Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
The Theory of Positive Disintegration by Kazimierz Dabrowski.
.
Everybody Has to Be Somewhere: Speculations on the Relativity
of the Self.
William Tillier
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Paper presented at the 1996 Dabrowski conference. The figures are not included here, if you want
them, please consult the pdf version of the document.
Abstract
Dabrowski presents a multileveled, hierarchical theory of personality development. A review of the
implications of Einstein's relativity theory for psychology provides a helpful context for Dabrowski's
work. In addition, recent works on personality provide further context. The implications for Dabrowski's
theory are explored and suggestions made concerning the usefulness of this approach for
psychology.
Everybody Has to Be Somewhere: Speculations on the Relativity of the Self.
Dabrowski's theory (1937, 1964, 1966, 1967, 1970, 1972, 1977; Dabrowski and Piechowski, 1977),
provides a powerful tool of analysis for studying psychology. His multileveled approach advances and
strengthens our understanding of the self and of how individuals see themselves, others, and the
world. An appreciation of Einstein's theory of relativity provides a helpful analogy and context to
Dabrowski's work. This paper will review the implications of Einstein's work on frames of reference,
and their relativity as an analogue to a multileveled approach to psychology. The vital roles played by
overexcitability and by subject-object in shaping the multilevelled view will be considered. Implications
of multilevelness will be discussed on both personal and social levels with speculations on the
developing self within a relativistic context. To conclude, recent literature on personality will be
reviewed and linked to Dabrowski's ideas.
Contextual Overview: A Multilevel Paradigm.
Today, many scientists express an appreciation for the deeper, multi-layered organizational structures
that form the foundation of systems and for the complex interrelationships between systems.
Scientists like Brian Goodwin (1994), George Johnson (1995), Stewart Kauffman (1995), Scott Kelso
(1995), and Murray Gell-Mann (1994) are leading the way in looking for deeper, organizing and
unifying principles. These approaches lead us away from relativism toward an appreciation of the
TOP Main Page Brief Overview Glossary Order DVD Bibliography Supplemental
fundamental universality of Nature.
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
Parallels between Dabrowski and recent directions in science are obvious. Both are trying to mine
"deeper layers" and both appreciate how seldom the surface reflects the reality of the "whole picture."
In both science and psychology, we have come to understand some parts of "the surface" in great
detail but we need to remember that this only begins to account for the great complexity and
interrelationships that exist below the surface. Dabrowski was trying to achieve a level of analysis that
could more realistically explain both the breadth of behaviour seen "on the surface" and the "depth"
and complexity of psychology and personality. Personality cannot be understood simply by the study
of behaviour. Theories of personality must be generated and measured against behaviour, just as
theories of Nature have to be generated and measured by empirical observation.
The paradigms we adopt to understand the world continue to yield to new world views. Man was the
universe until Copernicus. The Copernican universe gave way to Kepler. This was followed by a
Newtonian universe until Einstein. Do the trends reflected in recent scientific literature herald the
beginning on another shift in our world view? I believe they do and that the multilevel approach will
play a major role in the paradigm emerging from recent work.
As theory and research continue, specific links between developments in science and Dabrowski's
ideas will be forged, reviewed and clarified. For example, is there a relationship between the recent
theory of emergence and Dabrowski's third factor? Is there a basic tendency for all natural systems
(from single cells to personalities) to organize themselves and to try to move (to emerge) to higher,
"more elegant" levels?
This paper will begin to shape these links by discussing relativity and relating it to multilevelness and
Dabrowski's theory.
Relativity and Frames of Reference in Physics.
The study of relative frames has a long history, perhaps beginning when Galileo presented a theory of
relative motion in 1632. He described shipboard experiments showing that a coin dropped on the deck
of a ship would land at the feet of a sailor whether the ship was moving or not. Newton also
incorporated relativity into his laws of motion. Modern relativity theory postulates the existence of an
infinite number of possible frames of reference and rests on the idea that each frame must be
considered relative to each other frame (Robinson 1990).
Einstein established modern relativity by combining two ideas in his special theory of relativity. The
"old" principle of relativity, says that all of the laws of physics are the same in every frame of
reference. Einstein advanced relativity by adding the idea that the fastest signal speed possible is the
speed of light in a vacuum and that the speed of light must be the same in all frames. Therefore,
according to Einstein's theories, later confirmed by experiment, while various other quantities can
vary, all measurements of the speed of light taken in any frame of reference must produce the same
result (Robinson 1990, p. 46). This "requirement" of Nature produces many odd situations and
unexpected results when comparing two or more frames.
