The case for integrated intelligence

Marcus T. Anthony (PhD). See www.mindfutures.com, or email

mindfutures@yahoo.com
This article was published in World Futures: The Journal of General Evolution (no
date as yet).

In this article I develop a case for a theory of intelligence incorporating

transpersonal dimensions, namely integrated intelligence. Some recent
expanded theories of intelligence move into concepts like creativity, wisdom, and
emotional intelligence. Yet they remain embedded within mainstream intelligence
theory and its reductionist and materialist presuppositions. While various
theorists in consciousness theory have developed transpersonal models which
are beginning to be discussed in some mainstream circles, mainstream
intelligence theory is yet to address the broader implications of this. Recent
changes in the global economy and the needs of populations have created a
need for an expanded theory of intelligence, and more intuitive thinking.

…it seems to have been the vast expansion of a basic processing capacity for
use by external organizational regulations that appears to define the role of the
brain in human intelligence (Richardson 2000: 178).

We're talking about a large fraction of the public that believes in subjects that
scientists believe are out of the question.
Costas Efthimiou, professor at the University of Central Florida (Borenstein 2006)

One morning almost ten years ago I awoke at about 7.00a.m., and there was a song
playing in my head. I dare say the vast majority of people would simply have ignored
such a minor irritation. However I did not. After several years of having examined the
finer “tunings” of my own mind, I had come to realise that songs do not just randomly
appear in my mind. I had been told several years before by an Aboriginal shaman
woman to listen to the songs in my head, because I was being “told things” via the
songs. At that time I quite literally laughed at her. Nonetheless, I overcame my own
scepticism long enough to begin to take note of songs and song lyrics that suddenly
came into my head. I began writing them down. What began as a kind of quaint hobby
later became a rather more involved activity. Soon, I was being woken in the middle of
the night by song lyrics being drummed into my skull, sometimes so loudly that I would
jump out of bed to turn off the CD player, only to find that it was turned off. Several times
I was “serenaded” by beautiful angelic voices in languages that I had never heard, via
songs that I had never heard of, much less understood.
So when I awoke that morning I was particularly alarmed to note that the song that
was playing in my head was the theme from the TV series M.A.S.H.

Suicide is painless, it brings on many changes

And I can take or leave it if I please (Suicide, 1970).

1
 I mild panic came over me, thinking that someone was going to kill themselves. I got
out of bed and began pacing the room. Who could it be? There was only one person I
could think of. One of my sisters had suffered a mental breakdown, and her behaviour
was becoming increasingly bizarre. It had to be her. I began to think of what I could do to
stop her. At that time my sister and I were both staying briefly at my mother’s place, so
there was obviously something I could do.
As it turned out, my interpretation was hopelessly wrong (my sister is still alive today).
At about 9.00 a.m. there was a knock on the front door. I went to the door, and opened it.
A feeling of dread filled me. Standing at the bottom of the doorstep were two ashen-
faced policemen in full uniform. They duly informed my mother and I that my younger
brother Jerome was dead. He had hung himself from a tree in bush land less than a
kilometer from my mother’s house, in the early hours of the morning during a fierce
storm.
It has been countless experiences like this that have been the basis for my
development of the theory of integrated intelligence. To be sure, most were not nearly
as traumatic or life-changing, but many have been even more definitive in their validity of
information or implications. I have also met various other individuals who embody
integrated intelligence, and who have profoundly influenced my understanding of this
innate human intelligence. I believe integrated intelligence is a veridical human operating
system. So why do we find it absent from mainstream intelligence theory? Before
addressing this issue, I shall define integrated intelligence and outline some key
components of it in more detail.

Defining integrated intelligence

I define integrated intelligence as:
The deliberate and conscious employment of the extended mind, such that an
individual might function successfully within a given environment.
In turn the extended mind is defined as:
The state of personal consciousness whereby individual awareness is infused
with a transpersonal awareness that transcends the confines of the individual
mind and the limits of the sensory organs.
I have taken the term “the extended mind” from Sheldrake (2003) who sees it in
similar fashion. Yet the term integrated intelligence is my own. (1)
Any legitimate theory of intelligence should ideally make explicit the core operations
and end states of that intelligence (Gardner 1993). In their absence, rational discussion
of practical applications becomes impracticable, as does empirical testing. The core
operations of integrated intelligence as I have developed them are “integrated
perception”, “evaluation/choice”, “location”, “diagnosis”, “foresight” and “creativity and
innovation”. The end states are “wisdom” and “personal and social transformation”.
Tables 1 and 2 (below) list these, and provide applications, evidence and exemplars. (2)
Table 1: The core operations of integrated intelligence

Cognitive Potential Applications Anecdotal Exemplars Other Evidence

process

2
Integrated Integrated perception of
Perception the underlying order &
meaning of systems, &
“intelligence” within those
systems - including
cosmos.
Enhancing “spiritual”
worldview; meaning, &
sense of relationship with
nature & cosmos.
Location Determining location of
important objects (Targ &
Katra 1999: 139-141).
Also location of
information & data for
research; finding relevant
people & places.
Diagnosis Diagnosis of medical &
mechanical problems;
safety, health &
environmental hazards; &
sources of human error
(Targ & Katra 1999: 141).
Spiritual & psychological
introspection.
Evaluation/ Evaluating design &
construction alternatives,
choice
investment choices,
research strategies, &
technology alternatives.
(Targ & Katra 1999: 139)
Evaluation of life, career,
& relationship choices.
Foresight Foresight of natural
disasters, political
conditions, technological
developments, wear
conditions, & investment
opportunities (Targ &
Katra 1999: 142).
Determine consequences
of choices.
Creativity & The individual draws
Innovation upon transpersonal
modes of consciousness
to facilitate increased
inspiration & creativity in
work, business, research,
competition or leisure
Bucke’s (quoted in Tart Mystical & spiritual
1993) immediate traditions. Non-
perception “that Cosmos ordinary states of
is not dead matter but a consciousness
living Presence.” (Grof 2006;
Sheldrake et al.
2001). Wilber’s
(2001) “empirical”
mysticism.
Researcher Michael Remote viewing,
Talbot employs “deeper & including scientific
more intuitive abilities” in remote viewing
locating research data (Braud 2003, Radin
(Talbot 1992: 137). Also, a 2006, Sheldrake
‘psychic’ identifying a 2003).
murderer (CNN 2005).
Accounts of intuition, No known
dreams & spiritual empirical studies.
guidance to facilitate The links between
diagnosis of problems. wisdom and
Hawkins’ 2002 intuitively mysticism (Grof
diagnosed patients’ 2006).
illnesses.
Individuals who employ Card guessing
intuition & spiritual experiments from
guidance to make parapsychology,
choices. (e.g. Bach 1986 e.g., the Rhine ESP
– see ‘foresight’, below; experiments (Radin
Yogananda’s 1979 2003: 83-89).
immediate recognising his
master at first meeting).
Bach (1986). Using an Scientific
introspective visionary experiments into
technique he “sees” the “presentiment”
disastrous consequences (Radin 2006: 161-
of leaving his partner– & 180).
adjusts his choice
accordingly.
Chemist August Kekule Indigenous and
was “seized with the mystical
notion” of molecular conceptions of
nature of benzene ring in creativity
dream (Kafatos & Kafatou (Broomfield 1997;
1991:166); Otto Loew’s Lawlor 1991).
understanding
“transmission of neuronal
impulses”, while asleep
(Broomfield 1997: 80).
3
 Table 2: The end-states of integrated intelligence

Cognitive Potential Applications Anecdotal Exemplars Other Evidence

process
Wisdom Having intuited underlying
causes, meaning &
functions of various life
processes, the individual is
able to make intelligent
choices which enhance
happiness, well-being &
spiritual development of self
& collective.
Personal & Optimal human & Cosmic
Social evolution; may include
Transform- aspects of all core
ation operations, with purpose of
evaluation of personal
goals & choices within a
greater planetary & cosmic
dynamic. Potential for
increased hope & meaning.
The life of Mohandas The links between
Karamchand (Mahatma) spirituality, spiritual
Gandhi. Gandhi guidance & wisdom
combined an austere, from anecdotes &
mundane existence with tradition
political & intellectual (Broomfield 1997;
acumen, & combined se Lawlor 1991).
with spiritual tools, insight
& wisdom to forge a
powerful & effective life.
Bucke’s cosmic Field
consciousness (Tart consciousness
1993); Hawkins’ (2002) studies (Radin
experience of being 2006).
protected by a bright,
warming light while stuck
in a snow storm;
transformative power of
near death experiences
(Grof 2006); synchronicity
(Jung 1973).

The evidence for each of these core operations and end states comes from
parapsychology, mystical and spiritual traditions and personal anecdotes within the
literature - as the mid and right-hand columns of both tables indicate.

Is it really intelligence?
Can such an “ability” as integrated intelligence be legitimately termed an “intelligence”
at all? I believe it can and should be. Intelligence is notoriously difficult to define.
Sternberg’s (2003) theory of successful intelligence is essentially based around the idea
that intelligence is as intelligence does. In this sense, the successful completion of any
given task is a function of intelligence. Therefore if the extended mind is employed in the
successful completion of a goal or task; it is intelligence in action.
The definitions and attributes of intelligence tend to reflect the methods used to
measure it. For example, the inventor of individual intelligence tests, Alfred Binet,
developed tests to measure intelligence according to what he perceived it to be—
reasoning, imagination, insight, judgment and adaptability (Reber & Reber 2001: 361).
The employment of factor analysis within the concept of a general intelligence likewise
tends to elicit a self-reinforcing definition of intelligence. This is because statistical
analysis focuses upon the readily quantifiable. One cannot quantify that which cannot be
measured, or is very difficult to measure. Of importance here is that integrated
intelligence is closely related to psi phenomena, which are notoriously “elusive” Kennedy
(2003). Yet the issue is not simply one of measurement, because with mainstream

4
intelligence theory paradigmatic blinkers tend to remain firmly in place (as will be
outlined in the next section).
The essential point is that almost any definition of intelligence will reflect the
predicates of the social and cultural environment in which the definer lives and thinks
(Gardner et al. 1996). Notably, the Western episteme in the wake of the Enlightenment
has valorised critical rationality, has constructed education and schools accordingly, and
has developed intelligence tests to determine who will be “successful” within that
environment (Gardner et al. 1996).

The exclusion of integrated intelligence from mainstream theory

To appreciate the exclusion of mystical/spiritual concepts and theories from
contemporary mind science, one has to look beyond the debate regarding physical
evidence. Indeed the question of the transpersonal potentials of mind is almost always
absent – literally “out of the question.” Yet despite there being enough evidence to at
least allow a healthy debate to begin (as Tables 1 & 2 indicate, above), questions which
might address the concept of integrated intelligence are almost never posited. The
reason can be clarified via Figure 1 below, which situates intelligence theory within a
civilisational, paradigmatic and cultural perspective.
In Figure 1, each level is defined and mediated by the level below it. It depicts
discourses on intelligence and mind moving through layers, and being ultimately
determined by the lowest level of the system: the pervading level of consciousness—
vision logic (Wilber 2000). This implicitly valorises transpersonal theory and the Eastern
episteme, and mirrors the arguments of the transpersonalists, such as Bradley (2004),
Gebser (1985), Grof (2000), Hawkins (2002), Walsh (1990), Walsh and Vaughan
(1993), and Wilber (2000c), who find that rationality is but one developmental stage in
the greater evolution of humanity towards transrational awareness. (3) There are two
overriding paradigms displayed in Figure 1. At the fourth level there is the neo-Darwinian
paradigm (Loye 2004). This paradigm is part of a greater paradigm—the mechanistic
paradigm.
There are issues for the greater acceptance of integrated intelligence at all levels of
this schemata. At the consciousness level, what Wilber (2000) has called vision logic is
broadly compatible with critical rationality, while integrated intelligence is more
compatible with the cognitive processes associated with transrational levels of
consciousness.
In terms of the mechanistic paradigm, there are various tenets of that paradigm which
render it incompatible with integrated intelligence. These include materialism, the
rejection of psi and spiritual phenomena and experience, the denial of the affective, the
subject/object split, temporal linearity, patriarchal predilections, and ego-centred control.
In regard to ways of knowing, verbal/linguistic and mathematical/logical ways of
knowing dominate modern science, academia and education (Gardner 1993). These
tend to exclude the affective, mystical and sometimes ineffable ways of knowing involved
with integrated intelligence.

5
 Theory of
Intelligenc
e
Cog’tive
Psychology
(mind = computer)

Neuroscience

Molecular biology (neo-

Darwinism)

Ways of Knowing

The mechanistic paradigm

The Western episteme

Levels of consciousness

Figure 1: Layered schema depicting the epistemic foundations of Western mind

science and intelligence theory

The neo-Darwinian paradigm which permeates modern biology is also an issue, as its
tenets have become an established dogma within science (Loye 2004). These tenets
include reification of the random, materialism, reductionism and atheism. At the next
level of Figure 1 is neuroscience, which has adopted these precepts of neo-Darwinism,
especially rampant reductionism and materialism, and the consequent obfuscation of the
psyche. Finally, modern cognitive psychology has become “a handmaiden to
neuroscience” (Maddox 1999: 278) – an issue that Freud foresaw well over half a
century ago (Bettleheim, 2001).
Thus what Figure 1 shows is an effective hegemony of rationalism which still
dominates mainstream mind science in the West. It is within this hegemonic process that
integrated intelligence as a concept finds itself problematically situated. However I am
optimistic that in the long run the efficacy of the concept and its value as a cognitive
process for both individuals and humanity as a whole, will be vindicated – and indeed
acknowledged as crucial to our futures.

6
 The prime issue here is that the mainstream contention that consciousness (and
therefore intelligence) emerge from the material substrate of the brain (rather than being
purely a correlate of neuronal sub-structures), is a metaphysical assumption, and cannot
be tested via current scientific methods, let alone proven (Grof 1985: 23; 2006; Laszlo
2004). Indeed, as long-standing editor of Nature John Maddox admitted in 1999:
How the brain functions both in the everyday world and as the human
attribute of mind is hardly clearer now than at the beginning of the
century (Maddox 1999: 21).
There is at present a vast body of knowledge and data which supports the understanding
that the human mind can express itself beyond the limits of the individual self, and beyond
the constraints of a Newtonian or Eisensteinian construction of space/time. In addition to the
evidence indicated in Tables 1 and 2 (above), these include studies into comparative religion
and anthropology, extrasensory perception, premonitory dreams, near-death experiences,
crisis visions, psychedelic experience and so on (Combs, Arcari & Krippner 2006; Grof
2006). Further there are strong arguments for a developing paradigm of science which
incorporates non-local transfer of information, with consciousness as an integral component
of the cosmic system (Bradley 2004; Laszlo 2004; Sheldrake 2003; Wilber 2001). Despite
this, mainstream psychiatry and psychology has tended to label perceptions and
experiences of mind which fall outside of the mechanistic paradigm as psychosis,
superstition, or ascribe them to unresolved childhood conflicts and dependencies (Grof 1985:
24).
A position more readily consistent with the available evidence - and one more
representative of the genuine scientific knowledge available - is that of openness to
hypotheses and theories which reflect and acknowledge a full range of data and human
experience, and in turn accommodate a full range of possible models which explicate
that data and experience. It is for this reason that I maintain that mainstream
consciousness and intelligence theory is not fully representative of the human mind in
totality.
The resistance of mainstream mind science to models of mind that fall beyond
mechanistic mythologies is well illustrated by Stanislav Grof (2006) in his meeting with
influential scientist Carl Sagan. Having read of Grof’s Realms of the Human
Unconscious (which referred to mystical experiences involving light and archetypal
visions induced by altered states of consciousness and LSD), Sagan enthusiastically
asked to meet Grof. However upon their meeting, it became apparent that Sagan had
misunderstood Grof’s position. Sagan had taken the induced near-death-like experience
to be a repudiation of the mystical experience - a reflection of the imagination, of neural
disturbance. Grof explained to Sagan that there was a massive amount of data
corroborating and supporting the veridical nature of these experiences. As Grof
recounted more and more evidence and cases which supported his case, Sagan merely
refuted each with increasingly stubborn rejections, finally resorting to the insistence that
definitive cases must be frauds, and perpetrated by charlatans. According to Grof,
Sagan had formulated a worldview which was effectively “an unshatterable dogma that
was impervious to evidence” (Grof 2006: 329).
It is not the stringent questioning of so-called “extraordinary” human experiences by
Sagan and mainstream theorists that concerns me here. It is when such experiences
are deemed – to quote a mathematician on the possibility of the veracity of various psi
and supernatural phenomena – “out of the question” (Borenstein 2006). That is, certain
vital questions which express a deep examination of the issue are not posited. One of

7
the notable characteristics of paradigms is that they delimit not only fields of enquiry, but
the possible range of questions which can be asked (Grof, 1985).
When scientists and philosophers maintain an intellectual position while refusing to
consider a complete range of questions and hypotheses which address all the data, this
is not “scepticism”. It is dogma, as Rupert Sheldrake (2003) has pointed out.

Is intelligence in the brain?

As the quote from Richardson at the beginning of this paper indicates, there is ample
evidence that the brain itself is not the source of human intelligence. Attempts to attribute
intelligence to modules such as genes or specific parts of the brain are highly
problematic. For example, sensory data transferred from the part of the brain normally
employed to a specific task, to another by surgical rewriting may result in the new area
assuming the duties of the former. Such is the case with data from the retina of the eye
being rewired to the auditory area of the cerebral cortex (Richardson, 2000: 177).
Richardson’s thesis regarding the operation of brain functions is tentatively presented
as:
Far from being determined by a localized architecture, more distributed functions
(themselves emerging in interaction with complex and changeable external
demands) might use particular cell groups because they have processing
properties or connectivities conducive to them. These areas are then further
developed and transformed by the function (Richardson 2000: 177).
As a theorist writing within contemporary science’s self-limiting cultural and
paradigmatic delimitations. Richardson does not provide a definite answer to what the
source of intelligence actually is. He posits the tantalising hypothesis that it is a function
of the interaction between all the levels of the brain, micro and macro. Yet this leaves us
with a rather tricky question. From where does consciousness arise? This is where
transpersonal and mystical models may provide a working hypothesis. Various thinkers
have posited that consciousness originates beyond the brain (Grof 2006; Lazlo 2004;
Dossey 2001), a conclusion which is consistent with numerous spiritual traditions. If we
look at the previous quote from Richardson, it is perfectly compatible with this idea. The
“more distributed functions” which appear to be searching for suitable brain modules to
express themselves, appear to have a “mind of their own”. This is starting to look very
much like the ghost in the machine, a problem which Richardson himself does not
address. Here we reach the seemingly impenetrable precipice of the philosophy/science
divide – the mind/body problem. How does the physicality of the brain produce
consciousness? There are still no convincing answers from mainstream mind science.
The brain-equals-mind hypothesis is often treated as a given, despite its rocky
foundations. At the very least, until the time arrives when consciousness has been
shown to be an emergent property of the micro-systems or broader machinations of the
brain, the transpersonal models of mind and intelligence must stand as viable constructs
to be given serious merit by scholars and scientists.

Mainstream Intelligence Theory and Integrated Intelligence

IQ theory and systems theories within mainstream intelligence discourse contain
elements which are problematic in terms of the acknowledgement and situating of
integrated intelligence. Standard intelligence tests are essentially “pen and paper tests”

8
(Gardner 1993) and are done in ordinary states of consciousness. For example, with the
WAIS-3 —which is “reasonably representative” of IQ tests in general (Deary 2001: 6)—
there is no attempt to access the non-ordinary states of consciousness that are often
associated with receptivity and thus with integrated intelligence (Braud 2003: xx-xxi; Grof
2006). Further, the WAIS-3 does not test for any cognitive modalities, core operations, or
end-states associated with integrated intelligence: extrasensory acuity, spiritual
understandings, wisdom, intuiting deeper and transcendent meaning, the facilitation of
wisdom, communication with spiritual realms, and knowledge, etc. Typical of the modern
intelligence test, integrated intelligence plays little or no part in the WAIS-3 test, either as
an object of cognitive measurement or as method.
Many theorists who expand their conceptions of intelligence beyond the limitations of
a rational/linguistic and mathematically predicated IQ (Gardner 1993; Shearer 2004)
merely posit horizontal extensions to the fragmented mind. (4) This is done by adding
dimensions such as: lateral thinking (de Bono 1999); collective intelligence (Nash 2005;
Szuba 2002); inferential intuition (Klein 2003; Torff & Sternberg 2001); “civic intelligence”
(Dewey 1937); or various non-linear components as with Kosko’s (1994) “fuzzy logic”.
There is no expansion of the vertical dimension into the transrational. With the exception
of Kosko, these theorists do not address the worldview level, or adopt a civilisational
perspective on intelligence. These theories emerge from the mechanistic paradigm,
which does not allow for the conception of an integrated intelligence, as a biological,
localised and fragmented intelligence is implicit within that paradigm.
The dominance of the individual differences approach to intelligence testing in the
early to mid years of the twentieth century is significant, for this addressed only the
easily measurable components of intelligence. This featured a failure to acknowledge
environmental and social influences in the development of intelligence (and the
transpersonal). The dominance of Galton’s, Binet’s, and Piaget’s individualistic
approaches until well after the 1950s undoubtedly contributed to this (Sternberg et al.
2003).
Vygotsky’s greater cultural focus helped redress the issue (Sternberg et al. 2003;
Gardner et al. 1996). Yet, to refer to Wilber’s (2000) four-quadrant model (5), this merely
represented an expansion into the exterior-social domains of mind and its expression.
Systems theories of intelligence incorporating intrapersonal intelligence (Gardner 1993),
emotional intelligence (Goleman 1999), wisdom (Kunzman & Baltes 2003), and creativity
(Sternberg 2003) have expanded into Wilber’s interior subjective realms. Notably, none
of these represents an expansion into the transpersonal.
Integrated intelligence theory potentially adds a vertical dimension to intelligence
theory. It is a cognitive capacity that moves beyond psychometric (measurement-based)
and systems theories. Evidence for this can be taken from the fact that integrated
intelligence differs from mainstream theories of intelligence in its incorporation of the
extended mind. This is illustrated in Figure 2, below. Here, the rational cognitive modes
embrace critical rationality and its preferred ways of knowing; the interior individual
modes permit affectivity, creativity and wisdom; and the extended mind incorporates an
interior transpersonal subjective process.

9
 Extended Mind

Interior
Individual

Rational
IQ EQ CI INI W II
IQ ═ IQ theory. EQ ═ Emotional Intelligence. CI ═ Creative Intelligence.
INI ═ Intrapersonal Intelligence. W ═ Wisdom. II ═ Integrated Intelligence.

Figure 2: The distribution of rational, interior individual modes and the extended
mind in six representations of intelligence

Where does integrated intelligence fit in?

I therefore propose that transpersonal regulations can be added to our models of
intelligence to make them more accurately and find fully acknowledge all the dimensions
of consciousness and mind. How might this be done?
Ken Richardson (2000) has critiqued the limitations of mainstream dominant models
of intelligence. In doing so Richardson has developed his own five-tier model which
incorporates genetic (accommodating trans-generational change), genomic
(accommodating local perturbation during development), epigenetic (accommodating
intra-generational change), cognitive (accommodating life-long change) and socio-
cognitive regulations (accommodating social-cooperative action). This is a layered
system, where each level adds to and expands upon the lower levels, with each
acknowledging increasing environmental/social influence. As Richardson notes, many
traditional western models of intelligence embrace only a few of the levels. Classic IQ
theory is often restricted to genetic and genomic considerations and sees intelligence as
being purely or predominantly inherited.
Richardson’s thesis indicates that intelligence is not explicable purely in terms of brain
physiology and genetics. The development of society and culture is the primary reason
for the massive surge in human intelligence over recent centuries, as reflected in
advances in society, technology and the vast expansion of knowledge (Richardson,
2000).
I believe that Richardson is correct. It is clear that the various cognitive components
of intelligence can only fully express themselves where a culture permits that
expression. The great advances in the expression of human intelligence that we see in
the contemporary world’s fantastic works of technology are all functions of social and
cultural imperatives. The futuristic skyline of Shanghai could only emerge after Deng
Xiao Ping unshackled China’s economy from the constrictions of Maoism. High school
students studying calculus was unthinkable at the time of Newton – but is completely
normal in modern western culture that emphasises the importance of science,

10
mathematics and technology. Even the reader’s capacity to decode the written symbols
upon this page is a function of a culture that values that same codified form of
knowledge over other possible modes of knowledge communication.
Personally speaking, I grew up completely ignorant of concepts related to integrated
intelligence. A fundamental issue was the complete absence of any social
acknowledgement of that intelligence, and the total exclusion of its facilitation in my
education. What might the shift in human consciousness be, if children spent the same
amount of time on facilitation of inner worlds and integrated intelligence, as they
currently do on literacy and mathematics?
In order for me to come to the understanding that I now have about integrated
intelligence, I had to go through a process involving several phases, beginning around
the age of 26 (some 14 years ago). The steps included:
1) The slow development of an intrinsic interest in esoteric subject matters.
2) My considering the possibility that I might have a potential for integrated
intelligence myself.
3) Beginning disciplines which facilitated integrated intelligence - either directly or as
a by-product of processes which indirectly expanded this intelligence.
4) Being willing to transcend the criticism and ridicule of peers, friends and family,
and the self-doubt it engendered.
5) Circumventing the enormous resistance of “forces” at a psychic level which
attempted to constrain me. These included impassive fields of consciousness,
and actual fields of consciousness emerging from entities both physical and
metaphysical. The latter comprised “energies” which might be best described as
deeply malevolent in nature.
6) Overcoming the enormous fear and resistance – both consciousness and
unconscious – of awakening this intelligence; and acknowledging and embracing
the often highly disturbing information which integrated intelligence brings to the
conscious mind.

A key factor in the development of any intelligence is motivation - as was the case
with my desire to understand integrated intelligence. Intelligence theorist Sternberg
(2003) has long pointed out that motivation is prime mover in the expression of
intelligence. In my case, a number of extraordinary events (which I will not detail here)
contributed to my own desire to work with these levels of mind. Yet the prime factor in
my motivation to continue to work with integrated intelligence has been what Jung called
“the sacred wound”. I carried enormous psycho-spiritual scars into my adulthood. I
realised in my twenties that I would not be able to lead a satisfactory and happy life
unless I dealt fully and directly with these issues. I could have chosen mainstream
therapies to deal with these. Yet a number of experiences contributed to a deepening of
my own belief, understanding, and perception of “issues” that existed within my psyche.
A key point is that these experiences, the employment of integrated intelligence, and
the kinds of healing practices I employed, remained personal secrets which I only shared
with people of open mind. My own strong motivation circumvented the social denial and
rejection of the intelligence I chose to develop.

11
 Beyond socio-cultural regulations
I wish to go one step further than Richardson (2000), and state that the addition of a
further layer to his five-tier model can incorporate transpersonal regulations into the
equation, and garner an appreciation that knowledge from extra-sensory, collective and
cosmic sources are involved in the on-going evolution of human intelligence. (6) In this
sense the information received at the transpersonal level acts in a similar way to
Richardson’s social/environmental regulations. The difference is that for the majority of
human beings who are unaware of this transpersonal level, the effect is unconscious.
This is depicted in Figure 3, below.

transpersonal regulations (accommodating cosmic evolution)

↑
socio-cognitive regulations (accommodating social-cooperative action)
↑
Cognitive regulations (accommodating life-long change)
↑
Epigenetic regulations (accommodating intra-generational change)
↑
Genomic regulations (accommodating local perturbation during
development)
↑
Genetic regulations (accommodating trans-generational change)

Figure 3: The six regulations of integrated intelligence (adapted from Richardson

2000: 168)

Notably, in order for the transpersonal level to have greatest benefit in the
development of intelligence in the individual, it has to be acknowledged by that
individual. In turn the individual is most likely to acknowledge this level when it is
acknowledged or permitted by the society. In this sense it is dependent upon the “lower”
levels of the system. Of importance here is that various domains of intelligence are
acknowledged and appreciated by societies and cultures, while others are not. For
example, Richardson points out that abstract logic is absent from many cultures – and
thus people from these cultures are unlikely to do well in the written pen and paper tests
that are so much a part of many IQ tests, because abstract logic plays an important role
in these. (7)
Of course various individuals have always exhibited exceptional intelligence in
domains that are not generally appreciated by their culture or society. The natural
intelligence (Gardner et. al 1996) of Galileo was hardly embraced by the Church and
Italian society of the age, yet he excelled at it. Similarly, various individuals have

12
excelled at domains associated with integrated intelligence despite social resistance.
Elizabeth Kubler-Ross (1997) is one example here. Her work into embracing death and
especially the near-death experience drew considerable hostility at the university
hospital where she worked.

Integrated intelligence and spiritual intelligence

The theory of integrated intelligence as presented here is not a dogma. I see it as the
next step beyond the idea of spiritual intelligence, which has entered poplar
consciousness to some degree in recent years. The greatest problem with the concept
of spiritual intelligence as presented by such theorists as Buzan (2001), Grof (2006),
Levin (2000) and (Zohar (2000), is that they define the term loosely, then fail to
adequately delineate its core operations and end states. What I have done with the
concept of integrated intelligence is put forward the idea of an innate human intelligence
embedded within a sea of consciousness, and defined its precise components. However
this should be viewed as an attempt to develop greater understanding of a human
intelligence which is both veridical and important. It should not be seen as the final word
on the topic. Researchers should have a healthy respect for what is not understood, and
what may potentially be misunderstood within any given theory. For example, despite my
more than a decade of research into and experimenting with the practical applications of
integrated intelligence, I still have no genuine understanding of the physics of how it
works. Dossey (2001) points out that psi effects do not mirror the properties of the four
known forces of nature. Further, how reliable is integrated intelligence? What about
when it doesn’t work, or just plain wrong when we employ it? Just how readily can the
six core operations be employed within life in the modern knowledge economy – and
beyond? These are questions which require further research.
And not just research. For what I would like to suggest is that what is written in
academia and scientific circles should not restrict or define integrated intelligence and its
potential applications. We should not be sitting beside our printers waiting for the
computer to spit out graphs and data before we attempt to incorporate integrated
intelligence into our daily lives. If this was the best way to approach it, none of the
exponents of integrated intelligence that I have personally worked with would have
developed the degree of skill in this area that they have. Nor would I have ever written
this paper.

Why a transpersonal model, why now?

It is perfectly possible to construct models of intuitive and so-called “right-brain”
thinking that avoid the transpersonal. There are some important thinkers who have
developed models like this which are compelling in their own right (Goleman 1999;
Hogarth 2000; Klein 2003; Myers 2004; Pink 2005; Gladwell 2005; Torff & Sternberg
2001). These theorists do justice to a wide range of affective and intuitive cognitive
processes. They represent what I have called inferential (sensory) models of intuition -
as opposed to classical (extra-sensory) models. This binary is a neat (although
somewhat simplistic) way of identifying models of intuition which are brain-based, and
those which expand beyond current materialist models. My sense is that many creators
of such inferential models avoid transpersonal issues because to admit to such a model
is something akin to academic suicide. Less than one per cent of traditional colleges and

13
universities throughout the world contain faculty who will publicly admit to an interest in
psi research (Radin 2006: 280).
Personally, I am under no such pressure, being non-aligned with any institution at the
time of writing this article. I did encounter some resistance to my thesis proposal on
integrated intelligence from certain elements within my university. At one point I was
accidentally witness to an email where one faculty administrator ridiculed the concept of
integrated intelligence. “What is this integrated intelligence? Sounds like the hand of God
or something”, (s)he almost sneered. But to the credit of the administrators, my research
was permitted to continue. Here I suspect that the academic credibility of my thesis
supervisor Sohail Inayatullah was key.
My argument is not that these inferential models of intuition are wrong, but simply that
that do not go far enough. The basis of this assessment lies in my own personal
experience, as well as academic research. Having given considerable time and
enormous amounts of commitment to working with the kinds of cognitive processes
which are outlined in the theory of integrated intelligence, I feel personally bound above
and beyond any professional commitments to publicly state my views on these maters.
Systems theories of intelligence and expanded models of intuition have extended the
discourse, but it is time to move beyond the self-limiting and self-stultifying paradigmatic
delimitations of the mechanistic presuppositions which continue to dominate mainstream
doscourses. For me personally, the academic criticism and ridicule which inevitably
follows from taking such a stance is of much less importance than bringing to greater
awareness within academic and public circles what I consider to be the greater
potentials of human cognitive abilities.

The need for integrated intelligence

Beyond the importance of acknowledging integrated intelligence, there is now a
pressing need for it. Pink (2004) has pointed out that “right-brained” cognitive processes
have generally been undervalued in modern western culture. Left-hemisphere cognition
is often linguistic and textual in nature (Pink 2005: 17-20).
The left hemisphere handles logic, sequence, literalness, analysis. The right
takes scare of synthesis, emotional expression, context, and the big picture.
(Pink, 2005: 25)
Pink argues that the world is changing. What he calls “L-directed Thinking” skills (left-
brained) and jobs requiring such skills are being taken up by emerging economies like
India and China. Pink’s “R-directed Thinking” (right brained) involves six “high-concept,
high touch” senses (Pink 2005: 65): namely design, story (ability to synthesise
information into a narrative), symphony (finding integration, the big picture), empathy,
play, and meaning. What will be required in future are skills which more fully balance
both sides of the brain.
Now, R-Directed Thinking is suddenly… determining where we’re going and how
we’ll get there. L-directed aptitudes… are still necessary. But they’re no longer
sufficient. Instead, the R-Directed Aptitudes… artistry, empathy, taking the long
view, pursuing the transcendent – will increasingly determine who soars and
stumbles (Pink, 2005: 27).
In short, Pink argues that there is a shift from the information age to the “conceptual
age”. The driving forces are affluence, technology and globalisation. Those in most

14
demand and most able to prosper in this age will be creators, empathisers, pattern
recognisers and meaning makers (Pink 2005: 50).

In Australia, there is strong evidence that Pink is correct, with almost thirty-seven per
cent of millionaires under the age of forty being involved in creative industries such as
architecture, advertising, art, fashion, film, publishing, software, entertainment, TV and
video games (Horin 2006).
Another key issue is that prosperity in the modern age has freed vast numbers of
people from more mundane pursuits and immediate imperatives such as the need for
food or shelter. Millions are seeking transcendence of the mundane, even self-
realisation. Pink (2005) argues that self-realisation is now a quest for the vast majority of
the population. For example in the United States the number of meditators has doubled
in the last decade, with about ten million adults now practicing it. Fifteen million were
practicing yoga in 2005, a doubling from 1999 (Pink 2005: 60). This has lead Pink to
suggest that “meaning is the new money” (Pink 2005: 61). Others agree that critical
rationality is no longer enough in the short or long term (Laszlo et. al 2003; Zohar 2000).
To Pink’s thesis we can add the fact that there is a growing body of theorists calling
for a greater degree of spirituality in business, and in the workplace. Senge (1994) sees
personal mastery and the integration of the intuitive, transcendent and rational faculties
as being intricately interrelated in the modern workplace. These cognitive processes
enhance perception of the connectedness of the world, compassion, and commitment to
the whole (Senge 1994: 167). Senge calls for a movement away from selfishness and
towards a commitment to something greater than ourselves, including a greater desire to
be of service to the world. This incorporates the experience of the awakening of “a
spiritual power” (ibid.: 167-172). Senge argues that this shift is an important part of the
learning organisation.
There are parallels here with Inayatullah’s (2004) call for spirituality to be “the fourth
bottom line” of business. Inayatullah believes there is already a strong shift towards a
more responsible society and corporate world:
We are moving from the command-control ego-driven organization to the
learning organization to a learning and healing organization. Each step
involves seeing the organization less in mechanical terms and more in gaian
living terms. The key organizational asset becomes its human assets, its
collective memory and its shared vision (Inayatullah 2004
www.metafuture.org/Articles/spirituality_bottom_line.htm ).
For Inayatullah, the “spiritual” requires three factors which echo the concept of the
integrated society. (8) Firstly, there is the need for a “relationship with the
transcendent… both immanent and transcendental” (ibid.). Secondly, there is the
necessity of meditation and/or prayer. Finally, Inayatullah posits the need to honour the
social, which he defines as “a relationship with the community, global, or local, a caring
for others” (ibid.).
Likewise, Pink (2005), citing a report from the University of Southern California’s
Marshall School of Business called A Spiritual Audit of Corporate America, argues that
employees are hungering for spiritual values in the workplace. Pink argues that as more
companies come to appreciate this desire, there will be “a rise in spirit in business” (Pink
2005: 215).

15
 Integrated intelligence stands as a possible mediation factor here—its core operations
can work within all of these processes. If, as Inayatullah implies, spirituality does
become the fourth bottom line of modern economics, integrated intelligence could play a
crucial role.
The focus of Pink, Senge and Inayatullah is primarily short-term, centering on benefits
of “R-Directed Thinking” for workers in western knowledge economies. Yet, I would like
to assert the greatest benefit of integrated intelligence. Let me here quote Peter Russell:
We are all part of the same groundswell. The most important question we need to
ask is, how can I put my own life in greater alignment with that groundswell?
(Laszlo, Grof, & Russell 2003: ix)
I believe that integrated intelligence is part of the answer to this question. For
integrated intelligence is ultimately an affirmation of the extant reality that we are all part
of an intelligent cosmos. It requires a re-alignment of thinking, and radical shift in ways of
knowing.
Lastly I suggest a caveat. Opening up the psyche to integrated intelligence does not
mean that we become a channel for love and light. This is what I would call New Age
delusional thinking. The human mind is embedded in a sea of consciousness - thoughts,
ideas and energies that connect all humanity and the cosmos. That includes all the
darkness as well as the light. An encounter with the shadow – both your own and those
of other people – is an inevitable consequence of integrating individual human
intelligence with transpersonal realms. The data and information that is received may be
as delusional, psychotic and downright evil as any given piece of data that one finds
surfing the net. Integrated intelligence is like having a bigger net to put out into the
ocean. But it does not just catch the edible fish. It catches the odd sea-monster as well!
One of the greatest problems which developed from the Enlightenment and the
scientific revolution was the philosophical withdrawal of humankind from nature and the
cosmos (Tarnas 2000; Wilber 2000). With scientific detachment and reductionism came
the loss of connection, the loss of meaning and purpose. Now we find ourselves in a
time where more and more human beings are seeking a greater sense of meaning and
purpose. Much to the chagrin of skeptics and overt rationalists like Richard Dawkins
(2006), human beings are turning towards transcendence and religious and spiritual
matters in ever greater numbers. Critical rationality has created this alienation.
Integrated intelligence stands as an innate intelligence that may restore that connection,
and that meaning and purpose - or at least facilitate the active pursuit of it. Integrated
intelligence is about intimate connection with the cosmos, carrying on from where the
Romantics left off, with the quest for the synthesis of self and subject.
Richardson (2000) notes that human intelligence accelerated with the development of
society and culture, reaching levels of advancement in technology and science that
would have been hard to imagine in previous centuries. Would we see a similar
acceleration of human intelligence and civilisation if integrated intelligence were socially
accepted and incorporated into our education systems and ways of life? Would it be the
next great leap forward? We can only speculate. The advantages may be great, as I
have written previously (Anthony 2005a). These may include enhanced capacity to find
meaning and purpose in life, as well as counteract information overload and complexity;
a move beyond possessive individualism and greed; and a circumvention of the
information power and control of institutions and the state. I maintain that personal and
planetary transformation (one of the end-states of integrated intelligence) is the most
likely long-term benefit. Even so, the core operations of integrated intelligence –

16
integrated perception, evaluation/choice, location, diagnoses, innovation and creativity,
and foresight; along with the end state of wisdom – may all play a valuable role in the
development of society. For such benefits to accrue, there needs to be a shift from the
knowledge economy’s focus upon materialism, money and hard power – for these are
not readily compatible with the kinds of spiritual processes usually associated with
integrated intelligence.

Conclusion
So what is new about integrated intelligence? The idea of human consciousness
being embedded within a universal mind is as old as civilisation, as is the concept of
ESP. What is essentially new about integrated intelligence is it’s synthesis of intelligence
theory and consciousness theory, in particular transpersonal consciousnesses. Once
intelligence is defined and the core operations and end sates delineated, the practical
applications of the discourse can be grounded in practical experience and empirical
considerations – not merely philosophy and metaphysics.
It is time to begin to acknowledge and honour the profound and important intelligence
exhibited by some of the greatest minds on the planet. It is an injustice of the greatest
order that these great men and women have been pushed aside within intelligence
theory, and our psychology and science - and indeed within our entire civilisation. We
are talking about some people of profound courage, integrity and power. They deserve a
better place in our models of mind and intelligence.
My hope is that I have done enough here to initiate proceedings. I preach no dogmas,
but merely seek to voice a quiet dissent, with the aim of opening up the related
discourses. It is no longer good enough to say: “This is out of the question.”

Notes:
1. For a greater appreciation of the history of integrated intelligence, see Anthony (2003).
2. Table 1 has been expanded from Targ and Katra (1999) who, following the research of
Jeffery Mishlove, identify four different types of applications of remote viewing “in the real
world” (Targ & Katra 1999 pp 139-141). However, I have added various points and
extended the table to six applications. The term “foresight” has replaced Targ and Katra’s
category of “forecasting”. These core operations are reflective of the cognitive modalities
posited throughout the literature on integrated intelligence. I expect the genuine
applications of integrated intelligence will be closer to my additions, rather than the Targ
and Katra’s original applications, which seem to go beyond the empirical evidence for the
applications of remote viewing and psi in general. (e.g. Braud 2003; Kennedy 2003;
Radin 2006).
3. This is of course a debatable issue, but I will not address it in this paper.
4. I define the fragmented mind as the human mind in ignorance of its transpersonal
potentials. By contrast, the integrated mind is the human mind in full awareness of the
transpersonal realms of knowledge.
5. For a brief explanation of Wilber’s model, see my article – Anthony (2006b).
6. Richardson himself makes no reference to transpersonal dimensions of the psyche, nor
to transpersonal regulations in his model.
7. Nonetheless, these people may be quite capable of logical thought, if the problem being
presented has social meaning and relevance, as Richardson (2000) himself points out.

17
 8. The integrated society is a society which embraces integrated intelligence and permits its
informational input into its development.

References
Anthony, M., 2003. Integrated intelligence: The future of intelligence? Journal of Futures
Studies, 8(2), 39-54.
Anthony, M., 2005a. Education for transformation: integrated intelligence in the knowledge
economy and beyond. Journal of Futures Studies, 9(3), 31-35.
Anthony, M 2005b. Integrated intelligence and the pychospiritual imperatives of mechanistic
science. Journal of Futures Studies, 10(1), 31-47
Anthony, M., 2006a. A genealogy of the western rationalist hegemony. Journal of Futures
Studies, Vol. 11 (May).
Anthony, M. 2006b, Not-so-integral Futures. Journal of Futures Studies, Vol. 12, Nov.: 153-
162.
Bach, R., 1986. The Bridge Across Forever. New York: Dell.
Bettleheim, B., 2001. Freud and Man’s Soul. Sydney, Pimlico.
Borenstein, S., 2006. “Science bites myth of vampires, ghosts.” Yahoo News.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061026/ap_on_sc/vampire_science. opened 27.10.06.
Bradley, R., 2004. Love, power, brain, mind, and agency. In: D. Loye, ed. The Great
Adventure: Toward a Fully Human Theory of Evolution. New York: State University of
New York Press, 99-150.
Braud, W., 2003. Distant Mental Influence. Charlottesville: Hampton Roads.
Broomfield, J., 1997. Other Ways of Knowing. Rochester: Inner traditions.
Buzan, T., 2001. The Power of Spiritual Intelligence. London: Harper Collins.
Combs, A., Arcari, T., & Krippner, S. 2006 All of the Myriad Worlds: Life in the Akashic
Plenum. World Futures, 62: 75-85.
CNN (Hong Kong), 2005. Indigo children. (TV news story), 21.11.05.
Braud, W., 1998. Integral Inquiry: Complementary Ways of Knowing, Being, and Expression.
In: W. Braud & R. Anderson, eds. Transpersonal Research Methods for the Social
Sciences. London: Sage, pp. 35-68.
Buzan, T., 2001. The Power of Spiritual Intelligence. London: Harper Collins.
Capra, F., 2000. The Tao of Physics. Boston: Shambhala.
Dawkins, R., 2006. The God Delusion. London: Houghton Mifflin.
Deary, I., 2001. Intelligence: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dewey, J., 1937. Cultivating Society's Civic Intelligence: Patterns for a New ‘World Brain.’
Journal of Society, Information and Communication, 4(2).
Dossey, L., 2001. Healing Beyond The Body. London: Shambhala.
Gardner, H., 1993. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic
Books.
Gardner, H., Kornhaber, M.L., & Wake, W.K., 1996. Intelligence: Multiple Perspectives. New
York: Harcourt Brace College.
Gladwell, M., 2005. Blink: The Tipping Point. London, Penguin.
Goleman, D., 1995. Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Grof, S., 2000. Psychology of the Future. New York: Suny.

18
Grof, S., 2006. When the Impossible Happens. Boulder: Sounds True.
Hawkins, D., 2002. Power vs. Force: An Anatomy of Consciousness. London: Hay House.
Hogarth, R., 2001. Educating Intuition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Horin, A., (2006). “Young creative types the new mega-rich.” Sydney Morning Herald
(online). www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/12/10/1165685553911.html?from=top5#
Accessed 11.12.06.
Inayatullah, S., 2004. Spirituality as the fourth bottom line. Available from:
www.metafuture.org/Articles/spirituality_bottom_line.htm [Accessed 16 January
2006].
Jacobson, L., 1997. Embracing the Present. New York: Conscious Living.
Jung, C., 1973. Synchronicity. New York: Bollingen.
Kafatos, M., & Kafatou, T., 1991. Looking In Seeing Out. Wheaton: Quest Books.
Kennedy, J., 2003. The Capricious, Actively Evasive, Unsustainable Nature of Psi: a
Summary and Hypothesis. The Journal of Parapsychology, 67(1), 53-74.
King, D., 1999. Stephen Jay Gould. In: Predictions: 30 Great Minds on the Future. Oxford:
Oxford University Press,139-144.
Klein, G., 2003. The Power of Intuition. New York: Doubleday.
Kosko, B., 1993. Fuzzy Thinking. London: Harper Collins
Kubler-Ross, E., 1997. The Wheel of Life. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Kunzmann, U., & Baltes, P., 2003. Beyond the Traditional scope of Intelligence: Wisdom in
Action. In: R. Sternberg, J. Lautry, & T. Lubart, eds. Models of Intelligence:
International Perspectives. Washington: American Psychological Association, 329-
343.
Laszlo, E., 2004. Science and the Akashic Field. Rochester: Inner Traditions.
Laszlo, E., Grof, S., & Russell, P. (2003). The Consciousness Revolution. Las Vegas: Elf
Rock
Lawlor, R., 1991. Voices of the First Day: Awakening in the Aboriginal Dreamtime. Vermont:
Inner Traditions.
Levin, M., 2000. Spiritual Intelligence. London: Coronet.
Loye, D., 2004. Darwin, Maslow, and the Fully Human Theory of Evolution. In: D. Loye, ed.
The Great Adventure: Toward a Fully Human Theory of Evolution. New York: State
University of New York Press, 20-38.
Myers, D., 2004. Intuition: Its Powers and Perils. Yale University Press.
Maddox, J., 1999. What Remains To Be Discovered. New York: Touchstone.
Nash, R., 2005. Cognitive Habitus and Collective Intelligence. Journal of Educational Policy,
20(1), 3-21.
Pink, D.H., 2005. A Whole New Mind. New York: Riverhead.
Radin, D., 2006. Entangled Minds. New York: Paraview.
Reber, A., & Reber, E., 2001. The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology (3rd edition). London:
Penguin
Richardson, K. (2000). The Making of Intelligence. London: Phoenix.
Senge, P., 1994. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New
York: Currency.

19
Shearer, B., 2004. Multiple Intelligences Theory after 20 Years. Teachers College Record,
106(1), 2-16. Available from:
www.tcrecord.org. [Accessed 27 June 2005].
Sheldrake, R., McKenna, T., & Abraham, R., 2001. Chaos, Creativity, and Cosmic
Consciousness. Rochester: Park Street Press.
Sheldrake, R., 2003. The Sense of Being Stared At and Other Aspects of the Extended Mind.
London: Arrow Books.
Slaughter, Richard. 2006. “Beyond the Mundane – Towards Post-Conventional Futures
Practice.” Journal of Futures Studies. Vol 10, no. 4. Pp 15-24.
Sternberg, R., 2003. Wisdom, Intelligence and Creativity Synthesized. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Suicide is Painless, 1970 (Theme from M.A.S.H.). Copyright by Twentieth Century-Fox Music
Corporation.
Szuba, T., 2002. Was There Collective Intelligence Before Life On Earth?’ World Futures, 58,
61–80.
Talbot, M., 1992. Mysticism and the New Physics. New York: Arkana.
Targ, R., & Katra, J., 1999. Miracles of Mind: Exploring Nonlocal Consciousness and
Spiritual Healing. Novato: New World Library.
Tarnas, R., 2000. The Passion of the Western Mind. London: Pimlico.
Tart, T., 1993. Consciousness: A Psychological, Transpersonal and Parapsychological
Approach. Paper presented at the Third International Symposium on Science and
Consciousness in Ancient Olympia, 4-7 January. Available from: www.paradigm-
sys.com/cttart/sci-docs/ctt93-capta.html. [Accessed 8 August 2005].
Torff, B., Sternberg, R. (eds). Understanding and Teaching the Intuitive Mind. Mahwah: LEA
Books.
Wallace B., 2003. The Buddhist Tradition of Samatha. In: F. Varela, & J. Shear, eds.. The
View from Within: First Person Approaches To the Study of Consciousness.
Thorverton: Imprint Academic, 175-188.
Wilber, K., 2000. Sex, Ecology, Spirituality. Boston: Shambhala.
Wilber, K., 2001. Eye To Eye. Boston: Shambhala.
Wilde, S., 2001. The Sixth Sense. Carlsbad: Hay House.
Yogananda, P., 1979. Autobiography of a Yogi. San Francisco: Self Realization Fellowship.
Zohar, D., 2000. Spiritual Intelligence. London: Cygnus Books.

20