What do you think?
Rate this book
Developmental Politics: How America Can Grow Into a Better Version of Itself
American politics are badly broken. Yet to solve the seemingly intractable problem of hyperpolarization, we need to look beyond the gridlocked politics of Washington D.C. In Developmental Politics, Steve McIntosh shows how this growing rift in the fabric of American society is a cultural problem that requires a cultural solution. He offers a pragmatic yet inspiring approach to our national political dilemma through a new politics of culture—one that goes right to the heart of this entrenched, complex issue. McIntosh presents a variety of innovative methods through which citizens and political leaders from across the political spectrum can reach agreement and achieve consensus. McIntosh’s proposals for overcoming hyperpolarization are founded on an emerging form of “cultural intelligence” that directly addresses the conflicting values underlying our poisoned politics. This new way of seeing leads to an inclusive vision of social progress—a new American Dream—that can help revive our collective sense of common cause and thereby restore the functionality of our democracy. Developmental Politics provides the fresh thinking we need to transcend America’s contemporary political impasse. Reviews “Developmental Politics is essential reading for those who are concerned about the dysfunctional condition of America’s democracy. …” — John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Markets, and coauthor of Conscious Capitalism “Is there a world beyond polarization! Indeed there is. In this inspired and brilliant work Steve McIntosh presents a richly conceived integral agenda and evolutionary strategy for the development of culture and consciousness.” — Jean Houston, Ph.D., Chancellor of Meridian University and author of many books on human development “Steve McIntosh is an incredibly deep and clear thinker … This book is just what we need at this troubled time in history.” — Tony Schwartz, bestselling author and CEO of The Energy Project “If I could prescribe one book for every Democrat or Progressive candidate and campaign to read (ASAP!) … it would be Steve McIntosh's Developmental Politics. It's brilliant, well-written, and, I believe, just what the doctor ordered for our ailing body politic.” — Brian D. McLaren, author of The Great Spiritual Migration “McIntosh persuasively argues that an enlarged understanding of cultural evolution can help us reclaim our collective aspirations for social progress. This important study is a must read!” — Michael E. Zimmerman, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, University of Colorado at Boulder “This is the right book for what’s next in our politics, both nationally and personally. I found McIntosh’s description of the practice of values integration to be instantly indispensable.” — Jeff Salzman, Host of the Daily Evolver Podcast
- GenresPoliticsNonfiction
248 pages, Kindle Edition
Published March 1, 2020
23 people are currently reading
73 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
March 19, 2020
A review copy of this book was provided by Mr. McIntosh.
This is McIntosh’s fifth book, his fourth regarding Integral Thought. Integral Theory is a contemporary compilation of understanding our world with philosopher Ken Wilber as the center of the Integral Movement. (A good introduction to Integral Theory is the book: The Integral Vision: A Very Short Introduction to the Revolutionary Integral Approach to Life, God, the Universe, and Everything by Ken Wilber.) The Integral Institute and McIntosh worked together, and though McIntosh is no longer personally associated with the institute, they are fellow travelers and geographically proximate in the Boulder/Denver Colorado area.
While Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory has five major components: states, stages, lines, types, and quadrants, McIntosh focuses on Stages of Development in this book. (As did that of Clare Graves through his student Don Beck in Spiral Dynamics in Action: Humanity's Master Code, which may also be familiar to readers.)
Specifically McIntosh focuses on the three stages (also called levels, worldviews, or memes) of individual and social development which are most represented in modern American life. Among American adults and thus, voters, about 30% are Traditionalists. These individuals believe in faith, family and country, in self-sacrifice for the good of the whole, in duty and honor, law and order, and God’s will. Currently this group votes Republican for the most part. The largest cohort of the three stages that are the focus of this book are the Modernists who comprise 50% of voters that currently may vote either Republican or Democratic. Modernists promote economic and scientific progress, liberty and the rule of law, personal achievement, prosperity, and wealth, with the concomitant social status, and they value higher education. Post-modernists, or progressives, are about 20% of voters, who at this time are Democratic voters. Their values include social and economic justice, diversity and multiculturalism, a natural lifestyle and localism, as well as planetary healing.
Individuals grow through these stages, as do societies, going from Traditionalist, to Modernist, to Progressive. There’s actually a higher stage than progressive, variously called Integral or Post-Progressive that has so few people that they do not represent a force in public life. McIntosh does not address that group in this book.
As mentioned above, each stage of development has commendable values. Ideally an individual or a society retains those values as it grows into the next stage, but that does not always happen. For that reason we find adults in the U.S. in the midst of a culture war. Each group sees the negatives of the other groups, instead of the positives. To some extent this is a natural tendency as an individual moves into a higher stage, as she naturally wants to separate herself from the previous stage. But holding on to old enmities is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
To quiet this culture war, and make peace, we necessarily need to see the positives of each worldview. McIntosh shows us a method to enhance our own understanding of life, presumably letting go of negative views of prior levels. McIntosh’s method is to practice virtues and to construct our individual version of the good. He illustrates this method and shows readers exactly how to do this.
Whether this is the way to heal and move forward, or only a partial method that works for a few, is unknown. However by focusing on our own internal world and participation in life through the lens of practicing a virtue can only be helpful in our divisive society.
This is McIntosh’s fifth book, his fourth regarding Integral Thought. Integral Theory is a contemporary compilation of understanding our world with philosopher Ken Wilber as the center of the Integral Movement. (A good introduction to Integral Theory is the book: The Integral Vision: A Very Short Introduction to the Revolutionary Integral Approach to Life, God, the Universe, and Everything by Ken Wilber.) The Integral Institute and McIntosh worked together, and though McIntosh is no longer personally associated with the institute, they are fellow travelers and geographically proximate in the Boulder/Denver Colorado area.
While Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory has five major components: states, stages, lines, types, and quadrants, McIntosh focuses on Stages of Development in this book. (As did that of Clare Graves through his student Don Beck in Spiral Dynamics in Action: Humanity's Master Code, which may also be familiar to readers.)
Specifically McIntosh focuses on the three stages (also called levels, worldviews, or memes) of individual and social development which are most represented in modern American life. Among American adults and thus, voters, about 30% are Traditionalists. These individuals believe in faith, family and country, in self-sacrifice for the good of the whole, in duty and honor, law and order, and God’s will. Currently this group votes Republican for the most part. The largest cohort of the three stages that are the focus of this book are the Modernists who comprise 50% of voters that currently may vote either Republican or Democratic. Modernists promote economic and scientific progress, liberty and the rule of law, personal achievement, prosperity, and wealth, with the concomitant social status, and they value higher education. Post-modernists, or progressives, are about 20% of voters, who at this time are Democratic voters. Their values include social and economic justice, diversity and multiculturalism, a natural lifestyle and localism, as well as planetary healing.
