Web This Site
|
Web This Site |
|
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
INDEX <-- Words and Concepts
Constructing a Lexicon for MetapsychologyIn producing training materials for applied metapsychology, I, and the many others with whom I have shared the decision-making process, have had to make many difficult choices about format, presentation, and terminology, and it is unlikely that everyone, everywhere, is going to be happy with all our decisions. But I thought that at least I would go over with you the rationale behind the decisions we have made.Legal ConsiderationsWe are certainly in the business of helping people, but it is tricky to explain to people exactly what sort of help we are rendering. In certain ways, it would be most convenient to characterize what we are doing as counseling or therapy, because the format of one-to-one sessions that lead to an improvement in the client's life fits the model of counseling or therapy. But in many -- perhaps most -- parts of the world, one is not permitted to practice therapy or counseling without many years of training, and we are looking at creating a technique that is easy to learn and that can be broadly applied at a grass-roots level. If one had to have years of experience and specialized training before one could begin to apply the data of metapsychology, the volume of help provided would be inadequate.Theoretical ConsiderationsFurthermore, although the notion of therapy and counseling fits the external format of our sessions and might serve as an acceptable social pigeonhole, it is not a correct description or characterization of what we are doing. Facilitation is not counseling. A facilitator does not make any assertions -- nor give any counsel -- to the viewer. That would violate the Rules of Facilitation. And facilitating is certainly not therapy, in the sense that we are not trying to heal anything. A facilitator does not take a "sick mind" and make it well. That whole concept contradicts the basic principles of metapsychology and viewing.It might seem that what we are doing does not fit neatly into any accepted conceptual pigeonhole. But is that really the case? In truth, we are following the highest tradition of those disciplines whose principle activity is to train their adherents to apply methods that will lead to personal enhancement, happiness, and enlightenment. Spiritual examples of this tradition include yoga and Zen Buddhism; secular examples include Psychocybernetics, Focusing, the martial arts, and a multitude of "New Age" practices, including those listed in the "Sybervision" catalogue, found in most airline magazines. Viewing and other applications of metapsychology are best thought of as a form of training or education, The facilitator has the function of enabling the viewer to learn about himself by teaching him procedures to use to learn with and supervising the use of these procedures. The facilitator is not doing anything to the viewer. The viewer is doing what needs to be done, under the supervision of the facilitator. Ultimately, the viewer will gain enough skill and insight to reach a point at which he can do solo viewing, without the need for a facilitator. At this point, the viewer may be regarded as having "graduated". Educational NomenclatureThe basically educational nature of what we are doing is reflected in our terminology. In receiving this specialized training, the viewer does not proceed in an arbitrary manner but follows a General Curriculum. The Curriculum consists of certain definite Sections the viewer must complete, enroute to higher levels of ability, like the various "belts" one attains in martial arts; a martial arts program could equally be described as a curriculum.To my knowledge, there is no civilized country that does not permit free, unregulated training to occur in such fields as martial arts, yoga, and Positive Thinking. The fact that these forms of training result in an improvement in life conditions does not preclude their unrestricted use. As a matter both of legal requirement and of principle, then, the basic materials of metapsychology should be, and are, presented as educational materials. Terminological ConsiderationsThe general principles we have followed in arriving at our terms is to avoid, wherever possible, words that would be completely incomprehensible to the average reader unfamiliar with our work.One can make a plausible argument for inventing completely new terms for everything -- terms that don't even sound like natural language. In this manner, we could define our terms in an unambiguous way, and no possible false meanings or connotations could creep into the picture to confuse it. Counterpoised against this obvious advantage in clarity and lack of ambiguity lies the social impact of such a created form of jargon. Metapsychologists using non-natural terminology would find it very difficult to communicate with those unfamiliar with the subject matter, without going through an extensive word-clearing procedure that would leave all but the most conscientious and dedicated listener reeling in confusion. Over time, then, an "in-group" that knew the jargon and an "out-group" that did not would be created. The result would be the fragmenting off of metapsychologists from the rest of society and the consequent creation of a cult. The only sensible alternative is to try to use natural language terms as much as possible. Presumably, natural terms arise because there are certain common elements in the worlds of individuals that need to be referred to. If metapsychology truly fulfills its mandate by describing those elements and laws common to human experience, then in most cases there ought already to be natural terms that correspond to those elements. And we have found this to be the case. Most of our terms, then, are chosen by trying -- often with extensive use of a thesaurus -- to find the natural word that comes closest to the meaning we wish to convey. In trying, for instance, to come up with a word to describe the sort of affinity we feel for objects (as opposed to people), we came up with the ordinary term, "desire". We found that in almost every case where "desire" is used, it refers to an object and describes a form of affinity or attraction to that object. Our usage, then, corresponds to the common usage, but we have a rather more precise and concise definition of "desire" than is afforded by a dictionary. We are really following the common practice of science, in this respect. Physicists have commandeered the ordinary English word "mass" and given it a precise definition, but the physics meaning still applies well to most ordinary-language uses of "mass". In this way, a non-physicist has at least some inkling of what a physicist is talking about when he talks about mass. If, instead of "mass", physicists had chosen the term "surb", the ordinary public would have been truly boggled. Instead, physicists have preferred ordinary words like "star", "planet", "pressure", and "heat". Only in referring to things that lie outside the range of common human experience have physicists resorted to invented terms like "electron" and "quasar". Local TerminologiesEach separate locale in which metapsychology is presented will have a different set of attitudes, social conventions, and legal requirements. Although we have tried to make the "official" training materials both theoretically and legally sound and have tried to adopt the best terminology we could find, it is likely that, in order to promote metapsychology locally, some locally-acceptable terms will have to be arrived at. Although "facilitator" and "viewer" give an accurate description of the nature of the relationship, local words like "consultant" and "client" may communicate better in talking to those unfamiliar with metapsychology. In England, for example, the term "counselor" does not necessarily have therapeutic connotations and may be a preferable term.It is up to each individual center or practitioner to find terminology that is appropriate in talking to the public at large. In so doing, one should carefully study local legal and ethnic realities. But basic training and viewing actions should, in the interest of uniformity, be done using the terms contained in the training materials. Otherwise, the subject would become fragmented. Practitioners in one locale would have difficulty talking to practitioners from other locales; further, each would have to "reinvent the wheel" and create his own training materials. Once a person has been introduced to the subject by means of socially acceptable terms, he can then be taught the common language of metapsychology, and so acquire a more accurate way of expressing its concepts -- and the ability to communicate about metapsychology to all metapsychologists. Like other sciences, metapsychology is an international subject with an international terminology, and so it should remain. Frank A. Gerbode, M.D. |
|||||||||||||||||
|
To contact us write to info@tir.org for fastest response. Phone: +1 800 499 2751 (Toll-free USA/Canada) or +1 734 761 6268 (elsewhere) | ||||||||||||||||||