AQAL: The New Model of Human Consciousness

The AQAL model is, as far as I have found, by far the most comprehensive model of human consciousness, psychology, and development available at this time. While it certainly will eventually be replaced by a model even more complete, I believe this is the best map currently available for the territory of Conscious Evolution.

This model was first proposed by Ken Wilber in his opus Sex, Ecology, and Spirituality, and in A Brief History of Everything (essentially the Reader's Digest version of SES).

Much of this was in a comment I made on one of Daniel Pinchbeck's Reality Sandwich article, An Extravagant Hypothesis. I have added an explanation of the Quadrants, so that it is a fairly complete -- if very summary -- explication of Integral Philosophy's All Quadrants, All Lines, All Levels (AQAL) model. Those interested are highly encouraged to pick up Wilber's books for themselves. This information is exhaustively studied and documented, and is essentially the synthesization of literally millenia of anthropological, sociological, spiritual, and psychological systems and sciences from all over the world.

It must be understood that this is not "Ken Wilber's philosophy"! He is the author of its 20th century synthesis, and a genius of titanic proportions...but this is part of a continuum of knowledge going back at at least as far as the Great Greeks, and the Asian Philosophers as well. Indeed, Wilber's very first goal was to synthesize the knowledge from East and West.

As Wilber himself has said: (I'll have to paraphrase it a bit) We have seen farther because we are standing on the shoulders of giants...but we are standing on the shoulders of GIANTS, and we would do well to remember that.

This model is, I firmly believe, absolutely key towards the realization of our cause, especially as we deal with the mainstream. It, along with Wilber's thoughts on Holarchy and Value, are among his major contributions to our understanding of consciousness and psychological/psychic development.

Before I embark on this explanation, I feel this fact must be made very explicit: The Quadrants, Lines, and Levels are not things that exist, in and of themselves, per se.

They are merely perspectives one can take when observing and thinking about things that "do exist".

The picture at the top is an illustration of the concept. Again, it is very important to understand that this is not supposed to be an illustration of "the way it is"!

It is only a mnemonic tool which can aid in conception and understanding. To try and make it literal is to commit exactly the logical fallacy this model attempts to expose and make clear.

And let us never forget the Unity of Spirit. The quadrants are merely the ways in which Spirit manifests. But Spirit is never lost, Infinity is there the whole time.

In the diagram above, Spirit is the ink, the paper, the pixels, the Idea that preceded it, and the Hand which drew it all. There is nothing Spirit is not, and Spirit is No-Thing.

In the End, it is All One. This knowledge must be ever-present -- or fallacy is sure to follow.

First, the Quadrants:

The Quadrants are each equal in their Truth. No one Quadrant can be reduced to any other without remainder. The only way to have anywhere near a truly Holistic and Integral view of reality is to accept each possible perspective as equal, co-creating, mutually-causing, and important.

Previous to this model, persons would essentially pick their 'favorite quadrant' and attempt to explain all Truth solely from that perspective, or choose the line that seemed most important to them and attempt to explain all human development as corollary to that one kind of intelligence.

It is the repeated attempts to collapse Truth in to only one Quadrant/perspective that has caused the world of conflict in which we live today...so do your self a favor and avoid it. ^_~ Honor them each equally, and try to look at absolutely everything from all of them.

The four Quadrants are divided in to categories: The Individual and the Collective and the Interior and Exterior. The Individual is the top two categories, and the Collective the bottom two; while the Interior is the left side and the Exterior the right.

Therefore, starting from the top-left, we begin with the Interior-Individual perspective, also known as the Subjective. This is the Pure and Absolute Subject within each particle of existence. It regards what it 'feels like' to exist. Qualities such as beauty, love, and anger exist only on the Interior Quadrants. This is the understanding of Reality most obviously expounded by Buddhism and Hinduism, for example. The attempt to collapse all Truth in to this Quadrant is generally referred to as Solipsism or, less romantically, Ego-centrism.

