Martin Your question is: What is the crucial knowledge a facilitator has
to have?
In the latest issue of the Knowing Field, Diane Yankelevitz and Judith
Hemming address the question of whether Constellation facilitators need to
know psychotherapy. They both argue the answer is No. To be licensed as a
psychotherapist, one needs an advanced academic degree, several years of
supervised clinical training, and to pass a licensure test. Once licensed,
liability insurance providers and third-party payers emphasize
Evidence-Based treatment practices over eclectic therapies. What is
considered crucial knowledge for psychotherapists is too restrictive and
constraining for Constellation facilitators.
Our community to date has taken the all-inclusive approach; to be a
Constellation facilitator or trainer one only needs to claim to be one. We
have not fixed criteria for crucial knowledge.
Still, it is a good question, deserving an answer.
Maybe we can create a running list that can be refined over time. Perhaps
one of the ISCA forums will take this on.
Here is a starter:
Crucial knowledge a facilitator has to have is
The healing energy in a Constellation comes from the source. For each of
us, the source is our parents. A Constellation connects people in a good
way to their parents and the ancestors who came before them.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of martin hell
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 4:12 AM
To: constellationtalk
Subject: Re: [ConstellationTalk] Man serves the Feminine
PS: One more precision: This phrase is a socio-anthropological statement for
a patrilocal choice and tells us nothing about what to do in a specific
constellation. And like any other piece of knowledge from the humanities,
it's good to know about it, but you don't have to in order to do
constellations. It would even be harmful if you "tried" to apply it - that
would narrow the process.
Hm, I'm not really comfortable with what I wrote about no knowledge from
humanities being absolutely necessary for facilitating constellations. What
would be the crucial knowledge a facilitator has to have beyond from what we
learned by work and publications of constellation people? What else needs to
be included? Or does this already include everything?
I'm very curious what you think...
Best wishes,
Martin
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:24 AM, martin hell <hellsmartin@
<mailto:hellsmartin%40gmail.com> gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,famous
I don't know so much about Bert's recent point of view - haven't seen him
for a while. But I was following closely the debate there was on this
sentence. It's a recurrent one. I never heard any variants. In German itwhich
goes:
"Die Frau folgt dem Mann, und der Mann dient dem Weiblichen."
so it's
"The woman follows the man, and the man serves the female."
I think we should not use the word "feminine" since it sounds (at least
to me and I'm not a native speaker) like socially constructed gender,
Bert does mean. He is talking about the archaic forces, and he definesthem
somehow in this phrase, and I don't see much reason to think what hepoints
to finally comes down to a familiar ying-yang conclusion. Althoughying-yang
is a beautiful metaphor and makes a lot of sense on its own, no doubt.as
So here is my interpretation: Only the woman can give birth, and as s
mother she is absolutely crucial to the baby-child. This gives them an
incredible weight. In order to balance the man-woman relationship, so they
can be truly equal, the man has to furnish a huge service as well. A big
risking his life for giving birth to a child, which was very dangerousuntil
very recently. So he has, in this archaic equation, to guarantee thesafety
and wellbeing of woman and children to give as much as she gives by beinga
mother. This is very difficult, and not to make it any harder for him, shethe
is supposed to follow him where he can do it best - where he can be of the
greatest service to the nurturing and potentially life-creating power of
female, but not necessarily service to a potentially capricious feminine<mailto:danbcohen%40rcn.com> com>
will. Just like "following" is not meant in the sense of hierarchical
submission - both partners are equal if they equally give and take.
Best wishes,
Martin
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 1:18 AM, Dan Booth Cohen <danbcohen@rcn.
wrote:
David and All -
Compiling the insights gained from Constellations works well on what Eva
Madelung calls the systemic plane, but is best avoided on the
biographical
plane.
There's a famous thought experiment in moral psychology that considers a
case from the Korean War. A group of about 30 villagers was hiding out
in
the basement of a house. In order to prevent the group's discovery by
enemy
soldiers nearby, and certain death for everyone, a mother smothers her
crying baby. The moral question is about the mother's choice to kill her
baby to save the group as opposed to sacrificing them all in service to
maternal love. Psychologists have designed sophisticated tests to study
moral behavior in such extreme situations.
Systemically, Constellation facilitators can ask a different question
entirely, one that research psychologists cannot touch, but which we can
answer. What would the baby choose in such a situation? Our answer comes
from the experience of many Constellations: We see children
unequivocally
sacrifice themselves to save their parents. In this sense, our
experiences
give us insights into the hidden architecture of love.
On the practical level, if we begin a Constellation with such a
preconception locked into our minds, if we think we know the answer from
the
start, the Constellation is ruined before it begins. In Constellations
revolving around issues of men, women, and relationships, what I see
defies
categorization and generalization. The individuals and couples that come
to
my circles are struggling to endure their relationships. As a
facilitator,
I am rarely concerned with who leads or serves, but simply trying to
allow
them to experience a feeling of relief that unfreezes whatever has
seized
them.
Research psychology is committed to quantitative methods. The
psychologist
Kerlinger wrote, "Scientists are not and cannot be concerned with the
individual case. . . . The unit of speech in science is always the set,
the
group . . . The existential individual, the core of individuality,
forever
escapes the scientist. He is chained to group data, statistical
prediction,
and probabilistic estimates."
By this definition we are not scientists, but systemic philosophers. We
can
say, "Facilitators are and must be concerned with the individual case.
The
unit of speech in Constellations is always a particular person and their
place in the family system."
Dan
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--
Martin Hell (lic.)
Familienwissenschaftler
Abteilung für medizinische Psychologie
Bergheimerstrasse 20
69115 Heidelberg
+49 6221 3271642
+49 176 64112042 (Mobil)
