|
It seems that ‘holistic’
has become just another buzz word, so I would like to address a
few misconceptions about the ‘whole’ issue. It is quoted in
books and taught in colleges that Holism is based on von
Bertalanffy’s 'General Systems Theory' (please bear with me),
which is summed up as - ‘The whole is greater than the sum of
it’s parts’. This phrase may be succinct, but it does not
define Holism.
Systems Theory can be applied
to all systems physical or otherwise and essentially means that
the interaction of the component parts are as important as the
parts themselves. If we consider a bicycle as a system and
dismantle it, we no longer have a bicycle, we have a collection
of parts. It is only when the bike is assembled, that it
functions as a bike. We could scrutinise the individual parts
for a very long time, but if we don’t take a step back and
view the bike as a whole, then we might miss it’s purpose
altogether.
The method of understanding
something by reducing it to it’s smallest parts is known as
reductionism and this is the way that western medicine looks at
things. It is only a useful approach if you look at the whole
picture, as well (as in holism).
So if we move from the
relative simplicity of a bike to a system as complex as a human
being, we can start to get an inkling of the limitations of the
reductionist’s approach. This may also explain why medicine
seems to concentrate on treating symptoms, rather than digging
for a cause. i.e. If something is inflamed - prescribe an
anti-inflammatory, if there is pain - take a pain killer.
The other common misconception
about the Holistic approach is that it is any treatment or
therapy that effects the whole person. Put simply - any
treatment that has any effect, even if that be only a
psychological effect, does effect the whole person to a greater
or lesser degree. Purely because we are integrated wholes. You
cannot separate the physical, emotional, energetic/spiritual,
put them in boxes and expect them to behave independently.
So what is Holism?
The concept of Holism has
existed throughout the entire history of both eastern and
western philosophy and General Systems Theory wasn’t developed
until 1969. The actual word Holism first appeared in 1928, in
the book Holism and Evolution, by Jan Smuts, who wrote:-
"the creation of wholes,
and ever more highly organized wholes, and of wholeness
generally as characteristic of existence, is an inherent
character of the universe. There is not a mere vague
indefinite creative energy or tendency has specific
characters, the most fundamental of which is whole-making.
And the progressive development of the resulting wholes at
all stages - from the most inchoate, imperfect, inorganic
wholes to the most highly developed and organised - is what
we call Evolution. The whole-making, holistic
tendency, or Holism, operating in and through particular wholes
to the particular wholes, is seen at all stages
of existence, and is by no means confined to the biological
domain to which science has hitherto restricted it."
(Jan Smutts, cited by Otto &
Knight (1961), italics and ‘w’ of whole added by same.)
The Holistic approach to health
is taking into account all that exists that has relevance to the
nature of the individual with their problem. A tall order, even
when you consider that verbal communication is dwarfed by the
non-verbal and often subconscious to both parties. Also, the
intuitive faculty should not be underestimated. With this one
tries to get as close to the cause as one’s own ability and the
person in question can/will allow. The aim is to find and
encourage balance and vitality. The ‘vital’ aspect having many
names, such as, spirit, aura, chi, prana, human energy field,
entelechy, biomorphic field, etc.,. They all amount to the same
and has nothing to do with any particular religion or belief. It
is the life/emotive force, the drive or the driver - the ‘glue
of life’.
In short - it’s about
balancing Mind - Body - Spirit and their interactions. That may
involve working through any or all of these aspects. Ultimately it
is only the individual self that can heal or allow healing to
occur. But there is a lot of help that can be had by looking in
the right place. No one is an island.
What Constitutes a Whole?
The components that constitute a whole are
those parts that the observer considers as making up the whole.
Based on personal perceptions, conditioning and therefore beliefs.
The main point of contention here is the inclusion or exclusion of
a Vitalistic component.
The view that considers a 'Vital' component as
part of the whole is known as Vitalism and the view that
disregards this aspect is known as Mechanism.
The thesis that wholes, or some wholes, are
more than the sums of their parts in the sense that the wholes
in question have characteristics that cannot be explained in
terms of the properties and relations to one another of their
constituents. (Bullock & Trombley, 1988.)
Going on to suggest the aspects to be
considered in holistic Medicine/health are:- physical,
psychological and spiritual. Holism could not have been based von
Bertalanffy’s General System Theory (GST), as Tyreman (1992)
proposes, as GST did not present until 1969.
(Tarnas,1996). However, Bullock and Trombley (1988) state that -
"Holism challenges the notion of linear cause and effect and
draws on SYSTEMS THEORY for its explanations. Included in von
Bertalanffy’s (1981) own definition of GST
are the following:-
General system theory is intended to
elaborate properties, principles, and laws that are
characteristic of "systems" in general, irrespective
of their particular kind, the nature of their component
elements, and the relations or "forces" between them.
It is not limited to material systems but
applies to any "whole" consisting of interacting
"components."
This leaves us with our own beliefs to decide
what one regards as a whole. Tyreman confuses the ‘whole’
issue : firstly, by not clearly defining such terms, and secondly,
laying emphasis - "Holism is not concerned with the nature
of parts, but the relationship of parts." This
emphasis has not been found elsewhere and directly opposes
reductionism, whereas holism can incorporate reductionism. It is
difficult to imagine that the relationships are of greater
importance than the parts, when the former cannot exist without
the latter.
The two, having equal importance, may be seen in
Dr A.T.Still’s (founder of osteopathy)
Structure - Function interrelationship.
Together they form a whole, as in A.T. Still's
"body as a unit."
(1908).
Ayurveda - The Original Holism?
Ayurveda is
a system of healing which evolved on the Indian subcontinent some
3000-5000 years ago. Established by the same great ancient sages
who produced India’s original systems of meditation, yoga, and
astrology. Ayurveda has both a spiritual and a practical basis,
the spiritual perspective engendering the practical. According to
Ayurveda, humans consist of three bodies or aspects:- the
physical, the subtle and the causal. In modern Western language
these could be referred to as body, mind and spirit. The Ayurvedic
system of health care emphasises that health is a harmonious
functioning of all three parts of the trinity. (Gerson, 1993).
This is the earliest historical
recording an holistic approach to health, from long before Smuts
conceived the word "holism". Also this shows quite
clearly that Ayurvedic medicine is Vitalistic in nature. and
therefore Osteopathy as conceived by A.T.Still. This, coupled with
Still’s religious/spiritual background and the assertion that he
was a Magnetic Healer, Spiritualist and possibly a Universalist as
it was popular at the time and location (Trowbridge, 1991) and of
course, his own writings can leave little doubt as to his beliefs
towards Vitalism.
e.g.
"As an electrician controls electric
currents, so an Osteopath
controls life currents and revives suspended
forces."
(Truhlar, 1950, quoting A.T.Still.)
©Andrew
C. Woodhouse BSc (Hons) Ost
|
