Theoretical Foundations of
Process Work:
Exploring the Connections Between
Psychology and Physics
By Alan James Strachan, Ph.D
(originally published in Journal
of Process Oriented Psychology, 7/2, 43-51)
Introduction
At
first glance, the sciences of physics and psychology appear to be at opposite
ends of a continuum. Traditionally, physics is the ultimate objective science, probing into
the essential nature of the universe, the pillar upon which all other branches
of sciences rest. It is the ultimate
“hard” science.
Psychology
is the study of subjectivity, of the elusive, invisible, ever-changing
landscape of perception, emotion, and cognition. In some ways it is the ultimate “soft” science.
The
Cartesian and Newtonian paradigms support this dichotomy, but the perspective
of modern physics does not. According to neuroscientist Karl Pribram, the convergence of physics and
psychology is necessary if we are to understand the nature of the mind and the
universe in which we live:
Thus
modern physicists and modern perceptual psychologists have converged onto a set
of issues that neither can solve alone. If the psychologist is interested in the nature of the conditions which
produce the world of appearances, he must attend to the inquiries of the
physicist. If the physicist is to
understand the observations which he is attempting to systematize, he must
learn something of the nature of the psychological process of making
observations (1978: 15).
One of
the unique aspects of Process-Oriented Psychology is the degree to which
Mindell has integrated the discoveries of modern physics with the theoretical
and practical aspects of process work. Mindell earned an M.S. in Physics before studying Jungian psychology, and
has been working on this integration for over 30 years. In the foreword to his Ph.D.
dissertation in psychology Mindell wrote:
. . . I concentrated my studies in
college on physics, only to become dissatisfied with the scientific lack of
concern for the personal aspect of events. Hoping to find a more holistic approach, I studied depth
psychology. I still remember one
of my first dreams in analysis. I
was sitting listening to a lecture by Dr. Jung. After the lecture he approached me and said: “Don't you know
what you should be doing with your life?!” “No,” I replied. “Find the connections between psychology and physics,” he declared
(1976: i).
In
creating Process-Oriented Psychology, Mindell has relied to a great extent upon
the theories of modern physics. In
the following sections, I briefly outline classical and modern physics, and
then describe several themes Mindell has pursued, including: process as a
unifying concept, the incorporation of relativity theory, the adoption of a
phenomenological attitude, the perspective of modern physics on the body, and
the individual's relationship to the world.
Classical Physics
The
central figure in the development of classical physics was Sir Isaac Newton.
Newton synthesized the works of Copernicus, Kepler, Bacon, Galileo, and
Descartes by developing a consistent mathematical theory to describe the
behavior of natural phenomena. Newtonian physics was the most important scientific development of
seventeenth-century science and remained the cornerstone of scientific thought
for hundreds of years.
Newton's
theory made specific assumptions about the nature of the universe. According to Newton all physical events
occur within the three-dimensional space of classical Euclidean geometry. It is an absolute space that is
considered to be eternally at rest and unchangeable. Time is regarded as a completely separate dimension from
space. Time is also absolute,
flowing uniformly from the past to the present and on into the future. All changes in the physical universe
can be measured as a function of time.
Newton
believed the fundamental building blocks of the material world to be small,
solid and indestructible pieces of matter. All matter was considered to be
homogeneous, i.e., made of the same substance. One material differed from another because the basic
particles were more or less densely packed.
All
movement was conceived to be generated by the mutual attraction of material
objects, i.e., by the force of gravity. Newton's genius was that he was able to describe the effects of gravity
on material objects in precise mathematical terms. To do this he had to invent differential calculus.
Newton's equations of motion are
the basis of classical mechanics. They were considered to be fixed laws according to which material points
move, and were thus thought to account for all changes observed in the physical
world. In the Newtonian view, God
had created, in the beginning, the material particles, the forces between them,
and the fundamental laws of motion. In this way, the whole universe was set in motion and it has continued
to run ever since, like a machine, governed by immutable laws.
The mechanistic view of nature
is thus closely related to a rigorous determinism. The giant cosmic machine was seen as being completely causal
and determinate. All that happened
had a definite cause and gave rise to a definite effect, and the future of any
part of the system could---in principle---be predicted with absolute certainty
if its state at any time was known in all details. (Capra 1977: 44-45)
According
to this theory the individual observer could stand back from the great machine
of the universe and objectively describe all physical phenomena. It became the goal of all of the
branches of science to achieve such an objective description. Physics became the basis of all
sciences, and Newton's model was tremendously successful in describing, among
other things, the motions of astronomical bodies, the continuous motions of
fluids, and the mechanics of heat.
