The Journey to Wisdom

The quantum view explains the notion of relationships differently. We live in a fuzzy world where boundaries have an elusive nature and seldom mean what we expect them to mean. This aspect might drive us crazy as long as we focus on trying to specify them in terms of cause and effect relationships. Rather, we should try to see past the innumerable fragments to the whole, stepping back far enough to appreciate how things move and change as a coherent entity (Wheatley, 2000).

Being in the flow of the system means that we should participate in complex events occuring at the same time. Every small system participates in an unbroken wholeness (Wheatley, 2000). Activities in one part of the whole create effects that appear in distant places. Due to these unseen connections there is potential value in working anywhere in the system. We never know how our smal activities might affect others through the invisible fabric of our interconnectedness. So, in this quantum age, it is a question of 'critical connections' rather than critical mass.

The nature of the quantum world gives way to a unified whole that transcends our false sense of seperateness. Also, it encourages us to give up positioning things as polarities. We need to stop drawing lines of oppoisng views and try to understand the 'and' of one and one (Wheatley, 2000).

Quantum world is so strange that various new metaphors are being used. Zohar describes it as a "vast porridge of being where nothing is fixed or measurable...just beyond our grasp". Another scientist- Capra- defines it as a place where everything is interconnected like a vast network of interference patterns. Capra (1983) also stated that the universe looks more like a great thought rather than a great machine.

When the world started to be a machine and when we started to recognize its dynamic qualities many familiar aspects of it disappeared. Rather than searching for the basic building blocks of matter scientists discovered that things changed form and properties as they respond to one another and to the observer.

In the quantum world, relationships are all there is to reality (Wheatley, 2009). There are so many patterns of active relationship all in response to each other and to the environment that their 'elusive double lives' continue to tease us (Wheatley, 2009). Elementary particles like neurons, electrons..etc. come into being through interactions with other energy sources and no particle can be drawn independent from each other (Wheatley, 2009).

As human beings, we are at the edge of this new world of relationships. This world of relationships is rich and complex. To live in this quantum world with ease and grace, we need to change what we do. We need to become savy about how to foster relationships, how to nurture growth and development. We need to become better at listening, conversing, respecting one another's uniqueness as these are the fundamentals of strong relationships. We are no longer unconnected individuals. More and more relationships are out there in the vast web of life. Thanks to the power of the Internet, shouldn't we make a more meaningful use of this interconnectedness?

Collective wisdom grew through the practice of dialogue. Dialogue refers to a process of intellectual inquiry rather than of advocacy, a search for truth rather than a contest, people feel emotionally committed to the outcome (Charan, 2001). The outcome seems ‘right’ because people have helped shape it (p. 76).”

According to Senge, diaologue is a free flowing of meaning through a group, allowing the group to discover insights not attainable individually (1990, p. 10). It is the essence of creating shared meaning (Bohm).

Paradoxically, Zohar (1997) states that dialogue does not necessarily mean reaching consensus. Dialogue can and does generate complexity as well as contradiction. To underscore this, Zohar relates a famous Sufi story about the Mullah
Nasruddin. Nasruddin was a wise man or a fool, depending on your point of view. In this
particular story, two men have come to the mullah with an argument. The first man puts his
case, and Nasruddin says, “I perceive that you are right.” Then the second man puts his own
contradictory case, and once again Nasruddin says, “I perceive that you are right.” A third man looking on objects. How can Nasruddin say that both men are right when they entirely
disagree? To him Nasruddin says, “I perceive that you also are right.”

The richness of the dialogue under conditions of complexity generated learning that elevated collective wisdom.

For collective wisdom to arise, the decisions and approaches should be informed through a process Harvey (1995) identified as the “Accordion Model.” He characterizes the
accordion process as the closing and opening of bellows on an accordion. A small number of people work to breathe life into a project, then widen the process to gain input (collective wisdom, political/economic insight, content, tone, gaps, faulty assumptions or weak underpinnings, missed opportunities, potential areas of support and resistance). The results are then brought back for more reflection, dialogue, re-conceptualization, analysis and re-write. Like an accordion, the process, once again, expands out to the larger audience for more feedback, insight, etc. The “accordion process” continues until sufficient evidence suggests that there has been effective, broad-based input and dialogue.

