World Futures: The Journal of General Evolution

8/3/2019 World Futures: The Journal of General Evolution

1/35

This article was published in the journal World Futures: The Journal of

General Evolution, in 2007.

In this article I develop a case for a theory of intelligence

incorporating transpersonal dimensions, namely integratedintelligence. Some recent expanded theories of intelligence move

into concepts like creativity, wisdom, and emotional intelligence.

Yet they remain embedded within mainstream intelligence theory

and its reductionist and materialist presuppositions. While various

theorists in consciousness theory have developed transpersonal

models which are beginning to be discussed in some mainstream

circles, mainstream intelligence theory is yet to address the

broader implications of this. Recent changes in the global

economy and the needs of populations have created a need for an

expanded theory of intelligence, and more intuitive thinking.

it seems to have been the vast expansion of a basic processingcapacity for use by external organizational regulations that

appears to define the role of the brain in human intelligence

(Richardson 2000: 178).

We're talking about a large fraction of the public that believes in

subjects that scientists believe are out of the question.

Costas Efthimiou, professor at the University of Central Florida

(Borenstein 2006)

Defining integrated intelligence

I define integrated intelligence as:


2/35

The deliberate and conscious employment of the extended mind,

such that an individual might function successfully within a given

environment.

In turn the extended mind is defined as:

The state of personal consciousness whereby individual awareness

is infused with a transpersonal awareness that transcends the

confines of the individual mind and the limits of the sensory

organs.

I have taken the term the extended mind from Sheldrake (2003) who

sees it in similar fashion. Yet the term integrated intelligence is myown. (1)

Any legitimate theory of intelligence should ideally make explicit the

core operations and end states of that intelligence (Gardner 1993). In

their absence, rational discussion of practical applications becomes

impracticable, as does empirical testing. The core operations of

integrated intelligence as I have developed them are integrated

perception, evaluation/choice, location, diagnosis, foresight andcreativity and innovation. The end states are wisdom and personal

and social transformation. Tables 1 and 2 (below) list these, and

provide applications, evidence and exemplars. (2)

Table 1: The core operations of integrated intelligence

Cognitive

process

Potential

Applications

Anecdotal

Exemplars

Other

Evidence

Integrated

Perception

Integrated

perception of

the underlying

order & meaning

of systems, &

Buckes (quoted in

Tart 1993)

immediate

perception that

Cosmos is not

Mystical &

spiritual

traditions.

Non-ordinary

states of


3/35

intelligence

within those

systems -

including cosmos.

Enhancing

spiritual

worldview;

meaning, & sense

of relationship

with nature &

cosmos.

dead matter but

a living Presence.

consciousness

(Grof 2006;

Sheldrake et

al. 2001).

Wilbers (2001)

empirical

mysticism.

Location Determining

location of

important

objects (Targ &

Katra 1999: 139-

141). Also

location of

information &data for

research; finding

relevant people &

places.

Researcher

Michael Talbot

employs deeper

& more intuitive

abilities in

locating research

data (Talbot

1992: 137). Also,a psychic

identifying a

murderer (CNN

2005).

Remote

viewing,

including

scientific

remote viewing

(Braud 2003,

Radin 2006,

Sheldrake2003).

Diagnosis Diagnosis of

medical &

mechanical

problems; safety,health &

environmental

hazards; &

sources of human

Accounts of

intuition, dreams

& spiritual

guidance tofacilitate

diagnosis of

problems.

Hawkins 2002

No known

empirical

studies. The

links betweenwisdom and

mysticism

(Grof 2006).


4/35

error (Targ &

Katra 1999: 141).

Spiritual &

psychological

introspection.

intuitively

diagnosed

patients

illnesses.

Evaluation/

choice

Evaluating design

& construction

alternatives,

investment

choices, research

strategies, &

technologyalternatives.

(Targ & Katra

1999: 139)

Evaluation of

life, career, &

relationship

choices.

Individuals who

employ intuition &

spiritual guidance

to make choices.

(e.g. Bach 1986

see foresight,

below;Yoganandas 1979

immediate

recognising his

master at first

meeting).

Card guessing

experiments

from

parapsychology,

e.g., the Rhine

ESP

experiments(Radin 2003:

83-89).

Foresight Foresight ofnatural

disasters,

political

conditions,

technological

developments,

wear conditions,

& investmentopportunities

(Targ & Katra

1999: 142).

Determine

consequences of

Bach (1986).Using an

introspective

visionary

technique he

sees the

disastrous

consequences of

leaving hispartner &

adjusts his choice

accordingly.

Scientificexperiments

into

presentiment

(Radin 2006:

161-180).


5/35

choices.

Creativity

&

Innovation

The individual

draws upon

transpersonalmodes of

consciousness to

facilitate

increased

inspiration &

creativity in

work, business,

research,competition or

leisure

Chemist August

Kekule was

seized with thenotion of

molecular nature

of benzene ring in

dream (Kafatos &

Kafatou

1991:166); Otto

Loews

understandingtransmission of

neuronal

impulses, while

asleep

(Broomfield 1997:

80).

Indigenous and

mystical

conceptions ofcreativity

(Broomfield

1997; Lawlor

1991).

Table 2: The end-states of integrated intelligence

Cognitive

process

Potential

Applications

Anecdotal

Exemplars

Other

Evidence

Wisdom Having intuited

underlying causes,

meaning &

functions ofvarious life

processes, the

individual is able

to make intelligent

choices which

The life of

Mohandas

Karamchand

(Mahatma)Gandhi. Gandhi

combined an

austere, mundane

existence with

political &

The links

between

spirituality,

spiritualguidance &

wisdom from

anecdotes &

tradition

(Broomfield


6/35

enhance happiness,

well-being &

spiritual

development of

self & collective.

intellectual

acumen, &

combined se with

spiritual tools,

insight & wisdom

to forge a

powerful &

effective life.

1997; Lawlor

1991).

