Psychosynthesis distinguishes itself from other therapies by integrating various healing methodologies and techniques into a comprehensive approach that addresses the whole person.
Roberto Assagioli, March 15, 1970[1] (Assagioli Archives – Florence)[1]. Original Title: Riunione dei Medici di Perugia con il Dott. R. Assagioli. Translated and Edited With Notes by Jan Kuniholm[2]
Abstract: Psychosynthesis is a therapeutic approach that aims to bring order and harmony to the multiplicity of thoughts, feelings, and emotions within individuals. It recognizes the dynamism of psychic life and the interconnectedness of body, psyche, and spirit. Psychosynthesis distinguishes itself from other therapies by integrating various healing methodologies and techniques into a comprehensive approach that addresses the whole person. The therapist’s role is to establish a positive human relationship with the patient, as this is essential for any technique to be effective. Psychosynthesis can be applied not only in individual therapy but also in self-education, interpersonal relationships, and social contexts. Art is seen as a channel for the creative utilization of psychic energies, but it should be used in a way that promotes communication and evokes personal expression. The teacher’s role is to elicit and evoke the student’s inner potential, facilitating self-learning and self-expression. The revolutionary aspect of psychosynthesis lies in its practical application and its recognition of the transformative power of psychic energies. Self-psychosynthesis should focus on developing deficient functions and achieving balance, particularly for introverted individuals. Expression can take various forms, including artistic expression or humanitarian work. The process of identification and disidentification is a key technique in psychosynthesis.
I will touch on two points: what Psychosynthesis is, and what distinguishes it from other methods of psychotherapy. These are the two questions I am generally asked: these, and then the fields in which psychosynthesis operates.
Psychosynthesis starts from an undeniable observation — which anyone can observe in himself with some sincerity — and it is the one that is set out in the first handout of the first course . . . and it is fundamental: the multifaceted mind. In us —if we observe ourselves — we detect a multiplicity of tendencies, of thoughts, of feelings and emotions, which are variable and even contradictory — to the point that sometimes, rather than “multiplicity” we should speak more precisely of “chaos.”
This is the starting point, and I would say it is existential. And for everyone who sincerely observes himself and also others, this is absolutely undeniable: it is not a doctrine, it is an observation. From this comes the need to bring order to chaos, to bring harmony to conflicts; that is, to organize the personality, and I would say that this is the meaning and task of psychosynthesis. One could say with a slogan, “from chaos to Cosmos,” — Cosmos means order, harmony.[3] This, I would say, is the backbone: everything else is coordinated with this existential starting observation, and with this goal, at which we never completely arrive, but toward which we aim, and to which we can come very close.
Of course, this is not a static goal — since the synthesis is not only never perfect, but must be continually renewed and developed, because life is dynamism, it is movement. And so this is also another basic point — also not theoretical, but also the result of an observation — that can be translated with the concept of psychodynamics: namely, that psychic life is a dynamism of energies, and that the human being consists of body – psyche – spirit, and is therefore biopsychospiritual.
Let us now see what differentiates psychosynthesis from other therapies, or psychotherapies. Here, too, the fundamental element lies in the synthetic principle and method: that is, psychosynthesis proposes the synthesis of all valid healing methodologies, first and foremost of the various psychotherapies, but also of other therapies coordinated and integrated into an integral therapy that involves the whole person: body, psyche and spiritual essence. So [we have a] synthesis of therapies: I presented this briefly in a paper addressed to the Psychotherapy Congress in London.[4] There are many partially valid psychotherapies [or schools of psychotherapy], but so far each of them generally keeps itself separate from the others, and also they seem to me rather hostile [to one another].
Now this doesn’t really make sense. It is in fact a matter of taking the benefits, the good techniques and methods of each of them and separating them from the theoretical constructs with which they have been more or less identified. The classic example is that of psychoanalysis. Within psychoanalysis, one can distinguish the methods of investigating the unconscious from the doctrines of Freud and others, with which these are often connected and sometimes identified. One may very well reject those doctrines, and still make use of some of the analytic methods, such as free association, Jung’s free drawing, and other analyses, etc. So [we] take all the valid techniques there are, but free from the doctrinal ties they may have had with their various authors. This is in itself a fine distinguishing feature of psychosynthesis.
In this way, we have so far collected about fifty techniques that we use. Of course, you cannot use all of them with every patient; you have to choose them as you go along. This is another distinguishing characteristic of psychosynthesis: in his practice, the physician recognizes as he goes along which techniques are suitable, not only for that given patient, but also for that given period of treatment. Here is another fundamental principle, which is not only for psychosynthesis: namely, the uniqueness of each case and each patient, of an existential uniqueness. Franklin, for example, insists on it very rightly. [5] Each case is unique, and in a sense a specific method must be invented for each case, a method which coordinates and makes a synthesis of techniques suited to the case in question, for the purposes of each case.
