This article was downloaded by: [University of Arizona]

On: 02 February 2015, At: 03:34

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

World Futures: The Journal of New

Paradigm Research
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gwof20

The holistic paradigm

a
Stanley Krippner
a
Professor of Psychology , Saybrook Institute , 1550 Sutter
Street, San Francisco, California, 94709, USA
Published online: 04 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Stanley Krippner (1991) The holistic paradigm, World Futures: The Journal
of New Paradigm Research, 30:3, 133-140

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02604027.1991.9972203

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever
as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any
opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the
authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy
of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified
with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection
with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/
page/terms-and-conditions
 The Holistic Paradigm

STANLEY KRIPPNER

Professor of Psychology, Saybrook Institute, 1550 Sutter Street, San Francisco, California
94709, USA
(Received October 2, 1989)

KEYWORDS: holistic, medicine, paradigm, post-modern, mythology

Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015

Paradigms are worldviews. They are constellations of concepts, perceptions,

values, and practices that are shared by a community and that direct the activities of
members of that community. A paradigm can characterize a very small community,
such as a scientific research team, or it can characterize an entire culture.
What is referred to as the "modern" worldview emerged in Europe during the
17th century; it is responsible for impressive advances in technology, industry, and
scientific discovery. However, it has not prevented (and may even have been partially
responsible for) unprecedented fragmentation, nihilism, and destruction. As
Morris Berman states:
Western life seems to be drifting toward increasing entropy, economic and technologi-
cal chaos, ecological disaster, and ultimately, psychic dismemberment and disintegra-
tion (Berman, 1984).
As a corrective to this situation, "post-modern" or "holistic" thought hopes to
preserve the virtues of the "modern" worldview while replacing its mechanistic and
reductionistic assumptions with those that are more organic in nature.

THE MYTHIC NATURE OF PARADIGMS

Paradigms are worldviews that arise from epistemologies which, in turn, are
generated by the motivations that control them. In the 17th century, Europe
adopted the epistemology of empiricism (i.e., the modern scientific method) that
led to scientific principles that were repeatable and dependable. To a significant
degree, science was able to control nature, predict behavior, and explain a multi-
tude of phenomena.
The modern paradigm claims to have replaced mythology as an explanatory
structure. Indeed, it equates the term "myth" with the notion of falsehood. How-
ever, in its more traditional meaning, a myth is a story or organizing belief which
embodies certain basic principles that guide human activities. In former times,
cultural mythologies evolved for the purpose of helping members of a social group
cope with their surroundings, helping them through life's stages and crises.
World Futures Vol. 30, pp. 133-140 © 1991 Gordon and Breach Science Publishers S.A.
Reprints available directly from the publisher Printed in the United States of America
Photocopying permitted by license only

133
 134 STANLEY KRIPPNER

The old cultural mythologies performed four functions. They helped people
comprehend and explain the natural environment in an understandable way. They
provided a pathway for carrying people through the succeeding epochs of their
lives. They established social roles that facilitated congenial personal relationships
and fulfilling work patterns. They enabled people to feel that they were participat-
ing in the vast wonder and perplexity of the cosmos (Campbell, 1989). Mythologies
varied during the classical and medieval eras but still encompassed all four of these
functions.
Modern scientists rarely comprehend that they are fulfilling a mythic function by
providing explanations of the natural environment. Ancient observers believed
that lightning was produced by Zeus, Jupiter, or Thor throwing bolts to earth from
Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015

the heavens. The modern observer believes that lightning is an electrical discharge
in the atmosphere caused by the electric-charge separation produced in thunder-
storm clouds. The latter has replaced the former because of its parsimony and
applicability, but both concepts can be seen as mythic in nature.
Primitive or totemic thought conceptualized people as an integral part of nature:
knowledge was mediated through tribal shamans who heard "voices," saw "visions,"
and dreamed of "other realities." Later, for Greek and other people in the classical
era, knowledge was obtained through rationally constructed metaphysical systems.
In medieval times, knowledge was "scholastic," i.e., it was to be found in the correct
interpretation of sacred revealed scripture.
The modern approach to knowledge—proper application of the scientific
method—regarded the previous approaches as sheer superstition. However, each
of these epistemologies can be seen as mythic in nature, as positing an "absolute
truth," much like the Holy Grail or the Golden Fleece, a "truth" that could be
obtained through a heroic journey that would penetrate the changing flux of
experience and disclose a universal, underlying essence.
Modern science has fulfilled one mythic quest quite well insofar as it has provided
explanations for observable phenomena. In addition, it has accelerated the aban-
donment of ancient and medieval beliefs that produced suffering for certain
individuals and social groups. No longer are young people sacrificed to insure the
sun's reappearance following an eclipse. Only occasionally are women burned with
the corpses of their husbands during funeral ceremonies. With increasing rarity do
rigid caste systems and institutionalized slavery negate or warp the expression of
affiliation and talent. And it is uncommon today for people to be maimed, tortured,
or killed to satisfy the perceived needs of a bloodthirsty deity.
Some modern totalitarian and imperialistic states, perhaps unwittingly, have
attempted to produce all-embracing mythologies using science, technology, and
economics for this purpose. Entry into the state-approved political party or eco-
nomic system is seen as a rite of passage. Work and family are given heroic status
through awards heralding a worker's surpassing of production goals or the mother's
production of an approved number of children. The founders of the state, or the
authors of the political philosophy underlying the social structure of that state,
become God-like in nature.
Aldous Huxley (1932) satirized this trend in his novel Brave New World. In
Huxley's counter-Utopia, science and technology had produced a society that
 THE HOLISTIC PARADIGM 135

fervently believed in its motto: "Community, Identity, Stability." Individuality was a

thing of the past. Human beings were manufactured through mass production
methods, and conditioned to enjoy their social states. From infancy, "Beta" workers
were taught to repeat, "I'm glad I'm a Beta," and the other social classes, from the
Alpha Plus Intellectuals to the Epsilon Minus Morons, were similarly conditioned.
Henry Ford, who was thought to have used the name "Freud" when he wrote about
psychosexual matters, was the God-figure of the Brave New World.
With these exceptions in both fantasy and reality, modern science has not created
new rituals to mark life's developmental stages; it has not found ways to fulfill
people's needs for interpersonal intimacy or meaningful work, or their hunger for
spiritual fulfillment through unity with a schema greater than themselves. Modern
Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015

science, then, can be conceptualized as an incomplete mythology—one that has

impressive explanatory power but that is better at demolishing older mythic con-
structs than establishing new concepts to replace them. In other words, science
fulfills humankind's needs for understanding natural phenomena, but rarely ad-
dresses itself to the developmental, social, and spiritual needs that traditionally
were fulfilled by cultural myths.

THE EMERGING HOLISTIC PARADIGM

There is a limit to the guidance that science and technology can provide, at least
in their present form. For example, they have little to say about the spiritual nature
of human beings (Beloff, 1987). We can use the word "spiritual" to refer to those
human experiences that are accorded the ultimate value. They may be "numinous"
(filled with "numen" or divine power), "transpersonal" (extending beyond personal
concerns into those of all humanity), "transcendent" (establishing contact with
higher knowledge), and "sacred" (being worthy of reverence, devotion, or worship).
The holistic paradigm considers the physical, mental, emotional, social, and spiri-
tual components of the human being, their interactions, and their nurturance.
The modern worldview is mechanistic, insisting that nature is a machine, com-
posed of machine-like parts. The holistic paradigm allows for choice, for volition,
for will, for flow, and for spontaneity.
The modern paradigm is individualistic; people are seen as separate egos
encapsulated by their skins. The holistic worldview envisions communications and
connections between people and emphasizes the importance of community, of
society, and of culture.
The modern paradigm is scientistic, with the scientific method challenging the
concepts of religion. The holistic paradigm sees the potential worth of religious
institutions in reaffirming values, altruistic behavior, and cooperative activity—
while admitting that like all human institutions they often fall short of these goals.
The modern paradigm is materialistic, viewing all existence as composed of
measurable material entities. The holistic paradigm admits the possibility of anom-
alous events, of subtle energies, and undiscovered natural laws and principles that
might challenge the materialistic model or call for its revision.
The modern worldview is reductionistic; wholes are explainable in terms of their
 136 STANLEY KRIPPNER

parts. The holistic paradigm is systems-oriented; wholes are more than the sum of
their interacting parts. Emergent properties, dissipative structures, deep ecology,
and the implicit order make a reductionistic method untenable.
The modern paradigm extols the accumulation of material goods and a greed
motivated, power hungry, struggle-for-survival, work ethos. The holistic paradigm
is information-based, prefers the development of education, training, and human
services to the production of consumer items, and balances work with play and with
love. The holistic paradigm replaces breakneck industrialization with the careful
and deliberate use of rational and sustainable development.
The modern paradigm is anthropocentric, with humans mastering and control-
ling nature for their own ends. The holistic worldview sees humans at one with
Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015

nature, and calls for an end to overpopulation, pollution, erosion, desertification,

deforestation, and the wanton destruction of flora and fauna. It calls for a restora-
tion of the environment, and an abundance of food and natural resources rather
than a mental set based on scarcity.
The modern paradigm is Eurocentric, focusing its attention on Western indus-
trialized societies. The holistic paradigm draws upon wisdom from developing
countries as well as developed countries, from Eastern thought as well as Western
thought, from the Southern hemisphere as well as the Northern hemisphere, from
rural and tribal people as well as urban residents.
The modern paradigm is patriarchal and militaristic. The holistic paradigm is
aware of contributions made by feminist writers and artists, by androgenous life
styles, by members of racial, ethnic, and sexual minorities, by peace activists, by
environmentalists, and by the new economics, the new physics, and the new politics.
The territorial conflicts and bloody battlegrounds of the modern era will be
replaced by a lively interchange of markets, ideas, and information. Repression and
exploitation will be replaced by democratic participation and social justice.
A society based on the holistic paradigm promises a great deal: a societal
organization in which there will be less competition and more cooperation, and
where the feelings of social unity will be greater than the assertions of the individ-
ual; less of a work ethic and more of a merging of work, play, and learning; a greater
tolerance of variety and experimentation; a greater respect for the potentials of
consciousness; and a fostering of institutions which will support these goals.

INSIGHTS FROM NATIVE HEALERS

One source of holistic wisdom with which I am personally familiar is the native
healers who care for more sick and ailing people around the world than western-
oriented allopathic physicians. During the past two decades, my colleagues and I
have worked with native healers on five continents, admiring their devotion, their
insight, and their integrity (Villoldo and Krippner, 1987). The differences between
their models of healing and those of Western physicians mirror the difference
between the holistic and the modern paradigms.
Western medicine asserts that disease is an entity in itself which can be caused by
an agent external to the body and which can be isolated from other aspects of the
 THE HOLISTIC PARADIGM 137

patient during the treatment process. On the other hand, traditional native healing
assumes that disease is a part of a larger energy field and can not be treated in
isolation from this field. For example, disease can be directly related to a patient's
personality, life style, body constitution, family, or community.
Western medicine sees pain and illness as negative in nature, something to be
eliminated and avoided, even in conversation. Traditional medicine uses pain and
disease as sources of information concerning a patient's conflict, imbalance, and
disharmony. Confronting this information and bringing it into consciousness can
be an important learning experience.
Western allopathic physicians emphasize drugs and surgery in their treatment.
Native healers may use these procedures as well, but will also employ such methods
Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015

as acupuncture, diet, exercise, herbs, prayers, purifications, rituals, and visual-

