.jpg){kind=logo}
801 Ladera Lane, Santa Barbara, CA 93108
Community in Difference: Cultivating a Home for Love and Justice in an Indifferent World
February 28, 2013 to March 3, 2013
THE CONFERENCE IS SOLD OUT. We have a waiting list on a first come, first served basis should there be cancellations. There will be no payment at the door, unless arrangements have already been made with Brent Potter, local conference chair. To get on the waiting list, please e-mail Brent Potter: brentpotterma@yahoo.com. Thank you.
Presenters scheduled in Barrett Center (BC) and Room G requested AV (e.g. powerpoint). Presenters not assigned to these rooms will be giving paper or roundtable presentations.
Tickets for the Irvin Yalom Workshop will only be available at the door. Presale tickets are no longer available
Prices at the Door:
$50 general admission
$30 students with ID
Prices at the Door:
$50 general admission
$30 students with ID
Keynote Speakers for 2013:
Irvin Yalom, M.D.
Gabor Mate, M.D.
Jennifer Selig, Ph.D.
Geneva Reynaga-Abiko, Psy.D.
Shelly Harrell, Ph.D.
Invited Speakers:
Robert Stolorow,Ph.D., Jacqueline Gunn, Psy.D,
Dan Edmunds, Ed.D., and
members of the Pacifica Graduate Institute faculty
Irvin Yalom, M.D.
Gabor Mate, M.D.
Jennifer Selig, Ph.D.
Geneva Reynaga-Abiko, Psy.D.
Shelly Harrell, Ph.D.
Invited Speakers:
Robert Stolorow,Ph.D., Jacqueline Gunn, Psy.D,
Dan Edmunds, Ed.D., and
members of the Pacifica Graduate Institute faculty
-
Irvin Yalom, M.D., keynote speaker -
Gabor Mate, M.D., keynote speaker -
Jennifer Selig, Ph.D., keynote speaker -
Shelly P.Harrell,Ph.D., invited speaker -
Jacqueline Simon Gunn, Psy.D., invited speaker -
Negar Shekarabi,Psy.D., invited speaker -
Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D., invited speaker -
Robert Stolorow, Ph.D., invited speaker
Irvin Yalom, M.D., keynote speaker
This year, President Louis Hoffman and President-Elect Brent Robbins have agreed to make diversity a central mission of the Society for Humanistic Psychology's efforts. The theme reflects the importance of this current mission of the Society.
At the 2012 annual conference at Point Park University this past year, Dr. Nathaniel Granger, Jr. gave a stirring appeal to the Society that, if we wish to create more diversity in the Society's community, it is not enough to invite diverse members to our conferences. We must invite him, as a person, into our "home." The conference title is a homage to Nathaniel's inspiring speech, and also an appeal to the importance of cultivating "home" for diversity in our Society by recognizing, honoring and coming home to differences, both cultural and individual, within our community.
The main title of the conference, "Community in Difference" is an intentional play on words. When read audibly, the phrase could be interpreted to mean a community that is indifferent to its membership. This is the shadow side of a community that strives to create a respect for difference. Icy detachment is a danger of seeking diversity through indifference. The notion of indifference also conjures associations to the call to be free of prejudice and bias in our interactions with others. Yet, as human beings, we are saturated by history and by our cultural understandings, and so indifference or neutrality is a utopian (as in impossible), even if well-intentioned promise. Also, a community that is indifferent would not truly be a community, since part of what it means to be a community is to have a care and concern for others in the community, and to rally around shared values and goals. How does one cultivate a home within community that is not indifferent, yet which is mindful of the violence of prejudice and discrimination, despite good intentions? We invite reflection for this conference on this dilemma that is so central to the Society's current focus.
The explicit attention given to love and justice is a reference to what is currently a hot topic in phenomenological and continental thinking, especially in reference to dialogue among influential thinkers such as Paul Ricoeur, Jacques Derrida, and Emmanuel Levinas. These are all important figures who have helped to influence the face of humanistic and existential approaches to psychology. Within this conversation on love and justice, attention has been given to the paradox that often justice and love appear to be at odds with one another. Whereas justice is supposed to be impartial and fair, love by definition is usual construed as a special regard for a particular person or group of persons in contrast to others - a form of favoritism. Are love and justice in fact at odds? Or is there a way they can be reconciled? This paradox of love and justice parallels the problem of a community that wants to include difference but at risk of becoming so indifferent that genuine community is impossible.
