Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Ethics of Great Facilitation: Introjections

[Hans Tilstra (hanstilstra]

> Hans Tilstra wrote:
>
> > Powerful stuff, very worthy of learning, best chewed over through a
weekend workshop. Then, some of the reading makes more sense. However, for
aspiring facilitators, a couple of years of immersion is the ethical thing
to do, to say the least.
>
> Could you clarify what you feel would be unethical without "a couple of
years of immersion"?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stuart.

Psychoanalysts have termed the concern I have as "introjects", and it's a
concept about what people do (unconsciously). Here are some definitions of
introjects:
- literally means "to throw within"
- a psychological term for the unconscious absorption of another individual?
s personal qualities, akin to a psychological copy function
- an attitude of dependence, where the learners fill themselves with the
transmitted contents and modalities, without being asked to care much
whether or not it corresponds to their needs.
- an approach in which the learner imitates with limited awareness or
understanding of context.
- Taking in aspects of the environment such as ideas without assimilation
- A stereotypical, rigid response based on a swallowed, poorly integrated
beliefs (nb. analogy of eating)

When I start to throw around some of my learning, accompanied by introjects,
then the person on the receiving end of my work gets only bits & pieces. For
example, I was working with a group who was newly introduced to the DSM IV.
We went through what was called the medical students syndrome; not being
fully aware of some of the complexities & nuances we applied the newfound
knowledge with a level of enthusiasm & passion but with few shades of grey.

To me, that's unethical, that's the sharing of introjects rather than
integrated knowledge. I like the idea that my accounting is done by a
certified, practicing accountant. I like the idea that my teeth are treated
by a fully qualified dentist. I like the idea that my psychologist is
registered. These people are accountable, have procedures in place to get a
form of supervision.  Contrast that with the work taking place in
psychotherapy where anyone can set up a shop and call themselves a
psychotherapist.

I don't mind that Oprah uses psychotherapeutic material for entertainment
purposes. As a viewer, I'm reasonably aware that I'm watching Jerry Springer
for entertainment rather than great wisdom.

:-) Hans