Individuals grow through these stages, as do societies, going from Traditionalist, to Modernist, to Progressive. There’s actually a higher stage than progressive, variously called Integral or Post-Progressive that has so few people that they do not represent a force in public life. McIntosh does not address that group in this book.
As mentioned above, each stage of development has commendable values. Ideally an individual or a society retains those values as it grows into the next stage, but that does not always happen. For that reason we find adults in the U.S. in the midst of a culture war. Each group sees the negatives of the other groups, instead of the positives. To some extent this is a natural tendency as an individual moves into a higher stage, as she naturally wants to separate herself from the previous stage. But holding on to old enmities is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
To quiet this culture war, and make peace, we necessarily need to see the positives of each worldview. McIntosh shows us a method to enhance our own understanding of life, presumably letting go of negative views of prior levels. McIntosh’s method is to practice virtues and to construct our individual version of the good. He illustrates this method and shows readers exactly how to do this.
Whether this is the way to heal and move forward, or only a partial method that works for a few, is unknown. However by focusing on our own internal world and participation in life through the lens of practicing a virtue can only be helpful in our divisive society.
April 17, 2020
A very dense read that will both require and reward additional reading. McIntosh's thesis seems fundamental to our emergence from the current hyperpolarized culture war. As a Whiteheadean, I find this book very much in that tradition as is most of Integral Philosophy.
January 11, 2021
In this important and thought-provoking work, integral philosopher Steve McIntosh addresses the hyperpolarization of American politics from the perspective of cultural evolution, identifying our struggles as arising out of a competition among worldviews and offering a prescription for how to overcome the conditions that threaten to pull us into belligerent tribalism.
In Part I of the book, which is fascinating and insightful, McIntosh describes the emergence and role of the three competing worldviews that now dominate our culture--traditionalism, modernism, and postmodernism--and how our current hyperpolarization and political pathologies derive from the competition among them. Centuries of cultural evolution have brought us to our current state of affairs. Modernity arose with the Great Enlightenment, challenging and upsetting the social order that was the predecessor of traditionalism. Because modernism, with reason, individual rights, and economic freedom at its core, so rapidly improved the human condition (as it continues to do) it became widely embraced, ultimately forging a truce with traditionalism (a collectivist worldview anchored in religion and tradition), based on modernists' adherence to the core values of traditionalism (morality, order, etc.) as a means to hold society together. While the conflict never went away, the truce largely held, permitting humanity to make incredible and rapid material and social progress, while remaining grounded in traditional morality. In the 20th Century the postmodernist worldview emerged in opposition to modernity (and traditionalism, of course) and in reaction to perceived negative consequences of modernism--world wars, genocide, racism, colonialism and environmental degradation. Postmodernists, like traditionalists, emphasize collective identity rather than individualism, and seek to dismantle ("deconstruct") modernist and traditionalist structures, taking aim at all things modernists and traditionalists hold dear. As McIntosh says, "the hallmark of practically all forms of postmodern culture" is "anti-modernism," and, unfortunately it is too often expressed these days as a sort of militant illiberal fundamentalism. Whereas modernism reached a sort of truce with traditionalism, borrowing capital from it in order to cohere and survive, postmodernism as a worldview is "immature" and postmodernists generally do not (yet) seem to have recognized the advantages and necessity of such a move, despite the fact "without the liberal protections of individual freedoms provided by modernist values, and the foundational norms of fair play and honesty provided by traditional values, postmodern culture would soon regress to a 'pretraditional' level of warring factions."
McIntosh estimates that Americans are divided roughly as 30% traditionalist, 50% modernist, and 20% postmodernist. Among modernists there are a range of conventional political opinions, with some on the left side of the spectrum and some on the right. The cultural battle in which we are now engaged is between the traditionalists and the postmodernists as they compete for the allegiance of the modernists. "As a result of ongoing cultural evolution from traditionalism to modernism, and now increasingly toward postmodernism, contemporary American culture is being pulled apart by the competition between two seemingly incompatible communitarian moral systems--one premodern and traditional, and the other postmodern and progressive. These divergent moral systems are currently engaged in an intense political struggle for the allegiance of the modernist majority. The tug-of-war between these contending communitarian worldviews helps explain by modernists are consistently pulled toward one side or the other, and thus why centrism is not viable in our current political climate."
But if McIntosh's diagnosis is compelling, I wonder if his prescription is too optimistic. The solution to hyperpolarization, he argues, is for a cultural turn to integral philosophy--more specifically to elevating the cardinal virtues (justice, temperance, prudence, courage, hope, faith and love) and embracing them as the glue that holds our society together. These virtues, he argues convincingly, are in some form embedded within each of the competing worldviews. By recognizing them within the worldviews of one's antagonists, society can unify around them without sacrificing our own interpretations of the values that derive from them. For example, we should all affirm and seek to recognize within competing worldviews the values and virtues that are within our own, rather than focusing militantly on the values that we oppose. McIntosh cites the same-sex marriage debate as an example. Traditionalists are able to see same-sex marriage as an enlargement of the traditional institution of marriage itself and an opportunity to make available to more people the values that traditionalists affirm in marriage. Modernists can recognize that extending the right to marry to same-sex couples is an expression of the modernist value of individual liberty. Seen from these perspectives, the postmodern institution of same-sex marriage is not incompatible with competing worldviews and has, in fact, become widely accepted among traditionalists and modernists. But however attractive that prospect sounds and however such a thing might serve to calm our troubled waters, the practical advice for how to achieve it is vague (perhaps necessarily so). While I believe McIntosh is correct--that the hyperpolarization will only end when the antagonists make peace with their rivals by recognizing and embracing the goodness within each others' worldviews-- I wonder if this sort of cultural evolution isn't something that must occur naturally and impersonally. That is, I wonder if it isn't something that can be caused to happen. Regardless, it seems clear to me that we must try to resist the temptation to seek to defeat those with competing worldviews--that is, to seek to eradicate opposing worldviews or to force into submission those who hold them. Rather, we must try to integrate them.
Ultimately, it seems to me, integration will occur. A synthesis will arise out of the modernist thesis and the postmodern antithesis. There are many paths to that finish line--some of them being paths we must hope humanity does not have to take.
