Speaker 1: We were working with kids from the street a lot
Speaker 1: of the time, and they would, you know, they would say,
Speaker 1: if I don't have this protective part of me around
Speaker 1: all the time on the street, I'd be killed. And
Speaker 1: I would say, I totally get that, and we'd respect that,
Speaker 1: and I'm glad that part's been keeping you safe. But
Speaker 1: see if you'd be willing to relax and hear enough
Speaker 1: that we could heal what it's protecting, and then it
Speaker 1: could drop its weapons at the door. And sometimes that
Speaker 1: was literal.
Speaker 2: Today, it's a great pleasure to have Richard Schwartz on
Speaker 2: the podcast. Doctor Schwartz is a family therapist, academic author,
Speaker 2: and creator of the Internal family Systems branch of therapy.
Speaker 2: We cover a lot of ground in this episode, focusing
Speaker 2: on the mean tenets of the internal family Systems approach
Speaker 2: and the notion that there are no bad parts. Along
Speaker 2: the way. We cover a lot of his unique terminology,
Speaker 2: such as the idea of personal burdens, his notion of
Speaker 2: the self with a capital S, and our quote protect
Speaker 2: and quote exile parts. We also discussed the eight seeds
Speaker 2: of self energy and self leadership. Also, things get really
Speaker 2: wild at the end when we do an impromptu therapy session.
Speaker 2: Richard Schwartz helped me make contact with a part of
Speaker 2: myself that has been buried ever since summer camp when
Speaker 2: I was about ten years old. If that intrigues you,
Speaker 2: you'll have to listen to the end of this episode.
Speaker 2: In general, I like doctor Schwartz's approach. I think he
Speaker 2: has amassed a good amount of scientific support for many
Speaker 2: aspects of his theory, and I know for a fact
Speaker 2: that his approach to therapy has helped many many people
Speaker 2: change their relationship to themselves and relate differently to the
Speaker 2: various parts of themselves. So, without further ado, I bring
Speaker 2: you the legendary doctor Richard Schwartz. Dick. It is so
Speaker 2: good to have you on the Psychology Podcast. Thank you
Speaker 2: for being here today.
Speaker 1: Thanks for inviting me. Looking forward to it.
Speaker 2: Oh, thank you me too. I've been wanting to talk
Speaker 2: to you for a long time. First of all, I
Speaker 2: want to thank you for giving me a shout out
Speaker 2: in your book on the Maslow quote about creative self actualizers.
Speaker 2: So thank you. I appreciate that.
Speaker 1: Thanks for the quote. It is very helpful.
Speaker 2: You're very welcome. So I want to step back a
Speaker 2: moment and understand a little bit about what your career
Speaker 2: was before you created internal family systems, thinking, what was
Speaker 2: your career like before that? Were you a clinical psychologist,
Speaker 2: You're a therapist.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so I have a PhD in Maritland family therapy.
Speaker 1: So I was very steeped in the early days, pretty
Speaker 1: early days of the family therapy movement, which was a
Speaker 1: big sort of attempt to be a corrective to the
Speaker 1: excesses of the psycho analytic world. So there was this
Speaker 1: big polarization back then and I was a part of that.
Speaker 2: And you know, it's such an almost not obvious insight,
Speaker 2: but no one's ever made that insight before that you
Speaker 2: linked that internally, there seemed to be patterns coming up
Speaker 2: again and again the way that people were treating the
Speaker 2: different parts themselves. That was akin to the way that
Speaker 2: family members treat each other in the external world. I mean,
Speaker 2: what an incredible insight. You know, when you think of it,
Speaker 2: it's like, oh, that seems kind of obvious, but it
Speaker 2: really wasn't. So can you can you talk me through
Speaker 2: how this insight arose?
Speaker 1: The history of it is again, I was one of
Speaker 1: those obnoxious family therapists that thought you didn't have to
Speaker 1: do anything but reorganize external systems. And then I tried
Speaker 1: to prove that by doing an outcome study with a
Speaker 1: group of kids who had Bolivia with my colleague Mary
Speaker 1: Joe Barrett, and found that we could reorganize the families
Speaker 1: just the way the books said to and these kids
Speaker 1: kept binging and purging, didn't realize they'd been cured, so
Speaker 1: out of frustration, I began asking why they kept doing it,
Speaker 1: and they started talking this at the time strange language
Speaker 1: of parts to me. But I think the big event
Speaker 1: I had several advantages. One is I had assiduously avoided
Speaker 1: studying any intro psychic kind of models, so I had
Speaker 1: to come to the phenomena without any presumptions, and I
Speaker 1: had to you know, be in what the Buddhists called
Speaker 1: beginner's mind. I really had to learn from my clients.
Speaker 1: So for that reason, it's pretty close to the phenomena.
Speaker 1: And that I did have this big systems background from
Speaker 1: family therapy, so rather than just trying to get to
Speaker 1: know one part at a time, or you know, focus
Speaker 1: on them individually, I was very interested in how they
Speaker 1: operated as a system, in much the same way we'd
Speaker 1: been studying how families have patterns and sequences and getting
Speaker 1: caught in vicious circles, and yeah, I just noticed. I
Speaker 1: was in interested in how does this part relate to
Speaker 1: this one? And when this when this part takes over,
Speaker 1: and then what happens? And again it's just using the
Speaker 1: same questions that we were using with families. When your
Speaker 1: father does this, what do you? What do you do?
Speaker 1: And then when you do this, what does your sister do?
Speaker 1: And so I'm just trying to get a picture in
Speaker 1: my head of how this works as a system. As
Speaker 1: you said, I'm the first one to really do that,
Speaker 1: and I think it was because of my background and
Speaker 1: in my naivete.
Speaker 2: I mean, was there like a stroke of insight moment
Speaker 2: here like do you have like a story the founding
Speaker 2: of acid? You know, like you're like I was walking
Speaker 2: and then and then it dawned on me that I've.
Speaker 1: Got a lot of those, but I'd say the the
Speaker 1: biggest early one, because as my clients were talking about
Speaker 1: these parts, I made the mistake that most of the
Speaker 1: fields still makes, which is to assume that they were
Speaker 1: what they seemed like. So the critic was some kind
Speaker 1: of internalized parental voice, and the binge was some kind
Speaker 1: of out of control impulse, and when you think of
Speaker 1: them that way, you're ways of helping your client relate
Speaker 1: to them are limited. You want them to fight with
Speaker 1: a critic and stand up for themselves, and you want
Speaker 1: them to try to control the binge. So I was
Speaker 1: getting clients to do that, and they were getting worse.
Speaker 1: But I was like that man in a hole with
Speaker 1: a shovel. I didn't know to do anything but dig
Speaker 1: deeper and stand up stronger and control more. Until the
Speaker 1: first client that I was aware of had an extensive
Speaker 1: sex abuse history and cut herself on her wrists, and
Speaker 1: so it was driving me crazy. She was doing this
Speaker 1: on my watch. So one session, I decided she wasn't
Speaker 1: going to leave my office until the part had agreed
Speaker 1: not to do it to her. And by then I
Speaker 1: learned learned how to interact with these parts. And there's
Speaker 1: something called the Gestalt empty chair technique, where you have
Speaker 1: your clients sit in a chair opposite their chair and
Speaker 1: be the part and I could talk to it directly,
Speaker 1: and I have my client talked to it. And so
Speaker 1: I was berating this part for a couple hours one
Speaker 1: session and having my client do that, and it finally said, Okay,
Speaker 1: I won't cut her this week, and I opened the
Speaker 1: door of the next session. She has a big gash
Speaker 1: down the side of her face. And that was a
Speaker 1: turning point in the history of this model, because I
Speaker 1: collapsed internally and I spontaneously just said, I give up.