Given the profileration of Web 2.0/3.0 and especially the social networking tools, we can make collective wisdom emerge. Ongoing reflection, re-conceptualization can breathe life into new ideas/projects and eventually contribute to 'wise dialogues'. Whether it is online or offline wisdom is what the humanity is in ever-increasing need. As T.S Elliott put forth "What happened to the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?".

The concept of autopoiesis was originally developed by the Chilean scientists Varela and Maturana. It is a term of Greek derivation and means self (auto) production (poiesis) (Smith, 1982). The main argument of autopoiesis theory is that living systems are created in an autonomous, simultaneously open and closed, self-referencing, and observing manner. Autopoiesis theory conceives living systems as being continually self-reproducing in terms of the processes that made them (Maturana, 1991). So, they everything the system needs for self-production is already in the system. The system’s production of components does not depend on an input-output relationship with the environment.

The interrelations between components of the system define a unity. While over time an autopoietic system changes its components its organization is maintained. When the organization is changed a new system with a new identity is formed. Main characteristics of autopoietic systems are (Varela & Maturana, 1991):

- Autonomy: This means self-control/ self-law. So, a system is autonomous if it can specify its own laws. So, unlike mechanistic systems, components and processes are realized as unities. They are not specified through input/output relations like in a computer.

- Simultaneously open and closed: Changes in autopoietic systems are induced by independent events and structural changes occur to compensate for these changes. These perturbations stimulate processes in the system itself that follows the self-defined rules of the system. The environment can never control or determine these changes. So, the system is open to energy, but closed to control. Information is continuously constructed rather than being solely a representation.

- Self-referential: This means that the knowledge collected by the system about itself affects its structure and operation. In contrast, non-living systems have a different relating operation to the inputs given.

Since its introduction, autopoiesis theory has gradually evolved into a general systems theory which can be utilized in various different fields. Its development in understanding social systems is intertwined with seeing systems as adapting to their environment. Through its biological roots, autopoiesis theory focuses on processes and relations between processes rather than on properties of components (Morgan, 1986). Whether we like it or not, we are autopoietic systems as well.

For some scientists, consciousness originates in quantum-mechanical activity and hence is a quantum-mechanical phenomenon. For others, it is an ingredient throughout the universe, permeating all levels of being- not only the human brain, but also individual subatomic particles. This takes us to the view that energy is the ground of the physical world.

Apart from being the source of the physical phenomenon energy is also the source of mental phenomena. So, during the past 15 billion years, potentials for both physicality and mentality have been actualized (Laszlo, 1987).

Schelling and Hegel maintained that the mind and nature are both simply different movements of one absolute Consciousness that manifests itself in its own successive stages of unfolding. So, Consciousness is infinitely expressing itself in the process of evolution. Consciousness or energy is the ground and source of all. Schelling also asserted that consciousness knows itself objectively as nature and subjectively as mind.

The process of evolution with regard to consciousness can also be described as follows (Laszlo, 1987):

"Neuronal systems generate mental metaphors of the physical situation and bring them together in one mental space. A selective attention mechanism allows the mental fields to be scanned in terms of survival significance and neuronal correlates are arranged to become available for unconscious processing."

According to this view, the creation of a mental workspace allows information to come together in a subjective arena in which selective attention enables a scan of data. Based on different kinds of relevance of data, mental images, thoughts and feelings are used as input for further processing. Although all the process seems to be done by neurons, between the physical events the information is transduced into mental form. So, the conscious field is a great and required simplifier. It is not epiphenomenal.