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
Problems quickly arise when comparing experiences or perceptions between frames and relating
information from two frames can be like looking in the "fun-house mirror." Two events that appear
simultaneous from one frame may appear separate from another frame. Space, time and mass
become fluid relationships that no longer can be thought of as representing fixed quantities. Because
they represent relationships, their values will vary from one frame to another, to ensure that the Laws
of Nature (and the speed of light) "come out" the same in all frames (Johnson, 1995). "As two
laboratories move through space at different velocities, length will contract, time slow, mass increase
by just enough to guarantee that the rules that govern creation appear the same in both domains"
(Johnson, 1995, p. 73). Measured quantities will vary as required to "even things out" between frames
to ensure that the relationships between the quantities remain the same in any frame. Through this
mechanism, scientists conducting experiments in any frame will discover the same Natural Laws of
the Universe.
Our perceptions of the physical world are valid and accurate for us in our frame, as are those of others
in their frames. However, a comparison of the frames of two people reveals that perceptions of space
and time are quite different. Let us consider a specific example. Two observers meet and carefully
synchronize their watches, then one begins a rocket flight. The watches now are running in two
frames, both of which are governed by the identical laws of physics. In spite of this, subsequent
measurements comparing the time displayed on the watches will not agree. The timepiece on the
spacecraft will "run slower" and will show a slower time compared with the one on the ground
(Robinson, 1990; Schwinger, 1986). Within each frame, each watch will be perceived to be correct
and can be measured to be accurate and running normally. In fact, our normal perception of time
passing would hold. Although it would intuitively seem that one watch must be "wrong," each is correct
within its own frame of reference.
The space and time of each frame differ because each frame "splits" or divides space and time in a
different way. Again, space and time are not absolute and distinct quantities; each can vary depending
upon the specific circumstances of a given frame. Space and time are also dependent, they are
connected because both are components of the broader phenomenon known as space-time
(Robinson, 1990, p. 49).
In summary, all observers within one frame will have the same perceptual space and time, but
observers in another relative frame will have a different perceptual space and time (Robinson 1990).
Discrepancies in comparisons of frames are a central and common problem in psychology because
two people viewing what is apparently the same situation, generally will perceive and interpret what
they see quite differently. To paraphrase Max Weber, our highest ideals will be formed through a
struggle of interpretations, ideas and other ideals that will be as vital and important to others as they
are to us.
As described, when measured quantities are compared between two frames, discrepancies will often
be observed. However, these differences are not random. They are the product of complex and
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
precise mathematical laws. These laws always reflect two important aspects of Nature, projection and
horizon (Robinson 1990). To understand these features, imagine yourself standing on a set of train
tracks that extend infinitely over a flat desert terrain. As you look down the tracks, you will see "the
results of a projection process that takes place in the retinas of [the] eyes" (Robinson 1990, p. 375).
At a point corresponding to the horizon, the projective process brings the tracks together where they
seem to meet and disappear. A person standing anywhere on the tracks will see the two rails
converge at a finite point on the horizon. The observer's perception of this "fact" will be identical no
matter where on the tracks they stand. Moreover, anyone else standing in the same position will see
essentially the same view.
Wherever a person stands on the tracks, he or she will be standing at the centre point of a finite view
projecting between horizons on either side. This center point is experienced psychologically and is
commonly used to judge "where we are." "Each of us must judge other things in relationship to our
own values, which is equivalent to saying that we consider our location as the center point of the road
with no ending" (Robinson, 1990, p 377). The perceptual space between the two horizons represents
the inertial frame of reference for a given person.
Projection in our example corresponds to the principle of relativity in nature, that all of the laws of
Nature are the same in every frame. Each person can position himself anywhere on the track and will
still see the same projection of the track (Robinson, 1990).
The horizon is an artificial psychological limit. As one moves down the track, the horizon will
correspondingly move but the view will remain constant. In a sense, this is a real life example of the
practical limits of human neuropsychology, one illustrating the ease with which reality is modified. In
reality, the tracks never meet, the joining at the horizon is a psychological construct. As Robinson
notes, our world "is projected into that finite extent allowed by the human mind" (Robinson, 1990, p.
