Q&A Session with Ken Wilber
In his loft in Denver, March 4th, 2010

Questions created among the Spanish Integral Community

Interview Transcribed by Raquel Torrent,
President of Honor of the Spanish Integral Association

Raquel: How do you feel Ken? Talk to us about your health.

Ken: Well, you know I have a chronic fatigue syndrome. It’s an immune disease where cells lose the capacity to generate protein. It’s so debilitating. At this time we just can’t do anything. Doctors don’t know much about it. Their patients are misdiagnosed and they suffer horribly. It is despairing. We are just assuming that the seizures come because of bad diagnosis. Apparently, it attacks the limbic system, which is the place that seizures originate. So we’re just going with that. We don’t know if the seizures will come back. It truly could be lethal. The first two times I was in a coma for two days and when I came out doctors said they’ve never seen someone come so close to dying and then recuperate like I did. If I had started getting a series of seizures in my sleep they could just kill me, because it wouldn’t be noticed until the morning.

After the first series of seizures, they put me on Dylanton. It’s a drug for seizures. It’s been around forever. It doesn’t have any side effects. People even take it for longevity, so I got on it after the first series, but then I had a second series. They checked my blood level for the presence of the drug and it was extremely low, nowhere near anything that would be therapeutic; so I wasn’t absorbing it well. I had various blood tests and they finally adjusted the amount to take until we got it up to a therapeutic range. We’re assuming that that’s what’s protecting me. It’s very strange, this chronic fatigue immune deficiency syndrome. I don’t get colds I don’t get flus, so just this one illness. That’s why seizures were surprising and really quite an ordeal.

Raquel: Are you afraid that they might come back?

Ken: What I care about is the long term side effects that appear afterwards. It feels like I’m having a flare-up of chronic fatigue and it is just constant. That concerns me more than anything, because it doesn’t seem to be getting any better and that’s very annoying. I’m accustomed to work many hours and now I just can’t. The good news is that I haven’t had seizures for a long time, but I just sort of feel that I won’t. It just doesn’t feel intuitively that I will.

Raquel: Do you know Ortega y Gasset’s theory of Perspectivism and, if so (due to the fact that he shared with Gebser in Madrid’s cultural circles in the Second Republic,) do you think it has something to do with Gebser’s Aperspectivism, which you have finally adopted in your Integral model?

Ken: Well yes, I think there are some similarities with that. His perspectivism, looking at it from an integral perspective, is a structure that comes after the rational perspectivism. With rational perspectivism you can take perspective for the first time, but you’re also stuck in a particular perspective. While if you are in the integral perspective you are wide open to other different perspectives, because integral means that you hold it together. That clearly had an influence on me to some degree. I was one of the first to read Gebser in English and talk about him, so when I wrote Up from Eden I explicitly used his material. I introduced a lot of people to Gebser. He was great; he was just brilliant. I would have liked to see him live longer into his 60’s and 70’s because he would have had a lot to say. That’s why when I first found his stuff it was just obvious for me: I just knew he was basically right. And now it turns out that there are some things he gets right and some things not so right, but nevertheless he’s a pioneer.

His highest level is, of course, really just one of four or so higher levels. He does tend to sort or mix turquoise integral together with green. He doesn’t really get levels and lines and he doesn’t get states at all. But what he was doing at the time was really important in order to understand altitude, the existence of levels of worldviews. Something like that hadn’t been really done yet. He tried to make structures encompass everything that was happening, so all the different levels are put together and so he would treat art, religion and mathematics all as one. So you’re at magic. Everything is magic. If you’re mythic, everything is mythic and that is just not it. But getting those major altitudes was really good stuff for the time being.

Raquel: Shadow work–why is it not another element, the 6th?

Ken: It is essentially just a dysfunction of two of the other five. It’s just what goes wrong in developmental levels when something is dissociated or split off. It is not a separate inherent entity itself but what happens when something goes wrong.