Consciousness has a deeper meaning and purpose. Some quantum physicists refer to consciousness in terms of the collapse of the wave function used to describe the probability distribution of all possible states of the observed system. At the moment the measurement takes place, the wave function collapses and one particular state appears as real. The great mathematician von Neumann stated that only the human consciousness can collapse this wave function. Similarly, the physicist Wigner mentioned that the consciousness has a different role in quantum mechanics than the measuring device and that impressions entering it influence the quantum descriptions of objects. So, reality is not determined until a conscious observer measures the phenomena. As consciousness is a complex concept it can best be explained by taking into account both science and spirituality rather than providing solely a materialistic point of view.

Science is objective and limited to rational consciousness while spirituality is subjective and mainly uses intuitive consciousness (heart). Science and spirituality use different tools when researching consciousness; yet they both search for the truth.

Science develops a model that describes measurements and if the model describes the data accurately, it is accepted to be a natural law. In case the new measurements deviate from the current knowledge the laws are changed in order to related to the new measurements. So, science is based on the rational consciousness and is interested in how the consciousness operates rather than why it exists.

Spirituality, on the other hand, is concerned with the aim of consciousness. The following issues in general have been addressed in all spiritual movements and religions:

- The purpose of consciousness is related to more than a materialistic view that sees it as residing within the brain.
- Everything that exists originates from the same consciouness and serves a purpose.
- As the truth cannot be described by the logical mind only it should better be felt by subjective experience.
- The goal of life is to overcome the limitations of ego, to subjectively recognize one’s own consciousness and to attain the wisdom.
- Unconditional love, compassion, faith, humility, patience, tolerance, simplicity, spontaneity, modesty, courage, sincerity and forgiveness are at the core of spiritual life.

Both science and spirituality, objective and subjective experience are necessary to achieve balance between rational and intuitive consciousness. Great philosophers from all religions and cultures remind us that both rational and intuitive consciousness are required to deal with the purpose of life.

A law is a pattern within chaos. It is the recognition of realities that do not change under transformations of state. So, everyone can agree upon from different standpoints as these patterns are not culture-, state- or, time-dependent. Science an dart involve a search for these patterns in an ever-continuing process without never attaining it (Brown & Wiegand, 2006).

Since the beginning of the history there has been a search for the universal laws. Starting with aphorisms based in folk wisdom, eight laws of the universe have been distilled later on. While the first four laws are laws of form, the other four are laws of process and are dynamic. To summarize these laws (Brown & Wiegand, 2006):

- The Law of Nothingness: Similar to the universe’s start with the big bang from a vacuum point, our lives started with a blast in the depths of unformed darkness. So, all things begin in the womb of nothingness. Remembering that we will return to ‘home’- the place of infinite potential- we may experience strength, joy and wisdom. By listening in reverence to the universe, our lives may be changed. In this way, we may become willing agents of the Universe and experience effortless effort and actionless action.

- The Law of the Progression of Contraries: The world progresses by the interplay of good and evil, light and darkness and the Hegelian process of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Each attribute is in harmony with its complement.

- The Law of Concealment: Most of the universe is unknown to us and life itself is a mystery. Nature reveals herself gradually without overwhelming us. It plays the game of hide and seek. Concealment and revelation are complementary processes necessary for learning.

- The Law of Revelation: According to this law, that which was concealed will eventually be revealed. What once was unclear may be perceived in fine detail at once. Self-knowledge, science and learning are all progressive revelations. As Blake stated if the doors of perception were removed every thing would appear as it is infinite.

- The Law of Emanation: This is the Law of Becoming and focuses on the emergence from the complexities of natural processes. Nature consists of the interplay of creation, destruction and pure energy. The emphasis in on bringing forth, emanating and emerging. Our wills are manifested by the flow of the impulses of the Nature.

- The Law of Sustenance: Life, projects and universes are supported through the multifarious things required. As we are too ignorant to take care of even our most humble affairs the sensible course is one of having absolute trust and expecting nothing.

- The Law of Dissolution: Everything that has a beginning has an end. Death and birth are symmetrical processes. All things born will decay and die.

- The Law of Recapitulation: This is the domain of the Absolute where only spirit exists.

