What do you think?
Rate this book
Трамп и эпоха постправды
Кен Уилбер — один из самых востребованных и переводимых на различные языки мира американских мыслителей. Он предлагает провокационное, но при этом сбалансированное расследование истоков разворачивающейся культурно-общественной и политической ситуации в Америке, связанной с избранием Дональда Трампа в качестве президента страны.
США — страна, текущие процессы, а также внутриполитическая и внешнеполитическая активность в которой так или иначе влияют на весь современный мир. И ряд повсеместно игнорируемых факторов сыграли существенную роль в восхождении Трампа на вершину политической арены США. Что это за факторы? Это эпидемия крайних и даже экстремистских форм плюрализма, мультикультурализма, политики идентичности и политкорректности, поражённых нигилизмом и нарциссизмом. Повлияла и аллергическая реакция общества на эти проявления.
Книга не только помогает разобраться в причинах прихода к власти этой «новой» силы — олицетворяемой сейчас Трампом. Она служит противоядием от крайних — и разрушительных — форм культуры постмодерна. Помогает избежать ошибок, совершённых в странах Запада, где постмодернизм занял положение «эволюционного авангарда» интеллектуальных и культурных ценностей (не справившись со своей задачей).
Видение, предложенное Уилбером, проясняет восприятие текущей мировой ситуации — как социокультурной, так и интеллектуальной, — помогая прийти к взвешенным взглядам и интеграции важнейших истин плюрализма в цельном мировоззрении.
США — страна, текущие процессы, а также внутриполитическая и внешнеполитическая активность в которой так или иначе влияют на весь современный мир. И ряд повсеместно игнорируемых факторов сыграли существенную роль в восхождении Трампа на вершину политической арены США. Что это за факторы? Это эпидемия крайних и даже экстремистских форм плюрализма, мультикультурализма, политики идентичности и политкорректности, поражённых нигилизмом и нарциссизмом. Повлияла и аллергическая реакция общества на эти проявления.
Книга не только помогает разобраться в причинах прихода к власти этой «новой» силы — олицетворяемой сейчас Трампом. Она служит противоядием от крайних — и разрушительных — форм культуры постмодерна. Помогает избежать ошибок, совершённых в странах Запада, где постмодернизм занял положение «эволюционного авангарда» интеллектуальных и культурных ценностей (не справившись со своей задачей).
Видение, предложенное Уилбером, проясняет восприятие текущей мировой ситуации — как социокультурной, так и интеллектуальной, — помогая прийти к взвешенным взглядам и интеграции важнейших истин плюрализма в цельном мировоззрении.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published August 1, 2017
209 people are currently reading
1000 people want to read
About the author
Ken Wilber
225 books1,241 followersKenneth Earl Wilber II is an American philosopher and writer on transpersonal psychology and his own integral theory, a systematic philosophy which suggests the synthesis of all human knowledge and experience.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 98 reviews
May 8, 2017
I found this a really interesting and convincing opinion piece. Most of what Wilber discusses aligns with my own beliefs, so it was a little case of preaching to the choir - but still, I took a lot away from it.
Wilber attempts to explain the election of Trump, and the current notion of "truth" and "post-truth" in the world today using his own integral theories. I had no prior knowledge of his work on Integral Theory and the four quadrants, but this book was written in a way that made it easy to pick up quickly.
He explains the divide between liberals (or, specifically, Democrats) into two leading categories that conflict with one another and fail to provide a platform on which America can move forward. There are the traditional "orange" liberals who put emphasis on the importance of freedom above all else, and the emerging modern "green" liberals concerned with equality and all acts of oppression. In other words, what one might refer to as SJWs.
This is something I feel quite strongly about, though I rarely have time to write politics essays these days. I, too, am concerned with this kind of radical liberalism (indeed, radical anything usually comes dangerously close to mirroring the opposite). As Wilber writes:
He talks about an issue that I've seen a lot in the media since the election of Trump - the way in which white, rural, uneducated people have been dismissed and looked down upon by an elitist liberalism. It is interesting how liberals often participate in forms of aggressive conservatism - such as classism - in order to enforce their worldview. The result, of course, is that Trump won the election.
Wilber makes a lot of great points, even if I think he sometimes a) oversimplifies issues and b) overuses phrases like "aperspectival madness". I especially enjoyed reading his theory on the different stages of human worldview development and the way we progress from focusing on the self, to the group, to a more universal outlook.
Wilber attempts to explain the election of Trump, and the current notion of "truth" and "post-truth" in the world today using his own integral theories. I had no prior knowledge of his work on Integral Theory and the four quadrants, but this book was written in a way that made it easy to pick up quickly.
He explains the divide between liberals (or, specifically, Democrats) into two leading categories that conflict with one another and fail to provide a platform on which America can move forward. There are the traditional "orange" liberals who put emphasis on the importance of freedom above all else, and the emerging modern "green" liberals concerned with equality and all acts of oppression. In other words, what one might refer to as SJWs.
This is something I feel quite strongly about, though I rarely have time to write politics essays these days. I, too, am concerned with this kind of radical liberalism (indeed, radical anything usually comes dangerously close to mirroring the opposite). As Wilber writes:
The progressive Left—precisely because it was progressive, or tended to follow new evolutionary unfoldings—was now divided between its original, foundational values of the Enlightenment—individual rights and freedom; universal values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; the separation of church and state; emphasis on individual free speech and individual freedom in general—versus the novel values of newly emerging green, which included: overall, an emphasis on green’s “equality” above and over orange’s “freedom,” and thus an emphasis on group rights and a curtailing of individual rights if they in any way threatened to marginalize or even offend any minority group (a direct challenge to the First Amendment and a willingness to limit free speech if it seemed to hurt the feelings of any group);
He talks about an issue that I've seen a lot in the media since the election of Trump - the way in which white, rural, uneducated people have been dismissed and looked down upon by an elitist liberalism. It is interesting how liberals often participate in forms of aggressive conservatism - such as classism - in order to enforce their worldview. The result, of course, is that Trump won the election.
Wilber makes a lot of great points, even if I think he sometimes a) oversimplifies issues and b) overuses phrases like "aperspectival madness". I especially enjoyed reading his theory on the different stages of human worldview development and the way we progress from focusing on the self, to the group, to a more universal outlook.
April 20, 2018
The big idea for the book:
The Trump presidency is evolutionary self-correction.
The Green post-modern world-view needs to get some things right.
We are on notice to hold a higher bar for the “truth.”
The proviso for reading this review: Trump & The Post Truth World really requires a pre-requisite understanding of and a basic adherence to developmental models. Otherwise, it becomes difficult to understand what he is talking about and/or you won’t have faith in what asserts.
I happen to find the developmental models that he references as useful. Here they are in summary as laid out in the book.
Primary stages of development in the American population.
Red: egocentric, self-referential, instinctual
Amber (known by some as Blue): (alias “mythic membership”): ethnocentric, authoritarian, pre-modern
Orange: world-centric, rational, individualistic, modern
Green: world centered, pluralistic, post-modern
Wilber quickly asserts that the segment of the population operating at a Green world-view bear responsibility for the leading edge of culture; and in our time and space that is Green / post-modernism
He then unpacks the contradictions / problematic expressions in the post-modern world view:
• Context aware relativistic insights turned into total relativism and no universal truth,
• “Performative contradiction” of all values equal, except these Green values, which are better, but we won’t come right out and say our values are better, so we will just be resentful and dismissive that you don’t hold these same values,
• Inability to differentiate between dominator hierarchies and growth hierarchies, d. Hyper-sensitive politically correct ego inflation
• “Aperspectival madness” created the conditions for post-modern worldview to disintegrate into nihilism and narcissism
From here, Wilber outlines what the response to the down-side of Green looks like in our country. People holding most other world views have collectively reacted to aperspectival madness with disdain and strong anti-post-modern reactions.
Trump tapped that anti-post-modern collective response. People voted less for Trump than against the perspectival madness of the word-view that Trump rallies against
One simple example of the corrective function of this election was the re-ordering of the role of facts and truth. Pre-election, journalists and academics (largely post-modern) would often use relative perspective taking to speak around facts and truth and talk about cultural truth and individual truth. Trump used the same relativism but with more force, like a blunt tool to drive an egocentric and ethnocentric agenda. Now, any self-respective journalist wouldn’t be caught dead saying, “well, the facts are relative here.” There was a cultural course correction.
Here is a big take-away for me: Green mindset tech businesses have “democratized” information. The unintended consequence is the rising of “most popular” information, not the “most best.” Therefore, on google or Facebook, the more a topic is searched, the more than topic will be suggested, which increase the visibility for sharing and creates a loop. A loop of attention, not accuracy or truth. In this way, the progressive value of equality of perspective gets trumped (pardon the pun) by popularity.
So what does Wilber suggest as a solution?
The path forward is three-fold:
1. The collective post-modern gestalt gains the capacity to see performative contradiction and begins to take stand for the world-view that there is a better or higher or more evolved way of seeing the world and to assert that we have it. In this way, there can be more transparent dialogue based on productive conflict, rather than resentment and dismissive name-calling.
2. A significant number of people at modern and post-modern could make the moves to explore a higher perspective, which in integral speak is called, “second tier,” thinking. In it’s simplest form means that there is an appreciation for multiple world-views and all have partial perspectives that should be considered for a whole picture.
3. The green world-view catches on to the distinction between growth and dominator hierarchies.
One more example of where the green word-view, with it’s informed, well-educated and fairly enlightened view screws up mightily is in the mean-spirited attacks that are somehow justified in the name of post-modern ethos. This shows up in the “basket of deplorable” comment from Hillary Clinton; the racist, homophobic and nazi comments made by the left to describe ethnocentric-feinted right. To paraphrase Wilber, Most of the people that voted for Trump don’t wake up in the morning and say, “I am looking forward to being a racist today.” They wake up and say, “I want my kids and the people the look and act like me to be ok and I don’t know what the future is going to bring.”
To wrap, the summary of the book is:
1. The Trump presidency is crazy and yet serves as an evolutionary course correction.
2. If you are progressive, you need to assume responsibility for the leading edge of social and cultural evolution
3. Get outside your filter bubble and think more critically – understand people
4. Don’t be an asshole about your perspective
The Trump presidency is evolutionary self-correction.
The Green post-modern world-view needs to get some things right.
We are on notice to hold a higher bar for the “truth.”
The proviso for reading this review: Trump & The Post Truth World really requires a pre-requisite understanding of and a basic adherence to developmental models. Otherwise, it becomes difficult to understand what he is talking about and/or you won’t have faith in what asserts.
I happen to find the developmental models that he references as useful. Here they are in summary as laid out in the book.
Primary stages of development in the American population.
Red: egocentric, self-referential, instinctual
Amber (known by some as Blue): (alias “mythic membership”): ethnocentric, authoritarian, pre-modern
Orange: world-centric, rational, individualistic, modern
Green: world centered, pluralistic, post-modern
Wilber quickly asserts that the segment of the population operating at a Green world-view bear responsibility for the leading edge of culture; and in our time and space that is Green / post-modernism
He then unpacks the contradictions / problematic expressions in the post-modern world view:
• Context aware relativistic insights turned into total relativism and no universal truth,
• “Performative contradiction” of all values equal, except these Green values, which are better, but we won’t come right out and say our values are better, so we will just be resentful and dismissive that you don’t hold these same values,
• Inability to differentiate between dominator hierarchies and growth hierarchies, d. Hyper-sensitive politically correct ego inflation
• “Aperspectival madness” created the conditions for post-modern worldview to disintegrate into nihilism and narcissism
From here, Wilber outlines what the response to the down-side of Green looks like in our country. People holding most other world views have collectively reacted to aperspectival madness with disdain and strong anti-post-modern reactions.
Trump tapped that anti-post-modern collective response. People voted less for Trump than against the perspectival madness of the word-view that Trump rallies against
One simple example of the corrective function of this election was the re-ordering of the role of facts and truth. Pre-election, journalists and academics (largely post-modern) would often use relative perspective taking to speak around facts and truth and talk about cultural truth and individual truth. Trump used the same relativism but with more force, like a blunt tool to drive an egocentric and ethnocentric agenda. Now, any self-respective journalist wouldn’t be caught dead saying, “well, the facts are relative here.” There was a cultural course correction.
Here is a big take-away for me: Green mindset tech businesses have “democratized” information. The unintended consequence is the rising of “most popular” information, not the “most best.” Therefore, on google or Facebook, the more a topic is searched, the more than topic will be suggested, which increase the visibility for sharing and creates a loop. A loop of attention, not accuracy or truth. In this way, the progressive value of equality of perspective gets trumped (pardon the pun) by popularity.
So what does Wilber suggest as a solution?
The path forward is three-fold:
1. The collective post-modern gestalt gains the capacity to see performative contradiction and begins to take stand for the world-view that there is a better or higher or more evolved way of seeing the world and to assert that we have it. In this way, there can be more transparent dialogue based on productive conflict, rather than resentment and dismissive name-calling.
2. A significant number of people at modern and post-modern could make the moves to explore a higher perspective, which in integral speak is called, “second tier,” thinking. In it’s simplest form means that there is an appreciation for multiple world-views and all have partial perspectives that should be considered for a whole picture.
3. The green world-view catches on to the distinction between growth and dominator hierarchies.
One more example of where the green word-view, with it’s informed, well-educated and fairly enlightened view screws up mightily is in the mean-spirited attacks that are somehow justified in the name of post-modern ethos. This shows up in the “basket of deplorable” comment from Hillary Clinton; the racist, homophobic and nazi comments made by the left to describe ethnocentric-feinted right. To paraphrase Wilber, Most of the people that voted for Trump don’t wake up in the morning and say, “I am looking forward to being a racist today.” They wake up and say, “I want my kids and the people the look and act like me to be ok and I don’t know what the future is going to bring.”
To wrap, the summary of the book is:
1. The Trump presidency is crazy and yet serves as an evolutionary course correction.
2. If you are progressive, you need to assume responsibility for the leading edge of social and cultural evolution
3. Get outside your filter bubble and think more critically – understand people
4. Don’t be an asshole about your perspective
February 7, 2017
I enjoyed the transmission of an integral-wisdom state of consciousness.
February 9, 2024
Чудовий автор
Дає хороший фундамент розвитку суспільства і людини індивідуально. Описує схеми, які від яких вже можна відштовхуватися і додавати деталі
4 стадії розвитку людини і суспільства (кожного без винятку)
Егоцентрична - я
Етноцетрична - ми
Світоцетрична - усі ми
Інтегральна (космічна) - вся реальність
Згоден не зі всіма думками автора. Особливо його відношенням до етноцентричних груп та поверхового відношення до християнскої філософії.
Але подумати дуже багато є над цим. Тому тверда 5-ка. Зміг заворушути мій мозок. Буду далі копати в інтегральний підхід і метамодерн. Деякі відповіді на сучасне аперспективне божевілля точно можна там знайти.
Цитата, в яку я просто закохався:
«Прагнення до самоорганізації через самотрансцеденцію»
Дає хороший фундамент розвитку суспільства і людини індивідуально. Описує схеми, які від яких вже можна відштовхуватися і додавати деталі
4 стадії розвитку людини і суспільства (кожного без винятку)
Егоцентрична - я
Етноцетрична - ми
Світоцетрична - усі ми
Інтегральна (космічна) - вся реальність
Згоден не зі всіма думками автора. Особливо його відношенням до етноцентричних груп та поверхового відношення до християнскої філософії.
Але подумати дуже багато є над цим. Тому тверда 5-ка. Зміг заворушути мій мозок. Буду далі копати в інтегральний підхід і метамодерн. Деякі відповіді на сучасне аперспективне божевілля точно можна там знайти.
Цитата, в яку я просто закохався:
«Прагнення до самоорганізації через самотрансцеденцію»
February 22, 2018
This book seems to be more about evolution and Integral development than Donald Trump who according to Wilber seems to be a symptom of the present American developmental stage. I have read several Ken Wilber books over the years. Thomas Kuhn , a respected scientist and philosopher that Wilber often refers too might suggest that Wilber’s creation of Integral theory is just that, its a hypotheses”. I think that Wilber raises a. lot of interesting and important issues that are utterly necessary to discuss regarding reaction to Donald Trump and the trap of ethnocentric thinking. But I cant help but favour the notion that to change the direction of evolution is not as amendable to reason and conceptual analysis as one might think. I suspect that there is an aspect of it that is ineffable. How we develop might be more about our degree of awareness and wether or not we are attending to our inner and intuitive realization. A map capturing aspects of that development might be helpful but the act of following an actual map in search of integral development might distract from more authentic processes that inherently unfold, in awareness. There is no real abstract ideal to be pursued.
November 30, 2018
Although I'm quite into the Integral Theory and thus eager to have a glimpse of Ken Wilber's perspective regarding the election of Donald Trump as the president of USA, I must admit that I cannot recommend this book -- even though I by heart would like to for the sake of the theory and the author. The reason is that I presume the author could make his stance within a one-third of the number of pages, since I found him repeating the same messages over and over again, chapter by chapter. That repetitive style of writing is just weary, I am sad to sary.
