Contents

Google

The Will Project
The Will Project

Inner Path
Inner Path

General Systems Theory (GST) and Psychosynthesis

Note: The following article was the first of two research assignments as part of 2nd Year Psychosynthesis in 2003. The question was:
"Please explain the essential elements of the General Systems Theory in Physics and how it fits with Psychosynthesis Principles. Give examples of how it works from your own process."

The bulk of my research on General Systems Theory has been from the book General Systems Theory - An Introduction by Lars Skyttner. Most of the quoted principles and elements of General Systems Theory and related subjects are from this book. My other main source was Psychosynthesis - A "Systems" Psychology by Molly Young Brown.

On researching the topic of General Systems Theory (GST) I quite quickly came to realise that there are many elements that form important laws and principles regarding systems. Likewise, many people have differing views on exactly which laws and principles are the essential ones. It is the different views, and different models of systems that allow General Systems Theory and Psychosynthesis to sit well together. It has been suggested by the likes of Molly Young Brown that Psychosynthesis could be seen as the Systems model of Psychology. Also, Psychosynthesis has developed into divergent expressions from its early formulation by Roberto Assagioli. Along the way various people have added components of Jungian psychology, Gestalt concepts and practices, and various teachings on co-dependence. As such, Psychosynthesis shows itself to be a highly adaptive system, the core elements remaining, while new ideas and processes being added as required.

General Systems Theory, and Systems Thinking has developed and evolved over time, tracing common ideas and concepts back to early philosophies. In more modern times, Operational Research struck me as an important forerunner to General Systems Theory. Operational Research can be summed up in three main elements (my comments follow each point):

This fits in extremely well with Psychosynthesis therapy. We don't need to understand everything going on in our life, but we need to have a certain amount of control that allows us to function to a level we are happy with. As a therapist, this principle is even more relevant. We do not need to understand everything about a client. We don't need to ask why they are angry, or sad, rather what was going on to make them like that? Asking why is something that keeps us in our thinking space and cut off from our emotions and learning to actually understand. I will expand on this a little more latter when I discuss General Systems Theory and its similarities to Psychosynthesis with regard to looking at the relationship between things.

With regards to having things under control, Psychosynthesis, through the process of identification and dis-identification allows a person to gain more control of their life. It is considered that whatever we identify with we are control by, and whatever we can dis-identify with we can control. By the process of identification and dis-identification we can begin to find out what is happening, gain some understandings, and achieve a certain amount of control in our lives.

In my own process: this is something I've begun to accept and work with, not asking endless questions, or weighing up all the options in my head. A mentor of mine once described the process of over-rationalising and over-intellectualising everything as "head wanking" which is quite a suitable analogy. It doesn't really achieve anything, although may lead to a measure of excitement (in this case in one's head). It is not grounded in reality or living in the now. It may provide self-pleasure to think about one's intellectual capacity and achievements but it tends to solve nothing (and often achieves nothing).

Likewise, learning to dis-identify from feelings, emotions, body, and mind, allows me to find a calm and centred space where I am not at the mercy (so to speak) of stormy emotions or constant chatter within my head.

The collection of endless amounts of information, to me, fits in with the analytical, rational, logical, thinking parts of a person. Trying to find out all the information surrounding a task ends up becoming mindlessly time consuming. A certain amount of information is necessary to discover what is required. In Psychosynthesis the main consequences could be seen as our feelings. If we concentrate on our feelings, and only gather enough information to get a sense of what was or is going on that is causing us to feel a particular way, we can indeed leave the small details to rest in peace. We can follow a path of the feelings, considering them as suppling the bulk of the important information, and pad it out with enough description to get an understanding of what relationships between things are causing the various states of being to arise.

Likewise, I believe this fits in with a bottom-up approach, rather than top-down. An organic process can arise where the base (roots) is built and the overall structure is built upon this (trunk) and branches out as required (branches / growth).

This fits in very well with the concept of being present (living in the 'Now'). Essentially we need to take care of problems that are affecting us at the moment. In our Psychosynthesis therapy sessions we generally start looking for an entry point of something that is happening at present (rather than use the thinking processes to find something from the past to work on, which may lead to avoidance of what is actually more important). We also constantly update our information and focus by asking what feelings are present throughout the course of a session (or what we are feeling in response to any given situation in our day to day life).

Psychosynthesis also teaches that just because something once worked, and was our chosen solution, it doesn't imply it will work in the future or continue to meet our needs. In fact, it is the failure of repeated patterns and beliefs of our sub-personalities that we often find ourselves unhappy, or worse still, in crisis. This is because sub-personalities only take into account one need and generally have very limited scope for meeting that one need. These patterns and beliefs were generally started and made fixed and inflexible when we were very young (generally under the age of 7 or 8 years old). Sub-personalities may have met our needs, as children, but as we have grown into adulthood we often find that the solutions they offer are obsolete, and not in line with what are present day problems are.

In my own process: I have now done a reasonable amount of work with sub-personalities. I have learned that many of my past actions, and the motivations behind them, have been failing me for years, and worse still leading me into crisis. My biggest learning of recent is about an unrecognised Achiever sub-personality that means I over-commit myself trying to take on too many things and achieve too much. This is repeatedly leading me into ill health now, leaving me feeling drained and out of energy. It is by being aware that the old solutions, offered in the main by our sub-personalities, are obsolete that I've learned to find new ways to meet needs, and learn to recognise what my needs actually are!

An important similarity between Psychosynthesis and General Systems Theory is illustrated in a quote from Skyttner's book: "Systems thinking expands the focus of the observer, whereas analytical thinking reduces it."

This is to me a very important part of Psychosynthesis. Our aim is to expand the field of consciousness, to allow us to better understand the various aspects of the sub-conscious and how they affect us. There are two main ways that Psychosynthesis can assist someone in expanding their focus. The first is via the process of dis-identification. Once we have stripped away our identification with the thoughts, feelings, emotions, sensations surrounding our state of being, or stepped outside of our sub-personalities into the self (or another sub-personality) through dialoguing we are able to begin to see a bigger picture. This is expanding even further through contact with the Higher Self, which we use to see the bigger picture from a holistic point of view, outside of the duality and subjective experiences of our sub-personalities.

I believe that it is analytical thinking that keeps us trapped in our problems, and stifles our growth. In therapy, it can lead to an awareness of what our problems are, but seldom, it seems, able to truly see the bigger picture, and find a holistic solution to allow us to grow and move on. This to me is the downfall of psychoanalysis. It has the risk of keeping one trapped within the logical confines of the thought processes, where everything seems pretty much black and white. There is little scope for true creativity or expanding the focus to find a holistic solution outside of what is already known through analysis.

Skyttner also writes: "Synthesis does not create detailed knowledge of a system's structure. Instead it creates knowledge of its function (in contrast to analysis). Therefore, synthesis must be considered as explaining while the scientific method must be considered as describing."

This illustrates a very important difference between synthesis and analysis. I believe that Psychosynthesis, through its various processes, allows us to explain the things we need to understand. Bringing about an understanding is very important, whereas, to me describing something leaves us with knowledge only. In the Qabala the sphere of knowledge is pretty much an illusionary sphere. It is located below the supernal (transpersonal) spheres where wisdom and understanding reside.

Another important similarity between General Systems Theory and Psychosynthesis is found in the use of analogy. Skyttner relates that "analogies are explanations done by relating something not yet understood to something understood" and that this can be promoted to achieve integration. Psychosynthesis makes extensive use of analogy and metaphor to allow us to work on a symbolic level within the sub-conscious. For instance, the process involved finding an "And" (synthesis between polar opposites) can be best related through analogies. Even describing the "And" process we can show that it is set apart from "Either" / "Or" logic. For instance we could illustrate the "And" principle by giving two statements:

  1. You can have either a piece of cake or a biscuit.
  2. You can have a piece of cake and a biscuit.

People tend to understand this quite easily. We can then set about with further analogies to what we are trying to achieve within the sub-conscious with a further example of finding an "And" within a group of people:

Imagine a group of people attending a workshop. The facilitator asks what time people would like to take an hours lunch break at, and no consensus is forthcoming. So, the facilitator says, well, how about we take an half hour break now, and another half hour break later? In our imaginary example here, people are agreeable to it, so an "And" has been found.

So, now, having established an analogy for the "And" principle, we can begin to explain how the "And" can be used to synthesise opposites within our psyche. A diagram can be drawn to give a visual analogy to the principle:

And
Psychosynthesis Triangle demonstrates synthesis - "And" Process
Either Or

By drawing the triangle, we have given a visual analogy that the "And" can be seen as a point of intersection between the "Either" / "Or" options. We can further go on to explain that the "And" can be the best parts of the options, or it can be something entirely new outside of our current knowledge of the matter.

What is important to convey is that the "And" has effectively widened our focus and brought about a synthesis which transcends the limits we faced with the "Either" / "Or" options.