Speaker 1: I can't beat you at this, and the part said,
Speaker 1: I don't really want to beat you. And it was
Speaker 1: that moment where I shifted from the collapse, or the
Speaker 1: coercive place to start with in the collapse, and I
Speaker 1: just became curious and said, why do you do this
Speaker 1: to her? And the part told me the secret history
Speaker 1: of how when she was being abused, it needed to
Speaker 1: get her out of her body and control the rage
Speaker 1: that would get her more abuse, and this was an
Speaker 1: effective way to do that, the cutting, And so I
Speaker 1: shifted again. Now I have a kind of appreciation for
Speaker 1: the heroic role it played in her life, and I
Speaker 1: can convey that to her. And the part broke into
Speaker 1: tears because everyone hated it and was trying to get
Speaker 1: rid of it, and finally somebody was listening to it,
Speaker 1: and so that started the process the big insight that
Speaker 1: maybe these parts aren't what they see, which now forty
Speaker 1: years later, turns out to be true that I wrote
Speaker 1: a book called No Bad Parts, because there are no
Speaker 1: bad parts, even the ones that have done hated things.
Speaker 1: If you get curious and ask them, they'll share their
Speaker 1: secret history of how they had to protect and so on.
Speaker 1: So that's the kind of that's one of the radical
Speaker 1: aspects of iveass that all kinds of diagnoses and syndromes
Speaker 1: and symptoms and uh, you know, perpetrator behavior. If if
Speaker 1: you go to it with curiosity, you'll learn that these
Speaker 1: parts aren't what they say. They don't like doing what
Speaker 1: they're doing, but they think they need to. And they're
Speaker 1: also stuck in the past. So if we were working
Speaker 1: with one of your parts and I said, okay, I
Speaker 1: want you to ask it how old it thinks you are,
Speaker 1: you often will get a single digit. They think you're
Speaker 1: they're still five years old, and they've got to protect
Speaker 1: you the way they did back then. So all that
Speaker 1: was it's just say revelatory. You know. I was really
Speaker 1: hard to believe it first, and once I started to
Speaker 1: believe it, because I started trying the same proce with
Speaker 1: other clients, it was really hard to convince anybody else
Speaker 1: that this was true.
Speaker 2: Yeah, really revelatory. You know, I've spent some time really
Speaker 2: trying to wrap my head around the notion that there
Speaker 2: are no bad parts. It didn't it didn't come obviously
Speaker 2: to me that that is true, and I have been
Speaker 2: a little skeptical of that. But what I've come to
Speaker 2: understand and correct me if I'm wrong, is that there's
Speaker 2: an extra lay of nuance there that I when I
Speaker 2: dig deeper into your writings, that I think I can
Speaker 2: I can rally around. It's that you're you're not you know,
Speaker 2: you're not condoning all the actions of the parts. What
Speaker 2: you're I know, let me get through it, because I
Speaker 2: think I figured it out. I think I figured out.
Speaker 2: I think I get you finally good. But I've been
Speaker 2: trying to wrestle this. What what I'm understanding from you
Speaker 2: is that is that there are bad roles, but there
Speaker 2: there are no bad parts. So there are bad roles,
Speaker 2: there are bad Yeah, you wouldn't write You wouldn't write
Speaker 2: the book. No, bads, you wouldn't write that book.
Speaker 1: I would not write that book.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So that's my understanding of your work. It is
Speaker 2: really nuanced, and it really doesn't give a free pass.
Speaker 2: You know, it's like the old you know, it's like
Speaker 2: the thing you have to accept yourself before you can change.
Speaker 2: And then people always rebuttal and say, well why when
Speaker 2: I accept things that I don't like about myself? And
Speaker 2: then you have to explain to people acceptance is not
Speaker 2: the same thing as liking, you know, accepting, but you
Speaker 2: have to really make contact with the reality.
Speaker 1: But to that, I would add the line that if
Speaker 1: you start to accept this part of you that is
Speaker 1: so hard to accept, it will let you know that
Speaker 1: it's not what you think it is, and in that
Speaker 1: process it can actually transform. So it isn't like we
Speaker 1: go to all these bad roles and we just say
Speaker 1: I can accept you because you're not you know, I
Speaker 1: know you're not really bad, and let them vary. That way.
Speaker 1: We go to these parts to help them transform, and
Speaker 1: you can only do that if you really in your
Speaker 1: bones know they're not what they say that they actually,
Speaker 1: once released from these roles, become valuable inner citizens.
Speaker 2: Well, this is so relevant when I think about the
Speaker 2: proper way or the healthiest way of dealing with bullies
Speaker 2: school boys, or dealing with kids that act out. You know,
Speaker 2: the worst thing to do is to continually shame them,
Speaker 2: shame them for their behavior. But you actually can find
Speaker 2: that when you really do work with it. And I
Speaker 2: don't know if you've done this kind of therapy with
Speaker 2: aggressive boy at young boys.
Speaker 1: US. That's the population I started out with, makes sense,
Speaker 1: besides the believed kids. I was working at a place
Speaker 1: called the Institute for Givenal Research on the West Side
Speaker 1: of Chicago, and so we were working with kids from
Speaker 1: the street a lot of the time, and they would,
Speaker 1: you know, they would say, if I don't have this
Speaker 1: protective part of me around all the time on the street,
Speaker 1: I'd be killed. And I would say, I totally get that,
Speaker 1: and we respect that, and I'm glad that part's been
Speaker 1: keeping you safe. But see if I'd be willing to
Speaker 1: relax and hear enough that we could heal what it's protecting,
Speaker 1: and then it can you know, it could drop its
Speaker 1: weapons at the door and sometimes that was literal, and
Speaker 1: then it could pick him up on the way out.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I've worked a lot with that population.
Speaker 2: Wonderful. I want to start making some link just here
Speaker 2: to some of airs of mutual interest. One. You know,
Speaker 2: I'm a big fan of Abraham Masil and I've tried
Speaker 2: to I have a new hierarchy of needs and wrote
Speaker 2: a whole book and kind of an ode to Maslow
Speaker 2: and extending that work. And he was really obsessed in
Speaker 2: the last couple of years of his life with the
Speaker 2: bite Zatva path to enlightenment. And I love this quote
Speaker 2: from you in your book. You say IFS helps people
Speaker 2: become batisapas of their psyches. And that's really I think
Speaker 2: Masil would have appreciated that. I do. I certainly appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Can you explain a little bit about that path to
Speaker 2: enlightenment and how that is related to your psyche?
Speaker 1: Yeah? So then to do that, I have to introduce
Speaker 1: this other what I would consider to be the biggest
Speaker 1: discovery of IFS, which is as I was doing that work,
Speaker 1: like with the cutting part, or with these critics, or
Speaker 1: even you know, I you know, I didn't conclude that
Speaker 1: there were no bad parts until I decided to work
Speaker 1: in a treatment center for sex offenders and wound up
Speaker 1: working with the parts of perpetrators and would hear their stories.
Speaker 1: So anyway, I was doing that work of trying to
Speaker 1: get people to listen to rather than fight with these parts,
Speaker 1: rather than hate them or fear them. So I might
Speaker 1: be working with you with your critic, let's say, and
Speaker 1: I would say, okay, Scott, see what it wants you
Speaker 1: to know about itself, and wait, don't think of the answer,
Speaker 1: wait and see what comes from that place in your
Speaker 1: body where it seems to be located. And you would
Speaker 1: start doing that, and you might start a decent conversation
Speaker 1: with it, and then suddenly you're furious with the critic.