Personal &

Social

Transform-

ation

Optimal human &

Cosmic evolution;

may include

aspects of all coreoperations, with

purpose of

evaluation of

personal goals &

choices within a

greater planetary

& cosmic dynamic.

Potential for

increased hope &

meaning.

Buckes cosmic

consciousness

(Tart 1993);

Hawkins (2002)experience of

being protected

by a bright,

warming light

while stuck in a

snow storm;

transformative

power of near

death

experiences

(Grof 2006);

synchronicity

(Jung 1973).

Field

consciousness

studies

(Radin 2006).

The evidence for each of these core operations and end states comesfrom parapsychology, mystical and spiritual traditions and personal

anecdotes within the literature - as the mid and right-hand columns of

both tables indicate.

Is it really intelligence?


7/35

Can such an ability as integrated intelligence be legitimately termed

an intelligence at all? I believe it can and should be. Intelligence is

notoriously difficult to define. Sternbergs (2003) theory of

successful intelligence is essentially based around the idea that

intelligence is as intelligence does. In this sense, the successful

completion of any given task is a function of intelligence. Therefore if

the extended mind is employed in the successful completion of a goal

or task; it is intelligence in action.

The definitions and attributes of intelligence tend to reflect the

methods used to measure it. For example, the inventor of individual

intelligence tests, Alfred Binet, developed tests to measure

intelligence according to what he perceived it to bereasoning,imagination, insight, judgment and adaptability (Reber & Reber 2001:

361). The employment of factor analysis within the concept of a

general intelligence likewise tends to elicit a self-reinforcing definition

of intelligence. This is because statistical analysis focuses upon the

readily quantifiable. One cannot quantify that which cannot be

measured, or is very difficult to measure. Of importance here is that

integrated intelligence is closely related to psi phenomena, which are

notoriously elusive Kennedy (2003). Yet the issue is not simply one of

measurement, because with mainstream intelligence theory

paradigmatic blinkers tend to remain firmly in place (as will be outlined

in the next section).

The essential point is that almost any definition of intelligence will

reflect the predicates of the social and cultural environment in which

the definer lives and thinks (Gardner et al. 1996). Notably, the

Western episteme in the wake of the Enlightenment has valorised

critical rationality, has constructed education and schools accordingly,

and has developed intelligence tests to determine who will be

successful within that environment (Gardner et al. 1996).

The exclusion of integrated intelligence from mainstream theory


8/35

To appreciate the exclusion of mystical/spiritual concepts and theories

from contemporary mind science, one has to look beyond the debate

regarding physical evidence. Indeed the question of the transpersonal

potentials of mind is almost always absent literally out of the

question. Yet despite there being enough evidence to at least allow a

healthy debate to begin (as Tables 1 & 2 indicate, above), questions

which might address the concept of integrated intelligence are almost

never posited. The reason can be clarified via Figure 1 below, which

situates intelligence theory within a civilisational, paradigmatic and

cultural perspective.

In Figure 1, each level is defined and mediated by the level below it. It

depicts discourses on intelligence and mind moving through layers, andbeing ultimately determined by the lowest level of the system: the

pervading level of consciousnessvision logic (Wilber 2000). This

implicitly valorises transpersonal theory and the Eastern episteme, and

mirrors the arguments of the transpersonalists, such as Bradley

(2004),

Gebser (1985), Grof (2000), Hawkins (2002), Walsh (1990), Walsh and

Vaughan (1993), and Wilber (2000c), who find that rationality is butone developmental stage in the greater evolution of humanity towards

transrational awareness. (3) There are two overriding paradigms

displayed in Figure 1. At the fourth level there is the neo-Darwinian

paradigm (Loye 2004). This paradigm is part of a greater paradigm

the mechanistic paradigm.

There are issues for the greater acceptance of integrated intelligence

at all levels of this schemata. At the consciousness level, what Wilber(2000) has called vision logic is broadly compatible with critical

rationality, while integrated intelligence is more compatible with the

cognitive processes associated with transrational levels of

consciousness.


9/35

In terms of the mechanistic paradigm, there are various tenets of that

paradigm which render it incompatible with integrated intelligence.

These include materialism, the rejection of psi and spiritual phenomena

and experience, the denial of the affective, the subject/object split,

temporal linearity, patriarchal predilections, and ego-centred control.

In regard to ways of knowing, verbal/linguistic and

mathematical/logical ways of knowing dominate modern science,

academia and education (Gardner 1993). These tend to exclude the

affective, mystical and sometimes ineffable ways of knowing involved

with integrated intelligence.

Figure 1: Layered schema depicting the epistemic foundations of

Western mind science and intelligence theoryw


10/35

The neo-Darwinian paradigm which permeates modern biology is also an

issue, as its tenets have become an established dogma within science

(Loye 2004). These tenets include reification of the random,

materialism, reductionism and atheism. At the next level of Figure 1 is

neuroscience, which has adopted these precepts of neo-Darwinism,

especially rampant reductionism and materialism, and the consequent

obfuscation of the psyche. Finally, modern cognitive psychology has

become a handmaiden to neuroscience (Maddox 1999: 278) an issue

that Freud foresaw well over half a century ago (Bettleheim, 2001).

Thus what Figure 1 shows is an effective hegemony of rationalism

which still dominates mainstream mind science in the West. It is within

this hegemonic process that integrated intelligence as a concept finds

itself problematically situated. However I am optimistic that in the

long run the efficacy of the concept and its value as a cognitive

process for both individuals and humanity as a whole, will be vindicated

and indeed acknowledged as crucial to our futures.

The prime issue here is that the mainstream contention that

consciousness (and therefore intelligence) emerge from the material

substrate of the brain (rather than being purely a correlate of

neuronal sub-structures), is a metaphysical assumption, and cannot be

tested via current scientific methods, let alone proven (Grof 1985: 23;

2006; Laszlo 2004). Indeed, as long-standing editor of Nature John

Maddox admitted in 1999:

How the brain functions both in the everyday world and as the human

attribute of mind is hardly clearer now than at the beginning of thecentury (Maddox 1999: 21).