Raquel: Does tetrameshing imply causal processes? If so, could an underlying structure be described in order to establish a causal order among quadrants? For example, is it similar (although more complex) to when classical Marxists defend the Lower-Right quadrant (base) while determining and restricting Lower-Left (superstructure)?

Ken: Not really. The reason is that these four are hooked together in what I call tetrameshing. The four quadrants are four different perspectives on tetrameshing. If you have just a single structure that is looked at through a single perspective it is either a first or a second or a third person perspective, but this is all three of those–first, second and third perspectives of the quadrants. There is not a single structure that you can describe, because it is not a single perspective; it’s four perspectives. All emerge at the same time.

It looks like a causal event is happening, because there are four dimensions of the same thing. If something happens in the lower right it is going to appear also in the lower left and in the upper right and the upper left. But you can also start describing the event in the upper right and then say that is going to have effects in all the other quadrants at the same time. What can happen is that sometimes one of the quadrants is more noticeable or stands out the most, but there is still something going on in all four quadrants simultaneously. You can focus on one of them and attract something that is happening in the lower right, but something is happening simultaneously in the lower left and also in the other two quadrants. It’s just a single event that you can look at from these different perspectives.

Raquel: Will you release an updated compilation of lines, types, of all quadrants (à la Hargens in “An Overview of Integral Theory,” Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, March 2009)? And if, as Hargens said, “each line within a quadrant has correlates in the other quadrants” (10.) shouldn’t they then be defined as “meta-lines of development” or would that include all correlated lines of all the different quadrants?

Ken: No, that can be found in volume II of the Kosmos Trilogy, the volume after Sex, Ecology and Spirituality, from which I put several excerpt up on line: excerpts A, B, C. It is not yet published as a book. As I told you in the last Spanish Integral Conference, I am preparing five books that are almost finished. They are about 90% done.

Regarding the “meta lines of development,” yeah, you certainly can call them that. There are mental lines and levels of the mental lines. There you have correlates in all the other quadrants. For example, if we have the mental lines of moral development in the upper left, then in the upper right there are certain brain states that are going on and in the lower left this is occurring in a particular group of individuals. Yet, in the lower right what is occurring is being expressed in a determined manner in those groups. So, yes it does have correlates all the way around.

Raquel: How can we interpret Jung’s collective unconscious and archetypes from an integral point of view? Is there something like a pre-structure of collective energy that is universal and timeless?

Ken: Jung’s archetypes are not the archetypes that the perennial philosophy talks about, like Plato or Plotinus. An archetype is the first form in manifestation. In Plato, for example, it is described as a geometric form, triangles, squares and circles, and so on. In Buddhism there is the Vasanas, which is some form of collective memory. For Jung, though, when he was looking at these mythic forms they seemed to him to be some sort of primary forms.

Just because in the developmental sequence we find archaic, magic, mythic, rational, pluralistic, etc., where mythic is one of the most noticeable levels, when we go back and we look at the primitive tribes and so on, what we see are mythic forms with their mythic roles, there were God’s and Goddesses. But those aren’t really archetypes in the perennial sense. Those are simply roles that you have available at the magic and mythic levels of development. So they’re more like prototypes in Jung, just roles coming into existence in fulcrum 3 and fulcrum 4. Therefore, some of them are magic, some of them are mythic, but they are just magic and mythic forms that come into being. Their capacity to be those forms is universal, but what it changes is their surface structures. They vary. They look different from culture to culture, but there is nothing particularly spiritual about them. They confuse the fact that it was collective with it being transpersonal when is not. Collectively we all inherit ten toes. If I experience my toes, I’m not necessarily having a mystical experience; so it’s not necessarily transpersonal.

Surely that was a pioneering way to look at it. They were operating under the assumption that there is a surface consciousness that was rational, egoic and conventional. When you do that kind of stuff, freely associating those kinds of things, then you get down to what Freud called a primary process. That was just anything that was not rational, not egoic, so his primary process was magical/mythical thinking. Freud made the assumption that such was the first form of thinking. Jung agreed with that, with the exception that he didn’t want to interpret it as just being infantile. What started their big falling out was that argument when Freud said, “Never give up the libido theory!” Jung asked, “Why?” Freud said, “Because it protects us against the black mud of the tide of occultism.” Then Jung said, “Well, that’s all I was in reality interested in.”

