In a previous issue of Holons (the Integral Institute's free newsletter), Pavlina's blog was rated Turquoise, the highest developmental level they offer for blogs (meaning that it is more expansive and has more depth than other lower altitude blogs -- altitude indicates the level of development of any particular perspective). Some people objected to this, notably Julian at Zaadz and Colin Bigelow, Ken Wilber's right hand man. I tended to agree with those concerns.
Naturally, there has been a bit of discussion around this issue in the integral blogosphere. However, it seems that no one asked Pavlina for his point of view. D'Oh! That seems like such a direct approach.
So, finally, Pavlina weighed in on the whole thing over at Joe Perez's Until blog. Having read his response, I'm in 90% agreement with his point of view -- my only concern would be that he show more discretion in pushing material/views that can be damaging.
Anyway, here is a taste of his defense:
Understand that my website gets about 2 million visitors a month -- with people at all different stages of development. That's very different than talking to a room of 50 integrally minded people.You can read the whole discussion and the rest of Pavlina's response over at Joe's blog.
If I write only for the highest stages, which I could do, I'll help only a small fraction of my audience. I believe that would be an enormously suboptimal strategy if the conscious development and expansion of all is our goal. For most people it will be way over their heads -- no impact whatsoever. At best it will only make them aware that there is something out there they aren't ready for yet. But why not assist people where they are?
Consequently, I do not hold to the perspective of a fixed stage when I write articles or recommend products. I intentionally shift between different frequencies of the integral spectrum when I write. Sometimes I'll even blend the viewpoints of different stages into the same article, which is probably why people have such trouble classifying me from my articles. A 5-minute face-to-face conversation would be much more enlightening. The reason I write from different stages is because it's far more effective than writing from a single stage. I can assist a lot more people this way, not just those who are very close to me in their path of development.
Tags:
8 comments:
I post coments strickly from the lowest possible level of developement because it can be understood by anyone. This stratagey I call "nobody left behind" and it is effective across the board as everyone has access
to the level of the writing no matter how stupid I think they are.
I can see Buddha and others ranking up a list of where they are on the spiritual development ladder, and then writing to defend themselves if their writings are not taken in the vein that they (and some others) perceive them to be at.
thanks for the heads up bro. i agree with Pavlina as well. i have a feeling that he’s more complex than what the “integral” peeps think of him.
This statement by Pavlina at his website undoes everything he says in his defense, so far as I am concerned.
"So if the Law of Attraction is so powerful, then I'd better have some results to show for it, right? I primarily focused on attracting financial and business improvements since they're easily measurable. In the six months after watching The Secret, my income increased from $8,000 per month to $40,000 per month. What's amazing about this is that I didn't work any harder than usual; in fact, I've been enjoying more time off. Just as the teachers in The Secret reported, new opportunities started coming out of the woodwork. Other people picked up the phone and called me. I didn't do anything special to seek them out, aside from keeping my thoughts focused on attracting new opportunities."
Integral is understanding and appreciating other levels, not writing testamonials for first-level beliefs systems that are contrary to what you, yourself believe.
Tom,
Yeah, that is troubling. I'm not a fan of Pavlina in any real sense, although I do find some of his posts useful.
I liked his explanation of things at Joe's blog. But he has to walk the walk, not just talk the talk.
Peace,
Bill
Steve Pavlina lives in a fantasy world. I find that his replies to any questions that require critical thought are almost always stupid, simplistic, and fantastical.
Yeah, since this post was written, I have come to see Pavlina as a hypocrite and a materialist pawn in the machine.
He does not walk the talk he spouted back then this was posted.
LMFAO
Post a Comment