A Theory of Transformation
(or: A Loving Shove to "Aha!")

A View of Human Nature

Free Will/Determinism. We are conceived in determinism and have the potential of maturing into the context of "free will." In the womb our space is determined by the uterine walls; our biology is determined by the interaction of our genetic inheritance and the early influence of the uterine environment and home environment; our initial biological rhythms are determined by the biological rhythms of our mother; our emotional state is influenced by the emotional state of our mother and, the biological state of our mother (do we know, as yet, whether our "chemical imbalances" cause our behavior and feelings, or vice versa?) during the pregnancy and our early life; and our intelligence and general well being are determined by our genetic make-up and by the amount of stimulation before and after birth initiated by our mom and dad and/or our caretakers. All of these elements have an influence on our physical well being. These statements are supported in prenatal and perinatal research (visit the Association for Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health website for more information).

Our childhood is determined by our relationship with our parents, particularly our mother. Our entire life is determined, in varying degrees, by our relationship with our mother, as identified in object relations and attachment theory. [Note: this is not an indirect way to attach "blame" to mom. "Blame" does not exist in my theory of transformation. Mother is often at the effect of her environment, which includes Father or mate, her parents, her siblings, her children, her experience of being a child, her friends, relatives, co-workers, and her experience of the world in which they all live. The mother’s environment is experienced by the child through the mother.] The security of that relationship will affect our ability to direct our own actions; to act instead of react; and, to foster stable intimate relationships and friendships. Totally free will and choice are possible, not probable. The context of free will is available to those who know about it and who are prepared for it.

I believe it is possible to move from a) determinism to b) determinism, except when we exercise free will, to c) free will, except when we react to external influences. The latter is the "context" of free will. We are free, except when we are not. Since the experience of free choice is not fostered in this society, we have to discover it. At the same time, we still hang on to some of our early deterministic lessons, either consciously or unconsciously.

Nature/Nurture. An important element is often left out of the nature/nurture equation -- the mind. The environment and our view of "reality," which we "inherit" from our parents through our mother, interacts with our genetic make-up long before we are born. There certainly are natural influences. Body size alone influences our role and/or feelings about ourselves. There are also chemical influences that may relate to personality and mental health. However, these influences may be minimized or disappeared (as well as maximized) in the womb. It is very possible that many of the chemical "predispositions" that are thought to affect temperament or contribute to addiction and mental disorders are innate or present at birth but not genetic. The temperament and/or the mental health of the mother may even influence the change in body chemistry of the child (the fetus).

Past/Present. The context of our life is established in the past. A context shift can take place in the present, depending on the depth and focus of present experiences. The future is very "real" when we create it being so, and the fear of what does not yet exist (and, technically, never will) can result in inaction or exciting challenge and courageous action.

We are most vulnerable physically during the first trimestre in our mother’s womb. We are most vulnerable emotionally during the period before birth, at birth, and shortly after birth. We have not yet learned to defend ourselves. I believe we receive constant messages chemically and directly while in the womb and, based on the quality of these messages, we make decisions about how wonderful or not this new experience of life is and will be. It is a mechanical process and, of course, unintentional on the mother’s part. These decisions show up in a child’s mind just as a path appears in a field when a person walks in the same place over and over. It is not the fault of the field, and the person is simply attempting to go where they need to go on the only path they know. A path is created in the mind of a fetus when mom is experiencing peace, love and support, and when she is experiencing loss, repeated doubt about herself, constant fear or harsh treatment. A path can also be cut with a backhoe. Extreme trauma, such as a severe beating or the sudden death of a spouse can have an immediate impact upon the fetus. For example, in The Secret Life of the Unborn Child by Thomas Verny (immediate past president and founder of the Association for Pre- and Peri-Natal Psychology and Health) with John Kelly, research reports that the death of a father during pregnancy has more impact on the physical and mental health of the child than the death of a father following the child’s birth.

These mechanical decisions create a new context, or general condition, of life, replacing our natural context of peace. Context, however crude or generalized, is context, and it is very powerful. It is the origin of "self-fulfilling prophecy." The textbook of my early Christian education states, "As a man (and woman) thinketh, so is (s)he." Our perception of life is established very early, and we continue to prove that our perception is correct until a context-level intervention or transformation takes place.

There are many paths to transformation and a variety of transformational therapists. Fortunately, there is a variety of levels of context (ecstatic to depraved). The appropriate people often attract each other and sometimes both the client and transformer aretransformed.

I agree with a basic concept of object relations theory that a primitive sensory intelligence exists that enables a child to divide the world into satisfying and dissatisfying sensations. However, I think this intelligence exists before birth where the relationship with mom really begins. I also think the fetus has more of a sense of separateness than we now realize -- which does not change the child’s dependence upon the mother.