The humanistic psychological emphasis on unconditional positive regard is an example of a humanistic command to love -- that is to hold someone in special regard. Yet, the therapist or parent, for example, is commanded to do so unconditionally, which would imply that such love would be shared with everyone. Would such a love as unconditional positive regard risk becoming a cold indifference? Why or why not?
Another possible avenue of explanation is the problem of neutrality or objectivity in qualitative research. Many researchers believe they must remain totally objective in their understanding of an issue of concern. Yet, to become completely indifferent to one's scientific project would mean, at the extreme, a lack of interest or motivation in the research question, in which case the research could never even get started. How does a researcher balance the desire for truth with a passionate desire to know? In other words, how can the love of the subject be channeled in such a way that is not so indifferent as to be assume a researcher is inhuman, yet still remain a genuine and passionate search for an impartial truth?
These and similar questions are encouraged, but not required for submitted proposals to the conference. Other themes may include humanistic approaches to psychotherapy, community building, teaching and research. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods of research are all welcome. Integrative approaches to humanistic therapy and community psychology are especially appreciated, especially when they build bridges to other approaches and foster dialogue.
At the 2012 annual conference at Point Park University this past year, Dr. Nathaniel Granger, Jr. gave a stirring appeal to the Society that, if we wish to create more diversity in the Society's community, it is not enough to invite diverse members to our conferences. We must invite him, as a person, into our "home." The conference title is a homage to Nathaniel's inspiring speech, and also an appeal to the importance of cultivating "home" for diversity in our Society by recognizing, honoring and coming home to differences, both cultural and individual, within our community.
The main title of the conference, "Community in Difference" is an intentional play on words. When read audibly, the phrase could be interpreted to mean a community that is indifferent to its membership. This is the shadow side of a community that strives to create a respect for difference. Icy detachment is a danger of seeking diversity through indifference. The notion of indifference also conjures associations to the call to be free of prejudice and bias in our interactions with others. Yet, as human beings, we are saturated by history and by our cultural understandings, and so indifference or neutrality is a utopian (as in impossible), even if well-intentioned promise. Also, a community that is indifferent would not truly be a community, since part of what it means to be a community is to have a care and concern for others in the community, and to rally around shared values and goals. How does one cultivate a home within community that is not indifferent, yet which is mindful of the violence of prejudice and discrimination, despite good intentions? We invite reflection for this conference on this dilemma that is so central to the Society's current focus.
The explicit attention given to love and justice is a reference to what is currently a hot topic in phenomenological and continental thinking, especially in reference to dialogue among influential thinkers such as Paul Ricoeur, Jacques Derrida, and Emmanuel Levinas. These are all important figures who have helped to influence the face of humanistic and existential approaches to psychology. Within this conversation on love and justice, attention has been given to the paradox that often justice and love appear to be at odds with one another. Whereas justice is supposed to be impartial and fair, love by definition is usual construed as a special regard for a particular person or group of persons in contrast to others - a form of favoritism. Are love and justice in fact at odds? Or is there a way they can be reconciled? This paradox of love and justice parallels the problem of a community that wants to include difference but at risk of becoming so indifferent that genuine community is impossible.
The humanistic psychological emphasis on unconditional positive regard is an example of a humanistic command to love -- that is to hold someone in special regard. Yet, the therapist or parent, for example, is commanded to do so unconditionally, which would imply that such love would be shared with everyone. Would such a love as unconditional positive regard risk becoming a cold indifference? Why or why not?
Another possible avenue of explanation is the problem of neutrality or objectivity in qualitative research. Many researchers believe they must remain totally objective in their understanding of an issue of concern. Yet, to become completely indifferent to one's scientific project would mean, at the extreme, a lack of interest or motivation in the research question, in which case the research could never even get started. How does a researcher balance the desire for truth with a passionate desire to know? In other words, how can the love of the subject be channeled in such a way that is not so indifferent as to be assume a researcher is inhuman, yet still remain a genuine and passionate search for an impartial truth?
These and similar questions are encouraged, but not required for submitted proposals to the conference. Other themes may include humanistic approaches to psychotherapy, community building, teaching and research. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods of research are all welcome. Integrative approaches to humanistic therapy and community psychology are especially appreciated, especially when they build bridges to other approaches and foster dialogue.
Watch for announcements for registration and fees....coming soon!
No upcoming events
.jpg){kind=logo}