2017 September

Quote from Jordan Peterson

“I just received the following note from one of our Inner Circle members.  Below the note is my response.”


““The future is a judgmental father.” – Jordan Peterson

I liked this quote a lot.   Peterson is speaking of the masculine archtype.

It is a close to perfect example of the blue value basin.  If don’t have much density at blue (I don’t) it does give a visceral sense of the power/potential efficacy of the blue value structure.


Mike’s response:

““The future is a judgmental father.” – Jordan Peterson

I wonder about this as DQ-BLUE density…I would tend to think not with my understanding of the quote…father or perhaps judgmental father might point it at DQ-BLUE, but my sense is that it’s only been dumbed down to that language so we understand the metaphor;)


2017 September

Technical vs Adaptive Learning [1 Attachment]


Since Brian sent Kegan’s video…

Been looking at some terminology similar:

Single loop vs Double Loop
First Order vs Second Order
Information vs Transformation

I wish they would have chosen a different word than adaptive because I don’t have the relationship in my head between adaptive and transformative that they seem to proffer.

The idea being that adaptation is actually incremental rather than discontinuous change, but that’s just me.

The pdf attached is a short course, thought you might enjoy it for its brevity;)

2017 September


Well, the hardest–most counter-intuitive thing to GROK @F-L-O-W is the idea…

That there IS no composite standard for anyone to adhere too…excepting those which–are by default–accepted upon joining or being a part of any group.

“…the education and management of his character is the most important…”

This might be important to some but can’t be foist upon anyone because people are wired differently.

Until we get to the point where we can understand that people are motivated to different aspirants, the “strong” will continue to direct the weak.

Imagine this…some people maybe motivated to avoid “the above” or even “to be lazy….”

Now you can see why it’s difficult to apply a composite standard, and have it be “fair” to those who are motivated in an opposite direction–thus breaking down the libertarian model.

What about people who don’t want to work, learn, grow, or ANYTHING which we ascribe to be productive?

Should there be a minimum standard applied? Should people be forced against their “will” to be “normal?”

Hard questions when it comes to designing a “good society.”




Amazon on the Bubble

Back a number of years ago I passed along the now infamous GOOGLEZON video and I wish this was another one, but it’s not;)

It is however an interesting letter from the glass have empty side of things which has some important points, one about “timing of innovation that I think is interesting to our discussion about the unfolding of futures.

In fact, based on the true facts of the Amazon e-commerce juggernaut, I think Bezos’ assault on the brick-and-mortar sector would be far less menacing and reckless in that scenario. And that’s giving full credit to the fact that online shopping and nearly instant delivery of goods is an enormous consumer boon that would be making great inroads even in an honest free market.

But it wouldn’t happen nearly as rapidly or disruptively, because Amazon would be required to post a reasonable profit. And its stock price would reflect that reality, instead of riding the ridiculously false highs of Bubble Finance.”

This is an interesting point to validate a theme I tried to uncover @F-L-O-W, that it is the speed at which things are happening that is causing the problem, that the disruption per se.

Before I left the USA, Amazon was on a hiring binge around the country, so as these stores close, there will be work right behind them, but…

Me thinks that work that took a previous generation or two to build will be wiped out in the disruption and my guess is Amazon is not going to be hiring 45-55 year olds, the last of the boomers born around ’64or so.

I think stockman’ point about how Amazon and others have done what they have done at the speed at which it’s happens is where an issue lies in explaining and the only way to have stopped it would have been less freedom…go figure.

It’s worth reading because it’s helps us understand the “great polarity”…that’s what I’m calling what’s happening now–akin to times in the past where great forces have emerged and placed the world in tension between two poles of paradox where both are true.

This is not some ER-ORANGE runaway capitalism deep down, or a CP-RED opportunism vs. DQ-BLUE governance gambit…or less about FS-GREEN Equality and justice…no this is a great polarity, akin to a CIVIL WAR of the world’s where each side is being further sucked into the opposing black hole of values conflict, where like the generals of the civil war in the USA graduated from the same schools and were members of the same fraternity–forced now to fight against each other polarity!

Things around the world are being sucked into the black holes of this great polarity identified by good and evil, black and white, either/or, hot and cold and the splitting of veneers which have made the kalidescope of unfolding change.

