Saturday, December 8, 2018


Completion of Therapy

 
The Water said to theDirty one, “Come here.”The dirty one said, “I am too ashamed.”The Water replied. How will yourshame be washed away without me?” 
                                                         Rumi

                                                                                                           
How can we help our patients/clients be done with therapy?  My patient arrives at my door for the first session holding tightly to her defenses, especially shame[i](Maier 2017).  She leaves the last time with those same defenses held within her ability to imagine her future, while laughing at her painful self-talk. Now, she can see that her emotional burdens are resources for others who suffer as she used to.
We, patient and therapist, need to see our shared world from our innermost core with all its terror and glory. We must trust the patient’s ability to get her own development back on track.  Early in therapy her coping habits about being thwarted in her attachment needs, and her resulting feelings of shame, need to come up against our attention.  This is about feeling safe while exploring her imagined infant feelings.  We pause and listen then. We pause to allow the patient to evolve spontaneously, while she presents new areas needing investigation in the dyad.  These new areas are fertile for sublimated aspirations. 
The end of therapy is about sublimation.  Sublimation is a technique used by chemists to purify compounds.  The solid volatilizes, leaving the non-volatile residue of impurities behind.  It is a similar process in therapy. When habits related to feeling ashamed can be recognized, they can be volatilized and left behind.  Then she can clarify feelings of disgust as the final product of effective therapy.    In healthy development she will use information from visceral senses such as disgust, fear and rage [ii](Maier 2017) in socially appropriate ways to harmonize with her values to fuel realistic dreams and phantasies. This allows contemplation of an image of self from which emerges novel thoughts, feelings and behaviors. 
If my patient can embrace her disgust, she has a better chance to modulate the tendencies to push people away or smother her friends with dependence.  Once she consistently transmutes the stance of her self-judgments, she can begin to recognize the healthy and unhealthy processes of disgust she has towards people, places and things.  The power of her healthy disgust is then able to fuel intuition when she needs to stand up for herself. 
The areas of known inadequacy travel through the course of therapy emerging as uncertainty.  From uncertainty, her developmental second chance allows her to risk pushing the boundaries of her thoughts, feelings and behaviors.  As she acts ever more strongly from her values, she dreams of ways to be useful and notices when she is hiding in crestfallen self-doubt.  She, like a healthy developing child, learns the right amount of passion to express by acting out and letting mistakes become guides to appropriate assertiveness.  By trusting her uncertainty she can risk acting strongly on her beliefs.

The dark thought, the shame, the malice, meet them at the door laughing, and invite them in. Rumi





[i] Ibid. Sublimation might be thought of as an ability to imagine. The way the patient and the therapist imagine the future will influence their self-images in the present.  A major portion of the patient’s deeply felt self-images were formed before they were six years-old. All parent/caregivers have areas where they do not have the abilities necessary to provide “good enough” support for their babies.  When the child expresses an instinctive need that is not satisfied over and over again, they develop a strategy of internal attempts to soothe herself Thus creating a deficit in implicitly generating and integrating of what Stern (2004) calls ‘a present moment,’ the basic fabric of lived experience created in continuous small packages of interactions with others.
[ii] Maier, B., 2017. “The Compulsion to Predict Shame.” As a two-year-old sees a caregiver attempting to interrupt a very important game, a sudden expression of murderous rage appears.  Maybe the most difficult urge to sublimate is the desire to kill the “other”, which shows itself in a more pronounced way in the ‘terrible twos’ and adolescence.

