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 He writes on Best Practices in Energy Medicine (30 books)

Another blog:

From Gravity to Inertia DRAFT for comment

inertia-k-12-science-physicsFrom Gravity to Inertia DRAFT for comment
Transition from perceiving behaviors as gravity-dominated to inertia-dominated
The bridging rhetoric for perceiving ether

One thing I learned as an elementary and middle school teacher is science is the art of asking good questions.

Tho I have a Goethean Science blog I’m not a scientist by profession. My profession is closer to “mystic.”

I’ve made some effort to stay abreast of topics in New Physics, Etheric Physics and the Electric Universe. I notice a language (rhetorical) pattern that always makes me curious. On the primary questions of mass and movement, which interested Galileo, Newton and I’n sure many readers, I notice writers coming to conclusions before all observations are accounted for; and, a tendency to give up before questions about unaccounted-for observations are resolved. Giving up is not the same as answering a question; clinging to Newtonian principles is not the same as asking and answering questions.

I notice a tendency to close off discussion prematurely and stand on the authority of Newton and Einstein instead of proposing more useful questions. I notice these rhetorical gaps especially in middle and high school science teaching texts and online articles and videos for science teachers.

No such thing as “rest” in our solar system

Mr. Google tells me in Physics, inertia is defined as “the property of matter by which it retains its state of rest or its velocity along a straight line so long as it is not acted upon by an external force.”

However on Earth, anywhere in our solar system, there is no such thing as rest. The solar system is moving. So rest is only relative, one object to another.

What we mean by “rest” is two or more objects traveling at the same speed at the same time. Our perception of “rest” is highly conditioned by “proximity.” The common example is highway driving where a car in front of you or to the left or right of you appears not to move because you and it are traveling at the same speed and direction.

When we expand our perception of mass, we remember there is no “rest.” Every mass on Earth is already in motion. Since everything is already moving, each object has inertia just as much as it has mass.

Mr. Newton, I think, tells us gravity is a universal force; he tells us objects have inertia in proportion to their mass. HOWEVER I can find no observation helping me connect inertia with gravity.

My Goethean observation suggests the phenomena of inertia is very poorly described as a gravity phenomena.

My Goethean observation suggests inertia describes a mass phenomena.

Here, abstract mathematical thinking often intrudes on observation. It intrudes this way: “force X is a factor of force Y.” This is math lingo intruding on naked observation, sometimes distorting our thinking.

If correct, my observations suggest mass is independent of inertia. Whatever inertia is, Mr. Newton tell us it conditions mass to certain behavior: we must do work to move a mass from one location to another, or to change its speed or direction of movement. I observe this too.

What I am not able to observe is this common line of science teaching:

“Inertia: the resistance an object has to a change in its state of motion.”

The above quote clearly connects inertia to objects; it connects mass and inertia, makes mass a pre-condition for inertia. So far I’m unable to observe this.

The newer idea which fits observations more clearly is inertia, whatever it is, is indepdent of mass.

The idea is not unique to me. I forget the obscure references. Anybody know the references?

What I find more in line with my observations is “inertia” exists prior to mass, prior to objects.

What Newton called “inertia” can exist within mass AND exists everywhere in 3D time and space, independent and outside of mass.

When we start talking about observable something existing independent of and outside of physical mass, we are very, very close to talking about a medium within which all mass is situated and within which all mass is conditioned by.

If you like this, we are now miles away from “Inertia: the resistance an object has to a change in its state of motion.”

Once we consider inertia existing independent of mass, we are most of the way towards acknowledging a medium, invisible to merely animal eyes, surrounding and conditioning physical objects in one or more ways.

This is the of my proposal. To take it forward into discussing “ether” isn’t necessary because Rudolf Steiner, Gunther Wachsmuth, JJ Thomson and Gustave LeBon have done the work of documenting ether’s properties. Ernst Lehrs in his Man or Matter 3rd edition 1985 has done the work of connecting all of this with Goethean observation. No need to repeat their work.

I propose this thinking is 100% consistent with the thinking of JJ Thomson, Gustave LeBon, Rudolf Steiner and Ernst Lehrs.

The propositions:
– ‘inertia exists independent of objects’ and

– ‘resistance to a change of location or a change in speed or a change in direction, tells us of a medium thru which all 3D physical objects are already traveling,’

…are consistent with observation. Comments and corrections invited.

If these propositions find agreement elsewhere, they can do away with confused science teaching in the vein of, “Mass is that quantity that is solely dependent upon the inertia of an object. The more inertia that an object has, the more mass that it has.”

To Do possibilities

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.”

Abstract-summary of the Three Sciences we use everyday

Abstract of Three Sciences chapters 19-20 of Balance on All Levels PACME+Soul ~

“Hard scientists,” especially those skeptical of holistic ideas and subjective phenomena, forget we use two other kinds of science every day.

three-sciences-triptych-hi-resThe average adult—especially women–use Three Orders of Science each day.

Second Order Science: Physical survival intelligence ~

Each day we make many survival choices, safe, rational evaluations about how to cross a busy street, drive a car, handle power tools, problem solving; in fact, navigating any new situation unfamiliar to us.

Activity and choices around survival are “real,” are one kind of rational thinking; and, this is one category of “science” we use daily.

First Order Science: Immune System Self intelligence ~

Each day we make choices about what benefits me and only me. Do I like this dress better or that dress? Do I want fish or turkey for lunch today? Is it more beneficial for me to go to bed at 10pm or 1 am? Do I prefer this or that color, style, music, or turn of phrase in my speech?

Down below our neck, in our Small Intestine, our Cell Level Intelligence is “asking” and “testing,” “Is this nutrient floating by safe and beneficial for me to take into my bloodstream now?” Either this nutrient is safe and beneficial now or it is not safe and/or beneficial now.

Even tho they concern me and me alone, these activities and choices are also “real” and rational.

The two above add up to TWO kinds of rational thinking; now two categories of “science” we use everyday.

Let’s pause here to not “selfishness” occurs when the above two sciences get fused, cross-wired. Then “all about me” becomes the criteria for every moment of waking life. In extreme cases, my needs become more significant than yours or anyone else’s. A certain Republican candidate for President in 2016 demonstrated the error of this mis-use of thinking magnificently. We can all learn what not to do from his example.

Third Order Science: Intelligence of the greatest good for the greatest number ~

If you are a mother or a father, you make daily choices and decisions assessing the amount of food, clothing, shelter and resources we have in hand against the needs of everyone involved. In this “science” we think rationally about how easy it is to get more of each resource; and, how each need will expand or shrink in the next time period to come.

In this third category of rational choosing-deciding, I alone am no longer the sole stakeholder. I choose to consider the needs of my children, retired grandparents; and often, extended family members. Even tho thinking here concerns me as perhaps one small part of a greater whole, choices made in this area are also real and rational. Ask any parent.

By my count, this makes three categories of rational choosing, rational decision making, rational evaluations, we make every day, Three Sciences.

Q: What practical application does this have?

A: The Three Sciences may have have the most immediate and timely relevance to methods of holistic healing and Energy Medicine, all of them.

This is because Second Order (ego-survival, “hard” science) has been at war with holism and holistic thought since the 1970s [including everything in Waldorf].

The Three Sciences make the conflict unnecessary. ONE science alone cannot span the range of rational thinking we use every day; on one end, what is beneficial at the cellular level; and, what is beneficial for highest good of everyone and all critters on Planet Earth.

We can, we do, and we must use different Orders of thinking to address issues, depending which scale of concern is before us presently.

First Order Science is the naturally supportive science for holistic studies
How our cells and immune system “think” is 100% First Order Science. Not Second, not Third. First Order Science is the Science of the subjective; where, we honor and uncover more of both its intelligence; and, its limitations.

First Order Science is the key to forward progress in health and healing because ‘each person heals uniquely’ (Rudolf Steiner paraphrase). What is workable to heal me is highly individualized. It may or may not be workable for you. What works is often subjective. Outside of accidents and physical injury, the vast majority of healing for humans must be calibrated to the single individual. Humans are the least herd-like of creatures.

What thinking, which Science, characterizes hospital-drug-surgery-medicine? Can you guess?

Conventional 20th century medicine is 100% Second Order Science, the science of physical-material survival and male-ego-survival.

This is why it was pointless for John Thie, DC of Touch for Health and his practitioner colleagues to struggle for 25 years to get T4H services accepted by established medical authorities, why insurance companies never paid for Touch for Health by anyone except MDs. Holistic healing is literally outside what they call and consider “science,” beyond what they consider “real.”

With Three Sciences, we can say, just because holistic idea X is not Second Order Science does NOT mean no science, no rational, no critical thinking is occurring. Critical thinking occurs at three or more levels of intelligence inside us each and every day.

Q: Where does the science of Galileo-Descartes-Newton-Hawking fall?

A: Second Order. The middle Science was the first to evolve. First Order did not get going outwardly until the 1970s. Third Order began with Lincoln, Ghandi and ML King.

First Order Science healthcare has no conflict with Second Order medical healthcare. Why should they? they are separate Sciences. We want Second Order Science healthcare for accidents, injuries, and needed surgeries. We want First Order Science healthcare for most other wellness, health and prevention needs. A future, more Goethean Psychology will address concerns in all Three Sciences.

Dethroning gravity as the King of the Universe

abstract-gravityWhen man in the state of world-onlooker undertook to form a dynamic picture of the nature of matter, it was inevitable of all the qualities which belong to existence, scientists were only able to imagine and perceive gravity and electricity.

In the 1700s and 1800s mankind’s consciousness was closely bound up with the force of gravity in the human body.  Because of this focus, we were unable to imagine or perceive forces connected with levity, in our body, opposite to gravity.  

Nature is built on and between polar archetypes.  This means it was inevitable the ‘gravity-run-universe’ of Newton will eventually give way to a model of the universe built on gravity and its opposite.  Which we call “levity” in Man or Matter.  

[The process of de-throning gravity as sole King of the universe has already proceeded far in the topic of the Electric Universe (, et al) even tho this mis-labels some etheric phenomena as purely electrical.]

To gravity-bound intellects of the 1700s-800s, the only possible counter-force to gravity was electricity. Here lies the origins of our faulty world model, composed of only gravity and electricity, the pro-gravity side of forces, the ‘gravity team.’

We meet the idea of Creation composed and created only by gravity and electricity in the 1900s model of the atom, composed of what?  A heavy electro-positive nucleus circled by virtually weightless electro-negative electrons.  

[Man or Matter goes on to show while gravity is indeed primary, electricity is only a secondary force, NOT the equal opposite of gravity. ]

Heavily revised from Man or Matter, Chapter XIII Radiant Matter p 282.