Speaker 1: And it reminded me of family sessions where I'm working
Speaker 1: with two family members to try and get them to
Speaker 1: listen to each other, and suddenly one of them is
Speaker 1: furious with the other, and you look around the room
Speaker 1: and you see that a third party is queuing the
Speaker 1: one who's angry now that he disagrees with the other
Speaker 1: one too, and there's a kind of alliance that gets formed.
Speaker 1: And in family therapy, we learned to get that third
Speaker 1: member out of the line of vision of the one
Speaker 1: and create a better boundary, and when you did that,
Speaker 1: things would settle down and they'd have a decent conversation.
Speaker 1: So I began thinking, maybe the same thing's happening in
Speaker 1: this inner system. Maybe, as I'm having you talk to
Speaker 1: your critic. A party who hates the critic has jumped
Speaker 1: in and is interfering. So I would say to you, Scott,
Speaker 1: can you find the one who hates the critic and
Speaker 1: could you get it to just give us a little
Speaker 1: space in there?
Speaker 2: The critic of the critic, the critic.
Speaker 1: Of the critic. Yeah, a part that's polarized with the
Speaker 1: critic that's trying to stand up for you. Just ask
Speaker 1: it to chill for a little while so we can
Speaker 1: get to know this critic and in doing that we
Speaker 1: might be able to help it trust that it doesn't
Speaker 1: have to yell at you all day. And most people
Speaker 1: will say, okay, that one did relax back, and I'd say, now,
Speaker 1: how do you feel to where the critic and it
Speaker 1: would be some version of I'm just curious about why
Speaker 1: it calls me names and said from a place of
Speaker 1: calm and confidence and even compare and in that state,
Speaker 1: when I had you in that state, the critic would
Speaker 1: drop its guard and would tell its secret history of
Speaker 1: how it got into their role, and then we could
Speaker 1: actually help it transform. And when I would try that
Speaker 1: same process of getting these parts to open space, it's
Speaker 1: other parts and other people, it was like the same
Speaker 1: person would pop out with those same Seaward qualities of calm, confidence, curiosity, compassion,
Speaker 1: plus four more which include creativity, clarity, courage, and connectedness.
Speaker 1: And when I would ask people what part of you
Speaker 1: is that, because that's great, let's keep that there, they'd say,
Speaker 1: that's not a part like these others. That's me or
Speaker 1: that's myself. So I came to call that thus self
Speaker 1: with a capitalists yeah. And now forty years later, thousands
Speaker 1: of people using this all over the world, we can
Speaker 1: safely say that that sell is in everybody, can't be damaged,
Speaker 1: knows how to heal, and is just beneath the surface
Speaker 1: of these parts such that when they open space, it
Speaker 1: pops out spontaneously. And that's the big discovery of IFAs,
Speaker 1: and that, in going back to your original question, that
Speaker 1: turns out is not a discovery many other psychotherapies have made,
Speaker 1: but is a discovery that most every spiritual tradition has
Speaker 1: made that that's who, that's in our essence, and have
Speaker 1: different names for it, including Buddha nature. And somebody who
Speaker 1: has is in Buddha nature becomes a budhsata. So you
Speaker 1: when you're self led, you just naturally show compassion to
Speaker 1: all these former enemies, both internally and externally.
Speaker 2: Let me ask you a question. Are you familiar with
Speaker 2: the book Your Symphony of Selves by James Fataman and
Speaker 2: Jordan Kruber. No, okay, they're they're friends of mine, and
Speaker 2: uh it's a terrific book that's very much in alignment
Speaker 2: with with your your thinking, but from a maybe a
Speaker 2: different perspective. I don't I don't think they mentioned your
Speaker 2: therapy in there. But the idea is that we are
Speaker 2: a symphony of selves.
Speaker 1: Let me right, let me shut that down.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you can listen to my podcast chat with Jim
Speaker 2: Fataman later, but it's called Your Symphony of Selves. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Are they aware of my work?
Speaker 2: Well, I want to make an intro. You know, I'm
Speaker 2: not sure. I'm not sure. My question is this, you know,
Speaker 2: because your work also links to the work in evolutionary
Speaker 2: psychology on sub selves. You know, there's a like Douglas
Speaker 2: Kenrick and colleagues wrote you know, the Rational Animal, arguing
Speaker 2: that all of these different selves are very rational from
Speaker 2: an evolutionary point of view. So my question is why
Speaker 2: call it capital s self? Why not? You know, an
Speaker 2: alternative path you could have taken is to just say,
Speaker 2: these are all different cells. This is the authentic self.
Speaker 2: You could have called it something like put something a
Speaker 2: modifier between before self, and then we have all these
Speaker 2: other selves. Why is this the self in your model?
Speaker 2: There are other ways you could have gone with this.
Speaker 2: I'm just curious.
Speaker 1: Well, the reason I call them parts is because that's
Speaker 1: what clients called them. You know, it didn't give me
Speaker 1: that far in academia. It's not a great technical term.
Speaker 1: It actually sounds like an automobile, you know, like one
Speaker 1: part or another.
Speaker 2: But it's intuitive, but it'sive.
Speaker 1: It's intuitive. It's the most useful term every Like, if
Speaker 1: I'm talking to you and I say, oh, so this
Speaker 1: part of you does this, you don't say what are
Speaker 1: you talking about? But if I were to say, oh,
Speaker 1: if one of your sub personalities do this, or one
Speaker 1: of your ego states did this, you'd say what are
Speaker 1: you talking about? So so I just tried my best
Speaker 1: to keep the language close to the client and self
Speaker 1: without saying real self or true self or course self
Speaker 1: is the most user friendly word.
Speaker 2: So yeah, there's so much to think think through here.
Speaker 2: You know, I wrote I've been sort of synthesizing the
Speaker 2: scientific literature on what it feels like to be authentic.
Speaker 2: You know, you you asking questionnaires, what does it feel
Speaker 2: like it? And I and I call the authenticity bias.
Speaker 2: It seems that what people call their real self tend
Speaker 2: to be the aspects of themselves that exactly conform to
Speaker 2: the adjectives you used. So you're in all that research literature,
Speaker 2: people will if you ask them, you know, to to
Speaker 2: you give them a list of forty five different adjectives
Speaker 2: and you say, place at one to five scale the
Speaker 2: extent to which each one represents your real self. They
Speaker 2: will tend to put a five to all the kind
Speaker 2: of things you see. They eight things, curiosity, calm, confidence, competiton,
Speaker 2: so basically all the positive things. Now, So the way
Speaker 2: I've seen it, and I've interpreted that, maybe you're nicer
Speaker 2: than me. But the way I've interpreted it is that
Speaker 2: people have an authenticity bias is what I've called it.
Speaker 2: They are biased to only include the most moral and
Speaker 2: good aspects about themselves as their real self. And I've
Speaker 2: argued there's no such thing as the real self, they're
Speaker 2: just different selves, and that the root to growth is
Speaker 2: to actually take responsibility for your whole self, and not
Speaker 2: only and not disavow parts of yourself as not the
Speaker 2: real me. So maybe there actually is greater confluence there
Speaker 2: than I'm making it out to me, you know, to
Speaker 2: your model. But that's the way I've been thinking about it.
Speaker 2: So the thing that seems to be very in wine
Speaker 2: in our approaches is certainly not having shame for the
Speaker 2: other selves. But I would still include them as part
Speaker 2: of the They are really you, right, I mean, they
Speaker 2: still are parts of you, and owning that seems to
Speaker 2: be the part. Yeah, yeah, there you go.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And that's that's the important distinction though, because it's
Speaker 1: one thing to say I'm a manipulative asshole, and it's
Speaker 1: another thing to say I have a part that does
Speaker 1: this manipulative thing.
Speaker 2: But why isn't curiosity a part of you as well?
Speaker 2: I guess is what I'm asking? Or you know, confidence
Speaker 2: is a part of you. Compassion is a part of you.
Speaker 2: You could you could make the scientific claim at all
Speaker 2: either of those things are independent parts. Like the confident
Speaker 2: part isn't always the courage part. It doesn't always come together,
Speaker 2: does it? Do you see what I'm saying?
Speaker 1: I do. So what I'm saying is this self I'm
Speaker 1: talking about that you can access the way I describe,
Speaker 1: which is actually what people meditate to get to. In
Speaker 1: many spiritual traditions. Its described the same way. It has
Speaker 1: those qualities, but there are parts who also have those qualities.
Speaker 1: Now to know which it takes some inquiry. So if
Speaker 1: you want to know there's a part that's super curious
Speaker 1: about things, is that me? Or is that a part?
Speaker 1: I would just have you focus on that curiosity and ask,
Speaker 1: and then you could get an answer about it. Yeah.
Speaker 1: But going back to your original question, which is why
Speaker 1: aren't all of them you? They are parts of you,
Speaker 1: but they aren't your essence. And so I agree with
Speaker 1: the people filling out those forms because you're asking who's
Speaker 1: your essence and they're giving you that. And that's been
Speaker 1: my research, That's what I've found. And the fact that
Speaker 1: they're saying that's who I really am doesn't mean that
Speaker 1: they don't have negative, hurtful parts. And the goal of
Speaker 1: life has actually one goal is to help transform these
Speaker 1: parts and then bring them back home so they're actually
Speaker 1: even more you and they don't stand out and you
Speaker 1: feel much more integrated that way. And let me let me,
Speaker 1: let me go back to your concern about people not
Speaker 1: taking responsibility, because I do remember that was part of
Speaker 1: your question.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, there was like fifty parts to my question.
Speaker 1: Because I've struggled with that, and it turns out that
Speaker 1: it's a much easier to take responsibility for a part
Speaker 1: of you that did something heinous, because it's much easier
Speaker 1: to admit it. Yes, and it's also much easier to
Speaker 1: change that than if it's all of you, or if
Speaker 1: it's you, because all you got to do is find
Speaker 1: the part that did it, and there are you know
Speaker 1: about five ors maybe seven steps to healing apart and
Speaker 1: help it unload the burdens of care. Is it made
Speaker 1: to do that?
Speaker 2: I guess I have a really existential question because and
Speaker 2: I might just be overthinking it, but isn't it an
Speaker 2: implicat logical implication of what you're saying is that within everyone,
Speaker 2: we all have the same essence and it's the positive
Speaker 2: aspects of our being. It seems to me that's the
Speaker 2: logical implication we're saying. And I'm not fully there yet
Speaker 2: because there's let me.
Speaker 1: Positive pause me, because isn't the only positive aspects of us?
Speaker 1: All these parts have positive aspects?
Speaker 2: Okay?
Speaker 1: So The big paradigm shift is the idea that we're
Speaker 1: born with these parts, either manifest or dormant, and that
Speaker 1: as you go through your life, they come when the
Speaker 1: when their time is right, they kind of pop up,
Speaker 1: and they all have valuable qualities and talents for us.
Speaker 1: They they're they're necessary for our thriving in our life,
Speaker 1: and then they're forced out of their naturally valuable states
Speaker 1: by the traumas we suffer, into roles that can be
Speaker 1: quite damaging, and they pick up from these experiences, the
Speaker 1: traumatic experiences what we call burdens, these extreme beliefs and
Speaker 1: emotions that enter them and attach to them like a
Speaker 1: virus and drive the way they operate. So they're all
Speaker 1: good to begin with, and then they get infected and
Speaker 1: they get frozen in time and these traumas, and then
Speaker 1: they become damaging and what you might call bad. But
Speaker 1: releasing them from all that, they'll transform back into their
Speaker 1: naturally value of states. So I'm not saying that self
Speaker 1: is the only positive aspect at all. I'm saying that, yes,
Speaker 1: that's the only part of you that maybe hasn't been
Speaker 1: tainted or forced out of its extremes and knows how
Speaker 1: to heal you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there really is a un under it's nuanced, and
Speaker 2: there is an underlying spirituality component to this because there's
Speaker 2: kind of like a you know, a wholeness unity versus
Speaker 2: fragmented sort of theme going on here, which you see
Speaker 2: in a lot of spiritual things. You actually say here
Speaker 2: at one point. The big conclusion here is that parts
Speaker 2: are not what they have been commonly thought to be.
Speaker 2: They're not cognitive adaptations or sinful impulses. I would argue
Speaker 2: they could they can be cognitive adaptations from an evolutionary
Speaker 2: point of view, but that's that's an aside. Instead, parts
Speaker 2: are sacred spiritual beings and they deserve to be treated
Speaker 2: as such. I really would like to double click on that.
Speaker 2: It's it's a it's a fascinating claim. You know, what
Speaker 2: what does that mean scientifically for a part to be
Speaker 2: sacred spiritual being that automatically deserves to be treated as such?
Speaker 2: Like what is that? Can you unpack more what that means?
Speaker 2: I mean, I wrote the book Transcends, so I think
Speaker 2: I know what you mean, and I think I love it.
Speaker 2: But I would like for our audience if you could
Speaker 2: kind of just explain in like, like what technically does
Speaker 2: that mean because it's poetically sounds good, but what does
Speaker 2: that mean technically, Yeah.
Speaker 1: It sort of means, you know, it's it's a reflection
Speaker 1: of my journey because when I started out, I thought
Speaker 1: of them as little bundles of various cognitions and emotions.
Speaker 1: But they weren't beings. They weren't you know, full people
Speaker 1: or anything inner people. And then over time, as I
Speaker 1: worked with more and more, I got a sense that, oh,
Speaker 1: these are not just little collections of thoughts and emotion,
Speaker 1: but these are these actually have personalities, and they have
Speaker 1: a kind of essence to themselves, each of them, and
Speaker 1: they actually you know, there was a point where I
Speaker 1: didn't know the limits of what you could do with ifs,
Speaker 1: and so I recruited the toughest clients I could find,
Speaker 1: and some of whom back then were called multiple personalities
Speaker 1: or clients now would be called DEID clients. And so
Speaker 1: I wound up with those clients. You can't access much
Speaker 1: self in the beginning, so you wind up as a
Speaker 1: therapist working with their parts directly, talking to them directly.
Speaker 1: Sometimes we're like ten sessions in a row. I'd just
Speaker 1: been working with one of the parts and this I'm
Speaker 1: bringing to you. I don't talk about it all the time,
Speaker 1: but I know you love this kind of intellectual idea challenge.
Speaker 1: So as I'm talking to one of their parts, it
Speaker 1: starts talking about its own parts, and it has it
Speaker 1: self that can work with its parts. And so I
Speaker 1: kind of got that it's all little fractals, you know,
Speaker 1: it's all little microcosms, that each part has self, and
Speaker 1: each part has parts, and wow, who knows how far down?
Speaker 1: What is it? Turtles all the way down or something
Speaker 1: like that, Who knows how far it goes?
Speaker 2: So each one of us is not our own snowflake.
Speaker 2: Each one of us has an infinite number of snowflakes
Speaker 2: within our snowflake.