THESE ARE THE EMERGING CONDITIONS which will create the momentous leap but in the process, the transition is going to be ugly, slipshod and disruptive among our wildest dreams, and worse, it might span two decades…ahhh that we have enjoyed so much, and paid so little, might finally find ourselves on our knees is the great irony after all;)



2017 June

The OECD Loves a High-Tax Welfare State – Foundation for Economic Education – Working for a free and prosperous world

Ok, I captured this one-liner to illustrate how “generators” work on data:

“If there was a ranking of international bureaucracies, the World Bank would be my favorite (or, to be more accurate, least unfavorite).”

You see, a “most bureaucratic generator” causes the World Bank to be the exemplar (in the author’s eyes), and by switching the generator to least bureaucratic, it’s his least favorite:


If GRAVES found no significant “intelligence difference” between any of the values designations then why are they ranked in an order of hierarchical complexity?

He used a “generator” on his data = relativism = FS-GREEN, or GT-YELLOW being the hierarchically most complex due to relativism.

Yet this creates a problem.

While societies “may” unfold in an increasingly more relativistic fashion, it doesn’t make them more complex, or more free (using degrees of freedom as a generator) per se.

Societies do not adhere to genetics, because there are no genes hardwired into societies, or cultures.

I’m starting to think that democracy is a mistake in nature as well, as a democracy is less fit for accelerating complexity, the standards for citizenship are too low.

Thinking that the more who participate evens out the lack of understanding is going to prove that democracy is a very narrow approach to governance, IMHO; one of those same narrow approaches disdained by the democratic, no less.

Generators are very important.

Conclusions for any set of data can be generated using a generator.

If Graves data would be reorganized as least relativistic, AN-BEIGE would be more hierarchically valued, and in survival conditions, it is almost always the best.

Each set of conditions generates “best-fit” values, thus under any condition, the best fit will always emerge as the most hierarchically complex because those claimed to be more hierarchically complex stand on particular conditions being present.


No rule of law, ER-Orange is not fit, FS-GREEN can’t protest.

While it’s oversimplified, it does falsify the ideas put forward that values are hierarchically complex and that it’s best that all humans or societies should proceed through all levels incrementally to reach the most complex level it can.

If you reinterpret Graves Research using a different generator, you will find that the values basins he discovered do in fact exist and are durable, not because people choose them, but they are reflections of hardwired motives and thus chose us in many hybridized forms, but nonetheless, a core Attractor can be seen in all of us–hybridizing and adapting our core attraction to map through the current or “expected” conditions.

The KEY @F-L-O-W has three facets:

1. is to identify which core attractors are going to serve your hardwired motives and look for conditions to cue, support, scaffold and lift you favorably.

2. Noting where conditions require you to complement, supplement and delegate MITEAM to satifice conditions that are outside of your core hybridization.

3. While this is a fractional approach, it’s collaborative by default thus providing you with your cake and the opportunity to enjoy it too.


2017 June

ValuDYNAMICS Q&A: Tiers, Beers and Fears

Question (Jim Bower):

Would you agree that the Tier 1 value basins (Red, Blue, Orange, Green) are essentially hardwired into people at the individual level, similar to intrinsic motives?

And those value basin biases generally do not morph / change much over a life time. ???

Answer: (060617)

This is very tricky for me.

What I mean is you might say that… and like sausage be ok, but here’s how I would say it back in the sausage-making room.

Values are not hardwired per se.

But our adherence to those core values are durable over time.


Values are emergent from hardwired motives, so there is plasticity in that, as say a person like me motivated by self-confidence (low acceptance), competitiveness (vengeance), self-reliance (low family), independence, novelty (low order), expedience (low honor), and romance (lust), sloth (low physical exercise), trailer-park (low status), insular (low social contact), controlling (power) and curiousr grows up in Mitchell, NEBRASKA or Madison, Wisconsin, or San Diego, California (birthplace), or Manila, Philippines, each place dominated by a different core vMEME.

Now, throw in, nodal blue depression-era grandparents for the first 3 years, and a Marine Corporal father on top.

Is there any doubt that the CP-RED core serves the young Mitchell Mike well, and is both reinforced and “civilized” through the bounded conditions?

Without a doubt.

But, were those values hardwired?

Not likely.


Which means that the claim by Spiral Dynamics(R) channeling of Graves (SGD) that it is the interaction between neurology and conditions, both really big catch-all terms, remains valid.

