Transitions in Development

As we have seen there is a rich variety of features that characterises the human development process, most of which have already been dealt with - at least in summary fashion - through previous blog entries.

For example I define - as the broadest grouping of stages - 8 Bands (though I have suggested a possible future cyclical refinement of this approach in the previous blog entry). 

Then each Band consists of 3 Levels with therefore 24 levels in all.

Though the nature of interaction involved can vary greatly throughout development each level in turn is defined by 3 Sub-Levels.

Then with respect to each sub-level I define up to 8 Dimensions (or Directions),  the number of which depends on the band (and level) of development involved. The notion of 1 dimension is especially important from the conventional rational perspective where opposite polarities of experience are abstracted from each other. 2, 4 and 8 dimensions are then especially important in integral terms. 
2 dimensions relates to the notion of the complementarity of the horizontal polarities i.e. external and internal that work within a given level.
4 dimensions additionally includes the vertical polarities i.e. whole and part that work between levels.
8 dimensions then further includes the diagonal polarities i.e. form and emptiness that operate simultaneously within and between levels.

Closely associated with these dimensions is the notion of Mirror Stages, the precise significance of which again depends on the band (and level) of development involved.

Then within each sub-level, I define 3 Primary Modes (volitional, cognitive and affective) of development. These are then carefully distinguished from - what are somewhat misleadingly often  referred to as lines of development - multiple Secondary (Composite) Modes, which are not quite so critical as primary, in terms of the overall integration of development.

I also define 24 Personality Types. So the precise way through the dynamics of development are set to unfold is defined to a considerable extent by these types.

Again following on from the dimensions I define development in terms of both psychological  and physical stages i.e. stages of self and stages of reality.

This entails for example that associated with each “higher” stage of psychological development is a corresponding new “higher” scientific physical stage. In the most fundamental sense this applies to the very nature of mathematics (which underlies scientific understanding).

So properly understood, associated with every stage - and in a wider sense band of development - is a distinctive form of mathematical and scientific understanding.

I distinguish in turn 3 fundamental types of such understanding Analytic (Bands 1 and 2); Holistic (Bands 3, 4 and 5) and Radial (Bands 6, 7 and 8).

I also define each stage in terms of States and Structures with both defined for both day and night time use.

The vertical  interaction as between stages then gives rise to the possibility of peak and valley experience (with respect to both states and structures)

I also define stages in terms of their default meaning and in terms of both enhanced and diminished understanding.

Then the key feature I would claim regarding my approach is that it distinguishes carefully as between both differentiation and integration at every stage of development. Whereas the linear (asymmetric)  logical approach is suited for interpretation of the differentiated aspect,the circular (complementary) approach is suited by contrast for integration. 

I also in the past have used the notion of Phases (usually 5 or 8) to describe the manner in which particular stages unfold. However this would constitute more a literary device perhaps (to facilitate understanding) rather than fundamental feature of these stages. 

The most original feature is its holistic mathematical rationale which provides a precise dynamic configuration for the nature of all stages.

For example the distinction as between differentiated and integrated aspects above is based directly on the holistic interpretation of the binary digits (1 and 0).

I thereby lay critical emphasis on providing an inherently dynamic interactive approach. So it is never my intention to attempt to tie down development in a rigid manner but rather provide a framework from which to understand the many diverse and rich ways that it can experientally unfold.

However one more valuable distinction relates to the Transitions between stages (especially with respect to the major bands).

From my experience this transition between bands alternates as between a basic continuation in the same orientation (that characterised the previous band) and a decisive switch in this orientation.

Not surprisingly therefore problems are more likely to arise in development when a major switch in orientation is required (but not clearly recognised).

Now in general the transition from Band 1 to Band 2 entails largely a continuation of the linear type consciousness that unfolds at an increasing rate through Band 1.

So by the completion of Band 1 the growing child will have already learnt to dispel many confused unconscious notions.

In this sense the progress to concrete type understanding (where objective data are increasingly separated from subjective interpretation) should occur as a natural development.

All in all therefore Band 2 in modern developed cultures has come to be largely associated with the specialisation of linear type understanding (esp. with respect to science and technology).

However this poses special problems in terms of the successful transition to the next band (Band 3), which requires the substantial erosion of dualistic type understanding.

Indeed I believe it is accurate to say that modern society largely plateaus at Band 2 type understanding with very few making any substantial progress with respect to the more advanced bands.

As I have detailed frequently in my writings, those who are likely to make this transition tend to show unusual sensitivity to unconscious promptings (from an early age).

Thus when others are adapting to the demands and expectations of modern life, these are likely to feel as outsiders and undergo a significant existential crisis which is then only resolved through commitment to a “higher” spiritual meaning.

So when this transition is successfully negotiated, it leads to the contemplative path of Band 3 (characterised by increasing intuitive type development).

Band 4 then in many ways entails a continuation of this intuitive development (of  a transcendent spiritual kind). 

However this specialisation in the transcendent direction of spirituality can itself become highly problematic with one increasingly becoming removed from day to day secular concerns.

So the transition to Band 5 again requires a decisive switch in orientation where one comes to recognise in a new way the importance of the dualistic world of form (this time in a relative rather than absolute manner)..

This could also be expressed as the attempt to fully balance the transcendent with the immanent direction of spirituality.

Now again just as so many in the world get trapped at Band 2 (through over-specialisation of reason), I fear that many contemplatives likewise get trapped at Band 4, through an unduly transcendent spiritual focus (which inhibits proper adaptation to the world).

So the transitions from Band 2 to Band 3 and Band 4 to Band 5 are perhaps the toughest to successfully negotiate.

All going well the transition from Band 5 to Band 6 should occur in a natural manner (once the counterbalancing immanent direction has been sufficiently established).

However though I can only offer a diminished perspective, the transition to Band 7 (and the flowering of the full radial life) could prove more difficult.

On the one hand the more passive type, who had indeed successively adapted to the world - but in a somewhat restricted private manner - may be called to much greater public service.

On the other hand, the naturally active type may be required e.g. through ill health, to fulfil a more private contemplative role. So it is only the truly mixed type that would make the transition here without undue difficulty. In this way the other two types are forced to attempt a final important re-balancing of personality.

However when the transition to Band 7 is made willingly, the final transition to Band 8 is likely to represent a continuation of this trend.

Of course, to conclude, when the important transitions between bands are not successfully negotiated, then development is likely to significantly plateau at the “highest” band already attained.