Engage & Participate

Online Exercises

Quick Test: Are You Post-Progressive?

Are You Post-Progressive?
Take the Test

Take a 2-minute test of your post-progressivism, and see your “transcendence and inclusion score.”

This simple test asks you to select your level of agreement or disagreement with twelve political statements. The test results will indicate your inclusivity score, your transcendence score, and the overall extent of your post-progressive perspective.

Worldview Questionnaire

Worldview Questionnaire

What is your worldview? Take this 7-minute test and find out which “values frame” describes you best.

By answering these 17 questions you may learn more about your own worldview, as well as about the worldviews of others.

Character Development Exercise

Character Development Exercise

Become a better person through this brief exercise in character development—create your personal portrait of the good.

Answer 10 questions to create a personalized chart of what matters most to you. This chart—your Portrait of the Good—will be sent to your email address as a pdf file.

Community Comment

“I am grateful for the post-progressive way of thinking. It was totally new to me, and now that I have been exposed to it, I think it is the way forward. It is the future. If there is a way out of this terrible culture war, I think it will be something along these lines. I love the idea of taking the best of the different worldviews and bringing them together into a more inclusive post-progressive worldview. This is a brilliant approach, and I am going to try to share it with as many people who are willing to listen to me as possible.”

– Lucas Chasin

Community Comment

“Progressivism doesn’t work without a foundation of modernism and traditionalism. Post-Progressivism allows modernists and traditionalists to feel significant, to feel needed, and to have a foundational seat at the table. The reason I don’t identify as a progressive, even though I am a vegan, spiritual, conscious, burning man guy, is because I feel its rejection of these previous worldviews …”

– Thomas Waterman

Load More...
Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
2 days ago

Polarity number two is REAL & IDEAL. While this pair may at first seem prosaic or obvious, it is highly useful and applicable to many life situations. Without the moderation and challenge of the other, each of these poles can be problematic. Realism without idealism can lead to a cynical acceptance of a dysfunctional status quo. And conversely, idealism that is unrealistic can result in ineffectual wishful thinking. But when these two poles become mutually co-correcting, they can increase our power to improve things. ... See MoreSee Less

Polarity number two is REAL & IDEAL. While this pair may at first seem prosaic or obvious, it is highly useful and applicable to many life situations. Without the moderation and challenge of the other, each of these poles can be problematic. Realism without idealism can lead to a cynical acceptance of a dysfunctional status quo. And conversely, idealism that is unrealistic can result in ineffectual wishful thinking. But when these two poles become mutually co-correcting, they can increase our power to improve things.

Comment on Facebook

I love that you give focus to this potent polarity in Post-Progressivism, Steve McIntosh! In my embodiment practice, UZAZU Embodied Intelligence, we work a lot with this as well. On one hand, it's great to use embodied practices to activate & cultivate more ideal, well-regulated peak states—so the body-mind develops a more visceral, innate sense of what it's "ideally" wanting to organize around and move towards. On the other hand, it's also crucial to use embodied practices to feel more into, and become more deeply aware of, where we're "really" at with a given issue or situation. By having more conscious, non-reactive embodied experiences of our real states (including the more subtle layers of our tensions and dysregulation), AND then also having more clear, potent embodied experiences of our more (developmentally appropriate) ideal states—our system can start to more effectively & organically grow and evolve. Is this at all similar to how you see & experience this real-ideal polarity dynamic in the more values & socio-political-based realm?

Someone once said that life is like riding a bike; if you find yourself leaning too far over to one side, and you’re about to fall, you have to lean over in the opposite direction until you regain balance. I think C.G. Jung (correct me if I’m wrong) also talked about life being lived in the optimal suspension between opposites.

1 day ago

Polarity number three is COMPETITION & COOPERATION. While some progressives disparage competition, and some modernists overemphasize it, competition can be a powerful value creator. However, when it is not moderated by its polar counterpart of cooperation, competition can devolve into a dog-eat-dog condition wherein defensiveness saps productivity. Conversely, cooperation by itself, without the incentive or opportunity for individual excellence or creativity, can similarly devolve into groupthink or stifling bureaucratic mediocrity. But when competition and cooperation are brought together in a mutually correcting relationship that provides for both *challenge and support,* the value-creating potential of each side is maximized. ... See MoreSee Less