In my own process: Analogy is important to me. Analogy helps explain things by showing the relationships between something unrelated. To help me understand sub-personalities I was once given the analogy of a captain and his ship. The captain can be seen as the self, and the sub-personalities as the crew. If the captain is not in control then the sub-personalities are basically in a state of mutiny and will hijack the ship to try to meet their own ends.

Another important systems thinker mentioned by Skyttner is Hegel (1770-1831). The important points of Hegel's in relationship to Systems are as follows:

This fits in well with the Psychosynthesis concept of the psyche as represented by Assagioli's Egg Diagram. A person is more than just a sum of memories. A person is more than their thoughts, feelings, emotions, sensations, and body (as recounted in the Disidentification Exercise). The Higher Self, which can be seen as the pattern behind our being, defines the nature of the whole and ultimately this defines how the parts are through life experiences guided along a personal path of self-growth via the Higher Self. We cannot understand our sub-personalities, emotions, thoughts, feelings or bodily state via looking at the whole person, but we can see that each is interrelated and interdependent. There is a constant interplay (often given an analogy of a dance) between such things as our feelings, our sub-personalities, and even our relationships with other people and beings.

Hegel is also well known for his dialectic process, which has a lot in common with synthesis and the "And" principle. Hegel used the terms thesis, antithesis and synthesis. He believed all that the human mind always moved in a process of contradiction and reconciliation. This started at an initial belief, moved to it's polar opposite, and was ultimately transcended by a higher conception that involves (in part) both of the opposites. In turn, this synthesis becomes the new thesis for finding an antithesis to achieve yet another synthesis.

This is most echoed in Psychosynthesis with sub-personality work, where the weaker, polar opposite of a sub-personality is found, and the two worked with to achieve a synthesis ("And") between the two. It is acknowledged that at some point this new sub-personality will be worked with, it's polar opposite found, and synthesised.

Skyttner states that "in General Systems Theory on of the basic assumptions embraces the concept of order - an expression of man's general need for imaging his world as an ordered cosmos within an unordered chaos. A consequence implicit in this order is the presumed existence of a law of laws which in turn inspired the name of the theory."

Psychosynthesis is a system and model by which we can view and understand an ordered inner cosmos while still acknowledging and recognising what we currently perceive as unordered or chaotic. The processes of Psychosynthesis can in-turn allow chaotic and unordered inner parts to come together via synthesis and become more ordered and functional (for us). A lot of this I believe has to do with expanding the focus of one's inner world.

A good analogy I once read on the topic of self-discovery was comparing understanding the self with observing the Sun by watching a mirror on the ground, and never looking at the sky. The focus of the mirror only allows a certain amount of information to be understood. For instance on cloudy days the Sun cannot be observed at all, so it appears that this thing (the Sun) is a rather chaotic thing which only comes and goes in some unknown pattern. However, if our focus is expanded, and we actually turn to face the Sun, we may observe many more things, and likewise, from a higher vantage point (analogous on an inner level with connection with the Higher Self) one may observe that the Sun is present whether or not the sky is cloudy, and perhaps from a higher perspective again (of the whole galaxy) one sees that the Sun is actually the central point and it's rising and falling through our sky is in fact illusionary; that in fact the change in the position and transit of the Sun is caused by the rotation and orbit of the Earth instead.

Skyttner gives the currently accepted principles of General Systems Theory as having derived in the main from Ludvig von Betanlanffy (1955) and Joseph Litterer (1969) and several others. They are summarised by Skyttner as follows (with my commentary under them):

Psychosynthesis looks at the individual and society, as both have relationships with each other. Psychosynthesis principles can be used to explain interactions between individuals as well as the inner relationships and dependencies.

In my own process: To me, it is this recognition of relationship and interdependence that has been one of the most insightful and useful things in my own self-growth. I find that a recognition that we are all in relationship to each other (within groups, society, and nations) is important to realise. We are social animals. There is also a recognition, for me, that we need to have healthy inner relationships (between parts of our psyche) to have healthy relationships in the outer world.

Psychosynthesis considers many properties within the psyche (and the group mind) that other psychologies doesn't. The best example would be the concept of the Higher Self. While it is possible to increase the connection with the Higher Self through various techniques and construction of new beliefs, many psychologies would just deny the possibility from the outset, as there is no supporting data there to start with. This leads on to the point that many transpersonal qualities may be unknown from the start, and only present themselves when the focus is expanded and the bigger picture considered. The Higher Self, in many ways is a holistic property of the individual. It encompasses the entire individual, and gives rise to new properties not observed within the parts - the transpersonal qualities. These include such things as reconciliation of opposites (the "And" / synthesis), and unconditional love and forgiveness. These qualities can in turn be used within the other parts of the psyche to achieve integration, change and growth.

