A Serious Thing/ Just to be Alive
Mary Oliver
There are many days and many times
I go about my business of just being alive and I ignore all the wonder and music around me.
I walk right past the most exquisite sounds chirping and trilling and speaking to me.
I get in my car, turn on the radio, and drown out the morning chorus with harsh human songs and human news.
And I miss the daily symphony of Life.
It is a serious thing
just to be alive
on this fresh morning
in this broken world.
* * *
I discovered this poem recently. The online source says is to be found in Mary Oliver’s Red Bird collection, but I can’t find it there! I hope I will be forgiven for sharing it anyway… Even stranger, perhaps, is the way that I felt especially drawn to the last few words: “…in this broken world.” And then, for some reason that led me to revisit some of my thoughts on human development – especially the slow pace of this development, in the context of our current national and world reality.
Many years ago I encountered some theories and research that offered some explanations – to me, compelling – of human development. I feel drawn to share this model again, in the context of our current political and social reality. First – and to me, this is always essential in talking about developmental theories and models – I want to emphasize that development is, as I like to say, complex and messy. The boundaries of developmental stages blur: movement through stages is dynamic and fluid. We may at any given time have our “center of gravity” in a particular stage of meaning-making, but we are always falling back into old familiar frameworks and stretching to new horizons.
And another thing: it is notoriously hard to “see” where we are on the developmental journey. Some say we tend to over-estimate our own stage! Finally, we have to exercise great caution in attempting to assess the developmental stage of social groups: any one group is likely to include people at several stages.
So, all that said, I’d like to begin laying out some contemporary descriptions of the stages we are most likely to encounter in our world. (Because this is my focus, I’m not beginning with levels of development that are less common these days and less relevant in our time.) I begin each description in the “voice” of a hypothetical someone whose “center” lies in that stage.
Developmental Stage 3: Mythic-Literal, Conformist
I now take on for myself the stories, beliefs, and observances that symbolize belonging to my faith family. I believe in them literally and absolutely, and believe that my salvation depends on my observance of the moral codes that are part of the truth that has been given to us. There is only one truth, one path, and one purpose for my life, which is obedience to the will of God (etc.) as given to us by our faith leaders, whose authority is absolute. My personal relationship to God/Allah/Deity is a driving force in my life.
Here these is a fairly solid mental self (described as concrete-operational), differentiated from the emotional and physical self, and an ability to narrate one’s own experience. There are internal scripts that define what is right and wrong. But it is essentially the group’s story that is taken as one’s own. Sacred texts are interpreted literally, often with a focus on a few select segments. Social and moral roles and rules are understood as givens and shape the meanings that govern life for these older children and early adolescents (as well as about 10 percent of adults). Hierarchy is respected in the group to which one gives allegiance. This stage is often described as ethnocentric, with “ethno” referring to any group with which one is identified. There is an in-group and an out-group, with little recognition of individual differences. The membership group may be traditional or nonconformist, based on peer group, family, religion, nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and so forth. Fairness and reciprocity matter within the boundaries of the group, and “our God” is likewise seen as fair. (If something goes wrong, it implies that the individual has done something wrong or bad. Guilt keeps the individual in line.)
Developmental Stage 3/4: Conventional, Traditional, Interpersonal
I am still embedded in the rules and roles that have been given to me by my parents, my faith community, and my society. My relationships are central in my life, but are more complex than they used to be. I am aware that I am also an individual with my own personality traits. I often find myself caught between my own needs and the expectations of others. Because I am increasingly aware of my own thinking and experience, I often feel quite self-conscious. But I am comforted by my personal relationship with God, who knows and loves me.
A transitional stage, this characterizes mid-adolescence and is also estimated to describe about 37 percent of the adult American population. The capacity for what is called “early formal operations”- (a “new” level of cognitive functioning) has now developed, making it possible to think about the future, acknowledge one’s accountability to others, and understand that others have their own perspectives. On the whole, however, those whose center of gravity is at this stage still find themselves enmeshed or fused with their interpersonal relationships. They cannot stand outside their own values and beliefs in order to critique them. Some people at this stage find themselves beginning to seek and question (particularly in adolescence), while others are very set and certain in their beliefs (especially if they are a bit older and chose not to question the beliefs established at the Mythic, Conformist stage.)