June 17, 2018
This is essentially a long essay by Ken Wilber on his analysis of Trump's rise to power. Wilber is best known for his Integral theory, a theory on psychological development and it's implications for individuals and society. I found his arguments persuasive and enlightening. In essence Wilber argues that society has evolved in stages from an egocentric worldview to an ethnocentric worldview and further to a world centric (believe in progress,, free speech, merit, free trade etc) and finally to it's most recent progressive (oppose oppression of any vulnerable group, see global warning as a serious threat etc) worldview. Each of these stages involves a widening of perspective where individuals are able to truly empathize with a widening and more inclusive "self", excluding an ever smaller "other". Wilber argues that with each of these shifts a percentage of people remain in the previous stage, such that as of today in the west, 60% remain in ethnocentric and egocentric stages, 25% would be world centric and 10% progressive. Wilber argues convincingly that the rise of Trump is as much about a failure in the leadership of the progressive "leading edge" of society as it is related to Trump's ethnocentric base. Wilber's critique of progressivism is withering and I believe very accurate. His main points are that progressive's demonstrate contempt and often persecution of the "evils" of ethnocentrism, without awareness that this is developmental stage, not a personal choice. Progressives also remain trapped in a worldview characterized by postmodernism and it's self-defeating egalitarianism of all morality and deconstruction of truth itself in a miasmic relativism. Progressives have an aversion to hierarchies, seeing all hierarchies as oppressive and here Wilber introduces us to growth hierarchies that are inclusive and transcending. Wilber then goes on to prescribe the cure. He points the way for progressives to move forward and take an effective leadership role again. He posits further that a new developmental stage lies ahead which he calls "integral", claiming 5% are already there and that a tipping point exists at the 10% mark with much promise for this upcoming and desperately needed stage in human history.
August 13, 2017
This has helped me to make sense of Trump's America and Brexit's Britain. Admittedly I have a two decades' foundation in Ken Wilber's Integral philosophy, so I don't know how much of his discourse would be comprehensible to someone who didn't. But understanding what's happening is key (for me) to knowing what's best TO DO now. So, 5 stars for changing my thinking. Or for reminding me of what I already knew, I guess. It's sort of a return of hope.
February 28, 2021
This book, in a nutshell, is so far deep up its own ass that it's completely removed from reality. I can kind of agree with some of its central tenets -- the idea of the various color waves is sure, ok, I guess. But:
1. The book is INCREDIBLY repetitive. It could have easily been 40 pages shorter had the repetition been edited out. If I had to read the phrase "aperspectival madness" one more time I was going to descend into actual madness.
2. It lacks all nuance. Seriously, did the author only speak to academic liberals, not actual leftist activists? *No one* outside of academia truly believes there is "no truth" (which I guess he thinks there's a shift after Trump's election and he's had to argue with other scholars etc for forty years about this! But those are scholars. Not people "on the ground", so to speak.) Feminism does not think the opinion of every man is worthless. Identity politics does not say that white men are useless and not worth listening to ever about anything. That is a gross misunderstanding of social justice politics.
3. For a book so concerned with truths, it ironically gives a lot of falsehoods. I realize this was written shortly after Trump's election, when the "Trump was elected by white uneducated rural voters" myth was widespread. But it is that, a myth. Statistically, Trump voters came from the entire economic spectrum. Many, many college-educated people voted for Trump. It's completely incorrect to say that people voted for Trump because they were "the forgotten poor who elites looked down on."
4. The book also, and this is mostly what makes me so angry, even beyond the complete misunderstanding of things like safe spaces, assumes no "green" ever has ever tried to extend empathy to the "ambers". Every single person who the author would consider green that I know has spent hours upon hours trying to educate and discuss with the people in their lives who voted for Trump, often at great personal cost to themselves. But I guess that's just out duty as "more evolved people" (which, wow, how infantilizing to those people. They're not children, and again range the same spectrum of wealth and education, roughly, as did Clinton/Biden voters. But ok)? The fact is that this often DOES NOT WORK. I am very curious how the author feels about this work now, given how the Trump supporters continued to go deeper and deeper into the conspiracy theory, Trump-as-God hole, despite all the many, many, many times people and organizations tried to reach out to them to "understand" them after the 2016 election.
Putting the onus of reconciliation on the people who, in many cases, are the ones many Trump supporters enacted violence against is ridiculous. He argues that progressives are essentially the ones who invented oppression, and those at lower stages like Trump supporters simply don't understand oppression yet. Poor dears. And yet they're perfectly happy to harm, outlaw, and kill those they oppress. But I guess the greens made them victims.
I just can't figure out how he can say all this seriously. People have tried compassion. Things only got worse. It is intensely disgusting to place zero responsibility at the foot of the Trump voters, and say it was all the greens' fault for not being more understanding of their earlier stage of evolution. Would he still say that, after they've hurt and killed many? We've seen in the four years since this book was written that the only thing that statistically reliably stops those "amber" ethnocentric viewpoints from spreading is deplatforming. If the Q-Anon, neo-Nazis, alt-righters, and white supremacists are allowed to spread their views, people will listen, dig in their heels, and refuse to listen to people who love them. Acceptance of those viewpoints, reaching out to them, trying to integrate them, only served to make progressively more and more fascist viewpoints acceptable until we ended with a coup attempt.
So, while I respect the author's philosophy of the waves of human evolution, the author clearly a) is incapable of not grossly stereotyping both sides, incorrectly at that, and b) wrote a piece that did not age well, at all. There is so much complexity that he just hand-waves away, and it's inexcusable, in my book.
1. The book is INCREDIBLY repetitive. It could have easily been 40 pages shorter had the repetition been edited out. If I had to read the phrase "aperspectival madness" one more time I was going to descend into actual madness.
2. It lacks all nuance. Seriously, did the author only speak to academic liberals, not actual leftist activists? *No one* outside of academia truly believes there is "no truth" (which I guess he thinks there's a shift after Trump's election and he's had to argue with other scholars etc for forty years about this! But those are scholars. Not people "on the ground", so to speak.) Feminism does not think the opinion of every man is worthless. Identity politics does not say that white men are useless and not worth listening to ever about anything. That is a gross misunderstanding of social justice politics.
3. For a book so concerned with truths, it ironically gives a lot of falsehoods. I realize this was written shortly after Trump's election, when the "Trump was elected by white uneducated rural voters" myth was widespread. But it is that, a myth. Statistically, Trump voters came from the entire economic spectrum. Many, many college-educated people voted for Trump. It's completely incorrect to say that people voted for Trump because they were "the forgotten poor who elites looked down on."
4. The book also, and this is mostly what makes me so angry, even beyond the complete misunderstanding of things like safe spaces, assumes no "green" ever has ever tried to extend empathy to the "ambers". Every single person who the author would consider green that I know has spent hours upon hours trying to educate and discuss with the people in their lives who voted for Trump, often at great personal cost to themselves. But I guess that's just out duty as "more evolved people" (which, wow, how infantilizing to those people. They're not children, and again range the same spectrum of wealth and education, roughly, as did Clinton/Biden voters. But ok)? The fact is that this often DOES NOT WORK. I am very curious how the author feels about this work now, given how the Trump supporters continued to go deeper and deeper into the conspiracy theory, Trump-as-God hole, despite all the many, many, many times people and organizations tried to reach out to them to "understand" them after the 2016 election.
Putting the onus of reconciliation on the people who, in many cases, are the ones many Trump supporters enacted violence against is ridiculous. He argues that progressives are essentially the ones who invented oppression, and those at lower stages like Trump supporters simply don't understand oppression yet. Poor dears. And yet they're perfectly happy to harm, outlaw, and kill those they oppress. But I guess the greens made them victims.
I just can't figure out how he can say all this seriously. People have tried compassion. Things only got worse. It is intensely disgusting to place zero responsibility at the foot of the Trump voters, and say it was all the greens' fault for not being more understanding of their earlier stage of evolution. Would he still say that, after they've hurt and killed many? We've seen in the four years since this book was written that the only thing that statistically reliably stops those "amber" ethnocentric viewpoints from spreading is deplatforming. If the Q-Anon, neo-Nazis, alt-righters, and white supremacists are allowed to spread their views, people will listen, dig in their heels, and refuse to listen to people who love them. Acceptance of those viewpoints, reaching out to them, trying to integrate them, only served to make progressively more and more fascist viewpoints acceptable until we ended with a coup attempt.
So, while I respect the author's philosophy of the waves of human evolution, the author clearly a) is incapable of not grossly stereotyping both sides, incorrectly at that, and b) wrote a piece that did not age well, at all. There is so much complexity that he just hand-waves away, and it's inexcusable, in my book.
February 25, 2018
You can get a copy for the cost of sharing your email address, here: https://integrallife.com/trump-post-t.... It's about 80 pages, but the print is large, maybe 200 words or so on a page, so despite the density of its contents, it's a relatively quick read.
I came across this work from Michael Krieger over at Liberty Blitzkrieg, and based on what he had to say about it, I came into it expecting something that might be helpful for liberals trying to come to terms with, and understanding of, the Trump presidency. (This definitely isn't me.) This is almost certainly true. I think any liberal who reads this will come away with a more grounded understanding of this past election. But to my surprise, I also found it extremely helpful to someone who may have rooted for a Hillary defeat, and are now trying to come to terms that, while definitely not the status quo, are finding the non-status quo alternative we got to be not very palatable. (This is definitely me.) To be clear, I think most of us realized what a Trump president would mean, and still greatly prefer this to the alternative we were offered. But watching it unfold in reality is possibly just as unpleasant for people like me and Michael Krieger, as it is for Hillary supporters.