But the spiraling–while largely depicted in current reality as unfolding developmentally in a more hierarchically complex form mirrors those societies that were left largely undisturbed and uninfluenced directly through connectedness to other more advanced cultures–to include interbreeding.

Those cultures–like Graves Talisay (Philippines), as example–claimed to be isolated and was not spiraling into a more complex form; although more recent depictions of the “Talisay” questions the validity of that example.

I have to bring this into the picture because I have not found in my studies any culture that is not hybridized by influences to the neurology and conditions in individuals or the broader constitution of the culture.

Individuals, as well as culture have a memory, however in different forms, such that those memories become part of what’s durable.

[The reason that the SGD values basins remains relevant to me is supported through the idea of Jungian Archetypes, fyi. While not a direct fit, emergent forms show hybridization potential of the core algorithms in and among the basins, so fewer core basins are required to emerge more archetypes which are durable in and of themselves but still remain coherent to the core algorithms of those basins).]

Rather than unfolding more hierarchically complex, the development is a network of “core values basins” whose algorithmic value is that certain neurology tends to favor particular conditions and vice versa where fit is unlikely to produce anything but hybrids retaining the core values.

Said more simply, certain problems are best solved by certain solutions.

[While all problem solving leaves areas of unsolved problems and creates areas where new problems couldn’t have emerged without partial solutions, certain problems are more efficiently, effectively and sustainably solved in certain ways, and that combination is what makes things both durable and hybrid in and over time.]

I named these core values “attractor basins” to bring them into sync with the smaller and larger worlds of quantum mechanics.

I believe that Spiral Dynamics did a good job in encapsulating Graves Research and life-long work hence I refer to this System as Spiral Gravesian Dynamics and try to retain Graves Notation which is responsible for the emergent vMEMEs or “colors” used in Spiral Dynamics. (For the record, I hesitate to use SD acronym because SD actually belongs to System Dynamics which was evolving prior to Spiral Dynamics and my LeaderW@RE meta System uses both to explain largely why core values are emergent from core motives, and the values are not hardwired, although it takes yards of explaining to say that!

Depending on the “stocks and flows” of your hardwiring and the stocks and flows of conditions, the emergent values will hold varying density and frequency, which at times may color the veneers showing up as emergent from the core value system, especially in those who have fewer motives hardwired–less energy according to Reiss (IMPORTANT IMHO)–and find fit with high density and frequency with their feet in a single basin and no need to dance around between them.

One unasked question remains for the uninitiated to this ENTP party–yes both Mike and Jim are ENTPs and each “classic” but why is their behavior so different; vastly different–and that is the central question of “plasticity” or genetic guidance?

Or are type dynamics yet another doorway into BIAS DYNAMICS which has to be considered as a major player in plasticity or genetic guidance…in typical ENTP fashion?

Here’s a note that is helpful as I leave the reader to further dangle….

SGD identifies 8 core vMEMES which I refer to as “core values attractor basins” where power laws exist as a part of network dynamics.

Imagine this:


While the first depicts the simple emergence of values according to the SGD generator as a hierarchically more complex system, the other (a graphic of the internet) depicts what is more likely the network dynamics that reflects a non-hierarchical, yet more complex view of emergent values.

If you step back from SGD and realize that the values hierarchy is generated by the algorithms that shaped it, you realize that it’s a small fit to a large reality and while it helps us grok certain aspects of reality, it precludes us from understanding the bigger picture in detail.

If we do the iron man holographic sequence with Jarvis we toss away most of that which doesn’t fit and reinterpret the mechanics to get a much larger fit.

So dump the values hierarchy except as a theoretical notion that as cultures become older they tend to integrate more and are forced to cooperate due to size.

In the individual this is not true at all because, as the original question pointed out, the 1st tier values seem hardwired, and for practical purposes might seem so.

Yet, what do we keep?

[Unlike Wilber, a close Beck Coordinator, who “rewrote” the System by adding and changing and moving the colors to avoid the Spiral Dynamics copyright, technically ok, but morally repugnant to avoid mention of the ideas he appropriated, I chose to recognize the decades of work that Wilber dodged–and it’s important to call out his action for the uninformed, lest time credit Wilber with anything original;).]

Let’s keep and acknowledge the 8 vMEMES and reconfigure them as attractor basins.















Now, let’s discuss tiers, to unpack the assumptions behind Jim’s Question and Mike’s Answer.

