Iâve been spending time listening and reading many thoughtful systems
thinkers and have been intrigued to find the dividing line between systems
thinkers who are materialists and systems thinkers who are spiritual.
As a spiritually oriented person, I really enjoy the thoughtfulness of the
materialist systems thinkers. They have very specific rules they must
invoke to explain things and I value the integrity I see in many of them,
even if I donât understand their allergy to the spiritual or mystical.
That being said, I also found myself stirred up and challenged in a good
way by their arguments. Hereâs a great post, if youâre curious:
https://blog.cabreraresearch.org/sacred-cows-of-systems-thinking-emergence
On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 3:20 AM drmdressler <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hello Dan,*Alison P. Fornés*
Thank you for your heartfelt and eloquent defence of the indefensible.
After the last few exchanges on this forum it is clear to me that the
toothpaste is out of the tube, and it is futile to try to push it back. I
am certainly not here to defend big pharma or drug pushing psychiatry. I do
feel the centuries old persecutions, grievances, and traumas in your words.
Actually I am not here to argue the points or in fact to argue at all. On
the one hand physical reality, âmatterâ is already beyond magical on
closer
inspection, so to request additional magic just does not make much sense.
On the other hand I fully appreciate that the human condition may at times
warrant and indeed necessitate journeys into âsupernaturalâ dimensions. So
I am not asking anyone to change their point of view. Not at all. My
invitation all along has been about self-inquiry. To look deeply within and
identify the PERSONAL events and forces that leads us to conclusions we
have. It must be informative to
contemplate that the result of this initial invitation has been
passionate, defensive arguments.
May we have the wisdom and the kindness to take the path within.
Monika
--------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: constellationtalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
constellationtalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Dan Cohen
Sent: Saturday, 30 October 2021 4:33 PM
To: constellationtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello Monika â
I have been responding to your critique of pseudoscience for 45 years. In
1975, I studied at Northwestern University with Dr. Betty Jo Teeter Dobbs,
an Isaac Newton scholar. She was only the second scholar to be given access
to Newtonâs secret alchemical papers, the first being the great Cambridge
economist John Maynard Keynes. Her course revealed that there two pillars
of modern science, one observational and the other metaphysical. The
metaphysical foundation is materialist and reductionist-empiricist. This
results in the belief that consciousness is nothing but a consequence of
complex arrangement of matter, i.e., brain activity. This belief is neither
proven, nor warranted.
What devolved into pseudoscience were the remnants of alchemy and womenâs
plant medicine. Having been persecuted, hung and burned for 4 centuries the
descendants of Europeâs witch hunts â which slew upwards of 200,000
indigenous woman â struggle to maintain a coherent and sustainable
metaphysics based on the lost wisdom.
While many speculative methods flourish, an increasing number of
open-minded scientists are reaching empirically grounded conclusions that
challenge the mainstream majority view. They argue that we need a model of
consciousness that is nonreductive and recognizes that consciousness can
have its own direct access to reality through inner perception or radical
introspection. These offer valid access routes to deeper structures of
reality.
In Constellations, we work with three phenomena which challenge scientism.
1. Representative perception
2. Systemic entanglement
3. Orders of Love
There are many Constellation trainers and facilitators who adhere to
acceptable scientific understanding without mystifying. Others, like me,
are channeling ancestors, receiving and transmitting non-local
consciousness, and taking support from plant, animal, earth, ocean and
celestial resources. Our metaphysics are admittingly at odds. I am
convinced the evidence supports mine and is vacant in regard to mainstream
science.
I looked up Pseudoscience on Wikipedia, the authoritative custodians of
the academic/corporate worldview. Their list was made in the context of
âeducating the public about questionable or potentially fraudulent or
dangerous claims and practices.â In one way or another all the topics
impinge on scientific domains or practices. Hereâs a very small excerpt of
what is meant by pseudoscience.
* Astrology
* Feng Shui
* Acupuncture
* Alternative medicine
* Anthroposophy
* Applied kinesiology
* Aroma therapy
* Ayurveda
* Chiropractic
* Chronic Lyme disease
* Craniosacral therapy
* Energy medicine
* Energy therapy or healing
* Spiritual medicine or healing
* Functional medicine
* Homeopathy
* Osteopathy
* Traditional Chinese Medicine
* EMDR
* Hypnosis and hypnotherapy
I wonder why psychiatric medications for the treatment of chemical
imbalances in the brain did not make their list? Is it because of the
wealth of scientific evidence in favor of Zyprexa to treat depression? Or
is the divide between science and pseudoscience capricious and biased? I
agree with you there must be deeper and larger forces (not least financial)
compelling manufacturers and practitioners to propose unsupported
explanations.
For 45 years, I have devoted myself as an activist and clinician by
pursuing ideas marginalized by culture, erased by history, and obscured by
willful ignorance. Maria Popova writes, It is âin the margins of life as
commonly conceived by our cultureâs inherited parameters of permission and
possibility, that I have worked out and continue working out who I am and
who I wish to be â a private inquiry irradiated by the ultimate question,
the great quickening of thought, feeling, and wonder that binds us all:
What is all this?â
Whatever our metaphysical quibble, Monika, I do not doubt you are pursuing
the same pathways to look inside and harmonize our inner and external
worlds.
Warmly
Dan
--------------------------------------
Hello Julie,
You are making an interesting point. "Biological origin" can of course be
a convenient way to sidestep difficult social problems. On the other hand
there are all kinds of biological predispositions. To be fair WebMD a fully
mainstream and established scientific forum does not claim that mental
illness is exclusively biological. "Although the exact cause of most mental
illnesses is not known, it is becoming clear through research that many of
these conditions are caused by a combination of biological, psychological,
and environmental factors."
https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/mental-illness-children
To me the telling definition or question; is the approach open to be shown
as erroneous. Religion and pseudo science share closed, belief based
conclusions. Pseudo science in particular likes to borrow terms with clear
meaning and use them to gain credibility. Science may come to mistaken
conclusions but it must be open to rational argument. And of course there
is such a thing as scientific fraud.
In terms of this forum however the critical question: are we open to
investigate our emotional reactions and attachments. Are we prepared to
look within.
Monika
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Julie Ulbricht <julie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: constellationtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <constellationtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Monika
I'm not sure that I've read every post on this thread: It is hard to track
sometimes and I haven't understood everything that's been said either; but
what I return to is this word: "Pseudoscience", It seems to encapture in
itself a world view which I react against instinctively.
It seems you used this word with specific intent and somehow innocently of
the baggage many of us attach to the word, which is around the legitimising
of certain methods of enquiry over others.
I am currently immersed deeply in the work of the psychiatrist Jerry
Marzinsky who is asking questions outside of the accepted paradigm of
"Science" which was and is predicated on the belief that mental illness has
a biological origin. As far as I can ascertain there is nothing whatsoever
that is scientific about this belief.
So this is the ants nest that you stepped into Monika
warmly
Julie
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick
society." Krishnamurti
Simple Ayurveda
Julie Ulbricht BSc Ayurveda, PG Dip Ayurvedic Medicine
07529 549589
julie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
simpleayurveda.co.uk<http://www.simpleayurveda.co.uk>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: constellationtalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <
constellationtalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Joshua Alexander <
egomagickian@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 21 October 2021 03:44:54
To: constellationtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [constellationtalk] Re: Pseudoscience
Hello Dan and All,
First I would like to say that for some strange reason email replies at
times are truncated on this forum. Maybe freelist.org maybe yahoo, maybe
gremlins, maybe even me - I don't know.
In any case I would like to say Dan that I too re-read your comment, and I
didn't see you saying anywhere that slavery was imposed by Christianity.
This is also relevant to your below comment as far as people do seem to
have blind spots and amazing misunderstandings. So by virtue of this forum
my comments were addressed at the many constellation facilitators who seem
to have a predilection to make very questionable assertions as to why
constellation works. Magical, dream like fantasy trips are absolutely part
of the Constellation / Psychodrama process and the healing journey. I am
not disputing that for a minute, on the contrary. But to mix all kinds of
Multi Dimensional, Quantum Genetic DNA pseudoscience into a rational
argument undermines acceptance and respect for the whole modality.
Now I had my two cents worth, and I do not expect any change. There must
be deeper and larger forces (not least financial) compelling practitioners
to propose unsupported explanations. My original invitation was to simply
explore this religious attraction to pseudoscience. I also feel Tanja's
soothing words did have a stronger impact, without which people may not be
willing to look.
Monika
You received this message because you're subscribed to the
ConstellationTalk email list. To unsubscribe, visit
https://www.freelists.org/list/constellationtalk or email
constellationtalk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject
line. The list archive, going back to 2003, is at
https://www.freelists.org/archive/constellationtalk.
--
