Cognitive complexity as an aspect of intelligence
I've long been fascinated with intelligence and its various expressions and measures. When I was younger, I used to wonder how, for example, very well educated people — even some with graduate degrees from respected universities; an achievement that statistically correlates with a higher than average IQ — could become evangelical Christians. Not theologians or theological scholars, mind you, but hellfire-preaching, Bible-thumping, utlra-conservative fundamentalists. It just didn't compute, and yet I observed cases of it. How could someone who's supposed to be intelligent take an allegorical scripture, such as the New Testament, that lends itself (as the best allegories do) to several levels of interpretation, as literal, uni-level truth? Along the way, I came to appreciate the fact that IQ is just one measure of intelligence — important, yes, but still partial. I've known people whose IQ was formally tested at one or two standard deviations above the mean, who overall just seemed narrow-minded and/or emotionally stunted and/or deeply deluded and/or...well, dumb. I always remained curious as to what other factors influence intelligence in this broader and deeper sense.
Then I came across the work of Susanne Cook-Greuter and the idea of multi-stage developmental maturity, and it seemed to provide a big piece that had been missing from the intelligence puzzle. To put it in simple terms, it outlines several stages or tiers of cognitive development, from “preconventional” stages that characterize childhood1, to a range of “conventional” stages reached by most normal adults of any age or level of IQ, to less common “postconventional” stages, culminating (she believes, though I don’t) in a “unitive” stage. Each stage or tier is comprised of two or three sub-levels, and each is marked by increasing cognitive complexity, intellectual independence, nuanced meaning-making, and toleration for ambiguity; though, notably, the most advanced end of the spectrum is marked by a deconstructive bent that tends toward greater simplicity.
Briefly, the preconventional stages or tiers are where all children and a small percentage (~ 10%) of adults operate (the adults in this case would be considered developmentally disabled). The conventional stages or tiers are where the cognitive development of most (~ 80%) adults stops. The broad theme here is some degree of conformity to various norms (societal, peer-based, educational). The postconventional stages or tiers are represented in about 10% of the population. These stages are characterized by greater awareness of ego dynamics and of how language influences perception. The most advanced level, which is called postautonomous or construct-aware, is one "where the focus moves from finding increased levels of complexity, organization, and integration to one of deconstruction, simplification and types of knowing that exist beyond representational thought," as another researcher in this field2 put it.
That her designated final stage — unitive — is rare, I concur with Cook-Greuter; but as alluded to, I don’t agree that this represents another developmental stage or tier. I think what she’s calling the unitive stage isn’t a stage at all, but not other than the discontinuous shift of identity that we call enlightenment, awakening, liberation, etc. And as such, it doesn’t really have anything to do with cognitive or developmental maturity, which is why one can readily observe a more or less comparable variety of developmental complexity — including conventional simplicity — among the awakened as among the general population.
Here’s an at-a-glance schematic of what this is about.3 Note that this figure also has the advantage of depicting that putative “final stage” as a non-stage, even if its placement at the end of the stages tends to imply a culminating progression from what’s above it:
Nature of Stage Stage
Preconventional Stage 1: Sensorimotor–undifferentiated
Stage 1/2: Emotional–relational
Stage 2: Magical–impulsive
Early conventional Stage 2/3: Opportunistic–self-protective
Stage 3: Mythic–conformist
Mid conventional Stage 3/4: Conventional–interpersonal
Stage 4: Rational–self-authoring
Stage 4/5: Relativistic–sensitive
Postconventional Stage 5: Integrated–multiperspectival
Stage 5/6: Ego-aware–paradoxical
Stage 6: Absorptive–witnessing
Nonstage Nondual identification
Some thoughts on cognitive complexity vis-à-vis awakening
It seems to me that just as enlightenment — whatever mystery it ultimately represents — won't change one's eye color or body type, or boost one's IQ, neither will it fundamentally alter one's basic meaning-making style or capacity. This latter factor is what I attribute many of the differences in views and teachings on awakening to, as well as the many instances of oversimplification and self-contradiction in same (though, to be fair, some apparent contradiction can always be attributable to the increasing relevance of ineffability and paradox as one approaches — and, perchance, disappears over — the event horizon of fundamental realization). If one’s baseline stage of cognitive development was somewhere in the conventional range prior to enlightenment, it'll probably remain such after (that is, unless it develops further on its own; the point is, awakening does not automatically make this happen).
And to the extent that this is the case, it may explain at least some instances of trying to make a transformational shift fit an existing conceptual model, as well as any tendency toward cultism, absolutism (e.g., neo-Advaita), or one-size-fits-all approaches to practice, not to mention any dismissal of the relevance of psychological dynamics to so-called spiritual life. By the same token, if even in the absence of enlightenment you’ve had a strong tendency to question authority and its assertions (including the authority of esteemed teachers and revered texts), and to relentlessly inquire into and deconstruct your own most subtle and unconscious assumptions and givens to the point of arriving at contemplatively-gleaned views that are authoritative for you, even if doubted by most others, then you might have something at least as profound, unique and useful to contribute as individuals who are deeply enlightened but nevertheless functioning at an earlier or simpler stage of cognitive development.4
_________________________
1 According to Piaget, these stages are: sensorimotor (birth to 18—24 months); preoperational (2 to 7 years old); concrete operational (7 to 11 years old); formal operational (adolescence to adulthood).
2 Dane Craig Hewlett; A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF POSTAUTONOMOUS EGO DEVELOPMENT (unpublished doctoral dissertation).
3 Adapted from A GUIDE TO INTEGRAL PSYCHOTHERAPY: COMPLEXITY, INTEGRATION, AND SPIRITUALITY IN PRACTICE by Mark D. Forman.
4 And yet, there’s one thing even the most psychologically average awakened individual might be able to offer that a more psychologically advanced non-awakened individual generally can’t: transmission via presence/stillness.