Speaker 1: I don't know if it's I don't know if it's infinite.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of them. Yeah yeah, wow. So the
Speaker 1: point I'm making with all of that, or where do
Speaker 1: we start with that?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Well this quote parts are sacred spiritual being.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah yeah. So the more I got that, they're
Speaker 1: like seriously like little inner people or inner beings. Some
Speaker 1: of them don't look like people, you know. They when
Speaker 1: people see them, they describe them as an animal or
Speaker 1: something like that. But but they're sacred in the sense
Speaker 1: that for me, what I'm calling self, and again this
Speaker 1: is a big lead for me. I came into this
Speaker 1: work from a very scientific background. My father was a
Speaker 1: big and a chronology researcher. I have three brothers who
Speaker 1: became medical researchers. So I came in very atheistic and materialistic,
Speaker 1: and you know, just thought that way, and then through
Speaker 1: working with these systems, became more and more you know,
Speaker 1: maybe this is like what the Buddhists talk about, Maybe
Speaker 1: this is like what the Hindus talking about. Maybe this
Speaker 1: is like so it became more and more interested in
Speaker 1: all that, and lo and behold the metaphor I like
Speaker 1: best when I'm talking about self comes from quantum physics.
Speaker 1: That photons are both a particle in a wave. So
Speaker 1: for me, what I call self is a particleized version
Speaker 1: of what might be called the big self, or the
Speaker 1: the nondual or the wave state. And when it enters
Speaker 1: us and particleizes, it has boundaries and it knows how
Speaker 1: to operate in this plane. But if through psychedelics or
Speaker 1: some other meditation, you were to leave and enter that
Speaker 1: big non dual, you would feel the lack of boundaries
Speaker 1: and the connectedness to everything.
Speaker 2: You sound like lock Kelly.
Speaker 1: Lock Locks and ifs therapists.
Speaker 2: You guys have worked together, right, Oh yeah sure? Yeah, yeah, No,
Speaker 2: I mean or I should say he sounds like you,
Speaker 2: is what I should say. But yeah, yeah, but yeah,
Speaker 2: I love I love the non duality approach. Yeah, I know,
Speaker 2: it's wonderful.
Speaker 1: So the point I'm making is when I learned that
Speaker 1: parts have that in them as well, then they became
Speaker 1: sacred in her beings.
Speaker 2: Also, yeah, look, there's a real there's a real compassion
Speaker 2: at the base. I mean, it's like you're bringing yourself
Speaker 2: to this approach. You're not. You're not bringing some three
Speaker 2: year old part to help people. So so I want
Speaker 2: to really acknowledge that there is this kind of thread
Speaker 2: that runs around such a such an immense compassion and
Speaker 2: a loving kindness approach, a self compassion approach. I see
Speaker 2: a lot of Kristin Nef's kind of work relevant to
Speaker 2: how you treat these different parts of yourself.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm going to spend some time with her next
Speaker 1: week at a conference.
Speaker 2: Tell her I said, Hi, Hello, so you meet some
Speaker 2: discoveries about parts, and I just want to just listen
Speaker 2: to these discoveries, even the most destructive parts have protective intentions.
Speaker 2: Can you unpac a little bit what you mean by that?
Speaker 1: Well, if you want to go back to the sex offenders,
Speaker 1: for example, so I would work with one of those
Speaker 1: perpetu have them focus on the part that did the offending,
Speaker 1: which they were very loath to do. They hated that
Speaker 1: part and were terrified of it. But I would finally
Speaker 1: convince them to do it and ask where it got
Speaker 1: these impulses in the past, and they would see scenes
Speaker 1: of themselves as children, they're mainly men as boys being
Speaker 1: abused by their fathers, and it wasn't always sex abuse,
Speaker 1: but being abused in some form, And the part in
Speaker 1: showing that was trying to show that when they were
Speaker 1: being abused by this their perpetrator, the part looked around
Speaker 1: the room and said, who has power in this room?
Speaker 1: It's this guy doing this to me. I'm going to
Speaker 1: take into his energy to protect my system from him.
Speaker 1: And so that part gets stuck with the desire to
Speaker 1: hurt vulnerability that it got from its perpetrator, and then
Speaker 1: it teems up with a sexual part to throw a
Speaker 1: coup and take over and do the offending. So When
Speaker 1: I got that, that's when I started to really believe
Speaker 1: there are no bad parts. They're all just stuck with
Speaker 1: these burdens that didn't aren't natural to them, that came
Speaker 1: into their system from trauma. Or there's also what we
Speaker 1: call legacy burdens that come down through the generations that
Speaker 1: aren't related to personal traumas of your lifetime. They're related
Speaker 1: to things that maybe happened a century ago in your
Speaker 1: family lineage, or in your ethnic group, or largest floating around,
Speaker 1: heating around in.
Speaker 2: Our culture at like intergenerational Traumah. Yeah, very compassionate approach.
Speaker 2: I mean, some people you must get over and over again.
Speaker 2: What about Zerio Collers? You you must? You must? That
Speaker 2: must be your the default go to response to when
Speaker 2: you say that.
Speaker 1: I haven't worked with a lot of serial killers, so
Speaker 1: I couldn't say for sure, but I would strongly suspect
Speaker 1: that they they're perpetrating parts had of stories like the
Speaker 1: other perpetrators. And so this has big implications for how
Speaker 1: do we treat offenders, you know, how how do we
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm like you, I don't want them to
Speaker 1: not take responsibility and and accountability, and I don't want
Speaker 1: them to have the ability to continue to offend. So
Speaker 1: I'm not against uh, you know, locking people up. But
Speaker 1: while they're locked up and they're they're parts. And this
Speaker 1: is why so many of them kill themselves once you
Speaker 1: them up, because that particular protector was protecting them from
Speaker 1: the suicidal part. But while they're you know, they're safely contained.
Speaker 1: Let's help them with these parts. Let's not shame them
Speaker 1: and punish them, because that'll just perpetrate it all, I mean,
Speaker 1: perpetuate it all.
Speaker 2: Yeah. You know, I made a statement once that everyone
Speaker 2: deserves loving kindness and that if we increase loving kindness
Speaker 2: for everyone in the world, there would be increase of
Speaker 2: the total you know, goodness in the world overall. And people,
Speaker 2: some people really are resistant to that. Some people can't
Speaker 2: wrap their head around that notion that why would I
Speaker 2: show loving kindness to a cruel, mean person? And then
Speaker 2: I say, well, yeah, well, look that person's not well,
Speaker 2: so if I give them loving kindness to be more well,
Speaker 2: the world will be more well. Right, But some people
Speaker 2: really have trouble with that, you know, Yeah.
Speaker 1: Which I understand. I mean, before I did all this,
Speaker 1: I would have agreed with those people. But once you
Speaker 1: do this inner work, and then you see how it's
Speaker 1: all parallel in the outside world. You see the futility
Speaker 1: of the punishment approach, and how you know, just to
Speaker 1: be current, how the more violence Israel perpetrates on on
Speaker 1: the Palestinians, the more that's just going to perpetrate it
Speaker 1: and perpetuate.
Speaker 2: It all, and so vice versa and vice versa.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no question about it. And you know, I agree
Speaker 1: that Israel has a right to defend itself. But as
Speaker 1: you're finding, the world is watching how horribly they're treating
Speaker 1: Palestinian civilians, and that will all come back to bite them,
Speaker 1: and so those solutions just don't work in the inner
Speaker 1: world or the outer orle.
