The Secret Language of Birthdays


(Durwin Foster) #9

I feel some uneasiness about trying to lead off on this topic, and yet, I brought it up, so in service of having “skin in the game”, I am going to upload here a document that I started in the form of a proposal of something that I have been championing in the integral context for some time, although I haven’t gotten any traction with the project yet. Ken has given me his moral support that this would be a useful thing to have happen.

It would be to construct an assessment on this topic.Vision for Sex and Gender Reasoning Project.docx (9.2 KB)


(Ed Mahood) #10

As the whole sex/gender thing is not a focus of my particular attention nor is it as big a topic here as it apparently is in North America. (I’m not aware of any particular debate going on in Germany (or Europe for that matter) on the subject.) I will be the first to admit that I have little, if any, clue why it is apparently such a big issue, so given that I have little connection to what the issues might be, I’m more than willing to show up for a discussion; if nothing else, to fill in gaps and just get generally smarter.


(Marco V Morelli) #11

That looks like a good start, Durwin. Are you proposing this topic for Tuesday 7/3? Would you like to create a dedicated thread here in the forum?

Also, is there anything else you think we should take a look at (besides the Lecitca site and your project overview). Is there a specific way that lecitical assessment evaluates the level of ‘rationality’ of the actors it analyzes in the their Sex & Gender reasoning?

Since I do not know exactly how Lectica works, probably the first think I would be curious about are the criteria and parameters it uses to make such domain-specific evaluations, and evaluations in general.


(Durwin Foster) #12

Marco, we could do either or both of those, re: I could speak about the idea on Tuesday and/or you could create a dedicated thread. Also, I realize there is some controversy and competition between various assessment providers within the integral context, and one of the providers is Terri O’Fallon. Perhaps it would be courteous to invite her specifically to discuss her approach, since she has shown engagement with InfiniteConversations?


(Marco V Morelli) #13

Hi Durwin, we probably don’t have time to prepare anything for tomorrow, but I like your idea of inviting Terri to a discussion. It is just a matter of timing, I suppose. Would you like to reach out to her and set something up?


(Durwin Foster) #14

I can reach out to her sure. and then, if we don’t get her, shall we wait for a chat on this subject? or go ahead?


(Durwin Foster) #15

Stuart Sovatsky has a couple of good and perhaps relevant articles too. i downloaded them.


(john davis) #16

A suggestion. Bret Wienstien is a futurist who looks though the lens of evolutionary biology. He has a program that invites a developmental shift in a large group of humans, as we move towards a Planetary Civilization. Could we take a look at this talk and then think about the Integral Planetary Future(s) that have already been introduced?

This might give a topic for tomorrow and get the ball rolling towards a deeper dive into Durwin and Terri’s approaches. My intention is to support this trend and create the conditions for Cafe with some fireworks! Unfortunately, there is little time to read a text so I make this suggestion as an adjacent possibility.


(Marco V Morelli) #17

I’d love that. I have come across Bret Weinstein before and been impressed with this thinking. Also, I have had a long, expansive weekend, and it is a holiday week in the US, so something that doesn’t require reading is probably the best way to go at this point.


(john davis) #18

Yeah, I hear you. I can also offer a clean start to frame the conversation. The path of least resistance.


(Durwin Foster) #19

so this means NOT doing the talk about sex, gender, love? I ask because I went ahead and invited Terri by email.


(john davis) #20

Sorry Durwin. I had know idea this was happening. Please ignore my suggestion and best of luck getting it all together.


(Durwin Foster) #21

well, if she doesn’t respond by tomorrow morning, then I would say go ahead with Weinstein. I will let you know by tomorrow morning. How does that sound?


(Terri O'Fallon) #22

Thanks Durwin for inviting me…of course I am delighted to join. I can re arrange things—but I don’t know the link to connect with…can you send it to me?
Looking forward to this dialogue…
Smiles on your moments
Terri


(john davis) #23

Great! I’m glad that has worked out.


(Mark Jabbour) #24

I’ll be there/here @ccafe & am hoping for a lively discussion. I subscribe to Weinstein’s channel, but find him tedious, rambling. eg. In the above presentation he speaks of conflict & ways towards resolution as if he has an “evolved” level of consciousness, and yet couldn’t settle his own dispute with the college he was employed by; and admits at the talk’s end that sometimes things can’t be resolved, because … well he doesn’t quite get there because he doesn’t know that of which he speaks, the functioning and “purpose” of evolution . I much prefer Jordan Peterson. Below’s a recent interview he had up in Aspen with a NYT’s, young, female, editor, who was trying not to be antagonistic but could not be. Twice she tried to bait Peterson into talking about Trump, but he wouldn’t bite. Perhaps we can marry the two topics - eros & evolution, using the Peterson and Weinstein clips as a base. In the Q & A at the end of the Peterson piece, a great question is posed (I’ll summarize): Would you rather be right or happy? Which defines much of what lies at the root of conflict between associates, comrades, friends, and intimates. Peterson answers with the warning: but you’d better be willing to accept the consequences, no matter your choice. Which I’ve found very hard, because either way there is a cost. I/we tend to think that we choose well/best, but - “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” I’ll stop now. See you in 4 hours.:gorilla:


(Marco V Morelli) #25

Let’s see who shows up today and what’s on the table.

If @Terri can make it, I would love to hear from her first, since we haven’t really ever gotten a chance to speak in depth. I would like to mingle minds, and better understand her understanding (including unresolved questions and perceived possibilities, etc.) of human development in relation to ‘evolution,’ cosmically and culturally, and scientifically—if that’s not too much to ask. :sweat_smile:

@DurwinFoster , I believe, also has some ideas he would like to develop, related to sex and gender reasoning and integral development. Let’s work with who is present and we can interact with. There is much to learn!

Besides, I don’t think I would be able to absorb the Jordan Peterson interview, along with the Weinstein clip above (both of which I’m happy to watch) before the talk today (7/4). I just got back from lovely trip and am enjoying the summer. These guys are downers.

But they are smart and I want to hear what they have to say. I just want to be able to take their arguments and ideas, if that’s what they are, seriously; and today I can’t.

I hope @Terri and @DurwinFoster, you can join us. And @Geoffrey_Edwards, too, whose evolving novels-in-development explore critically related ideas through vast narrative imagination. And @johnnydavis54, @Douggins, @achronon, the @ccafe crew, et al. Durwin, let’s collaborate on the topic set-up, if you’re available. I will message you. ¡Hasta luego!


(Ed Mahood) #26

It’s Tuesday – but despite England vs. Columbia (one of my sons-in-law is British; his step-mother is Columbian) – I’ll be there. I have a fundamental question or two that would be very helpful to have answered (depending on whose there, of course).

(Side note: I watched Weinstein, who I think is a bit confused; I’ve watched enough Peterson to think highly of him as a psychologist and very little of him as a cultural critic; so, I could probably follow almost any discussion that arises.)


(Durwin Foster) #27

Is it at 11/noon or noon/1pm? @madrush. Because my calendar entry is for 11/noon. but on this thread, it says noon/1.


(Marco V Morelli) #28

Here is the topic for today: