.................by Stanley
.....At our first meeting of (MAP) MindBody & Personality Sir Ken Robinson, whose portrait adorns our logo above, spoke in the video on education. Funny and entertaining as he was, he made a serious point. It was that our present system of education is a terrible waste of human potential. Today, it is not enough to train our young people to learn and regurgitate facts. He said, “dancing, for example, should be given equal status to literacy. We all dance, don’t we? We all have bodies – or did I miss something?”
.....That is precisely the point of our new group. We have all missed something – particularly so in psychology. In MAP we are making an emphatic statement. It is that psychology is not just about what we call ‘the mind’ – we include ‘the body’ – or rather, we don’t regard it as separate in the first place. The single word: mindbody says it clearly. It means that the human person is a seamless, whole entity.
.....A person is a mindbody!
.....The problem is that we have missed something. We have been educated out of our instinctive knowing and taught only how to head-trip. And because we have been educated to stay in our heads we now have to begin to consciously pay attention to our body in a new way.
....Focusing is a practical expression of that endeavour.
....But let us be clear what we mean by ‘paying attention to the body’. We don’t just mean noticing it as a diagnostic indicator, the body as giving signals or signs about what is going on in the mind. This is to misunderstand the concept of mindbody. This mistake is still based on the split between mind and body and treating the body as a junior partner or servo-mechanism to the mind. If we treat this ghost called ‘the mind’ as the basic substance, it then has the full responsibility for changing itself – an impossible task.
.....But there can be some misunderstanding in all this. Focusing is not a psychological modality like counselling, gestalt, Jungian dreamwork etc. What we are saying is that any psychological modality must pay attention to the body side of the equation, it must do so either deliberately or implicitly, otherwise it is dealing with only half the person.
.....For about 30 % of people this focusing element of body attention and awareness is quite natural; such people are in touch with a certain depth within themselves. They will not name the body specifically as the source of their insightfulness. They will tell you that feelings, images and new ideas ‘just come to me’. This is because they are all-of-a-piece already. When they say ‘me’ they are referring to mindbody. Simple good communication works on them like a charm. They don’t have to deliberately focus.
.....However, most of us are somewhat effected by the tendency to live in our heads. For us, it is useful to consciously pay attention to the body. This conscious act is focusing proper. There are precise steps that show a person how to do this to begin with. The important thing is to know how to access oneself.
.....By focusing we mean giving the body its full partnership in one’s personality. This means listening respectfully to what, in its own way, it wants, feels, knows and perceives. For some lucky ones this is so natural that they have never considered anything else possible; others will say that their body doesn’t feel anything they don’t already know. Most people are somewhere in the middle: that is, somewhat neglectful of this deeper aspect of themselves.
.....Since its beginning depth psychology has always been fascinated by the so-called ‘unconscious’. It’s as though we’ve always known something was there and some very elaborate theories have been developed about it. What we have been looking for is a direct opening into it. It turns out that it is as close as it can possibly be – so close that we easily neglect it.
.....The meaning and purpose of MAP is to flesh out that neglect for the sake of a better life, no matter what our individual path and however we name it.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Sunday, June 14, 2009
CUMULATIVE EVOLUTION IN FOCUSING
.....................by Stanley
......The most important aspect of focusing therapy is what Gendlin has called ‘the murky edge’. This is the feel that every problem has if you look into your vague bodily felt-sense. What you already know and feel about a problem is important, but not nearly so important as what you don’t know. This is why it is vital to patiently address the ‘murky edge’, for it is out of this that something new can arise that moves the problem forward.
......The interesting question that arises from this is: why is it that the organism (the body) is so much better at solving some problems than the ‘thinking mind’? I would like to propose that the organism has its own mode of solving problems that has developed over the long course of evolution and that the felt-sense is the further deliberate use of an evolutionary adaptation; in the same way that Renoir’s rosy nudes uses and elaborates the sexual instinct; or the way writing makes use of the ‘speech’ instinct that is hard wired in a way that writing is not. The felt-sense then is not in itself a Darwinian adaptation but makes use of an adaptation that very definitely is: the problem solving ability that has evolved in living organisms since the beginning of life.
.....This is the hypothesis I’ve been thinking about for a while and I have no idea how useful it will be, but the only way to find out is to throw ourselves into it and see what happens. Here goes !
....The course of a typical focusing session follows a somewhat recognisable pattern. Not the content of the session, but the stages. The person first roughly gets a handle on the problem they wish to address. Then comes looking into the felt-sense of it, the vague murky edge. This is often followed by a state of mild confusion – ie. what really is the problem about? It seems shadowy and indistinct. Then there is the sense that there are a number of ways of looking at it, a number of possible ‘takes’, but it is still not clear what is important and what isn’t. It’s all a bit confusing. Then, perhaps suddenly, something emerges that seems right – a way of looking at it, a different perspective that seems clear. This is what we call ‘a step’. The person might expand on this new ‘take’ until a new sense of uncertainty arises. Now again the murky edge appears along with new possible ways of continuing. That is one complete cycle. A session may consist of many such cycles. Of course, it is not always as tidy as I have described it, but generally it will go something like that.
.....It is important to understand that at each cycle, not only the person changes, but the environment changes. For example he may start out with: ‘George is very helpful – perhaps I am not appreciative enough’. Then he makes a step to: ‘Well, actually he doesn’t help, he’s too pushy.’ The person’s perception of the environment (George) has changed. So now there is a new situation, a different problem.
.....Now let’s see how the organism might be operating and what might be happening from what we know about the process of natural selection.
.....The conscious thinking mind solves problems by forward looking to the end condition it wants to achieve. It makes an end goal and then analyses what steps are necessary to achieve it. The process in which the organism engages is quite different. If we imagine this to be analogous to the algorithmic process of natural selection, then what is being sorted out is which ‘take’ on the problem will move the organism forward – just one step.
.....In the murky edge the organism is already selecting everything that is relevant to the initial problem, call it problem A. The ‘everything that is relevant’ is what Gendlin calls ‘the implicit intricacy’ of the problem. This felt-sense is murky because nothing is as yet differentiated. There are many possibilities. Nothing has as yet been selected which will move the organism forward. It is conceivable that in the murky edge there is competition between the different factors that could be the next step – felt by the person as a sense of doubt or murkiness.
.....From these possibilities the best step is now selected which comes a sense of decisive forward movement. This then created a new circumstance, a new problem or a different aspect of the problem. It is as though the first step ‘breeds’ further possible steps, from which another step is selected.
.....Let’s put it again in another way: out of the implicit intricacy of the murky edge, one factor is eventually selected and is felt explicitly as a new development or ‘take’ on the original problem ‘A’ – (like the example above: ‘Well, actually he’s not helpful, he’s pushy). Now we have something different. It is no longer problem ‘A’ we are dealing with. Something has shifted and we now have problem ‘B’ with different factors. .....Again, there is the implicit intricacy of a number of possible ‘takes’ or steps from this. Out of these one will be selected that will carry the person forward. The person is carried along a line of development that is ‘self-selecting’ at each stage; each stage being a ‘better’ or ‘deeper’ solution. But the ultimate outcome is not predictable – that is exactly its advantage. The outcome is not determined by what you already know or are biased towards.
.....In modern engineering they are using computer generated evolutionary algorithms (EAs) to mimic the processes of natural selection and random mutation by ‘breeding’, selecting and re-breeding possible designs to produce the fittest ones. It is a similar process to natural selection, but not quite.
.....When we look at focusing, one thing is abundantly clear: there is some precise sorting and selecting that goes on out of sight. It is certainly not the way the thinking, planning mind works. The focuser merely gives attention to the edge and to what comes from it.
.....The way I have described this process may sound a bit mechanical, but that’s only because it’s difficult to lay out. In actual operation it’s as smooth and seamless as organic life itself.
.....The cumulative evolution at occurs in focusing is far more accurate and economical than ‘plans’, which are likely to be dominated by fixations. It can arrive at a satisfactory solution very quickly – perhaps in less than 10 ‘generations’ – the space of one session. .....Cumulative evolution adapts very accurately – that is, it harmonises the organism with the environment in a way that promotes and maximises the quality of life.
In focusing one thing is very noticeable. It is that one is always surprised at the enormous amount of detail that emerges from any problem, detail that one never suspected was involved. This can be understood as the multiple perspectives or possible next steps that jostle with each other as they compete, mutate and breed, becoming as they do so subjected to the process of selection, before one ‘take’ becomes a constant, giving one a sense of clarity and understanding.
.....In therapy working with the Darwinian idea of cumulative evolution makes it far more distinctive what we mean by the term ‘process’.
................................*
I thought of a little joke that can make fun of this essay:
“I have an attitude problem – in fact all my attitudes have a problem.
They all want to have babies !”
......The most important aspect of focusing therapy is what Gendlin has called ‘the murky edge’. This is the feel that every problem has if you look into your vague bodily felt-sense. What you already know and feel about a problem is important, but not nearly so important as what you don’t know. This is why it is vital to patiently address the ‘murky edge’, for it is out of this that something new can arise that moves the problem forward.
......The interesting question that arises from this is: why is it that the organism (the body) is so much better at solving some problems than the ‘thinking mind’? I would like to propose that the organism has its own mode of solving problems that has developed over the long course of evolution and that the felt-sense is the further deliberate use of an evolutionary adaptation; in the same way that Renoir’s rosy nudes uses and elaborates the sexual instinct; or the way writing makes use of the ‘speech’ instinct that is hard wired in a way that writing is not. The felt-sense then is not in itself a Darwinian adaptation but makes use of an adaptation that very definitely is: the problem solving ability that has evolved in living organisms since the beginning of life.
.....This is the hypothesis I’ve been thinking about for a while and I have no idea how useful it will be, but the only way to find out is to throw ourselves into it and see what happens. Here goes !
....The course of a typical focusing session follows a somewhat recognisable pattern. Not the content of the session, but the stages. The person first roughly gets a handle on the problem they wish to address. Then comes looking into the felt-sense of it, the vague murky edge. This is often followed by a state of mild confusion – ie. what really is the problem about? It seems shadowy and indistinct. Then there is the sense that there are a number of ways of looking at it, a number of possible ‘takes’, but it is still not clear what is important and what isn’t. It’s all a bit confusing. Then, perhaps suddenly, something emerges that seems right – a way of looking at it, a different perspective that seems clear. This is what we call ‘a step’. The person might expand on this new ‘take’ until a new sense of uncertainty arises. Now again the murky edge appears along with new possible ways of continuing. That is one complete cycle. A session may consist of many such cycles. Of course, it is not always as tidy as I have described it, but generally it will go something like that.
.....It is important to understand that at each cycle, not only the person changes, but the environment changes. For example he may start out with: ‘George is very helpful – perhaps I am not appreciative enough’. Then he makes a step to: ‘Well, actually he doesn’t help, he’s too pushy.’ The person’s perception of the environment (George) has changed. So now there is a new situation, a different problem.
.....Now let’s see how the organism might be operating and what might be happening from what we know about the process of natural selection.
.....The conscious thinking mind solves problems by forward looking to the end condition it wants to achieve. It makes an end goal and then analyses what steps are necessary to achieve it. The process in which the organism engages is quite different. If we imagine this to be analogous to the algorithmic process of natural selection, then what is being sorted out is which ‘take’ on the problem will move the organism forward – just one step.
.....In the murky edge the organism is already selecting everything that is relevant to the initial problem, call it problem A. The ‘everything that is relevant’ is what Gendlin calls ‘the implicit intricacy’ of the problem. This felt-sense is murky because nothing is as yet differentiated. There are many possibilities. Nothing has as yet been selected which will move the organism forward. It is conceivable that in the murky edge there is competition between the different factors that could be the next step – felt by the person as a sense of doubt or murkiness.
.....From these possibilities the best step is now selected which comes a sense of decisive forward movement. This then created a new circumstance, a new problem or a different aspect of the problem. It is as though the first step ‘breeds’ further possible steps, from which another step is selected.
.....Let’s put it again in another way: out of the implicit intricacy of the murky edge, one factor is eventually selected and is felt explicitly as a new development or ‘take’ on the original problem ‘A’ – (like the example above: ‘Well, actually he’s not helpful, he’s pushy). Now we have something different. It is no longer problem ‘A’ we are dealing with. Something has shifted and we now have problem ‘B’ with different factors. .....Again, there is the implicit intricacy of a number of possible ‘takes’ or steps from this. Out of these one will be selected that will carry the person forward. The person is carried along a line of development that is ‘self-selecting’ at each stage; each stage being a ‘better’ or ‘deeper’ solution. But the ultimate outcome is not predictable – that is exactly its advantage. The outcome is not determined by what you already know or are biased towards.
.....In modern engineering they are using computer generated evolutionary algorithms (EAs) to mimic the processes of natural selection and random mutation by ‘breeding’, selecting and re-breeding possible designs to produce the fittest ones. It is a similar process to natural selection, but not quite.
.....When we look at focusing, one thing is abundantly clear: there is some precise sorting and selecting that goes on out of sight. It is certainly not the way the thinking, planning mind works. The focuser merely gives attention to the edge and to what comes from it.
.....The way I have described this process may sound a bit mechanical, but that’s only because it’s difficult to lay out. In actual operation it’s as smooth and seamless as organic life itself.
.....The cumulative evolution at occurs in focusing is far more accurate and economical than ‘plans’, which are likely to be dominated by fixations. It can arrive at a satisfactory solution very quickly – perhaps in less than 10 ‘generations’ – the space of one session. .....Cumulative evolution adapts very accurately – that is, it harmonises the organism with the environment in a way that promotes and maximises the quality of life.
In focusing one thing is very noticeable. It is that one is always surprised at the enormous amount of detail that emerges from any problem, detail that one never suspected was involved. This can be understood as the multiple perspectives or possible next steps that jostle with each other as they compete, mutate and breed, becoming as they do so subjected to the process of selection, before one ‘take’ becomes a constant, giving one a sense of clarity and understanding.
.....In therapy working with the Darwinian idea of cumulative evolution makes it far more distinctive what we mean by the term ‘process’.
................................*
I thought of a little joke that can make fun of this essay:
“I have an attitude problem – in fact all my attitudes have a problem.
They all want to have babies !”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)