The Perils of Geometry for Integral Theory, Spiral Dynamics, and Developmental Psychology

In developmental models, there are several factors at play:

• A developmental hierarchy of stages of development
• A transcend and include meta model of including earlier stages and adding more features

This geometry can be misleading in that it presumes that a higher stage of development is "better" in all aspects from an earlier stage. However, let us take the example of red stage vs green stage. The current world situation seems to, for the moment, clearly indicate that red strategies are superior to green strategies in getting ownership of key decision making functional areas. Hence, red states / groups are far more effective in getting political, judicial, and legislative power compared to orange and green groups.

In terms of the spiral, more options are available as one progresses up the development chain. However, fewer options are available for lower level behaviors. Hence, a red person will have more red options then a green person as exemplified by the story below.

This is a fractal pattern. We generalize one improved measure / metric to thinking that all other measures are also improved. We can see this in all sort of different contexts:

• teachers are assumed to know everything and students little to nothing
• bosses / leaders are assumed to be able to make all decisions and explain why
• parents are supposed to be "right" all / most of the time
• ...

It reminds of a story a colleague once told us. In a public argument with a two year old, the two year may often win as it he/she will resort to whatever behavior will get him/her their desired outcome. This includes public tantrums, screaming, etc., etc. This, in a public place, will push the shame / guilt buttons of many adults to give in to a two year old's demands.