The Power of Self-Empathy: Compassion as Daily Practice

Introduction: Why Self-Compassion Matters

We’re usually quick to comfort a friend, but when it comes to ourselves, the tone changes — impatience, blame, even harshness. Self-empathy flips that script. It’s about listening to yourself with the same kindness you’d offer someone you care about. Far from indulgence, it’s the ground of resilience, healthy relationships, and steady growth.

Different voices point to the same truth. In Nonviolent Communication (Rosenberg 2003), self-empathy means pausing to notice what’s alive inside without judgment. Humanistic psychology calls it unconditional acceptance. Buddhist teachers view it as a practice of directly confronting suffering.
The Dalai Lama sums it up with a line that’s both simple and radical:

“If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion.”
(Dalai Lama, 2001)

Compassion isn’t a mood; it’s a practice. And it starts at home: “If your compassion does not include yourself, it is incomplete.” (Kornfield 1994, p. 28)

At our best, we don’t avoid suffering — we face it with courage and creativity. Real growth means holding both our strengths and our shadows, not choosing one over the other. Seen this way, self-compassion isn’t an escape at all — it’s a mark of maturity.

Self-empathy also means stepping out of the cycle of constant self-criticism. Instead of fueling shame, it offers a ground where mistakes become teachers and pain becomes part of the journey. When we allow ourselves to be human, we grow more resilient and more compassionate toward others who stumble along the way.
Research confirms this link: people who treat themselves with compassion recover more quickly and avoid spirals of anxiety (Neff, 2011).

It is also the practice of recognizing our own worth. Not inflated or diminished, but simply real. In that recognition, we discover that we have the strength to meet life honestly. We stop running from ourselves, and in doing so, find a steadier footing for all the challenges that come our way.

Self-Empathy as the Root of Compassion

It’s hard to meet others with kindness if we can’t extend it inward first. When we learn to look at our own struggles without shame, something shifts: we stop being so defensive, and our hearts open up. Compassion, far from being soft or weak, is actually a kind of inner strength. It gives us courage when life gets rough.

Turning compassion inward also quiets the constant inner critic that so many of us live with. When the voice of judgment softens, space opens for honesty and gentleness. That space becomes a place where healing can begin. Fear loosens its grip. Kindness becomes a daily practice rather than a distant ideal.

Meeting ourselves this way doesn’t make us self-centered. Instead, it clears the ground for a deeper connection. When we stop fighting our own humanity, we become more present with the humanity of others. The tenderness we extend inward naturally flows outward, shaping relationships, work, and community with greater warmth and strength.

These findings remind us that self-empathy is not just a comforting idea but a proven resource. It builds resilience the way exercise strengthens muscles — gradually, through steady practice. Over time, the habit of self-kindness becomes an anchor we can rely on in difficult times (Neff & Germer, 2013).

Here’s a snapshot:
Consider a young professional who made a grave mistake at work. Their first instinct was the usual harsh script: “I’m such an idiot, I’ll never recover from this.” But through therapy, they tried a different approach. They paused, noticed their feelings — shame and fear — and asked themselves a new question: “What do I need right now?” The answer was simple: support and a plan. They reached out to a mentor, repaired what they could, and turned the mistake into a lesson. What could have been a crushing blow became a turning point, all because they met themselves with compassion.

Everyday Applications

Self-empathy isn’t something you only practice on a meditation cushion or in therapy. It lives in the day-to-day moments — how you talk to your partner, how you face work stress, how you deal with your health, how you show up in therapy, and even how you walk your spiritual path.

– In relationships:
When we can name our feelings honestly, we’re less likely to project blame. Instead of “You never listen,” it can become, “I feel lonely and I need connection.” That slight shift turns a fight into a doorway to deeper understanding. Healthy love is grounded in truth and respect, not in games of control. Relationships can also be playful spaces to try out new ways of being together without fear of collapse (Rogers, 1961/1995).

Relationships thrive when empathy becomes the default language. Conflicts still happen, but instead of rupturing the connection, they open opportunities for repair. Trust grows when partners feel safe enough to be vulnerable, and self-empathy is what makes that safety possible. Here,

Maslow’s (1968) distinction also matters: living from “being needs” such as growth and honesty rather than “deficiency needs” like respect or approval. Being needs or values inspire curiosity, creativity, and openness, while deficiency needs tend to trap us in cycles of fear and grasping. Real connection grows when we show up as ourselves — no masks, just our strengths and our struggles side by side. That’s when relationships deepen, because they’re built on truth, not performance.