Saturday, November 3, 2018

Dissolving Shame





DISSOLVING SHAME AND THE METAPHYSICS OF PSYCHOANALYSIS






March 06, 2017
             
To be with the mind of another person is a truly beautiful thing.  This paper will attempt to demonstrate the need for psychoanalysts to proactively explore the primary affect of shame with patients as the first focus of therapeutic intervention.  I am proposing areas where we will need to adjust the philosophical foundations of our theories of practice.  According to Heinz Kohut: “It is easily observed that the narcissistically vulnerable individual responds to actual (or anticipated) narcissistic injury either with shamefaced withdrawal (flight) or with narcissistic rage (fight).”[1]   It requires careful self-observation to approach this type of investigation from a stance of effort toward equality.  
We need to remember the patient’s shame and embarrassment hide what Dr. Kohut goes on to say is “the need for revenge, for righting a wrong, for undoing a hurt by whatever means, …these are features which are characteristic for the phenomenon of narcissistic rage in all its forms.”2   Narcissistic injury underlies all forms of shame.  We are looking for effective ways to lessen its influences.  Simple didactic and investigatory processes can provide touchstones through the course of therapy for the patient to see how the patterns from her childhood continue to create rigidity and preclude spontaneity,  allowing moments of a new type of self-awareness.
An authentic self-story may begin to emerge in this awareness in moments of dyadic resonance. This self-story is instantly embedded in an historical narrative. 
Intuition and empathy take place outside of the time frame of history.  They happen within an instant; with either an internal resonance with many systems within us, and/or a resonance with an outside being.  I learned about the mind/body processes of these moments in my undergraduate studies of Robert Ornstein’s work in the early 1970’s.   He quotes William James (1950) “Our normal waking consciousness, rational consciousness as we may call it, is but one special type of consciousness…there lie potential forms of consciousness entirely different…for they are so discontinuous with ordinary consciousness.  Yet they may determine attitudes though they cannot furnish formulas, and open a region though they cannot give a map.  At any rate, they forbid a premature closing of our accounts of reality.” (cited in Ornstein, R. 1972)[2]  This, I believe, is the essence of our work as psychoanalysts; to sit in mutual recognition of unresolvable internal conflicts.
I will endeavor to synthesis, and build upon the theories of Heinz Kohut, Jessica Benjamin, Jaak Panksepp, Donald Winnicott, Mark Solms, Donna Orange and others in order to propose a dialogic approach to analytic processes for explorations of lived moments in therapy. These vitalized moments need feelings of equality to be recognized between patient and analyst.  To help our patients, we must become ever more sensitive to our own known and non-known overly structuralized biases.  
We must embrace the uncertainty of our beautiful art.  The deepest, most hidden patterns of distress are the most important to investigate.  Jaak Pankseep seemed to illuminate this idea: “The deepest and most ancient nuclei of the cerebellum, the fastigial and the interpositus nuclei, can generate aggressive behaviors when they are electrically stimulated.”[3]  One of our goals in psychoanalysis is to sooth these aggressive tendencies. We do not need to bring these powerful forces into conscious awareness.  We must remain uncertain of the exact effects of these deep patterns; however we can practice exploring their influences. 
We can best help our patients by being alerted when our own areas of shame and disgust are activated.  This is actually the dual-unfolding process, patient/analyst, of tracking the balance between the intrapsychic (subjectivity) and the intersubjective
(social subjectivity), without exclusivity to either. In Jessica Benjamin’s terms: “This is important, as it allows the fascination with and love of what is outside, therefore appreciation of difference and novelty.”5 Separation can now contain love of the world rather than simply using hostility to distance from mother.   According to Sartre this is transcendence of both independence and dependence; subjectivity and social subjectivity through projection.  We must embrace and explore this transcendence.  
This is the patient both loving and hating us.  Her subjectivity needs to know her hostility toward us in order for her to move toward completion of her therapeutic work.  Her subjectivity (individual survival) and her social subjectivity (fitting in in her surround) need a hand to hold in the darkness of her deepest fears.  The patient will need touchstones through the course of therapy to see how the patterns from her childhood continue to block innovations in her self-image.  We embrace uncertainty by holding lightly our theories of practice in order for our patient to effectively use her projections without recreating the drama and shame patterns of her childhood.
Patients are always aware, at some level, of the searing nature of the psychic pain which accompanies shame.  Adults may have a difficult time attending to this shame because of denial, disavowal and other defensive structures.  Patients can, on the other hand, easily tell you about shame experiences from their youth.  Our job, once a patient has shared a shame based story, is to slowly and respectfully allow these disclosures to illuminate her early childhood patterns of narcissistic rage and current, rigid patterns of negative opinions about herself.  Mark Solms says:
Above all, the phenomenal states of the body-as-subject are experienced affectively.  Affects do not emanate from the external sense modalities.  They are the states of the subject. These states are thought to represent the biological value of changing internal conditions (e.g. hunger, sexual arousal).  When internal conditions favor survival and reproductive successes, they feel ‘good’, when not, they feel ‘bad’.[4]
Shame results from an early-on strategy of picking the lesser of destructive options.  We pick practiced patterns of believing we are ‘bad’ because we know how to survive with that amount of shame.  
As the highly defended patient begins to feel observed in her ‘bad’ states while she is in my office, she learns to perturbate them by evolving a new internal condition, which includes me knowing her hidden shame.  As this patient then goes out from therapy she comes up against the world outside the surround of the therapeutic milieu.  As she feels a misattunement with the world, she will automatically repeat early-formed patterns for coping with misattunement.  Being so fresh from seeing these patterns with me, she may also utilize her inventive self to color her projection.  If so, what is it she transported from the therapy room?  Was she remembering some pithy comment of mine, or was she remembering the sound of the gurgling water of the fountain in my office while she is imagining her mother’s misattunement?  Either way she may treat the world in a different manner.  
In as much as her old patterns were based on feelings of shame, any new pattern is likely to be less destructive.  Jean Paul Sartre[5] would say her subjectivity appears as a repetitive being, an inventive being and projection.  I want to help her be familiar with her repetitive being, empowered in her inventive being and move toward more ability to sophisticate her projection.