Speaker 2: You just opened up that canon. I'm going to exert
Speaker 2: self control. Another discovery that you made is that parts
Speaker 2: are often frozen in past traumas when their extreme roles
Speaker 2: were needed. I think you kind of just touched on
Speaker 2: that a little bit, you know already when you were
Speaker 2: talking about your clients. I do want to ask you
Speaker 2: a question of because I know as you do bring
Speaker 2: in politics sometimes in your book. You did, but let
Speaker 2: me do double click on that for a second, because
Speaker 2: I want to just just I noticed that, like in
Speaker 2: your book, you had no problem stating you're not a
Speaker 2: Trump fan. You had no problem stating, you know, you
Speaker 2: bring up anti racism, which is it's like a very
Speaker 2: left phrase. Do you do you just see it as
Speaker 2: like you don't care if you alienate the audience, that
Speaker 2: that that isn't in agreement with that political view. Like
Speaker 2: I think it's kind of brave in a way, and
Speaker 2: and some could say foolish too, but I'm not going
Speaker 2: to say I think brave to do that. But because
Speaker 2: I try not to do that in my work, I
Speaker 2: try to keep it, you know, up here. But you
Speaker 2: seem to have no problem doing that in your book.
Speaker 2: So let me just ask you about that, like have
Speaker 2: you thought that through and why did you decide that
Speaker 2: you're okay with with bringing some of your own politics
Speaker 2: into it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well that was my policy was like yours for
Speaker 1: a long time, because I didn't want to alienate audiences.
Speaker 1: And I think a couple of things happened. What is
Speaker 1: I'm I'm old now. I turned seventy four this year,
Speaker 1: and so I care, I don't care as much about
Speaker 1: all that, and I feel like there's more urgency to
Speaker 1: change some things in the world now and and the
Speaker 1: more self, let I become what what happens to people
Speaker 1: as the access more self is you know there's that
Speaker 1: sea where Claire. So they see injustice a lot more
Speaker 1: than they did. They're not sublime to it that they
Speaker 1: they see the imbalances that are causing a lot of problems.
Speaker 1: And then they also have the C word courage, so
Speaker 1: they can act or speak about it to try and
Speaker 1: get it to change. And then they have confidence and
Speaker 1: so on. And so self is kind of a social activist,
Speaker 1: both in the inner world and the outer world. And
Speaker 1: I you know, these days, I'm working with a lot
Speaker 1: of the social activistic leaders trying to help them do
Speaker 1: their activism from self, and they're finding they have much
Speaker 1: more success when they don't do it from their their
Speaker 1: righteous parts or you know, those kinds of parts. And
Speaker 1: so this work is designed to bring more self to
Speaker 1: the world, which will, if we can succeed, actually start
Speaker 1: to change a lot of these things that are out
Speaker 1: of line. And so I'd say in the last ten years,
Speaker 1: I've been less afraid to be outspoken about a lot
Speaker 1: of that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I did. I didn't expect to go down this
Speaker 2: alleyway of topic, but it led me here and I
Speaker 2: am so curious, and so I'm bringing myself of curiosity
Speaker 2: into this discussion because you do would I would push
Speaker 2: back on one tiny thing, you know, or maybe it's
Speaker 2: a big thing. But a lot of social activism can
Speaker 2: become self righteous. So I wouldn't make a queer cut
Speaker 2: case between social activism and self righteousness. Do you ever
Speaker 2: work with because I think there's toxic activism. I think
Speaker 2: there's narcissistic and so it seems like this parts work
Speaker 2: you do can be very very important for social activists
Speaker 2: as well to make sure that they're really bringing there.
Speaker 2: I would say their best you would just say self,
Speaker 2: but I would see their best self into their activism.
Speaker 1: That's that's exactly what I'm trying to do. And like
Speaker 1: I said, I'm working with a number of them, and
Speaker 1: there are other groups that are basing their activism around
Speaker 1: I f S and they're there's just this increasing awareness
Speaker 1: that the place from which you do at your activism
Speaker 1: will either make things a lot worse or will make
Speaker 1: it better, and that these burden parts that drive people
Speaker 1: to become activists often are become even more of a problem.
Speaker 1: Like you're saying, so you've got helping them all do
Speaker 1: a lot of healing and learning to trust that they're
Speaker 1: more effective if they lead from this place of sound.
Speaker 2: You call it self leadership, right, that's the phrase. Yeah yeah,
Speaker 2: and self energy yeah yeah, awesome. And then the third
Speaker 2: thing you discovered when they trust, well, I mean you
Speaker 2: discovered many many things, more than three, but out of
Speaker 2: this list of three here, when they trust it's safe
Speaker 2: to step out of their roles, they are highly valuable
Speaker 2: to the system. So you're saying that there might be
Speaker 2: some ask some parts of ourself that on the surface
Speaker 2: look even evil, but they're not evil, and that when
Speaker 2: we can assign them a different role, we may actually
Speaker 2: find what we once called evil, we might actually find
Speaker 2: it valuable to the whole system. Is that what you're saying.
Speaker 1: Sort of? I'm not saying that the same behavior would
Speaker 1: be valuable, right, saying that they totally change. So let's
Speaker 1: go back to your critic. One question you could ask
Speaker 1: it would be ask this critic, if we could heal
Speaker 1: what it's protecting inside of you, so it was liberated
Speaker 1: from this role, what might it like to do instead
Speaker 1: inside of you? And you'd be amazed that the answers.
Speaker 1: Many of the critics now want to do the opposite.
Speaker 1: They want to be your cheerleader, or they want to
Speaker 1: help you discern what's good and bad for you, but
Speaker 1: they don't want to criticize you by anyways. They hate
Speaker 1: that role. So that's the point. They all want to transform.
Speaker 1: They just don't think it's safe into their naturally valuable roles.
Speaker 2: Well, you have this classification between exiles, managers and firefighters.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to understand that when we talk about protectors,
Speaker 2: is that is that the is that part of the
Speaker 2: exiles part, you know, the exiles, any of them can
Speaker 2: be our protectors that we're saying the exiles now, no, Okay,
Speaker 2: explain it to me.
Speaker 1: So we all come out of our families or our
Speaker 1: social systems, or while we're in those those those families,
Speaker 1: there are parts that are acceptable in parts of us
Speaker 1: that our families aren't like. And also when we get traumatized,
Speaker 1: there are parts of us that get hurt more than
Speaker 1: others by the traumas. Those tend to be the parts
Speaker 1: that before they were hurt were playful, loving, open inner
Speaker 1: children who are also very creative and playful. Like I said,
Speaker 1: but once something bad happens to you. They're the parts
Speaker 1: that are the most sensitive, so they get hurt the
Speaker 1: most by the bad thing, and so they then become
Speaker 1: burdened with beliefs like I'm worthless, or they carry all
Speaker 1: this terror from what happened, or they carry emotional pain.
Speaker 1: And once that happens, then you don't want anything to
Speaker 1: do with them, and everybody around you tells you just
Speaker 1: move on, don't look back, can't change what happened, And
Speaker 1: in doing that, you wind up exiling these precious inner
Speaker 1: children simply because they got hurt, not realizing you're not
Speaker 1: just moving away from the memories of it or the
Speaker 1: emotions of it, not realizing you're locking away your juice.
Speaker 1: And so once you have a lot of these exiled parts,
Speaker 1: you feel more delicate and the world seems a lot
Speaker 1: more dangerous because so many things could trigger them. And
Speaker 1: because of that, other parts are forced out of their
Speaker 1: naturally valuable states to become protectors. And there are some
Speaker 1: of them who are trying to protect the exiles from
Speaker 1: being triggered again by managing your life in such a
Speaker 1: way that everything is smooth and you don't get too
Speaker 1: close to anybody, So they can't hurt you again, or
Speaker 1: or you perform at a high level so you get
Speaker 1: accolades to counter the worthlessness, or you look really good
Speaker 1: so that you're not rejected. So this is what's called
Speaker 1: the ego or the defenses, and a lot of psychotherapies.
Speaker 1: But there are these little what in family therapy we
Speaker 1: called parentified children. They're young too, but they're taking on
Speaker 1: all this responsibility to protect you, and they're trying to
Speaker 1: preempt anything that would trigger the exiles and keep them
Speaker 1: all contained and keep you away from them. On an
Speaker 1: ongoing basis, world has a way of breaking through those
Speaker 1: defenses and triggering your exiles. When that happens, it's a
Speaker 1: big emergency because it's like these flames of emotion are
Speaker 1: bursting out, threatening to overwhelm you again and make it
Speaker 1: so you can't function. So there's another set of parts
Speaker 1: who immediately go into action to deal with this emergency.
Speaker 1: And in contrast to the managers who are careful and
Speaker 1: I want to please people and control you, these firefighters
Speaker 1: we call them take you out of control. Are very
Speaker 1: impulsive and they don't care about the collateral damage to
Speaker 1: your body or your relationships. They just need to get
Speaker 1: you higher than those flames of emotion right away, or
Speaker 1: distract you until they burn themselves out. And so so
Speaker 1: there are the big distinction is between axiles and protectors,
Speaker 1: and then within the protector rubric there are managers in firefights.
Speaker 2: Oh that's what I needed. I need that systematizing. Thank you,
Speaker 2: you're speaking my autistic language. Thank you, thank you. That's
Speaker 2: exactly what I needed because I've been trying. I was
Speaker 2: trying to map that all out and getting confused. What
Speaker 2: was a subset of what? Okay, thank you, thank you? Wonderful.
Speaker 2: I want to kind of end our interview today with
Speaker 2: some laws of inner physics. What a cool phrase, by
Speaker 2: the way, I love that, is that your phrase? Like
Speaker 2: you came up with that?
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I love it.
Speaker 2: You said it turns out that whenever a part agrees
Speaker 2: to not overwhelm, it won't overwhelm. So that's really interesting.
Speaker 2: Can you kind of unpack that a little bit and
Speaker 2: and how maybe a concrete example of how you've seen
Speaker 2: that with a patient?
Speaker 1: Yeah? So, uh. You know a lot of therapies like
Speaker 1: DBT and dialectical behavior therapy and others, a lot of
Speaker 1: trauma therapies are very worried about the window of tolerance
Speaker 1: of this from my language are exiled emotions and how
Speaker 1: you have to have all these practices to try and
Speaker 1: and contain all that. And so there are all these
Speaker 1: what are called grounding practices which include a lot of
Speaker 1: breath exercises, and you.
Speaker 2: Know you know what I'm talking about, right absolutely, I
Speaker 2: have a whole book.
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, yeah. So what I discovered was, if there's
Speaker 1: a big rush of that kind of exiled emotion coming forward,
Speaker 1: if you just ask the part to not overwhelm and
Speaker 1: reassure it that by not overwhelming, it's much more likely
Speaker 1: that you can help it. They won't overwhelm, you don't
Speaker 1: have to do any of the grounding style, and your
Speaker 1: client will suddenly be with the part rather than become
Speaker 1: the part, and can start to help it that way.
Speaker 1: So they have a lot of agency, is what I'm
Speaker 1: trying to say. The only reason they tend to overwhelm
Speaker 1: is because they know that if they don't totally take over,
Speaker 1: you're going to lock them up again. So if they
Speaker 1: know by not overwhelming, they're more likely to not be
Speaker 1: locked up, they don't need to overwhelm. And again, all
Speaker 1: this refers back to their sacred interveings. They have agency
Speaker 1: that you can negotiate with them.
Speaker 2: Well, you are literally saying, we all have multiple personalities,
Speaker 2: the ones that we label dissociative identity disorder. That's the
Speaker 2: latest term for those people. The more we it's more
Speaker 2: a matter of extremeness among the parts that it is
Speaker 2: just that they are separate species in us, like they
Speaker 2: have part they have multiple personalitis and we don't know.
Speaker 2: We all have multiple personalities, is what you're saying.
Speaker 1: It is what I'm saying totally, And.
Speaker 2: I think I agree with that, and I agree with that, and.
Speaker 1: People with that diagnosis aren't so different from us, except
Speaker 1: that because of the horrific trauma they suffered on a
Speaker 1: daily basis, their system got blown apart more splitting.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, a lot, you know, I hear you. Yeah,
Speaker 2: but you know, even that diagnosis is controversial in the
Speaker 2: field of psychiatry, as you know, you know, some people
Speaker 2: claim that it's not even a thing, you know, And yeah,
Speaker 2: here's another lall of inner physics. There's nothing inside of
Speaker 2: you that has any power if you are in self
Speaker 2: and not afraid of it. Wow wow, wow wow, how
Speaker 2: do you how do you make that change in your
Speaker 2: life where and go from being scared of your parts
Speaker 2: to not being scared of your parts? Like, what's the
Speaker 2: first step that someone can take to make that transformation?
Speaker 1: It turns out it's pretty simple. Like if I was
Speaker 1: working with you and I need help, Well, if let's
Speaker 1: pick a part you're scared off.
Speaker 2: You have one talking to women? Okay, no, talking to
Speaker 2: someone I'm interested in admitting being vulnerable that I'm romantically
Speaker 2: interested in a woman.
Speaker 1: Yeah, got it. Okay, So that's a part that's afraid
Speaker 1: to do it. You're not necessarily afraid of that part?
Speaker 1: Am I right?
Speaker 2: Afraid of rejection? I'm afraid of rejection?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Okay, so.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we could do that, So we can pick a
Speaker 2: different one.
Speaker 1: Well, no, we can do that. How much time do
Speaker 1: we have? I can't remember.
Speaker 2: I'm I'm good, brother, It's I'm just being ware of
Speaker 2: your your time.
Speaker 1: But I'm okay. You want to do a piece of work,
Speaker 1: real short one?
Speaker 2: You want to do people?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Sure?
Speaker 2: Why not? Why not? Why not?
Speaker 1: All right? So focus on that fear of rejection, yeah,
Speaker 1: and find it in your body, around your body. M
Speaker 1: where do you find it?
Speaker 2: It's interesting I would say that it actually it shows
Speaker 2: up as a disconnect from self. It's almost like as
Speaker 2: opposed to me finding it, it's like I can't find it,
Speaker 2: if that makes sense. But you have a sense of it, yeah, true, Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: I do. So just focus on that sense of it, okay,
Speaker 2: and tell me how you feel toward this part. Well,
Speaker 2: I am very judgmental about it. I I'm angry that
Speaker 2: it keeps getting in my way of being able to
Speaker 2: have a happier life and to have more courage in
Speaker 2: going after what I want.
Speaker 1: So that makes sense that you would be angry at it.
Speaker 1: But we're going to ask the part who doesn't like
Speaker 1: it to give us the space to maybe help it instead.
Speaker 1: And so see if that one who's so angry at
Speaker 1: it could give us a little space in there and
Speaker 1: relax back so we can actually get to know it
Speaker 1: and help it. Okay, then focus on it again and
Speaker 1: tell me how you feel toward it now.
Speaker 2: There is there is a compassion there, There is a
Speaker 2: I wanted to give it. I want to give it
Speaker 2: a hug and tell it to not be so scared.