A closer look:
A long-term couple had been married for ten years, stuck in a loop of arguments. One partner accused, the other withdrew. It felt hopeless. Then they learned to pause and listen inwardly first. The anger was discovered to mask loneliness, and the withdrawal was revealed as overwhelm, not indifference. For the first time in years, they spoke as allies, not opponents. The relationship didn’t magically heal overnight, but self-empathy gave them a fresh path forward.

Soft and Fierce Compassion

Compassion has two faces: the gentle and the fierce. Gentle compassion soothes, nurtures, and holds. Fierce compassion sets boundaries, says no when needed, and protects what matters. Both are necessary.

Compassion activates both soothing and protecting. It is courage in action, not sentimentality. Nonviolent Communication gives us words to express fierce compassion without blame: “I value our connection, and I need to say no.” Living authentically means staying true to one’s inner compass, even when it causes ripples.

Gentle compassion helps us soften toward pain, but fierce compassion ensures that kindness does not slip into enabling. Together, they form a balance that keeps compassion strong and trustworthy.

An example:
A social worker believed compassion meant never turning down a case. They worked until they burned out. One day, they realized, “If I collapse, I help no one.” With trembling courage, they began saying no. Far from abandoning their clients, they started serving them better, with clarity and energy. Fierce compassion saved both the worker and the people they served.

Pitfalls and Misunderstandings

Like any practice, self-empathy can go wrong, very much so:

– Self-indulgence:
Some mistake self-compassion for excuse-making. But real acceptance fuels growth. Only when we accept ourselves do we begin to change.

– Toxic positivity:
Cheerfulness that denies pain. This becomes sentimentality, the kind of “kindness” that doesn’t touch the truth.

– Idiot compassion:
Helping in ways that actually harm — rescuing again and again without letting the other grow—kindness without wisdom that enables harm rather than prevents it (Chödrön, 2001).

– Spiritual bypassing:
Hiding behind spiritual language instead of facing wounds. This is one of the most persistent shadows of spirituality (Masters, 2010).

Something to reflect on:
One man always rescued his brother financially, calling it compassion. But it only kept the cycle alive. In therapy, he faced the truth: this was enabling, not helping. With support, he told his brother, “I love you, and I can’t keep doing this. Let’s find a real way forward.” Painful as it was, that moment shifted their relationship from illusion to honesty.

Simple Practices for Daily Life

Compassion isn’t abstract. It grows through small habits repeated daily. Here are a few simple ways to bring it alive in everyday life:

1. Pause and Name:
When emotions surge, pause to name them without judgment. This loosens their grip.

2. Check Inner Needs:
Ask, “What do I need right now?” It moves us from blame to clarity.

3. Compassionate Breath:
Inhale and acknowledge pain; exhale and offer kindness. Small, steady breaths create big shifts over time.

4. Fierce Boundary:
Practice saying no with warmth and clarity. It preserves both energy and honesty.

5. Shared Humanity:
Whisper, “Others struggle too. I’m not alone.” This simple thought can open the heart.

Self-empathy is strengthened by practice, not by theory alone. Each time we pause, breathe, or name a need, we reinforce a pathway of kindness. Over time, these practices become ingrained in everyday life. As the Dalai Lama (2001) notes, compassion is cultivated through small, steady actions repeated each day.

Peak experiences, Maslow reminds us, often arise from this kind of authentic presence — glimpses of being more fully ourselves. These are moments of awe, unity, and deep fulfillment that strengthen our sense of meaning and renew our life energy. They often arrive unexpectedly, reminding us of what is possible when we live from openness rather than fear.

For instance:
A university student was drowning in exams. Each night, they scolded themselves: “Why can’t I do better?” Then they tried something different. They paused, named their feelings — “I feel overwhelmed” — and their needs — “I need rest and balance.” They took a few breaths, reminded themselves that every student struggles, and allowed themselves to rest. The next day, they felt clearer and did better. Small moments of compassion carried them through.

Conclusion: Courage in Self-Compassion

Self-empathy isn’t self-indulgence — it’s courage. It’s the choice to face life as it really is, without running away. In daily living, it steadies us.
In relationships, it deepens the connection. In therapy, it integrates the hidden. Authenticity here is liberation — a release from old compulsions and roles that once defined the person.
In treatment, this liberation enables clients to act from a place of freedom rather than fear, to respond in new ways rather than repeating old patterns. It marks a shift from living by external demands to living in accordance with inner truth.
On the spiritual path, it opens the heart.

Compassion begins with the self, but it does not stop there. Meeting our own pain with honesty and warmth prepares us to meet the world’s pain with wisdom. Compassion is a necessity, not a luxury. It may not always feel comfortable, but it will always be real.
As the Dalai Lama (1999) reminds us in Ethics for the New Millennium, compassion also carries the weight of universal responsibility — extending beyond the individual to families, communities, and the broader human family.
As Maslow (1968) emphasized, real growth means moving beyond deficiency and into being — a way of living that steadies and enlarges life.