377). Robinson says that "the horizon in the analogy corresponds to our view of perfection in nature"
and is currently represented in physics by the principal of light (Robinson, 1990, p. 379).
Two other aspects of relativity are important, the perfective and the perspective, and each frame of
reference must display both aspects (Robinson 1990). The perfective aspect can be described using
the metaphor of an Olympic athlete. Each athlete tries to achieve "a perfect ten" performance. An
athlete's objective frame of reference is a continuum from the worst performance (a zero) through to
the perfect (a ten). The highest score possible is a ten. Perfectivity says that if someone scores a ten,
then this person must appear as a ten to anyone observing the performance. In other words, "a
perfect ten appears as a perfect ten to all concerned" and the perfect ten athlete must be placed in the
same position (the highest) on every Judge's scorecard, just as the speed of light must be the same in
every frame (Robinson 1990, p. 76). It follows that the perfective aspect of relativity is represented in
nature by light (Robinson 1990).
The second aspect is the perspective, reflecting an individual's point of view. It is the subjective
evaluation of relative significance (Robinson 1990). In our example, it is the perceived rating that one
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
athlete gives another after watching their performance and saying "this person is worse, the same, or
better, than I am." A third athlete may watch and say that their performance is superior to either of the
first two. The major psychological implication of relativity is that one person's point of view does not
readily transcribe into the point of view of someone else. "This is the most difficult point of relativity
theory, but one faced every day in human relationships" (Robinson 1990, p. 74). The psychological
gestalt of one person cannot be transcribed to the world view, perceptions, thoughts, ideals, feelings,
etc., of anyone else. This insight is a first brick in the foundation of multilevelness.
Multilevelness and relativity have dual roles; both reflect basic features of Nature and each can be
used as a method of analysis. In the former context, the physical structure and relationships of Nature
describe a relativistic and multilevelled universe. The preceding discussion has outlined this
observation. In the next two sections we will lay the groundwork for multilevelness as a tool of
analysis.
Overexcitability.
A person's view of life and their interaction with the environment is drastically influenced by the
presence of overexcitability (OE). People exhibit a wide range of intensities when responding to
stimuli, reflecting sensitivities at the neuronal level, in Dabrowski's words, "each form of
overexcitability points to a higher than average sensitivity of its receptors" (Dabrowski, 1972, p. 7).
Above average neuronal sensitivity commonly leads to a pattern of behavioural and emotional
responses of above average intensity. Dabrowski distinguished five areas where over responding is
seen: sensual, psychomotor, imaginational, intellectual and affective (emotional). Emotional OE forms
the cornerstone of advanced developmental processes, and along with imaginational and intellectual
forms, the three "give rich possibilities of development and creativity" (Dabrowski, 1972, p. 7).
Overexcitability is a component of developmental potential (DP), a constellation of genetically based
factors that predispose an individual toward multilevelness and advanced development. The
individual's relationship with the environment is interactive, therefore the stronger the OE, the stronger
the impact of the environment on the individual and the stronger the individual's reciprocal influences
on his or her environment.
The foundation of how a person "sees life" emerges from their perceptions, which in turn, rest on the
information gathered by the basic senses. The unique physiology of an individual's perceptional
attributes establishes a predisposition that ultimately influences their beliefs, attitudes, values, and
behavioural responses to life. Essentially this represents a systematic bias; my view of life is based on
the reality that I experience and that reality is based upon the unique physiology of my sensory
system. Individual differences in genetic potentialities, neural differentiation, neural organization,
neural reactivity, and such, create "my perceptual world." When "hyper stimulated" by strong OE, the
senses will interact with environmental experiences to create the dynamics that fuel disintegration and
ultimately, advanced growth.
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
While it is tempting to say that we use our OEs to creative ends, it is more accurate to say that we are
"the victims" of our OEs. One does not control or easily direct the OEs. They act on us, thrusting us
into hyper states, conflict, emotional angst and disintegration. When we appreciate and see our
horizons and our center point for what they really are, limiting psychological constructs, we often feel
compelled to try to change. OE is a mechanism of analysis that gives us this appreciation. OE
continues to act throughout the developmental process, first as the raw fuel of motivation, later under
more conscious application and direction. We learn to direct and apply our talents (our developmental
potentials) and this is a hallmark of the creative process.