Jean-Paul Sartre’s critic of the metaphysics of psychoanalysis

            Analysis, psychoanalysis, is a method often used by charlatans, and its       underlying metaphysics isn’t a good one.  But as a technique for putting oneself        in perspective by relation to an onlooker, there is something truly excellent        about it, in the sense that it is a moment where we open up our thinking about   what we are, and we see things that we did not know.[6]  


I want to call into question several philosophical concepts underpinning psychoanalytic theory.  The following is the thread of my understanding of the deconstruction of the metaphysic of psychoanalysis outlined by Orange, Atwood and
Stolorow (1997)[7] in their critique of the Metaphysics of Neutrality in Working Intersubjectively.  They identified four conceptions of neutrality that need to be reexamined, which are prominent in psychoanalytic literature. 
One; is Sigmund Freud’s 1915 dictum (cited in ibid), that “treatment must be carried out in abstinence”, typically interpreted to mean that the analyst must not offer patients any instinctual satisfactions. Abstinence is the expression of deeply held belief systems for conducting analytic work, which include basic assumptions about human nature.  This is not a neutral stance.  Two; is Freud’s 1912 recommendation that the analyst ‘should be opaque to his patients and, like a mirror, should show them nothing but what is shown to him” (cited in ibid).  “Opaqueness” denies the essential interactive nature of the analytic process. Three; is Anna Freud’s 1936 statement that the analyst’s stance be one of “clear objectivity” and an “absence of bias” (cited in ibid).  Rather than being neutral, we are asking the patient to adopt and believe our beliefs about our own objectivity.  Four; is Dr. Kohut’s own statements about the idea of “expectable responsiveness” (cited in ibid).   Although this is a highly useful analytic stance, it does not describe a neutral one.  Instead, Working Intersubjectively recommends that we strive in our self-reflective efforts toward our own personal organizing principles, including those enshrined in our theories. They recommend we take a stance of empathicintrospective inquiry, similar to Dr. Kohut’s “vicarious introspection”.  
       Knowing we are uncertain about our patients’ habits and patterns of experiencing shame and disgust is the only true starting place for mutual recognition to occur.  Allan
Schore quoting Krystal (1988), “proposed that all later-developing affects evolve out of a neonatal state of contentment and a state of distress that differentiate into two developmental lines, an infantile nonverbal affect system and an adult verbalized, desomatised system.”[8]  Shame, a verbalized, desomatised system, is more available in talking cure processes.  While disgust is typically utilized in the last stages of therapy.  It is a nonverbal affect system and takes more maturity to transmute.  
In the talking-cure, when we are inquiring about affective processes, which include shame and disgust, we are getting at some of the earliest forming and most influential patterns of our own and of our patient’s distress.  The lived moments of these explorations provide the opportunity for a second chance to transmute her developmental biases.  Shame patterns are the easiest to see and talk about because they develop along pathways shared with the occipital cortex.  These areas also underlie our language abilities.  Distressing categorizations, or disgust, require the mysterious process of sublimation to healthfully influence thoughts, feelings and behaviors.
Disgust, a sensory affect, has us ‘spitting out’ or recoiling from our environment.  Dr. Schore also clarified that “implicit, nonconscious processing of nonverbal affective cues in infancy ‘is repetitive, automatic, provides quick categorization and decisionmaking, and operates outside the realm of focal attention and verbalized experience.’”(Lyons-Ruth, 1999, as cited in Schore, A. 2012)[9]  In so much as we seem to have an endogenous sense of our being, our habits of disgust and rapid categorization also contain highly useful influences.  They are our unique responses to our feelings of danger about our environment.  Our patient need to learn to use these powerful forces through sublimation when she feels an immediate threat physically or emotionally.  
The desublimation of our fantasies of destruction into our projections allows us to hold our boundaries gracefully.  Sandor Ferenczi explained sublimation as “a special investigation and observation of the conversion of passion into logic and ethical selfcontrol, then converted into positive pleasure taken in growth and development.”[10]  Our patient now has a new ability to see herself in the future having utilized her instincts in line with her values and beliefs.  Therapy can be considered satisfactorily completed when our patient can utilize influences from sensory affects around rapid categorization. 
We are truly Sartre’s “onlooker” when our patient feels we are attuned to her innocent viciousness, or she and I know we are misattuned. When patient and analyst can reregulate after moments of dysregulation in the counseling room both people can carry a new sense of coping with challenging situations.  Our cognitions about her pain are of little value.
The only time the patient sees us as an “onlooker” is when we are sharing a sense of uncertainty about her narcissistic pain.   Jessica Benjamin explains that our job is that of “reintegrating the excluded, negative moment to create a sustained tension rather than an opposition.”[11]   Our task, as therapists, is then to recognize the subtle, ever deeper thoughts/feelings of our own distress, trusting our patient to find and express her new found tensions. We, therapist and patient, now have a history of illuminating ever deeper layers of our most feared states of organization.
Our aggressions are patterned early, then later socially modified.  Jaak Pankseep explains: “RAGE is normally quelled by understanding of social consequences and by arousal of positive social relationships.”[12]  We want this positive arousal to occur for our patient as we observe.   A “working through” in Benjamin’s terms takes place as the patient experiences a felt sense of attunement with us, the onlookers. 
What cannot be worked through and dissolved with the outside other is  transposed into a drama of internal objects, shifting from the domain of the  intersubjective into the domain of the intrapsychic.  In real life, even when the  other’s response dissipates aggression, there is no perfect process of  destruction and survival; there is always also internalization. 15

