5 ms·

See also: Internal Family Systems. It's a form of therapy that considers all of us has having many different discrete "parts". I recently started IFS therapy a

See also: Internal Family Systems. It's a form of therapy that considers all of us has having many different discrete "parts". I recently started IFS therapy and have been having success with it. I'm not sure how literally I take the "parts" (I think they may be much less "solid" and more transient than IFS claims), but it seems to be a really interesting and helpful way to approach your own mind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Family_Systems_Model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Family_Systems_Model

ComradePhil 5y ago
Are you working with an IFS therapist or are you using Pete Gerlach's online self-help course? Has anyone had success with Pete Gerlach's course?
- Trasmatta 5y ago
  I'm working with an IFS therapist. I haven't used that course. I am also reading Jay Earley's "Self-Therapy" book in conjunction, and that's been helpful.
moth-fuzz 5y ago
The thing about DID and IFS is the underlying recognition that most people have parts, sometimes dissociated (as is the case with BPD, for example, and other dissociative disorders), and that this is part of normal human psychology. The crux of it is that this is simply one of the fundamental tools our brains has to use in response to trauma. The whole disorder part of dissociative identity disorder is when it becomes a problem that impedes healthy functioning. Just like we all have anxiety, it's there to protect us and warn us of potential dangers, but an anxiety disorder is when the anxiety is no longer helpful, damaging, even.
sshine 5y ago
I'll second this recommendation. I personally interpret the "parts" quite literally, but what's most interesting is: You can make most people say that "a part of them wants X, while another part of them wants Y" without having swollowed any metaphysics. It's like the ability to address the ambiguity of one's mind, without needing to admit that it is fundamentally fractured, is a language that many will eagerly adapt to. And yes, IFS also makes the claim that "multiple personality disorder" isn't. Here's a website that tries to explain what it's like to embrace the plurality of one's being: https://morethanone.info/ https://morethanone.info/
- cptcobalt 5y ago
  > Here's a website that tries to explain what it's like to embrace the plurality of one's being I'm not sure if the content matches your description of the site, or your description is ambiguous, or...there's work to be done in the reader's mind to understand your point than you articulated. Specifically, I don't think that conflicting desires or emotions in people inherently equates to plurality in "one's being", but this site immediately jumps off from the perspective that you are communicating with a collective person. So, my take away is that your point is that everyone is plural? > It's like the ability to address the ambiguity of one's mind, without needing to admit that it is fundamentally fractured I still also don't think that ambiguity or admitting that your mind is "fundamentally fractured" immediately equates to plurality? Maybe I'm missing some nuance here?
cptcobalt 5y ago
I've been in IFS therapy for a bit. I agree have a similar experience as you, I think. I don't take the "parts" too literally—and it was deeply uncomfortable to think about myself that way in the first few sessions while working on, well, the presenting issues. I adjusted and got more comfortable with it over time, and just see it as an easier way to have more precise communication (and also some internal introspection) in the frame of therapy. It feels like an applied irl Inside Out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Out_(2015_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Out_(2015_film)
pmoriarty 5y ago
For a Jungian look at this see "Subpersonalities"[1] by John Rowan. For a more recent take, see "Your Symphony of Selves"[2] by James Fadiman. [1] - https://www.amazon.com/Subpersonalities-People-Inside-John-Rowan-ebook/dp/B00CDV0XWO/ https://www.amazon.com/Subpersonalities-People-Inside-John-R... [2] - https://www.amazon.com/Your-Symphony-Selves-Discover-Understand/dp/1644110261/ https://www.amazon.com/Your-Symphony-Selves-Discover-Underst...
spython 5y ago
I too have had good experience with IFS, and I think from the point of view of IFS the less 'solid' and more transient the parts are, the better. The traditional 'multiple personality disorder' are then excessively rigid parts that block each other. I do enjoy asking my friends how old they feel just in the moment when they talk about something benign bothering them. Most of the time people are able to pinpoint the age from which they speak. E.g. they had a situation that reminded them of some injustice they experienced when they were 6, and so they traveled the affect bridge back to the behaviours and attitudes they had at 6. Of course a six year old can't solve it, but just remembering that they are older and more capable now can bring back the 'adult' parts that can find a solution.

ComradePhil 5y ago

Are you working with an IFS therapist or are you using Pete Gerlach's online self-help course? Has anyone had success with Pete Gerlach's course?

Trasmatta 5y ago
I'm working with an IFS therapist. I haven't used that course. I am also reading Jay Earley's "Self-Therapy" book in conjunction, and that's been helpful.

moth-fuzz 5y ago

The thing about DID and IFS is the underlying recognition that most people have parts, sometimes dissociated (as is the case with BPD, for example, and other dissociative disorders), and that this is part of normal human psychology. The crux of it is that this is simply one of the fundamental tools our brains has to use in response to trauma. The whole disorder part of dissociative identity disorder is when it becomes a problem that impedes healthy functioning. Just like we all have anxiety, it's there to protect us and warn us of potential dangers, but an anxiety disorder is when the anxiety is no longer helpful, damaging, even.

sshine 5y ago

I'll second this recommendation. I personally interpret the "parts" quite literally, but what's most interesting is: You can make most people say that "a part of them wants X, while another part of them wants Y" without having swollowed any metaphysics. It's like the ability to address the ambiguity of one's mind, without needing to admit that it is fundamentally fractured, is a language that many will eagerly adapt to. And yes, IFS also makes the claim that "multiple personality disorder" isn't. Here's a website that tries to explain what it's like to embrace the plurality of one's being: https://morethanone.info/ https://morethanone.info/

cptcobalt 5y ago
> Here's a website that tries to explain what it's like to embrace the plurality of one's being I'm not sure if the content matches your description of the site, or your description is ambiguous, or...there's work to be done in the reader's mind to understand your point than you articulated. Specifically, I don't think that conflicting desires or emotions in people inherently equates to plurality in "one's being", but this site immediately jumps off from the perspective that you are communicating with a collective person. So, my take away is that your point is that everyone is plural? > It's like the ability to address the ambiguity of one's mind, without needing to admit that it is fundamentally fractured I still also don't think that ambiguity or admitting that your mind is "fundamentally fractured" immediately equates to plurality? Maybe I'm missing some nuance here?

cptcobalt 5y ago

I've been in IFS therapy for a bit. I agree have a similar experience as you, I think. I don't take the "parts" too literally—and it was deeply uncomfortable to think about myself that way in the first few sessions while working on, well, the presenting issues. I adjusted and got more comfortable with it over time, and just see it as an easier way to have more precise communication (and also some internal introspection) in the frame of therapy. It feels like an applied irl Inside Out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Out_(2015_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Out_(2015_film)

pmoriarty 5y ago

For a Jungian look at this see "Subpersonalities"[1] by John Rowan. For a more recent take, see "Your Symphony of Selves"[2] by James Fadiman. [1] - https://www.amazon.com/Subpersonalities-People-Inside-John-Rowan-ebook/dp/B00CDV0XWO/ https://www.amazon.com/Subpersonalities-People-Inside-John-R... [2] - https://www.amazon.com/Your-Symphony-Selves-Discover-Understand/dp/1644110261/ https://www.amazon.com/Your-Symphony-Selves-Discover-Underst...

spython 5y ago

I too have had good experience with IFS, and I think from the point of view of IFS the less 'solid' and more transient the parts are, the better. The traditional 'multiple personality disorder' are then excessively rigid parts that block each other. I do enjoy asking my friends how old they feel just in the moment when they talk about something benign bothering them. Most of the time people are able to pinpoint the age from which they speak. E.g. they had a situation that reminded them of some injustice they experienced when they were 6, and so they traveled the affect bridge back to the behaviours and attitudes they had at 6. Of course a six year old can't solve it, but just remembering that they are older and more capable now can bring back the 'adult' parts that can find a solution.