There is at present a vast body of knowledge and data which supports

the understanding that the human mind can express itself beyond the

limits of the individual self, and beyond the constraints of a Newtonian


11/35

or Eisensteinian construction of space/time. In addition to the

evidence indicated in Tables 1 and 2 (above), these include studies into

comparative religion and anthropology, extrasensory perception,

premonitory dreams, near-death experiences, crisis visions,

psychedelic experience and so on (Combs, Arcari & Krippner 2006; Grof

2006). Further there are strong arguments for a developing paradigm

of science which incorporates non-local transfer of information, with

consciousness as an integral component of the cosmic system (Bradley

2004; Laszlo 2004; Sheldrake 2003; Wilber 2001). Despite this,

mainstream psychiatry and psychology has tended to label perceptions

and experiences of mind which fall outside of the mechanistic paradigm

as psychosis, superstition, or ascribe them to unresolved childhoodconflicts and dependencies (Grof 1985: 24).

A position more readily consistent with the available evidence - and one

more representative of the genuine scientific knowledge available - is

that of openness to hypotheses and theories which reflect and

acknowledge a full range of data and human experience, and in turn

accommodate a full range of possible models which explicate that data

and experience. It is for this reason that I maintain that mainstream

consciousness and intelligence theory is not fully representative of the

human mind in totality.

The resistance of mainstream mind science to models of mind that fall

beyond mechanistic mythologies is well illustrated by Stanislav Grof

(2006) in his meeting with influential scientist Carl Sagan. Having read

of Grofs Realms of the Human Unconscious (which referred to

mystical experiences involving light and archetypal visions induced by

altered states of consciousness and LSD), Sagan enthusiastically asked

to meet Grof. However upon their meeting, it became apparent that

Sagan had misunderstood Grofs position. Sagan had taken the induced

near-death-like experience to be a repudiation of the mystical

experience - a reflection of the imagination, of neural disturbance.


12/35

Grof explained to Sagan that there was a massive amount of data

corroborating and supporting the veridical nature of these

experiences. As Grof recounted more and more evidence and cases

which supported his case, Sagan merely refuted each with increasingly

stubborn rejections, finally resorting to the insistence that definitive

cases must be frauds, and perpetrated by charlatans. According to

Grof, Sagan had formulated a worldview which was effectively an

unshatterable dogma that was impervious to evidence (Grof 2006:

329).

It is not the stringent questioning of so-called extraordinary human

experiences by Sagan and mainstream theorists that concerns me here.

It is when such experiences are deemed to quote a mathematician onthe possibility of the veracity of various psi and supernatural

phenomena out of the question (Borenstein 2006). That is, certain

vital questions which express a deep examination of the issue are not

posited. One of the notable characteristics of paradigms is that they

delimit not only fields of enquiry, but the possible range of questions

which can be asked (Grof, 1985).

When scientists and philosophers maintain an intellectual position whilerefusing to consider a complete range of questions and hypotheses

which address all the data, this is not scepticism. It is dogma, as

Rupert Sheldrake (2003) has pointed out.

Is intelligence in the brain?

As the quote from Richardson at the beginning of this paper indicates,

there is ample evidence that the brain itself is not the source ofhuman intelligence. Attempts to attribute intelligence to modules such

as genes or specific parts of the brain are highly problematic. For

example, sensory data transferred from the part of the brain normally

employed to a specific task, to another by surgical rewriting may result

in the new area assuming the duties of the former. Such is the case


13/35

with data from the retina of the eye being rewired to the auditory

area of the cerebral cortex (Richardson, 2000: 177). Richardsons

thesis regarding the operation of brain functions is tentatively

presented as:

Far from being determined by a localized architecture, more

distributed functions (themselves emerging in interaction with

complex and changeable external demands) might use particular

cell groups because they have processing properties or

connectivities conducive to them. These areas are then further

developed and transformed by the function (Richardson 2000:

177).

As a theorist writing within contemporary sciences self-limiting

cultural and paradigmatic delimitations. Richardson does not provide a

definite answer to what the source of intelligence actually is. He posits

the tantalising hypothesis that it is a function of the interaction

between all the levels of the brain, micro and macro. Yet this leaves us

with a rather tricky question. From where does consciousness arise?

This is where transpersonal and mystical models may provide a working

hypothesis. Various thinkers have posited that consciousness originates

beyond the brain (Grof 2006; Lazlo 2004; Dossey 2001), a conclusion

which is consistent with numerous spiritual traditions. If we look at the

previous quote from Richardson, it is perfectly compatible with this

idea. The more distributed functions which appear to be searching

for suitable brain modules to express themselves, appear to have a

mind of their own. This is starting to look very much like the ghost in

the machine, a problem which Richardson himself does not address.Here we reach the seemingly impenetrable precipice of the

philosophy/science divide the mind/body problem. How does the

physicality of the brain produce consciousness? There are still no

convincing answers from mainstream mind science. The brain-equals-

mind hypothesis is often treated as a given, despite its rocky


14/35

foundations. At the very least, until the time arrives when

consciousness has been shown to be an emergent property of the

micro-systems or broader machinations of the brain, the transpersonal

models of mind and intelligence must stand as viable constructs to be

given serious merit by scholars and scientists.

Mainstream Intelligence Theory and Integrated Intelligence

IQ theory and systems theories within mainstream intelligence

discourse contain elements which are problematic in terms of the

acknowledgement and situating of integrated intelligence. Standard

intelligence tests are essentially pen and paper tests (Gardner 1993)

and are done in ordinary states of consciousness. For example, with theWAIS-3 which is reasonably representative of IQ tests in general

(Deary 2001: 6)there is no attempt to access the non-ordinary states

of consciousness that are often associated with receptivity and thus

with integrated intelligence (Braud 2003: xx-xxi; Grof 2006). Further,

the WAIS-3 does not test for any cognitive modalities, core

operations, or end-states associated with integrated intelligence:

extrasensory acuity, spiritual understandings, wisdom, intuiting deeper

and transcendent meaning, the facilitation of wisdom, communicationwith spiritual realms, and knowledge, etc. Typical of the modern

intelligence test, integrated intelligence plays little or no part in the

WAIS-3 test, either as an object of cognitive measurement or as

method.

