IFS /IFIO Therapy with Martin Linton.

17/10/2025

16/10/2025

✦ Escapism or Real Therapy? With an IFS lens?

Too often, I see therapy and coaching posts promising “effortless transformation,” “you’ll never have to feel this or experience that,” or “a healing journey without having to revisit the problem.”
These aren’t just hollow slogans — they are manipulations of suffering. They prey on people’s exhaustion and longing for relief, people who are burned out from chasing productivity or perfection.

Like false gurus or cults promising awakening but they only speak of the easy seductive bit, because they know problem won’t be attracted to the full reality. They only show stage 1 of 3. They get you hooked first.

But balance is not the same as the expectations of a holiday. To promise freedom from feeling is to promise disconnection from humanity itself - its avoidance.
When therapy is marketed as an escape from pain rather than a relationship with it, it stops being therapy and becomes entertainment — a polished performance of wellness.

As ethicists have long warned, this is a form of deception - a scene presented as the whole movie.

“Advertising that makes unsubstantiated claims, misleads or has the potential to mislead is unprofessional and may be illegal.”
— Association of Beauty and Therapy Council (ABTC), Ethical Advertising Guidelines

Another Deception is therapists suggesting people have no soul are devoid of living energy or worthless unless they’ve had enough therapy - that is simply untrue.

And research on the wellness industry has called out this exact problem:

“Whole industries have thrived on the basis of this logic, offering self-interested explanations and solutions for the many pains of living… they all share the same consumerist philosophy of suffering: that our central problem is something that targeted consumption can address.”
— Counselling Directory, “The Medicalisation and Commodification of Distress”

⸻

✦ Protector Culture Disguised as Professionalism

When therapists delete disagreement or sanitize their message, their media, into perfect branding, that’s not wholesome Self energy. It’s Self channeled through protective managers and firefighters — parts that elevate their own roles and needs above others’. Attached to a particular script, idea or image over people. It may look calm, confident, or “on brand,” but it’s actually a protector-led system managing vulnerability through control and applause for good looking success - a professional show that is really professional incongruence.

In IFS terms, these are the image managers and approval protectors at work — parts terrified of exposure, rejection, or shame. They’re not malicious; they’re afraid. Instead of leading from open curiosity, they lead from fear of blemish - perfectionist parts overworking. And when these parts run unchecked, the message becomes less about healing and more about maintaining an illusion of purity.

And often, this protector culture adds a layer of superiority and even pathologising abuse:
the claim that “others are doing it wrong, are defective, but my way is better, quicker, the true path.”
This competitive righteousness is not Self-led mastery — it’s a manager’s insecurity disguised as confidence. It reduces the sacred diversity of healing to a sales pitch, turning depth into hierarchy and collaboration into conquest.

⸻

✦ The Illusion of Wholesomeness

In these moments, what presents as calm Self energy is not the spacious, balanced Self we speak of in IFS. It is Self filtered and channelled through protector parts — a reduced and illusive version of wholesomeness.
It performs the aesthetics of calm while cutting out the complexity of wholesome truth.

When Self is mediated through protectors, it loses its authentic relational capacity — it becomes image, not presence that may be seductive. It speaks about wholeness but only embodies it in a particular way. This is why some professional spaces feel attractive yet the “light and love” is simply sterile hypnotically unethical: they’re curated for safety and pleasure, not depth of genuine connection - it’s connection made easy. The parts running the show seek stability, but at the cost of real wholesome aliveness that means re-centering and the wobbles that brings.

True Self-led energy doesn’t bypass or brand its way to calm; it invites in the messy, the uncertain, and the vulnerable. It knows that wholeness isn’t achieved by refinement but by inclusions that perturb the system to feel the practice of rebalancing.

⸻

✦ The IFS Ethos: All Parts, All Voices

In Internal Family Systems, the ethos is simple yet radical: all parts are welcome. That doesn’t just mean every internal part — it means every voice, every perspective, every emotion that arises within or between us- the internal practice is ultimately a social practice. The healing movement of a system depends on its willingness to include what has previously been excluded.

What we exclude externally reflects what internally not yet learned to be with.