Developmental Stage 4: Rational, Self-authoring, Individual, Modern Achiever
When I begin to feel constrained or disillusioned by the conformist/conventional worldview, I begin searching for my own way. I am more able to reason abstractly, to consider alternative possibilities, and to think about thinking. As I think more for myself, I am no longer embedded in social systems. Individual mastery, problem solving, goal-oriented planning, and achievement are important to me, and I like being acknowledged for my successes. I am more scientific in my approach and also appreciate systems of thought that highlight individual rights. My view of the world is more relativistic. There are no absolutes any more. I distrust authority and take responsibility for making my own meanings. I am the author of my own life.
This stage is estimated to be characteristic of about 30 percent of the adult American population. With the full development of the cognitive capacity for formal operational thinking, there is an increasing capacity for critical reflection on one’s identity and meaning structures. This is sometimes described as a demythologization process, characteristic of the modern mind. Former myths, symbols, and conventions lose their significance. In their place, reason and individual conscience play prominent roles in decisions. We may view atheism or agnosticism as expressions of spiritual orientation at this stage. Emotion and intuition tend to be dismissed as guides for action, and there is often a lack of connection with bodily experience. The influence of unconscious motivations is disregarded. Individual rights are respected, and the circle of care and compassion expands beyond one’s own group to all people (shifting from ethnocentric to world centric). At the same time, the ability to step fully into other perspectives is typically lacking. We may describe this as tolerance, or simply agreeing to differ. No one person or group has “the truth,” but rational approaches are still privileged. Individual striving and achievement are prized, and hierarchies based on achievement command respect.
Some models propose that this is a more typically masculine path in our culture. From this perspective, many women move out of conformist/conventional (stage 3/4) into a subjective mode that is still oriented toward personal meaning, but more influenced by an intuitive inner voice than by a rational way of knowing. When this evolves into a reason-based, procedural mode, it is often as a result of formal education. But even within procedural knowing, there are two possible flavors. One is separate knowing, which is much like the individual/achiever form described above. The other is connected knowing, which converges with Carol Gilligan’s work on moral development. (Critiquing Lawrence Kohlberg’s research on moral development as biased toward males, Gilligan (a well-known psychologist and feminist, who is now 88) argued, based on her research, that female moral development emphasized care and relatedness over individual rights.)
Developmental Stage 4/5: Affiliative, Relativistic-Sensitive, Postmodern, Pluralistic
In this way of making meaning, I am capable of even more cognitive complexity. I can criticize systems of thought, see patterns, and consider alternative possibilities and paradoxes. What is emerging more strongly now is an orientation toward relationship. I have an intimate connection with both the object of knowledge and my partners in dialogue. I like to share experiences and don’t like debate and argument. I value harmony and empathize with other points of view. I like to think of myself as tolerant and accepting of everyone’s viewpoint. All truths are relative and emerge in a particular cultural and historical context. Honoring diversity matters a lot to me. In my faith/spirituality, the power of symbols, myths, and rituals is now reintegrated with conceptual meanings, and I am open to the voices of my deeper self and my personal unconscious.
Here we are looking at cognitive development that is described as capable of mature formal operations and early postformal operations. Estimated to describe about 10 percent of the adult population, this postmodern stage emphasizes the importance of context. Truth depends on the point of view of the observer. With increased empathy, psychological mindedness, and ability to take multiple perspectives, this stage brings the potential for significant expansion and deepening of spiritual perspectives. A worldcentric orientation may even embrace all beings, in what is sometimes described as a cosmocentric view. Social engagement and activism may emerge from this sense of interconnectedness. Hierarchical structures of any kind are typically rejected.
Still, there are some limitations to this way of knowing. For example, Relativists are often not very tolerant of those who view the world from a conformist/conventional perspective. While they can see the possibility of a universal, inclusive human community, they are still wed to their own perspective and well-being. They tend to have difficulty dealing with the inharmonious elements of difference of opinion and negative emotions, especially anger. So it is easy to fall into a pattern of “being nice.” In groups of like-minded others, avoidance of conflict sometimes means that very little actually gets accomplished. Awareness of multiple perspectives can also lead to a new kind of identity crisis, a paralysis of overprocessing, or an exclusive reliance on intuitive knowing that totally excludes rational considerations. Related to this latter point is a postmodern tendency to revere the perspective of stage 2, the Intuitive-Projective, Magical-Impulsive stage. The rejection of modern rationalism often leads to a nostalgic longing for the prerational worldview that is associated with both the innocence of childhood and the premodern cultures of indigenous peoples.