The next Quadrant over is the Individual-Exterior, also known as the Objective. Every perspectival Subject is also itself an Object of perception from other perspectives . This is the realm in which one conceives of things in terms of Atoms, Molecules, etc. This is the dominant realm of Science. The attempt to collapse all Truth into this Quadrant is generally referred to as Scientism.

The Quadrant on the bottom left -- the first in the Collective segment -- is the Interior-Collective, also known as the Cultural. This is the general Quadrant of Post-Modernism -- the idea that we are solely the products of our upbringing and interaction within society. It is generally referred to as "nurture" in the "Nurture vs. Nature" debate. This is the Quadrant which contains the realizations of Mutual Understanding and communication with "others".

The last Quadrant, on the bottom-right, is the Exterior-Collective. This is the realm of systems theory, and deals with the interactions of exteriors with one another.

Steve McIntosh, in his book Integral Consciousness and the Future of Evolution, argues, quite effectively in my opinion, that the bottom-right Quadrant is merely an illusion caused by the attempted collapse of the other Quadrants into the third, the Objective Quadrant. This is what Wilber refers to as the 'Great Disaster of Modernity", and is responsible for much of the dehumanizing, reductive logic we suffer from today. This makes the "Q" in AQAL a bit of a misnomer, in my opinion. It is more a tetrant model, rather than a quadrant. Wilber himself frequently refers simply to the Big Three.

Note that it is in the Interior Quadrants that we find 'things' such as value, emotion, ideas, etc. They obviously "exist", in some way...but you can't point to them and say, "There it is." This is why science cannot see value or spirituality. Science focuses solely on the Exterior Quadrants. While you can see some effects of these things (due to the interactive, mutually-creating, co-causing nature of the dialectic between the Interior and the Exterior), you can't actually see them.

But that doesn't mean we can't perceive them.

You can't point at Love in the Exterior World...but you and I both know it when we feel it.

By this same token, we never really "see" the exterior. All we can interact with is the sensory information our body sends us, which our mind perceives as concepts and emotives. We see the effect of the Exterior on ourselves, but not necessarily the thing itself

The Interior and Exterior Quadrants are synonymous with Kant's theory of Noumenon and Phenomenon, which some of you may be aware of.

These three perspectives, Interior, Interior-Collective, and Exterior also correspond to the Socratic (I'm pretty sure it was Socrates...one of the Greeks, anyway) notions of The Beautiful, The Good, and the True. The Beautiful regards the Individual-Interior, the Good the Collective-Interior, and the True the Exterior. They are also referred to in our language as I, We, and It.

Now the Lines and Levels:

First and foremost: These must be understood as holarchies, not hierarchies. The 'Higher' levels include the 'Lower', not replace or destroy them; nor do they 'control and dominate' them.

The 'lines of development' in each person "evolve", in a dialectic fashion, up what has become known as the 'Spiral of Development' as they make their way through the various 'levels of development'.

Each "level" of development or consciousness has its own internal inconsistency (because it is a finite perception of infinity, and so is always going to be partial and hence incomplete).

Each "Higher' level solves the inconsistency of the level below it, but brings its own as well. Once this new inconsistency is discovered, the way is made for yet another new evolution and the next level...And Onward Towards Infinity.

Each level takes what is good from what came before, and leaves what was bad.

What also must be kept in mind is that each individual person has multiple intelligences, or lines of development, each of which must progress up the spiral individually. You can never really say someone is 'at' any level, per se, because each person has multiple lines each at their own stage of development. At best, one can get an 'average', or it can be thought of as a 'center of gravity'.

Me, for example: I have a high level of development on my spiritual line, but a low one on my financial intelligence. I'm horrible with money and finances, and am always screwing myself over on bills some way or another (the fact that the system is designed to take advantage of my sort doesn't help =P). I have a high level of development on my physical line, as I'm quite good at poi and juggle-sticks and whatnot...but my memory development is awful...I forget crap all the time, sometimes important crap (there may be certain, ah, habits I could forego to help this...but we'll cross that line when we get to it ^_~).

