There are several stories in this hour long program, one about earthquakes, one about race in a Californian university, and one about depression. The last one tells me what I know as a psychotherapy to be true. Not that antidepressants don’t always work, but that why they work is a big muddle, it could be the placebo effect or just time. And the price for this dubious result is to pathologise millions of people, to get them thinking about the psyche in a medical & unhelpful way.
All for huge profit.
The DSM 5 is a scandal and will make the problem worse!
All part of a 150 year trend… that bit was new to me.
The primary point that Greenberg expressed in the interview is that we are taking a normal human experience and turning it into a disease. He makes it clear that he has no problem with relieving the suffering of depression with drugs, but he questions whether we have turned normal blue moods into a disease in order to justify medicating away sadness.
A satisfying read online is where Greenberg is interviewed on the Well. Quote follows.
I am still intrigued by Dynamic Facilitation. I was recently asked a question about it: What about facilitator bias? Made me think and I discussed this question in various places. Clearly there is a lot of skill needed in the facilitation, however it is a clearly prescribed process.
Several things guard against excessive dependence on the facilitator, and prevent bias.
The focus on the creative output. I imagine this is facilitated by the charts.
The equal weight given to divergent perspectives.
Then as I was pondering this a podcast arrived – probably had been on the ipod for a while:
Joanna Harcourt Smith interviews
[Charles Eisenstein] June 27, 2009 – Interview with Charles Eisenstein
(50 minutes – 17.3mb)
Charles Eisenstein is the author of The Ascent of Humanity: The Age of Separation, the Age of Reunion, and the convergence of crises that is birthing the transition – a book about the history and future of civilization from a unique perspective: the evolution of the human sense of self.
It is a podcast about Dynamic Facilitation and the success of A Creative Insight Council (close to a Wisdom Council) in a city in Austria.
This does not really explain what Dynamic Facilitation is, or the principles of an CIC, or Wisdom Council. It is a process developed in the USA by Jim Rough. See my earlier blog post.
I hope this audio will motivate you to explore that.
If you are familiar with Psychodrama, I can say this: it is a highly sociometric process with strong facilitation from a neutral facilitator. The group of 12 or so is created by lottery in the whole population of the city or country! Such is the nature of systems, there is isomorphy (self similarity) from the microcosm to the macrocosm and the group, if well publicised, is the protagonist group for the whole community. A microcosm CAN experience the deep heart-felt transformation of a small group process and give back its wisdom to the whole, who are likely to be receptive as the group was made up of a diverse, non-expert group.
For people familiar with Imago Relationship Therapy, this is a process of facilitation that used a dialogue process. Not so much *between* the participants who do not need to learn how to send or receive, but through the facilitator.
One difference between DF, Dynamic Facilitation and the two process I mention above, Psychodrama and Imago, is that the facilitation works towards solution statements.
Note that these councils do not seek any formal power, nor will they meet again after the council is over.
I am really inspired. I have always had a hunch that the small group process which has been so powerful in my life would change the world but I could never quite see how. Now I get it! Fantastic.
I have linked to this quote before, I just noticed it again & saw it in a new light. In relationship to Moreno’s Canon of Creativity. I think the word “attention” is wonderful. Eastern traditions use attention in meditation, but what is attention? A Buddhist friend of mine said it is simply love. It is a mystery alright! I can put my attention where I will! Attention is intentional. Right now it is on the blinking cursor. A moment later on the song playing on the radio downstairs.
Attention & blessing are all forms of warm-up?
Compare this from with the passage below from an essay I have that will be in the next Psychodrama journal. Michael Meade:
What happens if they’re not shown the recognition of that seed?
Now, we’re back to death. William Blake said that the garden of the soul is already planted and is waiting for the water of life. Call it the water of attention. There are innate ideas, dreams, stories, buried in people. When we don’t water those seeds, culture loses ideas. It loses imagination. It loses the capacity to dream itself forward. I mean that literally.
What happens to someone whose innate core cannot grow?
The “second nature” of a person (the innate capacities) needs two kinds of attention. The person has to attend to it themselves. It also needs the other kind of attention which used to be called a blessing, the attention, especially from someone who’s respected, someone who says, “I saw that. I heard that. I see the seed of life you’re coming from.” If these two kinds of attention don’t happen, a kind of death is occurring, a withering.
From my essay, with a quote from Moreno:
“The universe is infinite creativity.” – Moreno
Moreno envisaged creativity as integral to the universe. Humans have creativity by virtue of being born in the universe and thus creativity itself lives within us. Yet not all of us are able to tap into our creative potential. What is the difference between those who create successfully and those who do not?
“What separates them is the spontaneity which, in the successful cases, enables the carriers to take full command of their resources, whereas the failures are at a loss with all their treasures; they suffer from deficiencies in their warming-up process. Creativity without spontaneity becomes lifeless; its living intensity increases and decreases in proportion to the amount of spontaneity in which it partakes. Spontaneity without creativity is empty and runs abortive. Spontaneity and creativity are thus categories of a different order; creativity belongs to the categories of substance — it is the arch substance — spontaneity to the categories of catalyzer — it is the arch catalyzer.”
This quotation is drawn from Who Shall Survive, where Moreno describes the Canon of Creativity. This quotation, drawn from Who Shall Survive, describes the Canon of Creativity. I interpret Moreno’s Canon as a heritage of paths to creativity; on the one hand, our innate vitality and ability to be spontaneous beings and on the other, our artifacts, all that we have made, the tools we use, our alphabet, language and literature, all the items conserved in the culture. The inherited past including art works and treasures remain dull and dead until we come to them with spontaneity. Our cultural items cannot influence our creativity until we bring them back to life. We are automatons unless we are co-creators.
Reading & listening to Robert Fuller got me thinking how he connects to the Marshall Rosenberg NVC, and all the dialogue material. I want to integrate!
Fear of banishment, need to be included, primal, we need to belong to the trib or we die.
Fuller is an expert on this major human need. Understanding needs is vital, and he seems to get this one. Needs are the missing link in psychotherapy – Maslows contribution is major – but it seemed the last word, and was not integrated into any modality that I know of.