I came across this work from Michael Krieger over at Liberty Blitzkrieg, and based on what he had to say about it, I came into it expecting something that might be helpful for liberals trying to come to terms with, and understanding of, the Trump presidency. (This definitely isn't me.) This is almost certainly true. I think any liberal who reads this will come away with a more grounded understanding of this past election. But to my surprise, I also found it extremely helpful to someone who may have rooted for a Hillary defeat, and are now trying to come to terms that, while definitely not the status quo, are finding the non-status quo alternative we got to be not very palatable. (This is definitely me.) To be clear, I think most of us realized what a Trump president would mean, and still greatly prefer this to the alternative we were offered. But watching it unfold in reality is possibly just as unpleasant for people like me and Michael Krieger, as it is for Hillary supporters.
September 21, 2017
This is an official edition of Ken Wilber’s long essay on Trump and post-truth. I had to re-read it once again in a process of working on the Russian translation of the book. I haven’t analyzed whether there are significant differences in the text in comparison to the ebook version that had been published last winter. It does have an added note to the reader, but I quickly looked through the sections of both versions, and they seem to be similar/identical (unless I missed some insertions in the text which were not in the previous ebook version). Anyways, once again, upon finishing my working with the book, getting to its last page, I felt rising inspiration of being alive and aware—even in the complicated sociopolitical conditions of the current-day affairs. In the background of all that noise there is a ceaseless presence of awareness that can disclose so much wisdom and compassion, viscerally felt! The full-of-depth vision that Wilber proposes is truly inspiring, especially in terms of a more integrated and peaceful state of awareness that arises (in me and, it seems, in others) when working with the meanings of such depth and span. I am thankful for that book.
Read
November 20, 2020A fascinating read!
I think I would have enjoyed it more if I had more knowledge of Spiral Dynamics or had read any of the authors previous works.
This book takes a look at the evolution of human culture and how Trump's presidency is a product of our awkward stage of growth.
The book isn't political at all, just a sociological look on a unique event that no one saw coming.
The theme of the book is if we want to continue evolving as a species, we need to learn to accept all human perspectives. Even the ones we fear.
I think I would have enjoyed it more if I had more knowledge of Spiral Dynamics or had read any of the authors previous works.
This book takes a look at the evolution of human culture and how Trump's presidency is a product of our awkward stage of growth.
The book isn't political at all, just a sociological look on a unique event that no one saw coming.
The theme of the book is if we want to continue evolving as a species, we need to learn to accept all human perspectives. Even the ones we fear.
August 1, 2021
It makes a good point about the failure of the green leading edge, but it's pretty repetitive even for a shorter book. I got a lot more out of his history of everything book.
June 28, 2025
Дуже добре. І про «істини не існує» і про кризу зеленого авангарду і про те, як люди, що сповідують інклюзію і толерантність, щиро ненавидять тих, хто не притримується цих поглядів. Бо «любити всіх і слухати всіх» таки виявилось недієздатним.
Роздратування. Ось що спонукало дуже різних людей обʼєднатись і таки обрати Трампа. А його противники і далі можуть називати його виборців «білим сміттям», лиш посилюючи опір.
Роздратування. Ось що спонукало дуже різних людей обʼєднатись і таки обрати Трампа. А його противники і далі можуть називати його виборців «білим сміттям», лиш посилюючи опір.
February 1, 2021
At times, this book was incredibly repetitive and I believe it could have been much more concise. That being said, I do generally agree with the topics that Wilber addresses. It is true that any ‘ruling’ class has tended to marginalize those who do not agree with them. This is no different than the current progressive liberal class that has come to dominate our social scene.
I do want to be clear that I am a liberal. I agree with liberal ideas of inclusiveness, civil rights, etc. But, as Wilber lays out, it must be understood that forcing one’s beliefs on someone else does not often lead to them changing their own beliefs. Understanding why someone carries their beliefs and educating them to your own beliefs is the best practice towards moving forward. Labeling a different group as ‘deplorables’ or ‘rednecks’ does nothing but create further division. As previous dominating beliefs of racism and sexism created a great divided amongst those of previous generations.
Overall, this book gives a good outline to explain why Trump gained so much popularity. He spoke to those who felt they were ignored. While I do not share Wilber’s immediate optimism that we will progress to the next ‘integral’ level in the coming decades, I believe it will eventually happen. I would be curious as to his thoughts 4 years after this book was written, as the country has become more divided.
I do want to be clear that I am a liberal. I agree with liberal ideas of inclusiveness, civil rights, etc. But, as Wilber lays out, it must be understood that forcing one’s beliefs on someone else does not often lead to them changing their own beliefs. Understanding why someone carries their beliefs and educating them to your own beliefs is the best practice towards moving forward. Labeling a different group as ‘deplorables’ or ‘rednecks’ does nothing but create further division. As previous dominating beliefs of racism and sexism created a great divided amongst those of previous generations.
Overall, this book gives a good outline to explain why Trump gained so much popularity. He spoke to those who felt they were ignored. While I do not share Wilber’s immediate optimism that we will progress to the next ‘integral’ level in the coming decades, I believe it will eventually happen. I would be curious as to his thoughts 4 years after this book was written, as the country has become more divided.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 30, 2024
Цікава філософія. Можна було вкластися у 40 сторінок :)
August 30, 2017
https://integrallife.com/four-quadrants/
http://www.integralworld.net/wilber_s...
If you never read any Ken Wilber or anything about Integral Theory or
Spiral Dynamics some of the language in "Trump and a
Post-Truth World" might seem a tad confusing at times. But I think you can probably work around and through it to understand his gist.
It's a blunt and I think an enlightening analysis of how we got where we are and how some self-examination might be in order for a lot of us. It summarizes with some
straightforward ideas about what to do from here. The first link is a short video of Wilber explaining the "Four Quadrants" which might be helpful to watch before you read the e-book. The link below that gives you an explanation of the memes described in the essay which also might be helpful.
To me it's a hopeful message. Trump might be exactly what we needed. As long as we're still in one workable piece once we get through this.
Not only that, but you'll be learning about Integral Theory and Spiral Dynamics which can be very interesting and liberating stuff. As long as you keep a skeptical yet open mind about what it is and what it can become.
By the way, you can get the e-book for free at integrallife.com
http://www.integralworld.net/wilber_s...
If you never read any Ken Wilber or anything about Integral Theory or
Spiral Dynamics some of the language in "Trump and a
Post-Truth World" might seem a tad confusing at times. But I think you can probably work around and through it to understand his gist.
It's a blunt and I think an enlightening analysis of how we got where we are and how some self-examination might be in order for a lot of us. It summarizes with some
straightforward ideas about what to do from here. The first link is a short video of Wilber explaining the "Four Quadrants" which might be helpful to watch before you read the e-book. The link below that gives you an explanation of the memes described in the essay which also might be helpful.
To me it's a hopeful message. Trump might be exactly what we needed. As long as we're still in one workable piece once we get through this.
Not only that, but you'll be learning about Integral Theory and Spiral Dynamics which can be very interesting and liberating stuff. As long as you keep a skeptical yet open mind about what it is and what it can become.
By the way, you can get the e-book for free at integrallife.com
September 9, 2017
An astonishingly astute reading of what led to the election of Donald Trump and what sort of attitude needs to be changed if we want to avoid a Mad Max dystopian future.
Wilber's insights essentially revolve around extremism: Wilber, like any intelligent, coherent, and sincere truth seeker, merely reasons in a way that seems perfectly acute and accurate to people he calls "integral" - which in my language means "coherent". To notice relevant informational states, essentially, is what makes Ken Wilber such an effective leader: he really does reason rightly, and expresses impressive flexibility in being able to discern the right amount of a certain value vis-à-vis the realities which determine the condition that is related to. Compassion, therefore, comes from understanding; and understanding means understanding the contextual constraints that underlie the behavior of biodynamical systems (although Wilber avoids this language, this is the reality of things - humans, like all material, dynamical, evolving objects, are functions of countless symmetry processes at many different ontological levels; and hence, there is a very real, though intensely complex, discernible and traceable logic in the way we self-organize). Human beings who believe in Trump believe in Trump for a very good reason: they are shaped by a context, by their own brain development, and so are probabilistically biased to pursue meaning and enlivenment in the only ways they know how.
Wilber's surety of having a direction may seem like too much (even to me) but this just may express my own unwillingness or unsurety towards states which seem profoundly and deeply transcendental. As a logician, Wilber is rarely off in his reasoning, if one, of course, grants that human beings self-organize according to the principle of 'being positively known', or in more spiritual terms, loved. Since we respond powerfully and with enlivenment when other faces and voices experience us powerfully, we feel "known", and in feeling this way, we become motivated to keep communicating - keep 'growing ourselves'.