Jung wrote a book named Symbols of Transformation, which was a complete break with Freud’s view of the libido. He wanted to see these symbols as the source of the mystical, contemplative and transpersonal awareness and it just is not. They are just the earliest forms of conventional thinking, but they’ve happened a long time ago. They’re not available to us as surface forms except when we’re ages 4, 5 or 6; then it comes out every day. Not all consciousness has form. As a matter of fact, a lot of states are unconscious or formless states, states of unmanifested cessation. States of consciousness are neither pre nor trans because they can be experienced as pre or trans. It is what we call para consciousness because it is to the side of consciousness. Even if you are in a formless state and you start to experience form it doesn’t have to be just in the Jungian mythic form type. It can be states of luminosity or geometrical forms or any number of forms. You can have collective experiences at any level that is not necessarily transpersonal.

Raquel: In which way do you think that would affect your vision of life if you were to have a a brief immersion in the Brazilian favelas, the Bolivian highlands, the Mayan communities, the paisants of Guatemala or the big trash cemeteries of Mexico City?

Ken: Those situations are essentially mythic in structure so there is nothing necessarily transpersonal about those forms. Therefore, living in any of those situations I would say that there is nothing spiritual per se. You have to look and see what states of consciousness they are, also, and that’s very hard to trap to figure out. Most of them have had shamanic forms of religion and that is a subtle state of experience, little evidence of causal (emptiness) and very little evidence of non-dual (suchness). So, these subtle realms, overworlds and underworlds, were the shamanic realities basically in what they’ve lived in–and those are fine. It is just that they’re not terribly advanced. They’re only advanced in comparison to gross states. Those were the essential structures of most of the early civilizations which were mythic in form and subtle in their states.

The poverty situations that are lived in those places have an unshakeable effect on people, whether they go there or to some places like Calcutta where the suffering is also suffocating because it’s so intense. In Calcutta you would have parents blind their children because blind beggars make more money and that is because they think that’s the only way they can assure them some future. It’s just hard to imagine the type of suffering that goes on there. So compassion is something you want to maintain while looking at them.

When talking of Buddha there is the Absolute Bodhichitta and the Relative Bodhichitta. Bodhichitta means essentially the enlightened mind. The Absolute Bodhichitta is emptiness and the relative Bodhichitta is compassion. So emptiness is the ultimate ground and then compassion is the actual activity or manifestation. That is why to manifest compassion is the only reality of consciousness–because the world is full of that suffering. To the Absolute all this is an illusion anyway, but it also wants individuals to wake up so it has compassion in that sense. But everything is a dream anyway and if you want to have a dream of having 5000 people starving, there are two ways you can get rid of the suffering. One is that in the dream you start feeding them all and the second way is to wake up. Tonglen, the compassionate exchange, is something that I am aware of because I do a lot of it, but surely sometimes I am more compassionate than others. But, of course, if you are connected directly with suffering–like living in those places or seeing it because you go there–you feel it more directly. That’s why Westerners really don’t know how good they have it.

Raquel: How can we understand the meaning of deterioration from an Integral perspective (looking at it from a spiritual consciousness)?

Ken: Things evolve or tend to evolve in a process of transcend and include. When they transcend and include they become larger and larger and more complex entities. The interesting thing to notice is that when any holon deteriorates it goes right back down in the same order. When cells deteriorate into molecules, then molecules will deteriorate into atoms and then atoms into quarks. They reverse the path that evolution created when they go up levels. So deterioration is reverse evolution. It is just undoing what was done. Involution is actually an intentionality to move from the higher into the lower. Deterioration is something that simply happens for various reasons–the holon is attacked or is in life circumstances that are beyond its capacity to respond or it lives its life cycle out and for whatever reason it just starts coming apart.

Raquel: Is the Integral Diet without meat or animal derivates? Do you think that the ecological diet is a fallacy?