Polarity number three is COMPETITION & COOPERATION. While some progressives disparage competition, and some modernists overemphasize it, competition can be a powerful value creator. However, when it is not moderated by its polar counterpart of cooperation, competition can devolve into a dog-eat-dog condition wherein defensiveness saps productivity. Conversely, cooperation by itself, without the incentive or opportunity for individual excellence or creativity, can similarly devolve into groupthink or stifling bureaucratic mediocrity. But when competition and cooperation are brought together in a mutually correcting relationship that provides for both *challenge and support,* the value-creating potential of each side is maximized.
5 days ago

Here is “Argument #9” in The Post-Progressive Post's series of "10 Counters to Potential Objections” (linked at the bottom). Let me preface this argument by affirming that I believe working for racial equality is a sacred cause, and a central political issue that America does well to focus on. The real question is how best to actually create greater equality. In the weeks ahead, the Institute for Cultural Evolution will publish a draft issue position paper on this subject, which will include more nuance. But in our current cultural environment, I think it is important to “reject the rejection” in firm and simple terms.

9. Because post-progressivism validates the “progress of Western civilization” it is essentially racist and complicit with white supremacy.

Post-progressivism rejects antiracism’s sweeping characterization of contemporary American society as essentially “white supremacist.” Indeed, post-progressivism is generally opposed to critical theory and neo-Marxism. But we nevertheless strongly affirm that working for greater racial equality in America is necessary and important. Post-progressivism also acknowledges that antiracism’s criticism is serving as a wake up call which is helping America to move beyond its complacency with the racial status quo. However, we think these critiques ultimately go too far. America has made measurable progress in ameliorating racism over the last 50 years, and this progress cannot be denied if we hope to make further progress toward greater racial equality.

Moreover, we firmly believe that Western civilization has made the world a better place overall. While there is still much work to be done to create a world that works for everyone, it must be acknowledged that most developed countries are now actively working to create more inclusive and less racist societies. Condemning contemporary Western civilization—the first civilization in history to actively oppose racism—is therefore counterproductive for the higher cause of racial equality.

post-progressive.org/our-basic-approach/countering-objections/
... See MoreSee Less

Comment on Facebook

Western Europe invented racism in the 16th Century for the purpose of colonial exploitation.

Steve, I'm basically in agreement with argument #9. You write, "Indeed, post-progressivism is generally opposed to critical theory and neo-Marxism." This suggests that critical race theory (CRT) and neo-Marxism have something in common. Could you clarify this a bit? It is easy to find critics from the right who regard almost anything liberals advocate as being at minimum socialistic and very often as Marxist or Communistic. How do you distinguish the post-progressive take on CRT and neo-Marxism from that of the political right? Argument #9 suggests an answer to my question but I am looking for something more specific. What is there of CRT and neo-Marxism of which we should be wary? What might be positive?

I appreciate the acknowledgement of the need to continue the work on greater racial equality in America while rejecting the view that this makes America essentially bad. I see this issue as quite difficult to address because it requires an order of thinking with the ability to see people and countries as neither all good nor all bad. This requires struggling with the paradox that the same white male enlightenment thinkers who genuinely encouraged human freedom. individual rights and scientific progress also still accepted a view of a permanent hierarchy of groups (and sexes) that was used to justify colonialism and slavery. Of course, slavery has always existed, but in the 1700s Blumenbach and Kant did describe a formalized hierarchy of races with Kant writing "humanity exists in its greatest perfection in the white race". The seed of equal rights for all races has been planted in America, and some progress has been made in laws and policies. That needs to continue, but I think there is also an emotional component that is part of the difficulty with communicating with one another about this issue and finding resolution. People struggle with questions of loyalty. How do you honor your grandfather who was so loving to you but was also a member of the KKK or participated in discriminatory treatment of workers in his business or was involved in some other negative treatment of others who are now your friends? How can you be a patriotic American while still acknowledging your country's past mistakes? Maybe this will need generational trauma healing such as what Thomas Hubl does or people from different backgrounds meeting together to listen deeply to one another's stories as well as the creation of post-progressive policies.

Thank you, I look forward to the further exposition

View more comments

3 days ago

This post begins a new series of my favorite positive-positive interdependent polarities. Each one of these polarities is a kind of philosophical technology for creating value and evolving consciousness. First up: LIBERTY & EQUALITY. These two values need each other to maximize their respective value creating capacity. When brought together in a dynamic relationship of challenge and support, each pole "trues-up” the other. ... See MoreSee Less

This post begins a new series of my favorite positive-positive interdependent polarities. Each one of these polarities is a kind of philosophical technology for creating value and evolving consciousness. First up: LIBERTY & EQUALITY. These two values need each other to maximize their respective value creating capacity. When brought together in a dynamic relationship of challenge and support, each pole trues-up” the other.

Comment on Facebook

With Liberty and Justice for all! ☯️

This graphic makes me think of the Uniqueness and Belonging polarity that is sometimes challenging in tight-knit or spiritual-type communities. Before I found Spiral Dynamics or Ken Wilber, my first taste of integral thinking was Christopher Alexander’s architectural book, A Pattern Language. In one section, he talks about the importance of creating alcoves off of main living areas; how this feature honors both the communal and individual nature of human beings. He proposes that for a designed space to “live,” it must be in service of both parts of the human person. Groups like this, visible to the public while also having ground rules, serve as alcoves for communities to become both a cohort and part of a greater whole all while keeping the polarities in check. Go PPP!

2 days ago

In this new article by Carter Phipps, he asks where 50 years of "I'll do me and you do you" has gotten us.

post-progressive.org/article/fifty-years-of-authenticity-and-all-we-got-was-the-qanon-shaman/?fbc...

What do you think? What has our focus on individuality and personal authenticity cost us as a culture? What part of this cultural ideal do we need to preserve when the pendulum swings back toward collective responsibility?
... See MoreSee Less

In this new article by Carter Phipps, he asks where 50 years of Ill do me and you do you has gotten us.

https://post-progressive.org/article/fifty-years-of-authenticity-and-all-we-got-was-the-qanon-shaman/?fbclid=IwAR336FP9eqLb9Hes-u5KEpZUuDA8HZyLJaKrN7Q5yABao8hbTBj72Q8Eje4

What do you think? What has our focus on individuality and personal authenticity cost us as a culture? What part of this cultural ideal do we need to preserve when the pendulum swings back toward collective responsibility?

Comment on Facebook

An intriguing consideration! Being from the same generation as Carter, I've found the influences in my life somewhat different. It does come down to the self vs selfless orientation to life. And selflessness, as in service to something greater than oneself, can seem, as Carter mentioned, "corny".

3 days ago

In these two videos that Jimmy Lusero, of Innovative Edge, independently produced, Steve McIntosh talks about the important values that animate the modern and progressive worldviews.

vimeo.com/568218839

vimeo.com/544053190

Taken together, these videos champion the “cultural intelligence” needed to see what both of these worldviews contribute to society. To learn more about the upside values and potential pathologies of each of America's three major worldviews, please visit:

post-progressive.org/our-basic-approach/post-progressivism-in-700-words/
... See MoreSee Less

Video image

Comment on Facebook

4 days ago

Here is the final argument in our "Responses to 10 Potential Objections to Post-Progressivism” series (live links are on the original webpage linked at the bottom).

10. This political philosophy seems elitist.

We welcome everyone who is willing to consider the post-progressive perspective. And we respect disagreements and encourage constructive critiques. Because the post-progressive perspective attempts to be “omni-inclusive,” it cannot be accurately characterized as elitist.

Admittedly, anyone who sincerely advocates a political perspective must believe their perspective is better than the alternatives. Yet while we do contend that post-progressivism is more inclusive than other political perspectives (as argued above), we certainly don’t regard ourselves as personally superior to anyone else.

Further, we believe that each of America’s major worldviews are legitimate “stakeholders” in our democracy—each set of values must have a place at the table in our governing process. See also this 14 minute video clip that addresses this question.

post-progressive.org/our-basic-approach/countering-objections/
... See MoreSee Less

1 week ago

Here is “Argument #8” in The Post-Progressive Post's series of "10 Counters to Potential Objections” (linked at the bottom).

8. Why are you concerned with “progressivism’s pathologies” when right-wing extremism is really the greatest threat to American democracy?

Right-wing extremism, as exemplified by the invasion of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, is certainly a threat that concerns us. But Donald Trump’s incitement notwithstanding, very few of his supporters are actually violent lawbreakers. And unlike the extreme versions of progressivism, right-wing extremism has relatively little cultural power. Indeed, a supermajority of Americans unequivocally condemn the Capitol insurrectionists and their ilk, including far-right militias and white supremacy groups. Moreover, the FBI and the U.S. military are now devoting significant resources to suppressing these groups. So while right-wing domestic terrorism remains a serious threat, there is little chance that it will gain more power.

The extreme elements of progressivism, however, pose a more sophisticated and powerful threat to American democracy than barbaric right-wing extremists. Unlike the far right, progressivism represents both an important new layer of moral concern, and an appreciable threat to America’s democratic norms. Because most of America’s universities, as well as much of the media, have been effectively captured by progressive ideology, the illiberal pathologies of this “successor ideology” need to be countered through new forms of political activism, which post-progressivism exemplifies. To preserve the minimum social solidarity necessary for a healthy democracy, progressive values must be better reconciled and integrated with the values of mainstream modernity and religious traditionalism. This is why we are focused on “transcending and including” progressivism by championing a more inclusive post-progressive political outlook.

post-progressive.org/our-basic-approach/countering-objections/
... See MoreSee Less

Comment on Facebook

I think this under represents the threat of right wing extremism. Insurrection is a pretty high bar. Where on the continuum, for example, would you place legislative efforts or suppress voting rights? Isn’t targeted efforts to disenfranchise voters a form of extremism or an illiberal pathology?

Cite: Hidden Tribes Report 6% of the voting populous isn't what I'd call enormous. Considering ~25% don't vote - so 4.5%.

Nice try, but while I'm generally a fan of PP this is one point where I have to strongly disagree with PP. You're correct that few right-wingers are violent, but do they really have little cultural power? They have the most-watched TV cable news show, virtually all of talk radio, News Corp and Sinclair, nearly half of Twitter and Facebook, the Christian college scene, think tanks galore, and so on. What's more, how much cultural power do they need to inspire and promote "terrorist cells" of extremely well-armed right-wing militants to conduct acts of insurrection and terror, and recruit disaffected youth to join their ranks? There are large numbers, polls say, who believe that America is headed to a new civil war and they are justified in taking up arms to protect the interests of their race/religion/beliefs. No, it's pretty clearly the right, not the left, that poses the greatest threat to American democracy. Progressive values need reformation and their pathologies addressed, as you wisely say, but that sort of threat has been around since the hippie 60s, when college students and hipsters went to extremes in promoting a cultural ethos of social justice. Pathological progressivism isn't new, but when have we ever seen a major political party exit consensual reality in favor of the delusion that the insurrection can be blamed on left-wing protesters, with many saying that violence to defend their beliefs is justified?

This analysis reminds me of an interview of Doshin Roshi (Integral Zen) by David Fuller (Rebel Wisdom). In particular the following exchange (2 minute clip here) where Doshin Roshi says that the reason the extreme left wing is scarier is that "they are more evolved." By the way, I have the feeling that maybe somewhat similar to the way cultural evolution oscillates between individualistic and communitarian poles (I gather in Spiral Dynamics), there's an oscillation between male and female. Currently woman is rising as a necessary compensation to male over-dominance (I characterize "modernity", with its analytic emphasis, as more stereotypically "male"). The political left pole would be more stereotypically female (as in progressive George Lakoff who contrasts right "strong father" with left "nuturing mother") and its pathologies would be less explicitly violent and more manipulative (as in reputation destruction, "cancel culture"). youtu.be/Pwq3EJjxUfE

I think those with a post-progressive perspective are uniquely positioned to see and deal with the threat of extreme elements of progressivism while still preserving positive progressive values. That is extremely important and must be done to preserve our democracy. However, I think there is also a quite serious danger from the right that goes beyond violent right wing extremism. I am very concerned about the deliberate attempt by those on the right to make voting harder and also by the promotion of Christian nationalism. This less violent element of the right does have cultural power outside of academia and the corporate world although many may not realize that. Maybe my own history and currently living in central California make me more concerned about this.

Does PPP have a theory on how to make the Senate more closely reflect the attitudes of the voting public? If it is true that a super-majority of voters condemn the January 6 insurrection, wouldn’t we expect the Senate to have authorized a bipartisan commission by a super-majority?

View more comments

5 days ago

Trial Run: This Week In The New York Times ... See MoreSee Less

Comment on Facebook

Thanks Jeff! Looking forward to our first official "This Week in the New York Times" live episode on Friday, July 30th at 11am Mountain Time!

Load more

Community Comment

“I really appreciated the use of gay marriage as an example of win-win-win policy solutions because it shows how people with different approaches to political issues can still align on values. In speaking to my friends about using this value integration technique I realized that it can be helpful to use value as a verb, rather than a noun. When you look at value as a verb, as in ‘what do we all value?’, it really does become possible for traditionalists, modernists, and progressives to value a lot of the same things.”

– Scott Kirby