ON INTEGRITY

Integrity is a shared process.

Integrity is interrelational.

Integrity is contextual.

Integrity is integrating.

Integrity is unscripted.

Integrity is a kind of super-attention.

Integrity is watching for the cracks in what you thought you knew.

Integrity is willingness to learn together.

~ Nora Bateson

Integrity is an important word and concept. It is critically important in spiritual and religious circles. Without integrity there can be no real spiritual growth in an individual or group. You can say that integrity is integral to attaining true fulfillment as a spiritual student.

The revelation that spiritual guru Deepak Chopra is mentioned multiple times in the email files linked to the Jeffrey Epstein case is, at a minimum, disturbing (LINK). A deeper dive into the situation, including how often so-called spiritual celebrities have difficulty maintaining integrity is here (LINK).

“My intent is to be generous of spirit and live with total integrity every day of my life.”
~ Deepak Chopra

“There is no such thing as a minor lapse of integrity.”
~ Tom Peters

I have often considered some spiritual celebrities as conduits to New Thought for many people. Author Wayne Dyer was such a way shower for me, leading me to being open enough to explore the Science of Mind in the 1980’s. I am grateful for that, and for much of the wisdom that Dyer shared over the years, even though he had his own lapses of integrity, including this (LINK).

One of the most disturbing factors of the crimes associated with Jeffrey Epstein and his wide circle of influential friends and clients is the extent to which such horrific behavior went on and was widely known (and therefore condoned). The victims numbered in the hundreds, and almost all were children at the time. The perpetrators number in the dozens, perhaps even the hundreds, and include world and business leaders. What all of this says about our society is worthy of deep reflection.

But our own house in spirituality and religion is far from perfect. The victims of failures of integrity by religious leaders number in the millions. This has been compounded by the repeated failure of those responsible to demand accountability by transgressors. And even when accountability has occurred, the results are often kept confidential allowing the perpetrators to relocate and offend again. Such violations of trust drive people from spiritual communities.

“As long as you have certain desires about how it ought to be you can’t see how it is.”
~ Ram Dass

We in spiritual communities and organizations have an interest in thinking of ourselves as good people, and we have an interest in being spiritual, which often means to be “nice,” no matter what. I have seen spiritual leaders who were toxic (LINK) protected by congregants, boards, and organizations. This was done for reasons including personal loyalty, a desire not to have a scandal revealed, or a sense that accusations must be proven beyond a doubt.

We in New Thought are nice people as a rule. We tend to think that we live in a friendly, even moral, universe and that people are basically good. We often pay a severe price for these beliefs.

“The opposite of reflexive niceness is integrity.”
~ James Hollis, Jungian analyst

Let’s look at these beliefs:

Our universe is not friendly or moral. It is evolutionary and amoral. We exist in our current forms because of violent collisions of planets, stars, and galaxies which allowed more complex elements to be formed and spread over wide distances. We exist in our current forms because of biological evolution, whose processes toward greater complexity and adaptation have resulted in the extinction of over 99% of all the species which have existed on earth. And we know that we are a transitional species, just as all others are; we will either evolve to more complex and well-adapted beings or become extinct as an evolutionary dead-end. Evolution is careless of the individual and of the species by nature.

Morality does not appear in our universe except as a human invention. Other species may and do cooperate, but they do so as a survival mechanism. Humans are capable of moral thought and actions, but it is something which must be learned and reinforced in the social structures around us. It too, is an evolutionary adaptation.

People have the capacity to be good and moral, but any number of things can limit that capacity, sometimes severely. We know scientifically that psychopaths have little or no ability for moral action or regret due to brain injuries, often occurring when in childhood. Research has shown that most psychopaths and sociopaths are incapable of regaining a sense of morality through any known treatments.

Of course, everyone who commits a violation of integrity does not have a physical condition limiting their capacity. In most cases, people simply decide to act out of integrity, usually by using rationalization. Everyone has done something out of integrity; most of us just about every day in some minor or significant way. It is important to remember that such actions are the result of a divided self, a self which is not integral.

Spiritual study and practices are in large part about realizing one’s wholeness, one’s integrity. To be in integrity means to be in your deepest truth. As that truth is realized more and more, it means to refuse to participate in behaviors which are out of integrity. It also means to speak out for integrity and justice and love in every community to which one belongs.

The Beloved Community does not tolerate behaviors which are out of integrity. Therefore, it requires people who are compassionate to fulfill their potential. We cannot be truly compassionate if we are out of integrity in our own lives; our communities cannot be compassionate if members are silent or complicit in behaviors which are out of integrity.

Our spiritual gurus know this yet often fail. We know this yet often fail. Our compassion is the only thing that can lead us to the realization of our true spiritual potential.

“Contradictions, whether personal or social, that could once remain hidden are coming unstoppably to light. It is getting harder to uphold a divided self….The trend toward transparency that is happening on the systems level is also happening in our personal relationships and within ourselves. Invisible inconsistencies, hiding, pretense, and self-deception show themselves as the light of attention turns inward….The exposure and clearing of hidden contradictions brings us to a higher degree of integrity, and frees up prodigious amounts of energy that had been consumed in the maintenance of illusions. What will our society be capable of, when we are no longer wallowing in pretense?”
~ Charles Eisenstein

Copyright 2025 – Jim Lockard

THE CAPACITY FOR COMPLEXITY, PART 3

“Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul.”
~ Mark Twain

As noted in Part 1 (LINK), our brains and egos want things to be simple and expedient. We tend to resist a more complex approach if a simpler one looks possible. As noted in Part 2 (LINK), at the less complex stages on the spiral, our capability to understand complexity is less developed and our values systems tend to be more rigid in an either/or fashion. Complexity understood takes us into gray areas, areas of paradox, mystery, and relativism. A complex world demands more of me. If my capacity for complexity has not evolved beyond a lower level, I will constantly find myself falling behind and grow resentful and angry.

EXAMPLE:

SIMPLE = Merry Christmas or Happy Chanukkah – celebrating my own tradition (especially if it is the dominant one in my society)

COMPLEX = Happy Holidays – because there are multiple traditions celebrating at this time of year.

Those centered at Postmodernist-Green on the spiral are very complex thinkers, but being at 1^st Tier, fear is still integral to their way of being (this fear is largely dispelled when one moves to Integral-Yellow which is the initial 2^nd Tier stage). Green wants the world to be connected, intimate, egalitarian, and fair. Green is very connected to feelings – no one should be made to feel bad because of who they are. So, “political correctness” or “wokeness” (LINK) at Green means that we should not say or do things which cause people to feel diminished because of their identities – race, ethnicity, gender, etc.; or any physical or mental differences they may have – ableism, mental issues (LINK), etc. Green is strongly in the “Happy Holidays” celebrating all cultural expressions camp and will insist that everyone else should be there as well.

Being feelings-based, Green often expresses a positive desire for people to support one another more widely, which can make it difficult for some at Green to request or require accountability from others. The fear of upsetting someone can extend to include all aspects of upsetting or disappointing others. Where there is no accountability demanded, those with underdeveloped emotional intelligence can cause problems in families, groups, and organizations. This failure to demand accountability is an unhealthy expression of Green.

Green also tends to have a blind spot to Red impulsiveness and lack of conscience, so someone at Red (or unhealthy Orange, which expresses like Red in some ways) can create a good deal of havoc when those at Green are in charge. Additionally, those higher on the spiral who may have issues such as narcissism or sociopathy – both of which lack the capacity to feel remorse for harming others – will need healthy boundaries to be established and enforced by leadership.

“Sociopaths do not care about other people, and so do not miss them when they are alienated or gone, except as one might regret the absence of a useful appliance that one has somehow lost. . . . It is not that [the sociopath] fails to grasp the difference between good and bad; it is that the distinction fails to limit their behavior.”
~ Martha Stout (LINK)

The absence of feelings of intimacy and remorse which is intrinsic to Egotistic-Red and remains in those with sociopathy and/or narcissistic personality disorder often does not register with feelings-based Green. The main difference between someone centered at Red and someone higher on the spiral who is a sociopath is that the sociopath has a greater capacity for complexity of thought. Narcissists and sociopath often attain positions of leadership – on boards and in ministry – because they know how to manipulate the emotions of others. Those centered at Green, especially if they are insecure, are particularly prone to such manipulation.

“We are required to accept that there is no parent to lead the way, no guru, no ideology to save us from the complexity and ambiguity of life.”
~ James Hollis, Jungian Therapist

Highly complex Green often has difficulty communicating in both directions with those lower on the spiral. They may use complex descriptions of already complex ideas to get points across. These are not fully understood, and those hearing them grow frustrated. Likewise, when someone at a less complex level on the spiral describes a desire or a problem, Green may see it as overly simplistic.

The key to successful communications within the spiral is to know where others exist in terms of complexity first, and values systems second. The best way to do this is to speak with people and find out the “whys” of their motivation. People centered at different levels on the spiral may exhibit the same behaviors, but for different reasons. So, behavior alone is not an ideal way to learn someone’s level of complexity.

With greater complexity comes the realization that things are more connected than our senses might indicate; that there are systems in play in nature and in our own psyches; and that things impact one another in ways that simplicity cannot describe. Yet, to reach some, we need to simplify our language to make it accessible. This can be done by speaking and writing with greater brevity, greater clarity, and by breaking systems into more discrete elements.

As I have noted elsewhere, when I was a spiritual leader, I used to send out different request for donation letters based upon my awareness of where individuals were on the spiral. For those whom I had no awareness of their level of complexity, I sent a letter that covered all of the main stages present, Blue, Orange, and Green.

Briefly, if I knew that you had a strong Blue values component, the letter was a simple and direct request, usually for a specific amount. Those at Blue tend to obey authority and prefer to be told what to do in many situations.

If I knew you to be at Orange, the letter was more complex in nature and appealed to how you might personally profit from donating. Programs like “pillars of the church” where givers are listed according to the amount they give are appealing to those at Orange (and horrify those at Green).

If I knew you to be at Green, the appeal was very complex as to how the money would be used to enhance the programs and people in the spiritual community and was very non-specific as to amount. Green values egalitarianism and wants every voice to be heard, but no one to feel bad because they can give less than others.

This brief example shows how spiral awareness can enhance the ability to communicate effectively and how developing a capacity for complexity also affects one’s values. I have focused more on the Postmodern-Green stage because that is where the majority of New Thought spiritual leadership is centered. There are also, of course, many centered at Modernist-Orange, but they are no longer a majority. Blue values are present (and a good thing, because Blue ethics are essential as we move up the spiral), but few are centered there anymore. The reason? New Thought teachings encourage self-development and self-development leads to greater complexity as we evolve.

We need to include greater spiral awareness in our resources for leadership. I will be conducting an online course in Spiral Dynamics for Spiritual Leaders in 2023, which will be announced here and on the usual social media sources soon.

“Chapter 1. Notes and Commentary.
“WE do not claim that more complexity is better than less; that less simplicity is better than more. We are simply reporting on the apparent transformation to greater complexity that appears to characterize the human experience.”
~ Don Edward Beck and Graham Linscott

THE CRUCIBLE. Third printing 2014

This concludes this series of posts, as always, your comments are welcomed.

Copyright 2022 – Jim Lockard

CONSENSUS AND THE EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS, PART 2

“Change is inevitable. Progression is a choice.”

~ Sonya Teclin

In Part 1 (LINK) of this series, I pointed out how consensus decision-making is the result of an evolutionary dynamic – one which emerges with the movement on the spiral into the Postmodernist-Green Level of Existence.

Consensus as the primary, or sole, formal method of decision-making at the spiritual community or organizational level works very well, if not perfectly, when all of those involved in the decision-making process are centered at Green. It is less successful when participants are centered lower or higher on the spiral. (Remember that lower or higher is not better nor worse, simply a reflection of the level of complexity of thought at which someone is operating currently). There is a tendency for those who are not aware of the dynamics of cultural evolution to simply think that they have discovered something new, such as consensus, and seek to entice others or impose the new thing on them. This can lead to negative consequences. An understanding of cultural evolution will help one realize that we are all evolving differently and unevenly; and that there are vMEME-driven implications in our emerging values systems.

 

Let’s look at some pros and cons of consensus decision-making, then follow with some additional exploration of developmental and evolutionary factors.

PROS OF CONSENSUS (some from this LINK)

• A way to ensure that every voice is heard
• A way to make decisions without authoritarian energy
• A safe space to voice concerns
• A respectful hearing of all perspectives
• A bias toward the non-rational – this can allow exploration of deeper meaning (Presencing – LINK).
• A process by which a group mind emerges from individual input
• A process aimed at achieving a greater good
• A way to synthesize various ideas or perspectives into a uniquely new outcome
• A way to forge greater emotional connection between members of a group or team

CONS OF CONSENSUS

• Those operating at vMEMEs below Green will feel out of harmony with the processing and will believe they must comply or be a hindrance (they will project their own values system onto the process at hand). Those at Blue will want to know what happened to Robert’s Rules of Order and be uncomfortable with what is to them the free-flowing nature of the process.
• Those operating at 2^nd Tier may well become very frustrated with how long it takes to process decisions and by the tendency to succumb to manipulation by feelings (see below), and they may leave the group.
• When unhealthy elements of Green are present, consensus can be obstructed or, at minimum, become very difficult. Examples of unhealthy Green include:
  • Open-ended relativism – every idea or concept or belief system has equal value – “Who am I to say what we should decide?“
  • A bias toward the non-rational – Green is where elements of Tribal-Purple re-emerge. This can result in budget income line-items such as “God Will Provide” when dealing with scarcity. This will be very difficult for someone centered at Blue, Orange, or Yellow to accept.
  • A strong bias toward inclusion can lead unhealthy Green to overlook whether candidates for positions have the necessary skills, experience, or ethical backgrounds.
  • Unhealthy Green can become authoritarian (re-emerging Blue). Remember, unhealthy Green can be in shadow and have a high tolerance for dysfunction.
• A tendency to be manipulated. At Green, feelings are paramount. Everyone must feel that decisions are correct and in the best interest of all concerned. This can lead to two major issues:
  • Someone with a lack of emotional maturity can manipulate the group by expressing negative or hurt feelings about issues. A sociopath can effectively sabotage or even take over the group by manipulating emotions.
  • Getting everyone on the same page emotionally can take a long time. Seemingly endless processing can frustrate members and make it difficult to recruit new people into leadership due to the frustrations of some with the leadership culture – word spreads that being on the leadership team is no fun.

It is important that we realize the evolutionary nature of human cultural development as we explore how we make decisions in groups. Those centered at the various levels on the spiral will naturally gravitate toward decision-making processes which reflect the values systems of their own level. And, they will tend to reject the decision-making processes which reflect the values systems of other levels. So, for someone centered at Blue or Orange, consensus will seem less than ideal. And for someone at 2^nd Tier, Yellow or Turquoise, it will seem like an immature process. At the same time, someone centered at Green will see authoritarian or majority rule decision-making as undesirable as well.

Remember also that vMEMEs are fluid – we are always in an evolutionary flow, even if we are slow to change. Evolution is never static, always dynamic. The composition of vMEMEs present on any decision-making team will be in flux, as are other aspects of their developmental natures. Each will bring levels of psychological development, styles of being such as introvert or extrovert, orientations to change (LINK), and what is happening in their lives at the current moment to the decision-making process. That said, the vMEME levels occupied by those involved will have the greatest effect on what kind of decision-making process is most favored.

“While genes evolve slowly, the decision systems formed by vMEMES are always on the move. vMEMES can be so dominant they seem like archetypes and are easily misinterpreted as ‘types’ of people. When several are in harmony, vMEMES resonate like the notes in a musical chord. However, vMEMES in conflict lead to troubled individuals, dysfunctional families, corporate malaise, fractured churches, and civilizations in decline and fall. Since they are ‘alive,’ vMEMEs can ebb and flow, intensify and soften like a string of Christmas tree lights on a dimmer. Several different ones may line up in support of a specific issue, idea, or project because they share the values contents. At other times, people with essentially the same vMEME decision-making frameworks may disagree violently over details of beliefs and what is ‘the good,’ degenerating into holy and un-civil war.”

~ Don Edward Beck & Christopher Cowan, SPIRAL DYNAMICS

Consensus is a good fit when an organization and/or its leadership team is centered at the Green vMEME. That said, it does not guarantee that the consensus process will have positive results. That will depend on how healthy the team expresses at the Green level. It will also depend on how those centered at different levels on the spiral are welcomed within the leadership team and the larger spiritual community. Like all 1^st Tier levels, Green is fear-based, and those at Green will tend to view those expressing the values systems of other levels as being wrong. When there is pushback, those at Green may close in together and keep others out of the decision-making process. These are all things that good spiritual leadership will be aware of, and work to minimize.

“Cultures are moving pictures, adoptive flow states, that can either downshift under fear or upshift with waves of confidence, access, education and appropriate structures.”

~ Don Edward Beck

Finally, it is important to realize that while consensus may be an ideal fit when those involved are at the Green level, the evolutionary process will continue, and there will come a time when expression at a higher level on the spiral will emerge. Any given spiritual community or organization may be centered at the Green Level for a few years or a decade or more. In Part 3 of this series, I will explore some of what we know about 2^nd Tier decision-making.

“It’s a recognition that reality as we know it is being animated by an evolutionary current. This is true on the cosmological large-scale structure of the universe. It’s true biologically. But it’s true on a human level, too. The great mystery is living and wanting to transcend itself through us toward greater expressions of beauty, truth and goodness. And so evolutionary spirituality says that, for lack of a better word, God is implicate, intrinsic to that evolutionary push.”

~ Rev. Bruce Sanguin

 

Here is where you can get my book
CREATING THE BELOVED COMMUNITY:
A Handbook for Spiritual Leadership,At
in paperback or Kindle editions –
(LINK TO AMAZON.COM)
(LINK TO AMAZON.CA – Canada)
(LINK TO AMAZON.CO.UK)
And at DEVORSS.COM

 Copyright 2017 – Jim Lockard