1. Economics (Economy) [Economist] Per Individual Quadrant Mainstream and Heterodox Schools

2. Economics (Economy) [Economist] Per Collective Quadrant Mainstream and Heterodox Schools

3. Economics (Economy) [Economist] Per Level of Development Mainstream and Heterodox Schools

4. Object Economy: Using Holarchical Capital Vs. Flatland Capital Conceptions

5. Object Economy: Mainstream Micro-Economy by 8 Alternative Zones Method (Positive-Negative Times Internal-External Times Individual-Collective) Internal here is internal to market transactions

6. Object Economy: By Mainstream Financial Economic System by 8 Standard Zones Method Internal here is internal to market transactions

7. Subject Economist: Political-Economic Types

8. Holarchical Embeddedness By Individual Quadrant (Some Healthy and Unhealthy Elements)

9. Holarchical Embeddedness By Collective Quadrant (Some Healthy and Unhealthy Examples )

10. What does it mean to act or employ a method in zone 1? (Internal-Indivdual-Interior)? Method (A Subet of Action) Internalization + Individuation + Interiorization(Examples Later) Healthy: positive internalization autonomy reception Unhealthy:negative internalization dissociation introversion Holarchical Development (Bowman 2009) Drives Specify a dynamic drive

11. The Integral agent reconciles levels of one’s own being. On the Importance of Deeper Inclusion => work for that in socio-culture: stage 3: sacrifice for future, but in this life and not just for ones own group. a healthy culture would make all groups feel part of “our group”. (helpful for financial and enviro. stewardship) stage 4: continue to honor achievement. But not just survival of the fittest competition. Stakeholder groups are expected to serve the greater good with support for sound regulations and assistance to transition to new sectors/skills. stage 5: sensitivity of the marginalized and culturally created meaning. But in ways that honor validity claims to our best understanding of today. Help the disadvantaged in ways that foster meaningful development.

12. Integral Mathematics Vs. O’Connor’s Triadic-Quadratic Perspectives In IM: Person Perspectives Reduced to Quadrants 3 rd Person Perspsctive and Pronouns = Exterior = External 1 st Person Perspectives and Pronouns = Interior = Internal O’Connor’s (2008, 2010) Triadic-Quadratic Perspectives

13. Language in ISP (Bowman, 2013) State language tends to refers to holarcical embeddedness (Bob is tall and a relexive thinker) Action language tends to refer to field action (Bob ate a meal) Need the whole sentence to determine interior-exterior correlates I am tall (object refers to an exteriority) That is me I am a reflexive thinker (object refers to an interiority) That is me

14. The Philosophical/Grammatical Conflation (Bowman, 2013) Edwards’ (2003) and O’Connor’s (2008, 2010): Reduction of “I” to interior and “Me” to Exterior  Conflates dual definitions of the subjective-objective duality Philosophical: Subjective: requiring personal experience “Strawberries taste better than blueberries” Objective: does not require personal experience “the floor is not level”  True philosophically subjective-objective matches interior-exterior realms Grammatical: Subjective-Objective: relating to grammatical subjects-objects “Bob ate a meal” Grammatical Subject-Action Verb-Object  Subject-Action-Object Triad of ISP

15. Clarifying Methodologies with ISP (Bowman, 2013) Structuralism Examples (Wilber, 2006) “I can approach the ‘I’ from the outside, in a stance of an objective or ‘scientific’ observer.” Case A: “I can do so in my own awareness when I try to be ‘objective’ about myself” Case B: “and I can also do this with other ‘I’s’ as well, attempting to be scientific in my study of how people experience their ‘I.’” => Case A re-categorized as phenomenology in ISP

16. Clarifying Methodologies with ISP (Bowman, 2013) Phenomenology Example (Wilber, 2006) “a 1 st -person having a 1 st -person experience.” Does not qualify as a broad science in ISP Experience must be made an object of awareness to qualify

17. Epistemic Vs. Ontic Fallacies Ontic Fallacy – Prioritizing Ontology (Being/Object) over Epistemology (Knowing/Subject) Critical Realism (CR) prioritizes Ontology as Real and then derives Epistemology Claims Integral Theory suffers from Epistemic Fallacy - Prioritizing Epistemology (Hedulund-de Witt, 2012; Marshall, 2012) Wilber (2013): Integral Theory is Panpsychic (Interiors go all the way down) Eg., an atom must proto-know another atom in order to interactwith it. Neither Epistemology nor Ontology can be prioritized. Integral Theory in general does not suffer from the Epistemic Fallacy (Partially, I side with Wilber in Bowman, 2013) Yet, Wilber’s applications do suffer from it: Eg IM: no drives from object to subject, object environment is not examined (recall amber agent in Finland vs. Iraq)

18. Language in ISP (Bowman, 2013)

19. Language in ISP (Bowman, 2013)