Dan
As always right to the heart of the matter with words that gently brush
against Truth with a capital T.As you said:
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.
Fields of the nameless
Thaw
Frozen joints
Allowing
Unseized arthritis
Another nameless name.
Siting silently
Being something
The field comes
And love flows by itself....
Your work with the "Monks" is an inspiration to my students looking at
incarceration and the Field....j
Enneapsychodramatics
Dr.Joseph M. Pirone 2018033080
On Saturday, March 22, 2008, at 08:18PM, "Dan Booth Cohen" <danbcohen@xxxxxxx>
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]