In the end, self-empathy is both the simplest and the bravest practice we can choose. It doesn’t erase suffering, but it changes our relationship to it. And in that shift, we find not only relief, but also the strength to carry compassion into the world.

And so the journey turns outward: from understanding to practice, from reflection to action.

From Reflection to Action

Self-empathy is not just a practice for special moments — it’s a way of living. Each time we meet ourselves with kindness, we create ripples that touch everyone around us. In families, it softens conflict. At work, it prevents burnout. In communities, it fosters trust. And on the spiritual path, it reminds us that awakening is never apart from our ordinary, human hearts.

Reflection to Action Questions:

  • When was the last time you spoke to yourself with genuine kindness? How did it change the moment?
  • Which area of your life — relationships, work, health, therapy, or spiritual practice — most needs the presence of self-empathy right now?
  • How might practicing self-compassion toward yourself ripple outward to affect those around you?
  • What simple daily habit could you begin this week to strengthen your practice of self-empathy?

As you reflect on these ideas, consider how one small act of self-empathy today might open a door — for you, and for others. The practice begins inside, but its fruits are shared.

– Edmond Cigale, PhD

 

References & Further Reading

  • Chödrön, P. (2001). The places that scare you: A guide to fearlessness in difficult times. Shambhala.
  • Dalai Lama. (1999). Ethics for the new millennium. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.
  • Dalai Lama. (2001). An open heart: Practicing compassion in everyday life. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
  • Gilbert, P. (2009). The compassionate mind. London, UK: Constable & Robinson.
  • Kornfield, J. (1994). A path with heart: A guide through the perils and promises of spiritual life. New York, NY: Bantam.
  • Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
  • Masters, R. A. (2010). Spiritual bypassing: When spirituality disconnects us from what really matters. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.
  • Neff, K. D. (2011). Self-compassion, self-esteem, and well-being. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00330.x
  • Neff, K. D. (2015). Self-compassion: The proven power of being kind to yourself. New York, NY: William Morrow.
  • Neff, K. D., & Germer, C. K. (2013). A pilot study and randomized controlled trial of the mindful self-compassion program. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(1), 28–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.21923
  • Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Rogers, C. R. (1995). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (Original work published 1961)
  • Rosenberg, M. B. (2003). Nonviolent communication: A language of life (2nd ed.). Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.
  • Rowan, J. (1983). The reality game: A guide to humanistic counselling and therapy. London, UK: Routledge.

Paradise not lost?

“The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven…”
– from John Milton’s Paradise Lost

The cognitive landscape of the mind possesses a remarkable capacity to reshape situational contexts. It has the ability to reconfigure adversity into a form of paradise or to illuminate challenges with a positive lens.

This notion is in accordance with the top-down processing model of perception elucidated in contemporary cognitive neuroscience, which underscores our capability to actively mold our experiences through interpretative frameworks.

Continuing along the path of cognitive clarity, we come to the concept of neuroplasticity. This phenomenon refers to the brain’s remarkable ability to reorganize itself by forming new neural connections throughout life, demonstrating its adaptability to learning, experience, and injury.

Cognitive neuroscience represents a significant component within the broader domain of Integral Consciousness Studies.

We invite you to enrol in our postgraduate Program, where you will deepen your understanding and integrate advanced insights into your personal and professional endeavours.

Integral Consciousness Studies, postgraduate Programs, INTRO >>

ICS Graduate Degrees >>

Apply online >>

ICS Services >>

The Volitional Brain: Towards a Neuroscience of Free Will

Introduction

In this short article, I write a research-anchored review of what the edited volume The Volitional Brain: Towards a Neuroscience of Free Will (Imprint Academic; eds. Benjamin Libet, Anthony Freeman, Keith Sutherland) sets out to do, what’s in it, and how its central claims connect to core empirical findings.

You can buy the book on Amazon, here >>

What the book is about

The volume collects (mostly peer-reviewed) articles and commentaries originally appearing in the Journal of Consciousness Studies to stage a confrontation between laboratory findings on voluntary action and philosophical theories of agency and responsibility. It’s structured as an arc: empirical neuroscience → clinical psychology/psychiatry → physics-level debates about mind–brain interaction → analytic philosophy of agency/responsibility.