Many theorists who expand their conceptions of intelligence beyond

the limitations of a rational/linguistic and mathematically predicated

IQ (Gardner 1993; Shearer 2004) merely posit horizontal extensionsto the fragmented mind. (4) This is done by adding dimensions such as:

lateral thinking (de Bono 1999); collective intelligence (Nash 2005;

Szuba 2002); inferential intuition (Klein 2003; Torff & Sternberg

2001); civic intelligence (Dewey 1937); or various non-linear


15/35

components as with Koskos (1994) fuzzy logic. There is no expansion

of the vertical dimension into the transrational. With the exception of

Kosko, these theorists do not address the worldview level, or adopt a

civilisational perspective on intelligence. These theories emerge from

the mechanistic paradigm, which does not allow for the conception of

an integrated intelligence, as a biological, localised and fragmented

intelligence is implicit within that paradigm.

The dominance of the individual differences approach to intelligence

testing in the early to mid years of the twentieth century is

significant, for this addressed only the easily measurable components

of intelligence. This featured a failure to acknowledge environmental

and social influences in the development of intelligence (and thetranspersonal). The dominance of Galtons, Binets, and Piagets

individualistic approaches until well after the 1950s undoubtedly

contributed to this (Sternberg et al. 2003).

Vygotskys greater cultural focus helped redress the issue (Sternberg

et al. 2003; Gardner et al. 1996). Yet, to refer to Wilbers (2000)

four-quadrant model (5), this merely represented an expansion into the

exterior-social domains of mind and its expression. Systems theoriesof intelligence incorporating intrapersonal intelligence (Gardner 1993),

emotional intelligence (Goleman 1999), wisdom (Kunzman & Baltes

2003), and creativity (Sternberg 2003) have expanded into Wilbers

interior subjective realms. Notably, none of these represents an

expansion into the transpersonal.

Integrated intelligence theory potentially adds a vertical dimension to

intelligence theory. It is a cognitive capacity that moves beyondpsychometric (measurement-based) and systems theories. Evidence for

this can be taken from the fact that integrated intelligence differs

from mainstream theories of intelligence in its incorporation of the

extended mind. This is illustrated in Figure 2, below. Here, the rational

cognitive modes embrace critical rationality and its preferred ways of


16/35

knowing; the interior individual modes permit affectivity, creativity and

wisdom; and the extended mind incorporates an interior transpersonal

subjective process.

Figure 2: The distribution of rational, interior individual modes and

the extended mind in six representations of intelligence

Where does integrated intelligence fit in?

I therefore propose that transpersonal regulations can be added to

our models of intelligence to make them more accurately and find fully

acknowledge all the dimensions of consciousness and mind. How might

this be done?

Ken Richardson (2000) has critiqued the limitations of mainstream

dominant models of intelligence. In doing so Richardson has developed

his own five-tier model which incorporates genetic (accommodating

trans-generational change), genomic (accommodating local perturbation


17/35

during development), epigenetic (accommodating intra-generational

change), cognitive (accommodating life-long change) and socio-cognitive

regulations (accommodating social-cooperative action). This is a layered

system, where each level adds to and expands upon the lower levels,

with each acknowledging increasing environmental/social influence. As

Richardson notes, many traditional western models of intelligence

embrace only a few of the levels. Classic IQ theory is often restricted

to genetic and genomic considerations and sees intelligence as being

purely or predominantly inherited.

Richardsons thesis indicates that intelligence is not explicable purely

in terms of brain physiology and genetics. The development of society

and culture is the primary reason for the massive surge in humanintelligence over recent centuries, as reflected in advances in society,

technology and the vast expansion of knowledge (Richardson, 2000).

I believe that Richardson is correct. It is clear that the various

cognitive components of intelligence can only fully express themselves

where a culture permits that expression. The great advances in the

expression of human intelligence that we see in the contemporary

worlds fantastic works of technology are all functions of social andcultural imperatives. The futuristic skyline of Shanghai could only

emerge after Deng Xiao Ping unshackled Chinas economy from the

constrictions of Maoism. High school students studying calculus was

unthinkable at the time of Newton but is completely normal in modern

western culture that emphasises the importance of science,

mathematics and technology. Even the readers capacity to decode the

written symbols upon this page is a function of a culture that values

that same codified form of knowledge over other possible modes of

knowledge communication.

Personally speaking, I grew up completely ignorant of concepts related

to integrated intelligence. A fundamental issue was the complete

absence of any social acknowledgement of that intelligence, and the


18/35

total exclusion of its facilitation in my education. What might the shift

in human consciousness be, if children spent the same amount of time

on facilitation of inner worlds and integrated intelligence, as they

currently do on literacy and mathematics?

In order for me to come to the understanding that I now have about

integrated intelligence, I had to go through a process involving several

phases, beginning around the age of 26 (some 14 years ago). The steps

included:

The slow development of an intrinsic interest in esoteric subject

matters.

My considering the possibility that I might have a potential for

integrated intelligence myself.

Beginning disciplines which facilitated integrated intelligence -

either directly or as a by-product of processes which indirectly

expanded this intelligence.

Being willing to transcend the criticism and ridicule of peers,

friends and family, and the self-doubt it engendered.

Overcoming the enormous fear and resistance both conscious

and unconscious of awakening this intelligence; and

acknowledging and embracing the often highly disturbing

information which integrated intelligence brings to the conscious

mind.

A key factor in the development of any intelligence is motivation - aswas the case with my desire to understand integrated intelligence.

