Compassion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n For a quick entry into the concept of Compassion as I use it, [see: “Compassion, basically<\/a>“]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Compassionate healing comes from the inside out. This \u2018inside\u2019 doesn\u2019t just mean \u2018inside the mind.\u2019 It goes deeper within the mind itself in accordance with subconceptual processing, getting to inside mental-neuronal patterns. [see: \u201cInner vs. Outer Change of Patterns<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is congruent with the latest developments in neurocognitive science, especially oriented towards the primacy of neuronal networks. [see: \u201cPatterns in Neurophysiology<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n This leads to a new and crucially distinct take on common factors in psychotherapy.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n These are usually seen as additional, underlying, or enabling the specific factors of specific therapeutic methodologies. [see: \u201cNon-Specific Factors of Therapy<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n The new take is none of the above. This insight is crucial for appreciating this text. The difference is that the Compassion-take is intrinsic \u2015 a fundamentally different way to perform the techniques. Doing so, the \u2018techniques\u2019 cease to be instrumental. One can talk of art or a way of being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Content vs. form<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n [see: \u201cThe Water and the Jug<\/a>\u201d] With a sole focus on the jug, if there is something inside, then it\u2019s by happenstance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A \u2018master therapist\u2019 carries the content inside himself. In the above metaphor, he can use the jug to bring the water. It doesn\u2019t matter so much which jug he uses. Someone may find a new jug and pour the water like a master therapist. The jug will work all right, yet it\u2019s not the jug that does the work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To the master therapist, any jug will work, and even no jug \u2015 special enough. In the continually final stage, he lets go of the jug; this is, he doesn\u2019t use the jug as if this were the water to drink.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The techniques are carriers. That may explain the dismal results from science.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Namely, in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the techniques don\u2019t work since they are operationalized; this is: conceptualized. That is precisely the aim of an RCT. It is also precisely the way to investigate the jug without the water.<\/p>\n\n\n\n No wonder it doesn\u2019t work this way \u2015 being due to the scientific method that only investigates the form. [see: \u201cWHY Psychotherapies Don\u2019t Work<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Example: exposure<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The exposure by itself, as a 1-2-3 methodology, is a carrier. It starts being Compassionately active at the open-symbolic level. [see: \u201cSymbolic Healthcare<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n For instance, in a spider phobia, the spider is a symbol. This is important in its deep meaningfulness. The \u2013 symbolic \u2013 spider is energetic since it is a part of the phobic person. [see: \u201cA Symbol Is Always YOU<\/a>\u201d] Therefore, it is essential to communicate with the deeper meaning. This cannot be profoundly attained through using exposure to the spider as a mere carrier. The exposure is the what; the in-depth communication is the how. Please be aware that this is not a simple thing to do! Contrary to this, it is the mother of complexity. No instrument will do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Example: archetypal analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Indeed, let\u2019s get Jungian. Jung was the first to note that archetypes are hardly conceptual. They don\u2019t speak a conceptual language.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One can see \u2018working with archetypes\u2019 as more direct exposure. Sorry for the repetition: This starts being Compassionately active at the open-symbolic level. An archetype is numinous because of its deep meaningfulness. If you throw this out of the jug, there is nothing left to drink.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Example: insight<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Insight-based therapies don\u2019t work because of conceptual insight. You get the picture without my repetition this time. This is also important within the AURELIS way of coaching.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Insight can be seen as a living entity. It works if it lives inside the client \u2015 which it only does through growing there. [see: \u201cInsight is a Path<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Charisma?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n What is called \u2018charisma\u2019 can be another jug, as a stance that is being used instrumentally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Insofar as the charisma is intrinsically present inside the therapist himself while doing the good work, it is Compassion. [see: “The Coach’s Charisma<\/a>“] In that case, no jug is needed. Any jug may either be a temporary aid or get in the way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n No disease, no diagnosis, no therapy<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n No problem. [see: \u201cProblem- vs. Growth-Oriented in Mental Issues<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although Compassion this way is brought within the techniques themselves, this is not the so-called \u2018medical model,\u2019 which I prefer to call the \u2018disease model\u2019 or the \u2018medication model,\u2019 since medication is supposed to cure disease. [see: \u201cMost Drugs are Symptomatic<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Therefore the Compassion-take is not \u2018therapy:\u2019 no disease, no diagnosis, no therapy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n AURELIS coaching<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This is, also, no therapy. It’s oriented entirely on Compassion. From this, techniques are never used in any instrumental way. Everything is eventually active from the inside out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thus, logically, also the way of becoming a coach. [see: \u201cGrowing towards AURELIS Coach<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you feel for this, please let us know.<\/p>\n