The table of contents confirms contributions from C.D. Frith & S.A. Spence (functional anatomy of volition), Wolfram Schultz (basal ganglia & reward), Benjamin Libet (free will & the veto), Gilberto Gomes (readiness potential), Jeffrey Schwartz (volition/attention and neuroplastic change), Ulrich Mohrhoff & H.P. Stapp (quantum/interactionism), D.L. Wilson (energy-conservation arguments against interactionism), as well as E.J. Lowe and David Hodgson on mental causation and responsibility.

 

Part I — The empirical core: how the brain initiates “voluntary” acts

Readiness potentials and the veto.
Libet’s chapter revisits his classic finding: a slow cortical build-up (the Bereitschaftspotential, BP/RP) begins ~550 ms before a spontaneous finger flexion. At the same time, the felt time of deciding (“W”) comes later, ~200 ms before movement. He uses this to argue that conscious will may not initiate acts, but it can still veto them (“free won’t”) within a late window. This is the central empirical anchor for the volume’s free-will debate.
Cambridge University Press & Assessment
Ingenta Connect

Underneath Libet’s interpretation sits the original discovery of the readiness potential by Kornhuber & Deecke (1965)—a slow, surface-negative wave over motor cortex preceding voluntary movement—giving the book’s empirical motor cortex footing.
SpringerLink

Functional anatomy of volition.
Spence & Frith survey imaging and lesion evidence for a distributed “volition” network: supplementary motor area/pre-SMA, anterior cingulate, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, parietal areas, and their loops with basal ganglia. Their thesis is compatibilist in spirit: “volition” refers to the network’s actions when they are internally generated and goal-directed, rather than reflexive.
Ingenta Connect

Basal ganglia and reward prediction as biasing “will.”
Schultz’s inclusion frames dopamine neurons and cortico-striatal loops as computing reward prediction errors that shape action selection. The implication: what feels like “willing” is continuously biased by learned predictions encoded in BG–prefrontal circuits.
Physiology Journals
Oxford Academic

Interpreting the RP.
Gilberto Gomes reviews what the RP actually measures and cautions against taking an averaged, slow potential as a literal “decision onset.” This moderates strong anti-free-will inferences and foreshadows later critiques.
PhilArchive

What this part establishes: voluntary action is preceded by measurable preparatory activity in medial frontal circuits; conscious intention reports are late; BG-prefrontal computations shape selection dynamics. The live question becomes whether consciousness can still modulate or veto these trajectories rather than originate them.


Part II — Psychology & psychiatry: Can top-down attention change brains?

Two chapters ground the agency in clinical phenomena:

Guy Claxton argues that folk impressions of “conscious command” are unreliable; intentions and actions co-arise within complex neural controllers; consciousness often narrates after the fact.
University of Bristol

Jeffrey M. Schwartz presents OCD as a testbed for willful attention. He describes cognitive-behavioural “relabel/refocus” training that recruits alternative circuits (OFC–ACC–striatal networks), arguing that sustained, deliberate attention can drive measurable brain changes—i.e., volition has causal teeth via neuroplasticity. While interpretive, it connects agency to clinically tracked circuit change.
PhilArchive

Takeaway: In domains like OCD, deliberate attention strategies can measurably reshape pathological loops, suggesting a route by which “will” influences neural dynamics, consistent with compatibilist or emergentist readings.


Part III — Physics & interactionism: where could the mind do work?

This is the book’s most contentious section:

H.P. Stapp argues that quantum measurement gives a locus for mental causation (attention/intention selecting “questions” to pose to nature), preserving causal efficacy for conscious events.
arXiv
Ingenta Connect

Ulrich Mohrhoff explores “interactionism” from a physics perspective, querying whether a non-physical mind could interact with matter without violating physical law.
PhilPapers

D.L. Wilson presses the standard objection: if the non-physical mind pushes neurons, where does the extra energy come from? Absent a precise mechanism, interactionism appears to threaten energy conservation and causal closure.
Ingenta Connect

Why it matters for the book: this section sets the boundary conditions; if interactionism is off the table, any account of volition must live entirely within (or supervene on) physical dynamics—pushing many contributors toward compatibilism or toward Libet-style “veto within the system.”

Part IV — Philosophy of agency & responsibility

David Hodgson challenges a Humean forced choice (determinism or chance) and defends room for responsibility that’s not reducible to either, while engaging with the neuroscientific constraints.
PhilPapers

E.J. Lowe argues for the reality of self-agency and (non-Cartesian) mental causation compatible with a strong causal closure principle, emphasising explanatory roles for mental states without crude energy-injection stories.
Ingenta Connect

Net philosophical move: even if preparatory activity precedes awareness, responsibility might attach to how systems are configured across time (policies, reasons, control capacities), keeping normativity alive without denying the neuroscience.

