sociatry827

[Adam Blatner]

Dear all,  re trying to define sociatry: 
   Bud's response, if I understand it correctly, in answer to my question about the boundaries of the term sociatry, is that he would include all the approaches that are therapeutic, including all indigenous approaches. 
      He hinted (?) that non Morenean approaches such as Hellinger's constellation work might rightly be included also.

     If that is so, might Michael Rosenberg's conflict-resolution approach be relevant? How about all sorts of other forms of applied psychology.
       What about more general forms of promoting mental health?
             Community-building?
                  Medical-Physical health promotion?  Improvements in Agriculture? 
     Where should the line be drawn, or, come to think of it, do we even need to generate or define a boundary?
             No, if the term sociatry refers to a broader vision: The spirit of doing psychiatry (especially as the word referred in the 30s through the 50s mainly to the entire enterprise that included psychotherapy) with the wider society and culture. 
          Yes, a line must be drawn more narrowly, if the term is to refer to "a science" (though I still don't know what that would consist of) or something more strictly involving only Morenean approaches---and perhaps even then, only some of them and not others.

      So thanks, Bud, and let's hear more of what others think.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: BARNETT WEISS 
  To: Adam Blatner 
  Cc: grouptalk 
  Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 12:06 AM
  Subject: Re: sociatry826a


  In answer to Adam's queries:

  all techniques such as those mentioned here by Adam are tools for accomplishing the over all task of Sociatry. Moreno's sprang out of his particular vision that had to do with working in groups which is as I indicate really ancestral and indigenous in nature. The roots he notes are those of the Greek Theater whose roots are African as well though rarely credited as such.  Hellinger, while really apparently not very well versed in psychodrama, was quite clear about the African Ancestral community indigenous roots of the work he promulgated as that is precisely where he spent around 20 years of his life prior to creating Constellation work. In it, he released the director to a large extent by allowing the group members to take a far more independent role using their immediate responses to what is called the knowing field of the action as directions to be worked with rather than allowing the protagonist to lead and be followed while continuing to work from their story. This opens up a great deal more counter spontaneity and allows for so much more to happen. I think the integration of various other action and other techniques with the constellation work would be even more powerful and am working at finding and writing about a better bridge between them all. John Payne is using a great deal more spiritual aspects including ritual and it leads to very powerful and lasting healing for the groups and individuals participating. It also "magically", though physicists and Shamans can easily encompass this magic with their explanations, influences those not participating even over great distances without their being notified. There is far more dear Horatio 

  There is nothing in and of itself about what Malidoma was speaking about that is magical. It is the hard and courageous work of finding and being true to your purpose in life which, in the long run, is always some form of service to the larger community. This is most often with little or no support for this quest. It involves a great deal of risk and derision especially for the WESTERN mind which is driven by capitalism and individualism at it's worst. The old standby, interdependence has a nice ring to it, and is rarely practiced by couples or families let alone organizations or communities. 
  "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  mine too. 
  Blessings, Bud

  Adam Blatner <adam at blatner.com> wrote:
    Adam's further comments: on Bud Weiss' response at 4:14 PM 
       BW wrote--- also in response to Ann's reporting of Kevin's writing in ANZPA (?),  "I appreciate the depth of this attempt to be descriptive in some defining way using all kinds of wonderful sounding phrases and it leaves me a bit confused.
           AB: Whew, I wasn't the only one. 

       BW I reiterate that for me it is quite simple. Sociatry is the fishbowl. The tools are sociometry in its different forms, either cold where no rearrangement of the groups is made vs the hot form where rearrangement is made, Sociodrama, and psychodrama. All of these tools will facilitate the increase of spontaneity within the system...i'e. the opening up of choices for all, increase in role competence, and expansion of role capability for all. 
         AB: So, then, would it be your opinion that sociatry only involves the applications of Morenean methods in the service of helping humanity?  And other theories and methods---the thousands of others---are then not sociatry? 
          I'm still neutral or undecided, but wondering about what the best definition of the term would be.
                  If the more limited approach is sociatry, then folks who want to also support things like, say, Theatre of the Oppressed  or   Playback Theatre  would be doing something beyond sociatry, even if it is in general alignment with sociatry's goals.

          BW I don't see it as any more complicated than that which is why I loved what Moreno had laid down as these principals were easy to grasp and lead to action directly. 
          AB: Okay, but I do see it complicated by the questions I just raised, and await some more general consensus. 

    AB:  Bud then inserts a long quote from Malidoma Some, which again I think we need to critically analyze. No doubt some continued attention needs to be given in the ongoing tension between community needs and individual needs. Too much on the "let's don't be selfish" can lead to oppression by the collective. Too much on the individual can lead to a weakening of community vitality. How then to find the balance? We need to address specifics, I think. We need to recognize that talking in terms of noble generalities does NOT lead magically and automatically to right actions as applied in their particulars.   

       Thanks, Bud, for engaging. Warmly, Adam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20070827/4c18e32d/attachment.html