You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Orange's article adds to the growing body of literature (e.g., Cambray 2004 & 2006; Coburn 2002; Hogenson 2004; Stolorow et al. 2001; Sucharov 2002) that attempts to reposition therapeutic attitude and technique through the lens of complexity theory (Cilliers 1998). This ‘lens’ highlights what is immediate in interactions and redistributes the authority of experience by refusing to assume the role of ‘one who knows’, honouring the variety of intersecting contexts. Such an approach re-sights the attitude of the therapist toward recognizing what is ‘emergent’ in the field and steers away from interpretations based on theoretical concepts derived in a reified way from other points of reference (psychologies, philosophies, cultures, contexts). The underlying theoretical inspirations are concepts such as Bohm's ‘implicate order’: ‘unbroken wholeness…underlying the perceived world of separateness….’. And here we sidle close to Jung's theory of the psychoid unconscious and the unus mundus. While for Jungians this may sometimes appear to be familiar territory, Orange brings a new and lively perspective as she moves through implicate order into the frontier of complexity thinking, with implications that both critique old ways and create new ways of thinking about the work.