Interpersonal differences will arise, in part, due to relativistic factors. People interact from, and
between, different frames and people's "clocks of perspective" will run at different rates because each
person lives and perceives in their own unique frame. In other words, because each of our frames is
unique and all relate to each other relatively, all of our "perceptual clocks" show conflicting information
to some degree. Individual differences in developmental potentials will add to these differences as
high DP will initially accentuate existing differences. I believe that this is a major source of the initial
conflict and disintegration caused by high DP.
The reality experienced and described by people with high DP will be both quantitatively and
qualitatively different from that experienced by people with a "normal" or average level of DP related
factors. Individuals with a high endowment of OE and DP will often be out of harmony with their
families and with society, a feature Dabrowski called positive maladjustment. People with enhanced
potentials form discrete subgroups of individuals in the population. Usually, the stronger these
potentials, the greater the impact on the development of the individual but the more "out of step" he or
she will be with many of those around them. This will contribute to varying levels of stress and social
isolation. How well an individual can cope with these developmental conflicts will, in part, determine
how much DP will eventually be realized. As development proceeds, these differences will diminish as
one comes to accommodate the frames of others and work to overcome differences.
Developmental factors are especially influential at times of crisis or trauma; times when the psyche is
weakened and therefore more open to reorganization. For example, as Kohlberg's moral dilemmas
test one's existing moral code, an opportunity to develop a more advanced moral solution is created.
Dabrowski's theory is based upon the idea of mental growth through successive breakdowns of
psychological organization. The strength of developmental factors will mediate the impact of a given
crisis and how it will be experienced and dealt with. Several outcomes are possible, the person may
recover from the crisis and reintegrate at a higher position than previously held, or stay at the
preexisting level, or he or she may occasionally regress and reintegrate at a lower level.
Subject-object and the Self.
The "subject-object" process is a critical aspect of laying a psychological foundation for multilevelness,
for self development and the differentiation of individual values.
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
"The process of evaluating one's own internal environment is essential for multilevel disintegration.
The feeling of the separateness of one's own self increases and this is so not only in contradistinction
to the external environment, but also, even primarily, in relation to one's own inner environment, which
is evaluated, is made into a hierarchy, and becomes a subject of more precise cognition and
appraising thought. A 'subject-object' process takes place in one's own self. One's internal milieu is
divided into higher and lower, into better and worse, and into desirable and undesirable. There
appears here the feeling of 'lower value' and the feeling of guilt when one 'falls down' to a lower level,
knowing that he has the capacity to raise himself up" (Dabrowski, 1967, p. 69).
The "method" of subject-object allows us to see and understand ourselves from both objective and
subjective perspectives. Using imagination, one can literally step back from the self and see oneself as
an object. As Jaspers (1963) noted, this allows us to see the usual cause and effect connections that
exist between our self and life from another "outside" perspective. We see that we normally live life as
unthinking puppets controlled by life's strings. This creates an opportunity for us to reevaluate our
selves as individual, single entities in the world and to take fundamental control of our selves in
relation to the external, causal relationships that act on the self. As the self is transformed through "the
crises of self-understanding," a person comes to appreciate and take control of the basic relationship
between the self and the world. This new relationship and the new self responsibilities that it entails
compel a person to be, to rise above the predetermined scripts of life and to move toward authenticity
and autonomy, the two hallmarks of development. The "new" self becomes an ongoing construction
project, in the end becoming autopoietic, continually self-producing, building itself over time (see
Maturana and Varela, 1980). The direction of the old cause and effect relationship with life is reversed
and the person begins to "pull their own strings." This autonomy is initially reflected by a new
confidence felt in basic decision making and, ultimately, by actively deciding what stimuli to react to
and how to respond. Guided by the hierarchy of values, automatic reactions are replaced by a
deliberate "plan" of responding to life. Returning to our analogy, we take an active role in determining
our center point and our horizons.
The "method" of subject-object also allows us to see and understand others both objectively and
subjectively. "In this way we perceive and understand the other individual in his full personality, in his
differentiated feelings and aspirations. This results in a much more complete and deep insight and
understanding" (Dabrowski, Kawczak and Sochanska, 1973, p. 124). The ability to approach oneself
as object is in direct proportion to one's ability to approach others as subjects (Dabrowski, et al, 1973).
