Friday, July 30, 2010

Michelle Chase - Between Attack and Accommodation: Integrally Redefining “Devil’s Advocate” - #itc2010

Last night Sean mentioned we might want to seek out presentation by folks we may not know well - this is one of those hidden/unknown diamonds to whom he was referring. Michelle gave an excellent presentation on a very important topic.

Here is the abstract:
Michele Chase, Ph.D., John F. Kennedy University: Between Attack and Accommodation: Integrally Redefining “Devil’s Advocate.”

Examining the role of critique in Integral Land we find on one hand claims that idea exchange is harsh, pointed, and sometimes rude, and on the other serious charges that the community is cult-like, closed to true inquiry, and in need of dialectic and true critique. This presentation reviews textual forms of academic critique, applied to analysis of published and unpublished writing in the Integral Community. Possible
explanations for particular textual forms are offered, including developmental levels, and together we’ll engage in suggesting new textual forms for critique that would further inquiry and scholarship from an Integral perspective.

Michele Chase directs the MA in Holistic Health Education at JFKU. She applies her background in textual discourse analysis to studying communicative contexts in health promotion and in Integral Land. Her current project is a study of subtle energy-related words, metaphors, and meanings, especially related to perspectives on healing.
* * *

She began with the Wild Earp episode from Wilber - Was it a good idea to attack so provocatively his critics? Was this a form of integral critique? Or was it simply a temper tantrum? (My questions.)

She also identifies the reasons we might not be willing to be critical - including personality type, gender, stage, fear of "tearing down," etc.

Is there a relationship between level of development and how we critique?

Wilber says yes - crosstalk - failure to hear each other, especially in first tier.

Some of the Main Points:
  • She began her main point with it means to take a stand, to stand for something.
  • Truth claims - can you own your truths?
  • Taking a stand is solid, defensive or offensive.
  • Maybe we should take a stance, as in Tai Chi - more fluid, open.
  • Taking a stance transcends attack and defend, or even something happening.
  • We need a "community of we" where stances are examined and built upon, rather than criticized and destroyed.
  • Embrace our cognitive dissonance - it creates an opening for new ideas.
  • Embrace multiple levels/stages in integral culture - creates tension that generates growth, new ideas, other perspectives.
  • Integral inquiry is essentially a "we space."
I'll have much more to say on this presentation when I have time - Michelle offered me her notes from the presentation and has graciously allowed me to site from her paper (linked to above).

For now, I'm off to hear Roger Walsh.

No comments: