Six-Facets Developmental Arc (ILC Level II — ongoing)

A candidate model for how a practitioner continues developing the practice over time, once the tools have been introduced — the ongoing-competency arc, as distinct from the onboarding arc (ilc-fundamentals-arc), the developmental arc (twelve-steps), and the in-the-moment form (practice-cycle).

Layer note (CLAUDE.md §0): This is WRAPPER (layer 3), not core. What it organizes — the Six Facets as a value set, and the tools that serve each — is layer 2 (the facets themselves) and layer 1 (the tools). This page proposes one progression view of those layers. The facets themselves live at facet-translating-body-wisdom, facet-navigating-inner-world, facet-discovering-true-power, facet-getting-unstuck, facet-aligning-with-essence, facet-living-big-life.

⚠️ Same delivery-format caveat as ilc-fundamentals-arc. This arc is filed as the competency structure, not the delivery format. The 2025 ILC Master Curriculum delivers Level II through the same facilitator-led shape as Level 1, and the same fork (structured-curriculum-vs-open-meeting) applies. The competency structure here can be held independently of the delivery question.

Status: CANDIDATE

Live, in contention. First filing in the ongoing-competency-arc slot — no coexisting candidates yet. Filed as a candidate so the team has something concrete to converge on or against.

What it is — the arc

A competency map organized by the Six Facets. Not a sequence of weeks but a list of named capacities the practitioner develops, returns to, and deepens over time. The practitioner does not “complete” the arc; they orient from it.

Each facet carries a small set of named competencies (the “I…” statements in the curriculum’s Level II). The competencies are practitioner-facing — what the practitioner can say about their own practice when the competency is alive.

The competency structure

facet-translating-body-wisdom (foundation; every meeting opens here)

  • I move sensations and emotions through my body via breath and awareness.
  • I move through entire cycles of each emotion.
  • I wait until reactivity clears, then access what I want and what I don’t want.
  • I notice when I’m projecting, withdrawing, or withholding; I clear withholds to return to presence.
  • Practice anchor: daily prayer/meditation; ongoing sew and experiencing-your-feelings practice.

facet-navigating-inner-world

  • I have met and interviewed personas from every state in Reactive Brain.
  • I understand how my personas project on the world.
  • I understand how my personas require the world to show up in a certain way.
  • I can see persona interlocks and take steps to shift beyond them.
  • Tools that serve: personas, persona-interviews, persona-to-essence, projection-work.

facet-discovering-true-power

facet-getting-unstuck

facet-aligning-with-essence

  • I know my purpose.
  • My manifesto / commitments / intentions are clear and available; my life and myself reflect them.
  • My essence is palpable.
  • I love myself deeply and continuously; I relate to myself compassionately.
  • I know what I really want, and I live intentionally from that.
  • I understand flow — how to co-create it and how to surf it.
  • I connect with others from Creative Brain, always looking for the answer to how can everybody get everything they want?
  • Tools that serve: determining-purpose, manifesto, intentions, commitments, essence-interview, persona-to-essence, creative-brain-communication.

facet-living-big-life

What it gets right (why it’s a candidate)

  • Returns to the facet taxonomy as the organizing principle. The Six Facets are already the constitutional value-set the practice answers to (per v5 strategy and the wiki’s facet pages). Letting the progression be organized by the facets themselves is internally consistent — facets do double duty as both value set and competency map.
  • Treats practice as ongoing development, not curriculum to complete. Aligns with twelve-steps’s stations-not-curriculum framing, while replacing the recovery-tradition shape with one internal to EPI.
  • Practitioner-facing language. The competencies are “I…” statements, owned by the practitioner. No external evaluator.
  • Holds room for tools not yet exported. Several facets (especially Living Your Big Life) name tools that are still needs-export. The arc structure works without those tools being filled — it surfaces them as the practitioner reaches the relevant competency.

Where this arc differs from the others

SlotQuestion it answersTime scale
onboarding-arc (ilc-fundamentals-arc)What order do we introduce the tools in?Weeks
ongoing-competency-arc (this page)What capacities does a practitioner develop over time?Years, ongoing
practice-structure (twelve-steps)What shape does long-term practice take?Years, ongoing
in-the-moment-form (practice-cycle)What is the repeated move?Minutes

The ongoing-competency-arc and practice-structure slots are the closest neighbors — both answer “what does long-term practice look like?” They differ in what they organize around:

  • A developmental arc (Twelve Steps style) organizes around stations of the practitioner’s path (recognition, willingness, inventory, amends, ongoing practice, carrying the message).
  • A competency arc organizes around capacities the practitioner develops (the “I…” statements above).

These may be complementary rather than competing. A practitioner could have both a developmental arc (where am I on the long path?) and a competency map (what am I building right now?).

Open questions

  • Whether this arc replaces or accompanies a developmental arc. If the Six Facets give orientation and the competencies name development, is a separate developmental arc (twelve-steps or successor) still needed? Or do they answer different enough questions that both belong?
  • Competency assessment vs. competency self-naming. The competencies are “I…” statements — owned by the practitioner. The team should be explicit that the assessment is self-assessment, not external evaluation. The peer-led commitment (facilitator-pathway-vs-no-professional-class) lives here: no one grades a practitioner on these.
  • What if a practitioner never reaches some competencies? The arc has no completion. The team should be deliberate that not naming a competency as alive is not a failure state. It is information.
  • Whether each facet needs equal weight. The current structure has Living Your Big Life carrying many more competencies than other facets. Worth confirming this asymmetry is intentional and reflects the facet’s broader scope (which the v5 framing suggests it does).

What would move this

  • A second ongoing-competency arc as a candidate, so the team has alternatives to compare.
  • Team conscience on whether this and twelve-steps are complementary or in tension.
  • Convergence on whether self-named competencies are the right evaluation form (vs. e.g. mentor-assessed, partner-witnessed, or unassessed entirely).
  • Filling the needs-export tools in the Living Your Big Life facet so the arc has substance throughout.

Coexisting candidates (same slot: ongoing-competency-arc)

None filed yet. Per CLAUDE.md §5, all candidates in this slot would link ALTERNATIVE_TO each other and coexist until the team converges.

Source

raw/2025 ILC Version AT Master Curriculum.docx.md, Level II (Embodying the Six Facets of Evolutionary Power) and the closing Six Facets of Evolutionary Power section listing the competencies.