Intelligence theorist Sternberg (2003) has long pointed out that

motivation is prime mover in the expression of intelligence. In my case,

a number of extraordinary events (which I will not detail here)

contributed to my own desire to work with these levels of mind. Yet


19/35

the prime factor in my motivation to continue to work with integrated

intelligence has been what Jung called the sacred wound. I carried

enormous psycho-spiritual scars into my adulthood. I realised in my

twenties that I would not be able to lead a satisfactory and happy life

unless I dealt fully and directly with these issues. I could have chosen

mainstream therapies to deal with these. Yet a number of experiences

contributed to a deepening of my own belief, understanding, and

perception of issues that existed within my psyche.

A key point is that these experiences, the employment of integrated

intelligence, and the kinds of healing practices I employed, remained

personal secrets which I only shared with people of open mind. My own

strong motivation circumvented the social denial and rejection of theintelligence I chose to develop.

Beyond socio-cultural regulations

I wish to go one step further than Richardson (2000), and state that

the addition of a further layer to his five-tier model can incorporate

transpersonal regulations into the equation, and garner an appreciation

that knowledge from extra-sensory, collective and cosmic sources areinvolved in the on-going evolution of human intelligence. (6) In this

sense the information received at the transpersonal level acts in a

similar way to Richardsons social/environmental regulations. The

difference is that for the majority of human beings who are unaware

of this transpersonal level, the effect is unconscious. This is depicted

in Figure 3, below.


20/35

transpersonal regulations (accommodating cosmic evolution)

socio-cognitive regulations (accommodating social-cooperativeaction)

Cognitive regulations (accommodating life-long change)

Epigenetic regulations (accommodating intra-generational change)

Genomic regulations (accommodating local perturbation during

development)

Genetic regulations (accommodating trans-generational change)

Figure 3: The six regulations of integrated intelligence (adapted from

Richardson 2000: 168)

Notably, in order for the transpersonal level to have greatest benefit

in the development of intelligence in the individual, it has to be

acknowledged by that individual. In turn the individual is most likely to

acknowledge this level when it is acknowledged or permitted by thesociety. In this sense it is dependent upon the lower levels of the

system. Of importance here is that various domains of intelligence are

acknowledged and appreciated by societies and cultures, while others

are not. For example, Richardson points out that abstract logic is

absent from many cultures and thus people from these cultures are


21/35

unlikely to do well in the written pen and paper tests that are so much

a part of many IQ tests, because abstract logic plays an important role

in these. (7)

Of course various individuals have always exhibited exceptionalintelligence in domains that are not generally appreciated by their

culture or society. The natural intelligence (Gardner et. al 1996) of

Galileo was hardly embraced by the Church and Italian society of the

age, yet he excelled at it. Similarly, various individuals have excelled at

domains associated with integrated intelligence despite social

resistance. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross (1997) is one example here. Her work

into embracing death and especially the near-death experience drew

considerable hostility at the university hospital where she worked.

Integrated intelligence and spiritual intelligence

The theory of integrated intelligence as presented here is not a dogma.

I see it as the next step beyond the idea of spiritual intelligence,

which has entered poplar consciousness to some degree in recent

years. The greatest problem with the concept of spiritual intelligence

as presented by such theorists as Buzan (2001), Grof (2006), Levin(2000) and (Zohar (2000), is that they define the term loosely, then

fail to adequately delineate its core operations and end states. What I

have done with the concept of integrated intelligence is put forward

the idea of an innate human intelligence embedded within a sea of

consciousness, and defined its precise components. However this

should be viewed as an attempt to develop greater understanding of a

human intelligence which is both veridical and important. It should not

be seen as the final word on the topic. Researchers should have ahealthy respect for what is not understood, and what may potentially

be misunderstood within any given theory. For example, despite my

more than a decade of research into and experimenting with the

practical applications of integrated intelligence, I still have no genuine

understanding of the physics of how it works. Dossey (2001) points out


22/35

that psi effects do not mirror the properties of the four known forces

of nature. Further, how reliable is integrated intelligence? What about

when it doesnt work, or just plain wrong when we employ it? Just how

readily can the six core operations be employed within life in the

modern knowledge economy and beyond? These are questions which

require further research.

And not just research. For what I would like to suggest is that what is

written in academia and scientific circles should not restrict or define

integrated intelligence and its potential applications. We should not be

sitting beside our printers waiting for the computer to spit out graphs

and data before we attempt to incorporate integrated intelligence into

our daily lives. If this was the best way to approach it, none of theexponents of integrated intelligence that I have personally worked

with would have developed the degree of skill in this area that they

have. Nor would I have ever written this paper.

Why a transpersonal model, why now?

It is perfectly possible to construct models of intuitive and so-called

right-brain thinking that avoid the transpersonal. There are someimportant thinkers who have developed models like this which are

compelling in their own right (Goleman 1999; Hogarth 2000; Klein 2003;

Myers 2004; Pink 2005; Gladwell 2005; Torff & Sternberg 2001).

These theorists do justice to a wide range of affective and intuitive

cognitive processes. They represent what I have called inferential

(sensory) models of intuition - as opposed to classical (extra-sensory)

models. This binary is a neat (although somewhat simplistic) way of

identifying models of intuition which are brain-based, and those whichexpand beyond current materialist models. My sense is that many

creators of such inferential models avoid transpersonal issues because

to admit to such a model is something akin to academic suicide. Less

than one per cent of traditional colleges and universities throughout


23/35

the world contain faculty who will publicly admit to an interest in psi

research (Radin 2006: 280).

Personally, I am under no such pressure, being non-aligned with any

institution at the time of writing this article. I did encounter someresistance to my thesis proposal on integrated intelligence from

certain elements within my university. At one point I was accidentally

witness to an email where one faculty administrator ridiculed the

concept of integrated intelligence. What is this integrated

intelligence? Sounds like the hand of God or something, (s)he almost

sneered. But to the credit of the administrators, my research was

permitted to continue. Here I suspect that the academic credibility of

my thesis supervisor Sohail Inayatullah was key.