Where the volume lands (and how it holds up)

Consensus points the book establishes:
(i) Voluntary actions are prepared by medial frontal and BG circuits well before movement;
(ii) Conscious intention is not the earliest event;
(iii) Nevertheless, there is conceptual and empirical space for late-stage modulation/veto and for longer-term, attention-driven plasticity (clinical OCD example).
Cambridge University Press & Assessment
Ingenta Connect
Physiology Journals
PhilArchive

What later work adds:
Single-neuron work in humans shows internally generated ramping in pre-SMA/SMA seconds before movement (consistent with distributed accumulation models). MVPA/fMRI studies can decode simple left/right choices up to ~7–10 s before awareness, indicating that upstream biases are present long before decisions crystallise. These findings refine (but don’t by themselves refute) space for late inhibitory control (a “free won’t” reading) and for responsibility at the level of policy/character over time.
PMC
Nature

To sum up in plain language:
Treat the RP as a population-level preparatory signature, not “the moment your brain decides.” See volition as the emergent control profile of fronto-striatal networks shaped by reward history and current goals, with consciousness plausibly exerting late-stage biasing, monitoring, and sustained training (plasticity) functions.

 

Scientific research papers on the subject of top-down perception, free will and consciousness (DOIs or direct links):

Kornhuber HH, Deecke L. (1965). Pflügers Arch 284:1–17. DOI: 10.1007/BF00412364
– First report of the Bereitschaftspotential (readiness potential) preceding voluntary movement. :contentReference[oaicite:16]{index=16}

Libet B. (1985). Behav Brain Sci 8(4):529–566. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X00044903
– RP begins ~550 ms pre-movement; awareness ~200 ms prior; proposes a conscious “veto” function. :contentReference[oaicite:17]{index=17}

Libet B. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6(8–9):47–57. Publisher link:
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/1999/00000006/f0020008/966
– “Do we have free will?”—accessible summary of the experimental argument and the veto idea. :contentReference[oaicite:18]{index=18}

Spence SA, Frith CD. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6:11–29. Publisher link:
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/1999/00000006/f0020008/964
– Functional anatomy of volition: pre-SMA/SMA, ACC, DLPFC, parietal, BG loops in internally generated action. :contentReference[oaicite:19]{index=19}

Schultz W. (1998). J Neurophysiol 80(1):1–27. DOI: 10.1152/jn.1998.80.1.1
– Dopamine neurons encode reward prediction errors; frame action selection biases relevant to “will.” :contentReference[oaicite:20]{index=20}

Gomes G. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6(8–9):59–76. Preprint:
https://philarchive.org/archive/GOMVAT
– Interprets what RP measures and cautions against simple “brain decided” readings. :contentReference[oaicite:21]{index=21}

Schwartz JM. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6:115–142. Preprint:
https://philarchive.org/archive/STATIO-5
– OCD CBT as a model of willful attention producing circuit-level brain changes. :contentReference[oaicite:22]{index=22}

Stapp HP. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6:143–164. arXiv: quant-ph/9905054
– Quantum-mechanical proposal for mental causation (attention/intention). :contentReference[oaicite:23]{index=23}

Mohrhoff U. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6:165–184. Entry:
https://philpapers.org/rec/MOHTPO
– Examines whether interactionism can be made consistent with physics. :contentReference[oaicite:24]{index=24}

Wilson DL. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6:185–200. Publisher link:
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/1999/00000006/f0020008/973
– Argues mind–brain interaction would violate conservation laws; sets a high bar for dualism. :contentReference[oaicite:25]{index=25}

Hodgson D. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6:201–224. Entry:
https://philpapers.org/rec/HODHM
– “Hume’s Mistake”: responsibility beyond simple determinism/chance dichotomy. :contentReference[oaicite:26]{index=26}

Lowe EJ. (1999). J Consciousness Studies 6:225–239. Publisher link:
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/1999/00000006/F0020008/975
– Defends self-agency and mental causation without crude energy-injection models. :contentReference[oaicite:27]{index=27}

Later context:
Soon CS et al. (2008). Nat Neurosci 11:543–545. DOI: 10.1038/nn.2112
– Decoding simple choices seconds before awareness; supports early biasing. :contentReference[oaicite:28]{index=28}

Fried I, Mukamel R, Kreiman G. (2011). Neuron 69:548–562. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.11.045
– Single-neuron ramping in human medial frontal cortex before self-initiated acts. :contentReference[oaicite:29]{index=29}

Book metadata/contents confirmation:
Google Books record for *The Volitional Brain* (Imprint Academic, 2000).
– Editors, publication details, and contents overview. :contentReference[oaicite:30]{index=30}


– Edmond Cigale, PhD

My story: the magic of integral vision

The progress of science in the last hundred years has been remarkable. The start of the 20th century saw one of the most important scientific breakthroughs, the advance of the theory of relativity (Einstein 2010; Lorentz, 2012) and the introduction of quantum mechanics that superseded deterministic laws of mechanical Newtonian physics (Planck 2015; Gamow, 1985; De Gosson, 2016).