Modern Physics
Scientific
discoveries in the 1800s made it apparent that Newton's model could not explain
all natural phenomena. Nonetheless, his theory remained the cornerstone of the scientific
paradigm until several developments in the early 1900s radically altered the
basic tenets of classical physics. Of principle importance were Albert Einstein's special theory of
relativity, investigations of the behavior of subatomic phenomena, and the
development of quantum mechanics.
Einstein
published the special theory of relativity in 1905. According to the theory,
...space is not
three-dimensional and time is not a separate entity. Both are intimately connected and form a four-dimensional
continuum, 'space-time.' In
relativity theory, therefore, we can never talk about space without talking
about time and vice versa. Furthermore, there is no universal flow of time, as in the Newtonian
model. Different observers will
order events differently in time if they move with different velocities
relative to the observed events. In such a case, two events which are seen as
occurring simultaneously by one observer may occur in different temporal sequences for other observers. All measurements involving space and
time thus lose their absolute significance. In relativity theory, the Newtonian concept of an absolute space
as the stage of physical phenomena is abandoned, and so is the concept of an
absolute time. Both space and time become merely elements of the language a
particular observer uses for his description of the phenomena. (Capra 1977:
50-51)
While
investigating the behavior of subatomic particles physicists discovered that
every experiment they conducted yielded paradoxical results. Eventually physicists realized that the
paradoxes were part of the fundamental structure of atomic physics, and that
they could not accurately predict or explain results as long as they were
following the tenets of classical physics.
One of
the basic paradoxes is that the subatomic units do not have a straightforward
appearance, i.e., they can appear either as particles or as waves depending
upon how the observer looks at them.
Another
paradox, referred to as Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, is that it is
impossible to know both the position and the momentum of a subatomic particle
with absolute precision. The more
that is known about the position of the particle, the less one can know about
its momentum, and vice versa. If
either the position or momentum is known with absolute precision, then it is
impossible to know anything at all about the other aspect of the particle.
This
means that the observer has an unavoidable impact on the phenomena
observed. For example, if the
observer chooses to know more about the position of a particle, he necessarily
affects what can be known about its momentum. The observer is influencing what classical physics
considered to be absolute phenomena. According to the Uncertainty Principle, the 'objective' universe is
inextricably linked to and influenced by subjective choice. Modern physics holds that it is not
possible to be the detached observer postulated by classical physics.
According
to the uncertainty principle it is possible to predict the probability that an event will occur, but it is not possible to predict actual events. The paradigm of classical physics held
that it was theoretically possible to know both the position and the momentum
of an object, and thus to predict actual events.
Quantum
theory was developed as a means of explaining the paradoxical nature of
subatomic particles. Quantum
theory has supplanted the view of classical physics that there are solid
objects and that the laws of nature are strictly deterministic.
According
to quantum theory, the occurrence of individual events in the subatomic realm
is determined by chance. For
example, a given subatomic particle (X) may spontaneously decay into other
subatomic particles (A, B, and C) whose composition differ from each
other. Physicists, using quantum
theory, can accurately predict that X will eventually decay into 34.6% A, 49.2%
B, and 16.2% C, but they cannot predict whether a given decay will be A, B, or
C. According to quantum theory, individual events in the subatomic realm occur
randomly.
If
quantum theory is concerned with the subatomic realm, what of the macrocosmic
realm of everyday, observable reality? Surely there is a distinction to be made between the random yet
statistically predictable events of subatomic phenomena and the behavior of
ordinary objects such as cars moving on a freeway.
These
ordinary events appear to obey the principle of local causes. According to this principle,
information is carried from one place to another by a signal, and no signal can
travel faster than the speed of light. Therefore, all events must be caused by local phenomena, i.e., phenomena
which are traveling at or below the speed of light. This principle corroborates commonsense observations: a
light is turned on, and then I blink; I touch a hot object, and then I withdraw
my hand. A local event causes
another local event.
Occasionally,
however, events occur in everyday life which appear to contradict the principle
of local causes. Mindell referred
to such a case in Dreambody, in which a woman began to feel intense
pains in her breast at the same time that her sister, in a distant location and
without anyone's knowledge, was visiting her doctor and receiving a diagnosis
of breast cancer (1982: 34-5). This incident appears to violate the principle of local causes. Events such as these are easy to ignore
because they contradict our commonsense understanding of how the world
functions.
Physicists
have challenged the commonsense view of the macrocosmic world both in theory
and experimentally. In 1964
Physicist J.S. Bell created a mathematical theorem which proves that either the
principle of local causes or the statistical predictions of quantum theory are
correct, but not both. Because
quantum theory has been so successful at explaining everything from subatomic
particles to stellar energy, and because a number of experiments have verified
the statistical predictions of quantum mechanics, many physicists have
concluded that our commonsense view of the world, based on the principle of
local causes, is not correct.
But if
our commonsense view of the world is not correct, then what is the true nature
of the world? Physicist Henry
Stapp has written:
The important thing about Bell's
Theorem is that it puts the dilemma posed by quantum phenomena clearly into the
realm of macrocosmic phenomena...(it) shows that our ordinary ideas about the
world are somehow profoundly deficient even on the macrocosmic level. (quoted
in Zukav 1984: 290)
Quantum phenomena provide prima
facie evidence
that information gets around in ways that do not conform to classical
ideas. Thus, the idea that
information is transferable superluminally is, a priori, not unreasonable.
Everything we know about Nature
is in accord with the idea that the fundamental process of Nature lies outside
space-time... but generates events that can be located in space-time. The theorem of this paper supports this
view of nature by showing that superluminal transfer of information is
necessary, barring certain alternatives...that seem less reasonable. (quoted in
Zukav 1984: 295)
As
Stapp alludes, physicists have developed a number of alternative and mutually
exclusive theories which attempt account for the ways that "information
gets around." (See Zukav
1984: 296 and Wilbur 1985: 174.) It is beyond the scope of this discussion to describe these theories,
not only because they are "less reasonable," but also because the alternative
mentioned by Stapp---that there can be superluminal transfer of
information---is the theory favored by Mindell and incorporated into
Process-Oriented Psychology.
One of
the implications of Bell's Theorem is that the random decay of particles in the
subatomic realm is not random. Instead, all
such events are dependent upon something that is happening elsewhere, although
it may not be apparent what the connected event is. That is, the behavior of a subatomic particle is determined
by its nonlocal connections to the universe as a whole. Since these connections cannot be known
with precision, the classical idea of cause and effect has to be replaced by
the broader concept of statistical causality.
The
discoveries and theories of modern physics paint a picture of what may be the
true nature of the world: an indivisible universe in which "separate" parts and events
are connected at a deep and fundamental level.
To
summarize, modern physics has supplanted the basic tenets of classical
physics. Modern physics is based
on the behavior of subatomic particles rather than on everyday sensory
perceptions; regards space and time to be relative rather than absolute;
emphasizes systemic relationships rather than rather than individual, isolated
objects; maintains that we change things when we observe them; does not assume
that there is an objective reality separate from our experience; and predicts
probabilities rather than events.
Process as a Unifying Concept
Mindell
conceives of “process” as a common focus for physics and Process-Oriented
Psychology, and as a unifying concept for physics and psychology
generally.
There
are several ways in which modern physics takes a process-oriented
approach. Physics, like
information theory, evaluates phenomena from a systems perspective, and systems
theory emphasizes process over structure. Modern physics thus emphasizes relationships rather than individual,
separate objects, and conceives of the relationships as being inherently
dynamic. For example, atomic and
subatomic “particles” are now conceived to be bundles of energy, and energy is
continually active, or in process.
Process-Oriented
Psychology also takes a systems perspective. Clients are not viewed as individual, separate objects, but
rather as imbedded in a complex web of systemic relationships. The fundamental nature of these
relationships is that they are dynamic, ever-changing, and always in process.
As
process unfolds, it does so in the form of patterns. In physics, these patterns are described in terms of the
probabilistic wave equations of quantum mechanics. In Process-Oriented Psychology, patterns are attributed to
the organizing function of archetypes. Both archetypes and wave functions are attempts to describe the creation
of patterns out of underlying process. In River's Way, Mindell wrote that
. . . dream work indicates that outer
events are not haphazard phenomena, but conform to patterns and have
meanings. The course of inner and
outer processes conforms to the patterns or archetypes found in the dreams of
the observer. These patterns
create the essence of process, ‘process logic.’ This logic gives coherence to all spontaneous perceptions. For example, apparently dissociated
dream fragments are not independent pieces of some chaos, but cluster around a
particular archetype (1985a: 60).
Modern
physics no longer considers space or time to be absolute qualities. Physicist David Finkelstein considers
process to be more fundamental than either space or time: “classical quantum mechanics is a
hybrid of classical concepts (space, time) and quantum concepts (states,
tests). A more consistently
quantum mechanics is proposed, with space, time, and matter replaced by one
primitive concept of process” (quoted in Mindell 1985a: 67).