Ken: Well, you can have an integral diet with or without meat. There are numerous reasons to have a meatless diet and many of them are economic, because it takes an enormous amount of grain to feed a cow and to get it to the point to produce a pound of protein. It requires something like a hundred pounds of grain for one pound of protein. So in terms of hunger for the world it is a big waste. Meat is a big, big economic waste. It’s very expensive to produce meat for food. Then there is all the garbage that goes into meat, as well as a lot of medical reasons for avoiding it, for example the disposition of our intestines not being prepared to digest it. I’ve seen approaches to this that make sense to me and they are approaches that use your genetic or blood background to determine if you need a lot of meat, some meat or no meat at all. Islanders live on fruit, while Tibetans practically all eat meat. The Dalai Lama gets very ill if he stops eating meat. It just makes sense to me that we come from different lineages and therefore we have different needs.

Generally speaking, the less that you do in raising crops, the better in order to create healthier and more natural food. For example, pesticides stay in the food. Then you eat them and that’s very bad for your health. Also antibiotics are probably not good. A lot of food is radiated and I know that’s not healthy. So I’m just suspicious about what they do. So that’s why I say the less they do to food, the more ecological in general, probably the better. And another thing–whether you believe it or not–it is impossible to tell if they are really growing what they say are ecological crops or eggs or feed for animals. A lot of this is just men without ethics.

Raquel: Is God the first and last holon? Would that be another manner of expressing the Alpha and the Omega?

Ken: In involution God is one of the first holons. God is the great Thou in the lower left quadrant. Vedanta has that out of emptiness or Narjuna Brahma comes Sajuna Brahma, the Brahma with form. The one that they used more is Ishvara. So this is in the lower left. Along with that is the first I-I, the first Atman. In the right hand quadrant is Prakriti, which is the fundamental matter of the Universe. All of those appear at once, so when you put the four quadrants over emptiness that #8217;s the first thing that comes out.

Raquel: Have you contacted paranormally with Treya?

Ken: That’s an interesting question. I felt that the night that she died, while I was doing Tibetan practices from the Book of the Dead, I felt that she was literally present during that–all through that morning and during the next day. Then I felt that there was some sort of release. I do think about her often, but I don’t have paranormal experiences of that sort. It is more that she’s part of me.

Raquel: Which would be the three things you would be doing in case you would be able to govern the world?

Ken: First would be to institute some form of world economy and secondly some form of world police so that we can stop crimes against humanity. We have to be able to re-enforce that to stop genocides in Africa, terrorism in the Middle East, etc. Therefore, we have to have some type of police force. Third, we would have a world Spirituality where people can start in any religion they want. But they are like dual citizens, so they understand that any of these faiths are essentially equal, and that there is a difference in growing structures from magical, mythical, rational as well as growing states like gross, subtle, causal, pure awareness and non-dual. Both are important, but they are different. So I would say that I would introduce a contemplative dimension into the world through education.

Raquel: What would it mean to be an Integral educator?

Ken: It is just to realize that there is more than one dimension to human beings and also more than one type of intelligence. We need to educate all of the multiple intelligences. We need to educate ethical and emotional, musical, mathematical, interpersonal. We also need body and spirit. Probably it is the same concept of the Gymnasium that the old Greeks had but it certainly has to do with educating body, mind and spirit. The mind is just one aspect of cognitive intelligence. When we say mind and spirit, we are seeing them as levels but they can also be lines.

Raquel: Is life real? Talk to us about the miracle of life and in particular human life. Is it just a dream, an illusion like the Hindus say?

Ken: I have to give you the paradoxical answer about any manifestation and that is yes and no. From the relative point of view it’s real. We see it real, it feels real, we think it as real and from the absolute point of view is illusory and just a magical display of luminous play or form of the Spirit’s own manifestation for sports and play. That’s the meaning of the word Maya. If things are seen apart from the Spirit, which is what we usually do, then they appear real. But if they can be seen as a manifestation of the Spirit, then they are just a creative manifestation of the Spirit. And that’s basically what you want to do–wake up to the Spirit and see the whole manifested realms as just a dazzling creative play of the deepest Self. And there is only One Self, One Spirit doing it all.

Raquel: What aspects of your personality do you consider that have favored the development of your model and which ones have specifically complicated it?

Ken: Clearly my intellectual intelligence has favored it; the cognitive is how you are able to see perspectives, how you take the role of others, recognize patterns, see all these perspectives and how to put them together integrating them. What has complicated it…there are some intelligences that I haven’t developed. But they are not dysfunctional either, as I see it. But if I have to say something I would say that what has complicated it more is the interpersonal at the egocentric and emotional level.

Raquel: How has the relationship with the feminine influenced your theory ?

Ken: Theoretically, I give it absolute balance with the masculine in the four drives and every holon in agency and communion, Eros and Agape. Theoretically, I equate them. In terms of my own being I don’t think I’m overly emotional, but I do think that I’m sensitive. I do see what other people are seeing. I can feel what they’re feeling. It is sensitivity and that’s a type of emotion, so theoretically absolutely and personally more than the average guy. I know that people say that there are not many women around me in the Integral movement. Apart from the fact that that’s not so true, we have to bear in mind that men have historically been the pioneers of all new things. For example, when the Internet started there were about a 60% of male users. Yet, right now the integral psychology course at John F. Kennedy University is 60% women; it’s true that it did start male but it’s been shifting.

Raquel: How could an Integral Politics be initiated having in mind that it should be a multinational or transnational process?

Ken: Well, we just don’t know. At some point we see that it’s just going to take a long, long time. But like Habermas says, human beings don’t just stand up next to each other, they stand next to each other and try to understand each other. So, there is a drive, an Eros, a tendency to unify in better forms of social interaction. Ultimately, this means that there will be some sort of World Federation and we won’t get Integral Politics until we get a World Federation. That’s going to take at least a hundred years, but we are starting to see signs like in the European Union–countries coming together for the benefit of the whole even though they lose their sovereignty. That’s the idea of a Federation. It is a slow process. It will take a while, but in that case we will be able to start having an Integral Politics. Integral Politics is going to be a leader down phenomena, because there are not too many people at these higher levels. So it’s going to have to come from leadership at these higher levels. Then people will trust them and vote for them and they will institute an integral framework. I wouldn’t like to do it myself, but I don’t have the energy. If I would have, I suppose I would only do it in case there was a huge demand. Then I may consider it, but it is not something that I would choose to do.

Raquel: Why are they not letting Obama govern?

Ken: It has to do with the structures of Washington, DC. They’re so embedded into this two party system–Republicans or Democrats. Those two parties are killing him. Whenever he comes out with something that is fairly integral, whichever is left out the most gets crappy, absolutely crappy. When he started he was a little bit naïve about how easy it would be to get some of these comprehensive and balanced programs across. It has surprised him and his followers that the door was slammed in his face as hard as it was and so he can’t get hardly anything done. It’s so bipartisan. So two party system!!! It’s just a lousy way to do it.

The problem with the Democrats is that they are so fragmented that they don’t have a real strength and ability to support Obama as a whole force. When the liberal philosophy was introduced in the West during the Western Enlightenment the liberals actually sat on the left side of the Parliament. That’s why they were called the left wing. That’s where everything started. Then there were only two parties–either left or right, either liberal or conservative. And that’s what it was during most of a hundred years. But then, as evolution continued, and Green started to emerge, all of a sudden the liberals, the avante guard, leading edge, moved into Green. The other half of the Democrats stayed at Orange.

Then here we have the Republicans, who used to be just Amber. Half of them stayed Amber and half of them moved to Orange. So the problem is that it is harder to get Green and Orange together than it is to get Orange and Amber together. So the Republicans more or less pull together when they have to, but the Democrats are a mess–the postmodern culture creatives and the old time liberals, those Orange enlightenment liberals. They just don’t get along well at all.