In Part I of the book, which is fascinating and insightful, McIntosh describes the emergence and role of the three competing worldviews that now dominate our culture--traditionalism, modernism, and postmodernism--and how our current hyperpolarization and political pathologies derive from the competition among them. Centuries of cultural evolution have brought us to our current state of affairs. Modernity arose with the Great Enlightenment, challenging and upsetting the social order that was the predecessor of traditionalism. Because modernism, with reason, individual rights, and economic freedom at its core, so rapidly improved the human condition (as it continues to do) it became widely embraced, ultimately forging a truce with traditionalism (a collectivist worldview anchored in religion and tradition), based on modernists' adherence to the core values of traditionalism (morality, order, etc.) as a means to hold society together. While the conflict never went away, the truce largely held, permitting humanity to make incredible and rapid material and social progress, while remaining grounded in traditional morality. In the 20th Century the postmodernist worldview emerged in opposition to modernity (and traditionalism, of course) and in reaction to perceived negative consequences of modernism--world wars, genocide, racism, colonialism and environmental degradation. Postmodernists, like traditionalists, emphasize collective identity rather than individualism, and seek to dismantle ("deconstruct") modernist and traditionalist structures, taking aim at all things modernists and traditionalists hold dear. As McIntosh says, "the hallmark of practically all forms of postmodern culture" is "anti-modernism," and, unfortunately it is too often expressed these days as a sort of militant illiberal fundamentalism. Whereas modernism reached a sort of truce with traditionalism, borrowing capital from it in order to cohere and survive, postmodernism as a worldview is "immature" and postmodernists generally do not (yet) seem to have recognized the advantages and necessity of such a move, despite the fact "without the liberal protections of individual freedoms provided by modernist values, and the foundational norms of fair play and honesty provided by traditional values, postmodern culture would soon regress to a 'pretraditional' level of warring factions."
McIntosh estimates that Americans are divided roughly as 30% traditionalist, 50% modernist, and 20% postmodernist. Among modernists there are a range of conventional political opinions, with some on the left side of the spectrum and some on the right. The cultural battle in which we are now engaged is between the traditionalists and the postmodernists as they compete for the allegiance of the modernists. "As a result of ongoing cultural evolution from traditionalism to modernism, and now increasingly toward postmodernism, contemporary American culture is being pulled apart by the competition between two seemingly incompatible communitarian moral systems--one premodern and traditional, and the other postmodern and progressive. These divergent moral systems are currently engaged in an intense political struggle for the allegiance of the modernist majority. The tug-of-war between these contending communitarian worldviews helps explain by modernists are consistently pulled toward one side or the other, and thus why centrism is not viable in our current political climate."
But if McIntosh's diagnosis is compelling, I wonder if his prescription is too optimistic. The solution to hyperpolarization, he argues, is for a cultural turn to integral philosophy--more specifically to elevating the cardinal virtues (justice, temperance, prudence, courage, hope, faith and love) and embracing them as the glue that holds our society together. These virtues, he argues convincingly, are in some form embedded within each of the competing worldviews. By recognizing them within the worldviews of one's antagonists, society can unify around them without sacrificing our own interpretations of the values that derive from them. For example, we should all affirm and seek to recognize within competing worldviews the values and virtues that are within our own, rather than focusing militantly on the values that we oppose. McIntosh cites the same-sex marriage debate as an example. Traditionalists are able to see same-sex marriage as an enlargement of the traditional institution of marriage itself and an opportunity to make available to more people the values that traditionalists affirm in marriage. Modernists can recognize that extending the right to marry to same-sex couples is an expression of the modernist value of individual liberty. Seen from these perspectives, the postmodern institution of same-sex marriage is not incompatible with competing worldviews and has, in fact, become widely accepted among traditionalists and modernists. But however attractive that prospect sounds and however such a thing might serve to calm our troubled waters, the practical advice for how to achieve it is vague (perhaps necessarily so). While I believe McIntosh is correct--that the hyperpolarization will only end when the antagonists make peace with their rivals by recognizing and embracing the goodness within each others' worldviews-- I wonder if this sort of cultural evolution isn't something that must occur naturally and impersonally. That is, I wonder if it isn't something that can be caused to happen. Regardless, it seems clear to me that we must try to resist the temptation to seek to defeat those with competing worldviews--that is, to seek to eradicate opposing worldviews or to force into submission those who hold them. Rather, we must try to integrate them.
Ultimately, it seems to me, integration will occur. A synthesis will arise out of the modernist thesis and the postmodern antithesis. There are many paths to that finish line--some of them being paths we must hope humanity does not have to take.
August 31, 2024
A VERY sober. VERY well written Introduction to Integral Political Theory for an American audience.
I’m not 100% sure about this.
NORDIC NOD?
But I’m guessing this book is (at least in part) a response Hanzi Freinacht’s (Daniel Görtz) series on Political Metamodernism including (1) The Listening Society and (2) Nordic Ideology. Although Freinacht/Görtz is openly critical of Ken Wilber, and Integral Theory. He is ABSOLUTELY indebted to Wilber, and Integral Theory. And as such, represents some of the first serious, academic critique/adaptation of Wilber, and Integral Theory. And MAN ALIVE that is exciting.
AT LAST!
Integral Theory (a) sees the light of day, (b) gets serious criticism and competition, (c) produces something useful, (d) moves (at least a little bit) away from new age spirituality.
I won’t go into detail about the specifics of this book.
Other than that is a BADLY NEEDED framework for MOVING PAST the current AMERICAN CULTURE WAR and the deeply POLARIZED POLITICAL GRIDLOCK were are all dying from.
In essence.
This book offers a TECHNOLOGY of AGREEMENT.
It’s a ray of LIGHT in the DARKNESS.
It’s probably too late.
But in HOPELESSLY OPAQUE DARKNESS.
This GLIMMER of hope is a QUANTUM leap forward.
5/5 ⭐️
I’m not 100% sure about this.
NORDIC NOD?
But I’m guessing this book is (at least in part) a response Hanzi Freinacht’s (Daniel Görtz) series on Political Metamodernism including (1) The Listening Society and (2) Nordic Ideology. Although Freinacht/Görtz is openly critical of Ken Wilber, and Integral Theory. He is ABSOLUTELY indebted to Wilber, and Integral Theory. And as such, represents some of the first serious, academic critique/adaptation of Wilber, and Integral Theory. And MAN ALIVE that is exciting.
AT LAST!
Integral Theory (a) sees the light of day, (b) gets serious criticism and competition, (c) produces something useful, (d) moves (at least a little bit) away from new age spirituality.
I won’t go into detail about the specifics of this book.
Other than that is a BADLY NEEDED framework for MOVING PAST the current AMERICAN CULTURE WAR and the deeply POLARIZED POLITICAL GRIDLOCK were are all dying from.
In essence.
This book offers a TECHNOLOGY of AGREEMENT.
It’s a ray of LIGHT in the DARKNESS.
It’s probably too late.
But in HOPELESSLY OPAQUE DARKNESS.
This GLIMMER of hope is a QUANTUM leap forward.
5/5 ⭐️
August 10, 2021
I have to admit that it took some internal prodding to get me to finally read this book. I'd been aware of it from around the time it was published in March 2020 and back in 2015 I'd read and appreciated his The Presence of the Infinite: The Spiritual Experience of Beauty, Truth, and Goodness (2015). But perhaps like a good many of us, I've suffered from a bit of burnout from trying to understand and to promote a cure for the current fever in American politics and culture. But then I realize that if we don't properly diagnose and cure this raging fever, then the American experiment in democracy, self-government, and the rule of law probably won't survive. Also, I know well that life, politics, history wait for no one; politics is an ongoing endeavor that involves a constant struggle to arrive at decisions and to take the actions needed to maintain a functioning democratic polity. In times like these, one can better understand the temptation of authoritarianism, the destruction of politics. But I also know that such thoughts put one on the road to perdition, if not plain-old hell. One must continue to fight the good fight.
I was also promoted to read this book now by learning that McIntosh, along with his confederates Jeff Salzmann (of the Daily Evolver podcast) and Carter Phipps (author of the book Evolutionaries that I've read), were launching a new endeavor through their organization The Institute for Cultural Evolution. The new endeavor, labeled "The Post-Progressive Project" via its website provided a guide to what these three and others had in mind as a political project. I like what I read, and decided to dig deeper. I'm glad that I did.
I should also say that I might have been a little skeptical of McIntosh's aspirations in this book because of my having read The Presence of the Infinite: The Spiritual Experience of Beauty, Truth, and Goodness. After all, one doesn't usually identify American politics with beauty, goodness, or truth. But then, on the other hand, I contend that we do sometimes find--or should I say generate--diamonds in the muck. I knew that McIntosh's first three books dealt with evolutionary thought, metaphysics, and other high-altitude topics through the lens of integral philosophy as re-incarnated in its contemporary American form starting with the project of Ken Wilber. (I say reincarnated in deference to the earlier project of integral philosophy espoused by Sri Aurobindo.) So my concern upon embarking upon this book was whether McIntosh could successfully shift from high-altitude reconnaissance flights to serving as a ground-level scout who can accurately report on the fighting ongoing in the jungle of American politics. The answer is "yes," and he does so not by abandoning his high-flying ideas, but by incorporating them into his ground-level observations and recommendations. Indeed, given McIntosh's appreciation of dialectics and polarities, I should have expected nothing less.
One insight that McIntosh identifies early in the book is a key point that many "modernists" (in McIntosh's terminology, or more broadly, I'd say "liberals") don't appreciate. That is, that all politics lies downstream from culture. Modernists, including both contemporary liberals and Marxists, tend to believe that all politics lies downstream from economics--or at least it should be this way if only the "traditionalists" (McIntosh's term) weren't so indifferent to their economic self-interest. ("What's the matter with Kansas?") Contemporary American conservatives have known this for a long time--and they have exploited this insight--to create the culture wars that keep Republican candidates afloat even as their economic program favors the wealthiest. (Traditionalist-"conservatives" are abetted in this by the apparent ignorance of so many modernists about this insight.) A large share of American voters favor the policies and programs of the Democrats but they love the culture of the conservatives and Trumpists. (Not all conservatives should be tarred with the Trumpist brush, thank goodness.) With this insight in hand, McIntosh identifies three bundles of cultural "worldviews" currently dominant on the American scene, which he labels "traditionalist," "modernist," and "postmodern." Each of these groups holds a distinct (although not always conflicting) set of values. Each group has certain strengths (good values if you will) and certain negative "values." McIntosh argues that each of these groups can be seen on a developmental continuum. Within such a developmental continuum one would ideally see the incorporation of positive values from one level to the next. Hence, a liberal society depends on the more fundamental--shall we say conservative--values of loyalty to family, group, and country, as observers from Tocqueville to David Brooks and Patrick Deneen have argued. The "post-moderns" (political "progressives") tend to scorn the "modernists" (liberals) for the emphasis liberals place on tolerance, open debate, the use of markets, and adherence to institutions and rules. Such critics don't appreciate that these modern, liberal, democratic doctrines and values undergird the economic, legal, and political institutions that allow a postmodern, progressive perspective to receive a hearing. Without these liberal institutions, we can expect that the rise of illiberal regimes similar to those that scarred 20th-century Europe and Asia. Not a happy precedent. The program that McIntosh presents here is the try to end the culture wars in American politics (or at least take it down several notches) by recognizing and incorporating the positive values from each perspective while jettisoning the unique negatives that each worldview entails. Needless to say, this is easier said than done, but McIntosh is on the right track.
Here's how I would describe the gist of McIntosh's prescription: (Spoiler Alert!): The only way of out is up. That is, the only way out of our current political dysfunction is by taking our value system "up" a notch. This path would retain what's worth keeping among the values entailed in each of the three worldviews while disposing of the junk. McIntosh dubs this new level of consciousness "integral consciousness" as in the integral philosophy that I referenced above.
McIntosh's program presents us with a daunting challenge. As he recognizes, the path forward is like negotiating a mountain trail that never goes straight up but dips and climbs and switches back and thereby allows the climber to ascend to the higher peak. Course corrections and setbacks are a part of the human story. There's no true tale of uninterrupted progress. (McIntosh includes a useful meditation on the idea of "progress" in our thinking.) McIntosh is also realistic enough to identify the strange twists that often occur in politics and between worldviews. His comment on Trump's relationship with the traditionalist worldview is choice:
Although clearly not a traditionalist, Trump has positioned himself as an enemy of postmodernism. Traditionalists therefore hired Trump as their “bouncer” or cultural bodyguard. And when hiring a bouncer, one may be inclined to overlook his arrest record.(Location 1097, Kindle ed.)