In
Process-Oriented Psychology, Mindell referred to this “primitive concept of
process” as the Unus Mundus, or one world, a term borrowed from Jung: “The Unus Mundus is the world of
archetypes in contrast to the world of archetypal manifestations such as dream
processes and synchronicities . . . . (and) reflects a level of existence from
which the manifest world is created” (1985a: 63).
Finally,
in addition to linking physics and Process-Oriented Psychology, Mindell also
considers the concept of process to be a bridge between physics and psychology
generally:
. . . in a post-Einsteinian universe,
where telepathy, synchronicity, dreams, and somatic body trips occur, the
concept of process unifies events which move from psyche to matter,
imaginations into the body. This
concept allows psychology and physics to come together and allows the process
worker to deal with post-Einsteinian signals and channels, regardless of their
inner mechanisms or superluminal nature (1985a: 68).
Bringing Relativity into Psychology
In River's
Way, Mindell
wrote that Einstein's theories inspired him to relativize the channels in
Process-Oriented Psychology.
Just as
Einstein's theories established that neither space nor time are absolute, in
Process-Oriented Psychology, the channel structure is not absolute. According to Einstein, there is a
space-time continuum, and in Process-Oriented Psychology, there is a continuum
of experience which has been differentiated into the auditory-visual-proprioception-kinesthesia-relationship-world
channels. None of these channels
has an absolute value relative to the others, and no channel exists apart from
the others: they are all part of the same continuum of experience.
Many
systems of psychotherapy appear to favor one type of channel experience over
another. Depending upon its
orientation, a school of psychotherapy may favor internal body experiences,
verbal expression, movement, or visual imagery. In Process-Oriented Psychology, it is the information value
of the experience that is important, not the channel in which it occurs.
In
addition to relativizing the channels, Einstein's theory of the spacetime
continuum has influenced the attitude of Process-Oriented Psychology toward
what is “real” and what is not. As
Capra has observed,
We have no
direct sensory experience of the four dimensional space-time, and whenever this
relativistic reality manifests itself—that is, in all situations where
high velocities are involved—we find it very hard to deal with it at the
level of intuition and ordinary language (1988: 89).
In
fact, we sometimes do appear to have direct sensory experience of four
dimensional spacetime, and occasionally these experiences may occur within the
context of psychotherapy. The
process worker cannot simply dismiss experiences that are unique or unusual,
such as telepathy or a synchronistic event, but must be receptive to them for
at least two reasons. First,
because they may be meaningful and helpful to the client; and second, because our
commonsense notions of space and time are, after all, only relative.
The Phenomenological Attitude
In River's
Way, Mindell
wrote that Process-Oriented Psychology is derived in part from “the
phenomenological attitude of theoretical physics” (1985a: viii). Traditionally, the phenomenological
method is a way of dealing with the information that presents itself to human
experience. In Process-Oriented
Psychology, the therapist takes a phenomenological approach by examining the
facts of perception with an attitude of neutrality.
One of the
advantages of process science is its neutral basis. Since process work is based upon a phenomenological
viewpoint, terms such as psyche and matter, inner and outer, psychology and
physics, are replaced by the experiences, awareness, and observations of a
given observer. Thus the
physicist's approach to ‘purely material’ events is, in principle, no different
that the process worker's approach to body, dream, or relationship experiences. (Mindell 1985a: 55)
Psychotherapists
display the natural tendency to classify perceived facts into specific
categories. Once this is done, the
inclination is to ignore any new facts that do not fit preconceived
beliefs. The Process-Oriented
therapist also categorizes experience, but attempts to remain neutral by
remaining willing, moment by moment, to incorporate information that runs
contrary to expectations. In so
doing, the Process-Oriented therapist tries to stay as close as possible to the
actual phenomenon without distorting it through interpretation. This is true whether the phenomena fit
within a Newtonian framework of clearly delineated cause and effect, or within
a relativistic framework of acausal, superluminal signals.
Although
Process-Oriented Psychology strives for neutrality, it does not claim to be
objective in any absolute sense. Mindell agrees with the perspective of modern physics which maintains
that the observer's psychology affects that which is observed. This means that the therapist will
always alter what is observed, no matter how close the therapist manages to get
to the actual phenomenon.
The
phenomenological attitude does not mean that the Process-Oriented therapist
remains uninvolved. On the
contrary, ideally the process worker is able to participate fully in the
ongoing flow of events even while observing what is happening. This is far from easy, for whenever the
therapist finds himself or herself at his or her own growing edge, the tendency
is to lose awareness. As Mindell
has noted, someone who could continually maintain the balance between experiencing
and phenomenological awareness would “correspond to a psychological ideal, the
integrated or whole individual, someone who is simultaneously involved and
clear about his involvement” (1985a: 66).
Modern Physics and the Body
Mindell's
understanding of modern physics has influenced the way in which he
conceptualizes body phenomena.
Modern
physics maintains that an observer affects that which is observed. Just as light resembles either a
particle or a wave depending upon the nature of the observational process, so
too the body takes on different appearances according to the way in which it is
viewed. For example, if blood is
drawn and analyzed, then the body is perceived in terms of blood chemistry. To an athlete running a race, the body
consists of a medley of proprioceptive and kinesthetic sensations.
Mindell
has referred to the body observed through objective physiological measurements
as the ‘real body,’ while the body observed through individual experience is
the ‘dreambody.’
Typically,
the measurements of the real body are considered to be more objective and valid
than the body as perceived by individual experience. And yet the real body can no longer be considered to be
absolute, for several reasons. The
first reason is that the subjectivity of the observer affects all observations,
so that every measurement becomes relative. Secondly, if physicists view matter as energetic fields of
varying intensities rather than solid, clearly defined particles, then we can
no longer assume that the ‘real body’ is simply a solid object with objectively
measurable qualities.
Just as
a physicist must be able to view light as both particle and wave, so Mindell
considers both the real body and the dreambody to be equally valid:
Both real
body and dreambody descriptions are valid within their own observational
realm. Confusion arises only when
one body description is treated more importantly than the other or when
questions pertaining to one body are asked about the other body (1982: 10-11).
Mindell
thus recognizes the ‘real’ body of objective physiological measurements as well
as the dreambody of individual experience, and does not consider one to be more
important or ‘real’ than the other. Valuable information would be overlooked if either the real body or the
dreambody is not thoroughly investigated.
Applied
to the practice of psychotherapy, this means that if a client reports that the
client has high blood pressure, and also remarks that the beating of the
client’s heart is like the pounding of an anvil, then each of these statements
reveals something about the nature of the client’s body. Taking the first statement seriously
might mean encouraging the client to continue to have the client’s blood
pressure monitored. Taking the
second statement seriously might mean having the client amplify the client’s
experience of the pounding anvil, and thereby discover more about the nature of
the dreambody.
In a
later work, Mindell (1989a) further differentiated the categories of body
experience.
The Individual's Relationship to the World
The
theories of modern physics maintain that individuals do not exist in isolation
from all other people and from the world. Mindell has used field theory and the analogy of the hologram to explain
how the consciousness and destiny of the individual is inextricably linked to
global and universal processes.
Field Theory
Mindell's
inclusion of a world channel in the channel structure of Process-Oriented
Psychology is critical to his theoretical explanations of synchronicity, dreaming
up, and the nature of mental illness. The world channel includes the individual's relationship to unfamiliar
people, and to collective groups of people, such as community, country, and
foreign nations. It also includes
the individual's relationship to inorganic phenomena such as physical objects
and the universe.
Mindell
has included a world channel because he noticed that different aspects of the
world sometimes behave as though they are part of an individual's process. Information can be transferred to the
individual via the world channel in a number of ways. In the case of dreaming up, the information is transmitted
by another person. In the
case of some synchronistic events, the information appears in the form of
animals or natural phenomena. In
some cases, such as telepathy, the transfer of information from the world to
the individual does not obey the principle of local causes.
The
behavior of the world as a channel for the individual has led Mindell to
speculate about the field-like properties of the human mind. As the examples above indicate, “our
mind can be spread over space at any given moment” (Mindell 1989b: 56). In other words, whereas the physical
brain is located in the human skull, the mind behaves like a field of
consciousness that extends throughout both local and nonlocal space. Each person is an individual whose
field includes other individuals and the world at large.
This
same field-like quality is also characteristic of the world itself, so that the
“world is a field, organized by patterns, not by time and space” (Mindell
1989b: 56). The world's field is
inextricably linked with the fields of individuals. Just as the world can be a channel for the individual, so to
is the individual a channel for the global field, which Mindell refers to as
the global dreambody. Every person
is simultaneously an individual dreambody and part of the collective dreambody.
