At this juncture in history it might be very worthwhile to refer to an American researcher who some 50 years ago did some research that can be very relevant to us at present. I am referring to a psychologist called Dr Clare W Graves (1914-1986). He apparently sought to make sense of the often-conflicting theories of the great psychological theorists of his time. Graves described values as a basis of human evolution.
He then eventually arrived at what he called ‘The emergent, cyclical, double helix model of adult bio-psychosocial systems development’. Hell, I know that it sounds ominous! How does one remember phrases like that?
However, do not worry; the essence of Gravesian theory and technology is that the thinking patterns (maps) of individuals, groups, and societies are the product of their response to the challenges of existing in their particular environment, be it physical, social, political, economical, technological, ecological, or whatever.
As the environment and the challenges of existence for humans change, so their thinking patterns (maps), and values (coloured spectacles with which humans view their maps), clearly also change.
Individuals as well as groups of humans can, and do, move along the mentioned helix, or spiral, to levels of greater complexity of thinking (hopefully conceiving better, or more accurate, maps) which are appropriate to their new environment.
If there is any truth in the Gravesian approach, it can simplify our approach to the complexity of the human world already mentioned. It will clearly again be only yet another model, or map, of the human reality, and as such we must be careful not to confuse this model and the reality it will represent once again!
There is the old scientific pitfall looming again. We must be careful not to step into any ‘Black Holes’ on our way. Are there perhaps any ‘White Holes’, by the way?
When, according to Graves, it is understood that people at different levels of development, none of which should be considered superior or inferior to any other level according to him, perceive the world around them in different ways – and are likely, in developing, to perceive it in different ways again –- we can simplify our view of the human world tremendously. We can hopefully then apportion the necessary blame for the predicament of the earth also more equitably….
The intersections of the Gravesian double helix represent problems of human existence and the subsequent human response to them – the thinking pattern that emerges at that particular level. Graves gave them alphabetical values.
The levels of thinking identified by Graves are, in ascending order of complexity, are as follows:
- First level – AN – Biological survival. This is characteristic of hunter / gatherer bands.
- Second level – BO – Animalist tribalism. A belief in spirits, magic, and close identification with the tribal order.
- Third level – CP – Achievist. A breaking away from the tribal order, personal ambition, often accompanied by an urge for power.
- Fourth level – DQ – A concern for order, correctness, doing things the right way, an intolerance of dissent. This is characteristic of certain religions and ideologies.
- Fifth level – ER – Entrepreneurial drive. A quest for the good life here and now. Strategic thinking and the capacity to strike deals.
- Sixth level – FS – A reaction to the above, a concern for justice and community.
- Seventh level – GT – Integrated, holistic thinking, a capacity for taking the large view.
- Eighth level – HU – This level apparently is still emerging. A concern for global issues and continued human survival.
Graves did not mention any further levels, but I am not satisfied with this sudden finale. I am sure Graves was not too much concerned about any higher levels, seeing that his eighth levels is even now only emerging. However, for me the extension of these levels was very important – and for a reason. The next level might just be an important escape route for Earth, considering the size and growth of human population as such.
If one considers the English historian Arnold Toynbee’s (1889-1975) work, A Study of History, on the great known human civilisations, it would seem that all civilisations are born, grow, reach maturity, and then usually decline quite sharply at a certain point. Sorokin’s work must also be mentioned here.
Pitirim Alexandrovitch Sorokin (1889-1968) was a Russian-American sociologist who founded the department of sociology at Harvard University in 1930.
In the history of sociological theory, Sorokin distinguished three kinds of socio-cultural systems, namely:
- Sensate (empirical, dependent on and encouraging natural sciences);
- Ideational (mystical, anti-intellectual, dependent on authority and faith), and
- Idealistic (the harmonious blending of the sensate and the ideational).
In his monumental four-volume work (Social and Cultural Dynamics) written between 1937 and 1941, Sorokin created a grand scheme for the synthesis of Western history which is based on the cyclical waxing and waning of three basic value systems that underlie all manifestations of any culture.
The reasons for the decline of civilisations are usually catastrophic (natural catastrophes or attacks by human enemies), or the civilisation runs out of natural resources, and more importantly also because of common human decadence, and this is possibly yet another Gravesian level. All human civilisations eventually become decadent! Nevertheless, while civilisations are functioning they seem cyclically to wax and wane through Sorokin’s basic value systems.
Sorokin’s analysis suggests very forcefully that the crisis we are facing today is no ordinary crisis, but one of the great transition phases, that have occurred in previous cycles of human history.
These profound cultural transformations do not take place very often. According to Lewis Mumford (1895-1990), there may have been fewer than half a dozen in the entire history of Western civilisation. Among these is the rise of civilisation with the invention of agriculture at the beginning of the Neolithic period, the rise of Christianity at the fall of the Roman Empire (circa 395-500 AD), and the transition from the Middle Ages to the Scientific Age.
The transformation we are experiencing now may well be more dramatic than any of the preceding transformation because the rate of change is more extensive, involving the entire globe, and because several major transitions are coinciding.
The rhythmic recurrences and patterns of rise and decline that seem to dominate human cultural evolution have somehow conspired to reach their points of reversal at the same time.
The decline of patriarchy, the end of the fossil-fuel age, and the paradigm shift occurring in the twilight of the sensate culture are all, contributing to the same global process.
The current crisis, therefore, is not just a crisis of individuals, governments, or social institutions; it is a transition of global dimensions. As individuals, as a society, as a civilisation, and as a planetary ecosystem, we are reaching what Fritjof Capra (The Turning Point, 1983) would refer to as ‘a turning point’!
Thus, considering Sorokin and Toynbee’s work – these Gravesian levels of development are not always on the incline, but eventually they must, and will, finally decline! There is always finally an ultimate demise of every civilization.
Share
Print
Save