My argument is not that these inferential models of intuition are

wrong, but simply that that do not go far enough. The basis of this

assessment lies in my own personal experience, as well as academic

research. Having given considerable time and enormous amounts of

commitment to working with the kinds of cognitive processes which are

outlined in the theory of integrated intelligence, I feel personally

bound above and beyond any professional commitments to publicly statemy views on these maters. Systems theories of intelligence and

expanded models of intuition have extended the discourse, but it is

time to move beyond the self-limiting and self-stultifying paradigmatic

delimitations of the mechanistic presuppositions which continue to

dominate mainstream doscourses. For me personally, the academic

criticism and ridicule which inevitably follows from taking such a stance

is of much less importance than bringing to greater awareness within

academic and public circles what I consider to be the greater

potentials of human cognitive abilities.

The need for integrated intelligence


24/35

Beyond the importance of acknowledging integrated intelligence, there

is now a pressing need for it. Pink (2004) has pointed out that right-

brained cognitive processes have generally been undervalued in

modern western culture. Left-hemisphere cognition is often linguistic

and textual in nature (Pink 2005: 17-20).

The left hemisphere handles logic, sequence, literalness, analysis.

The right takes scare of synthesis, emotional expression,

context, and the big picture. (Pink, 2005: 25)

Pink argues that the world is changing. What he calls L-directed

Thinking skills (left-brained) and jobs requiring such skills are being

taken up by emerging economies like India and China. Pinks R-directedThinking (right brained) involves six high-concept, high touch senses

(Pink 2005: 65): namely design, story (ability to synthesise information

into a narrative), symphony (finding integration, the big picture),

empathy, play, and meaning. What will be required in future are skills

which more fully balance both sides of the brain.

Now, R-Directed Thinking is suddenly determining where were

going and how well get there. L-directed aptitudes are stillnecessary. But theyre no longer sufficient. Instead, the R-

Directed Aptitudes artistry, empathy, taking the long view,

pursuing the transcendent will increasingly determine who soars

and stumbles (Pink, 2005: 27).

In short, Pink argues that there is a shift from the information age

to the conceptual age. The driving forces are affluence, technology

and globalisation. Those in most demand and most able to prosper inthis age will be creators, empathisers, pattern recognisers and meaning

makers (Pink 2005: 50).

In Australia, there is strong evidence that Pink is correct, with

almost thirty-seven per cent of millionaires under the age of forty


25/35

being involved in creative industries such as architecture, advertising,

art, fashion, film, publishing, software, entertainment, TV and video

games (Horin 2006).

Another key issue is that prosperity in the modern age has freedvast numbers of people from more mundane pursuits and immediate

imperatives such as the need for food or shelter. Millions are seeking

transcendence of the mundane, even self-realisation. Pink (2005)

argues that self-realisation is now a quest for the vast majority of the

population. For example in the United States the number of meditators

has doubled in the last decade, with about ten million adults now

practicing it. Fifteen million were practicing yoga in 2005, a doubling

from 1999 (Pink 2005: 60). This has lead Pink to suggest that meaningis the new money (Pink 2005: 61). Others agree that critical

rationality is no longer enough in the short or long term (Laszlo et. al

2003; Zohar 2000).

To Pinks thesis we can add the fact that there is a growing body of

theorists calling for a greater degree of spirituality in business, and in

the workplace. Senge (1994) sees personal mastery and the integration

of the intuitive, transcendent and rational faculties as being intricatelyinterrelated in the modern workplace. These cognitive processes

enhance perception of the connectedness of the world, compassion, and

commitment to the whole (Senge 1994: 167). Senge calls for a

movement away from selfishness and towards a commitment to

something greater than ourselves, including a greater desire to be of

service to the world. This incorporates the experience of the

awakening of a spiritual power (ibid.: 167-172). Senge argues that this

shift is an important part of the learning organisation.

There are parallels here with Inayatullahs (2004) call for spirituality

to be the fourth bottom line of business. Inayatullah believes there

is already a strong shift towards a more responsible society and

corporate world:


26/35

We are moving from the command-control ego-driven organization to

the learning organization to a learning and healing organization. Each

step involves seeing the organization less in mechanical terms and more

in gaian living terms. The key organizational asset becomes its human

assets, its collective memory and its shared vision (Inayatullah 2004

www.metafuture.org/Articles/spirituality_bottom_line.htm ).

For Inayatullah, the spiritual requires three factors which echo

the concept of the integrated society. (8) Firstly, there is the need

for a relationship with the transcendent both immanent and

transcendental (ibid.). Secondly, there is the necessity of meditation

and/or prayer. Finally, Inayatullah posits the need to honour the social,

which he defines as a relationship with the community, global, or local,a caring for others (ibid.).

Likewise, Pink (2005), citing a report from the University of Southern

Californias Marshall School of Business called A Spiritual Audit of

Corporate America, argues that employees are hungering for spiritual

values in the workplace. Pink argues that as more companies come to

appreciate this desire, there will be a rise in spirit inbusiness (Pink

2005: 215).

Integrated intelligence stands as a possible mediation factor hereits

core operations can work within all of these processes. If, as

Inayatullah implies, spirituality does become the fourth bottom line of

modern economics, integrated intelligence could play a crucial role.

The focus of Pink, Senge and Inayatullah is primarily short-term,

centering on benefits of R-Directed Thinking for workers in westernknowledge economies. Yet, I would like to assert the greatest benefit

of integrated intelligence. Let me here quote Peter Russell:

We are all part of the same groundswell. The most important

question we need to ask is, how can I put my own life in greater


27/35

alignment with that groundswell? (Laszlo, Grof, & Russell 2003:

ix)

I believe that integrated intelligence is part of the answer to this

question. For integrated intelligence is ultimately an affirmation of theextant reality that we are all part of an intelligent cosmos. It requires

a re-alignment of thinking, and radical shift in ways of knowing.

Lastly I suggest a caveat. Opening up the psyche to integrated

intelligence does not mean that we become a channel for love and light.

