors, values, and structures that exhibit a pattern of phenomenon that is qualitatively different than the preceding stages of 1st Tier.
If you would like to explore more of what 2nd Tier is and deepen your understanding, I recommend the following resources:
The Never Ending Quest by Clare Graves. PDF version
Ego Development Theory by Susanne Cook-Greuter
Spiral Dynamics by Don Beck
Theory of Everything, Integral Psychology, and Integral Spirituality by Ken Wilber
The Listening Society by Daniel Gortz
NOTES -
¹ Ken Wilber, Integral Spirituality (Boston: Integral Books, 2006), Figure 2.4 , after page 68.
² Susanne Cook-Greuter, Nine Levels Of Increasing Embrace In Ego Development: A Full-Spectrum Theory Of Vertical Growth And Meaning Making (Prepublication, 2013), http://onesystemonevoice.com/resources/Cook-Greuter+9+levels+paper+new+1.1$2714+97p$5B1$5D.pdf.
Also: Susanne Cook-Greuter, Postautonomous Ego Development: A Study of Its Nature and Measurement (Integral Publishers: Dissertation Series, 1999)
Jane Loevinger was the first researcher to publish a theory on ego development in the 1960s with empirical data to support it. But as with any line of research, there are limitations. One of those critiques highlighted was that her theory did not offer any structural logic to it. It did not explain why one stage developed into the next. Cook-Greuter solved this problem by offering the evolving perspectives on the self.
She writes: "I suggest that the evolving 'perspective on the self' demonstrates the inner logic of ego development from the Symbiotic stage through the proposed postautonomous stages...unlike Loevinger's construct, (1) it explains the dynamic unfolding of the self, (2) provides a test whether a stage is qualitatively different from a previous one, and (3) serves as a predictor...as it stands now, my version of the theory explains both the strengths and the limits of each meaning-making stage and anticipates the specific issues that adults are likely to have to negotiate at the next level in their development. It predicts what content and processes they will be able to notice, perceive, act and reflect upon, organize, and synthesize at the current stage that they did not perceive before...it explains how people form systems of coherent meaning and how they move from one interpretation of reality to the next by tracking the changes between the stages." (1999, pg 52-53).
She further explains in her online 2013 paper: "None of the other developmental theories seems to pay quite the same attention to the phenomenon of the evolution of perspective taking even though the capacity to take multiple perspectives is mentioned in almost all theories as a mark of more advanced development. I will use this structural indicator as one of the most salient markers by which to gage a person’s level of consciousness." (2013, pg 18)
And these evolving perspectives can be measured by the method of sentence completion tests (SCT). "The evolving perspective on the self, as measured by the SCT, can be shown to satisfy the demands for a hard-stage theory. It shows a qualitative difference in structure that serves the same basic function of meaning-making throughout the stages. The stages form an invariant sequence, they represent structured wholes, and they constitute hierarchical integrations." From Susanne Cook-Greuter, "Chapter 5: Maps for Living: Ego-Development Stages from Symbiosis to Conscious Universal Embeddedness," in Adult Development Volume 2: Models and Methods in the Study of Adolescent and Adult Thought, eds. Michael L. Commons and Cheryl Armon et al (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1990), pg 86.
She scored around 4420 sentence completion tests (SCTs) from the period of 1980 to 1997 and through this data and Loevinger's, this combined data confirmed the theory of evolving perspectives thru the ego stages. (Cook-Greuter, 1999, 142-143)
³ Cook-Greuter lists 5 levels of person perspective taking with room in her theory to include nth-person perspectives at her highest level of unitive and beyond. (Cook-Greuter, Nine Levels, 2013). In the following, I share where she and I have different opinions on where to place 5th person perspective along the stages and my reasons for doing so. I also suggest three other criteria for the 5th person perspective in addition to hers.
Cook-Greuter (2013) explains that the 4th-Person Perspective has the following characteristics: 1) the move from objective to subjective emphasis on meaning making: interpretation of truth is based on position of observer (pg 52); 2) the capacity to stand outside the system and culture one grew up in (pg 53); and an expanded 4th-person adds: 3) the capacity to see that the self and other from a historical perspective and perspective of one's own lifetime being nested in multiple cultural and systems contexts (pg 62, 66)..."expanded in time and space" (From her unpublished 1985 manuscript).
