Transference in Coaching Session

I think that not only a therapist but also a coach should pay attention to "transference" between a client and coach in a session, so I capsulized the concept below.

             This psychological phenomenon between a client and therapist is one of the key concepts in a therapeutic setting. Freud categorized this concept into the following three ideas.

1 The positive transference, in which the patient’s feelings for the therapist are primarily affection and trust.

2 The negative transference, consisting primarily of hostility and suspicion.

3 The un-neutralized erotic transference, in which the patient experiences insistent desire for sexual intimacy with the analyst. (Kahn, 2002, pp.184-185)

About the positive transference, Freud regarded it as an unobjectionable phenomenon and insisted that it enabled a therapist to provide a client with a sense of trust or safety which built a preferable relationship between the client and therapist. On the other hand, Freud raised an alert over the negative transference. He argued that a therapist must intervene in and remove it if the transference comes up in the session. Otherwise the therapy session will not work for a client. Likewise the negative transference, Freud warned that the erotic transference had a negative impact on the therapy session. Although it is sometimes recognized as a kind of the positive transference, Freud explained that “if those feelings persisted in spite of the analyst’s best effort to convert them to analyzable material, there was nothing to do but refer the patient to another therapist” (Kahn, 2002, p.186). Thus, a therapist should have a competency to discern the type of transference. 

Reference

Basic Freud: Psychoanalytic Thought for the 21st Century

Primary Model of Pathology in Psychoanalytical Force

              Regarding the primary model of pathology in 2^nd force, I’d like to describe the Freudian view of pathology in the following.

              As for the key concept of a Freudian view of pathology, Munroe (1955) explicates that “the idea of the symptom as an adaptive mechanism has become a commonplace and that its cure is always envisaged as handling of the underlying (typically unconscious) dynamics rather than the symptom itself” (p. 280). In other words, Freudians regard a symptom of our mental illness as a kind of an adjustment mechanism to protect our “self” from the external world. Moreover, the characteristic of a Freudian view about treatment of pathology is that they often don’t focus on the symptom itself but our unconscious realm.

The Oedipus complex is one of the well-known pathological symptoms in Freudian views related to our unconsciousness. To explain the overview of this symptom, the Oedipus complex is that “all boys experience the unconscious wish to get rid of father and replace him as mother’s lover, and that all girls carry the unconscious wish to eliminate mother and replace her as father’s lover” (Kahn, 2002, p. 57). In this example, Freudians don’t pay attention to the superficial phenomenon (all boys and girls tend to have the desire to obliterate the existence of their father or mother.) but attempt to elucidate the mechanism by shedding light on our repressed unconsciousness. Although Freudians are likely to reduce our pathology into the issue of only our repressed unconsciousness, it is highly estimable for them to clarify the relationship between some pathologies and human unconscious realm.

Reference

1Basic Freud: Psychoanalytic Thought for the 21st Century

2Schools of psychoanalytic thought;: An exposition, critique, and attempt at integration

Psychoanalysis and Post Freudian in Wilber's Spectrum of Consciousness

             Ken Wilber’s spectrum of consciousness model comprises the following four levels: shadow, ego, existential, and mind. To come right to the point, the second force (psychoanalysis and post Freudian) is situated on the ego and shadow level. The first, Wilber (1975) explains that human beings tend to identify with his or her ego. While human beings in the existential level are regarded as organism which has a rational thought, human beings in the ego level are deemed to have a mental picture of his or her total psychophysical organism. The second, Wilber (1975) describes the shadow level in the following: “Under certain circumstances, man can alienate various aspects of his own psyche, dis-identify with them, and thus narrow his sphere of identity to only parts of the ego, which we may refer to as the persona” (p. 110). As mentioned above, human beings in the ego level are likely to identify with his or her whole ego. On the other hand, human beings in the shadow level become gradually able to dis-identify with some aspects in his or her ego.

As well as Wilber’s remarks, psychoanalysis addresses human ego and shadow realm. In psychoanalysis, human ego is defined as “the part of the psyche in contact with external reality” (Frager & Fadiman, 2002, p. 24), and human shadow is described as “an archetypal form that serves as the focus for material that has been repressed from consciousness” (p. 69). I think that the second force is categorized into the ego and shadow level in Wilber’s model in that both of them refer to the same aspects of human beings such as ego and shadow.  

Reference

1 The Spectrum of Consciousness  

2 Personality and Personal Growth (6th Edition)

Quantum Holism

As for the concept of “quantum holism,” I think that the main characteristic of this concept is interdependence. While a mechanistic view which insists that all natural events are like machines or artifacts tends to neglect interdependence, quantum holism pays attention to reciprocal influences in reality. When we think about social issues such as international conflicts, environmental issues, or global economic crisis, the above worldview like mechanism will not give any beneficial clues to these global issues, because in that paradigm, these issues are recognized as isolated ones in countries and never thought as comprehensive issues in the world. As we know, our world is becoming more and more interconnected, so the first step toward a solution of such global issues might be to understand that our world is not separated but closely connected with each other.  

Quantum Society: Nonlocality

Memo: Nonlocality: “The concept of the interconnectedness of all things leads to the last and perhaps the most bizarre tenet of quantum physics” (Zohar & Marshall, 1994, p. 48). This concept challenges the phenomena such as healing from a distance and shared dreams, which can’t be expounded fully in terms of materialistic views. Though this idea of nonlocality is often lionized by New Age people, in fact, thousands of well-controlled researches show the existence of these kinds of phenomena, so we might acknowledge a part of the wisdom of nonlocality which has been regarded as an unscientific concept.
The following book which I don't read yet is also fascinating for me..."Quantum Psychology..." I heard this word in the class.

Radical Nature: Quantum Theory VS Determinism

One of the key concepts in quantum theory is “noncausal.” This term means that quantum events are not causal and intrinsically unpredictable (De Quincey, 2002). This concept refutes the idea of determinism which insists that every event is a cause-and-effect relationship. Of course, this deterministic idea made a numerous contribution to the modern psychics, but it includes an inherent limitation. For instance, the deterministic view couldn’t elucidate the logical connection between one event and another in a certain random event (e.g., weather). Although quantum theory also can’t illuminate the mechanism of a certain random event, it has a value in that it forces us to investigate the view of traditional paradigms (materialism, determinism, etc.).

My Integral Coaching for Whom?

While engaging in Integral Coaching, I just came to think: “For whom do I provide this coaching?” Needless to say, I do it for my clients. That’s right, but my coaching offers tremendous benefits for my growth and development as a human being (I don’t like the word “benefit,” but I can’t find a more appropriate word…perhaps, welfare, well-being…I don’t know.). It is true that I “give” something to my clients as a coach, but at the same time, I obviously “take” or “learn” something important from my wonderful clients.

My coaching is full of agony and joy. In each coaching session, epitome of our life manifest in that moment. I suppose so. I live my life, but I sometimes seem to live others’ life…For whom does my coaching exist in this real world? For me? For my clients? For the universe?