Thus an
individual can be considered as the unconscious or the split-off and dreamed-up
part of another person or group just as the group can be understood as a part
of the individual. If we switch
our viewpoints and no longer consider the individual and his dream as the
center of the universe, but the universe's process as the central phenomenon
organizing the behavior of its individual parts, we enter that part of
psychology which borders upon relativistic physics. (1985a: 54)
The Hologram
In
addition to having a field-like aspect, another way of describing the
interrelatedness of the individual and the world is by using the analogy of the
hologram.
Hologram
theory was originally developed in the late 1940s by Nobel physicist Dennis
Gabor, but it was not until the invention of the laser that it became possible
to create holographic images. A
hologram is a special kind of optical storage system in which an image of the
whole is encoded in each of the parts. For example, suppose a holographic photograph is taken of a tree, and
then the image of a branch is cut away. If the image of the branch is then enlarged to the size of the original
photograph the resulting picture will be of the entire tree, not just an
enlarged branch. In other words,
each individual part of a holographic image is a condensed representation of
the entire image.
In
physics one of the leading proponents of a holographic model of the nature of
reality and consciousness is David Bohm (1980). Bohm's theory is an attempt to account for the difference
between the manifest world of appearances, in which objects appear separate and
distant, and the underlying, hidden reality, which is indivisible and
connected. Bohm refers to the
phenomenal world, in which objects and events that appear to be separate and
discrete in space and time, as the explicate or unfolded order. The explicate realm is contained within
and generated by a more fundamental realm of undivided wholeness which he terms
the implicate or enfolded order. Because the implicate whole is available to each explicate part, Bohm's
model is a holographic one.
A
holographic model of the universe depicts the relationship of a part to the
whole in a very different manner than the Newtonian, mechanistic model. The Newtonian model emphasizes
substance and quantity, so that there is a clear difference between, for
example, a single cell and the entire body of which it is a part. The holographic model emphasizes
information, so that a single cell, through its genetic code, contains
information about the entire body.
Mindell
has applied the holographic model to various aspects of human behavior and experience:
The world
we live in behaves, in many respects, like a hologram. It's broken up into little
segments: nations, cities,
religions, groups, or families, and each of these smaller segments carries the
same pattern found in the world as a whole (1987: 99).
In
discussing the treatment of the mentally ill, Mindell noted that according to
hologram theory the inner personal situation of the client is a reflection of
the outer situation in the environment, and vice versa. This perspective gives the therapist
several treatment options:
Seeing the
world through the analogy of hologram theory helps you understand how you can
change the individual by working with the world or change the world by working
with the individual. Thus there
are two ways of working with hopeless situations, extreme states, and impossible clients. One is by improving the psychotherapy
of the individual and the other is by working on the world situation (1988a:
101).
Synchronicity,
dreaming up, and projection can also be viewed as holographic phenomena since
each of them involve the mirroring of an inner psychological situation by an
external event.
Finally,
from a holographic perspective, our individual problems and joys are also an
expression of a more global process. Mindell wrote that “Your dreambody is yours, yet it's not yours. It's a collective phenomenon, belonging
to nature and the world around you. Your dreambody is you, but it's also the entire universe” (1985b:
71).
Thus
both field theory and holographic theory point to the same conclusion: that the separation between the
individual and the world is in some essential way an illusion.
References
Bohm,
D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Capra,
F. (1977). The Tao of physics. New York: Bantam Books.
Capra,
F. (1988). The turning point. New York: Bantam Books.
Mindell,
A. (1976). Synchronicity: An investigation of
the unitary background patterning synchronistic phenomena. Ann Arbor, MI: Xerox University Microfilm.
Mindell,
A. (1982). Dreambody: The body’s role in
revealing the self. Santa
Monica, CA: Sigo Press.
Mindell,
A. (1985a). River’s way: The process science of
the dreambody. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Mindell,
A. (1985b). Working with the dreaming body. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Mindell,
A. (1987). The dreambody In relationships.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Mindell,
A. (1988). City shadows. New York: Routledge, Chapman &
Hall.
Mindell,
A. (1989a). Coma: Key to awakening. Boston, MA: Shambhala Publications.
Mindell,
A. (1989b). The year one. New York: Viking Penguin.
Pribram,
K. H. (1978). What the fuss is all about. Revision, Summer/Fall, 14-18.
Wilber,
K. (Ed.). (1985). The holographic paradigm and other paradoxes. Boston, MA: New Science Library.
Zukav,
G. (1984). The dancing Wu Li masters. New York: Bantam Books.