Four quadrants in our Head, Gut and Heart – Q&A

Hardly a metaphor here, my most left-brain science-like article on this to date

Four quadrants in our Head, Four quadrants in our Gut, Four quadrants in our Heart – Q&A

whole-brain-model-herrmann-2016Last week I was asked by a wonderful psychologist to explain what I do. The title above popped out. I explore our Four Quadrants for purposes of healing and wholeness. Perhaps this raises more questions in your mind…

Q: Are all three sets of quadrants the same?

A: No. Each resides in a specific location in our body image. The locations are stable universally.

Q: Where are they on the Freud-Jung-Steiner scale of Conscious, Sub-conscious, Unconscious?

A: All quadrant activity is unconscious. No wonder it took so long to come to the attention of Westerners doing basic research in human psychology.

A: Are all sets of quadrants the same frequency?

Q: No. Each functions within a distinct range of frequency. These do not overlap much–unless and until–you wish to become more integrated and whole-brained.

Q: In one quadrant system, is the content of each quadrant the same or different?

A: All different, but the same four archetypes appear in each quadrant system (Bertrand’s uncovery of the Inner Family).

Q: Are the Inner Family arranged in the same pattern in all three quadrant systems?

A: No. Quadrants in the lower two systems, heart and gut, have the same arrangement and presentation. The Inner Family in our head quadrants are arranged in a separate, stable presentaton, universally present.

Q: Are all three quadrant systems the same for men and women; or, do they vary between male and female like the chakras might?

A: All three sets of quadrants the same for men and women universally on Earth.

Q: Are they the same for children and adults?

A: No. The principal and primary pattern of human development birth up to puberty is as described in all Waldorf whole-child development texts.

Q: What happens to the quadrants from before puberty to after puberty?

A: The stable pattern of quadrants can only be cognized after puberty. In Three Selves terms, the Basic Self is the locus of control in children in utero up to puberty. Prior to puberty, the four quadrants in our gut predominate and are the locus of control. Their task is to build self-esteem as recorded and measured in the Conception Vessel in front.

After puberty the locus of control switches to Conscious Self. From then on our Head Quadrants and Governing Vessel (self-concept) in back store for playback the majority of our Habits as adults.

As children before puberty, we are primarily conscious and awake to the activity of our gut quadrants as this is where our habits of reacting to self, others, world, God are stored.

After puberty Conscious Self becomes the stand-in for our immortal-eternal soul. Its task is to make healthy choices and decisions. That’s The Plan anyway.

Want to give God a chance? If it’s good–do it. If it’s not good–don’t do it ~ John Morton

Q: Do animals-mammals have these same quadrants?

A: No evidence of this to date. The speculation is no evidence is likely to come forward. Human beings are not the same as even the higher apes, as materialistic science wishes to equate us.

Q: Why is four quadrants such a common, durable pattern?

A: It is not a theory, not an abstraction, not “quantum.” Four Quadrants can be perceived-verified-validated by two approaches. The presence of, and contents of, quadrant systems can be perceived thru direct clairvoyant observation, for those who can see and wish to look.

The second method is muscle testing and self-testing. Basic researchers in psychology no longer have to be highly clairvoyant to perceive the pattern of the quadrants. You can perceive them thru self-testing and muscle checking experiments.

Q: Is a Four Quadrants approach the same as “humoral medicine”?

A: No. It’s a mistake to think “history” as intellectual or religious tradition plays much of a role here. True, considerable history of Four Elements exists, in Western thought, since ancient Greek times as “humoral medicine.” The Four Humors was the major, accepted pattern in human psyches used by healers and doctors, until the 1850s, when the germ theory took over. Greek origins are at the base of humoral medicine. Not so for the Four Quadrants and Inner Family. Four Quadrants is also NOT the same as Rudolf Steiner’s Four Temperaments.

Q: Why is this ancient pattern coming back since 2000?

A: Two reasons. One is while few people are sufficiently clairvoyant to perceive-verify-validate natural phenomena in the Four Quadrants, since the mid-1960s hundreds and then thousands of people became active muscle testers and self-testers. A significant fraction of these work on clients in clinical settings, affording them opportunity to conduct large numbers of basic research experiments.

For those curious, the reality of differing, stable character of four quadrants in each of three areas is cheap and easy to perceive-verify-validate.

The second reason the Four Quadrants is coming back is the effectiveness of understanding and working with Unconscious Patterns. In the 1850s when the germ theory took over from Humoral Medicine, the germ theory in the West wiped out any, all and every competing insight into human health and disease; for example, homeopathy and chiropractic. 50 years now into holistic health and healing, it may be difficult to imagine the utter stranglehold and corrupt anti-competition practices used to promote-establish germ theory as the sole, undisputed model of human health and disease. It was at the time a big positive breakthru. At the same time, the baby was thrown out with the bathwater. Superstition and humoral medicine were thrown on the trash heap of Western history, along with any interest in Unconscious Patterns.

This skewed medical and psychology basic research towards only pathology, drugs and surgery. Authentic basic research into human psyches was put on hold.

Interest in Unconscious Patterns only re-awakened in original Psychosomatic Medicine, 1955-1965. In the mid-1870s the topic re-emerged in the wider context of the whole person. Psychosomatic symptoms were immediately recognized as a useful paradigm in holistic healing methods of all kinds. The lack of a comprehensive holistic theory and general holistic experimental method prevented stronger forward movement. Courtesy of Goethe, these were uncovered in 2014.

Due to the wide availability and low cost of muscle testing; and, the tremendous therapeutic power of Unconscious Patterns, the Four Quadrants are coming back into use slowly. We should see significant mainstream interest in about 100 years.

Q: Is the Four Quadrants the same as our etheric body?

A: No. The Four Quadrants is only one of an unknown number of etheric forms, features and capacities.

The Four Quadrants arise from the four-fold character of etheric formative forces. Let’s remember etheric forces are mystery itself. The “Great Mystery” points 100% to etheric forces, which can be defined many ways; including, as the Divine Feminine.

Q: What is the state of etheric forces literature?

A: There is hardly any significant literature. The book Etheric Formative Forces, by Rudolf Steiner’s secretary, Geunther Wachsmuth, free online, if you can find it, has proven over time to be more a defense of Steiner’s ideas than a modern introduction.

The better starting place on a literature of etheric forces is one single book, Man or Matter, 3rd ed. (1985) by Ernst Lehrs. Nick Thomas (Editor), Peter Bortoft (Editor) The preferred third edition is HERE.  It’s about $30 delivered. The first edition is free online but is a famously difficult read. I’ve read both. Start with the third ed. By the way, the original title was Man and Matter, which makes more sense. I recommend the first 12 chapters of third ed; the rest is esoteric even beyond Energy Medicine.

Theosophical-Rosicrucian literature on etheric forces exists but has not proven popular nor useful. Why? Because it attempts a mental understanding of etheric forces. Not until Lehrs, in the 1950s, who was a Waldorf high school science teacher, was anyone able to write in such a way to point to the etheric without equating ether and mind. Paradoxically what we call “thinking” is another manifestation of etheric phenomena, at its higher frequency end.

Lehrs antidotes most every flaw and confused idea of the Quantum Discussion. Man or Matter is one of very few books in any field speaking directly to a future Goethean Holistic Science compatible with and supportive of truly human values.

The second piece of etheric forces literature which can stand with Lehrs, known to me, is chapters 19-24 of Balance on All Levels PACME+Soul; Finally, a general holistic experimental method; The Three Sciences we use everyday; Holistic Psychology 2.0

Chapter 19: Goethean Holistic Science

Chapter 20: Three Sciences

Chapter 23-24

Comments welcome. Conversation invited.

Christmas 2016

Find author and Health Intuitive Bruce Dickson at https://HolisticBrainBalance.wordpress.com He writes on Best Practices in Energy Medicine (30 books) http://www.amazon.com/Bruce-Dickson-MSS/e/B007SNVG46

Another blog: http://blog.GoetheanScience.net

Flowering plants speak to us of evolution and transformation (Ernst Lehrs paraphrase)

abstract-stamen-flower_lily16kIt appears the most active level of our waking adult psyche is four head quadrants, not anatomical brain quadrants, not physical-anatomical brain parts in any combination.

But wait, there’s more. “Brain quadrants” are only an analogy, a metaphor, for activity both obvious and subtle, occurring in our etheric body.

Brain-head quadrants appear to be the primary active level of waking thinking-feeling.

Before readers go off half-cocked, neither quadrants, nor any one quadrant, is the primary active level of our immortal-eternal soul.

Quadrants make possible the 3-dimensionality of all our habits (learned behaviors) of thinking-feeling, 95% of our psyche.

The other %5 to 10% of conscious deliberate choice-making is made possible by our immortal-eternal soul.

Keeping quadrants in perspective assists us not to over-generalize the significance of quadrants, as was done earlier with right~left brain hemispheres.

Building on Rudolf Steiner, a flower analogy is presented to show how all these things connect and evolve.

From our neck-up, in our thinking-feeling, we have something surprising, not predicted by the organization and activity of our gut brain, the capacity for independent thought, of critical thinking.

The surprising appearance of independent thinking on top of our more animalistic child within is exactly analogous to the surprising appearance of a rose blossom on top of a stem with only rose leaves.
If you just landed here from Mars, a desert planet, with not one flower at all, and you had never seen a flower on TV, nor any flowering plant; if you were seeing your first rose in bloom; and, the rose portion was blacked out, so all you could see was the roots, stem and leaves, could you easily predict a rose blossom?

No. Only a very poetic-intuitive consciousness would be abel to predict a flower blossom from only roots, stems and leaves.

Contemplating the majesty of how our head quadrants expand possibility in the human psyche, can lead us right into the natural character of transformation.

A rose blossom is the climax of a year-long cycle of slow, patient growth.

Independent thinking-feeling is the climax of 12 or more years of slow, patient development.

Nature’s developmental stages are visible in us. Humankind’s developmental stages are reflected in Nature—as Goethe and Steiner were trying to tell us.

Polarity of Connectivity~Renunciation (surrender)
Building on Goethe, in Man or Matter, Chapter V p. 85 in the 3rd Ed. “The Adventure of Reason,” Ernst Lehrs proposes “the Principle of Renunciation.”

Lehrs describes Goethe’s insight how the leaves of an annual plant have to renounce their comfortable rhythmic growth and predictable alternation to produce something completely different, new and unexpected, a flower.

The comfortable process of leaf, leaf, leaf has to be let go off to concentrate vitality towards producing a flower.

In turn the flower has to renounce its color, more-perfect geometry, fragrance and sexuality to make something altogether different: seeds.

In turn the seeds have to renounce living in the dreamy bosom of the Ur-plant, in perfect abstract potential, to do the work of germinating, sprouting and make the long climb of leaf, leaf, leaf.
Each stage has to give up a lot for the next stage to “blossom.”

Colored shadows demo how all color has a subjective aspect. Let’s apply this to ether studies

colored-shadows4 colored-shadows3 colored-shadows2 colored-shadows1According to Goethe, all hues are colored shadows. Later, color scientists, most famously Edwin Land (founder of the Polaroid Corporation), appear to produce shadows of virtually every hue… (ref)

The above photo-demonstrations serve to bring healthy doubt into Newton’s one-sided, 100% materialistic explanations of color.

If studied, the images suggest a definite subjective element must be part of how we perceive color, how we estimate and imagine polarities where they may or may not exist, how in fact, each person may do this somewhat uniquely.

These photo-demonstrations of colored shadows are part of an old argument which may have new meaning in our post-2012 world.

You may know in the field of “free” energy, older ideas about ether are being revised and upgraded as we speak.

A main piece of the old argument between Goethe~Newton on color can be summarized freshly as:  Is color 100% a materialistic phenomena; or, is a subjective and physiological element part and parcel of how we view color?

This is a microcosm to the identical dilemma and conflict encountered by etheric researchers.  Those who know Goethe’s view of color can propose a useful question to etheric researchers:  Is ethericity 100% a materialistic phenomena; or, is a subjective and physiological element part and parcel of how we perceive and work with etheric formative forces?

If you have seen Chapter 19 of Balance on All Levels PACME+Soul it should be clear how one-sided scientists, paid by corporations, often prefer totally one-sided science, where human ethics, morals and choice are irrelevant.  Conversely, how Goethean, two-sided scientists-experimenters celebrate the etherical, moral and transformatinal aspects of working with ethericity.

The current generations of etheric researchers are intelligent and collaborative. See the free two-hour YouTube video of intro statements by 30 of the leaders at the 2015 gathering of researchers, approximately HERE

However current etheric researchers tend to be less interested in artistic and metaphysical Oneness than Steiner and his immediate successors on this topic in Anthroposophy, most notably, Ernst Lehrs.

Goethean holistic science analogized to “warp and woof”

warp-woofGoethe’s Science theory and method can be analogized to “warp” and “woof” in weaving. 

Warp and woof point to the two directions of threads in cloth. When woven together, regardless of the raw material, warp and woof together, conjoined, have the best chance of creating whole cloth.

The warp is the the laborious footwork of observing your subject, in Nature as much as possible, from as many angles as possible, in as many seasons as possible.  This is the Outer Game of Goethean Holistic Science.

The woof is taking all your external observations, written notes and explorations inside, into your thoughts and feelings:

  • What observations repeat?
  • What patterns, if any, can you perceive?
  • Have other explorers found these same repeating patterns or not?
  • Is you initial question (hypothesis)  still relevant to your own personal growth direction?
  • Do your observations support tweaking your hypothesis usefully?
  • Going all the way in to Imagination, Intuition and Inspiration, what light, if any, do they add to your subject?

When the Inner Game of GHS is complete, then the explorer returns back to the warp.  Time to report your findings to colleagues, and anyone else interested.  We share our of expansive joy.  We also share to see if others can see our openings to negativity, “chinks in our armor,” in our arguments, better than we can.  

Q:  How does this differ from conventional science?