This is what I would call New Age delusional thinking. The human mind

is embedded in a sea of consciousness - thoughts, ideas and energies

that connect all humanity and the cosmos. That includes all thedarkness as well as the light. An encounter with the shadow both your

own and those of other people is an inevitable consequence of

integrating individual human intelligence with transpersonal realms. The

data and information that is received may be as delusional, psychotic

and downright evil as any given piece of data that one finds surfing the

net. Integrated intelligence is like having a bigger net to put out into

the ocean. But it does not just catch the edible fish. It catches the

odd sea-monster as well!

One of the greatest problems which developed from the

Enlightenment and the scientific revolution was the philosophical

withdrawal of humankind from nature and the cosmos (Tarnas 2000;

Wilber 2000). With scientific detachment and reductionism came the

loss of connection, the loss of meaning and purpose. Now we find

ourselves in a time where more and more human beings are seeking a

greater sense of meaning and purpose. Much to the chagrin of skepticsand overt rationalists like Richard Dawkins (2006), human beings are

turning towards transcendence and religious and spiritual matters in

ever greater numbers. Critical rationality has created this alienation.

Integrated intelligence stands as an innate intelligence that may

restore that connection, and that meaning and purpose - or at least


28/35

facilitate the active pursuit of it. Integrated intelligence is about

intimate connection with the cosmos, carrying on from where the

Romantics left off, with the quest for the synthesis of self and

subject.

Richardson (2000) notes that human intelligence accelerated with the

development of society and culture, reaching levels of advancement in

technology and science that would have been hard to imagine in

previous centuries. Would we see a similar acceleration of human

intelligence and civilisation if integrated intelligence were socially

accepted and incorporated into our education systems and ways of life?

Would it be the next great leap forward? We can only speculate. The

advantages may be great, as I have written previously (Anthony2005a). These may include enhanced capacity to find meaning and

purpose in life, as well as counteract information overload and

complexity; a move beyond possessive individualism and greed; and a

circumvention of the information power and control of institutions and

the state. I maintain that personal and planetary transformation (one

of the end-states of integrated intelligence) is the most likely long-

term benefit. Even so, the core operations of integrated intelligence

integrated perception, evaluation/choice, location, diagnoses, innovation

and creativity, and foresight; along with the end state of wisdom may

all play a valuable role in the development of society. For such benefits

to accrue, there needs to be a shift from the knowledge economys

focus upon materialism, money and hard power for these are not

readily compatible with the kinds of spiritual processes usually

associated with integrated intelligence.

Conclusion

So what is new about integrated intelligence? The idea of human

consciousness being embedded within a universal mind is as old as

civilisation, as is the concept of ESP. What is essentially new about

integrated intelligence is its synthesis of intelligence theory and


29/35

consciousness theory, in particular transpersonal consciousnesses.

Once intelligence is defined and the core operations and end sates

delineated, the practical applications of the discourse can be grounded

in practical experience and empirical considerations not merely

philosophy and metaphysics.

It is time to begin to acknowledge and honour the profound and

important intelligence exhibited by some of the greatest minds on the

planet. It is an injustice of the greatest order that these great men

and women have been pushed aside within intelligence theory, and our

psychology and science - and indeed within our entire civilisation. We

are talking about some people of profound courage, integrity and

power. They deserve a better place in our models of mind andintelligence.

My hope is that I have done enough here to initiate proceedings. I

preach no dogmas, but merely seek to voice a quiet dissent, with the

aim of opening up the related discourses. It is no longer good enough to

say: This is out of the question.

References

Anthony, M., 2003. Integrated intelligence: The future of intelligence?

Journal of Futures Studies, 8(2), 39-54.

Anthony, M., 2005a. Education for transformation: integrated

intelligence in the knowledge economy and beyond. Journal of Futures

Studies, 9(3), 31-35.

Anthony, M 2005b. Integrated intelligence and the pychospiritual

imperatives of mechanistic science. Journal of Futures Studies, 10(1),

31-47


30/35

Anthony, M., 2006a. A genealogy of the western rationalist hegemony.

Journal of Futures Studies, Vol. 11 (May).

Anthony, M. 2006b, Not-so-integral Futures. Journal of Futures

Studies, Vol. 12, Nov.: 153-162.

Bach, R., 1986. The Bridge Across Forever. New York: Dell.

Bettleheim, B., 2001. Freud and Mans Soul. Sydney, Pimlico.

Borenstein, S., 2006. Science bites myth of vampires, ghosts. Yahoo

News.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061026/ap_on_sc/vampire_science.opened 27.10.06.

Bradley, R., 2004. Love, power, brain, mind, and agency. In:D. Loye, ed.

The Great Adventure: Toward a Fully Human Theory of Evolution. New

York: State University of New York Press, 99-150.

Braud, W., 2003. Distant Mental Influence. Charlottesville: Hampton

Roads.

Broomfield, J., 1997. Other Ways of Knowing. Rochester: Inner

traditions.

Buzan, T., 2001. The Power of Spiritual Intelligence. London: Harper

Collins.

Combs, A., Arcari, T., & Krippner, S. 2006 All of the Myriad Worlds:

Life in the Akashic Plenum. World Futures, 62: 75-85.

CNN (Hong Kong), 2005. Indigo children. (TV news story), 21.11.05.


31/35

Braud, W., 1998. Integral Inquiry: Complementary Ways of Knowing,

Being, and Expression. In: W. Braud & R. Anderson, eds. Transpersonal

Research Methods for the Social Sciences. London: Sage, pp. 35-68.

Buzan, T., 2001. The Power of Spiritual Intelligence. London: HarperCollins.

Capra, F., 2000. The Tao of Physics. Boston: Shambhala.

Dawkins, R., 2006. The God Delusion. London: Houghton Mifflin.

Deary, I., 2001. Intelligence: A Very Short Introduction. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Dewey, J., 1937. Cultivating Society's Civic Intelligence: Patterns for a

New World Brain. Journal of Society, Information and Communication,

4(2).