izations.
In Western medicine, the body is considered to be a machine that needs frequent
repair. In Native medicine, the body is seen as a dynamic system, as an energy field
within a larger context. To the western physician, body and mind are separable;
mental problems are referred to psychotherapists. For the native healer, body and
mind are a unity; in most instances, arbitrary divisions between mental and physical
problems do not exist.
In allopathic medicine, the physician is important and ultimately provides the
necessary answers to the patient's problems. In traditional medicine, the client's
assistance often is sought as well as that of the family and community. Various
assignments are delegated so that the patient can assist in self-healing.
In Western medicine, the placebo effect is largely disregarded or thought of as a
nuisance. Native medicine relies heavily on the patient's belief and the importance
of attitude. Indeed, the therapeutic power of socially sanctioned treatments has
been accepted within every society since the dawn of recorded history.
In allopathy, measurement and quantitative information are paramount. In
traditional medicine, measurement is not disregarded; pulse reading in Oriental
medicine is an example of precise measurement. However, qualitative information
is also sought. The patient's reports and the doctor's intuition are highly valued.
Modern Western medical research is conducted in a laboratory; the focused
attention of the scientist is the only connection between the person and the experi-
ment. Medical researchers pride themselves on their "detachment" and "objec-
tivity." In traditional medicine, curiosity is present, experimentation is present, but
detachment is not present. The stimulus for research might be the death of a loved
one, a message in a dream from the spirit world, or a plague that has decimated the
community. This type of research implies that there is a direction worth following,
but the process eliminates the distance between the researcher and the topic rather
than increasing it.
Allopathic medicine and native healing have come into greater contact since the
World Health Organization, in 1977, pledged to attempt provision of worldwide
health care by the year 2000. This goal was to be actualized through the training of
native healers, sometimes incorporating them into western medical clinics, birthing
centers, and hospitals. Already, successful programs have been initiated in parts of
Africa, Asia, and Latin America (Mahler 1977).
 138 STANLEY KRIPPNER

CRACKS IN THE MODERN PARADIGM

Thomas Kuhn (1970) has observed that any time in science there are facts that
cannot be easily explained and observations which do not fit in fully with what is
known. A paradigm shift often results from this accumulation of anomalous data
once they reach a critical mass. At the present time, there are several data sources
that indicate that the modern paradigm is incomplete at best and flawed at worst.
One of the most perceptive analyses of the cracks in the modern paradigm has
been put forward by the philosopher Huston Smith (1982) who has described four
aspects of the stress and distress that have become apparent.
1. Distress stemming from reductionism. In a worldview reduced to factual
Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015

information, institutions have lost a coherent sense of values. Facts, especially those
gleaned from the study and control of nature, are given a higher priority than
wisdom. But it is wisdom rather than facts that helps people fulfill the mythic needs
of guidance, meaning, and enspiritedness. Therefore, distress results from value
uncertainties and science is helpless to afford relief.
2. Distress occasioned by reason. In the modern worldview, nothing is granted
the credentials of "truth" unless it has been arrived at through reason. Reasoning
may take the form of logic, observation, or experimentation, just as long as the
process is objective, separate from nature, and mechanistic.
3. Stress in evolutionary theory. As a description of life's journey on the planet,
evolution is a noble scientific achievement. But the modern paradigm, perhaps
unwittingly, has attributed an explanation of that journey through evolution. For
example, it claims that natural selection working on "chance mutations" accounts
for life forms. But the term "chance mutations" points to something inexplicable; its
use as explanation demonstrates the mythic incompleteness of the current para-
digm.
4. Stress in quantum physics. The reference points for the modern worldview are
matter and motion—the materialistic, mechanical paradigm. Developments in
quantum mechanics have thrown this paradigm into question but they have not
made any significant dent in this mode of constructing reality.
Smith's examples point to places where breakthroughs may occur because the
modern paradigm is vulnerable at those points. As mentioned before, modern
science is the predominant mythic construction of the age, but it is an incomplete
myth. Its proponents have applied it successfully to humankind's need for explana-
tion, but not to the need to cope successfully with social and personal change, or to
the need for spiritual understanding.
There are several other writers who have proposed new paradigms that are
holistic in nature. David Bohm (1986), the physicist, sees an implicit order hidden
within the explicit order. Furthermore, Bohm and other representatives of the "new
physics" remind us that not only does quantum theory point out the impossibility of
distinguishing between an "observer" and an "observed," but it can be interpreted
in a way as to bring consciousness fully into the mainstream of scientific investiga-
tion. Another area directly relevant to the holistic paradigm would be the "holo-
nomic" models of reality, ranging from the empirically based work of the neuro-
 THE HOLISTIC PARADIGM 139

scientist Karl Pribram (1980) to the more speculative theorizing of the biologist
Rupert Sheldrake (1981).
Other writers have proposed applications to holistic thought of biological syn-
ergy (Bateson, 1979; Bleibtreu, 1969), ecological research (Harman, 1974), general
systems theory (Krippner et al., 1985), and human science (Polkinghorne, 1983).
Each of these movements indicate the potential value of a new paradigm, one that
would herald important revisions of current myths as well as the construction of
new mythic conceptualizations of the world and our place in it.
In the holistic paradigm, the post-modern age might be simpler, more elegant,
and more parsimonious than can be imagined today. The current dichotomies
between "brain" and "mind," between "body" and "psyche," and between "matter"
Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015

and "spirit" may be resolved in favor of a systems-oriented interactionist model of

consciousness. What today is considered "extra-sensory" may tomorrow be concep-
tualized as "super-sensory." What today is considered the "unconscious" may some-
day be termed the "ever conscious."
If the post-modern age is to represent a substantive advance over the modern
age, the world's antagonistic superpowers and sects will need to be reconciled, the
earth's ecology will need to be restored; the dispossessed peoples of the globe will
need to be empowered: the planet's dwindling food and energy resources will need
to be augmented and carefully allocated; effective treatments for old and new
diseases will need to be discovered. The holistic paradigm may well provide clues,
models, metaphors, and even applications for assisting in solving some of the
critical problems that must be faced both in our own time and in whatever post-
modern world is able to emerge in the future.

Acknowledgments

This paper was prepared for an international conference, "Seeking the True Meaning of Peace,"
University for Peace, Escazu, Costa Rica, June 26-30, 1989.

References

Bateson, Gregory. 1979. Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity, New York: E. P. Dutton.
Beloff, John. (1977). "Historical overview." In B. B. Wolman, Handbook of Parapsychology, pp. 3-24, New
York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, p. 21.
Berman, Morris. 1984. The Reenchantment of the World, New York: Bantam Books, p. 1.
Bleibtreu, John N. 1969. The Parable of the Beast, New York: Collier Books.
Bohm, David, 1986, Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Campbell, Joseph. 1984. The Hero with a Thousand Faces (2nd ed.), New York: Bantam Books, p. 34.
Harman, Willis W. 1974. T h e social implications of psychic research. In John White and Edgar D.
Mitchell (eds.), Psychic Exploration: A Challenge for Science, pp. 640-669, New York: G. P. Putnam's
Sons.
Huxley, Aldous. 1932. Brave New World, New York: Doubleday, Doran.
 140 STANLEY KRIPPNER

Krippner, Stanley, Ruttenber, A. James, Engelman, Suzanne R., and Granger, Dennis. 1985. Toward the
application of general systems theory in humanistic psychology, Systems Research 2, 105-115.
Kuhn, Thomas. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (rev. ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Mahler, Halfden. November 1977. "The staff of Aesculapius," World Health, p. 3.
Polkinghorne, Don 1983. Methodology for the Human Sciences: Systems of Inquiry, Albany: State University
of New York Press.
Pribram, Karl H. 1986. Behaviorism, phenomenology and holism in psychology: A scientific analysis.
Journal of Social and Biological Structure 2, 6 5 - 7 2 .
Sheldrake, Rupert. 1981. A New Science of Life, London: Frederick Mullen
Smith, Houston. 1982. Beyond the Post-Modern Mind, New York: Crossroad.
Villoldo, Alberto and Krippner, Stanley. 1987. Healing States, New York: Fireside Books.
Downloaded by [University of Arizona] at 03:34 02 February 2015