David,
I respectfully disagree. If anything, the curiosity we feel about the
process - while completely natural - is a danger to the field. Our
mandate to do the work does not include curiosity. In fact, of the
times I have felt the field collapse freeze or otherwise be
unworkable, it is most often because I or someone else is approaching
with an attitude of curiosity rather then in service to the true
needs of the client to effect a change in how things are in their
system.
I do not exclude theory. I just try to not be too caught by it's
seductive qualities. It is very easy to for it too rise into a place
where it obscures what arises from the practice. Especially if what
arises doesn't agree with our theory. Or perhaps that's only a
weakness of mine. ;-)
namaste.
Kenn
On Feb 11, 2008, at 4:26 AM, david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi Kenn,
You say you are interested that we are asking this question.
I have some thoughts on this.
I think curiosity is a big part of phemonenological practice, so that
is maybe where our energy comes from to ask this question.
And, if we are phemonenological in our approach, then we don't
exclude anything in the field, and theory is part of the field.
Cheers....David Mathes
What is a Constellation?
Posted by: "Kenn Day" enki@xxxxxxx kenndeigh
Fri Feb 1, 2008 7:59 pm (PST)
I find it rather interesting that we are even asking the question.
Constellation Work is a phenomenological technique. Why are we trying
to determine the theory, when we already know that the practice works?
namaste,
Kenn
