By Gary Seeman, Ph.D.

Click here to contact Gary and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

Awareness is Ever-Present

To be aware is to witness. And our witnessing selves are always there when we dream, [1] in daily activities, when feeling emotions, and in states of excitement or distress. We are constantly aware, though our focus may be clear or muddled. Without awareness, there is no consciousness. But awareness is hard to see. It is ever-present, like the air we breathe.

Although always present, awareness may not be remembered. For example, we may walk around a table while moving from one room to another. But we let our perception of the table recede from consciousness without storing memories that are easily retrieved. The encoding of memory depends in part on the intensity of experience, whether this intensity is influenced by the strength of a sensory perception or an emotional response.

We are self-aware when we attend to representations of experience – whether drawn from memory or visualizing a possible scenario. In psychotherapy, we train awareness on our lived experience to realize our hopes and goals and live more satisfying lives.

Every form of psychotherapy has methods to enhance awareness. This reflects the central role of improving the quality of awareness in the process of mental healing. Read the rest of this entry

I’ve received two requests to add Psychoanalysis to our list of therapies and I thought this would be a valuable discussion topic and one that would help me to make a decision about whether or not to include this type of therapy. Here’s my problem: I know this may be biased and outdated, but the association I have (no pun intended) when I think of Psychoanalysis is of a withdrawn, unresponsive, and impersonal figure providing well-timed interpretations about the transference of their “patient,” who lays with the analyst sitting behind and out of view. I’m aware that this association is based on traditional Psychoanalysis and that the model has evolved beyond its original forms into numerous approaches such as Object Relations and Self Psychology. Neither do I underestimate the value of psychodynamic theory and its influence in my work. I even took part in a year long Object Relations training about 10 years ago. But Psychoanalysis presents more than a theory with useful concepts about the intra-psychic world; it’s the way Psychoanalysis encourages the analyst/therapist to “Be” with the client that concerns me.
So, I remain concerned that Psychoanalysis does not fit our idea of what “good” therapy is and I’d like your opinion on it. More precisely, I’m questioning the following:

1) Do contemporary psychoanalytic approaches hold that behind the layers of protection, no matter how self-destructive or hurtful to others one has been, there is a lovable and vulnerable Self at the very core?

2) Do contemporary psychoanalytic approaches hold an unwavering belief that people can grow, heal, and transform?

3) Do contemporary psychoanalytic approaches tend to view people as fundamentally and irreparably flawed on some level?

4) Do contemporary psychoanalytic approaches work collaboratively by helping a client to tap into their own intuitive wisdom or do these approaches instead rely more often on the analyst providing interpretation and insight to the client about his or her problems?

5) Do contemporary psychoanalytic approaches encourage the analyst/therapist to be free in their use of Self, open to purposeful self disclosure, and to hold a kind, caring, and compassionate state of being with their clients? Or is it encouraged that the analyst/therapist be the detached evaluator who relies solely on the working through of transference as the primary method of healing?

Please feel free to post your comments and thanks in advance for sharing your wisdom,

Noah :) P.S., thanks to everyone who’s responded. I just posted a lengthy comment in response to all of yours. Click on “comments” to read.

© Copyright 2007 by http://www.GoodTherapy.org Therapist Irvine Bureau - All Rights Reserved.