"Discovery of the object in oneself is at the same time the discovery of subject in others" (Cienin,
1972, p. 25). Self-discovery goes hand-in-hand with the development of a deeper and more
comprehensive understanding of others. In large part, this process is the basis for the development of
empathy and the foundation for positive relationships in life.
It can be a startling realization to discover that other people see the world differently than we do and
that "we all do not think alike." Eventually, we realize that each person has, at least potentially, a
unique frame of reference and a correspondingly unique view of him or her self and of life. This
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
recognition allows us to use our imagination to move out of our frame and into the frame of someone
else. We can imagine another person's subjective view of life and the associated thoughts and
feelings that would accompany it. That is, to imagine ourselves at the centre of someone else's frame
and to try to extrapolate their world view.
As the ideas of self, others and empathy are understood, insights mount concerning the relative
relationship between the self and the world at large. The appreciation of the self as an object and the
apparent meaninglessness of the self and of life, creates a humble understanding of what it means to
be a self. To appreciate the self in this way is to realize that we are essentially insignificant and
powerless, like a leaf in a maelstrom. Existential crises arise from the dual realization that "we are in
this world alone" (no one else is like me or can understand me) and that "I am the only one who can
help me find out what I am. What my life means." At this point, an individual realizes that to find out
where they "fit" and to find meaning in life, they must actively take control of the self and to construct
the self. Generally ascending from despair, self-determination and self-responsibility become more
vital than ever. Through disintegrations and reintegrations, blueprints of the self can be revised,
renovations done, and new constructions begun. As this process becomes a way of life, the
autopoietic fabrication of the self and of the relationships between the self and the world builds what is
meaningful to the self. This becomes Dabrowski's hierarchy of values, a system of values that
interactively constructs individual meaning for the self, meaning in relationship with others, and
meaning in the world at large. Individualized values evolve, moving away from "the lower" and toward
"the higher." This is the only satisfying resolution of the existential crisis brought on by the
development of the self.
In summary, self-discovery leads to an increased understanding of the self as object and of others as
subjects. The result is often a life crisis resolved only by developing a true self, in Dabrowski's terms,
by developing one's unique personality. This involves a recognition of the personality ideal, the
perfective "ought" aspect. We thus consciously come to strive, to move from "is" to "ought," a hallmark
of multilevelness in action.
The Multilevelled View.
The multilevel view of life is a critical component in empowering individual human development and in
laying the foundation for social and cultural growth. Dabrowski says that the development of the self
begins with fundamental qualitative shifts in how one sees the world, shifts characterizing the move
from unilevel to multilevel perception. Unilevel development is limited to quantitative change, choices
between options on the same plane. In contrast, multilevel growth involves quantitative and qualitative
change. Multilevel growth involves becoming aware of the existence of higher planes and seeing
contrasts between higher possibilities and lower actualities. This leads to a shifting of our values,
beliefs and behaviours to a new track on a higher plane.
Robinson (1990) notes that each of us must judge everything else in relationship to our own position.
We are at the centre of our own frame, but this is not simply a metaphorical physical position, it is a
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
psychological position bounded by our encircling perceptual horizon. This landscape and our position
can represent many psychological dimensions, for example, Robinson notes that our position can
represent our values. The ultimate phenomenological gestalt of this position is an individual's
perception of their self and of the world. We intuitively feel and relate to our self as at the centre of our
landscape. We each have our own self (our own position) and our own frame of reference (our own
landscape). In our metaphor, each of us has the same physical tracks stretching out in front of us and
each of us sees life with the same projective process that brings the rails together at the horizon (the
perfective aspect). We each have the same type of clock, however, when our frames are compared,
our interpretations of our perceptions differ widely, and our identical clocks show different times (the
perspective aspect).
In other words, as in physical frames, our psychological frames of reference are not readily equatable
with those of others. Specifically, the perceptions that we compare are produced in different frames
and the frames relate relativistically. This adds to interpersonal incongruities. Multilevelness is the
psychological equivalent to the theory of relativity, the perception of, and accounting for, the fact that
psychological frames relate relativistically. Multilevelness as a method of analysis allows us to
understand a multileveled world just as relativity as a tool of analysis helps us understand the
physical, relativistic world. The achievement of multilevelness is analogous to realizing that our
horizons are artificial and that there are levels of tracks running on planes above and below ours.