It is with this sense that Wilber speaks about 'inter-including' the levels beneath you. His colorful language of 'red' 'amber', etc corresponds to levels of narrative-making, or meaning making, which occurs along certain emotional capacities. One person can love only himself (egocentric); and only those who are immediately of benefit or utility to him. Then people become worldcentric, and become universal in their aspirations; this allows them to be more 'open' and therefore loving.
In a more realistic, biological model, each group is constrained by the meaning that is woven and the affects which weave them, and so, it is the biodynamical rhythms and the affects they produce, as well as the meanings which constellate 'above' them, directing the way the rhythms will move, while at the same time being determined by the rhythms.
All of this relates deeply to traumatology, and what has been discovered about the brain stem (or reptilian brain) in the form of the polyvagal theory. The vagus nerve (the wandering nerve) enervates the heart, lungs and viscera, and so mediates the bulk of the 'interoceptive' information from the body to the brain - in other words, how we feel in our bodies, and the energy level, more or less, we feel animating us. The vagus streamlines to the brainstem, where it is then splits into an older dorsal branch, and a newer ventral branch, which is called the nucleus ambiguus. The nucleus ambiguus in turn streamlines to the orbitofrontal cortice, which allows for conscious modulation of the breath, and so, heartrate (or vagal tone).
Psychological trauma is a moment in neurological processing where system decoherence forces the dorsal vagal branch to become dominant and to suppress the vagal branch i.e. conscious control of the body. This trauma response essential 'dissociates' the mind from its body, and so, constitutes a state of utter helplessness, since the mind can no longer feel competent to control what it feels; and so, in not being able to control what it feels, it is girded by unconscious processes to dissociate the knowledge of how fearful it is. Trauma thus engenders a situation where one self state emerges as a defensive function (which is dissociated) against the dysregulating self-state we call trauma. The trauma state, and the states of self-experience it produces, are threatening, and so the mind (or the brain) organizes its subsequent dynamics in terms of what would be semiotically meaningful: strong states.
It is through such a process that certain identity levels emerge, and so, more or less supports Wilbers idea of a developmental process whereby consciousness grows more and more until it experiences itself as semiotically 'above', powerfully ordered at higher and higher levels.
Lastly, I'm not sure if Wilber is aware of this, but it seems relevant: some people knowingly worship chaos; that is, they don't have any particular 'desire for anything'. The ancient gnostics have been described as this; and the scholar Eric Voegelin believed that Gnosticism of this type largely precedes Christianity, and may be concomitant with the start of human civilization 6 years ago (not the start of the Neolithic).
If the upper classes believe this, and believe this because they knowingly prefer to live reality in this way, the evolutionary logic Wilber uses seems to indicate that this upper class is deafeningly arrested at a very early level of development - largely, again, by the contexts which determine how it is they come to believe.
That humanity has progressed seems to have been in spite of them, even though, the 'elite', as they are known, seem to arise again and again like the Phoenix; although something tells me the profoundly mythological and speculative nature of their belief system (the 'rapture' seems to ring a ding ding of this) is itself a confabulation that works to counter the guilt/shame of living and acting in ways that are disasterously antagonistic to the self-organization of their own systems i.e. the price they pay for being wealthy, is losing all sense of whats mentally and spiritually healthy.
Wilber's insights essentially revolve around extremism: Wilber, like any intelligent, coherent, and sincere truth seeker, merely reasons in a way that seems perfectly acute and accurate to people he calls "integral" - which in my language means "coherent". To notice relevant informational states, essentially, is what makes Ken Wilber such an effective leader: he really does reason rightly, and expresses impressive flexibility in being able to discern the right amount of a certain value vis-à-vis the realities which determine the condition that is related to. Compassion, therefore, comes from understanding; and understanding means understanding the contextual constraints that underlie the behavior of biodynamical systems (although Wilber avoids this language, this is the reality of things - humans, like all material, dynamical, evolving objects, are functions of countless symmetry processes at many different ontological levels; and hence, there is a very real, though intensely complex, discernible and traceable logic in the way we self-organize). Human beings who believe in Trump believe in Trump for a very good reason: they are shaped by a context, by their own brain development, and so are probabilistically biased to pursue meaning and enlivenment in the only ways they know how.
Wilber's surety of having a direction may seem like too much (even to me) but this just may express my own unwillingness or unsurety towards states which seem profoundly and deeply transcendental. As a logician, Wilber is rarely off in his reasoning, if one, of course, grants that human beings self-organize according to the principle of 'being positively known', or in more spiritual terms, loved. Since we respond powerfully and with enlivenment when other faces and voices experience us powerfully, we feel "known", and in feeling this way, we become motivated to keep communicating - keep 'growing ourselves'.
It is with this sense that Wilber speaks about 'inter-including' the levels beneath you. His colorful language of 'red' 'amber', etc corresponds to levels of narrative-making, or meaning making, which occurs along certain emotional capacities. One person can love only himself (egocentric); and only those who are immediately of benefit or utility to him. Then people become worldcentric, and become universal in their aspirations; this allows them to be more 'open' and therefore loving.
In a more realistic, biological model, each group is constrained by the meaning that is woven and the affects which weave them, and so, it is the biodynamical rhythms and the affects they produce, as well as the meanings which constellate 'above' them, directing the way the rhythms will move, while at the same time being determined by the rhythms.
All of this relates deeply to traumatology, and what has been discovered about the brain stem (or reptilian brain) in the form of the polyvagal theory. The vagus nerve (the wandering nerve) enervates the heart, lungs and viscera, and so mediates the bulk of the 'interoceptive' information from the body to the brain - in other words, how we feel in our bodies, and the energy level, more or less, we feel animating us. The vagus streamlines to the brainstem, where it is then splits into an older dorsal branch, and a newer ventral branch, which is called the nucleus ambiguus. The nucleus ambiguus in turn streamlines to the orbitofrontal cortice, which allows for conscious modulation of the breath, and so, heartrate (or vagal tone).
Psychological trauma is a moment in neurological processing where system decoherence forces the dorsal vagal branch to become dominant and to suppress the vagal branch i.e. conscious control of the body. This trauma response essential 'dissociates' the mind from its body, and so, constitutes a state of utter helplessness, since the mind can no longer feel competent to control what it feels; and so, in not being able to control what it feels, it is girded by unconscious processes to dissociate the knowledge of how fearful it is. Trauma thus engenders a situation where one self state emerges as a defensive function (which is dissociated) against the dysregulating self-state we call trauma. The trauma state, and the states of self-experience it produces, are threatening, and so the mind (or the brain) organizes its subsequent dynamics in terms of what would be semiotically meaningful: strong states.
It is through such a process that certain identity levels emerge, and so, more or less supports Wilbers idea of a developmental process whereby consciousness grows more and more until it experiences itself as semiotically 'above', powerfully ordered at higher and higher levels.
Lastly, I'm not sure if Wilber is aware of this, but it seems relevant: some people knowingly worship chaos; that is, they don't have any particular 'desire for anything'. The ancient gnostics have been described as this; and the scholar Eric Voegelin believed that Gnosticism of this type largely precedes Christianity, and may be concomitant with the start of human civilization 6 years ago (not the start of the Neolithic).
If the upper classes believe this, and believe this because they knowingly prefer to live reality in this way, the evolutionary logic Wilber uses seems to indicate that this upper class is deafeningly arrested at a very early level of development - largely, again, by the contexts which determine how it is they come to believe.
That humanity has progressed seems to have been in spite of them, even though, the 'elite', as they are known, seem to arise again and again like the Phoenix; although something tells me the profoundly mythological and speculative nature of their belief system (the 'rapture' seems to ring a ding ding of this) is itself a confabulation that works to counter the guilt/shame of living and acting in ways that are disasterously antagonistic to the self-organization of their own systems i.e. the price they pay for being wealthy, is losing all sense of whats mentally and spiritually healthy.
May 3, 2020
Odotin tämän kirjan lukemista innolla, koska se on erilaista kirjallisuutta kuin mitä yleensä luen, käsittelee varsin ajankohtaista aihetta ja lupasi selittää, miksi olemme siinä maailmantilanteessa, jossa nyt olemme. Teksti toimii varmasti hyvin esseenä, mutta olisi kaivannut hieman lisää editointia muuttuessaan kirjaksi. Esimerkiksi teksti toisti itseään aivan liikaa niin termien (älkää koskaan puhuko "näköalattomasta hulluudesta" enää ikinä, termi toistui niin monta kertaa, että näen punaista) kuin itse sanoman tasolla. Tämä johti siihen, että loppua kohden luin sanoja ymmärtämättä niiden merkitystä, koska halusin vain päästä kirjan loppuun (tätä olisi toki helpottanut, jos henkisenä sääntönäni ei olisi lukea loppuun kaikki kirjat, jotka olen aloittanut). Filosofien ei ole (kai?) tarkoituskaan tarjota käytännöllisiä ratkaisuja, mutta niiden puute oli myös häiritsevää, koska mielestäni vasta konkreettisten toimien ehdottaminen veisi sanoman maaliin. Olisin halunnut lukea kirjaa jossain julkisella paikalla vaikuttaakseni sivistyneeltä, mutta kirjan lukeminen ei kyllä johtanut merkittävään valaistumiseen.
January 31, 2024
This book was recommended by someone I trust and respect, Beth Silvers from Pantsuit Politics podcast. The ongoing struggle to understand how folks considered to be of similar mind, values, and goals chose a candidate who represents the antithesis of those values has only gotten worse as time goes on and this book provided perspective that proved helpful and instructive. To be clear, the terminology was far over my head numerous times. There was also a lot of repetition that made a difficult read all the more so. However, the book has indeed been helpful and provided a framework that helps me better understand the intense divisiveness within this nation and elsewhere in the world as well. Better still, it provides a playbook for how to navigate our way out of the increasing hostility and apply our efforts to reducing and reversing the tensions. Essentially, it all boils down to a much shorter message, but one that is the lifelong work of any and all who claim to follow the teachings of Jesus: love our neighbors. This isn’t a fun read or an easy read, but is a book that has been comforting, helpful, instructive and impactful.
December 23, 2017
The concepts are spot-on...just a too long, too boring read to stay with it through the solutions. Way too wordy and too messy in writing...
August 12, 2017
I love it when old white men tell me how "political correctness" is responsible for the downfall of civilization.
Also, if you can't understand how poetry is "as true as science" that just leads me to intuit that you don't understand how poetry works.
Keep it.
Also, if you can't understand how poetry is "as true as science" that just leads me to intuit that you don't understand how poetry works.
Keep it.
May 20, 2021
I cannot say that I entirely agree with (or even totally understand) all of Wilber’s ideas, but he has piqued my interest in Integral Theory. Overall, I appreciated the alternative perspective to "us versus them."
September 5, 2020
Ken Wilber - Trump and a Post-Truth World.
Trump: "...an actual buffoon in action..." is about the only mention Wilber makes of the man whose name features in the title. Not surprisingly discourse has little to do with the man who has become a symbol of the problems of the post modern age. Having been decades in the making, a clash of opposing world views has set the stage for a battle to dominate the history of the 21st century, and with it, the course of the evolution of thought. Wilber contends that there is still cause for hope, and this at the time of writing, just after Trumps inauguration.
Ken Wilber has been described as "one of the most widely read and influential philosophers of our time" or even "the Einstein of conscious studies". His most notable works "A Brief History Of Everything" 1996 and "A Theory Of Everything" 2000. Famous for his theory encompassing transpersonal psychology and philosophy, "Integral Theory" is a system that synthesizes all human theory, knowledge and experience.
Without digressing in detail and hence difficulty, Wilber outlines enough of his "Integral Theory" (in laymans words), to explain his current argument concerning the shock election of Trump and the reasons of thought that drove the outcome. He asserts that "virtually everybody was missing what is perhaps the single most central issue and crucial item for understanding what had happened, why it did, and what it means". The polarization of beliefs and division of society into tribal groups often aligned to the right and left in a continuing struggle to capture what both extremes see as the proper path forward is the problem he addresses. To do this Wilber outlines the development of thought in a model based on hierarchies. In his reasoning the "Green" or post modern hierarchy has reached a flashpoint such that its progress, in a sense, has exceeded its intelligence and had become disfunctional. Problematically as a thinking existence we, as a world, have come to accept thinking as a progression to a higher level, and in that deduction, a negation takes place that relegates and dismisses the previous states of consciousnesses or hierarchies. Wilber offers the understanding (initially recognized by the feminist Carol Gilligan in "A Different Voice") of a true perception which ultimately holds the key to the way forward. The advancement beyond the "Green" disfunctional impass. Gilligan interpreted the hierarchies of thought as being both "Dominator" and "Growth" simultaneously. The latter being a superior state and as such the realization to a state of Holarchy rather than Hierarchy. It denotes the perception that each state of consciousness is valuable in that it is necessary to the ultimate understanding of the whole, should not be discounted or devalued, and instead is an integral part of the whole.
So what does all this mean? I urge you to read the book.
The world (in thought and being) is at a crucial stage of disintegration. The division we now face encompasses not just the potential for war, but a war more devastating than that of the last century. It will be a war that has no borders but exists instead within minds, as part of our realm of understanding. It is incumbent on those that have the capacity to think (the "green" hierarchy), to transcend their lack of awareness of the very traits of human weakness they purport to reject and despise. They must truly accept those they refer to as the "deplorables" (RE Nancy Pelosi), accept a spiritual element to "being" and lead the path forward. At the end of his book Wilber concludes with an optimistic stance. Today three years later I can only presume the worst.
Trump: "...an actual buffoon in action..." is about the only mention Wilber makes of the man whose name features in the title. Not surprisingly discourse has little to do with the man who has become a symbol of the problems of the post modern age. Having been decades in the making, a clash of opposing world views has set the stage for a battle to dominate the history of the 21st century, and with it, the course of the evolution of thought. Wilber contends that there is still cause for hope, and this at the time of writing, just after Trumps inauguration.
Ken Wilber has been described as "one of the most widely read and influential philosophers of our time" or even "the Einstein of conscious studies". His most notable works "A Brief History Of Everything" 1996 and "A Theory Of Everything" 2000. Famous for his theory encompassing transpersonal psychology and philosophy, "Integral Theory" is a system that synthesizes all human theory, knowledge and experience.
Without digressing in detail and hence difficulty, Wilber outlines enough of his "Integral Theory" (in laymans words), to explain his current argument concerning the shock election of Trump and the reasons of thought that drove the outcome. He asserts that "virtually everybody was missing what is perhaps the single most central issue and crucial item for understanding what had happened, why it did, and what it means". The polarization of beliefs and division of society into tribal groups often aligned to the right and left in a continuing struggle to capture what both extremes see as the proper path forward is the problem he addresses. To do this Wilber outlines the development of thought in a model based on hierarchies. In his reasoning the "Green" or post modern hierarchy has reached a flashpoint such that its progress, in a sense, has exceeded its intelligence and had become disfunctional. Problematically as a thinking existence we, as a world, have come to accept thinking as a progression to a higher level, and in that deduction, a negation takes place that relegates and dismisses the previous states of consciousnesses or hierarchies. Wilber offers the understanding (initially recognized by the feminist Carol Gilligan in "A Different Voice") of a true perception which ultimately holds the key to the way forward. The advancement beyond the "Green" disfunctional impass. Gilligan interpreted the hierarchies of thought as being both "Dominator" and "Growth" simultaneously. The latter being a superior state and as such the realization to a state of Holarchy rather than Hierarchy. It denotes the perception that each state of consciousness is valuable in that it is necessary to the ultimate understanding of the whole, should not be discounted or devalued, and instead is an integral part of the whole.
So what does all this mean? I urge you to read the book.
The world (in thought and being) is at a crucial stage of disintegration. The division we now face encompasses not just the potential for war, but a war more devastating than that of the last century. It will be a war that has no borders but exists instead within minds, as part of our realm of understanding. It is incumbent on those that have the capacity to think (the "green" hierarchy), to transcend their lack of awareness of the very traits of human weakness they purport to reject and despise. They must truly accept those they refer to as the "deplorables" (RE Nancy Pelosi), accept a spiritual element to "being" and lead the path forward. At the end of his book Wilber concludes with an optimistic stance. Today three years later I can only presume the worst.
December 15, 2020
Ken Wilber is maybe one of the most original & authentique thinkers of our time. He really brings in an overall map of the worldly landscape of thought and life. Probably historically he will be seen as the philosopher that helped humanity to understand the bigger picture and the individual in this bigger picture, which together have the potential of a paramount leap in human development.
From archaic, magic, mythic, modern, postmodern towards an integral approach which includes all of the former development stages. With "Trump and a Post-truth world" Ken Wilber shows the societal (political) picture of the different development stages differently put as: egocentric, ethnocentric and world centric and their underlying mutual judgments (ot Culture Wars as Wilber puts it). Different truths on different levels that for different origins and reasons accuse and judge the other as ignorant, stupid, selfish, naïve etc.
Ken Wilber doesn't choose part in this Hilary/Biden is better than Trump or vice versa. And he make's quite well clear that the higher development stage of the worldcentric (pluralistic, post-modern) must learn to see in itself the contradictions that is has to surmount and correct within, in stead of showing itself isolated superior towards the ethnocentric and or egocentric world view.
This post-modern, pluralistic stance like: "everyone is equal, there is no hierarchy, there is no truth etc.", has led to a sort of implosion of the leading edge of society which is at large in contradiction with itself which makes the general worlwide confusion today quite clear.