It took almost half a century to see a similar development in descriptive science, i.e., psychology. The mid-20th century saw the fall of behaviorism (Braat et al., 2020); its narrow and deterministic views were challenged by the discovery of neuroplasticity (Ansermet, 2007; Costandi, 2016; Denes, 2015) and superseded by an open, positive, and responsible humanistic worldview (Kirk, 2002; Rowan, 2015).

Humanistic psychology has, in turn, been upgraded into a completely new field of human consciousness exploration, transpersonal psychology (Grof, 2009; Kaklauskas, 2016).

The implications are significant and might offer much more than meets the eye (Cigale, 2011). We are, however, encouraged to investigate these premises and to research and explore even further into the fabric of reality:

“The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery every day.”
– Albert Einstein, quoted in Life magazine, May 2, 1955; Expanded, p. 281

 

Introduction

My name is Edmond Cigale, and I am the director of the Transpersonal Psychology Institute. I currently mentor Integral Consciousness graduate students at Rushmore University.

In this short article, I intend to share how integral studies have contributed to the transformation and brought “magic” into my life. Like everyone else’s, my intellectual growth and inner transformation were idiosyncratic.

In general, there are two approaches to studies: the so-called horizontal and vertical studies. The horizontal study focuses on gathering information and data from scientific research and relies mostly on analysis, linear logic, and understanding. In contrast, the vertical approach to studies calls for an additional and decisive effort: inner transformation, emotional intelligence development, and enhancement of self-awareness.

Under the wing of respected Prof. Dr. John Rowan (1925-2018), my approach to doctoral studies was the latter, as I hope to share in the present text…

 

Scientific vision examined

The sharpness of the scientific mind offers clarity seldom perceived without the assistance of precise scientific research methodologies. This translates in the present context to systematic, unbiased, and independent research conducted in a controlled environment, often beyond mainstream beliefs – research that yields reproducible results open to further investigation.

And it is very comfortable to trust in such scientific reality, a priori, and without ever examining all possible angles. When everything seems to make sense and falls right into place, it seems challenging to do that. It can be difficult to leave the intellectual comfort zone and let go. In fact, why would anyone be so bold as to step out of the proven scientific worldview?!

I experienced two such challenges during my formal studies of the integral paradigm. The accompanying inner growth moved me permanently beyond the mental ego level of awareness (Wilber 2000) and dared me to relinquish reliance predominantly on the intellect.

I faced the first challenge when it became apparent that my belief system about psychiatry as science was utterly misplaced and rather naive. According to independent research (a quick online search on the “chemical imbalance myths and facts” will reveal what I refer to), psychiatry is unable to determine the origin of so-called “mental disorders”. There are no real scientific, biological, or laboratory blood tests (as is the case with physical maladies) that support any of its claims. Quite the opposite, actually:

“We don’t know the etiology of really any of the mental disorders at the present time.”
– Dr. Darrel Regier, former director of research at the American Psychiatry Association (interviewed by CCHR, a new page opens up)

The year I studied modern psychiatry’s history, “science,” and methodologies was the gloomiest period of my life. I could hardly believe what I was discovering; although it was still challenging for me to admit, I was not able to deny how mistaken my understanding was.

The short-sighted belief that the mind-body connection is quite clear and trust in my perception of psychiatric “science” were both affected beyond repair.
Reality vs. my intellect 1 : 0.

The second, less stressful (but quite disturbing) challenge manifested when I studied the basics of quantum physics along with the professional and private lives of Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schroedinger, Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Wolfgang Pauli, Sir Arthur Eddington, Niels Bohr, and Louis de Broglie.

All of these giants of the scientific community and brilliant minds had many things in common. I want to highlight the two most relevant to the subject under discussion.

First, they were unanimously asserting that they were only interpreting reality (basically volunteering that they did not know or could not pinpoint exactly how the universe, at the subatomic level, worked). The famous and universally accepted Bohr’s Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics (Camilleri 2009), for instance, as brilliant as it is, is only an interpretation – one of many, at that – and nothing more.

“The physicist of the latest generation is operationalist all right, but usually he does not know, and refuses to believe, that the original Copenhagen interpretation – which he thinks he supports – was squarely subjectivist, i.e., nonphysical.”
(Bunge, 1967, p.4)

These notions rendered a direct shot to the very heart of my intellect! If the geniuses listed above admitted that science could not provide adequate answers to the most basic questions about reality, who or what could?!