We meet our patients when they are asking us to help them change the drama of their internal objects. We must capture within therapeutic ambiance a shared sense of change of status.   The perceived change, though embody in our patient, requires her to feel an attuned recognition of the onlooker.  Now the patient, in Sartre’s terms, is able to transcend both her internalized sense of herself as subjectivity; and at the same instant hold us in mind as resonating with her from our external position as a part of her social subjectivity.  Her innovative self then contains a projection in which she has introjected us. 

An Example from a Once-Weekly Analytic Process
We need to be searching for what Sartre calls, “the not-known.”[13]  When distressed, our patient has “clearly marked off a domain within the real world,”17 which feels uniquely her own, as Sartre was translated to say.  She makes herself a being that is constructed of her deep-held prejudices about herself and others.  We are helping patients see the distress they create for themselves with their deep felt biases and stereotypes which have been habituated in their affects; such as disgust and shame.  
Once a therapeutic alliance is established I always read and explain with the patient the following set of ideas from Andrew Morrison in Shame: The Underside of Narcissism.
I believe that the ego ideal - and particularly the ideal self- provides a framework for understanding shame from an internal perspective.  The values, idealizations,  and parental expectations of perfection, which form the content of the ego  ideal, have been structuralized and no longer require the presence of external  object as guide…  The shape of this ideal self is determined by this internal  perspective.  It is failure to live up to this ideal self – 
experienced as a sense of inferiority, defeat, flaw, or weakness – that results in  the feeling of shame…it is the affective response to that failure, the searing  shame, that is experienced clinically… and that therefore should be the first  focus of therapeutic intervention.[14]

Even eight year old patients are able to tell me how they hold internal images of their parents wanting them to be perfect.
After discussing these theories with a 30 year old male patient during his 3rd weekly session, I asked him to tell me the earliest embarrassing memory he had from grade school.  He said: “At Show-and-Tell in first grade the kids laughed at me because I showed my Barney stuffed toy.”  He was harboring a fear they would find out how terrified he was of the bear in the Barney video.  The other kids were seeing him as immature for still being attached to his Barney, while he was presenting it as a way to cover the way he knew his parents felt about him for being afraid of a cartoon bear. This reinforced his feelings of being awkward around his peers.   As he left this therapy session I asked him to carry the awareness of us both knowing he suffers from fearing of being spontaneous in social situations because people will find out about all his fears of being immature.  
He originally came into to see me because his social world was shrinking as his symptoms of anxiety increased.  His few friends were getting jobs and starting families while moving away from video games and partying.  There was a woman at work he wanted to get to know.  His first week after disclosing his embarrassment, he reported the self-narrative which kept him from talking to her.  “I will say something to her that she thinks is immature and she will laugh at my advances.”  Rather than feeding into his obsession about coming up with the perfect thing to say, we brain-stormed a body posture for him.  He had demonstrated good spontaneous social skills, both in his sessions and when I had seen him in the halls of my office building.  Our therapeutic work is based on the hypothesis that his embarrassed, afraid stance was related to his inability to see his parents as satisfied with his social maturity.  In subsequent sessions he communicated a new sense of identity, which included an ability to talk with this attractive co-worker.  Knowing the reality of his early strategies sets the two of us in a novel stance in relation in our investigatory processes.  We perceive his current distress from a changed state, a state of knowing, which is a felt sense.  This is not about having cognitions related to the factors of his distress.  His developmental second chance is a felt sense we know we share.
Development, which would have been better timed at two months old, can be vitalized at 30 years old to transmute the overly rigid self-narrative of him being immature.  He must pause in real life to allow a new self-concept to inform his choices. The great, deeply irresolvable tension of creating a pause in the process of going-onbeing, is Sartre’s: “to know oneself is to change oneself, and most importantly, it is to pass from one status to another…we are all, from this point of view, subjectivities transcending ourselves towards objects.  But I remind you that what I said, most importantly, is that there is a change of status.”[15]   We must capture within therapeutic ambiance a shared sense of change of status.  This happens as we pause and can only happen from a position of equality.  The perceived change, though embody in our patient, requires attuned recognition of the onlooker.  Remember, also that Sartre said “I am working entirely on the basis that the two notions—of subject and object—are senseless when taken in separation from one another.” 20

Conclusion

Our distressed patients are attempting to get along in a world full of people who seem to have no distress from deep internal tensions.  Suffering people come to see us when the pain of being so different from those around them has become unbearable.  Our job is to help them take ownership of the value of the suffering which led them to us.  As quickly, effectively and respectful as we can we must relieve them of shame based strategies for coping with their lives.  As stated by Andrew Morrison: 
I am also convinced that, so long as shame or its manifestations are  fundamental and experienced strongly, it is fruitless to proceed with dogged  interpretations or clarifications of conflictual or genetic factors.  That is, any  attempt to bypass shame in favor of underlying explanatory factors will be  unsuccessful and counterproductive and will cause patients to feel  misunderstood or criticized and attacked.  As Lewis 1977, (cited in 
Morrison 1989) noted, “the continued bypassing of shame represents one of the  major sources of negative therapeutic reaction”. [16]
 
 Our joint investigation only starts when there is a feeling of mutual respect.   If our patient can embrace her relationship with us, she has a better chance to modulate the tendencies to push people away or smother them with dependence.  Once she consistently transmutes the stance of her self-judgements, she can begin to recognize the healthy and unhealthy process of disgust she has toward people, places and things.  The power of her healthy disgust is then able to fuel her intuition when she needs to stand up for herself.  Transmutation, and the ability transport it into ever more challenging environments, allows the simultaneous transcendent awareness of interiorisation and exteriorization.  To complete therapy the patient needs to know how and with whom she can continue this transmutation.  The patient’s stance as a subject among objects needs perpetual innovation of her projection.    
Distressed people cling disparately to a need to predict, lest they re-experience the dreadful feelings in their history.  Healthy people move through new environments with the same need to predict in a natural, obvious development: using defenses, such as; of sublimation, humor and altruism.  My patient arrives at my door holding tightly to her defenses.  She leaves the last time with those same defenses held within her ability to imagine her future, while laughing at her painful self-talk and, now, able to see that her emotional burdens are resources for others who suffer as she does.