Graves indicated that the Tiers were 6×6 and that was:

—-Tier 1








—-Tier 2








So why did Jim just ask about four?

Graves noted a distinct difference in intelligence between BO-PURPLE and CP-RED and stated there was NO INTELLECTUAL DIFFERENCE AMONG THE REST, this included GT-YELLOW, according to my knowledge.

However, I have found there IS AN INTELLECTUAL DIFFERENCE suggested between the tiers and because we are “iron (man) ing” out the differences and evolution, and me being a big fan of DNA, it made intuitive sense to separate the tiers differently. While it might appear that the Gravesian Octaves did return with the ability to attract and replicate density and frequency from an earlier tier, it was muted, such that GT-YELLOW is a warm basin, where it’s precursor CP-RED (in my rendition) is hot at the core.


—-Tier 0






—-Tier 1






—-Tier 2





At the demarcations (this is VERY IMPORTANT) between Tiers, intelligence, or at the minimum; hierarchical complexity of some significant difference exists. If you have lived in cultures where the dominant core Values Attractor Basins (cVAB) were not yet Tier 1 (in the Jay Re-Interpretation), you will not argue.

As to the debatable difference between Tier 1 and 2 (some have overreached with Tier 3 designations, but their need for height shows how short they are, IMHO) lies a hardwired difference in fluid intelligence or Hierarchical Complexity (HC). (I’ll wait for the question to come.)

While I could continue to answer Jim’s question, let’s see if Jim reframes or clarifies his next question.


If anyone else has a question, it’s time to start the book.


Now you know why the Bible starts at the beginning;)


Ps: I have the format for the ValuDYNAMICS Book now and I was inspired by how easy it is to frame my thinking in response to inquiry and as the Krishnamuti Dialogues proved with Bohm and the Interviews with Nisargadatta Maharaj showed that this mode can be very beneficial as a narrative, and it works well for me, so what will be key will be really hard questions and those questions that follow from the answers I construct.

Obviously this opens a can of worms, but I’m feeling like there is soul in soil these days, as Dr. Manya predicted from my astrology:)



2017 May

A Brief History of Happiness: How America Lost Track of the Good Life—and Where to Find It Now

Anyone read this?

Biology can explain but not excuse our worst behavior. Testosterone may drive a vicious warlord, but social triggers shape his actions.”



2017 April

A New Tribalism Spreads in Donald Trump’s Washington – WSJ

Interesting way to combat complexity which ties back into a notion of mine that we DO NOT TRANSCEND AND INCLUDE, but network for fitness.

Fractionalization is emergent from fitness to a set of conditions which does not then, extend to a more complex set of conditions–iow–just because ur fit at one level doesn’t mean you will remain fit across levels; each level or basin of attractors having its own criteria.

This recursion at purple(?) indicates that fitness is more specific rather than general so “dropping out of integration” where fitness ebbs produces flow!

An interesting notion because this meyatransition would indicate that “CP-RED” is offering fitness again;)


2017 March

Maker City: A Practical Guide for Reinventing American Cities | KurzweilAI

Something Graves missed…

“Maker City: A Practical Guide for Reinventing American Cities is a comprehensive case studies and how-to information useful for city leaders, civic innovators, nonprofits, and others engaged in urban economic development. Maker City: A Practical Guide for Reinventing American Cities is committed to going beyond stories to find patterns and discern promising practices to help city leaders … more…

Something that I have been considering for some time is how 2nd Tier comes for the masses?

The path is in this metatheme:


Now the mode with which that occurs is technology.

If we were to go back (I’m sure someone has already done this) and look at broad spectrum technological innovation, we would see the “markers” necessary for memetic evolution.

What the author points to is one of those broad spectrum evolutions…and that’s what is required for GT-YELLOW conditions to emerge because the world is stuck and the current civil war is about existential fear on the far left and the far right–whose values are mobilizing the end of First Tier.

The question I have is will the end of first tier be the end of man;)

The polarization occurring is setting up the conditions where all systems devolve into a FT (First Tier) cul de sac…with no way out.1

The only way out, to borrow a phrase…”is not to play.”



2017 February

Green vs. faux green

“I just received the following note from one of our Inner Circle members.  Below the note is my response.”

I would argue this is indicative of the green basin (vs.  faux green expression).   Build a political platform on these sentiments and you are dead on arrival.

Mike’s response:

Unpack this some.