Seeker of truth
follow no path
all paths lead where
truth is here
e.e. cummings

In quantum physics, relational holism refers to the process in which whole systems are created by the relationships among subatomic particles (Wheatley, 2006). The parts are drawn together by a process of internal connectedness; so they don’t remain as parts. As electrons cross paths with one another their own individual qualities become indistinguishable. As Zohar (1990) stated:

“The whole will possess a definite mass, spin and so on, but it is indeterminate which electrons are contributing what to this. As the constituent electrons’ properties continually change it is no longer meaningful to talk of their individual properties.”

In light of this information, it is not difficult to recognize ourselves as electrons moving, merging with others, forming new wholes, being forever changed in the process. We all have experienced things “coming together” or been in collective efforts that far exceeded what we could do alone. Yet, we rarely understood that we were participants in a universe that thrives on open information and that works with us to self-organize into systems of increased capacity.

Chopra states: “Information has a longer life span that the solid matter it is matched with…after all, a cell is a memory that has built some matter around itself, forming a specific pattern. Your body is just the place your memory calls home.”So, information is essential to vitality. It is necessary for new order, an order that we don’t impose, but order nonetheless. So, we must abandon our dark cloaks of control and trust in its need for free movement. All of life uses information in this way.

We have to be more open to meet the unending pressures for change; yet the concept of fluid and permeable boundaries sparked mostly fear (Wheatley, 2006). If we understand the deep support we have from natural processes it will help reduce some of this fear. It is not that we are moving toward disorder when we dissolve existing structures and speak of fluid boundaries. Rather, we are engaging in a fundamentally new relationship with order, order that is identified in processes that manifest themselves only as temporary structures (Wheatley, 2006). Order itself is a dynamic organizing energy rather than being located in a specific structure (Wheatley, 2006). Nourished by information, this organizing energy becomes the living universe. The gift is growth into new forms whereas life goes on richer and more creative than before.

Inclusionality refers to the awareness that space is a dynamic inclusion within, around and permeating natural forms across communities, providing opportunities for movement and communication (Rayner, 2007). The biologist Rayner views boundaries as comprising complex arrays of voids that emerge from the co-creative togetherness of inner and outer domains rather than being passively surrounding entities. So, boundaries are no fixed limits.

At the core of this definition is a shift in our frame of reality from totally fixed to relationally dynamic. This occurs due to the perception of space and boundaries as co-creative and connective. This new kind of thinking is a response to today’s bigger challenges (Boerwinkel, 1971). Throughout the history of the mankind, there have been accelerations, waterfalls and cascades- in Rayner's words- that require new types of thinking to deal with today’s increasingly complex problems.

Inclusionality entails “both-and” thinking rather than the exclusive antagonistic “or-or” thinking (we-they)”. It takes off the illusion (group-)ego- assumptions about independency and power over as these did not work in the past. Its concern is with how to make the transition of fighting for oneself towards freeing of everybody. Interdependency is the only type of dependency. As there is no “out-group” what we do with the other is what we do with ourselves. Such a shift requires going beyond the purely materialistic (group-)ego based on only five senses.

Inclusionality can also be applied to the field of learning. A wholebody approach can be adapted in which learning with mind and the five senses are accompanied by learning from heart and soul, including our intuition and sixth sense at both an individual and group level. Getting into contact with one’s inner senses, the higher self and with the void and the space of pure potentiality are essential.

Inclusionality in general implies becoming one by dissolving the illusion of becoming two. A marriage between ego and soul should also take place for inclusionality to happen. As Rayner (1997) claims, “we no longer see the world as an assemblage of isolated objects surrounded by emptiness, nor do we lose ourselves in the infinitude. We rather feel ourselves as ever-transforming through the dynamic, mutually breathing relationship of inner with outer through intermediary space”. We view ourselves as being coherent through the connectivity of our common space while remaining unique in our individually situated identities.