For 5th-person perspective, she states the following characteristics: 1) beyond one's own lifetime (pg 76); 2) global-historical perspective (pg 76); 3) capacity to perceive, compare, and integrate system of systems and nested paradigms (pg 76); 4) the perspective that meaning making is not just subjective, but that our cognitions construct our reality vs being inherent in reality (pg 77). They are beginning to perceive the nondual reality.
I would add three more: 5) the perspective of paradox and holding polar opposites at the same time; in particular, 6) the ability to perceive the objective in the subjective and vice-versa; 7) able to experience non-linear perspectives and perceiving the linear in the non-linear. Cook-Greuter (2013) considers earlier levels of #5 and #7 as part of 4th person perspective-taking (pg 56, 61, 66, 71). But as I explain below, I believe these should belong theoretically to 5th person perspective-taking. Also important to take note, I experience these levels of perspective-taking lie on a spectrum vs just black and white discrete points. Thus the later aspects of 4th person will have some early 5th person aspects. There will be a transition and blend.
The last stage in 1st Tier in her theory has a 4th-person perspective and when someone traverses into the Teal level (1st stage in 2nd Tier, her Autonomous ego level), she describes the perspective-taking as an "expanded" 4th- person perspective. This is where I disagree with her and suggest that the expanded 4th person be placed at high green, the more developed aspect of her Individualist ego stage. In addition, I am suggesting that her placement of 5th-person perspective be placed at the Teal level (her Autonomous ego stage) vs the 2nd stage of 2nd Tier (Construct-Aware). I am proposing this switch for a number of reasons. I think it is a quantum leap for an individual to traverse from stage 6 (green) to stage 7 (teal). She even mentions that other theorists have come to this observation: "The 4th person perspective represents the next differentiation stage in the sequence of the stage by stage differentiation-integration pattern. It is considered a major watershed in EDT [ego development theory] as it signifies the move from conventional to postconventional meaning making. Several of the other developmental theories consider the next, the Strategist stage [Teal- 1st stage of 2nd Tier], as a more crucial transformation [italics mine]. From a meaning making point of view, what is deemed most important is simply a matter of emphasis and choice." (Cook-Greuter, Nine Levels, pg 53). Her latter sentence is highlighting the arbitrariness sometimes in category and theory creation which I will point out below in more detail.
In my experience, I see individuals at the first stage of 2nd Tier embodying capacities that feels really unique and deserves its own nth-person perspective category. With a 4th-person perspective, individuals see all meaning-making and truth assertions as subjective. "Everyone has their truth" and "It is all subjective" are common verbal expressions from people operating from this level of perspective taking in my experience. But when individuals make that quantum leap into Teal, they develop this incredible capacity to embrace both the subjective and objective qualities of meaning-making and truth affirmations. This is no small feat. What they are doing is going into this capacity of embracing paradox and unifying polar opposites that seem contradictory. They are including 3rd person and 4th perspectives, but also transcending them! I would consider this a new level of perspective-taking - the ability to look outside themselves and also inside themselves and also embrace the subjective and objective qualities of meaning making at the same time. Another reason I see that the 1st level of 2nd Tier deserves a new category for nth-person perspective taking is the individual's new capacity to move from linear to non-linear thinking. As I have been facilitating people in making this transition, it is large leap for them and very painstaking.
These reasons above is why I am inviting my three proposed new features of 5th person: #5, 6, and 7; as part of the 5th person perspective-taking vs being part of 4th person theoretically.
Another important note for us to contemplate for future research: she also is acknowledging at the second stage of 2nd Tier (her Construct-Aware stage) that an individual could be at 5th person perspective OR potentially at a higher nth-person perspective: "5th person perspective and beyond...nth p.p" is mentioned above a figure illustration under the heading of her Construct-Aware stage (Cook-Greuter, Nine Levels, pg 76). This acknowledgement also could support my suggestion of placing 5th person perspective at Teal vs Turquoise since it is possible that someone at Turquoise could also be at a higher nth-person perspective vs a 5th one.