Then there is another distinctive feature, represented by the therapist’s study of himself. For each therapist there are in fact techniques which prove to be more suitable and more corresponding to his temperament and mentality, and which are therefore more fruitful, and therefore also more useful to the patient than others. So the therapist must strive to use all techniques, even those that are less congenial to him; but given the great choice that there is, he can first find those that are most suited to him, and then, little by little, learn to use even those that are less congenial, but which he is nevertheless able to manage.
Another distinctive point is represented, I would say, by a synthesis of opposites. That is, the most important therapeutic factor is found in the human relationship that is established between the therapist and the patient: this is essential. It can even be said that once a positive human relationship has been established, then any technique works; and that when this is absent, even the best technique will not work. So this human relationship between therapist and patient is absolutely a priority. And here I make a clarification right away: what we are talking about is not the classical transference found in psychoanalysis, but something quite different. The transference in psychoanalysis consists in supporting or provoking the patient’s projection of his more or less repressed states of mind onto the therapist, especially those related to his relationships with his parents, or with others. This is an artificial process, a projection, and in psychoanalysis we analyze this projection and try to resolve it.
Now this projection certainly exists, we recognize it, and it has to be analyzed and resolved. But this is only a first step: it is clearing the ground for the genuine relationship between therapist and patient. That is not a projection — these are inevitable human relationships that are created in dialogue, in the encounter between two human beings. And here, making use of this relationship is not easy; we need to use its positive sides, and avoid excessive immature or affective dependence of the patient towards the therapist; and then there is a stage of gradual weaning until the end of therapy. After which a good human relationship may remain, but no longer therapist-patient, but a friendly and often cooperative relationship. These are the essential points. So: the primacy of the human relationship, but also appreciation of specific techniques. One thing does not exclude the other. So also: precise techniques, such as rêve éveillé,[6] free drawing, training exercises.
Another distinctive point consists in the primacy of the will. On this I will not dwell, because there are various handouts on the will. Last Saturday I spoke of the will as the Cinderella of psychology and therapy. It has been neglected or even denied: now, this is a mistake. The will is in fact an essential function of the human being and therefore should be recognized, valued and utilized. This I would say as a first overview may suffice: now you can ask questions, because this [talk] is meant to be just an aperitif, and is not an actual meal.
As for the fields of action, let’s say that psychosynthesis in the first place established itself as a therapy, and this remains the field [of interest] . . . but then we immediately moved on to self-education, first of the therapist and then of each person. Self-psychosynthesis can be guided in a didactic psychosynthesis,[7] but when one does not have the resources for that, it can also be done by each person on his own: it is more difficult, but perhaps even more useful. Then in the therapeutic field, there is another basic principle of psychosynthesis, that no one is ever 100 percent sick, and no one is 100 percent healthy. It is a matter of percentages or gradations, and sometimes also of environmental conditions: that is, someone may be perceived in a certain way in a given environment, but not that way in another. So another key point is to focus on the healthy part in each patient, and not to emphasize the sick part.
This brings us to education. From the earliest years we must focus everything on what is positive in the child, young person, or adolescent, and direct his energies constructively before they are conditioned, or repressed, or diverted. Another fundamental point of psychosynthesis is the transformation and sublimation of psychic energies. This has also been recognized in psychoanalysis, where Freud talked about sublimation, but then in practice he did nothing with it. He correctly admitted that it exists, but then did not use it, whereas it is one of the most profitable techniques: that of transmuting, directing and channeling psychic energies. Of course, to do this one must first free them from their repressions, but also there are some that are already free, which must also be directed and used.
The analogy that arises is simple, and it is with “water management.” In the mountains it rains, and streams and rivers are formed; if these are left to themselves, then periodic flooding occurs, waters seep into the ground, create swamps, etc. Repression is in itself stupid — as stupid as it would be to throw boulders into a stream to stop its flow. On the other hand, these waters should not be left to themselves either. Rather, one must try to manage them and channel them for irrigation and hydroelectric use. Water, by itself, is neither good nor bad. And so it is with the instinctual energies: sexuality, aggression and self-assertion are neither good nor bad in themselves. It all depends on the use made of them, and instead of calling them good or bad, one should speak of their constructive use or destructive use. So they are energies, one can say “pre-moral” — neither good nor bad — they are natural psychic energies, just as water and electricity are natural physical energies. It’s all about using them, and this is to be done first of all in education, before they are misused or diverted, thus producing neurosis; and there is a whole program of educational and preventive psychosynthesis there.
Another field that connects with this is that of interpersonal and social relationships. The same psychic dynamics, the same psychic laws, and the same techniques also serve for inter-individual psychosynthesis, of which the two main fields are: psychosynthesis of couples (man and woman), and family psychosynthesis (parents and children). I have also talked and written about this at length, and you can find abundant material; here I am just giving some suggestions of what you can find in psychosynthesis. And then you can even get to social psychosynthesis: even conflicts between social classes, nations, etc. can in fact be interpreted, and I would even say cured, again using the same techniques. For example, the channeling of aggressive and combative energies can be done on a collective scale (there is much to be said about this), and in this I refer to the psychosynthesis of nations and humanity, as set up and outlined in the program.
Now a few clarifications on a few points that are of most interest to you.
Question: We would like a few things about psychosynthesis, art and the New Age. Art in the New Age.
Dr. Assagioli: This is a formidable question, but I can answer it very simply. Art is one of the channels, one of the main ways for the creative utilization of psychic energies. You have to see how it is used, though, because certain arts, indeed many works of art, are a mere discharge — not sublimated — of complexes or impulsive and instinctive energies; and this is art that hurts — regardless of its aesthetic value. We must therefore distinguish between aesthetic value and psychological effect; they are two quite different things. One can even say paradoxically that the more a work of art has aesthetic value, the more it can hurt because it is more effective. I will now give two examples: leaving out modern art, I will give two elevated examples.
Goethe as a young man had fallen hopelessly in love with a married woman, and not being able to live out this passion of his, he was in despair and thought of suicide. Since, however, he was a writer and was basically sane, he poured his despair into a novel, The Sorrows of Young Werther, after writing which he felt liberated from this passion. In fact, Goethe described this despair so well that in the novel he makes the protagonist commit suicide; he himself did not do it, but the protagonist did. But what happened? Now, the narrative of this act turned out to be so expressive and poignant that many young people who read The Sorrows of Young Werther committed suicide. So you see, this is not about moralizing, about moral or immoral art — no, this is simply about a legitimate work of art, which has good aesthetic value, but which certainly provoked suicides!
Another example is Baudelaire’s Le fleurs du mal, a work that is artistically beautiful but has harmful suggestive effects.[8] A final case I have written about is Wagner’s Tristan and Isolde.[9] There, too, Wagner himself had an unhappy passion that he had to give up, which he transfigured into a wonderful opera, Tristan and Isolde. But I know that Tristan and Isolde has hurt many people, and not only weak, suggestible or emotional people. I myself have had the testimony, I would say the confession, of one of the best clergyman, a most noble figure, who during the First World War did excellent work as a confessor in the army. Well, he told me that after attending a performance of Tristan and Isolde, he came out distraught and upset, and for some time . . . that hurt him.
So, you see, when you talk about the deleterious effects of commercial pseudo-art that arouses sexual and combative instincts, you are not moralizing, you are not attacking the freedom of art, as they say. This is all hypocrisy, because they make these works for commercial purposes and certainly not for artistic purposes, and then they smuggle them in as “art.” Sometimes they are also really noble and valid works of art, and yet they have these effects. There is a conflict between the aesthetic situation and the total human situation; and this is an important but separate topic. However, artistic activity should be encouraged in patients and children, because it is a way to satisfy the needs of the unconscious. Then there is higher art, in which the superconscious, the higher part, is manifested through artistic symbolism.
Then, what else was there? Art in the New Age?
Question: Yes, art in the New Age. The fine arts.
Dr. Assagioli: The best, most brilliant and inspired artists — it is as if they were prophets; that is, they anticipated in certain of their works what would later develop. And so even now we hope that there are artists who are prophets and initiators, heralds of the principles of the New Age. The New Age, in a sense, will be the psychosynthesis of humanity. This is occurring for practical and technical reasons — in fact, the interactions of all kinds, by air travel, etc., mass communications and all the rest, means that a synthesis is being produced in humanity. Also in fashions, in everything, a collective human mentality is being formed which is no longer provincial or national, or even continental. Things are actually moving toward a synthesis of the whole of humanity, and this is basically nothing more than the principle of psychosynthesis applied to humanity as a whole. The same processes can also be applied to the therapy of humanity, and from the current chaos and conflicts we can arrive at a harmonious synthesis . . . Of course this is an overview, but it is within the general framework of the synthetic principle.