This ‘togetherness’ makes us adopt an open attitude towards ‘difference’. This means understanding that each view makes a unique and partial contribution to the overall picture, as in a hologram. Ultimately, we engage in the act of “creating the intuitive collective consciousness of humanity, and fulfilling the self-interest of the individual concurrent with the fulfillment of the self-interest of the whole.” (Raynerm 1997) While these Seeds of Wholeness from the past, present and the future grow and ripe we may evolve through this level of inclusive Becoming, and Dissolving, in our thinking and doing.

Since the beginning of history, leadership has been gaining a lot of attention. The Chinese philosopher Lao Tze was writing about it 2,500 years ago and due to the timelessness of his ideas, his work is still referred to.

The main characteristics of exemplary leaders have been identified by various leadership scholars such as Kouzes and Posner as follows:

- Challenging the process: Leaders search for opportunities. They experiment challenging other people to go out of their comfort zones.
- Inspiring a shared vision: Leaders envision a new future and motivate others to join n that new direction.
- Enabling others to act: Leaders strengthen others and foster collaboration.
- Modelling the way: Leaders set the example for people by their own leadership behaviour and get the process moving.
- Encouraging the heart: Leaders recognise individual contributions and celebrate team success.

Leaders possess the following vital competencies to realize their leadership (Crainer, 2006):

- Management of attention: Having a vision that commands the attention and commitment of the followers
- Management of meaning: Cutting through complexity to frame issues in simple images and language
- Management of trust: Expressing a consistency of purpose
- Management of self: Being adept at identifying and fully utilising one’s own strengths and seeking to develop one’s own areas of weaknesses

Last, but not least, leadership requires an emotional spark of ethos. As Marshal Slim stated in his book “Defeat into Victory” that morale is a state of mind. This state of mind makes individuals feel they are part of something greater than themselves. It is based on the following foundations according to their importance: spiritual, intellectual and material. As only spiritual foundations can stand real strain spiritual foundations come first. Intellectual foundations come next as men are swayed by both reason and feeling. Finally comes the material one as the highest kind of morale is often met when the material conditions are lowest (Slim, 1956).

Finding this emotional spark of ethos might require the practice of leadership skills on its own. Leadership is a way of both living and thinking that are essential to deal with the uncertainties of our world.

The 20th century witnessed the physicists’ struggle with their whole way of thinking when trying to understand the paradoxes of the universe. As Capra (1983) states in his book “The Turning Point”, these paradoxes indeed were essential aspects of atomic physics. Although their effects on the scientific view of reality were shattering.

In traditional science, the persistent belief is that studying the parts is the key to understanding the whole; so in order to learn more about the workings of individual parts, things are taken part and then put back together (Wheatley, 2006). Such a machine imagery is based on he world works of great scientists such as Newton and Descartes. This Newtonian science tries also to understand the world by focusing on the building blocks of matter that can be known through our physical senses. So, it was materialistic.

In contrast to Newtonianism, the new science focuses on the whole systems and their relationships within those networks. As the old Sufi teaching states: “You think because you understand one you must understand two, because one and one makes two.” So, to view systems from this perspective, we must not try to reduce phenomena to simple cause and effect relations or study its parts as isolated contributors.

In the quantum world, relationship is the key determiner of everything. Instead of existing as independent things, subatomic particles are observed only as they are in relationship to something else. As Heisenberg described it, the unseen connections between entities that were thought to be separate is the main ingredient of all creation. “The world appears as a complicated tissue of events in which connections of different kinds alternate and determine the texture of the whole.” (Heisenberg, 1958).

To understand life as life we should move away from the machine imagery (Wheatley, 2006). Like the human body that is an integrated system rather than a collection of discrete parts, the earth is a self-regulating system; a community of interdependent systems that create the conditions for life. These dynamics of living systems that reorganize themselves into greater order when confronted with change made scientists leave behind the machine model of life.

Moreover, new science should also take into account that both order and chaos are required for new creative ordering. Within a state of chaos, a system is held within well-ordered and predictable boundaries so that change can occur. New science also describes how order is created by simple rather than complex formulas which repeat back on themselves through the exercise of individual autonomy (Wheatley, 2006).

