Magical Path - Psychosynthesis Notes 2

Psychosynthesis Notes 2

The following are various notes and chapter summaries of Roberto Assagioli's book:

Overall I find the chapters just read to be easy enough to follow in most instances and I can understand some of where Assagioli is coming from.

It came to me that it would seem Assagioli is partly a product of his training in Freudian thought, and Psychiatry (and also his Qabalistic thought, although this doesn't easily show through in his writing, but there are the occasional comments which allude to it or would fit well with Qabala, especially where he talks about Spirituality. Because of the background of Assagioli, I can see how many of the differences between his "version" of Psychosynthesis and Jay Ray's "version" differ. Assagioli was really the seed or beginning point of Psychosynthesis, developing the system from his own theories and experiences, and from tools and techniques he had worked with in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy fields. His "version" carries with it an aura which is the product of his own Self. Jay Ray's "version" of Psychosynthesis carries an aura which is the product of her own Self, and living "sum total" of her experiences. Jay's Psychosynthesis and teachings draw on other things such Shamanism, and co-dependency, plus all of Jay's own insights and wisdom, and comes (in my opinion) from a much more Spiritual focal point, rather than the academic background of Assagioli (both Psychiatric/Freudian, and Qabalistic which tends to be very cerebral and academic in the main).

Some of Assagioli's writing tends to be a little unclear, and again this is possibly from the translation of from Italian. I find often where he is talking about the Self it is unclear exactly what he is getting at. He talks about the personal Self and the observing Self. At times it is unclear (to me) whether he sees these as different or the same.

I agree with some of the statements Assagioli makes and I originally came across some of them from other sources, and have come to understand and agree with the comments. Such things as:

Techniques are only tools and can be modified. There is a high importance of the principles and the basic purpose of the entire endeavour. This to me is the experiential part of learning. Such things as the talks we are doing, it is the process, which is most important, not a right/wrong of the actual talk.
All techniques can be modified at will, but should keep in mind the purpose of the therapy.
From a previous mentor I learned (first from his theories, then from my experiences with him, and students of my own) that there is a high importance of the actual relationship between the Guide/Teacher/Therapist and the Student/Client. This in some ways is more important than the techniques used. Following on from the above, techniques are not the be-all and end-all of therapy (or anything really). Assagioli included a quote from L.W. Dobb to illustrate this point: "technicians tend to fall in love with, and then be corrupted by, psychological weapons." I have noticed and had pointed out to me that this is often a common thing, people become hung-up in the technique. An example related to me was in Golden Dawn circles people became known as "astral junkies" because they became totally absorbed in astral projection, and spend all their free time doing it. This is a form of escapism. In another instance, a friend of mine I spoke to for the first time in about 8 years (we'd lost contact), is now involved in hypnosis and self-hypnosis and was telling me how it is the be-all and end-all of 'therapy'. However, to me hypnosis is simply one technique that may be used, and I also have serious doubts as to whether it is viable long term at letting people become consciously aware of their problems and limitations. Overall I believe that techniques are just tools and can be discarded (temporarily or permanently) when they no longer give the desired results, and a new technique used. I believe it is about being open to possibilities and not limiting one's focus.

I noted in this section that Assagioli appears to have concepts (boxes) about different groups or types of people. There are the "nervous patients", "normal people", academic / well educated people (who should easily be able to understand Assagioli's concepts!), and people of varying degrees of "culture". I find this limiting, and not truly recognising the individual, unique essence within people. I can understand that at times it is hard not to be judgemental, and view one's Self as being 'above' the rest of the crowd, and in some ways I don't feel this is wrong, as long as there is an overall recognition that everyone is on their own journey, and everyone is different rather than there being a 'better' / 'worse' category. A quote I like (which from memory is attributed to an Apache Indian) is "love your enemy, but hate his behaviour". To me this captures some of the essence of recognition of uniqueness. People are all human beings with a unique gift for us, even if that is in the way of a huge learning experience that we might find extremely unpleasant, distasteful or abusive. While we may find their actions abhorrent we can still step back and look at the bigger picture, learn from them, about ourselves, and recognise that they are still a human being at the bottom of it all, just lacking in many of the skills necessary for personal interaction which can be considered appropriate or respectful. In the main I would suggest it is nurture, not nature, which creates aberrant human behaviour, but also believe that in a greater scheme of things even the 'vilest' of people are here to help and aid the conscious evolution of humanity.