They wouldn’t form a party together if they had to in case we had a parliamentary system. The Green would separate entirely and then there would be a Green party and an Orange party. And the thing is that there is nothing these individuals can do to change their level of consciousness and, therefore, change the situation. When you are at Green, you’re Green. That’s how you’re going to see the world and you can’t change that. This is the reason why we’re stuck with this Democratic party that has to be the leading edge–having half of them as Green and half of them are not–they load each other. Therefore, Obama is not looking happy. He has even lost a lot of weight. There are certainly parts of the Republican Party, particularly in Amber fundamentalism, that have a tendency to think in a Fascist way. So the shadow of Fascism is there. Therefore, they are ethnocentric and militaristic and patriarchal and Biblical in their orientation. You know they are one way and one way only, so they tend toward this Fascism a lot. It’s about one quarter of the members of Congress. So we have this engrained two party system and it is not working. I really don’t know what’s going to happen.

Raquel: How can we transform a Green consciousness to a second tier one?

Ken: It’s hard enough to transform an adult if they want, but if they don’t want it’s just almost impossible. So how do you get someone out from Green? I guess by doing an Integral Transformative Practice or Integral Life Practice and working on transforming. But not many politicians are willing to do that, so we just get stuck with people being at these levels. There is not much we can do about it. We’re stuck in seeing what happens, but without a means to really change it. What is going to happen is that slowly Green is going to move into second tier and then we’ll have like 10 or 15 per cent of the population at second tier. Then a tipping point may occur. I think it will occur because we’re seeing already that the percentage of people moving up to second tier is on the rise. We have had people at Green for 30 years. About one third of those were called the Green Exit, because they were just ready to exit at any moment. Only they could do it. If a third of Green moves into second tier then that would be the 10 to 15 per cent into second tier. But the thing is that this has to start coming from within.

When Paul Ray says that his culture creatives are almost 28% of the population that he has investigated (United States, Australia, Europe and Japan), he says it from a Green point of view because everyone who doesn’t fall into left or right is considered as Green. Integral percentages are thrown in there. Green is counted as culture creatives. Some of the Magenta get counted as culture creatives and even new agers are also counted in that way. So it is unreal and I disagree with this way of doing things.

Raquel: Why do we live? What is the sense or meaning of life?

Ken: A standard contemplative answer is that there is only Spirit and for Spirit to entertain Itself it goes out of Itself manifesting in the world. So starts the game. The only way to play the game–like if you ever want to play checkers by yourself–you cannot do it, because then you know what the other person is doing. Then it is not fun or real. So the only way that you can get the game going is if you play the other role; then you forget the role you’re playing. That’s what Spirit is doing and that’s why we’re forgetful of who we really are. That’s why we start the path of liberation through the path of contemplation–meditation waking up so we go back to remembering who we are, who started the game and what it all means. That’s what the waking up process tells us and shows as what it is. And that’s a very straightforward process.

Raquel: How could we unite resilience and Integral Vision (regarding enterprise management).

Ken: The true Integral Vision is resilient. It has an enormous stamina and a great capacity to give and take, because it is constructed of holons–wholes which are part of other wholes. It’s a great deal of give and take and a great deal of strength in the system itself. So it’s hard to knock it over, because it just gives so much. It’s a very fluent and fluid process and in that sense is very resilient. Businesses that explicitly use the Integral Model actually build resilience into the business, because every part is part of the whole. Each member feels connected to everything that’s going on. Therefore, the whole business is in each member. There is an enormous strength in all the people there adding up to the strength of the business.

Raquel: And what is there after death? How do we die integrally?

Ken: I buy just the straight perennial philosophy of the Tibetan Book of the Dead version which is that, after death, we are immediately introduced into Dharmakaya or true and pure Spirit. If we recognize that, then we remain as that. If not, the subtle realm appears. If we recognize that, we remain there and if we don’t, then the gross realm appears. Then we see our parents. This is known as “the great fall.” Then, into the world we go again. It is like we just bounce, bounce, bounce, until we develop awareness. Depending on how much awareness we have, the more we can control events in the after state. It is just like having lucid dreams. I didn’t have a near death experience in itself–yes, well I did during the comas when I was just in Big Mind.

