[Excerpt from TT: 2009-08-09]
[Question] In MFM, it was mentioned that Carl Jung was one of the “mavericks” of psychology in that he incorporated “mysticism” into psychology, which so few westerners given credence too. Of course there are many schools of psychological thought regarding counseling individuals. Psychoanalysis, cognitive behavioral theory, humanistic/existential theories are but a few examples. Given that psychology, at least in the west, is still so concerned with “measurable” scientific facts, how can one really tap into the ‘spiritual’ while still being “accepted” by the scientific community? Of course, assuming this is possible, or even desirable for that matter. I know of the work of Viktor Frankl, Ernesto Spinelli and the aforementioned Carl Jung; but it seems they are still largely disrespected by the psychological community. Can Michael provide insight into this topic? For example: who are the “psychological mavericks” of the 21st century who are (or may be in the near future) on the cusp of making real progress on the process of counseling the WHOLE person, spirit included, rather than merely some fragments (no pun intended) of the personality that most of the “scientific” theories like psychoanalysis and cognitive behavioral therapy seem to emphasize? I realize this is several questions in one, so it should be noted that I’m not looking for specific answers to each part as much as I am looking for concepts or psychologists to investigate regarding spiritual counseling or what is also called existential or phenomenological psychology, as I feel that counseling one while incorporating the spiritual can potentially do more lasting good than a lot of what passes as psychological intervention currently. Of course this is all speculation on my part, but was curious about Michael’s input nonetheless. Sorry for the lengthy question; tis the curse of my scholary-ness I think.
[Michael Entity] In terms of practice, there are many who incorporate “spirituality” into whatever method of Psychological Counseling they use, as long as that spirituality is translated into useful terms for the one being counseled. Others incorporate spirituality in a way that is simply an undercurrent within the terminology of the psychological method. For most who truly wish to help another, it is nearly impossible to avoid some form of spirituality, though it is useful to keep this to a minimum until the more tangible elements of the psyche have been explored.
Though this channel is limited in terms of psychological theories and descriptions, we can say that Gestalt Psychology is close to “spiritual” within the limitations of the psychological field.
We will add that as the Mature paradigm settles in, so would the expansion of concepts within the realm of Psychology. For now, if one were looking for counseling, we would suggest being less concerned with the method, and more concern with your resonance to the individual counselor.
We would also add that this division of spirituality from counseling goes both ways, so to speak, in that if one were to go to a proclaimed “spiritual counselor,” the more tangible elements of the psyche might be ignored just as smugly as the less-tangible are ignored in Psychology.
[Comment] definitely true, and there is certainly plenty of literature about the more tangible aspects.
[Michael Entity] Those we might consider to be “mavericks” are publicly unknown to at this time, but if all moves forward as intended, would most likely rise to awareness within the next 20 years or so.
We can also suggest looking back at our 7 Levels of Mind. You would see quite clearly where any psychological theory or method might fall, and this would give you a fair gauge of the higher levels of counseling or theories that might be available.
The “mavericks” we see who may move psychology forward to include higher levels of Mind, if you will, would be those who move the field to embrace the Telepathic levels. Currently, it appears to us that most theories and practices remain at Transition levels and below, which do work for most.