I don't feel that it is useful to put clients into boxes or be judgemental on them as to their academic abilities or "culture". Anyone seeking any kind of Self development or psychosynthesis, no matter how small the degree they are capable of achieving or committing too, deserves a lot of credit. In this respect I like Jay's approach of breaking down the concepts of Psychosynthesis to be digestible by the lowest common denominator. Psychosynthesis is a powerful concept (or set of concepts / world view) that it should not be limited only to those of high academic calibre, but to anyone who seeks to know themselves or overcome issues or problems they have.

Essentially Assagioli's philosophy agrees with my statements, as he says true integration and growth require more than mere analytical treatment, rather the use of active techniques. This leaves for a very broad scope to achieve the aims of psychosynthesis, and doesn't require much in the way of academic ability.

Chapter 3

In chapter 3 Assagioli begins to outline techniques used. He starts off by stating that the first step is knowledge of both the conscious and unconscious aspects of one's personality. I agree with this approach, initially studying any issues we feel we need to address, and/or are consciously aware of. Undoubtedly, from my experiences, exploring what we consciously know, through the techniques of psychosynthesis, quickly leads us into the unconscious areas and starts bringing up issues for us to look at which we were not originally aware of. So while I agree in the main with Assagioli that we have to understand the conscious before we explore the unconscious, I don't believe the two areas are really separable, and looking at what we know will undoubtedly lead us into learning about what we don't know (what is sub- or un- conscious at present). I disagree in one sense also, that if we spend a lot of time just going over what is consciously known we will begin to go around in circles. I believe an understanding only comes with a thorough exploration of conscious and unconscious attributes. And understanding is something which is multileveled or multi-dimensional. While we may believe we understand something well enough, over time our understandings change, so there is no need to thoroughly understand anything before you explore a little deeper into the unknown. Once more is actually brought into conscious awareness our understanding then becomes to deepen and become more full.

Assagioli is quite clear that he considers a scientific attitude as very important part of Psychosynthesis. The scientific attitude is always trying to look at things objectively in a reductionist way. In contrast, the Psychosynthesis of Jay's is far more subject, about what feels right to us as an individual. Overall, it is more holistic. This makes greater sense with me and I feel is more appropriate and beneficial for individual uniqueness and growth. Further, even modern social psychology asserts the importance of subjectivity. A quote I read went roughly along the lines of the following: "Before you enter a building you only need to know subjectively that the roof won't fall on your head to give you the confidence to feel safe inside it. You do not need an engineer to give you a report on the building." In this manner, acting out of the subjective approach we are more involved in the experience rather than a passive observer.

However, having said all this, there is indeed an important role for objectivity. I see, in the main, that working with the Higher Self and going into the Higher Self energy to look at issues gives an objective approach. This fits in with subjective = temporal and objective = transpersonal / transcendent.

Assagioli also looked at freeing oneself of emotions while looking at issues. He described emotions as "disturbing and distorting". This is where Jay's teaching differ greatly, as do my own beliefs. Emotions can be "disturbing (more so) and distorting (less so)" when one is not familiar with emotions, as many of us are in present society, especially men. However, emotions are critical in being human, and alive. Once one learns to accept emotions, even "disturbing" emotions can be experienced with relatively less discomfort, and far from being distorting they help clarify the picture. Assagioli's relegation of emotions to "distorting" fits in with his sense -> feel -> think -> act model, as thinking in his opinion is critical at making the "correct" decision, and more appropriate to scientific thought and method. Acting on something that may be disturbing is not necessarily rational. However, feelings and emotions are something that have developed within humans and other animals for very important reasons and in humans aid, and are aided by an analytical mind. The analytical mind helps give us self-awareness, and the ability to look outside the now, with reflection and heuristic abilities, we can add to what we know through direct experience. Verbal and written communication is also aided by the analytical mind. However, we remain very much entities existing in the "now", so need the feedback our thoughts and emotions provide us to exist within the flow of things, rather than the rough ride trying to rationalise and second-guess life provides.

Techniques

As an overall comment, some of the techniques are used by Jay and some are not. To me, some are useful and some are less useful, although individuals may find some value in doing them. Some I have mixed feelings on, and some I think are academic exercises and don't really assist in Psychosynthesis. Some would appear to derive from Freudian Psychoanalysis.

Biography � As with many other techniques, I don't doubt that there would be value in doing an auto-biography. It is not something Jay has taught in her class. I don't think it is necessary to get a biography from a client before working with them. The client will relay their past to you during sessions anyway. For an individual there could be plenty of benefit in writing a biography for personal use and as a therapeutic tool, especially when compared to and combined with the Family of Origin (Origin of Traits).
Diary � this is something Jay mentions but has given no specific information on. I've kept a diary on and off for about 6 years, and find it a valuable personal tool for seeing progress and growth, and expressing ideas and emotions. I am in two minds about giving a diary to a therapist (or anyone else for that matter) to read. I have been in a situation where a mentor has read my journal, and also in a position I've let other people read my journal. I've also been in the possession that a mentor had copies of my journal stolen by a third party who then related personal details of mine to someone else (in this case an ex-girlfriend). While there was some anger at the third party, I felt sufficiently 'together' that it didn't particularly worry me. However, some of my other journals and journal entries contained much more open and honest writings and I would have felt rather nervous about what could be done with the information contained within.
Origin of Traits. This was basically what Jay presented in first year as Family of Origin. I find it personally very useful, and continue to find its relevance in my continuing growth and learning about my issues and their genesis.
Conscious Complexes. This would appear to stem from Freudian psychoanalysis. We don't tend to talk about complexes, certainly not "mother complexes" or "father complexes". To me, the closest things that fit in are talking about "issues" (which is far more general), or conglomerate sub-personalities. This is however quite different than what Assagioli discusses.
Polarities, Ambivalences and Conflicts. We talk about polarities, particularly with sub-personalities. Jay has not used the word ambivalences, but we have discussed switching between the two polar opposite sub-personalities. Conflicts have also been covered in Jay's course in some form or another, although perhaps under the terminology "blockages".
Sub-personalities. This seemed to be similar enough to Jay's material. The thrust of what Assagioli was saying is that the aim is to synthesise subs without repressing useful traits. This makes sense, and is basically what is done with the "And" process (which is another name for Synthesis anyway).
Traits belonging to preceding psychological ages. This is not really covered by Jay. To me it seems far more clinical and about labelling, rather than just experiencing and expressing. The closest thing of relevance I noted was talking about infantile traits, which we would discuss as being related to the Inner Child. I don't see any particular benefit to labelling traits as being infantile, adolescent or adult. I find more use in labelling things as appropriate or inappropriate for our continued growth, happiness, fulfilment and well-being.
Constitution of Man. It was interesting that Assagioli suggested giving this lecture to "well educated people"� it seems a little pretentious that he wasn't offering a system for the "common person" but one of well educated peers. I did however notice his comments on it being a "working hypothesis" which fits in with my thinking of things being a map, not the territory.
The Self. Nothing to say on this.
The Will. Assagioli sees this as primarily unconscious motivation. He discusses both the will of the personal self and the unconscious will. He talks about bringing the Will of the Higher Self in line with the Will of the personal Self. I'd suggest it was the other way around, that the personal Self needs to align more closely with the Higher Self to be on one's own path. In esoteric circles this is the process of Initiation, and finding one's True Will.
Valuation. I agree with a lot of what Assagioli discusses (in general). I see that in general people will be happy to look at "Higher Self" stuff, but when looking into the shadow Self there is a serious devaluation there, as shadow and lower energies are looked at in a negative (moral/ethical) way. Assagioli talks about helping "the patient to more mature values" which to me is rather moralistic and ethical. To me, what is essentially important is continued survival and functionality, experiences, sensations, feelings and thoughts. Values have little merit, especially in the bigger picture. Values have immense value in aesthetics. I agree with Assagioli that values are relative to the individual, age, general condition and stage of therapy.

* * *

For more information on Psychosynthesis you can check out the following websites:

* * *

Go To Part:

Back to Esoteric Articles - Magical Path

contact: email Magical Path -

Contents

Psychosynthesis Notes 2