A:  To understand how a Goethean approach differs, the frame has to expand to include the Three Sciences We Use Everyday.  If new to you, read that then come back here.  

The easy way to discern how a Goethean approach differs from conventional science is to go thru the above again in the framework-paradigm of Three Sciences:

The Outer Game of Goethean Science, the warp applies Second Order Science.  DO the labor of observing your subject, in Nature, as much as possible, from as many angles as possible, in as many seasons as possible. View your subject so completely, any second explorer, any other place on Earth, or in time in the last 100 years or next 100 years, can replicate and verify your observations.

Applying the methods of Second Order Science is the Outer Game of Goethean Science.

Then the woof.  We go inside, to our garret, our cave, our study, our meditations and contemplations.  We assess our observations.  We check our notes.  We recall…

“Being a scientist is simply being careful not to fool yourself” — John Carlson, amateur rocket scientist

We accept and admit to ourself our perceptions are necessarily SUBjective.  There can be error.  Bias, prdjudice and intolerance can all be uncovered and rooted out.  We check and often re-check to remove First Order Science distortions due to imperfect subjective perception. 

That’s not all.  We check ourself to see how we have changed observing our subject.  We also check to discern how observing our subject has changed us.  Maybe in observing birds and wildlife covered in oil from an offshore oil spill we come to a greater appreciation of and dedication to renewable forms of energy.  Noticing how we change in studying our subject is First Order Science.

Third Order Science appears in our moral-ethical conclusions based on our outer exploration and inner cogitations.  Perhaps as was done by some in the 1960s, our outer experiences and inner contemplations causes a few of us to conclude the military draft of young men forcing them to be footsoldiers in wars is unethical, cannot be supported and actions against this form of mind control are beneficial to the majority of people.  Perhaps we are so convicted of this view, a few of us collect bottles of cow’s blood, break into an Army recruiting office at night, and pour blood on all the files and documents we can find.  

This is how applying Goethean Science can lead to acts of civil disobedience.  Thoreau at least would applaud.  

Guess what?  The “powers that be” including virtually all corporations, understand this possible outcome of applying science in its holistic form (Goethean).  They don’t want this.  

How to control science to it remains the handmaiden of corporate interests?  You pay your scientists.  You pay them in part to make an unspoken bargain for them to keep their subjective (First Order Science) and moral-etheric considerations (Third Order Science) off the table, out of sight and out of mind.  

In this way, since about 1940 or 1950, science restricts itself more and more to uncovering only what the “powers that be” including virtually all corporations, wish to have uncovered and discovered; that is, more things to make them profitable.  

The above suggests why Goethean holistic science is potentially dangerous to the current status quo of elites; and, why science must be controlled as it currently is in early 2018. 

Written by Bruce Dickson, HolisticBrainBalance.wordpress.com

Goethean science as big tent for science and psychology

tent_bigThe idea of a “big tent” in psychology goes like this:  what theory of psychology is sufficiently broad and inclusive so it could embrace, support, shelter and nurture diverse techniques-methods under a single roof?  A “big tent” is a metaphor for a big idea, under which subordinate ideas can gather, identify common ground, find support and engage constructively.

In the 20th century, scores of competing models of the human psyche, each attempted to uncover strong therapeutic direction, what to do with this client in this circumstance.  This intention was healing, even tho many times between models, “the words got in the way.”

Academic psych texts, God bless them, often compounded this problem by comparing and contrasting psychological models.  This emphasized the individuality of each tree in psychology at the cost of a sense of direction and purpose to the whole forest.  This is why Gerald Corey’s Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy, latest edition, is so well-respected.  He minimizes the conflict between facets of the field, emphasizing a synthetic and collaborative approach.

It’s September, 2014 now as I write this.  After 45 minutes of search and reading, Mr. Google has convinced me the topic of a “big tent” in psychology exists; however, the issue is no longer of much interest, addressed mostly in brief remarks to build consensus in opening talks at live, in-person, psychological conferences.

I agree, we do not want to return to the 1850s when primitive ideas about the human psyche, how humans compare to animals; and, whether humans are or are not “spiritual” resulted in knock-down, drag-out fights and heated debate.  Looking back, these seem no more productive than other unnecessary wars fought by men.

Mr. Google persuades me today the foundation on which a big tent for psychology can be erected—if possible—has nothing to do with psychology per se.  It has to do with science. 

In psychology we are, it seems, arguing with on diverse assumptions about science, physics and metaphysics–without recognizing our rhetorical ground is not level.

Mr. Google suggests where most thinkers on big tents in psychology get stuck is in defining science.  They want to define science.  They want one science, with these principles, these values and their definition.  They want a one-pointed science as their big tent in science.  Then they attempt to shoe-horn the human psyche into this mental definition of “science.” Continue reading