Dialog Highlights

Unfolding Images of Life Project
for Co-Evolutionary Exploration and Practice

Ver. 1.0 for Web, August, 2003

This is a journal of comments that includes personal statements by the authors why we are doing this project, and our answers to critical feedback from reviewers, and other significant contributions. This Dialog Highlights document is meant to be in response to the following project documents, particularly the first two:

Organization of this early version of the Dialog Document

A.  Who are the Authors and Co-Sponsors of this Project?

B.  Why we initiated this project and gave it the form it has.

C.   Our response to questions and comments based on reviews of first draft project

       materials

A. Who are the Authors and Co-Sponsors of this Project?

This project was initiated by the late Dean Brown and Oliver Markley who have thus far written most of its materials.  It is co-sponsored by Inward Bound, Oliver's research and service practice (www.owmarkley.org/inward) and the Foundation for Mind-Being Research (www.fmbr.org), both of whom maintain a website where this project is posted.

H. Dean Brown, Ph.D. is the author of Cosmic Law: Patterns in the Universe.  Educated as a theoretical physicist, during his multi-discliplinary career Dean has worked as a nuclear physicist, national educational system designer, computer software inventor and entrepreneur.  He has learned Sanskrit, Hebrew, and Greek and has translated key wisdom literature from Sanscrit such as The Upanishads and the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali.

For an announcement of Dean’s recent passing and tributes, please see http://www.fmbr.org/cosmiclaw/index.htm.

Oliver W. Markley, Ph.D. is the co-author of Changing Images of Man, Information and the Future, America Beyond 2001, and Twenty First Century Earth. Educated both as a design engineer and a social psychologist, most of his professional career has been spent as a futurist researcher, professor and consultant.  He has explored a wide variety of psycho-spiritual theories, disciplines, and processes, and has published a number of proven visioning methods for tapping higher sources of wisdom resident in each of us.

B. Why We Initiated This Project and Gave it the Form it has

1. Why do we do this project ? 

·        Pure Impulse (entelechy), initiated in response to what in the Project Glossary we call the Metatronic level of reality from which higher wisdom originates. More on this is covered in “My Work with Nature Spirits (Devas),” a set of working notes by Oliver Markley , describing guidance from nature spirits (“devas”) on healing and ascendance.

·        For its own sake—to please ourselves—but in alignment with partnership with an emerging community of wisdom leaders at three levels of consciousness (personal, interpersonal, transpersonal. 

·        To illuminate the “landscape” of evolutionary unfolding or ascension that is sufficiently rigorous and useful as to please us, whether or not others agree—but also to do so in a way that is coherent, and productive of greater understanding and joy for all who participate in the project and benefit therefrom.  

2. Why do we focus on images?  And what does this term connote for us?  For us, image is more than merely visual; it is a sensual pattern of any type. We anticipate using images of all types, including verbal definitions, symbols, pictures, stories, myths, music, tactile, etc. 

A key way in which images are important is that they help us get to “the issues behind the issues” by being “preceptual”—a term that simultaneously means both “that which precedes perception” and “that which guides perception,” as in the term preceptor.” 

Our recognition of the “behind it all” role of images as being preceptual stems from the twin SRI studies that this project is built on (Contemporary Societal Problems and The Societal Consequences of Changing Images of Man). These studies introduced the following sequence of general systems levels where the significance of “issues behind the issues” becomes clear:

• Substantive
• Procedural
• Normative/Ideological
• Conceptual

Thomas Hurley, in his essay, Changing Images 2000, developed a similar set of categories: 

• Events
• Patterns of behavior
• Systemic structures
• Basic values and beliefs

And at a still more fundamental general systems level is metatronics, defined in our Lexicon as:  Cosmic law, the  archetypal relationships and patterns of process coming prior to morphogenetic fields of thought forms in the unmanifest aspect of reality, which, in turn, we assert, is causally prior to the manifest domain of space and time.

To summarize, our choice of the term image as a key concept in this project lies primarily at the conceptual/basic values and beliefs and metatronics levels in the above typologies, but we note that good images refer to all levels of reality.

3. And why did we initially focus on Ascending Images of Life? The two SRI futures research studies noted above did much to advance thinking about the use of relatively new theories (e.g., on general systems and paradigmatic revolutions in science) in the forecasting and fostering of intentional evolution, both personal and societal—a thrust that was further extended by integrative authors such as Ken Wilber (especially in his book, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution); and Thomas Hurley (Changing Images 2000: Integral Approaches to Re-Imagining and Re-Making Ourselves and the World, A First Sketch of Questions, Perspectives, Possibilities).  

Then, during a lengthy retirement retreat, which involved working part-time at a beautiful nursery on Hawaii's “Garden Island” of Kauai, a suggestion was received from the devic world of plant spirits to do some type of mainland-based project on ascension (more than that was quite unclear). After deciding to move ahead with this Devic suggestion, the title Ascending Images of Life simply presented itself in our thinking, and we accepted it, gladly noting that the term “life” was a happy extension beyond the patriarchal anthropocentrism of the earlier SRI study (Images of Man), but noted a bit less gladly that the term ascension  was already becoming something of a fuzzy buzzword in certain centers of  New Age “pop” culture. [Subsequently, for reasons described below, we have chosen to use unfolding as our primary term of reference.]