Psychosynthesis tends to not promote what many self-development or psychological systems would consider goal setting. This is partly semantic, as there are goals within Psychosynthesis, such as the synthesis of sub-personalities. However, the goals tend to be conceptual in nature rather than a fixed outcome, thereby allowing freedom and flexibility for the outcome to manifest in an appropriate way for the individual.

Again, the reaching of an equilibrium point could be considered to be the "And". A point of synthesis is reached, which in turn can become the starting point for a new pattern to emerge and eventually be transformed or transcended.

I consider it import to reiterate one of the statements from operational research, to "solve the problems of today and be aware that pre-requisites and solutions soon become obsolete." So while the goal is to solve the problem, there is no fixed solution that is trying to be achieved (which may be a wild goose chase).

An example of a non-fixed goal for society could be the discovery or manifestation of a new, efficient, clean, and safe form of energy. A fixed goal would be the creation of a water-powered motor, which could potentially turn into a fruitless goal, or unachievable with current understandings. To the contrary, it may also become the end solution if the non-fixed goal path had been taken.

Other goals within Psychosynthesis, depending on how much the individual chooses to undertake, include finding unfolding one's life purpose. Again, this isn't fixed, and can change, given that what one needs to be doing is what one's Higher Self needs one to be doing at that time.

Within a therapy session the goal could be stated to be bringing about some shift of change in the individual, at very least giving them a little insight into one of their issues or problems. The goal of on going therapy sessions is to help the person find their centre (Self, or 'I') and perhaps find connection with their Higher Self (in some form) to allow them to become empowered to overcome issues for themselves. This again is highly flexible, and is not about a planned, step-by-step, goal.

In my own process: I find it a relief not to set myself virtually unachievable goals! I believe that our needs are best met by finding our centred space (the Self) and being aware of our emotions and feelings, and acting from this space. By being in the Self, we are open to the flow of energy, information and guidance from our Higher Self, which allows us to make better decisions than simply relying on the known facts. I also believe that trying to dis-identify with the outcome and making a decision but accepting that the best outcome will come from it, rather than a set outcome opens life up to be a wonderful, exciting place full of mystery and learning. There is less disappointment, because I am not identified with the outcome and full of desire for it. I may desire the attainment of a concept, but I will remain open to what the actual outcome is. For instance, I may decide I need employment to earn some money to pay the bills. But I will be open to what comes up, not fixed on working in the computer industry, or refusing to be a factory worker. My current job is something I'd never considered in the past, filing records, but it pays as well as my last job as a computer technician and I am in a reasonably harmonious work environment (from my own perspective).

These two points overlap to a greater or lesser extent with what I have to say next, so will be covered together.

This again fits very well with Psychosynthesis, which after all is about transformation via synthesis. A specific transformation process integral to Psychosynthesis teachings is "The Will". The Will is the part that transforms choice into action, and again is best illustrated via a descriptive analogy:

Hold your hand out in front of you. Think about dropping it, and what it will feel like. Make the choice to drop your hand. Visualise dropping your hand back to your side. Imagine that it is by your side again. Now, drop your hand.

As is illustrated (and you can try it for yourself to get a feel for it) the process of making thinking about doing some, choosing to do something, and even visualising something does nothing without a transformation process, which in Psychosynthesis is defined as Will.

Another important transformation process in Psychosynthesis is the process by which we interact with our environment in general. Assagioli wrote that the process goes from Sense, Feel, Think to Act, showing a process by which inputs to our senses (and inner sensations) give rise to feelings, which in turn we can think about, before going into output mode and acting.

In a more modern expression of Psychosynthesis, the process is changed slightly, to Sense, Feel, Act, then Think. To me, this fits better with the process of an open system, as Think becomes a process of feedback into the system to update our actual knowledge (more a reflective process of analysis once action has already occurred).

So a brief description of this transformation process becomes:

Inputs:

Senses (hearing, seeing, touching, tasting, smelling) and Inner Sensations

Processing:

Feelings and emotions arise from the senses and sensations

A choice is made dependant on how we are feeling

The process of The Will is invoked (a subsystem)

Output:

Action in accordance with our choice

Feedback:

We reflect on how the choice and action has affected us, and whether it met out needs. This may lead us into other processes, such as working with the Higher Self, to discover ways which would better meet out needs.

An example is we have the sensation of hunger pangs, which give rise to us feeling hungry. We make the choice to eat an apple and go ahead and do so. We then consider whether or not that has cured our hunger, or do we want to eat something else.

Psychosynthesis recognises a cyclic process of life. While life can be sustained for a period of time, and maybe extended via healthy living (taking care of one's bodily, mental, emotional, and spiritual needs), eventually this causal (personal) life comes to an end. So while the process may be unavoidable, life is finite, and something that we can learn to accept and cherish rather than fear and try to avoid.

For some within Psychosynthesis and Transpersonal Psychologies it is considered that it is only the lower, personal, parts of the psyche that are in fact transitory in nature, and the transpersonal parts of us, such as our Higher Self, will remain after our current existence is over.

Whether or not this is accepted, the processes of unfolding one's Self through Psychosynthesis means a recognition of the finite time we have in this incarnation, and therefore leads to being able to work with this knowledge to fulfil our life's purpose.

I have covered the process of feedback above. However, as far as regulation of the individual goes, Psychosynthesis has much to offer. Via working with a process such as the "And" one can start to achieve equilibrium between the various parts of the Psyche. Becoming more aware of one's Self and in touch with feelings and emotions allows a greater degree of regulation within the psyche. Feedback could be considered discovering (by whatever process is worked with at the time) what needs are not being met, or could be better met by finding new ways to meet them. Feelings can be considered the most reliable for of feedback we receive (on an inner level) as they instantly alert us to what is going on. Thinking on the other hand, can be a good method of feedback for reflecting and mulling over what has been going on. Thinking is limited however in that we are limited to known facts. To go beyond this we need to go back to the feeling level, and work with the energies associated with the Higher Self to gain an holistic understanding of what is going on, and what we need to be doing to best meet all our needs (rather than meeting only one or few needs).

It can be easily recognised within Psychosynthesis that there is a division of the psyche, as a complex system. Various distinct areas are defined, such as the body, mind and emotions. Various parts of the psyche are defined as the Self, The Higher Self, and sub-personalities. The body for instance contains most of our sensory inputs, and contains the brain, considered to be where our mind exists. The mind, for the main part, provides us with our rational faculties of thought and reason, as well as the lower instinctive parts and drives. Within the individual there are also the feelings and emotions which have importation specialised roles, alerting us to what is currently going on for us. For example, if someone is encroaching on our space, and overstepping our boundaries we may feel angry, or perhaps frightened, depending on the specific circumstances. This is separate from our thoughts, as logically we may be thinking, "but I shouldn't feel angry (or afraid)". Perhaps we have children, and they are intensely seeking our attention, running around, being noisy and jumping on us. We are trying to prepare a meal, and become angry when they won't settle down and allow us to do the work we have chosen to do. So our specialised area of emotions says "Boundary violation… switch on Anger". On the other hand, our mind has a different set of data, and we say to ourselves, "but they are just kids, I shouldn't be feeling angry with them, they're just playing". I use this only as an illustration of the different specialised facultie, and won't attempt to unravel or explain the situation or what could possibly be done to actually solve it!

This state is something else I believe relates to some import areas of Psychosynthesis. For example, being open to possibilities and creative solutions via the Higher Self, Psychosynthesis recognises that there are many equally valid alternative ways of attaining something. These will vary from person to person, or from time to time, dependant on any number of factors and the choices we make at any given time.

As for obtaining different and mutually exclusive objectives from an initial state, this would fit well with the creation of sub-personalities within the psyche. Sub-personalities come about to meet a need, and develop around one single belief which becomes more and more fixed over time due to repeated experiences with trying to meet the need. Sub-personalities tend to be mutually exclusive as they attempt to meet only one need, the only way they know how, at the exclusion of any other sub-personality. They always have a polar opposite, with one sub-personality being more dominant and the other suppressed or repressed or just under-developed and 'weak'.

It is the up to the processes mentioned above to work through what is needed to best meet all needs, the recommend way being via working with the Higher Self to find one of the many creative solutions!

The most important factor between General Systems Theory and Psychosynthesis I found was the defining of a system as things and how they relate to each other. In Psychosynthesis we talk about the relationship between Self and other, as well as the inner relationships between the parts of the psyche. On the level of looking at personal relationships, groups, societies, cultures and humanity itself, the relationship between beings is for me one of the most important aspects to consider. It is perhaps the reason why we are here, to experience things as a human, such as the relationships between ourselves and other beings.

* * *

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

Back to Esoteric Articles - Magical Path

contact: email Magical Path - send me a message