Raquel: If you could which would be the advice you would give to President Zapatero in a very simple and short manner regarding the following themes that so much are affecting Spain:

The economic crisis

Ken: Do everything you can to bring your government and his money policy into alignment with the economy, for example putting money into the economy. On the other hand, it could mean taking it out. It all depends on what the moment requires, because the government role is to balance the monetary supply. Therefore if there is too little you put in some more and if there too much you take it out. There are several schools of economics on how to do that. I think it is a very important subject in order to maintain that balance. The banks needed to receive the money they received. At the same time it’s important to do something as well with the money that people have in their pockets, meaning that they may maintain the balance they need. I would say that being in the economy is such an important matter for the people. It is a must be fixed somehow. What I don’t know is the how. But surely it is important for a president to know how to elevate the morale of the lower left quadrant so the people feel better instead of creating economical paranoia that is at the end worst than the reality itself. So reminding Spaniards that they have a great history and a great country and great strong people is a must.

Raquel: Nationalisms

Ken: I would say that it’s the same than before because what you want to do is to move consciousness from ethnocentric to worldcentric. That means transcend and include what it is to want to embrace your country of origin and feel greater pride and affinity for it and at the same time to recognize yourself as a citizen of the world accepting that every land belongs to the planet anyway. We are looking forward to the world citizens, because these are the ones that will create the World Federation.

Raquel: Climate change

Ken: First of all getting real scientific data of what is actually happening is really difficult, because there is not an agreement among the data of the Amber scientist and the Green scientists. The Green are in favor of global warming so much that they tend to exaggerate it and Amber denies it, tending to undercut it. All of them are really high and sound scientists that are coming out with these different and contradictory ideas. It’s so frustrating, because then you don’t know whom to believe. Therefore, if we do determine that there is global warming and we accept that it is due to the gasses that human beings have put into the air, then we definitively would must cut down in those emissions. But you want to make sure that that’s what’s really happening, because it costs at least a trillion dollars to lower those gases. In the case that it is not necessary, that money can be used to investigate a cure for HIV or any other thing that would be needful for humanity. The truth is that we are in trouble.

How much we don’t know really, because they don’t have agreement about the data. Some say that the Sun is going to become colder and therefore generate such a frosting that everything is going to freeze on earth, therefore that would wipe out the idea of the global warming. So again, who to believe?

Raquel: Immigration

Ken: Before, most countries were founded with a single ethnic group. One of the few countries in the world that was built on a multiracial basis was the United States. It is a so- called “melting pot” where we have very different ethnic groups coming into this land, like Germans, Irish and Polish, people from Holland, Italy, Spain and Africa, etc. Now it is difficult for other countries to open up to receive all those different ethnic groups that are coming in. They feel this way, because people are not culturally prepared, the moral and ethical lines are not very developed and people dislike differences. They blame immigrants for the loss of jobs and benefits. It is an area that needs to have politicians who develop consciousness about the various levels of growth. This is crucial so they can see where these cultures are in terms of altitude and know how they are going to clash with the prevailing culture. If you have some knowledge of that, you can intervene by facilitating that process. As it is right now liberals are just Green egalitarian, no difference. And the truth is that some of these cultures are really low. Whether you are a Spaniard or a German there is no way that the country is going to let you engage in certain behaviors and attitudes. But with the immigrants we are going to prove to the world how much we are permitting. They the immigrants do it and the country goes nuts. That’s the real problem with the leading edge of the political parties: they are Green.

About the Author

Raquel Torrent is a psychologist, therapist and teacher. She is President of the Spanish Integral Association. She has been an Integral/Transpersonal Therapist (Private consultation) since 1989. She was the founder of the Ken Wilber Study Group in Madrid (2001) and Ken Wilber’s two days Seminar at the Psychology Faculty, Complutense University of Madrid (2003). She is an accredited Spiral Dynamics specialist (2001 with Don Beck).