4.   Why do we place so much emphasis on precise definitions as the foundation of this project?  Here is a direct quote of a statement one of us made as we began:

“I find it particularly irritating in much Noetic or New Age writing to find consciousness used many different ways, none of which are defined, and with seemingly no awareness of the conceptual slippage involved.  So I end up not knowing what they are talking about, and not even using the word itself if I can avoid it, because of its ambiguity.  I don't want us to fall into this trap.”

We note that social consensus (in the sense of rigorous logic and “sanity”) is always “wrong;” therefore we must look elsewhere for our definitions if we are to build on a strong foundation.  We must look to etymology, and create an internally consistent lexicon, perhaps ultimately clustering similar (and contrasting) notions found in different of the great wisdom traditions of the world, and thereby ending up with a gradient sequence of “ascending images” that are precisely defined—including operational definitions regarding their experiential realization.  However, we are willing to forge definitions which deliberately reflect consensus reality as it is found in various times /places in history, especially our own—even if these are not internally consistent or unambiguous. 

So, much of what we do in launching this project is about semantic clarification.

For example, although we applaud efforts to foster ecological “sustainability” (which the SRI studies noted above were very much a part of), we note that the emphasis on sustainability needs to be balanced with (or transcended by) the consciousness of abundance. (In some ways, these two are opposite conceptions.  One is fear-based, the other is not.  This often shows up in the compromises that become necessary in the seeking and getting of money, which we intend to avoid in this project—which is why, after releasing the first draft of the project materials, we were delighted to find an article by Rob Lehman on Love and Money, which we have appended to the end of this second major version of this document.

5.      Why did we choose co-intelligent/co-evolutionary exploration and practice and dialog as principal methods of approach?

 We deliberately chose the phrase “exploration and practice” rather than the more commonplace term, “research,” in order to focus squarely on the value of open-ended discipline—“walking the talk” as well as “talking the walk”—as we study and seek to integrate Perennial Philosophy literature on such topics as the Advaita Vedanta of Hinduism, the Prajnaparamita of Buddhism, the Kabbala and the mystic writings of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.  Doing this for its own sake, the main benefit we are deriving from this project is the vast openings of clarity we experience as we realize this wisdom for ourselves, and hope through this project to help others find it as well.

As regards the terms “co-intelligent,” “co-evolutionary” and “dialog,” there are so many influences pointing in this direction, it is hard to single out the most important.  But we feel the need to mention at least several: 1) The pioneering work of the Point Foundation and its Whole Earth series of publications—all of which emphasized the value of co-evolutionary approaches; 2) the writings of Tom Attlee and his Co-Intelligence Institute; and 3)  the work of the great quantum physicist, David Bohm, who not only was a pioneer in the visualization of the flow of manifestation from the implicate order (that we call the realm of metatronics) of pre-materalistic thought forms to the explicate orders of beliefs and behavior in space and time; he also pioneered in the use of dialog as a way to focus this flow of manifestation in ways that are coherently integrative for the communities that engage in meaningfully focused dialog on things that matter most. 

As we begin this project, we are quite open as regards how best to accomplish the co-intelligent/co-evolutionary dialog aspects of the project.  Should it be one dialog process, or many?  Should it use a sophisticated computer conferencing software application program, or something simpler? Face to face meetings?  How often and with whom?  We expect to answer these questions by both face-to-face conversations, and by feedback from readers of the project website.  (Please see the questionnaire on the contact page of the websites where these project materials are posted.) [installation note: this hot link will have to be site specific, won't it?  No, we just need the questionnaire to ask which website they are responding from.]

It should be noted that we are launching this project with no external funding, and are not seeking any until there is specific need—and when this is so, we assume that the funding will be attracted by the project, rather than having to go “hat in hand” in the well-worn path of grantsmanship.

C.  Our response to questions and comments based on reviews of first draft project materials

We expect that the dialog process of this project will take many different forms, both in how it emerges and how it is documented.  

In what follows we share a few of the critical comments and questions received from early reviewers of our draft project documents (in this font), together with our answers (in this font).

1.      I like the way open-ended, dialog-oriented way you are going about this project.  But I can't quite see what type of role you see the Keel playing.  Can you clarify this?

The Keel is basically a compendium of resources for further work to better clarify and foster the unfolding and ascension of consciousness and life, both personal and social.  It defines certain basic concepts that were fundamental to our thinking as we developed this project, and that we think likely to be useful to other participants as we, together, explore how to achieve the noble vision of the project.  As we stated above, part of what we are trying to achieve is a new level of precision and internal consistency with notoriously ambiguous conceptual domains, such as consciousness.

2.      There is a real problem with the term ascension:

a.      It wrongly, but so very strongly brings up mental association with flaky, New Age usage of this term, that it is hard to get beyond this problem;

b.      It also brings up strong associations with traditional Christian uses of the term (Christ's ascension; the 2^nd coming, etc.);

c.       It strongly connotes the idea that “higher is better; lower is worse;” and in this way makes it difficult to move toward the “integrative” thrust that you rightly want to accomplish.

