Hi. I sent a chat about suggested books. Thanks for asking. The developmental model you describe fails to account for the most human of who we are. Does it deal with how children perceive death, or the outcomes of that perception? How about value formation? Or sexuality? Inspiration and imagination? Play at varying ages? How children know community? Aesthetic? Importance of family dynamics? Time? Identity formation ? The meaning and importance for adult development? Love? Insight into these transcend stages and only be engaging fields of knowing these can the uniqueness of each child come forth. Also, this engagement frees us from the belief that we should control the future of the child. Relational emergence happens only through conscious participation. We have to start with all that attributes an qualities of our humanness. And, prima facie, that optimal well-being, (which Adler called greatness) is always at play within.
Thank you, Ba. I should perhaps clarify that I don't see the Ring of Matter as a developmental model in itself, but as one particular lens on developmental priorities. I was struck by how much it foregrounded relationship and interconnectedness, which is part of what drew me to explore it. I’m interested in the wider fields you describe too, and it’s interesting to me that there seem to be some deep resonances between your work and the Gene Keys, despite the very different frameworks. I’m looking forward to exploring your books and understanding your thinking more deeply.
Of course. I shouldn’t have assumed that you did and written a more considered response. I admit to a knee jerk reaction. Apologies. I respect you and would be interested that, when ready, we could co-explore the deep resonances. The website was interesting but not thorough, (I didn’t expect it to be) and I learn better in dialogue unless I take a deep plunge, which I am not able to do at this time.
This is such a valuable post Gem. A wonderful structure for thinking about the differing priorities at different stages..
This made me think of the psychosocial psychologist Erikson, who wrote about the stages of childhood, each with its own task to work out. His middle-childhood task is about industry versus inferiority. Your emotional phase, 7–14, with its fear of inadequacy at the centre, feels close to this. He'd say what the child is trying to organise in these years is a felt sense of competence - am I capable, can I make and do things that matter, do I measure up? - and the shadow of it is a sense of inferiority, of not being enough.
So a child needs to experience feeling capable, and to have it seen and named by others. And yet this is too often experienced in school as the opposite - being measured against other children, feeling capable only if you reach someone else's targets and achievements rather than your own. In my view, what matters is that the child feels genuinely competent and has it witnessed on their own terms.
And, in my view, this is far more likely to happen when a child is able to work in their zone of proximal development (Vygotsky's idea that we grow through what is just beyond our current reach, with the right support alongside us) not against where everyone else is. And it seems to me that children naturally do know where this zone is. In the right environment, with the right support - they challenge themselves and they learn and grow.
Hi Davina, thank you so much for reading and commenting. All that you’ve said is so spot on and such a useful way of looking at it. I agree that it’s about the sweet spot where a child is gently stretched at the edges of their individual abilities and comfort zone, so that a feeling of competence is nurtured… rather than inadequacy from it not meeting them where they are. I am so interested in comparing the different theories, models, and traditions that have proposed ideas in these areas, for comparing, contrasting and even blending like you have done. This investigation into the conditions that allow development to unfold more naturally and more humanely is definitely driving me now. I know you are similarly interested in these questions and explorations so I’m sure we’ll keep talking :-) Thank you again.
Hi. I sent a chat about suggested books. Thanks for asking. The developmental model you describe fails to account for the most human of who we are. Does it deal with how children perceive death, or the outcomes of that perception? How about value formation? Or sexuality? Inspiration and imagination? Play at varying ages? How children know community? Aesthetic? Importance of family dynamics? Time? Identity formation ? The meaning and importance for adult development? Love? Insight into these transcend stages and only be engaging fields of knowing these can the uniqueness of each child come forth. Also, this engagement frees us from the belief that we should control the future of the child. Relational emergence happens only through conscious participation. We have to start with all that attributes an qualities of our humanness. And, prima facie, that optimal well-being, (which Adler called greatness) is always at play within.
Thank you, Ba. I should perhaps clarify that I don't see the Ring of Matter as a developmental model in itself, but as one particular lens on developmental priorities. I was struck by how much it foregrounded relationship and interconnectedness, which is part of what drew me to explore it. I’m interested in the wider fields you describe too, and it’s interesting to me that there seem to be some deep resonances between your work and the Gene Keys, despite the very different frameworks. I’m looking forward to exploring your books and understanding your thinking more deeply.
Of course. I shouldn’t have assumed that you did and written a more considered response. I admit to a knee jerk reaction. Apologies. I respect you and would be interested that, when ready, we could co-explore the deep resonances. The website was interesting but not thorough, (I didn’t expect it to be) and I learn better in dialogue unless I take a deep plunge, which I am not able to do at this time.
That’s understandable. Yes, I look forward to exploring the resonances more too.
This is such a valuable post Gem. A wonderful structure for thinking about the differing priorities at different stages..
This made me think of the psychosocial psychologist Erikson, who wrote about the stages of childhood, each with its own task to work out. His middle-childhood task is about industry versus inferiority. Your emotional phase, 7–14, with its fear of inadequacy at the centre, feels close to this. He'd say what the child is trying to organise in these years is a felt sense of competence - am I capable, can I make and do things that matter, do I measure up? - and the shadow of it is a sense of inferiority, of not being enough.
So a child needs to experience feeling capable, and to have it seen and named by others. And yet this is too often experienced in school as the opposite - being measured against other children, feeling capable only if you reach someone else's targets and achievements rather than your own. In my view, what matters is that the child feels genuinely competent and has it witnessed on their own terms.
And, in my view, this is far more likely to happen when a child is able to work in their zone of proximal development (Vygotsky's idea that we grow through what is just beyond our current reach, with the right support alongside us) not against where everyone else is. And it seems to me that children naturally do know where this zone is. In the right environment, with the right support - they challenge themselves and they learn and grow.
Hi Davina, thank you so much for reading and commenting. All that you’ve said is so spot on and such a useful way of looking at it. I agree that it’s about the sweet spot where a child is gently stretched at the edges of their individual abilities and comfort zone, so that a feeling of competence is nurtured… rather than inadequacy from it not meeting them where they are. I am so interested in comparing the different theories, models, and traditions that have proposed ideas in these areas, for comparing, contrasting and even blending like you have done. This investigation into the conditions that allow development to unfold more naturally and more humanely is definitely driving me now. I know you are similarly interested in these questions and explorations so I’m sure we’ll keep talking :-) Thank you again.