Universality/Uniqueness. Universality and uniqueness exist in two distinct realms. At one level we are all the same. At another level we are very different. Patterns certainly exist but can be both helpful and misleading when working with a particular person in therapy.

I will comment first on how we are alike because how we are alike is more significant than how we are unique. Patterns, by the way, exist only in the "unique" realm. There are no degrees of universality. In that realm we are simply alike.

An existential theorist, protege of Victor Frankl, and creator of Axiotherapy, George Vlahos, postulated that we all need to love and be loved; desire and be desired; understand and be understood; and respect and be respected. One of the most well known humanists, Abraham Maslow, proposed that all human beings share a set of basic needs. Harold Lasswell, a well known sociologist and political scientist, along with W. Ray Rucker, former dean of the School of Leadership and Human Behavior at United States International University in San Diego, tested their set of basic value needs for over six decades, concluding they are not only holistic but universal. We, as human beings, share the same context (or "context of contexts"), the same needs, the same desire for love and peace. The youth of the sixties were clear about what was needed. They sought love and peace by attempting to modify many of society’s institutions other than the one charged with providing the base for love and peace, the family. The foundation for love and peace begins at home and we continue to recreate it in the form in which we were trained.

The expression of our underlying sameness (our context of contexts) is unique to every human being. It is part of being human. Our uniqueness begins in childhood (including our intrauterine experience) as we learn/struggle to survive in our circumstances. We share characteristics, such as functioning more effectively in goal-oriented circumstances, though the expression of these attributes (such as our goals) is markedly unique; and we share behavioral dimensions, such as extrovertism and introvertism, that point out specific ranges of behavior while allowing for unique expression.

Optimism/Pessimism. We are created in a natural state of optimism and growth potential in a context of peace. There may be exceptions to that but they are not genetically based exceptions. A theory held by some in the field of pre- and peri-natal psychology is that there may even be a psychological trace from the attitude of parents at the time of conception. There are already workshops (in California, of course) on conscious conception. I do not believe or disbelieve this theory (fortunately, it is either true or not regardless of my belief). However, when it comes to the creation of new life I would certainly suggest the safest alternative. That is, I would support the practice taught at these workshops to welcome a new life during intercourse with the purpose of creating new life.

So, most of us are created in a natural state of optimism and growth potential in a context of peace -- or, maybe all of us, even if it is difficult to feel or recognize. I have been doing my own "peace survey" for the past twenty years of so. I have asked several thousand students and workshop participants about their desire for peace. The question has been, "Is there anyone in the room who does not want to be at peace?" So far, no one has raised their hand. Sometimes I ask, "Is there anyone in the room who knows very clearly what pure peace really is?" On a few respond that they do. If this very unscientific survey has any validity, why does everybody want to be in a state in which most of them have no experience?

Everybody does have an experience of peace (except, of course, those who do not -- at least in this lifetime) and it is remembered. However, most do not remember that they remember. People I have known respond with assurance that they want to return to a state of peace without having a clear idea why they are so sure. I believe the experience of peace is recorded indelibly during the first days, weeks or months in the womb. This early experience is largely responsible for supporting thousands of therapists, workshops, off-the-wall groups and techniques, and a thriving self-help book/recording industry. Many other professions and fields of endeavor also owe the "search for peace"
phenomenon a great debt (entertainment, fashion, fitness, spirits, etc., etc., etc.).

The experience of peace may be the psychological state of homeostasis. If we do not know something about our natural state of peace, why would people be trying so hard to get cured of their upbringing? Why is our physiological state of disequilibrium called "dis-ease?"

I also believe we are created in a state of optimism and completion. Emotionally, we are complete and whole. Nothing needs fixed. That is, nothing needs to be added to us or taken away from us to make us emotionally healthy individuals. We are naturally healthy emotionally. Who would not be optimistic about that!? In that completed, perfect state we would not know what else to be.

Maslow has pointed out that we tend to move in a growth direction. If their is a requirement to "grow" psychologically or emotionally, even though we were probably created as emotionally healthy beings, there must be some kind of early intervention that convinces us that our natural state is not natural. In my opinion, this pathological intervention appears before birth in many cases and, by the nature of the circumstances, appears to be relational.

If my theory is correct, the term "growth " is inaccurate. If we are already complete emotionally at conception, then how do we "grow" in life to a state we have already experienced? In order to heal ourselves, we need to remove the barriers we have created (mechanically and unintentionally) to experiencing our natural state of emotional health.  A book that supports this point of view states the view very clearly in its title, Love Is Letting Go Of Fear. Actually, the author apparently supports this point of view and he is Gerald Jampolsky.

This natural and healthy state of peace coexists with love in the context of contexts. The pathological event (aberrant variation in experience) is one of the many manifestations of fear. Love cannot be destroyed but it can be buried deeper and deeper by fear. A child, before or after birth, learns pessimism and can return to the experience of optimism and peace as the barriers of fear are disappeared (see the section on treatment, "A View of Counseling and the Counseling Process").

How do I know our natural state is love and optimism? I do not know it in a way I can prove it. And, I do know it. Additionally, there is some interesting research going on in the field of health psychology and the study of Psychoneuroimmunology. The work of Carl Simonton, Bernie Siegel, and Gerald Jampolsky, particularly with cancer patients of all ages, is becoming well known. At Ohio State University the mind-body connection is being explored by a psychologist and immunologist (Kiecolt-Glaser and Glaser) partnership. The work of the Program of Psychoneuroimmunology at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Medicine is reported in Head First: The Biology of Hope, by Norman Cousins.

The experiences and research results reported indicate the powers of the mind and of love can be employed to heal us physically. If love was not our natural state, how could expressions of love and the experiences of peace heal us? If we were naturally neutral there would probably be no results from this research. If we were naturally evil, it would seem that nasty thoughts and behaviors would return us to a healthy state.

We are already healed! We need to recreate the state of natural health.

Are People Basically Rational or Irrational? Yes. We appear to have been created with a wonderful mix of rationality and irrationally. The "rational" is considered to be dominant by some left brain-right brain theorists (localized in the left hemisphere), while others credit the right hemisphere with the ability to "see the big picture." I theorize that the functions of the left and right hemispheres of the brain were created equal and the dominance of one side over the other is a result of life experience.

Motivation. There appear to be both internal and "external" motivators. However, in the end, motivation is always internal. The behavioral choices we make, however, are sometimes strongly influenced by unconscious internal sources, which may feel like "no choice." When we notice that making choices becomes difficult we would probably benefit from some type of intervention.

I believe we share a set of basic needs with every other human being and we will satisfy these needs in an appropriate manner unless they are thwarted. Then we may satisfy them in an inappropriate manner. The set of basic needs that has been most helpful to me was developed by Harold Lasswell and further developed by W. Ray Rucker. They include: Affection, Respect, Responsibility, Power and Influence, Personal Well Being, Economic Well Being, Understanding and Skill. I have combined this set of basic needs with a planning approach created by Roger Kauffman into the Basic Need Approach to Planning and Needs Assessment. It was the only theory-based planning approach found in a thorough search of the literature in 1991. If you are interested in more information, please contact me at Lynn@BreakthroughExperience.com.

Need is usually seen as the lack or absence of something resulting in mental or physical deprivation. It can also be said that need is an action energy that seeks fulfillment in a culturally appropriate and culturally understood manner. Unfortunately, all cultures do not support need fulfilling behavior and may even encourage unsupportive behavior. For example, I learned that little boys do not cry. Now we are learning that crying is beneficial psychologically and physiologically. Often people have to be taught how to recognize the expression of love when the intention is present and the cues are not evident.

The action energy associated with needs is not so strong that we cannot control our behavioral expression of needs; nor is it so weak that we can control their expression for an extended period of time without some behavioral or psychological or physiological consequence. This action energy is not to be confused with instincts. The expression of needs is culturally based, whereas instincts are expressed the same behaviorally in any context.

We also appear to be goal driven beings. Not many people set goals but when they do it seems to be an effective motivator. Psychological and physiological disequilibrium produce a behavioral response. The clearer we are about our goal and its benefits to us and/or to others, the more likely we will move in the direction of reaching the goal. If we feel anxious or our heart is beating rapidly, we may be motivated to sit down and relax. Hunger, thirst and sex have both physiological and psychological incentives to action. Sex differs, in that satisfaction is usually desirable but not essential to the life of a human being.

David McClelland conducted research and training in psychologically based motivation for over thirty years. He made two or three generations of business people aware of the need to achieve, the need for affiliation, and, later, the need for acknowledgment and power. They each have another side, from the fear of failure to the fear of powerlessness, that motivates people to act. Although the action may sometimes be similar for each need at either end of the enhancement--deprivation continuum (i.e., moving toward achievement or away from failure) the psychological consequences for the individual are quite distinct.

Every day, in my capacity as a business relationship consultant or a health planning consultant, I see the results of the enhancement and deprivation of our basic needs. I have also verified these results in job satisfaction surveys and interpersonal sociograms. Not too long ago, the management of an organization in which I had done periodic testing may have expected the level of morale to raise noticeably after a significant pay raise. Job satisfaction was actually lower than the year before, comparing the results of the same job satisfaction instrument. More money may keep people on the job but it takes a variety of supportive management actions to sustain and improve job satisfaction.