Yes. We agree that the term ascension can be a problem.  But the term integrative, while perhaps preferable in many ways, simply doesn't appear to have enough “juice” to work in the project title or as our main focus.

The concept of ascending levels of consciousness has a long history of usage in the Vedic and Buddhist wisdom literature, predating the other uses you cite.  For example, the image of the lotus flower, growing up from its root in the mud to flower with aesthetic purity in the sky, is a classic Vedic symbol of ascendance.  Moreover, the emergence from “nothing” of all that is (as briefly reviewed in the Project Keel) can hardly be called anything else than a process of evolutionary ascendance.

Because we give ascension a sufficiently precise technical definition, and because we think it better than any other term we know of for our purposes, we are sticking with it for the time being.  But we are quite open to changing this if and when it seems clear that we should.   

The above was written in response to our first draft materials.  Then later, just as we were about to post our “second draft materials” on the Internet, Dr. Paul Ray made the following suggestion:

[After reading your materials] I have a recommendation for your Lexicon:

The word "ascension" felt "off" to me as well, for the usual list of reasons.  It's not terrible, but... Upon meditating on it, "unfoldment" or "unfolding" immediately came. 

I looked in up in Webster's International dictionary:
Unfold: Not the transitive verb that takes an object, but the intransitive verb form without an object:  unfolding=self-disclosing, self-developing.
Isn't that just it, perfectly? 

1. That takes it nicely to the next step beyond bodily development over childhood and psychological development over the life cycle. It is not mere development in the physicalistic sense but is More.

2. And also...  It retains an image of the way a flower opens from its estivating bud, or a plant grows, which can be described both as a continuous process or a stage-process (as with mammalian development, including humans).  So you can retain your levels and also deal with continuities.

3. And it's also is the way spiritual development works. The true self/true nature is disclosed, and all the new aspects of being are unfolded from potentia.  Sufis refer to this as the "unfurling" of all the Divine Attributes - as with a flag or flower bud - Wahhabo = “the descent and unfurling of the many-splendored divine attributes.”

4. What came to me then was that spiritual unfoldment complements, and completes as a triad, the physicist David Bohm's enfolded implicate order, which was given as a complement to classical physical reality.

We agree completely.  It is interesting that the image of unfolding would come from someone whose demographic research led to the coining of the term Cultural Creative, a designation that from a global viewpoint, has everything to do with the unfolding of creative “win-win” solutions to the vexing problems of society. (See www.culturalcreatives.org  for more on this theme.)  But because this suggestion comes just as we are about to post the second draft of our materials using the ascension label, and because our whole endeavor is cast as a compendium of resources that are continuously being refined, it makes sense to not delay posting our work until we can rewrite everything to reflect the new image. Therefore, for this iteration, we are simply changing the title, and in the rest of the materials we use a variety of synonyms for such as  progress, advancement, maturation, evolution, transformation, integration and enlightenment.

3.      Given the wide variety of approaches, these days, that attempt to accomplish more or less what you are attempting, what makes you think that the promise of your approach is outstanding or unique?

Although we are trying to be radical and conservative as defined at the beginning of the project Sketch, we are most definitely not trying to be unique.  Quite the contrary. But the most appropriate answer is probably that we don't know that our endeavor will be outstandingly successful currently envisioned, but we do have certainty regarding the appropriateness of our approach. 

Why?  To cite but three reasons, because:

Three such process tools are described in the Applications document:

For purposes of people who are critically reading these Ascending Images project materials, these “level-(of consciousness)-specific processes may be thought of as something like an  existence proof—as this term is used in mathematics—that “state-specific” processes and practices are available through which to foster integrative ascension.:

Our own contributions here are meant as only a beginning.  With the Ascending Images project materials on the Internet, we expect to add many links to other such resources.  And we hope that other worthy applications will be suggested by wisdom leaders as the project unfolds.

4.       Your emphasis on guidance from nature spirits (“devas”) is likely to be quite off-putting to many whose participation and support you would like to attract.  Do you really need to emphasize this? 

Shamanic wisdom leaders from indigenous cultures all over the world are unanimous that if humanity is to attain ecological harmony, we must avail ourselves of nature-based sources of wisdom. 

Moreover, because the guidance from metanoic nature spirits quite literally led to the launching of this project (described in My Work with Nature Spirits), it would be out of integrity, given our explicit method of approach, not to own up to this fact.  And finally, since an important part of our method of approach is to stage an open-ended dialog with culturally creative individuals who feel an intrinsic resonance with the idea of interacting with wisdom from all relevant sources, we aren't really concerned about the likelihood that some will not feel comfortable with our approach. 

D.  Questions to stimulate initial contributions to this Dialog

As we said at the end of the Unfolding Images Project Sketch, your comments are invited.  Some questions by way of continuing:

1.      What do you find that connects with you most deeply?

2.      What do you know that would extend our understanding of unfolding / ascension and how to foster it in

          ourselves and our society?” 

3.      What other questions do you suggest be posed to stimulate discussion and dialog?

E.  Additional Dialog contributions by participants [to be added]