Dear David G
My thoughts are that I can't bracket off my judgements and my past, but I
try to have the intent of working phenomenologicaly, and try my best to
notice my judgements and past in my work.
I don't think its an either or, and in constellations representatives need
to describe their phenomena, otherwise we would only work with movements of
the soul, I guess.
Cheers....David M
on 15/6/05 2:51 AM, David Grillo at dgrillo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
dear Barbara,
Its refreshing to hear someone speak so clerly about phenomenology! I think
it's a difficult place to find and function from and yet its the space that
allows change! Such a paradox...Going back to Husserlian thinking, we have
to put our preconceptions (epoche, bracket off) and beliefs aside and stay
with the process without judging it...
The moment we try to describe phenomenology, is the moment it goes, you name
it you lose it...so subtle!
Thanks for the thought
david G
-------Original Message-------
From: Barbara Morgan <mailto:Barbara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 06/14/05 10:36:58
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ConstellationTalk] phenomenology
From my own understanding of it, if we are truly phenomenological we can't
write about this stuff at all, as we have to take each situation as it
appears at the time, according to how we feel, how the representatives feel,
how the client feels, what else is in the field - both at the workshop and
wider field. The orders and underlying theories are background thinking
only.
I remember it being referred to as allowing present experience to over-ride
belief. For me that means being prepared to let go of any pre-conceived
ideas about what works. On the other hand, they can be very useful! As we
open ourselves up to phenomenology, it becomes clear how contradictory and
paradoxical constellation work (and life!) is.
Being present is how I would sum it up.
Barbara Morgan
-----Original Message-----
From: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dan Booth Cohen
Sent: 04 June 2005 13:33
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ConstellationTalk] phenomenology
We're always in the interplay between formulaic and phenomenological. The
scene you described is more formulaic. It becomes more phenomenological
when you swap them around and they feel worse. Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: On Behalf Of Chris Walsh
Imagine we are facilitating a constellation. We notice 2 representatives who
are standing side by side look quite uncomfortable. We then realise that
according to the orders they are on the wrong side of each other. So we swap
them around. They both sigh and visibly relax so we feel happy with the
intervention.
My current question about this is: What part of this - if any, is
phenomenological?
Hasta la vista
Chris Walsh
Website www.constellationflow.com <http://www.constellationflow.com>
Yahoo! Groups Links
Yahoo! Groups Links
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ConstellationTalk/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ConstellationTalk-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ConstellationTalk-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=Unsubscribe>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
David Mathes
Inner Success Pty Ltd
Consulting * Training * Counseling
Supporting Change
Telephone: 03 9315 2220
Fax: 03 9315 3776
Mobile: 0407 073 802
Email: davidmathes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