Developmental Stage 5: Integrative, Integral, Authentic, Multiperspectival, Self-Actualized
I can now naturally make room for people who inhabit all the prior stages. I am at home in a global, big-picture view of all these complex systems, understanding that they are in flow and that a certain amount of chaos and change is natural. I deeply appreciate paradox and dialectical processes. I embrace such apparent opposites as mind and body, reason and emotion, masculine and feminine, conscious and unconscious, self and other. I am at home in life and in myself, and am able to bring forth my gifts in an authentic way, often in service to others.
With a solid foundation in postformal cognition, people whose center of gravity is in this stage probably make up about 5 percent of the adult US population. This stage is just beginning to emerge in the population. The Integral stage is characterized by a deeper openness to other traditions and perspectives. In addition, the illusions of earlier stages (that the self will triumph over suffering, loss, death, or that the Mystery may eventually be penetrated and cognitively understood) fall away, which may leave the individual with a new sense of existential isolation and uncertainty.
Pitfalls and Benefits of a Developmental View
A few closing comments…here is the first. Both the Rational Modern Achiever and the Postmodern Pluralist, despite embracing more perspectives, can be critical of those at the Conformist and Conventional stages. It is not until development moves well into the Integral stage that there is a deep capacity for acceptance of all the preceding stages of meaning-making. This does not necessarily mean they are all seen as “equal” in the context of human life unfolding on the planet, but they are all embraced as valuable parts of the human journey. There is a capacity to interact with authentic, loving respect and skill with people who inhabit each stage.
Here is my second comment. The risk of biased judgment certainly exists when the model is based on a developmental framework. A common critique of this model is that a hierarchical lens easily lends itself to abuse. For instance, the colonial and Western-oriented writings of scholars in anthropology and religious studies were vulnerable to arrogant judgment of the “lower” levels of development. But prejudiced, unwise use of the hierarchy concept does not necessitate the avoidance of all hierarchical lenses. Any contemporary use of a hierarchical framework needs to be committed to the awareness, sensitivity, and responsibility that are the fruits of those earlier distortions. The blanket avoidance of all possibilities of hierarchical organization becomes its own kind of self-limiting prejudice.
But – a developmental lens can help us relate to a range of perspectives with more understanding and compassion, not less. We can appreciate that any framework of meaning has its place in human life and this is definitely not “patronizing tolerance.” We can see how a particular worldview unfolded, and how it makes coherent sense to those who inhabit it. There is a growing capacity to approach those who hold a particular perspective in a more respectful and skillful way, not assuming that everyone sees the world the way that we do. This is very helpful in working with our fellow citizens (incuding counseling clients).
It’s also important to highlight an important distinction between oppressive (or dominator) hierarchies and growth (actualization) hierarchies. We recognize the former in any system that values “power over,” emphasizing domination, oppression, and exploitation. Actualization hierarchies, on the other hand, point to the unfolding of potential, the process of growth itself. We see the latter in the natural world, in the development from atoms to molecules to cells to organisms. In humans, healthy development involves an increase in both complexity and the capacity for caring and understanding—represented in widening circles from egocentric (me) to ethnocentric (my group) to worldcentric (all human beings, all life on the planet), and eventually to cosmocentric (the whole cosmos). Every new level, if it emerges in a healthy way, both transcends (reaches beyond) the preceding level and includes (embraces) it. A growth hierarchy actually points to a lessening of oppression and domination. The recognition of this potential invites us to consider human development as a process of transformation, with increasing depth and scope along the way.
Perhaps this introduction can help to open our eyes and hearts to more understanding and compassion in relating to current life on our planet. As long as we’re alive, we can grow. Perhaps we can begin to see the world beyond our familiar lens, which often causes us to “miss the daily symphony of life”? Perhaps we can recognize “the serious thing” to which we are invited –
It is a serious thing
just to be alive
on this fresh morning
in this broken world.
* * *
My thanks to Vero Lova for her image. I’ve chosen it because in a very simple and beautiful way, it includes “development” from tiny buds to full flowerings.
For a helpful introduction, see Elizabeth Liebert, Changing Life Patterns: Adult Development in Spiritual Direction (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2000).