The castle of my scientifically-oriented mind began to crumble, and the unyielding (and illusory, I might add) grip on reality in the comfort of well-established cognitive maps started to appear more like a prison and less like the aforementioned clarity.

The second thing the scientists listed above (most of whom were Nobel laureates) had in common was that they were all mystics in their private lives (Wilber 2001). Professionally, they all subscribed to the supremacy of the intellect; in private, however, they all saw through the intellectual might and ventured beyond it.

“…Here is the place where the freedom of the will comes in and establishes itself, without usurping the right of any rival. Being emancipated thus, we are at liberty to construct any miraculous background that we like in mysterious real of our own inner being, even though we may be at the same time the strictest scientists in the world, and the strictest upholders of the principles of determinism. It is from this autarchy of the ego that the belief in miracles arises, and it is to this source that we are to attribute the widespread belief in irrational explanations of life…
… I might put the matter in another way and say that the freedom of the ego here and now, and its independence of the causal chain, is a truth that comes from the immediate dictate of the human consciousness”.
(Planck, 1932)

These words still get to me, especially considering that they have been spoken by one of our time’s greatest intellectuals and scientists.

A good friend of Albert Einstien’s, Sir Arthur S. Eddington, expressed similar notions in slightly different words:

“…We have learned that the exploration of the external world by the methods of physical science leads not to a concrete reality but to a shadow world of symbols, beneath which those symbols are unadapted for penetrating. Feeling that there must be more behind, we return to our starting point in human consciousness – one centre where more might be known. There, in immediate inward consciousness, we find other stirrings, other revelations than those conditioned by the world of symbols. Physics most strongly insists that its methods do not penetrate behind the symbolism.
Surely then, that mental and spiritual nature of ourselves, known in our minds by an intimate contact transcending the methods of physics, supplies just that…which science is admittedly unable to give.”
(Eddington 2004)

These thoughts had a huge impact when I first read them, and even now, after more than ten years, their power still reverberates strongly in my mind.

Notions similar to those quoted above instigated the beginning of the end of my worship of intellectual strength and its overestimated reach. The gate out of the mental ego identity and its linear logic was in sight.
Reality vs. my intellect: 2 : 0.

Looking back, I can see that I needed those insights as challenging as they were. The expression clavus clavo eicitur really is idiomatic in this case. It would be futile to use something against itself, mind against mind. It was the other way around: I employed the scientifically-oriented mental continuum to examine itself and look directly at its fundamental aspects. And when faced with its own inability to fathom reality directly, without interpretations or symbols, intellect just collapsed and withdrew. And I could move on to deeper states of awareness and identity development (Wilber 2000a) unhindered.

 

Opening doors to integration

It was a real struggle on my part, a real challenge to dive deeper and to let go, I have to admit. And it took long years to become fluid enough to switch between rationality and deeper self-awareness. Honoring the hard sciences and their axioms and being able to let go and immerse into deeper awareness concurrently – I was incapable of making it on my own. I needed help, and I understand that now.

Dr. John Rowan

The support came from my dear mentor at Rushmore University, Prof. Dr. John Rowan (1925 – 2018). He possessed a rare quality of balance between scientific erudition and deep empirical wisdom.

I had the honor of learning directly from him for six years in live presentations, seminars, and workshops on the integral paradigm and various stages of human identity development (Rowan, 2005). I also spent a lot of time with him privately. Result: my perception changed considerably.

While academic erudition and empirical wisdom separately are both quite admirable, when combined or integrated, that is where they shine!

Integration itself can be a delicate subject, to say the least. On one side, we have solid scientific and rational facts (which would be unwise to deny), and on the other side, we have subjective inner events (which we better not ignore) that easily avoid scientific scrutiny. When we journey from hardcore disciplines like cognitive neuroscience or quantum mechanics into descriptive sciences like transpersonal or humanistic psychology, we leave a safe comfort zone defined by the intellect and venture onto the thin ice of subjectivity.

The said integration is the middle line between all opposite extremes (i.e., objectivity and subjectivity) and at the same time (conceptually) incorporates and (empirically) transcends both.

 

Professional success and “magic”

It is rewarding to see that certain aspects of the integration under discussion have brought success to my professional life.

Based on my graduate studies at Rushmore under Dr. Rowan’s wing and after a great deal of inner transformation (psychotherapy, meditation, etc.), I developed a new psychotherapy modality, Transpersonal Cognitive Therapy (TCT®). I established a three-year private school for transpersonal and humanistic consultants, TCT® Academy.

The Program was a huge success, and the therapy itself is quite effective, considering that therapists from other psychotherapy schools seek help from TCT® consultants.

All the science and methodologies supporting the integral vision discussed herein have been empirically and directly validated many times over since 2011, at the TCT® Academy and in private sessions of numerous TCT® consultants. And the same science and most of the methodologies have been integrated into our new graduate Integral Consciousness Studies Program.

The fact that our integral approach is being shared and taught internationally through the Rushmore University ICS Program is quite a message in itself, I feel.

The integral magic, as it were, manifests in my private life as well. I can slide or switch between all existing stages of human identity development (as per the universally accepted Wilber map, summarized in Barret, 2006) easily and effortlessly. In practical terms, that translates to the ability to perceive reality only through the linear mental capacities (Mental Ego level), authentic heart (Authentic level), as a soul (Subtle Transpersonal level), spirit (Causal transpersonal level), or as completely naked awareness (Nondual Transpersonal level).

These skills alone have brought immense joy and inner freedom into my life! The integral vision revitalized my most important relationships and deepened my self-awareness. It continues to offer a positive, effective, and truly fresh way of living in a fast-changing world.

There is another aspect to my story, to be honest. The integral vision always considers multiple angles simultaneously, and possessing integrated knowledge from various aspects of reality has left me somewhat alone. I rarely encounter a person that shares similar integral views on reality…

To make a rather long success story short, it has been a rough ride over the years, and yet, given a choice, I would do it all over again in a heartbeat.

The torch of the integral vision has been passed on to me, and through the Integral Consciousness Studies (ICS) Program, I am more than willing to share everything I have learned thus far.

I want to take this opportunity to extend a warm welcome to anyone willing to embark on the road less traveled, as it were – willing to sharpen the intellect and, simultaneously, daring to experience deeper levels of human consciousness!

 

Edmond Cigale

Listen to voice-over

 

 

 

____________________

Bibliography:

Ansermet (2007), Biology of Freedom: Neural Plasticity, Experience, and the Unconscious, Routledge; 1st edition

Barret (2006), An Overview of Developmental Stages of Consciousness, Integral Without Borders – International Development Centre, download PDF >>

Braat, Michiel and Engelen, Jan and van Gemert, Ties and Verhaegh, Sander (2020), The Rise and Fall of Behaviorism: The Narrative and the Numbers, link >> (new page opens up)

Bunge (1967), The turning of the tide, Quantum Theory and Reality, Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, New York

Camilleri (2009), Heisenberg and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (The Physicist as Philosopher), Cambridge University Press

Cigale (2011), On the pragmatic value of the transpersonal state of awareness:
changing beliefs and emotions, Rushmore University research paper, view/download PDF >>

Costandi (2016), Neuroplasticity (MIT Press Essential Knowledge series), The MIT Press; Illustrated edition

De Gosson (2016), The Principles of Newtonian and Quantum Mechanics, WSPC; Second edition

Denes (2015), Neural Plasticity Across the Lifespan: How the brain can change, Routledge; 1st edition

Eddington, A. (2004), Science and the Unseen World, Kessinger Publishing

Einstein (2010), Relativity: The Special and the General Theory, Ancient Wisdom Publications

Gamow (1985), Thirty Years that Shook Physics: The Story of Quantum Theory, Dover Publications, Revised ed.

Grof (2009), Brief History of Transpersonal Psychology by Stanislav Grof, published in the International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, view/download the PDF here >>

Kaklauskas (2016), Shadows & Light – Volume 2 (Talks & Reflections): Theory, Research, and Practice in Transpersonal Psychology, University Professors Press

Kirk (2002), The Handbook of Humanistic Psychology: Leading Edges in Theory, Research, and Practice, SAGE Publications

Lorentz (2012), The Einstein Theory of Relativity; a Concise Statement, a Kindle edition

Planck (2015), The Origin And Development Of The Quantum Theory, Andesite Press

Planck (1932), Where is the science going, New York, Norton

Rowan (2005), The Transpersonal: Spirituality in Psychotherapy and Counselling, Routledge, 2nd edition

Rowan (2005), The Future of Training in Psychotherapy and Counselling: Instrumental, Relational and Transpersonal Perspectives, Routledge

Rowan (2015), Ordinary Ecstasy: The Dialectics of Humanistic Psychology, Routledge, 3rd edition

Wilber (2000), A Theory of Everything: An Integral Vision for Business, Politics, Science and Spirituality, Shambhala Publications

Wilber (2000a), Integral Psychology: Consciousness, Spirit, Psychology, Therapy, Shambhala, Illustrated edition

Wilber (2001), Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World’s Great Physicists, Shambhala Publications

 

Quick links: