How big is our inner world

The inner world - every person is a unique universe

According to Reinhold Bartl's model of inner experience, every person has three sources of knowledge or instances.

The conscious “I”, the involuntary “it” and the body. The conscious "I" can be described as our conscious thinking, it includes our image of ourselves with all our strengths, weaknesses, conscious values ​​etc., the "I want (for good reasons) world" of rationality. The involuntary "it" includes the involuntarily arising feelings and impulses, the "it happens / feels (for good causes) world" of intuition. The third instance is the body, which the leading brain researcher Damasio called the stage of emotions. The body reacts to the impulses of the involuntary "It" (Bartl (2016)).

Martina Gross, who founded the first hypnosystemic training institute in Vienna, put Bartl's model in a framework that integrates the timeline:

The experience in the here and now arises from the interplay of the inner world with stimuli from outside. Our brain ceaselessly scans the outside world and, based on all past experiences with a similarity value, extrapolates an emotional evaluation of the current situation. In other words, one could say, based on the comparison of the current situation with the sum of the projections of past, similar situations, it is decided quite involuntarily which experience network is activated. This extrapolation is carried out preconsciously and is always geared towards the desired future and its probability. It provides us with a very quick, involuntary, emotional assessment of the current situation, which has a decisive influence on the experience in the here and now. Damasio calls this signaling system of the unconscious a somatic marker. The evaluation is based on the following scheme: 1. Was good, visit again or 2. Was not so great, if possible avoid it. Gunther Schmidt and Maya Storch (quoted from Gross (2016)) take up the concept of somatic markers as feedback from one's own organism and a reference to check whether something is experienced as coherent. (Gross (2016), Schmidt (2014, 2017))

In the best case, the conscious “I” and the involuntary “it” cooperate with one another in a targeted manner. This leads to an experience of coherence and balance and the feeling of being in exactly the right state for the current and desired experiences.

Mechthild Reinhard, who together with Gunther Schmidt set up the Systelios Clinic for Psychosomatic Health Development, takes up the biopsychosocial model (Engel 1977), which describes the human being as an overall biopsychosocial system, in one of her reflections on the inner world.

The social system stands for the rules of the game of the family, society and the environment into which we are born. As Mechthild Reinhard puts it, these migrate into us and become an aspect of ourselves. In addition, we have our very own biological system, with which we come into the world, and that it only exists once in its respective uniqueness and we also have a psychological system. From a systems-theoretical point of view, it is often described in such a way that these 3 subsystems (social, biological, psychological) mutually become environments within us. The needs that arise around us and in us due to the social system and the very own needs of our biological system do not always go hand in hand. This is where the psychological system comes into play, Mechthild Reinhard sees it as a meaning-giving system that constantly has to negotiate what comes together in one. For example, how we see ourselves, the social environment and the world, and how we see our relationships and roles in and with the world and how meaning is given on a psychological level and this has a physical and emotional effect. The psychological system is the only one that has the ability to separate / split up and involuntarily splits into parts that are associated with the outside world, the social system and parts that are associated with the biological needs of our unique being. We are sometimes aware of this, but very often we are not, but we always have to deal with the physical and emotional effects. According to this way of thinking, the biological system is constantly in the process of balancing the possible contradictions that are raging in the psychological system, in its own perception / perception and meaning, in the limited space of its own body. In contrast to the psychological system, according to Mechthild Reinhard, the biological system is not able to separate or split up. Mentally we can feel torn between different needs and social influences, but physically it is not possible for us to split up / run in different directions at the same time. Physically, through the skin, we have a completely natural boundary to the outside world and internally our body is organized in such a way that it needs cohesion. In the body everything is in constant communication with everything and there is also no classic hierarchy, it is more a constant coordination and cooperation.

Often the body expresses the internal psychological contradiction in its body language quite involuntarily. Therefore, according to Mechthild Reinhard, with regard to mental and physical well-being, it is recommended to build up our psychological system in such a way that we first recognize ambivalence / inconsistency as the fundamental constitution of our human existence. In order to then research, based on this, which ways of accessing myself and the outer world can contribute to the fact that we can view our inner world as a whole world. As a coherent event where all parts have their place and their authorization. (Reinhard (2020))

Bibliography:

  • Bartl, R. (2016). Addiction, anxiety, obsession, eating disorders. Hypnosystemic perspectives for the helpful handling of painful disorders and their protected concerns. C-Seminar Clinical Hypnosis; Hypno-Synstitut Vienna.
  • Fereberger, B. (2020). Resources to stabilize the nervous system in times of crisis. Seminar ÖAP; Vienna
  • Gross, M. (2016). From A for fear to Z for doubt. C-Seminar Clinical Hypnosis; Hypno-Synstitut Vienna.
  • Herr, A. (2017). Introduction to hypnosystemics. Guest speaker in the 1st module of the basic course on systemic pedagogy with Mechthild Reinhard; Helm-Stierlin-Institute Heidelberg
  • Kollar, A. (2018). Hypno meets Brainspotting 2nd C-Seminar Clinical Hypnosis. MEGA Vienna
  • Maturana, H. & Varela F. (1984). The tree of knowledge. The biological roots of human knowledge. Gold man
  • Porges, S. (2010). The polyvagal theory. Neurophysiological basics of therapy. Emotions, attachment, communication and their origins. Paderborn: Jungfermann Verlag
  • Porges, S. (2016). Connectedness as a biological imperative: Understanding trauma through the lens of the Polyvagal Theory. Pre-congress workshop speeches are not enough!?; Heidelberg
  • Porges, S. (2019). The Polyvagal Theory and the Search for Security: Trauma Treatment, Social Engagement, and Bonding. Liechtenau: G.P. Probst publishing house
  • Reinhard, M. (2017). Basic course systemic pedagogy and counseling; Helm-Stierlin-Institute Heidelberg
  • Reinhard, M. (2018). Advanced course systemic pedagogy and counseling; Helm-Stierlin-Institute Heidelberg
  • Reinhard, M. (2020). Extension course systemic pedagogy and counseling including coaching & supervision; Systelios Academy Siedelsbrunn
  • Schmidt, G. (2004). Love affair between problem and solution. Hypnosystemic concepts for difficult contexts. Heidelberg: Carl-Auer.
  • Schmidt, G. (2011). Introduction to hypnosystemic therapy and counseling. Heidelberg: Carl-Auer.
  • Schmidt, G. (2014). Curriculum Clinical Hypnosis (B1-B8) of the MEG. Milton Erickson Institute Heidelberg
  • Schmidt, G. (2017). Self-hypnosis and hypnosystemic self-management. C-Seminar Clinical Hypnosis; Milton Erickson Institute Heidelberg