Speaker 1: So so do that. So go ahead and let it
Speaker 1: know you have compassion for it now, And if you
Speaker 1: can just go ahead and hug it and let it
Speaker 1: know it's not alone, that you are there and you
Speaker 1: you can care for it, and see how it reacts.
Speaker 2: Well, it's not running away.
Speaker 1: Good. Yeah, and see if there's anything it wants you
Speaker 1: to know about it's fear and don't think, just just
Speaker 1: wait and see what comes.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know something, something came. Something can it's it's
Speaker 2: telling me that it's it can't let go of what
Speaker 2: happened to me at age ten in summer camp.
Speaker 1: Okay, so let it know. That makes sense.
Speaker 2: Okay, but.
Speaker 1: Are you open to getting out out of there where it.
Speaker 2: Stuck desperately want to not just not just open?
Speaker 1: Okay, So tell it first to really let you get
Speaker 1: how bad that was for it. Let it whatever it
Speaker 1: needs to trust that you get it, to let you
Speaker 1: feel it and see it and sense it until it
Speaker 1: feels like, now you really get how horrible that was?
Speaker 2: Hmm.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's feeling like you get it now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, just ask it, just ask it, but exactly do
Speaker 2: I ask it?
Speaker 1: Ask if it feels like now you really get how
Speaker 1: bad it was?
Speaker 2: M m, yeah bad it was?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Or is there more it wants you to know?
Speaker 2: But it's like, really clinging too, not wanting to ever
Speaker 2: experience that feeling again.
Speaker 1: Totally get that. Yeah, but we're going to keep working
Speaker 1: with that. So we're gonna help it with that clinging.
Speaker 1: But just ask again if it does feel like you
Speaker 1: get how bad it was? Yeah? It does. Okay, So Scott,
Speaker 1: I want you to go to that guy in that
Speaker 1: time and be with him in the way he needed. Somebody.
Speaker 1: Tell me when you're in there with him, I'm there,
Speaker 1: how are you being with him?
Speaker 2: Well, I'm being supportive in a way no one was
Speaker 2: with me at the time.
Speaker 1: Perfect, So just do that for a while until he
Speaker 1: really trusts he's not alone with her. How's your reacting.
Speaker 2: With love?
Speaker 1: Good? Okay? And ask him if there's anything he wants
Speaker 1: you to do for him back there before we take
Speaker 1: him to a good place. Just don't think, just ask
Speaker 1: him and wait for the answer. Yeah, what's he wants
Speaker 1: you to do?
Speaker 2: Be one of those friends that last the situation with
Speaker 2: me and said, there's many fish in the sea.
Speaker 1: So go ahead and do that for him.
Speaker 2: I did already. Sorry, And how was that? Curtn't wait?
Speaker 1: Mm hmmm. How does he react?
Speaker 2: He laughed, and he's like, yeah, that's just completely different reaction.
Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, So ask him now if he's ready to
Speaker 1: leave that time and place with you and come to
Speaker 1: either to your place there or to a fantasy place
Speaker 1: of his choice.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he's definitely ready.
Speaker 1: Where does he want to go?
Speaker 2: Can I admit this on my podcast? It's up to you.
Speaker 1: So you got him there? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, how's he like it? He's got a very
Speaker 2: different attitude all of a sudden.
Speaker 1: That's great.
Speaker 2: He's got a very different attitude. Wow, he's almost kind
Speaker 2: of like asshole.
Speaker 1: Now, well we gotta yeah, we've got to help him
Speaker 1: with that. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I think he's overcompensated there.
Speaker 1: I think so too. Okay, you tell him, let him
Speaker 1: he doesn't have yeah, tell him to slow down.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, okay, okay, I did.
Speaker 1: You can kind of be his mentor in this area.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I see that.
Speaker 1: But tell him he never has to go back to
Speaker 1: that camp scene, and that you're gonna be his friend,
Speaker 1: mentor parent. You're gonna be taking care of him now.
Speaker 2: Mm hmmm, amazing, Yeah I did. I did well. Now
Speaker 2: you saying I can bring that protector guy, I can
Speaker 2: bring that guy out anytime I want.
Speaker 1: Yeah? Wow. Yeah, But let's finish. We're not quite done, okay,
Speaker 1: So ask him if now he's ready to unload the
Speaker 1: feelings and believes he got back there.
Speaker 2: He says, what does that mean to unload?
Speaker 1: We'll show him. All we need is his desire to
Speaker 1: not carry this stuff anymore. The fear, yeah, the beliefs
Speaker 1: about himself.
Speaker 2: Yes, definitely ready.
Speaker 1: And ask him where he carries that in his body,
Speaker 1: Round his body.
Speaker 2: Where he has in the past carried it.
Speaker 1: Just where he's carrying it still if he still is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, right here.
Speaker 1: Okay, And ask him what he'd like to give it
Speaker 1: all up to light, water, fire, wind, earth, anything else. Light.
Speaker 1: So bring in the light and have it shine on him,
Speaker 1: and tell him to let all that out of his
Speaker 1: chest and just let the light take it away. Yeah,
Speaker 1: no need to carry this anymore.
Speaker 2: Wow. Wow, in the background, noise stopped. What do I
Speaker 2: do now doing? Now he's like a enthusiastic puppy.
Speaker 1: Good? And tell him now if he wants to, he
Speaker 1: can invite qualities into his body he'd like to have
Speaker 1: and just see what comes into him.
Speaker 2: Now, confidence, authenticity, and heart led.
Speaker 1: It's great. So how does he seemed now?
Speaker 2: I like him?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Good? So again. Let him know he can hang
Speaker 1: with you and you know, go to night clubs if
Speaker 1: he wants, or whatever he wants, whatever he wants to do,
Speaker 1: but he doesn't have to carry this stuff anymore.
Speaker 2: Wow, he said, that's revolutionary.
Speaker 1: And if you want, you can invite your other parts
Speaker 1: to come in and see him, especially the one that
Speaker 1: didn't like him. Have that guy come in and see
Speaker 1: how he is different.
Speaker 2: Now Wow, wow, incredible, it's like a different guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right. Okay, wow, So does that feel complete
Speaker 1: for that? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Yeah, amazing. Are you gonna send me the bill?
Speaker 1: Happy to do it my gift?
Speaker 2: Thank you, Dick, You're welcome. I think we should end
Speaker 2: this episode on that note. People just got a chance
Speaker 2: to see in action.
Speaker 1: I appreciate your being so vulnerable in your in front
Speaker 1: of your audience.
Speaker 2: I don't know how I feel about this, but I
Speaker 2: actually I feel good. Of the course of the whole thing,
Speaker 2: I felt better and better. But I also I think
Speaker 2: that it's just something that a lot of people can
Speaker 2: relate to and resonate with, whether or not you're a
Speaker 2: male or female or whatever your gender is. I think
Speaker 2: you can really relate to that feeling of being would
Speaker 2: rather avoid than to be rejected.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, I didn't talk to a girl all
Speaker 1: through high school. I was so afraid of that rejection.
Speaker 1: And it wasn't until I went out for football in
Speaker 1: college and I became a football star that I had
Speaker 1: the courage to actually talk to alema. So I totally
Speaker 1: get it.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, oh man. Well, thank you so much Dick
Speaker 2: for the parts work, but also just being on my
Speaker 2: podcast and for sparring a little bit with me as well.
Speaker 2: And well, you're a legend in the field of in
Speaker 2: my field, so I really have immense gratitude for you,
Speaker 2: So thank.
Speaker 1: You, Thank you Scott, and again thanks for being such
Speaker 1: a good sport.
Speaker 2: And I really enjoyed our sparing so meo