[1] Kohut, H., 1972  Thoughts on Narcissism and Narcissistic Rage, (p.378)                                      The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, St. Child, 27:360-400 2 Ibid, p. 379.
[2] Ornstein, R. (1972)  The Psychology of Consciousness, p. 46.
                                               San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman and Company
[3] Panksepp, J. (2012)   The Archaeology of Mind, p. 157.
                                                    New York, NY: W.W. Norton 5 Benjamin, J (1995)  Like Subjects, Love Objects, p. 41.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton
[4] Solms, M (2013)  The Conscious Id: Neuropsychoanalysis, p. 7.
                                                   London, http//www.tandfonline.com/loi/rnpa20
[5] Sartre, J. (translated 2016)  What is Subjectivity?
                                                    London:  Verso Books
[6] Ibid, p. 39.
[7] Orange, D., Attwood, G. and Stolorow, R. (1997) Working Intersubjectively,     pp. 36-8.
                                                    New York, NY: The Analytic Press
[8] Schore, A. (2012)    The Science in the Art of Psychotherapy, p. 152.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton
[9] Ibid, pp. 385-6.
[10] Ferenczi, S. (translated 1932) The Clinical Diary of Sandor Ferenczi, p. 151.
                                                    London: Harvard University Press
[11] Benjamin, J (1995)   p. 23.
[12] Panksepp, J. (2012)   p.158. 15 Benjamin, J (1995)  p. 10.
[13] Sartre, J. (translated 2016) p. 80. 17 Ibid p.8
[14] Morrison, A. (1997) p. 36
[15] Sartre, J. (translated 2016) p. 38. 20 Ibid p. 36.
[16] Morrison, A. (1997)  p. 180. 

Monday, July 20, 2015

Resources

RESOURCES


C:\Users\Bill\Documents\Current Writings\References.docx
References:
Winnicott, D. (1982)  The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment.
                                                 London:  The Hogarth Press.
Morrison, A. (1997)  Shame: The Underside of Narcissism.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton
Panksepp, J. (2012)   The Archaeology of Mind.
                                                    New York, NY: W.W. Norton

Winnicott, D. (1963)   Fear of Breakdown.
                                                  London: The Hogarth Press.
Schore, A. (2012)    The Science in the Art of Psychotherapy.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton
Benjamin, J (1995)  Like Subjects, Love Objects.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton
McWilliams, N. (2011)  Psychoanalytic Diagnosis.
                                                   New York, NY: The Guilford Press
American Psychoanalytic Assoc. (2006)  Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual.
                                                   Silver Spring, MD: Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organizations
Hirsch, I. (2008)  Coasting in the Countertransference.
                                                  New York, NY: The Analytic Press

Nhat Hanh, T  (2002)  No fear, no death.
                                                  New York, NY: Riverhead Books

Heineman, T (2006)  Building a Home Within.
                                                  Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Co.

Dupont, J (1985)  The Clinical Diary of Sandor Ferenczi.
                                                  Cambridge. Mass: Havard University Press


Schore, A. (1994)    Affective Regulation and the Origin of the Soul.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton

Schore, A. (2003))    Affective DysRegulation and Disorders of the Self.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton

Schore, A. (1994)    Affective Regulation and the Repair of the Self.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Norton

Orange, D. (1997)  Working Intersubjectively.
                                                  Mahwah, NJ: The Analytic Press

Benjamin, J. (1988)  Bonds of Love.
                                                   New York, NY: W.W. Pantheon
Damasio, A. (2003)  Looking for Spinoza.
                                                 New York, NY: A Harvest Book

Damasio, A. (1994)  Descartes Error.
                                                 New York, NY: Penguin Group

Damasio, A. (2010)  Self Comes to Mind.
                                                 New York, NY: Vintage Books

Atwood, G.  (1979)  Faces in the Cloud.
                                                Lanham, Md: Rowan & Linfield Publishers

Atwood, G.  (1984)  Structures of Subjectivity.
                                                Hillsdale, NJ: Rowan & The Analytic Press

Ornstein, R. (1972)  The Psychology of Consciousness.

                                                 New York, NY:  W.H. Freedman and Company

Non-formulaic, Intersubjective Process---The insufficiency of Technique—

“From the intersubjective point of view, there is no ‘right answer’ to the questions about self-disclosure or other matters of what many call ‘technique.’ There are two people together, an analyst and a patient, trying to find understanding that will permit a reorganization of experience or perhaps a developmental second chance.´ Orange, D. (2001) Working Intersubjectively p. 34



In the early 1970's I studied Pierre Tielhard de Chardin, William Blake, Paul and Anna Ornstien, and many others to understand the organization of our body/brain/mind.