We project our selves out from our centre, to the horizon, the functional perceptual limit of the
boundary of the self. In unilevel development, we coexist with others and the world at large and we
interface at the point where our horizon meets the outside ("the other"). In advanced development, we
come to appreciate that we are an integral part of others and of the whole.
With developing insight into the self, our horizon expands and more of the world is encircled and
integrated into the self. In this model, we do not simply see further (quantitatively), we rise higher and
come to take in more of the scope of the "big picture" and its relative importance (the qualitative). We
develop an enlarged perspective as we "see out" to the edge of our expanded horizon (Robinson
1990). We come to see ourselves in a new relationship to others and the world and we develop an
interactive, dynamic adjustment of our self within the larger frame, realizing that we are a small, but
important, part of a greater whole.
Along with the expansion of the horizon, the horizon becomes more permeable and allows a more
open exchange between the self and "what is beyond." "Frame-exchanging" and "frame-sharing"
(deep empathetic experiences) can occur with others, for example, falling in love. The overlapping of
interpersonal horizons is a sign of multilevel interaction, revealed by an empathetic understanding of
the other and of their position.
In addition, frame sharing and exchange can occur between a person and Nature. Many descriptions
of this can be found, for example, Maslow's oceanic experience. One's frame of reference is
momentarily unbounded and one intuitively comes to share some fundamental "understanding" with
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration
"the larger world." I believe that this is commonly seen in creativity and in moments of creative flow
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). We temporarily see beyond our normal human constraints (horizons) and for
a moment, see more of the "real" world around us. This enlarged perceptual domain is normally
unavailable to us and represents an example of the perfective aspect of psychology.
A new appreciation for the vertical strata of life and of other people comes to dominate an individual's
world view. These forces create a multilevelled appreciation and an ongoing awareness of the
perfective and perspective aspects in life. A person constructs a scale (just as the Olympic athlete did)
to represent the highest goals of what is possible in life. The person constructs their own perfective
ideal self, the Olympic "ten" of personality. This also forces a person to confront and rate their "is" in
comparison to their imagined ideal, their perfective "ought." Beyond this intrapsychic "yardstick,"
multilevelness also allows us to compare and rate our behaviour relative to that of others (the
perspective aspect). Multileveled (vertical) views of the self, and of the self in relation to the other,
create an ongoing evaluative component that helps to guide the formation of our beliefs and values. In
turn, our attitudes and behaviour become increasingly congruent with this "revised"value structure.
Qualitative shifts are fuelled by OE and the conflicts it creates. In perfective and perspective contexts,
individuals come to question life and the "traditional wisdom" of social institutions, which perviously
had been taken for granted. Development begins a process of critical evaluation of the basic tenets on
which one's current world view is based. As individuals begin to see contradictions and injustice, their
existing value structure begins to disintegrate. Individual values start to replace social values. The
seeds of subject-object and of the growing sense of self, the third factor and the inner psychic milieu,
eventually contribute to the development of a unique, individual value structure.
The development of the hierarchy of values sharpens the focus of the vertical dimension of "the lower
versus the higher." As vertical comparisons continue to create accumulating conflict, momentum
builds to reject the lower aspects of the self and to literally "set one's sights higher." At some point,
you realize that "the lower" cannot be part of your self anymore. You now see "what you must do,"
leading to an ongoing commitment to maximizing the "higher" elements of the emerging "new" self.
This self is actively constructed upon the foundation of the new (or renewed) set of basic beliefs and
values. This hierarchy of values guides the behaviour of an authentic, integrated, individual self and
represents a product of the fundamental qualitative shift of multilevelness.
A multilevel view has a dynamic relationship with the developing self. The more intense the vertical
conflicts, the more intense the need to find resolution through growth. The more growth, the broader
the multilevel comparisons that fuel developmental dynamisms. Simultaneously, the sharper the
feeling that "you have to overcome the lower."
Manifest characteristics of unilevelness and multilevelness are discernible in the general philosophy
and behaviour espoused by groups of people. Unilevelness is characterized by more psychopathic
thinking and behaviour, emphasizing the selfish satisfaction of individual needs. The higher levels
reflect increasing awareness of the emotional and spiritual needs of people, respect for others, and
http://www.positivedisintegration.com/einst.htm[03/02/2009 6:05:16 PM]

---

Document Outline

• Einstein and the Theory of Positive Disintegration.pdf
  • • ÿ
• 1996figures

---