Dossey, L., 2001. Healing Beyond The Body. London: Shambhala.

Gardner, H., 1993. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple

Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H., Kornhaber, M.L., & Wake, W.K., 1996. Intelligence:

Multiple Perspectives. New York: Harcourt Brace College.

Gladwell, M., 2005. Blink: The Tipping Point. London, Penguin.

Goleman, D., 1995. Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.

Grof, S., 2000. Psychology of the Future. New York: Suny.

Grof, S., 2006. When the Impossible Happens. Boulder: Sounds True.

Hawkins, D., 2002. Power vs. Force: An Anatomy of Consciousness.

London: Hay House.


32/35

Hogarth, R., 2001. Educating Intuition. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.

Horin, A., (2006). Young creative types the new mega-rich. Sydney

Morning Herald (online).www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/12/10/1165685553911.html?from=top5

# Accessed 11.12.06.

Inayatullah, S., 2004. Spirituality as the fourth bottom line. Available

from: www.metafuture.org/Articles/spirituality_bottom_line.htm

[Accessed 16 January 2006].

Jacobson, L., 1997. Embracing the Present. New York: Conscious Living.

Jung, C., 1973. Synchronicity. New York: Bollingen.

Kafatos, M., & Kafatou, T., 1991. Looking In Seeing Out. Wheaton:

Quest Books.

Kennedy, J., 2003. The Capricious, Actively Evasive, Unsustainable

Nature of Psi: a Summary and Hypothesis. The Journal of

Parapsychology, 67(1), 53-74.

King, D., 1999. Stephen Jay Gould. In: Predictions: 30 Great Minds on

the Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press,139-144.

Klein, G., 2003. The Power of Intuition. New York: Doubleday.

Kosko, B., 1993. Fuzzy Thinking. London: Harper Collins

Kubler-Ross, E., 1997. The Wheel of Life. New York: Simon andSchuster.

Kunzmann, U., & Baltes, P., 2003. Beyond the Traditional scope of

Intelligence: Wisdom in Action. In: R. Sternberg, J. Lautry, & T.


33/35

Lubart, eds. Models of Intelligence: International Perspectives.

Washington: American Psychological Association, 329-343.

Laszlo, E., 2004. Science and the Akashic Field. Rochester: Inner

Traditions.

Laszlo, E., Grof, S., & Russell, P. (2003). The Consciousness Revolution.

Las Vegas: Elf Rock

Lawlor, R., 1991. Voices of the First Day: Awakening in the Aboriginal

Dreamtime. Vermont: Inner Traditions.

Levin, M., 2000. Spiritual Intelligence. London: Coronet.

Loye, D., 2004. Darwin, Maslow, and the Fully Human Theory of

Evolution. In: D. Loye, ed. The Great Adventure: Toward a Fully Human

Theory of Evolution. New York: State University of New York Press,

20-38.

Myers, D., 2004. Intuition: Its Powers and Perils. Yale University Press.

Maddox, J., 1999. What Remains To Be Discovered. New York:Touchstone.

Nash, R., 2005. Cognitive Habitus and Collective Intelligence. Journal

of Educational Policy, 20(1), 3-21.

Pink, D.H., 2005. A Whole New Mind. New York: Riverhead.

Radin, D., 2006. Entangled Minds. New York: Paraview.

Reber, A., & Reber, E., 2001. The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology(3rd

edition). London: Penguin

Richardson, K. (2000). The Making of Intelligence. London: Phoenix.


34/35

Senge, P., 1994. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the

Learning Organization. New York: Currency.

Shearer, B., 2004. Multiple Intelligences Theory after 20 Years.

Teachers College Record, 106(1), 2-16. Available from:www.tcrecord.org. [Accessed 27 June 2005].

Sheldrake, R., McKenna, T., & Abraham, R., 2001. Chaos, Creativity, and

Cosmic Consciousness. Rochester: Park Street Press.

Sheldrake, R., 2003. The Sense of Being Stared At and Other Aspects

of the Extended Mind. London: Arrow Books.

Slaughter, Richard. 2006. Beyond the Mundane Towards Post-

Conventional Futures Practice. Journal of Futures Studies. Vol

10, no. 4. Pp 15-24.

Sternberg, R., 2003. Wisdom, Intelligence and Creativity Synthesized.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Suicide is Painless, 1970 (Theme from M.A.S.H.). Copyright by

Twentieth Century-Fox Music Corporation.

Szuba, T., 2002. Was There Collective Intelligence Before Life On

Earth? World Futures, 58, 6180.

Talbot, M., 1992. Mysticism and the New Physics. New York: Arkana.

Targ, R., & Katra, J., 1999. Miracles of Mind: Exploring Nonlocal

Consciousness and Spiritual Healing. Novato: New World Library.

Tarnas, R., 2000. The Passion of the Western Mind. London: Pimlico.

Tart, T., 1993. Consciousness: A Psychological, Transpersonal and

Parapsychological Approach. Paper presented at the Third

International Symposium on Science and Consciousness in Ancient


35/35

Olympia, 4-7 January. Available from: www.paradigm-

sys.com/cttart/sci-docs/ctt93-capta.html. [Accessed 8 August 2005].

Torff, B., Sternberg, R. (eds). Understanding and Teaching the

Intuitive Mind. Mahwah: LEA Books.

Wallace B., 2003. The Buddhist Tradition of Samatha. In: F. Varela, &

J. Shear, eds.. The View from Within: First Person Approaches To the

Study of Consciousness. Thorverton: Imprint Academic, 175-188.

Wilber, K., 2000. Sex, Ecology, Spirituality. Boston: Shambhala.

Wilber, K., 2001. Eye To Eye. Boston: Shambhala.

Wilde, S., 2001. The Sixth Sense. Carlsbad: Hay House.

Yogananda, P., 1979. Autobiography of a Yogi. San Francisco: Self

Realization Fellowship.

Zohar, D., 2000. Spiritual Intelligence. London: Cygnus Books.

World Futures: The Journal of General Evolution

Documents