Question: Now there is some small question to ask about techniques, as far as the art of the New Age is concerned. That is, how can psychosynthesis work in art through its various techniques? That is, can an educator make art a means of collective education, or mass education, if we want to use that term? And if a psychosynthesis practitioner wished to use any of its techniques specifically in order to be able to establish a communication relationship between himself and his pupils, or a communication relationship with a school group of children or middle-aged young people, that is, to shorten in a certain sense the work of being able to get to the bottom, in the psyche of those who express themselves through art . . . would there be any particularly suitable technique among these fifty that the Master has illustrated . . . ?
(Question clarified by Miss Ida Palombi [Assagioli’s Secretary]): She asks whether among the fifty techniques of psychosynthesis there is one that in a particular way might be useful for teachers to use to establish a deeper relationship in the field of art. And whether there is a technique that can help to establish a deeper relationship between the teacher and the children, which can help to speed up or shorten the time needed for their education, again in the field of art and art expression.
Dr. Assagioli: I can answer with the saying of a Greek sage, I can’t remember who it is, I think Plutarch: “The soul is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be kindled.” So the teacher’s function in psychosynthesis is exactly the opposite of what it is [in most schools] now. That is, the teacher must not “teach,” but must educate in the etymological sense of e-ducere, to bring forth. As for learning, he must teach students how to learn from themselves, but never preach, never lecture. What matters is dialogue, inducing, encouraging people to express themselves. First of all with drawings, because drawing precedes speech, and especially in introverts it is much easier to express themselves with drawing than with speech — after all, the alphabet consists of stylized drawings. Therefore, drawing out — through modeling, through movements, and through the spoken and written word — brings out what is inside of each person, which each person then has to interpret on his or her own. And from what comes out, more questions emerge, and then the questions must be answered, but always only on the basis of the material spontaneously offered by the pupil. In short, the adult is at the service of the learner, in this sense, but it is a most noble service. It is Socratic method applied with modern techniques.
Question: An interpretive technique, not an educational one.
Dr. Assagioli: But even more than interpretative — I would say eliciting and evoking. Evoking, and then interpreting, and helping to use. These are the three basic factors. First you have to evoke; and then help to understand, and more than understand — to comprehend; and finally to use. These are the three stages. But always starting from the existential situation of the student. This can also be done in groups, and this is what all parents should do. A parent who wants to be an educator has this beautiful task. Not to be an eternal father or eternal mother, but rather to collaborate and provide opportunities. Of course, there are many difficulties: first of all, the adult is [often] not prepared, or does not have the will to do it. Then, too often the adult unloads his own complexes on the child.
Therefore, the first and most important thing to be done is parental self-psychosynthesis. Then there are the material obstacles, in the sense that children need movement and muscular activity, and for all this nowadays there is a lack of parks and gardens, and there is also usually a lack of a place that can be set aside for the child to have fun and raise hell, which he should be fully entitled to. There is is a stage in fact when the child has the right to throw things around, to destroy, and to act up. So even a small room, even an attic, even a basement, but let it be entirely at his disposal so that he can do whatever he wants in it . . .
Question: So art is just language?
Dr. Assagioli: Yes, yes, it is a language and should be encouraged, but as a language. Languages right now are taught in an anti-psychological, stupid way. The correct way to learn languages is the same as the mother tongue. This is not taught, but the child absorbs it, I would say, by osmosis, by evocation. Now, in learning a language as a child, or as an adult, one must use the same method. You can apply the saying . . . of becoming little children. In learning a foreign language everyone is a little child, and should learn in the same way as one learns the mother tongue. You see, these things that I am saying, I am saying them in a way that makes them seem acceptable, true and commonsensical; and yet in reality they are profoundly revolutionary, because they overturn the relationships between parent and child, teacher and pupil, doctor and patient. In fact, they have this new and revolutionary character, beneath the harmless and common-sense appearances with which I expound them.
Question: Then art should be understood more as a matter of communication than as a creation?
Dr. Assagioli: In both ways. Now I don’t want to make a pun, but one can say that all communication [communicazione] is basically a creation [creazione]. And in turn, in a sense, that every created thing communicates its language to those who can understand it. So these are basically two aspects of the same thing. In some cases the communication aspect may prevail: for example, in writing the style represents the artistic part, but the conscious purpose consists in communication. Whereas in free and inspired creation, on the other hand, the emphasis is on creation, which then becomes communicative for those who can understand it.