Welcoming all parts is not the reductionism of limited coherence; it is the “balance practice” achieved through hearing, being with the whole. It asks us to lean wider and more systemically, to recognise that health is not created by narrowing our view to what’s comfortable or pleasing, but by holding the full complexity of human experience.

When we restrict voices or delete difference in the name of harmony, we create fragility, not balance. Wholeness is not the silence of dissent — it’s the capacity to stay open when the system expands beyond what feels safe.

⸻

✦ Returning to Wholeness

This glossy “wellness” model doesn’t lead to wholeness — it leads to spiritual bypassing, to a culture where discomfort is treated like failure and where image replaces authenticity.
That is the practice of intolerance not tolerance.

True healing requires contact with the full spectrum of experience. It asks for courage, not comfort. For feeling, not fleeing.

To the therapists and coaches who market perfection, ease, and superiority:
You may mean well, but you are feeding people’s avoidant parts while starving their capacity for truth.
Healing is not effortless. It is honest.
And to promise otherwise is not compassion — it’s exploitation.

15/10/2025

The systems about you have power that effect you in ways beyond their seductive energy.

Article link 👇

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1D3kGCziiJ/?mibextid=wwXIfr

————————-

14/10/2025

Self / Body & systems. 🌀

Guided experiencing, (light).

This is a systemic practice that is know in the systems community called “Reflexivity”. Always one eye externally and one internally monitoring internal and...

14/10/2025

Self / Body & internally formed systems.

Self makes it possible:

Link 👇

https://youtube.com/shorts/8FgHOsp2D3M?si=5iSGNdAT2iNelCq2

13/10/2025

Martha Sweezy on shame, guilt, and protective systems.

Link to video 👇

https://youtu.be/QT0vn2yh-kQ

—————

13/10/2025

What if I start a group called
“Courageous Communities”
?

12/10/2025

Michie Rose: 1., 2., 3. Being in the dance…. From the voice that gave IFS ‘unburdening’ and ‘legacy unburdening’…
“When you yourself, as a client, experiences the depth, truth, and beauty… IFS hits home”””

Video link 👇

https://share.google/ow0mevX0V8Wqja5Bo

———

12/10/2025

IFS: formation of its construct, with Kay Gardener & co-founders…. Early days and History of IFS…

Video link 👇

https://youtu.be/dScn4co1Lao?si=viYuT2EhmtFfTLxS

———

06/10/2025

*[Article]:
The Exile of the Inner World: Introversion, Self, and the Cultural Disembodiment of Awareness in Cultural Formation.

Abstract

This paper examines the convergence of Jungian analytical psychology, humanistic psychology, and contemporary therapeutic models, particularly Internal Family Systems (IFS), as a lineage informing a Western form of mindfulness. It argues that Carl Jung, Carl Rogers, and Eugene Gendlin collectively laid the philosophical and experiential groundwork for the third wave of psychotherapy by emphasising inner awareness, acceptance, and embodied presence. Introversion is conceptualised as the cultivated capacity to inhabit the inner world and connect with the Self, whereas extraversion represents cultural and social pressures that prioritise external focus, validation, and social conformity. The paper develops a framework in which the human spirit naturally evolves toward authenticity and inner awareness, while the cultural mind lags behind, enforcing conformity, producing protective parts that exile aspects of the inner world. IFS offers a practical framework for Self-led living, reconciling internal and external orientations, and fostering resilience at both personal and societal levels.

⸻

Introduction

Mindfulness and contemplative practices have become central features of contemporary psychotherapy, particularly within the third wave of therapeutic modalities. Third-wave approaches influenced by Eastern wisdom, such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT), and Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR), emphasise present-moment awareness, acceptance, and values-driven action. While often framed as innovations of the late twentieth century, their conceptual and experiential roots trace back to earlier Western thinkers who foregrounded inner awareness, relational authenticity, and embodied presence.

Carl Jung, Carl Rogers, and Eugene Gendlin exemplify this lineage. Jung introduced the archetype of the Self and the process of individuation, emphasising integration of inner multiplicity and alignment with inner authority. Rogers prioritised the inner locus of evaluation and the therapeutic relationship as a vehicle for authentic self-connection. Gendlin developed the concept of the felt sense, a somatically anchored awareness that grounds experience in the body, bridging cognition, emotion, and embodiment. Together, these thinkers cultivated a Western approach to mindfulness that mirrors Eastern principles while remaining culturally and psychologically grounded.

Central to this discussion is the concept of introversion, understood not merely as a personality trait, but as a cultivated capacity to engage the inner world. Extraversion, by contrast, represents outward orientation frequently valorised in Western society, privileging visibility, sociability, and external validation. Cultural prioritisation of extraversion pathologises introversion, fostering disconnection from the Self and contributing to cultural narcissism—a collective preoccupation with image, approval, and performative identity.

This paper develops a theoretical framework in which the human spirit, naturally oriented toward inner awareness, often outpaces the cultural mind, which evolves slowly and enforces conformity. Protective parts arise to shield the ego from this lag, producing internal exile of thoughts, feelings, and capacities, while the Self remains untouched. IFS provides a practical framework for Self-led living, supporting reconciliation of inner and outer orientations.

⸻

Jung, Rogers, and Gendlin: Foundations of Western Mindfulness

Carl Jung’s contribution to the psychology of consciousness lies in his conceptualisation of the Self and the process of individuation. The Self represents both the centre and circumference of the psyche, integrating conscious and unconscious dimensions and guiding alignment of the ego with the broader psychical system. Jung described complexes—autonomous subpersonalities—as orbiting the ego, influencing behaviour, perception, and emotional life. Therapeutic work involves cultivating a conscious relationship with these complexes, facilitating integration through methods such as active imagination and dream analysis.

From a mindfulness perspective, Jung anticipated core principles of the third wave: nonjudgmental observation of inner phenomena, acceptance of multiplicity, and cultivation of embodied awareness. The inner gaze—attending to images, emotions, and symbolic patterns—parallels meditative practices in both Eastern and Western traditions, reflecting an early Western form of contemplative psychology.

Carl Rogers extended this lineage through the humanistic emphasis on the inner locus of evaluation. Psychological health arises when evaluation is guided by internal standards rather than social pressures. Incongruence occurs when cultural norms, expectations, or external validation dominate, producing anxiety, self-alienation, and the development of Internalized Conditions of Worth (ICWs). ICWs describe the internalised rules and expectations acquired from family, society, or culture, which shape self-judgement and protective behaviours. The therapist’s role is to maintain unconditional positive regard, providing a relational environment in which the client can reconnect with authentic inner experience.

Eugene Gendlin introduced a further dimension with his concept of the felt sense. The felt sense is a pre-verbal, holistic awareness of a situation, problem, or emotional state that arises in the body. Focusing, the method developed from this insight, directs attention to the felt sense, allowing it to articulate itself into conscious understanding. Gendlin’s approach embodies mindfulness in a Western form, integrating cognition, emotion, and embodiment through gentle, experiential awareness. The felt sense aligns naturally with both Jungian attention to inner multiplicity and Rogers’ emphasis on relational attunement, completing the triad that constitutes the Western roots of mindfulness.

⸻

The Three Waves of Psychotherapy and Their Lineage

Psychotherapy has historically evolved in three broad waves, each reflecting a different relationship to inner experience. The first wave, behaviourism, focused on observable actions and conditioning, largely disregarding inner states. The second wave, cognitive therapy, shifted attention to thoughts and beliefs, emphasising modification of maladaptive cognitions. While the second wave acknowledged the interior world, it remained largely evaluative and intellectual. The third wave, emerging in the 1990s, prioritises context, acceptance, mindfulness, and values-oriented living, explicitly incorporating awareness and self-as-context.

Jung, Rogers, and Gendlin anticipated much of the ethos of the third wave decades earlier, emphasising inner observation, nonjudgmental acceptance, and embodied awareness. In this sense, the third wave formalises insights that these Western thinkers had already articulated experientially.

⸻

Introversion, Extraversion, and the Cultural Mind

Introversion reflects the cultivated capacity to inhabit the inner world, attending to thought, emotion, and symbolic life. Rogers argued that psychological health arises when the locus of evaluation is internal. Gendlin’s felt sense anchors this orientation in the body, facilitating inner attunement and reflective engagement.

Extraversion is valorised in Western culture, privileging sociability, assertiveness, visibility, and external validation. Cultural narratives equate outward orientation with competence, social success, and moral worth, pathologising inward-focused behaviour as deficiency or withdrawal.

This preference for extraversion reflects a lag between the human spirit and the cultural mind. The human spirit evolves toward inner integration and authenticity, while the cultural mind—constituted by societal norms, institutions, policy, and technology—operates more slowly, often enforcing conformity and suppressing multiplicity. Protective parts arise to shield the ego from this cultural pressure, resulting in internal exile of capacities such as creativity, intuition, and reflective consciousness. The Self remains untouchable, even as the ego negotiates both personal and impersonal pressures.

⸻

Internal Family Systems: Navigating Cultural Pressure and ICWs

Internal Family Systems (IFS), developed by Richard Schwartz, provides a framework for understanding how inner experience is exiled and reclaimed. The psyche comprises discrete parts—managers, firefighters, and exiles—alongside a central Self embodying clarity, calm, compassion, curiosity, and confidence. Protective parts mobilise to shield the ego, which is vulnerable to social, cultural, and internalised pressures.

Many protective dynamics reflect Rogers’ Internalized Conditions of Worth (ICWs), in which absorbed expectations from family, society, or culture shape behaviour, self-judgement, and emotional regulation. Beyond ICWs, the larger cultural mind exerts impersonal or “non-human” pressures—governance systems, institutional policies, technological infrastructures—that are slower to evolve and operate independently of human empathy or spirit. Together, these form a scale of influence: from human-internalised pressures (ICWs) to non-human cultural systems, across which protective parts act to maintain ego stability.

Jungian complexes are analogous to IFS parts, with individuation paralleling unburdening and integration under Self-leadership. Gendlin’s felt sense aligns with IFS practices, fostering embodied awareness and attentive engagement with each part. By cultivating Self-leadership, individuals can reclaim exiled experience, challenge ICWs, and navigate the cultural mind while maintaining the integrity of the Self.

⸻

Toward a Western Mindfulness

The synthesis of Jung, Rogers, Gendlin, and IFS represents a Western form of mindfulness integrating inner awareness, acceptance, embodiment, and relational authenticity. It emphasises:
1. Inner awareness: Attention to psychic, emotional, and somatic processes, including multiplicity of parts.
2. Acceptance: Nonjudgmental recognition of all inner states and experiences.
3. Embodiment: Integration of cognitive, emotional, and somatic experience.
4. Compassion: Ethical and relational orientation toward self and others.
5. Integration of inner and outer worlds: Balancing introverted and extraverted orientations to navigate social demands while maintaining Self-connection.

Western mindfulness, in this formulation, explicitly attends to the multiplicity of the psyche, relational dynamics, and socio-cultural context, mitigating the consequences of cultural lag, ICWs, and extraversion bias.

⸻

Conclusion

Jung, Rogers, and Gendlin collectively constitute the Western lineage of mindfulness, emphasising awareness, acceptance, and embodiment. Introversion is reframed as a cultivated orientation toward the inner world, enabling Self-connection, while extraversion reflects both a natural orientation and a culturally enforced imperative. Protective parts arise to shield the ego from internalised expectations (ICWs) and the overwhelming pressures of a slower-evolving cultural mind, producing internal exile. Internal Family Systems offers a practical synthesis, integrating Jungian, humanistic, and experiential principles to cultivate Self-led living that reconciles inner attunement with social engagement. By reclaiming exiled inner experience, individuals maintain the integrity of the Self, strengthen ego resilience, and foster a more reflective, mindful society.

⸻

References

Cain, S. (2012). Quiet: The power of introverts in a world that can’t stop talking. New York: Crown Publishing Group.

Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. London: Penguin.

Fromm, E. (1955). The sane society. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Gendlin, E. T. (1978). Focusing. New York: Bantam.

Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: An experiential approach to behaviour change. New York: Guilford Press.

Jung, C. G. (1921). Psychological types. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Jung, C. G. (1928). The structure and dynamics of the psyche. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Jung, C. G. (1959). The archetypes and the collective unconscious. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Linehan, M. M. (1993). Cognitive-behavioural treatment of borderline personality disorder. New York: Guilford Press.

Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. London: Constable.

Schwartz, R. C. (1995). Internal family systems therapy. New York: Guilford Press.