Some people are really good at music and have a massive 'musical intelligence'. Some have a head for numbers. We all have our inherent talents in one line or another, but we all have each of them.

At least a dozen of these lines have been agreed upon by developmental psychologists, and there are very likely many more. Personal development, then, is not a linear path. It is a vast landscape, and each person takes a different course.

Each line starts at square 1 in each person. Because of the Akashic Field/Collective Unconscious phenomenon, the more people that have 'achieved' any stage -- the more that level has been realized and lived -- the faster each individual can progress to that level, as this field acts as a sort of 'strange attractor' for development...but never can a level be skipped. Never can someone just suddenly become level 4 from level 2 without passing through level 3.

Sudden jumps can occur in heightened awareness, such as (but not limited to) psychedelic journeys. These are referred to in the Integral Model as peak experiences. But it takes time, energy, and practice to transform these temporary states into permanent traits.

The reason I believe this model is so important is that it opens a window of compassion on those who believe differently. The biggest flaw I see occur -- here, on RS, and a million other places (and, please...mea culpa far more often than I would like, believe me...just human here, and emotions are wily beasts) is attempting to have someone realize an idea, or using a course of rhetoric with them, that they simply aren't ready for, and then getting irritated when they don't understand or believe.

Trying to speak to your average Joe/Jill about, just for example, cosmic unity consciousness is comparable to speaking French to a !Kung tribesman:

You can yell as loud as you want, get mad, think they are stupid because your words seem so obvious and true to you, while they are just speaking in grunts and clicks...you can even attack the poor soul...but what you can't do is make them understand something that they have no conscious internal reference for, however violent or vitriolic you become.

The best thing to do is to listen, and try to get a feel for their language, rather than expecting them to speak yours. Listen for questions to answer, and think, "Okay, when I still had that question, what was it that finally sent it home for me?" And just work on that one question, rather than trying to speed up the process by giving them all of the answers all at once. I call this The Non-Aggro Method.

Try to build on what you both agree with, rather than fight over what you don't. Try to understand that the reason they don't believe you is because things look different from their perspective.

Heck, try to keep in mind that it might even be you that is wrong. =)

It also acts as a great humbler. The understanding of multiple lines virtually removes the arrogance of believing oneself to be 'more advanced' than others. Sure, you might be...on a few lines. Chances are, however, that they are more advanced than you on others. Everyone goes their own way, and there's really nothing to say which is the 'most correct'.

Above all, you want to remember that Progress is a function of Process, and have compassion and empathy. Remember, always, that you, yourself, were not born with this knowledge. Chances are, it took a lot of time (and most likely a lot of pain) for your own realizations. Why should it be any different for anyone else?

"Evolution occurs through Transformation, not Exhortation." To again quote Wilber.

It takes more time and patience, but I have had tremendous success with this technique over the years. Slowly but surely (and surely is the one that really matters), I have helped a decent number of people to understand and even change...one step at a time.

We must study everything from as many perspectives as possible, and understand the idiosyncratic nature of individual development. We need to take in to account the various realities created within this One Reality, rather than attempt to explain them all away.

There we go. I have tried to make this explanation as short and simple as I know how. In doing so, I have been forced to leave out much detail and the absolutely enormous body of evidence and thought which gave it birth and backs it up. If you liked it, I would recommend starting with Steve McIntosh's book Integral Consciousness and the Future of Evolution, as he has done an absolutely marvelous job of tracing the rise of Integral Consciousness, and has added many of his own modifications which I believe must be included.

I have also scattered links to resources throughout the piece, in case you didn't notice. ^_~

I also, of course, recommend Wilber's books for those who really want to get in to the idea. But McIntosh is a bit better at being concise, so I think it is the best place to start.

Namaste, friends.