I insist again on the revolutionary character of psychosynthesis, because it can often be said — and we do, too! — that there is nothing new in it, that for example even educators basically always talk about personality formation, harmonious development of the child, etc. That’s all very well, but they say it only theoretically, and then they don’t do it, or they do it wrongly. We must not stop at external consensus and similarities, but we must see how it is done in practice: and that is what is revolutionary. So many people say, yes, instincts should be channeled, they should be used, but then they don’t do it . . . In the reformatories, among the young delinquents of society, there were found some super-gifted people who were not recognized as such, who were not helped to bring out this higher part of themselves — which they then applied to crime; and this of course they were able to do well! Psychosynthesis addresses live and urgent problems of immediate application.
When electricity was unknown . . . The knowledge of psychodynamics, that is, of psychic energies and their use, is analogous to the discovery of electricity and its use, and of atomic energy and its use, whether good or bad. That is, there are formidable natural energies of the inner world [of a person] that must be discovered and understood, and used well. They are natural energies in the psychological sense, it is human nature that is distinct from the chemical-physical nature — not opposite, but distinct. Theoretically, psychosynthesis can be said to be psychodynamics in action.
Question: Can self-psychosynthesis in particularly emotional individuals create destructive conflicts in the individual himself?
Dr. Assagioli: If it is badly done. I’ll give you an example right away. Self-psychosynthesis is precisely about not digging too far into things [at a time]. Take for example an emotional, shy introvert who has difficulty communicating. For him, psychosynthesis consists of cultivating functions that are lacking; that is, extroverting himself, forgetting himself, seeking means of expression, seeking dialogues with others. This is the first part of psychosynthesis. And another principle of psychosynthesis is this: developing functions that are present but deficient.
So far I have talked about the utilization of existing or exuberant energies, but there is also a whole other side, and this is where the will takes over. Develop the deficient functions. For example, an intellectual person should develop their feeling, fantasy, imagination and intuition. Emotional people, on the other hand, should have their rational and practical side developed; and so on. So in self-psychosynthesis the first thing to do is to [create] balance, in the sense of integrating by developing the deficient functions. And for introverts, for the people you alluded to, this is primarily an external psychosynthesis, not an internal one. Of course, self-analysis in these cases is inadvisable: it could be a danger, it could be harmful. It is therefore a matter of choosing the right technique for the right person at the right stage for the right purpose. It is the uniqueness of each application.
Question: For individuals who do not have artistic tendencies, what is the best means of expression?
Dr. Assagioli: There are many. Expression is not necessarily only artistic. For example, there is social work or humanitarian work. A nurse, a social worker, a person who has developed sensitivities, they have a work in which they express their energies, which basically can also be called creative in a way, although it has nothing to do with aesthetics. They may have no aesthetic sense, but nevertheless they do beautiful humanitarian work. Whereas maybe a person with a lot of artistic sense can be obnoxious in social life.
[Assagioli probably coughed or sounded hoarse]Question: We worry about your vocal cords.
Dr. Assagioli: It doesn’t mean anything, I will be quiet for twenty-four hours. Take advantage of me while I’m here.
Question: We talked about techniques, point us to a simple technique to bring order to the chaos of forces . . .
Dr. Assagioli: Psychosynthesis. The process of identification and the process of disidentification.
[1] The source of this essay is www.psicoenergetica.com. —Ed.
[2] Editor’s interpolations are shown in [brackets]; Elisions . . . Are as shown in the source document. —Ed.
[3] Order and harmony is the meaning of the original Greek word kosmos. This meaning was expanded to mean “an orderly harmonious universe” by the philosopher Pythagoras. —Ed.
[4] At the Sixth International Congress of Psychotherapy in London in 1964, Assagioli presented a paper entitled, “Synthesis in Psychotherapy,” which was transcribed and published as Issue #15 by the Psychosynthesis Research Foundation in New York, and is also available as Doc. #22314 in the Assagioli Archives. —Ed.
[5] The Assagioli Archives contain references to American diplomat, printer, scientist philosopher and polymath Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), who wrote of what he called the “moral or prudential algebra,” which may the source of this reference. The exact origin is unknown. —Ed.
[6] French: “waking dream,” a technique developed by French psychotherapist Robert Desoille. —Ed.
[7] i.e., with a teacher or trainer. —Ed.
[8] Baudelaire’s Le fleurs du mal [The Flowers of Evil] was published in 1857, was a book of poetry which dealt with themes of decadence, eroticism, suffering, sin, self-disgust and death. —Ed.
[9] Wagner’s opera, too complicated to summarize, involves a fatal love affair. —Ed.
[1] Perugia is an Italian city located not quite halfway between Florence and Rome. A branch of the Istituto de psicosintesi had been established in Perugia by 1970. —Ed.
Leave a Reply