There is no magical clip of the fingers to turn this right in a second, but Wilber makes clear that from the now competing development stages, grossly: ego-ethno- and worldcentric the leading edge has to transcend/evolve towards integral development which includes all the former development stages and it is important to understand one cannot skip a stage. It can help us to understand that we as an individual go through all of these stages our self and talking for myself I have fragment of all the stage within me. Some integrated some not fully integrated but I can sense there is a force within that strives for wholeness, which means it wants to integrate all shadowly fragments that can hide left and right, below and above within our (in)conscious. Ofcourse our ego can protect us from this integration, because the ego at times doesn't like to revive certain experiences. We have to learn to include our ego not by judging it but by seeing, understanding encompassing it. Becoming aware of it fears and way of its functioning so bit by bit the ego can become part of the whole again. Instead of feeling separated, neglected, misjudged. But this is overall an intimate process of healing of our being. In a way as I interpret this, this is what Ken Wilber means probably by: An evolutionary Self-Correction.
To be clear you can't make a law for this and then is will happen. ;-)
“The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking. It cannot be changed without changing our thinking.” and being and seeing.
― Albert Einstein
Understanding the difference between dominator Hierarchy and Growth Hierarchy will be a monumental leap forwards.
I gave the book a four star, just to make clear it is to me and maybe you as a reader to make it a five-star notation. It is a work in progress in which we ourselves are the building blocks and part of the fifth star. 😉
From archaic, magic, mythic, modern, postmodern towards an integral approach which includes all of the former development stages. With "Trump and a Post-truth world" Ken Wilber shows the societal (political) picture of the different development stages differently put as: egocentric, ethnocentric and world centric and their underlying mutual judgments (ot Culture Wars as Wilber puts it). Different truths on different levels that for different origins and reasons accuse and judge the other as ignorant, stupid, selfish, naïve etc.
Ken Wilber doesn't choose part in this Hilary/Biden is better than Trump or vice versa. And he make's quite well clear that the higher development stage of the worldcentric (pluralistic, post-modern) must learn to see in itself the contradictions that is has to surmount and correct within, in stead of showing itself isolated superior towards the ethnocentric and or egocentric world view.
This post-modern, pluralistic stance like: "everyone is equal, there is no hierarchy, there is no truth etc.", has led to a sort of implosion of the leading edge of society which is at large in contradiction with itself which makes the general worlwide confusion today quite clear.
There is no magical clip of the fingers to turn this right in a second, but Wilber makes clear that from the now competing development stages, grossly: ego-ethno- and worldcentric the leading edge has to transcend/evolve towards integral development which includes all the former development stages and it is important to understand one cannot skip a stage. It can help us to understand that we as an individual go through all of these stages our self and talking for myself I have fragment of all the stage within me. Some integrated some not fully integrated but I can sense there is a force within that strives for wholeness, which means it wants to integrate all shadowly fragments that can hide left and right, below and above within our (in)conscious. Ofcourse our ego can protect us from this integration, because the ego at times doesn't like to revive certain experiences. We have to learn to include our ego not by judging it but by seeing, understanding encompassing it. Becoming aware of it fears and way of its functioning so bit by bit the ego can become part of the whole again. Instead of feeling separated, neglected, misjudged. But this is overall an intimate process of healing of our being. In a way as I interpret this, this is what Ken Wilber means probably by: An evolutionary Self-Correction.
To be clear you can't make a law for this and then is will happen. ;-)
“The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking. It cannot be changed without changing our thinking.” and being and seeing.
― Albert Einstein
Understanding the difference between dominator Hierarchy and Growth Hierarchy will be a monumental leap forwards.
I gave the book a four star, just to make clear it is to me and maybe you as a reader to make it a five-star notation. It is a work in progress in which we ourselves are the building blocks and part of the fifth star. 😉
November 8, 2017
This thought-provoking book makes a good case for "what happened" in 2016, drawing heavily upon something called Integral Theory. This visually stunning model of human development assigns colors to memes that individuals and cultures progress through, from egocentric to ethnocentric to worldcentric and beyond. I am reminded both of Plato's idealized hierarchy of governments (and personalities) described in the Republic, and Jimi Hendrix's "rainbow of emotions" he sings about in "Bold As Love." At any rate, it is an intriguing theory that this book uses to make its arguments, but leaves the reader with many questions.
The crux of the book is that a new cultural meme, the "green", emerged in the 60s (the counter-culture) as a more inclusive, more compassionate alternative to the establishment "orange" meme (achievement, progress, materialism). Green's quest to be more inclusive came at a price, however, that being the denial of objective truth, since acknowledging this would mean there's a privileged perspective. "That's just your opinion man" led to the extinction of facts. This is one aspect of the world we find ourselves in.
The other is the incompatibility of the memes themselves. The dominance of green setting the tone of the culture (e.g. political correctness) and dismissal of dissent (by, for example, "deplorables") clearly led to resentment by other memes, in particular the traditional "amber," which in turn favored a populist like Trump.
Provocatively, Wilber repeatedly asserts that the green meme, which should be driving our culture's evolution, has utterly failed, and Trump's election is a sort of self-correction, a way for society to fall back, regroup, and try again to progress.
I found these explanations enlightening, fleshing out what I have heretofore found to be unsatisfying self-flagellation by the Left. Moreover, Wilber's application of Integral Theory suggests ways forward, that in the end are pretty obvious. Namely,
'an attitude of outreach, of embrace, of compassion and care. Each higher stage--green in this case--inherently "transcends and includes" its predecessors. But despising them, loathing them, actually hating them is to "transcend and repress," "transcend and exclude," "transcend and ridicule--at which point one's right and one's capacity to be a genuine leading edge is forfeited.'
In short, leadership.
Since this is the first book of Wilber's that I have read, I don't know his style, but this book seemed rushed. It's fairly repetitive, and somewhat disorganized with frequent tangents and parentheticals. As mentioned earlier it relies heavily on a theory, and as such it can get jargony. But I didn't come away empty-handed, and moreover it did pique my interest in exploring the theory, so it succeeds on many levels.
The crux of the book is that a new cultural meme, the "green", emerged in the 60s (the counter-culture) as a more inclusive, more compassionate alternative to the establishment "orange" meme (achievement, progress, materialism). Green's quest to be more inclusive came at a price, however, that being the denial of objective truth, since acknowledging this would mean there's a privileged perspective. "That's just your opinion man" led to the extinction of facts. This is one aspect of the world we find ourselves in.
The other is the incompatibility of the memes themselves. The dominance of green setting the tone of the culture (e.g. political correctness) and dismissal of dissent (by, for example, "deplorables") clearly led to resentment by other memes, in particular the traditional "amber," which in turn favored a populist like Trump.
Provocatively, Wilber repeatedly asserts that the green meme, which should be driving our culture's evolution, has utterly failed, and Trump's election is a sort of self-correction, a way for society to fall back, regroup, and try again to progress.
I found these explanations enlightening, fleshing out what I have heretofore found to be unsatisfying self-flagellation by the Left. Moreover, Wilber's application of Integral Theory suggests ways forward, that in the end are pretty obvious. Namely,
'an attitude of outreach, of embrace, of compassion and care. Each higher stage--green in this case--inherently "transcends and includes" its predecessors. But despising them, loathing them, actually hating them is to "transcend and repress," "transcend and exclude," "transcend and ridicule--at which point one's right and one's capacity to be a genuine leading edge is forfeited.'
In short, leadership.
Since this is the first book of Wilber's that I have read, I don't know his style, but this book seemed rushed. It's fairly repetitive, and somewhat disorganized with frequent tangents and parentheticals. As mentioned earlier it relies heavily on a theory, and as such it can get jargony. But I didn't come away empty-handed, and moreover it did pique my interest in exploring the theory, so it succeeds on many levels.
December 5, 2020
“Essentially 50% of the country hates the other 50%” claims Ken Wilber, and I have to agree. This observation really bugs me, particularly as someone who fancies himself a diplomatic / peace-keeper type of person.
Trump and the Post-Truth World looks at today’s current political climate through the lens of Integral Theory and offers EXPLANATION, BLAME, and SOLUTIONS.
Ken Wilber EXPLAINS our current climate through the “colorful” lens of Integral Theory. Categories of ideologies are identified by colors: red (powerful / courageous / egocentric), amber ( law & order / patriotism / belief in a higher power), orange (science / reasoning / rationalism), green (equality / pluralism / relativism), etc, and I found it a fascinating framework from which to explore the topic. Total game changer for me, love the framework as a theory.
Ken Wilber BLAMES the current political climate on unhealthy post-modernistic “green” attitudes and thoughts that have abandoned all hierarchies (even the healthy ones) and went overboard with the idea of relative truth. Trump built a base of voters by being thoroughly anti-green, attracting red, amber, and orange voters alike. To be fair, Wilber sees plenty of faults with every category, but he feels compelled to challenge "green" to do better. These sections were too overgeneralized for me. I feel like the book was content to pigeonhole every voter into a disparate color category, when in reality I know very few people who fit solidly into just one color level when forming their ideologies, political or otherwise.
