Phenomenology, Field Theory and Dialogue and Their Application in Gestalt Psychotherapy

Thomas Fairclough

Phenomenology, Field Theory and Dialogue and their application in Gestalt Psychotherapy.

Yontef purported that any complete psychotherapy requires at least three elements: a theory of the therapeutic relationship, a theory of consciousness and a scientific theory.[1]

Gestalt brings together three different components, which are, in themselves robust, theoretical disciplines influencing other areas such as pedagogy, physics, research and other therapeutic theories.This new gestalthas evolvedin a way that it is impossible now to see them in isolation; which in effect also reflects the holistic nature of Gestalt. Fractal in that together, their patterns and processes are so repeatingly intertwined, like a rich, fluid tapestry and related at every level,that this format is simply my attempt at a ‘categorised framework’ for the purpose of a theoretical overview.

Phenomenology

Phenomenology is a 19th century, Husserlian concept, borne from the philosophical movement of existentialism at a time of crisis within the natural sciences. Husserl said that we don’t inhabit a world of science. We inhabit a world of meaning and significance to us, to a more lived experience. A ‘life world’[2].

From this he developed descriptive phenomenology (eidetic) and subsequently Heidegger developedinterpretive phenomenology (hermeneutic).

For Husserl, it was essential that:

…the researcher to shed all prior personal knowledge grasp the essential lived experiences of those being studied. This means that the researcher must actively strip his or her consciousness of all prior expert knowledge as well as personal biases[3]

In practice, this is ‘bracketing’ which is the concept of holding back opinions, biases, judgements in honour of the other persons’ subjective experience. This was what Husserl considered to be transcendental subjectivity[4]. Three Husserlian components of being an effective phenomenologist were: ‘Bracketing’ orThe Rule of Epoche. Another rule wasThe Rule of Description, which is to focus only on description as opposed to interpretation. The Rule of Horizontalizationensures that one doesn’t prioritise certain things above others andthat all information has potential. Interestingly Joyce and Sills add to these components by adding Active Curiosity, which I also feel is essentialin any Gestalt enquiry.

Heidegger believed that ‘bracketing’ wasn’t possible. He believed that wewereseparate yet part of the world. However he posited that it was this separateness thatwas the motivating driver in needing contact with ‘other’in order to assuage the emptiness and isolation of conscious existence. Admitting isolation whilst alsoliving with ayearning to belong causes us ‘existential angst’, which we can bypass by living in Sartrean ‘bad faith’[5]; essentially meaning to live ‘in-authentically’ or ‘choosing not to choose’, by not accepting the ultimate emptiness, freedom and isolation of human existence. Jacobs felt that many of us do this to survive the harsh reality of consciousness.

Most people operate in an unstated context of conventional thought that obscures or avoids acknowledging how the world is. This is especially true of one's relations in the world and one's choices. Self-deception is the basis of inauthenticity: living that is not based on the truth of oneself in the world leads to feelings of dread, guilt and anxiety. Gestalt therapy provides a way of being authentic and meaningfully responsible for oneself. By becoming aware, one becomes able to choose and/or organize one's own existence in a meaningful manner.[6]

Heidegger’s philosophy, although more interpretive in nature was more compatible with Gestalt because it acknowledged that ‘field’ cannot be stripped from one in service of the other and although Husserl set down a process of trying to achieve ‘transcendental subjectivity’, it was ultimately doomed from the outset. Joyce and Sills talk with a Heideggarian slant when they say:

In practice, of course, it is impossible to bracket in this way for more than moments at a time and indeed it would be impossible to function without our assumptions and attitudes.[7]

Husserlian emphasis on the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of a situation is‘intentionality’; the idea that states of consciousness have a feature of aboutness to them, they are directed towards something[8]. For instance I am angry about something. I am thinking about something. The relation between the thing I’m thinking of (a chair as something to sit on) and the way in which I’m thinking about it (my experience of the chair being a place where I, as a child was sent when I was naughty and the meaning I make from this).

How the world appeared in phenomenology became of more importance than how it may objectively be. Phenomenology according to Merleau- Ponty is:

…the study of the appearance of being to consciousness, rather than taking for granted its possibility in advance.[9]

Thisexistential, holistic stance was a radical conceptual shift from the existing dualistic standpoint. Descartes maintained that we were ‘souls’ carried in a vessel (body) and that they existed as separate entities. Reason was considered ‘higher’, more evolved and more reliable in meaning-making; and our physicality was considered ‘lower’, primitive and less reliable. This comparedradically with an emerging existentialism claiming thatwe can only know the world from our own particular ‘lens’ and any attempt at trying to understand it from an objective point of view was not only futile, but impossible. Merleau-Ponty’sPhenomenology of Perception[10] is an attempt at solving the problem of Cartesian dualism and moving towards‘existential holism’. Our bodies were no longer separate to our minds and rather than being limited to being rational animals, we were considered to be ‘sensing’, embodied organisms with a wealth of information to be had.

Sensing, however, invests the quality with a living value, grasps it first in its signification for us, for this weighty mass that is our body, and as a result sensing always includes a reference to the body.”[11]

In my personal and professional experience, this ‘dualism’ is densely steeped within Western culture and it is commonplace to hear comments like: “My mind knows what’s best for me, but tell my body that”, reflecting the disconnectedness many people feel between mind and body.

Related to this is the law of pragnanz[12] which essentially means that humans perceive in the simplest way possible; so in Gestalt, by raising awareness a client will gather more comprehensive information and ‘fill in the gaps’ in a way that makes something more meaningful and understandable.

The above is clearly only a ‘thumbnail’ sketch of a whole philosophical movement, but regarding its clinical application, it is understandable why this is essential to psychotherapists in understanding our clients’ experience and ‘meaning-making’, if we are to help them.

Working phenomenologically can come as a surprise to clients, as is often a complete paradigm shift. Learning a ‘new way’[13], to understand the world: “I am my body, my body is me”can be difficult, certainly at first. For instance, working phenomenologically in my own therapy I learned that I often sit on one leg and am unaware of this until it becomes uncomfortable. Instead of deflecting by saying ‘I sit on my leg’, I experiment with other phrases such as ‘I sit on myself’, ‘I restrict myself’, ‘I do things to myself sometimes until I am in pain’. I then glean more information and can make more meaning from how I am in the world in this moment and also understand further how I may modify myself.

Our own subjective experience is essential in understanding more wholly how we make meaning in the world. Meaning-making is a complex, holistic process by an embodied organismthat is part of a greater organism; separate yet paradoxically a part of it; summarised by Merleau-Ponty:

To be a body is to be tied to a certain world, and our body is not primarily in space, but is rather of space.[14]

So if ‘self’ emerges from our phenomenological experience and there can be no ‘self’ without someone or something to relate to, then the world is therefore ‘co-created’. This is a vital element in Gestalt, as it shares responsibility for the relationship between both client and therapist and can avoid over-responsibility, shame andfears of ‘getting it wrong’; it can also redress the inherent power imbalance somewhat whilst also providing a ‘reparative model’ for other relationships.

Field Theory

Field theory is integral in understanding the ‘figure-ground’ of Gestalt. Perls Hefferline and Goodman didn’t articulate field theory although they alluded to it. It was later Gestalt theoreticians such as Lewin, Latner, Parlett and Yontef that developed its importance within Gestalt.

Field theory originated in physics before it was integrated into Gestalt and it is considered its own discipline:Gestalt Theory Field Theory in some quarters. Its scientific determinism was difficult to integrateinto Gestalt in a disciplined sense, not in so much that it was ‘I-It’ based, but that it lacked the ‘I-Thou’. This also from a philosophical standpoint raised (not for the first time) the whole issue of ‘free will versus determinism’. Our philosophical view on this is clinically significant for instance working with issues such as addiction or where clients feel that they have no control over their choices. There is clearly not enough space here to give credence to this vast subject but it does raise questions regarding autonomy, agency and responsibility in the truest and fullest of senses and whether we can be truly free in a predetermined world.

The term ‘field’ used in this context does not just mean the environment, but also physiological and psychological processes which although do not necessarily ‘exist’ in themselves in matter form, are still living dynamic forces or influences. The physicist Faraday originally coined the term ‘field theory’. Using an experiment with iron filings on a piece of paper with a magnet underneath, he observed the ‘field’ in how the iron filings dispersed on the paper and calibrated according to each other. This ‘field’ wasn’t a material thing in itself but a ‘force-field’, influenced by all the elements within it and vice versa. Not only was this field not an entity in itself it was also not a fixed thing. It is (like ‘self’) a dynamic process. Einstein then went onto confirm that fields were now established as real, even though they were immaterial![15].Field theory couldnot only make sense of something as massive as the solar system but also of something as small as what was then the atom(now of course DNA). Indeed this facilitated a move away from Newton’s atomistic and reductionistic view of the world. It was also completely in keeping with the theory of relativity and quantum physics so it came with a robust pedigree to be assimilated into the roots of Gestalt. Indeed the word ‘gestalt’ refers to the shape, configuration or whole, the structural entity, that which makes the whole a meaningful unity different from a mere sum of parts[16].

In true (and once again ‘fractal’) reflection of field theory, it itself changes according to the field conditions, so although field theory in its fullest sense incorporates the whole universe, in its clinical application with clients we attempt to be realistic in our awareness of the whole field and limit it to the clients’ internal/external world, our own internal/external worlds and to the ‘in-between’.Emerging from this is a new gestalt and what happens within this process is where the real therapeutic work begins. What becomes a focus in the ‘therapeutic relationship’is ‘figural’ and the context in which it occurs, is the ‘ground’, whilst also being part of a larger field:

A field is a systematic web of relationships and exists in a context of even larger webs of relationship.[17]

It was Lewin who applied ‘field theory’ to Gestalt theory as an attempt to understand what the primary motivating driver in human behaviour was? Was it the subconscious? The Id? External influences? Archaeological experiences? Lewin introduced the concept that the need organises the perception of the field and the acting in the field[18]; that we behaved in accordance with our perception of the world and that this was an interactive process. Our phenomenological experience affected how we saw and behaved in the world. That in any given situation we do not perceive isolated fragments, but we take in the whole of the situation and we calibrate our meaning accordingly (related to the law of pragnanz). This was radical in the sense that Lewin was proposing that we were not solelyresponsible and that society had a part to play in how human beings, feel, think and behave.

It is from here that we see the holistic approach in Gestalt developing further. Smuts considered that the holistic organism contains its past and much of its future in its presentand that as organisms, we are a self-regulating entity[19],which became one of the bedrocks of Gestalt theory.

Parlett developed five principles in Gestalt Theory Field Theory:

1)The principle of changing process – that everything is forever changing. Even though processes will sometimes follow familiar patterns, they are still in a constant state of flux as hypothesised by Heroclitus centuries beforehand when he said that you can not step into the same river twice[20]. It is important to be mindful of this when clients (and therapists) report ‘stuckness’; although impossible, stillaccepting that it may feel like this. 2)The principle of singularity–in that each situation is an emergence of something completely new, never seen before and although perhaps similar, it is not exactly the same as the other and therefore has new potentialities within it. This has clinical significance in that most clients come to therapy to change something about themselves 3)The principle of possible relevance – this reminds the psychotherapist that every single element of a given situation is important and latching onto one facet, particularly too quickly can eliminate other possibilities from emerging. 4) The principle of contemporaneity – this is integral within Gestalt in that all events can only be experienced in the here and now. History is experienced now in how we remember anevent and the future is experienced now in how we anticipate (which is also influenced by how we view our past and present experiences). Essentially, the past is dead, no longer relevant in any other way than how we perceive it to be now. 5) Perspectival view on reality – within the field we can never experience any event in the same way as another. This brings to mind for me how I was taught in my early training that empathy is the ability to ‘walk in someone’s shoes’. This is an unattainable and therefore unrealistic goal in clinical practice, because one can not wholly understand any event or experience, there will always be other factors, based on the client AND the therapist’s ‘life space’[21]. It is also vital to remember in practice that it is certain that the client will definitely have a very different experience of therapy than the therapist.

DIALOGUE

Dialogic method has its roots in existentialism in that the focus is on human existence and their relationships with each other and the world according to their own direct experience. Gestalt owes this method primarily to Buber; an heir to the likes of Kant, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer. His best known work is I and Thou[22] where he postulated that we are beings that can enter into dialogue with any aspect of the world, not just other human beings. He didn’t however go as far as Nietzsche in denying the existence of God; indeed for Buber the ultimate I–Thou was with God. However he did agree that humans objectified the world as a means to an end (I–It), rather than as an end in itself (I-Thou) and that this was a cause for human anguish. His focus was on the ‘in between’ or the ‘encounter’ and this is where the true nature of dialogue exists.

In those rare moments when a deep realness in one meets the other it is a memorable ‘I-Thou relationship’ as Martin Buber, the existential Jewish philosopher would call it. Such a deep and personal encounter does not happen often but I am convinced that unless it happens occasionally we are not human.[23]

Buber wasn’t suggesting that the only aim in life was in the I-Thouor that I-It was inherently ‘bad’; but that they were two ends of a continuum and both part of healthy functioning. For instance, I hope in my work that there are many I-Thou experiences between my clients and I, however our experience moves to I-It functioning when we exchange money.

Dialogic method – 1) Presence – In contrast to psychoanalysis where the therapist was a ‘tabula rasa’ to be projected upon, the presence of an authentic self in the meeting not only models, but is in service of the client. Healthy expression from a therapist comes in the form of sharing the impact within the session the meeting may be having on the therapist and disclosure of this kind is at the heart of Buberian dialogue. Disclosure of inappropriate material from the therapist’s life is clearly not. A good caveat is to ask one’s self: “how is this in the service of the client?”.2) Inclusion – A willingness to be affected by the encounter and to try and look at the world from the client’s perspective whilst acknowledging that this can never be achieved 100%. Meeting someone ‘as they are’ is an accepting process and is what Buber also called ‘confirmation’[24]. To meet a client with a view to what they are doing right now as ‘wrong’, ‘deficient’ or pathological in some way is not practising inclusion. However if one completely becomes confluent and (tries to) see the world in exactly the same way as the client, inevitably one could be drawn into also assuming that there canbe no potential for change (for instance, in the case of a client feeling completely hopeless). The therapist has to keep a sense of self in order to be potent. Also if a therapist can be facilitative in a client becoming accepting of where they are right now, (leaving aside the paradoxical effect this can have in ‘change’) this can also reduce feelings of shame.