New science is changing our beliefs and perceptions. Scientists start to move away from the mechanistic worldview and speak in terms of fluid and invisible fields without any boundaries that can grow and adapt to life. After all, wouldn’t this be very illuminating for scientists themselves, as well?

Morphic fields are patterns that repeat themselves whenever new biological forms are created to reinforce the form (Sheldrake, 2004). Sheldrake (2004) points out that human brains and nervous systems are connected via such fields so that thoughts and emotions can be shared. This electromagnetic field has been referred to by Laszlo as 'psi' fields which might contribute to the development of human consciousness.

Similarly, the quantum physicist Bohm called the intelligence in the universe as 'quantum potential'. He believed that the content of each of our consciousness is an enfoldment of the totality of physical, mental, internal and external existence. So, by bringing about a mode of thinking which begins from the most encompassing possible whole and goes down to the sub-wholes based on the actual nature of things a new reality can be manifested. An integral thinking- 'quantum thinking'- is required for bringing about this reality.

Another spiritual philosopher, Si Aurobindo, used the word 'involution' instead of 'enfold' to explain the implicate order of the universe; namely the interconnected whole. He stated that there must be an involution of the Divine before there could be any evolution. The divine spark is rolled up in the stuff of matter itself and is latent in all life. Accordingly, evolution is the progressive unfolding of Spirit out of the density of material unconsciousness (Combs, 1996).

This spiritual impulse of life is ever-originating due to continuous renewal. To make the shift to a more holistic structure of experience rather than being rooted in a perspectival ego we should let go of our dominant mental structures and go beyond current rational thought.

The integral thread is the acknowledgment that human development and consciousness evolve from this divine spark that is universal. Our attachments to the material world and to our identities in that world keep us disintegrated with ourselves and separate from each other. So, as Senge said, connecting with the larger field that goes beyond what exists now opens up a great power and beauty.

In the last quarter of the twentieth century, the Integral worldview started to emerge as a response to the discoveries of quantum physics, chaos, complexity and system theories (Wilber, 2003). This new perspective of the world embraces a “both/and” rather than an ‘either or” universe. As Maxwell (2002) states; this new mode of perception goes beyond the illusion of separateness between scientific and spiritual understanding. It discerns the unity underlying diverse forms of existence and supports a holistic perception of the cosmos.

This revolutionary thinking has already been recognized by physicists such as Heisenberg, Bohm and Einstein. They already recognized the link of particles to every other particle in the universe. As Einstein stated the source of all true wisdom lies in embracing all living creatures in the whole of nature and its beauty. Only by widening our circle of understanding and compassion can we be freed from the delusion of being separate from each other.

According to Wilber’s Integral perspective, each stage of expansion the prior ones in terms of developmental aspects of consciousness transcends. The term “Integral" refers to a sense of being all encompassing. Each step is required while moving to more complex levels of consciousness. The level of awareness is manifested through modes of thought and actions. Integrative and holistic values are exhibited at the more complex levels of consciousness. Each phase is interdependent with all the others and the collective consciousness is aware of the active participation in the evolution of the humanity.

The origins of this holistic perspective can be traced back to leading scholars and theorists such as Laszlo, Wilber, Gebser, Beck, Whitehead and de Chardin. Both self-knowledge and world knowledge are essential to such an integral worldview. Similarly, the interrelatedness that connects all phenomena was also acknowledged in other fields of science, spirituality and philosophy.

As the future of the evolution of human consciousness depends upon going beyond the acceptance of multiple viewpoints we should be able to recognize the organic and interconnected nature of the universe.

The integral mindset is one of fluidity, openness to invention, inquiry, complexity, chaos, quantum and emergent phenomena (Laszlo, 2002). To fully engage in life and bring forth new knowledge the following building blocks play an important role: the art of critical thinking, the joy of discovery, love of learning, developing curiosity, risk taking. Without taking these factors into account, the integral mindset cannot be realized.