McIntosh packs a great deal into this book. In addition to his political and cultural analysis of the contemporary American scene, he also details the (integral) philosophic background to his thinking. The full details of McIntosh's program are too much to consider in this review (read the book!), but a couple of items caught my attention that I want to take point-out. The first item involves McIntosh's description and deployment of "polarity theory." I'd not heard of this theory before, although the idea behind seems intuitive and easy enough to grasp. The example of the application that McIntosh shared and that caught my eye as a former athletic team member, coach (volunteer level), and spectator, as well as from career as an attorney is contained in this quote:
In the case of the competition-cooperation polarity, for example, unrestrained competition, in the absence of a larger agreement to play by the rules and cooperate, can quickly devolve into a dog-eat-dog condition wherein defensiveness saps productivity. Conversely, cooperation by itself, without the incentive or opportunity for individual excellence or creativity, can similarly devolve into groupthink or stifling bureaucratic mediocrity. But when competition and cooperation are brought together in a mutually correcting relationship that provides for both challenge and support, the value-creating potential of each side is maximized. (Location 1210)
Anyone who's been a member of an athletic team understands the challenge of competing for playing time and "glory" while also understanding the need to pull together and work as a team. Teams require cooperation and sacrifice for the good of the team. I've always thought that the most successful coaches have learned how to maximize both sides of the competition-cooperation polarity to get the most out of their players as individuals and as a team. (McIntosh has recently posted a useful series of visuals identifying different polarities at work in our lives.)
The other topic that I want to note is McIntosh's introduction of "virtue ethics" into his integral thinking. Some years ago (okay, on the order of three decades ago) I read Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue. Honestly, I didn't get it, but after reading McIntosh's promotion of this line of thinking, I'm ready to sign-up for the remedial program. McIntosh cites the work of Aristotle and Aquinas as well as more contemporary thinkers like Elizabeth (G.E.M.) Anscombe, Iris Murdoch, and Alasdair MacIntyre as developing the virtue ethics perspective. McIntosh also mines the traditional virtues theological (faith, hope, and love) and classical (justice, prudence, temperance, and courage) for their usefulness. He also provides a list of "alternative and somewhat more secular terms for the virtues" that includes loyalty, compassion, fairness, integrity, creativity, determination, and enthusiasm. This alternative way of considering morality, so different from deontological and utilitarian theories, is an intriguing and practical way of thinking about how we conduct ourselves.
Before closing (and I've left many topics unaddressed), I should note that partway through the book it struck me how well organized and well-written this book is. Knowing of McIntosh's training and experience as a lawyer, I couldn't help but think of this book as a well-written brief. McIntosh makes his case systematically and methodically, supporting his contentions and anticipating objections. A winning brief from my perspective. (And believe me, not all briefs are well-written well-argued, or persuasive, all to the consternation of judges and their clerks.)
Has McIntosh provided us with a roadmap out of (political) hell? Yes, at least a rough one. Not the only one, certainly, but his map provides enough guidance to allow us to commence our journey with the hope of arriving at our promised land of relative political tranquility. The challenge will be to spread McIntosh's political and developmental good news among the people. I'm on board. I'm now a member of the Post-Progressive Alliance that seeks to implement the principles of McIntosh's book and the insights of his confederates. I say, "Onward and upward!"
I was also promoted to read this book now by learning that McIntosh, along with his confederates Jeff Salzmann (of the Daily Evolver podcast) and Carter Phipps (author of the book Evolutionaries that I've read), were launching a new endeavor through their organization The Institute for Cultural Evolution. The new endeavor, labeled "The Post-Progressive Project" via its website provided a guide to what these three and others had in mind as a political project. I like what I read, and decided to dig deeper. I'm glad that I did.
I should also say that I might have been a little skeptical of McIntosh's aspirations in this book because of my having read The Presence of the Infinite: The Spiritual Experience of Beauty, Truth, and Goodness. After all, one doesn't usually identify American politics with beauty, goodness, or truth. But then, on the other hand, I contend that we do sometimes find--or should I say generate--diamonds in the muck. I knew that McIntosh's first three books dealt with evolutionary thought, metaphysics, and other high-altitude topics through the lens of integral philosophy as re-incarnated in its contemporary American form starting with the project of Ken Wilber. (I say reincarnated in deference to the earlier project of integral philosophy espoused by Sri Aurobindo.) So my concern upon embarking upon this book was whether McIntosh could successfully shift from high-altitude reconnaissance flights to serving as a ground-level scout who can accurately report on the fighting ongoing in the jungle of American politics. The answer is "yes," and he does so not by abandoning his high-flying ideas, but by incorporating them into his ground-level observations and recommendations. Indeed, given McIntosh's appreciation of dialectics and polarities, I should have expected nothing less.
One insight that McIntosh identifies early in the book is a key point that many "modernists" (in McIntosh's terminology, or more broadly, I'd say "liberals") don't appreciate. That is, that all politics lies downstream from culture. Modernists, including both contemporary liberals and Marxists, tend to believe that all politics lies downstream from economics--or at least it should be this way if only the "traditionalists" (McIntosh's term) weren't so indifferent to their economic self-interest. ("What's the matter with Kansas?") Contemporary American conservatives have known this for a long time--and they have exploited this insight--to create the culture wars that keep Republican candidates afloat even as their economic program favors the wealthiest. (Traditionalist-"conservatives" are abetted in this by the apparent ignorance of so many modernists about this insight.) A large share of American voters favor the policies and programs of the Democrats but they love the culture of the conservatives and Trumpists. (Not all conservatives should be tarred with the Trumpist brush, thank goodness.) With this insight in hand, McIntosh identifies three bundles of cultural "worldviews" currently dominant on the American scene, which he labels "traditionalist," "modernist," and "postmodern." Each of these groups holds a distinct (although not always conflicting) set of values. Each group has certain strengths (good values if you will) and certain negative "values." McIntosh argues that each of these groups can be seen on a developmental continuum. Within such a developmental continuum one would ideally see the incorporation of positive values from one level to the next. Hence, a liberal society depends on the more fundamental--shall we say conservative--values of loyalty to family, group, and country, as observers from Tocqueville to David Brooks and Patrick Deneen have argued. The "post-moderns" (political "progressives") tend to scorn the "modernists" (liberals) for the emphasis liberals place on tolerance, open debate, the use of markets, and adherence to institutions and rules. Such critics don't appreciate that these modern, liberal, democratic doctrines and values undergird the economic, legal, and political institutions that allow a postmodern, progressive perspective to receive a hearing. Without these liberal institutions, we can expect that the rise of illiberal regimes similar to those that scarred 20th-century Europe and Asia. Not a happy precedent. The program that McIntosh presents here is the try to end the culture wars in American politics (or at least take it down several notches) by recognizing and incorporating the positive values from each perspective while jettisoning the unique negatives that each worldview entails. Needless to say, this is easier said than done, but McIntosh is on the right track.
Here's how I would describe the gist of McIntosh's prescription: (Spoiler Alert!): The only way of out is up. That is, the only way out of our current political dysfunction is by taking our value system "up" a notch. This path would retain what's worth keeping among the values entailed in each of the three worldviews while disposing of the junk. McIntosh dubs this new level of consciousness "integral consciousness" as in the integral philosophy that I referenced above.
McIntosh's program presents us with a daunting challenge. As he recognizes, the path forward is like negotiating a mountain trail that never goes straight up but dips and climbs and switches back and thereby allows the climber to ascend to the higher peak. Course corrections and setbacks are a part of the human story. There's no true tale of uninterrupted progress. (McIntosh includes a useful meditation on the idea of "progress" in our thinking.) McIntosh is also realistic enough to identify the strange twists that often occur in politics and between worldviews. His comment on Trump's relationship with the traditionalist worldview is choice:
Although clearly not a traditionalist, Trump has positioned himself as an enemy of postmodernism. Traditionalists therefore hired Trump as their “bouncer” or cultural bodyguard. And when hiring a bouncer, one may be inclined to overlook his arrest record.(Location 1097, Kindle ed.)
McIntosh packs a great deal into this book. In addition to his political and cultural analysis of the contemporary American scene, he also details the (integral) philosophic background to his thinking. The full details of McIntosh's program are too much to consider in this review (read the book!), but a couple of items caught my attention that I want to take point-out. The first item involves McIntosh's description and deployment of "polarity theory." I'd not heard of this theory before, although the idea behind seems intuitive and easy enough to grasp. The example of the application that McIntosh shared and that caught my eye as a former athletic team member, coach (volunteer level), and spectator, as well as from career as an attorney is contained in this quote:
In the case of the competition-cooperation polarity, for example, unrestrained competition, in the absence of a larger agreement to play by the rules and cooperate, can quickly devolve into a dog-eat-dog condition wherein defensiveness saps productivity. Conversely, cooperation by itself, without the incentive or opportunity for individual excellence or creativity, can similarly devolve into groupthink or stifling bureaucratic mediocrity. But when competition and cooperation are brought together in a mutually correcting relationship that provides for both challenge and support, the value-creating potential of each side is maximized. (Location 1210)
Anyone who's been a member of an athletic team understands the challenge of competing for playing time and "glory" while also understanding the need to pull together and work as a team. Teams require cooperation and sacrifice for the good of the team. I've always thought that the most successful coaches have learned how to maximize both sides of the competition-cooperation polarity to get the most out of their players as individuals and as a team. (McIntosh has recently posted a useful series of visuals identifying different polarities at work in our lives.)
The other topic that I want to note is McIntosh's introduction of "virtue ethics" into his integral thinking. Some years ago (okay, on the order of three decades ago) I read Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue. Honestly, I didn't get it, but after reading McIntosh's promotion of this line of thinking, I'm ready to sign-up for the remedial program. McIntosh cites the work of Aristotle and Aquinas as well as more contemporary thinkers like Elizabeth (G.E.M.) Anscombe, Iris Murdoch, and Alasdair MacIntyre as developing the virtue ethics perspective. McIntosh also mines the traditional virtues theological (faith, hope, and love) and classical (justice, prudence, temperance, and courage) for their usefulness. He also provides a list of "alternative and somewhat more secular terms for the virtues" that includes loyalty, compassion, fairness, integrity, creativity, determination, and enthusiasm. This alternative way of considering morality, so different from deontological and utilitarian theories, is an intriguing and practical way of thinking about how we conduct ourselves.
Before closing (and I've left many topics unaddressed), I should note that partway through the book it struck me how well organized and well-written this book is. Knowing of McIntosh's training and experience as a lawyer, I couldn't help but think of this book as a well-written brief. McIntosh makes his case systematically and methodically, supporting his contentions and anticipating objections. A winning brief from my perspective. (And believe me, not all briefs are well-written well-argued, or persuasive, all to the consternation of judges and their clerks.)
Has McIntosh provided us with a roadmap out of (political) hell? Yes, at least a rough one. Not the only one, certainly, but his map provides enough guidance to allow us to commence our journey with the hope of arriving at our promised land of relative political tranquility. The challenge will be to spread McIntosh's political and developmental good news among the people. I'm on board. I'm now a member of the Post-Progressive Alliance that seeks to implement the principles of McIntosh's book and the insights of his confederates. I say, "Onward and upward!"
June 7, 2020
This book was a revelation! I did not previously understand postmodernism as a culture; I only knew as an academic point of view. What a difference this understanding makes in reading behind the headlines.
The author clarifies that evolution has progressed beyond the biological to also encompass the evolution of culture and consciousness. The postmodern culture evolved out of the modern culture, which evolved out of the traditional culture. Each comes from what came before. The values of each culture are different, but cannot be erased as many progressives would prefer. Instead, the values of each culture must be preserved and must evolve to a transcendent new American culture.
The author explains these ideas at length that still requires some deep thinking, but what a thrill to finally get it.
A highlight for me was the section demonstrating how the seven virtues promoted by Saint Thomas Aquinas have been updated by 20th Century scholarship and are just as relevant today. And, in fact, are key to resolving the culture conflict underlying our political polarization.
The author clarifies that evolution has progressed beyond the biological to also encompass the evolution of culture and consciousness. The postmodern culture evolved out of the modern culture, which evolved out of the traditional culture. Each comes from what came before. The values of each culture are different, but cannot be erased as many progressives would prefer. Instead, the values of each culture must be preserved and must evolve to a transcendent new American culture.
The author explains these ideas at length that still requires some deep thinking, but what a thrill to finally get it.
A highlight for me was the section demonstrating how the seven virtues promoted by Saint Thomas Aquinas have been updated by 20th Century scholarship and are just as relevant today. And, in fact, are key to resolving the culture conflict underlying our political polarization.
October 8, 2025
2025.09.02–2025.09.05
Contents
McIntosh S (2020) (06:55) Developmental Politics - How America Can Grow Into a Better Version of Itself
Preface
Part I: Toward a Politics of Culture
1. America’s Existential Dilemma
• Competition Between Alternative Moral Systems
• A New Politics of Culture
• Worldviews—the Basic Units of Culture
2. The Momentous Emergence of the Modernist Worldview
• The Standard Narrative of Modernity’s Emergence
• Modernism and Traditionalism
• Modernity’s New Cultural Opponent: The Progressive Postmodern Worldview
• Modernity Came About Primarily as a Result of the Emergence of New Values
• Modernity Depends on the Borrowed Social Capital of Traditionalism
• The Developmental Logic of Cultural Evolution
3. Tracing the Development of the Progressive Postmodern Worldview
• The Revolt of Modernity’s Artists and Intellectuals: 1848 to 1968
• Postmodernity Is Born as a Distinct Worldview
• Postmodernism Is Founded on a New Communitarian Ethos of Sensitivity
• Postmodernism Is Both a Blessing and a Curse for Western Civilization
4. Reaching Political Agreement Through Values Integration
• Conventional Proposals for Reaching Political Agreement
• Focusing on the Bedrock Values at the Heart of Our Political Disagreements
• Values Integration: Preliminary Considerations
• Developmental Politics’ Values Charts—Foundations of Its Integrative Method
• Polarity Theory—An Introduction
• Examples of Values Integration in Action
• The Method’s Secret Sauce: Integral Consciousness
• Values Integration: Some Final Considerations
Part II: Toward a New Political Philosophy of Purpose and Progress
5. Evolving Our Understanding of the Good
• The New Truth: Consciousness Evolves
• In Search of an Understanding of Noosphere Energy
• Reconceiving Value as a Form of Interior Energy
6. Harnessing the Energy of Value
• Value Enters the Universe with the Emergence of Life
• Human Consciousness Is Attracted by an Ever-Expanding Dimension of Value
• Self-Interest and Greater-Than-Self-Interest Cohere as an Interdependent Polarity
• The Political Significance of Transcendence
7. Cultivating Cultural Evolution Through a New American Dream
• Transcendence and the Structure of Evolutionary Emergence
• Goodness, Truth, and Beauty—Traces of the Transcendent Within the Immanent
• Discovering a New American Dream
• Strategies for Cultivating Cultural Evolution
• • 1. Evolving American culture by improving each existing worldview on its own terms
• • 2. Evolving American culture by fostering the ongoing growth of consciousness along the timeline of human history
• • 3. Evolving American culture by advancing an integral worldview that transcends postmodernism
8. A Renaissance of Virtue
• The Energetic Properties of Goodness, Truth, and Beauty Revisited
• Discovering a Natural System of Virtues
• The Obligations of Virtue
• Virtues and Transcendence
• How the Practice of the Virtues Can Ameliorate America’s Political Problems
9. A Transcendent Vision of Progress
• The Problem with Progress
• Progress and Transcendence
• Dangers of Transcendence
• Toward a Universal Definition of Progress
• Making Progress Beyond Hyperpolarization
• Appreciating Each Form of Culture’s Unique Connection with Transcendence
• Connecting Our Political Progress to the Cosmic Progress of Evolution
Appendix A: On the Ontological Status of Worldviews
• Our Emerging Understanding of Social Ontology
• The Relevance of Developmental Psychology
• Mapping the Ontology of the Noosphere
Appendix B: An Exercise for Practicing Virtues: Creating a Personal Portrait of the Good
• Step 1: Contemplate Your Essential Interests (Three Questions)
• • Question 1. Self-Interest: What Do You Ultimately Want?
• • Question 2. Other-Interest: Who Are the Others You Care Most About?
• • Question 3. Greater-Than-Self Interest: What Qualifies as Authentically Transcendent for You?
• Step 2: Discern Your Most Important Virtues (Seven Questions)
• • Question 1. What Do You Owe to Others?
• • Question 2. What Do You Owe to Yourself?
• • Question 3. What Do You Owe to Your Plans and Dreams?
• • Question 4. How Do You Face Your Fears and Respond to Difficulties?
• • Question 5. What Is Your Best Stance Toward the Future?
• • Question 6. How Do You Relate to What Is Ultimately Real?
• • Question 7. What Is the Best You Can Be, Do, or Give in This World?
• Step 3: Live with Your Portrait of the Good—Work to Make It a Portrait of Who You Really Are
Notes
Selected Bibliography
Acknowledgments
Index
About the Author
Contents
McIntosh S (2020) (06:55) Developmental Politics - How America Can Grow Into a Better Version of Itself
Preface
Part I: Toward a Politics of Culture
1. America’s Existential Dilemma
• Competition Between Alternative Moral Systems
• A New Politics of Culture
• Worldviews—the Basic Units of Culture
2. The Momentous Emergence of the Modernist Worldview
• The Standard Narrative of Modernity’s Emergence
• Modernism and Traditionalism
• Modernity’s New Cultural Opponent: The Progressive Postmodern Worldview
• Modernity Came About Primarily as a Result of the Emergence of New Values
• Modernity Depends on the Borrowed Social Capital of Traditionalism
• The Developmental Logic of Cultural Evolution
3. Tracing the Development of the Progressive Postmodern Worldview
• The Revolt of Modernity’s Artists and Intellectuals: 1848 to 1968
• Postmodernity Is Born as a Distinct Worldview
• Postmodernism Is Founded on a New Communitarian Ethos of Sensitivity
• Postmodernism Is Both a Blessing and a Curse for Western Civilization
4. Reaching Political Agreement Through Values Integration
• Conventional Proposals for Reaching Political Agreement
• Focusing on the Bedrock Values at the Heart of Our Political Disagreements
• Values Integration: Preliminary Considerations
• Developmental Politics’ Values Charts—Foundations of Its Integrative Method
• Polarity Theory—An Introduction
• Examples of Values Integration in Action
• The Method’s Secret Sauce: Integral Consciousness
• Values Integration: Some Final Considerations
Part II: Toward a New Political Philosophy of Purpose and Progress
5. Evolving Our Understanding of the Good
• The New Truth: Consciousness Evolves
• In Search of an Understanding of Noosphere Energy
• Reconceiving Value as a Form of Interior Energy
6. Harnessing the Energy of Value
• Value Enters the Universe with the Emergence of Life
• Human Consciousness Is Attracted by an Ever-Expanding Dimension of Value
• Self-Interest and Greater-Than-Self-Interest Cohere as an Interdependent Polarity
• The Political Significance of Transcendence
7. Cultivating Cultural Evolution Through a New American Dream
• Transcendence and the Structure of Evolutionary Emergence
• Goodness, Truth, and Beauty—Traces of the Transcendent Within the Immanent
• Discovering a New American Dream
• Strategies for Cultivating Cultural Evolution
• • 1. Evolving American culture by improving each existing worldview on its own terms
• • 2. Evolving American culture by fostering the ongoing growth of consciousness along the timeline of human history
• • 3. Evolving American culture by advancing an integral worldview that transcends postmodernism
8. A Renaissance of Virtue
• The Energetic Properties of Goodness, Truth, and Beauty Revisited
• Discovering a Natural System of Virtues
• The Obligations of Virtue
• Virtues and Transcendence
• How the Practice of the Virtues Can Ameliorate America’s Political Problems
9. A Transcendent Vision of Progress
• The Problem with Progress
• Progress and Transcendence
• Dangers of Transcendence
• Toward a Universal Definition of Progress
• Making Progress Beyond Hyperpolarization
• Appreciating Each Form of Culture’s Unique Connection with Transcendence
• Connecting Our Political Progress to the Cosmic Progress of Evolution
Appendix A: On the Ontological Status of Worldviews
• Our Emerging Understanding of Social Ontology
• The Relevance of Developmental Psychology
• Mapping the Ontology of the Noosphere
Appendix B: An Exercise for Practicing Virtues: Creating a Personal Portrait of the Good
• Step 1: Contemplate Your Essential Interests (Three Questions)
• • Question 1. Self-Interest: What Do You Ultimately Want?
• • Question 2. Other-Interest: Who Are the Others You Care Most About?
• • Question 3. Greater-Than-Self Interest: What Qualifies as Authentically Transcendent for You?
• Step 2: Discern Your Most Important Virtues (Seven Questions)
• • Question 1. What Do You Owe to Others?
• • Question 2. What Do You Owe to Yourself?
• • Question 3. What Do You Owe to Your Plans and Dreams?
• • Question 4. How Do You Face Your Fears and Respond to Difficulties?
• • Question 5. What Is Your Best Stance Toward the Future?
• • Question 6. How Do You Relate to What Is Ultimately Real?
• • Question 7. What Is the Best You Can Be, Do, or Give in This World?
• Step 3: Live with Your Portrait of the Good—Work to Make It a Portrait of Who You Really Are
Notes
Selected Bibliography
Acknowledgments
Index
About the Author
December 22, 2020
I just finished Developmental Politics by Steve McIntosh and was deeply inspired. It's about transcending our political divide and it really captures the issues beautifully. This issue of our political division is obviously becoming worse every day and I'm deeply worried about our country being torn apart. Steve is too, which is one of the reasons why I believe he wrote this powerful book.
This book can help us to start to transcend this seemingly intractable divide. Steve articulates the polarization that grips our country and tells the story of how we can overcome it through various pragmatic tools. He uniquely recognizes the inherent worth of the three major clashing cultures of our time (traditional, modern, and postmodern) while finding ways to integrate them with an approach that honors the best of what each has to offer. He recognizes tools like polarity theory and the classical virtues of the good, the true and the beautiful as ways to get beneath the divide to help us moving forward towards common goals that each culture can agree upon together. Steve's depth of philosophical understanding while integrated with pragmatic wisdom to help the world, make this a must read in my opinion for anybody looking to transcend our political divide.
I'm excited after reading the book to take up the necessary work to be a part of the solution. I sincerely hope you check it out. A lot is at stake in the coming months and years ahead. The only way I see us being successful is doing it together. Steve has beautifully set out a blue print on how to make that happen.
This book can help us to start to transcend this seemingly intractable divide. Steve articulates the polarization that grips our country and tells the story of how we can overcome it through various pragmatic tools. He uniquely recognizes the inherent worth of the three major clashing cultures of our time (traditional, modern, and postmodern) while finding ways to integrate them with an approach that honors the best of what each has to offer. He recognizes tools like polarity theory and the classical virtues of the good, the true and the beautiful as ways to get beneath the divide to help us moving forward towards common goals that each culture can agree upon together. Steve's depth of philosophical understanding while integrated with pragmatic wisdom to help the world, make this a must read in my opinion for anybody looking to transcend our political divide.
I'm excited after reading the book to take up the necessary work to be a part of the solution. I sincerely hope you check it out. A lot is at stake in the coming months and years ahead. The only way I see us being successful is doing it together. Steve has beautifully set out a blue print on how to make that happen.
March 18, 2024
This book is quite heavy on philosophy and light on how to get there. That said, he gets to some interesting ideas. One is that our politics are three groups: traditional (often faith based), modern (from the Renaissance and a reliance on science), and postmodernism (a more world-centered view. The author makes the point that we need to recognize the part that each group plays and demonstrate respect for the values of each one. He has a great chart showing the bases, strengths, and weaknesses of each group. He maintains that practicing virtues based on our values, we will generate energy to evolve as a culture. At the end he gives an exercise to outline your personal values and virtues. I just wish there had been more guidelines on how to get there on a group level.
September 13, 2024
I went into this book wanting to share it with others so throughout I had a critical mind anticipating summarizing and sharing the content. This was an incredibly dense read. It read a bit like a philosophy textbook, which perhaps was the point. The three stars are for the readability- it felt both not enough and also repetitive at times. However the content would be close to 5 stars. It allowed me to step away from my own polarized perspective by providing the history and challenges with the main political stances alive right now. It provided a lot to ponder and my hope is that I can find other books or videos or resources to continue this contemplation and better put into practical use in my own life. But this was a nice eye opener and I’m glad I spent the time getting through it.
May 27, 2022
required reading for anyone who cares about humanity
I’ve been a fan of Integral since the late 1990s, through Ken Wilber’s works, mainly, and I feel like Steve’s map of solutions to America’s perpetually gridlocked political state has a real chance of working if we really care to apply it. There are some minor typos/proofreading errors here and there (at least in the Kindle edition), which tend to bother me overmuch, but it is easy to see beyond them to the golden good that this book shines forth. Thank you, Steve.
I’ve been a fan of Integral since the late 1990s, through Ken Wilber’s works, mainly, and I feel like Steve’s map of solutions to America’s perpetually gridlocked political state has a real chance of working if we really care to apply it. There are some minor typos/proofreading errors here and there (at least in the Kindle edition), which tend to bother me overmuch, but it is easy to see beyond them to the golden good that this book shines forth. Thank you, Steve.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews