A Phenomenological Beginning

[N]o matter what we do, life will bring obstacles, challenges, painful experiences, and losses. When things get too difficult and devastating, we can call on the large cosmic perspective that we have discovered in our inner quest.

Stanislov Grof, The Cosmic Game

There are two ways we can study the mind, one from the "outside" and the other from the "inside." A study of mind from the outside is more typical of the modern scientific method, whereby an "objective" observer-investigator might dissect the brain, study its gross morphology, delineate its various microscopic and macroscopic structures and pathways, and extract and elucidate its many cellular and chemical components and connections. So too from this outside perspective, the observer-investigator can study mind-brain through various tests of behavior and intelligence, provoked situations and stimulus-response reflexes, measured outcomes and descriptions of neurological pathologies and accidents and on and on. There are all sorts of ways to study the mind-brain from the outside.

And yet, none of these outside methods would ever provide any sort of clue as to what it means to have a mind or what it feels like to be a conscious, sentient being. Foremost, to understand mind you must first have one. Without first hand possession, brain science is mere physical dissection and description, which only takes the investigator so far. So too, the psychologist who operates solely from the outside perspective of investigation without the highest vigilance of his/her own mental subjectivity, risks the same dead-end conundrum that eventually befalls the quantum scientist or any investigator following a purely objective approach. When it comes down to it, as edifying as it may be, a study of mind from the outside does not, and cannot, get the investigator to the root of consciousness and being.
At least a few searchers have realized this all along. Mystics from all camps and cultures, East to West fall into this category, including the pre-Socratic Greeks I've mentioned, whose primary mode of investigation, as with many philosophers, lay in introspection. Einstein too might be included in this group, as his internal "thought experiments" are what enabled him to see what no apparatus had yet been designed to detect. In fact it was one of Einstein's German contemporaries, philosopher Edmund Husserl who offered the modern articulation of this type of "inside" investigation. Borrowing from Hegel, he called it phenomenology.

From Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung to Stanislav Grof, Stanley Krippner and Charles Tart, a historical study on the growth and development of the field of human psychology from the late 19th century to the present would itself be instructive of the growth and development of the individual human psyche. While even a brief overview of this history would require a book by itself, we might sketch the briefest generalization here.

Beginning with Freud, the human mind is studied from the outside. That is, the clinical investigator delves into the psyche of the patient and through in-depth analysis there are uncovered various childhood traumas and instinctual desires which demand attention and resolution for healthy functioning. Ok, not a bad start for an inquiry into human psychology, but a number of problems begin to surface, cultural bias and the limitations of objective analysis for instance. As the individual psyche is further explored, interjections and interpretations of the investigator, as well as the influence and basis of the "collective" psyche come into play. Psychoanalysis begins to reveal not just the source of pathologies and problems, but a wellspring of human growth and potential. What's more, spiritual dimensions begin to surface. Seeing this happen, Jung breaks away from Freud.

Phenomenology, the systematic reflection on and analysis of consciousness comes into play. The therapist jumps on the couch himself. Introspection and self-exploration are deemed not only valid but necessary means to a full understanding of psychic functioning. The fields of depth psychology and Gestalt therapy emerge, paying special attention to process and therapist-patient interaction. Humanistic psychology comes to the forefront as
relationship and ethical considerations are seen as key ingredients for healthy psychic functioning. Behaviorist psychology, with its more objective-mechanistic views of mind take a back seat along with Newton.

Deeper still into the human psyche, we touch upon our ancient roots and connections, as well as imagine our highest aspirations. The human potential movement gets going. So does the field of transpersonal psychology, along with its acceptance and utilization of altered states of consciousness. For it is found that in stepping outside the usual, and often conditioned, realms of human awareness that we see who we are beyond human, our fundamental animal roots and desires, as well as our loftiest dreams and ambitions. Finally we see ourselves as part of an ever-ongoing evolutionary process of mind, body and spirit---one in which we humans are but a part. Yet, however paradoxical, it is seeing ourselves in this bigger picture, in this context of existence beyond human, that we become whole. As it is here that we see the simultaneous connection of self and source, and the Divine therein.

Historical details and accounts might vary, and I realize I've skipped many steps and left many blanks, but I think this briefest sketch of the growth and development of the field of modern psychology illustrates how the evolution of a whole can reflect the evolution of a part. And I think visa versa, as wholes and parts develop simultaneously in concert. In this example we see how the whole-part starts as a child, naive and innocent, thinking itself separate from its environment until, after much questioning and exploration, injury and healing, insight and revelation, it finds itself grown-up, mature, whole, expressing itself both rationally and artistically in this divine milieu. Herein thefield of psychology itself, as with Maslow's individual human, self-actualizes and transcends.

Back to the beginning. Two ways to study the mind. One from the outside, an objective observer, separate from the subject at hand.  And another from the inside, looking within, oneself the subject of investigation. It is posited that today's predominant culture places too much emphasis on the former and not enough on the latter. No doubt both approaches are necessary to existence. So where's the balance?