Ken Wilber’s SOLUTIONS involve his Integral approach, accepting the healthy elements that arise from each color & rejecting the bad while also embracing hierarchies that are based on growth & development (as opposed to domination). Yes, the solutions in this book are quite idealistic, but I also found them to be compassionate and hopeful.
This is by no means a perfect book, very repetitive, but I love the framework. Ultimately it gives me a way to listen to, reflect on & discuss our current political situation in a way that doesn’t make me want to pull my hair out, not an easy task!
Trump and the Post-Truth World looks at today’s current political climate through the lens of Integral Theory and offers EXPLANATION, BLAME, and SOLUTIONS.
Ken Wilber EXPLAINS our current climate through the “colorful” lens of Integral Theory. Categories of ideologies are identified by colors: red (powerful / courageous / egocentric), amber ( law & order / patriotism / belief in a higher power), orange (science / reasoning / rationalism), green (equality / pluralism / relativism), etc, and I found it a fascinating framework from which to explore the topic. Total game changer for me, love the framework as a theory.
Ken Wilber BLAMES the current political climate on unhealthy post-modernistic “green” attitudes and thoughts that have abandoned all hierarchies (even the healthy ones) and went overboard with the idea of relative truth. Trump built a base of voters by being thoroughly anti-green, attracting red, amber, and orange voters alike. To be fair, Wilber sees plenty of faults with every category, but he feels compelled to challenge "green" to do better. These sections were too overgeneralized for me. I feel like the book was content to pigeonhole every voter into a disparate color category, when in reality I know very few people who fit solidly into just one color level when forming their ideologies, political or otherwise.
Ken Wilber’s SOLUTIONS involve his Integral approach, accepting the healthy elements that arise from each color & rejecting the bad while also embracing hierarchies that are based on growth & development (as opposed to domination). Yes, the solutions in this book are quite idealistic, but I also found them to be compassionate and hopeful.
This is by no means a perfect book, very repetitive, but I love the framework. Ultimately it gives me a way to listen to, reflect on & discuss our current political situation in a way that doesn’t make me want to pull my hair out, not an easy task!
August 25, 2020
This will be a very strange book if this is your first exposure to Integral Theory. Ken does try to give a 50,000 foot overview, but that *and* the thesis of this book are too much to include in such a short volume. I wish I had encountered the essay this was expanded from.
I'd like to propose an alternate view of one of the early chapters (the one where he's talking about Google). I was there when the young internet was growing up. It was a very Orange place. In the early days of search no one, until Google had hit upon a method that was head and shoulders above any other. Brin and Page did with the page-rank algorithm. Now keep in mind Brin & Page and the company they built are very meritocratic and techno-utopian. Tech will solve the worlds problems, information wants to be free (as long as we can monetize it first). Back in those days presenting the most populate and linked to information actually tended to provide the "right" answers. At least from an Orange POV. When you open up the internet to the masses, as happened shortly afterwards, then all hell breaks loose. Technology does what it always does; acts as an amplifier of human behaviour. Well we see what comes of that in 2020 with the likes of google, facebook and other social media companies where the user (an apt term) is not actually the customer. And where nihilism and narcissism rule so we get the success and fame of "influencers," selfie culture, memetic tribes and cancel culture.
I hope Wilber is right and things correct a bit, because I really don't like what I see. I've seen a positive if perhaps somewhat utopian dream, turn to mostly ashes. And I'm just talking about the Internet, not the Great American Experiment.
I'd like to propose an alternate view of one of the early chapters (the one where he's talking about Google). I was there when the young internet was growing up. It was a very Orange place. In the early days of search no one, until Google had hit upon a method that was head and shoulders above any other. Brin and Page did with the page-rank algorithm. Now keep in mind Brin & Page and the company they built are very meritocratic and techno-utopian. Tech will solve the worlds problems, information wants to be free (as long as we can monetize it first). Back in those days presenting the most populate and linked to information actually tended to provide the "right" answers. At least from an Orange POV. When you open up the internet to the masses, as happened shortly afterwards, then all hell breaks loose. Technology does what it always does; acts as an amplifier of human behaviour. Well we see what comes of that in 2020 with the likes of google, facebook and other social media companies where the user (an apt term) is not actually the customer. And where nihilism and narcissism rule so we get the success and fame of "influencers," selfie culture, memetic tribes and cancel culture.
I hope Wilber is right and things correct a bit, because I really don't like what I see. I've seen a positive if perhaps somewhat utopian dream, turn to mostly ashes. And I'm just talking about the Internet, not the Great American Experiment.
March 10, 2021
Once of the most thought-provoking books I’ve read in years. Despite what the title may lead you to assume, this book is not primarily about politics. Rather, philosopher Ken Wilber applies his own framework of Integral Theory and shows how the movement of humans through different developmental stages has both positively and negatively impacted recent political history.
Perhaps the most surprising takeaway for me is just how many pointed criticisms he offered for the “green” or postmodern stage of development and how its abject denial of absolute truth trickled down into the orange/modern and amber/ethnocentric stages of development, thus adding layers of unhealthiness to every stage. Wilber’s account of the many failures of postmodernism as a leading developmental stage are simply devastating, and he explains well why it has left us all longing for something more. This is not to say that postmodernism is without merit; Wilber would argue that every stage of development has gifts to be received and rough edges to be resisted. One of my favorite lines he says often: “No one is smart enough to be wrong 100% of the time.”
Ultimately this is a hopeful book as he believes that postmodernism will be transcended by a more integrated leading edge that sees the truth of each stage that has preceded it. He lays some fascinating groundwork for what that may look like and when it may happen.
This book does a better job of explaining the tensions I have seen within each American political party (Democrat, Republican) than any other I’ve read, and it will give thought leaders, politicians, pastors, and deep thinkers much to ponder about how we can help carve a way forward that is not so tribally centered and politically motivated. Highly recommended.
Perhaps the most surprising takeaway for me is just how many pointed criticisms he offered for the “green” or postmodern stage of development and how its abject denial of absolute truth trickled down into the orange/modern and amber/ethnocentric stages of development, thus adding layers of unhealthiness to every stage. Wilber’s account of the many failures of postmodernism as a leading developmental stage are simply devastating, and he explains well why it has left us all longing for something more. This is not to say that postmodernism is without merit; Wilber would argue that every stage of development has gifts to be received and rough edges to be resisted. One of my favorite lines he says often: “No one is smart enough to be wrong 100% of the time.”
Ultimately this is a hopeful book as he believes that postmodernism will be transcended by a more integrated leading edge that sees the truth of each stage that has preceded it. He lays some fascinating groundwork for what that may look like and when it may happen.
This book does a better job of explaining the tensions I have seen within each American political party (Democrat, Republican) than any other I’ve read, and it will give thought leaders, politicians, pastors, and deep thinkers much to ponder about how we can help carve a way forward that is not so tribally centered and politically motivated. Highly recommended.
February 19, 2021
"won't someone please let all-time great comedian jerry seinfeld feel comfortable performing on college campuses again 😢" is kind of a weird hill for integral theory to die on, but okay.
seriously though, super useful and important book here. as always, wilber has a lot of profound and essential insight to offer. and as always, he can be a bit repetitive/tone-deaf. but that doesn't change how vital an integral metatheory perspective is for our world. some key reminders/take-aways for me:
- there is a difference between domination hierarchies and growth hierarchies (and when we squash or neglect growth hierarchies, we drive ourselves toward domination hierarchies by default)
- people don't choose what stage of development they're at
- compassion is the only truly sane integral response
- it's essential that we move toward becoming a deliberately developmental culture -- one that acknowledges the value and partial-truths to be found at every preceding level of development, rather than focus on denouncing the unhealthy aspects at those earlier levels of development.
all that being said, this book was written in early 2017. i wonder what wilber's thoughts are now, on the other side of a trump presidency (but far from the other side of trumpism). i think his diagnosis remains spot-on, obviously... but i don't think a lot of progressives have token up his call for healing over the past four years, and i think the events of 2020 and early 2021 have likely only made things worse.
ahh, evolution.
seriously though, super useful and important book here. as always, wilber has a lot of profound and essential insight to offer. and as always, he can be a bit repetitive/tone-deaf. but that doesn't change how vital an integral metatheory perspective is for our world. some key reminders/take-aways for me:
- there is a difference between domination hierarchies and growth hierarchies (and when we squash or neglect growth hierarchies, we drive ourselves toward domination hierarchies by default)
- people don't choose what stage of development they're at
- compassion is the only truly sane integral response
- it's essential that we move toward becoming a deliberately developmental culture -- one that acknowledges the value and partial-truths to be found at every preceding level of development, rather than focus on denouncing the unhealthy aspects at those earlier levels of development.
all that being said, this book was written in early 2017. i wonder what wilber's thoughts are now, on the other side of a trump presidency (but far from the other side of trumpism). i think his diagnosis remains spot-on, obviously... but i don't think a lot of progressives have token up his call for healing over the past four years, and i think the events of 2020 and early 2021 have likely only made things worse.
ahh, evolution.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 98 reviews