Creating categories and demarcations are arbitrary, but a principle that guides me as a theorist is whether the new category is providing theoretical value. We create categories and levels to illustrate different groups of similar phenomenon that exist as a point along a continuum. I believe designating the 1st stage of 2nd Tier as 5th-person and placing the "expanded 4th-person" to the higher aspects of the last stage of 1st Tier will serve theoretical value because it will convey the quantum leap and substantial new phenomenon and meaning that so many theorists see when someone traverse from 1st Tier to 2nd Tier.
I also have a guess why maybe Cook-Greuter and I have come to different understandings on this. The participants for her 1990 article where she published her findings for the first time and also her dissertation in 1999, were from an earlier decade than the individuals I have come across. I think in the 1980s and 1990s, individuals from the Individualist and Autonomous stages exhibited different typological patterns than individuals in the 2010s. I have found that the last 15 years, there has been an explosion and growth of different personal development trainings, spiritual trainings, and communities that just didn't exist prior to that point. I have been in all these arenas since 1990 and just from my personal experience, there has been an evolution of these teachings. Tony Robbins and NLP was the example of those earlier times, but when you get into the 2010s with the mainstream use of social media, new teachers appeared with all sorts of self-connection and personal development techniques that just didn't exist prior. Back in the 1980s and 1990s, it was not easy to set up a business in that way and succeed. But with the advent of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, it became incredibly easy to reach people and share your brand and message from a very low cost. Everyone and their grandma...lol...began to teach in these outlets. So with the growth of these new communities and coaches and their corresponding new approaches, I believe it took people into self-connection in deeper ways than previously possible. My guess is that 1980s and 1990s saw the early phases of the green meme and its corresponding ego development stages (see table above with integral colors), but as time went on, deeper versions of green and these ego stages emerged and thus new typologies were born each with their unique patterns and phenomenon.
So it is my guess that what I am observing in the field and what Cook-Greuter came across just might be different degrees of these typologies at the Individualist and Autonomous ego development level. I believe further empirical research is needed to confirm my observations and theoretical suggestions. I don't feel called to perform this research, but I feel called to inspire a new generation to take this on. If you are such a person, please contact me. I would love to be part of that committee around the theory and empirical methods employed.
In addition, an assessment from Clare Graves' The Never-ending Quest, he places Jane Loevinger's Autonomous stage (stage 7) somewhere at his stage 6 (green) and stage 7 (teal) (pg 461). Jane Loevinger's Ego Development theory is the predecessor of Susanne Cook-Greuter's theory. This can further support that some of the Autonomous typologies could be placed in stage 6 theoretically. And also noting that Loevinger's data for this level was from the 1960s, a very early time period for both the emergence of stage 6 (Individualist) and stage 7 (Autonomous) typologies.
⁴ This capacity could be what Cook-Greuter was implying (see note 2) around a possible nth-person perspective in the second stage of second tier and the beginning of a 6th person perspective.
⁵ Sri Aurobindo, The Life Divine (Pondicherry, India: Sri Aurobindo Ashram Publication Department, 1939), pg 972. He spoke of additional levels of cognitive intelligence after the rational mind: the higher mind, the illumined mind, intuitive mind, overmind, and the omniscient supermind. The higher mind would be equivalent to vision-logic as a label for 2nd Tier level of cognitive intelligence. Illumined Mind would fall under the beginning stage of the theoretical 3rd Tier.
⁶ Cook-Greuter, Nine Levels, pg 19 - that was the statistic she found in her 1999 dissertation. However in her 1990 (pg 89) paper, she found 91% (based on her research sample size at the time) of the adult population fell under stage 5 (orange) and below - Susanne Cook-Greuter, "Chapter 5: Maps for Living: Ego-Development Stages from Symbiosis to Conscious Universal Embeddedness," in Adult Development, Volume 2: Models and Methods in the Study of Adolescent and Adult Thought, eds. Michael L. Commons et al (New York: Praeger, 1990), pg 89.
Interestingly enough, Kegan found something similar. He found 93% at his 4th order of consciousness or below (stage 5 and below). See Robert Kegan, In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994), pg 193.
⁷ See Clare Graves, The Never Ending Quest, eds. Christopher C. Cowan and Natasha Todorovic (Santa Barbara: ECLET Publishing, 2005 post-humous). Large parts of this book were written by 1977 (pg v, vii-footnote 5) and other parts thru 1982 (pg iii). Clare Graves died in 1986. Also see Clare W. Graves, "Human Nature Prepares for a Momentous Leap," The Futurist, (April 1974): 72-87.
⁸ Ken Wilber, Integral Psychology (Boston: Shambhala, 2000). Ken Wilber, A Theory of Everything (Boston, Shambala, 2000).
⁹ Ken Wilber, Integral Spirituality (Boston: Integral Books, 2006)
¹⁰ Coined by Integral artist, Stuart Davis. See https://www.circleanywhere.com/blog/Transclude.
¹¹ Cook-Greuter explains this point regarding her ego development theory:
"Despite the appearance of this diagram, the theory is not to be seen as a simple hierarchy, or a stair-case like sequence of clearly separated levels which describe all human beings. Let me make it clear at this point: Ego stages are idealizations. They describe the ideal outcome of healthy development for each increase in perspective and integration at a new level. No individual fits all aspects of these descriptions. They serve as a road map...as a rule we find that the later the stage, the more varied ways there are to embody that frame of mind as more and more capacities and resources come on board. Nobody is at one or another stage 100%. Although a person may test as having his or her center of gravity at a specific stage, we always see a distribution of responses over at least 3 levels...the MAP-test identifies the center of gravity. We define the center of gravity as that level of ego maturity to which a person has consistent access to under ordinary circumstances without special support conditions or under unusual stress." (pg 4-7)
In Susanne Cook-Greuter, Nine Levels Of Increasing Embrace In Ego Development: A Full-Spectrum Theory Of Vertical Growth And Meaning Making (Prepublication, 2013), http://onesystemonevoice.com/resources/Cook-Greuter+9+levels+paper+new+1.1$2714+97p$5B1$5D.pdf.)
¹² For example, when people first get introduced to Spiral Dynamics and other developmental theories, there is a tendency to make an erroneous projection that these levels are static and fixed; and to consider them as types of people. Beck makes this point by sharing the nuance of types and codes. He considered these levels as codes vs types of people:
"Codes co-exist within us, like musical chords, rather than a single note. Visualize a stack of Russian dolls. Pick up the top doll and nestled inside is a smaller doll. Pick up that doll to reveal another doll and so on through multiple and progressively smaller dolls. Likewise, the characteristics of one code remain nestled in our consciousness even after a new code takes predominance in our thinking. Thus, BEIGE is nestled inside PURPLE, which is nestled inside RED, which is nestled inside BLUE, which is nestled inside ORANGE, which is nestled inside GREEN and so on...remember, codes are types in people. They are not types of people. [bold and italic mine]. Someone may strongly express, for example, ORANGE values, but we must not forget that nestled within that individual will be also codes BEIGE, PURPLE, RED and BLUE. They may also have the beginning of Code GREEN appearing in their psychological make-up. No one is a Code ORANGE person. ORANGE expresses a value system, a code." (Beck, Spiral Dynamics in Action, pg 32)
¹³ "Later (higher) is not necessarily better than earlier meaning making, it’s a matter of optimal fit." (Cook-Greuter, 2013, pg 17)
"Derailment in development, pockets of lack of integration, trauma and psychopathology are seen at all levels. Thus later stages are not more adjusted or 'happier.'" (Cook-Greuter, 2013, pg 3)
Clare Graves echoes this sentiment:
"I am not saying in this conception of adult behavior that one style of being, one form of human existence [stages of development] is, inevitably and in all circumstances, superior to or better than another form of human existence, another style of being. What I am saying is that when one form of being is more congruent with the realities of existence, then it is the better form of living for those realities. And, what I am saying is that when one form of existence ceases to be functional for the realities of existence, then some other form, either higher or lower in the hierarchy, is the better style of living." (Graves, The Never Ending Quest, 482)