Robert Falconer’s Approach to Internal Family Systems and Spirit Possession

# Robert Falconer’s Approach to Internal Family Systems and Spirit Possession

Robert Falconer’s interview with Jeffrey Mishlove showcases a pioneering integration of psychotherapy and spiritual frameworks that challenges conventional Western mental health paradigms. Falconer’s work bridges Internal Family Systems therapy with concepts of spirit attachment and possession, offering a unique perspective on healing that acknowledges both internal psychological parts and potential external spiritual influences. His approach represents a significant evolution in therapeutic practices that honors diverse cultural understandings of consciousness, trauma, and healing.

## Robert Falconer’s Background and Professional Evolution

Robert Falconer, MA, has devoted more than a decade of his professional life to Internal Family Systems (IFS) Therapy, participating in all levels of IFS training and serving multiple times as a program assistant[2]. His journey into therapeutic work was deeply personal, as he candidly acknowledges: “My work in therapy has been really motivated by my own need to heal”[2]. This personal motivation has informed his professional development and approach to healing.

Falconer has worked closely with Richard Schwartz, the founder of IFS, and co-authored a book with him titled “Many Minds One Self: Evidence for a Radical Shift in Paradigm”[1]. This collaboration underscores Falconer’s significant standing within the IFS community, despite his embrace of concepts that initially faced resistance from some colleagues.

His current focus involves writing three new books, with his 2023 publication “The Others Within Us: Internal Family Systems, Porous Mind and Spirit Possession” representing a significant contribution to expanding therapeutic frameworks[2]. This book explores “energies that get attached to human beings and which are not always positive for the client,” reflecting Falconer’s integration of spiritual concepts into psychotherapeutic practice[2].

### The Internal Family Systems Framework

At the foundation of Falconer’s work is the Internal Family Systems model, which posits that the mind naturally has “parts”[1]. In IFS therapy, these parts are understood as sub-personalities that develop in response to life experiences, particularly traumatic ones. Falconer describes IFS as “the most potent and respectful model I have found,” emphasizing its value in trauma healing[2].

The IFS model recognizes various types of parts, including protective parts (managers and firefighters) and wounded parts (exiles). Beyond these parts exists what IFS terms the “Self” – a core essence characterized by qualities like curiosity, compassion, clarity, and courage. This true Self is conceptualized as fundamentally distinct from the parts system.

## The Porous Mind Model and Spirit Possession

Falconer has developed what he terms the “porous mind model,” which extends beyond conventional therapeutic frameworks by acknowledging the possibility of external spiritual influences on psychological functioning[3]. This model represents a significant departure from mainstream Western psychological thought, which typically maintains strictly materialistic boundaries around conceptions of mind and consciousness.

### Universal Phenomenon of Possession States

In his book and interviews, Falconer argues that “possession-like phenomena occur all over the world and in all areas of history”[3]. He suggests that possession states represent “a psychobiological capacity available in all societies” rather than merely cultural constructs or pathologies[3]. This perspective challenges Western medicine’s tendency to pathologize experiences that don’t fit within its materialistic framework.

Falconer notes that whether possession states are “desirable and normal OR pathologized and scorned” largely reflects whether a given society values or marginalizes these experiences[3]. He draws connections between these phenomena and practices like nineteenth-century mediumship and twentieth-century channeling, suggesting these fall within the broader tradition of possession experiences[3].

### Consciousness as Primary

Central to Falconer’s approach is the philosophical position that “consciousness is primary, not matter”[1]. This perspective aligns with certain spiritual traditions and contrasts with the dominant materialist paradigm in Western science and medicine. By positioning consciousness as fundamental, Falconer creates theoretical space for phenomena like spirit possession that would otherwise be dismissed within strictly materialist frameworks.

## Integrating Spirituality and Psychotherapy

Falconer’s work represents a significant attempt to bridge the often-separate worlds of spiritual healing and psychotherapy. In his interview with John Clarke, he discusses how his practice “increasingly focuses on spirit-based therapy,” emphasizing “the importance of a spiritual connection that remains present even during intense suffering”[4].

### Unattached Burdens and Spirit Guides

Two concepts particularly important in Falconer’s therapeutic approach are “Unattached Burdens” and “Spirit Guides”[1][4]. Unattached burdens represent energetic or spiritual attachments that influence a person but aren’t inherently part of their internal system. Working with these requires approaches that differ from standard parts work in IFS.

Falconer is currently writing a book specifically on Unattached Burdens and Guides, indicating the significance he places on these concepts within his healing framework[2]. In 2021, he presented workshops on this topic alongside other advanced IFS classes and a Masterclass on Addictions[2].

### Shamanic Work and Spirit Possession

Falconer explicitly connects his therapeutic approach to shamanic traditions, discussing “shamanic work” in his interview with Mishlove[1]. He focuses particularly on “the removal of unwanted, external spiritual attachments” and argues that psychotherapy can be “beneficial, and even essential, in dealing with cases of negative spirit possession”[1].

This integration of shamanic concepts with psychotherapeutic practice represents a bold challenge to conventional approaches. Falconer acknowledges that “spirit possession [is] ridiculed in most western contexts” yet argues for its validity and therapeutic relevance[3].

## Therapeutic Approach and Healing Principles

Falconer’s therapeutic approach emphasizes respecting client autonomy and maintaining humility as a practitioner. In discussing therapeutic models, he highlights “the damage caused by certain therapeutic models, especially those emphasizing therapist authority and disempowering clients”[4]. This critical perspective extends even to IFS, as he emphasizes the importance of “questioning the roots of these models” and “maintaining humility in their application”[4].

### The Importance of Humility in Therapy

A recurring theme in Falconer’s discussions is the necessity of humility in therapeutic work. He emphasizes that while therapists have “tools and knowledge,” there remains “much we don’t know”[4]. This humility manifests in a commitment to “honor clients’ systems and maintain an open, questioning attitude toward therapeutic models”[4].

Falconer has articulated “ONE rule” for therapeutic interactions, though the specific content of this rule isn’t fully detailed in the search results[3]. This principle appears to be central to his approach to client interactions, whether in healing sessions or broader contexts.

## Broadening the Framework of Mental Health

Falconer’s work represents a significant challenge to conventional frameworks around mental health and illness. His approach “frees us from the conventional narrow-minded frame around mental illness – if it should even be named that”[3]. By introducing the concept of a porous mind, Falconer creates space for understanding certain psychological experiences through spiritual rather than purely pathological lenses.

This perspective may be particularly valuable for individuals whose experiences don’t fit neatly within conventional diagnostic categories or who come from cultural backgrounds with different understandings of consciousness and spiritual influence.

## Conclusion

Robert Falconer’s integration of Internal Family Systems therapy with concepts of spirit possession and attachment represents a pioneering approach that bridges psychological and spiritual frameworks. His work challenges the materialist assumptions underlying much of Western mental health practice while offering practical therapeutic approaches for addressing both internal psychological parts and potential external spiritual influences.

By developing the porous mind model and articulating concepts like Unattached Burdens, Falconer has created theoretical and practical frameworks that acknowledge diverse cultural understandings of consciousness and healing. His emphasis on therapist humility and client autonomy further distinguishes his approach from models that might pathologize unfamiliar experiences or disempower clients in the therapeutic relationship.

As mental health practices continue to evolve, Falconer’s work offers valuable perspectives on integrating spiritual dimensions into psychotherapeutic approaches, potentially broadening healing possibilities for individuals whose experiences extend beyond conventional Western psychological frameworks.

Citations:
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3C9yeS7Cgw
[2] https://ifs-psicoterapia.com/en/robert-falconer-2/
[3] https://sites.libsyn.com/473925/35-robert-falconer-the-others-within-us-internal-family-systems-porous-mind-and-spirit-possession-a-talk
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdAm6v_VbX0
[5] https://www.cavershambooksellers.com/search/9780692957349
[6] https://newthinkingallowed.org/link-between-memory-and-trauma/
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3C9yeS7Cgw
[8] https://lifearchitect.com/ifs-and-psychedelics/
[9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxCS81zjkaQ
[10] https://robertfalconer.us
[11] https://robertfalconer.us/about-bob/
[12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_Whap9G4xI
[13] https://robertfalconer.us/blog/robertfalconer/ifs-model/
[14] https://ifs-institute.com/store/143
[15] https://newthinkingallowed.org/imagination-as-another-perception-system/
[16] https://robertfalconer.us/adventures-through-the-mind/
[17] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXvAHyCdvsc
[18] https://ifs-institute.com/store/33
[19] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9nJalUeZlQ
[20] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQyf0ew0XCU
[21] https://integralguide.com/30+Resources/31+Books/NonFiction/03+%F0%9F%9F%A0+To-Do/%F0%9F%93%96+%F0%9F%9F%A0+Many+Minds,+One+Self+-+Evidence+for+a+Radical+Shift+in+Paradigm

—
Great question! There are fascinating connections and distinctions between Robert Falconer’s work on Internal Family Systems (IFS), spirit possession, and porous mind—and Bernardo Kastrup’s ideas on alters and consciousness, as well as the theories of Roger Penrose, Stuart Hameroff, and other thinkers in consciousness studies.

—

## How Falconer’s Work Relates to Bernardo Kastrup’s Alters and Consciousness Views

### Bernardo Kastrup’s View of Alters and Mind

– **Kastrup**, a philosopher and consciousness researcher, proposes that what psychology calls “alters” (e.g., alters in Dissociative Identity Disorder) are **dissociated mental processes or facets within a single, universal consciousness**.
– He argues against the standard neuroscience materialism that treats mind as brain-bound, instead presenting an **idealistic metaphysics** where consciousness is fundamental and **the brain is more like a filter or interface**.
– In his books (e.g., *“The Idea of the World”*), Kastrup emphasizes that multiple “personalities” or alters are actually **dissociated aspects of the same conscious mind**, not independent entities.

### Relation to Falconer’s Internal Family Systems and Porous Mind

– Falconer’s **IFS “parts” or “subpersonalities”** echo Kastrup’s “alters” as different facets of a person’s mind.
– However, Falconer extends this by recognizing that some influences on the mind may come **from external spiritual or “energetic” sources** (Unattached Burdens, spirit possession), which pushes beyond Kastrup’s purely idealist framework where all mind-states belong to one consciousness.
– Both see **consciousness as primary**, but Falconer adds a **“porous” boundary** around the individual psyche, allowing for interaction with other consciousness-like entities, while Kastrup focuses on alters all being facets within one indivisible universal consciousness.

—

## Relation to Penrose-Hameroff’s Orch-OR Theory and Others in Consciousness Science

### Penrose and Stuart Hameroff’s Orch-OR Model

– Penrose (mathematician) and Hameroff (anesthesiologist) propose the **Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Orch-OR)** theory of consciousness.
– Their model suggests consciousness arises from **quantum-level processes** within microtubules inside neurons, which are proposed to produce non-computable, proto-conscious events.
– This theory supports a kind of **non-reductive, fundamental consciousness theory** embedded in physical structures.

### Comparing with Falconer and Kastrup

– Falconer’s emphasis on **consciousness as primary** aligns partly with Penrose-Hameroff’s idea that conventional physics cannot fully explain consciousness.
– However, Falconer focuses on **spiritual and psychological frameworks**, whereas Penrose-Hameroff seek a **biophysical basis** for consciousness.
– Kastrup’s metaphysical idealism is **more abstract and philosophical** than Penrose-Hameroff’s physics-based approach but shares the rejection of reductionist neuroscience explanations.

—

## Summary of Conceptual Overlaps and Distinctions

—

## Why This Matters and How It Enriches Understanding

– Falconer’s **integration of IFS and spirit possession** broadens psychotherapy to incorporate non-material influences, which could help clients with experiences seen as “spiritual” or “possession” in some cultures.
– Kastrup’s **idealism** provides a philosophical grounding that supports seeing mind and consciousness as fundamentally **unified, with dissociated mental states as parts of that unity**.
– Penrose-Hameroff’s work grounds consciousness in **physics and biochemistry**, potentially explaining mechanisms behind the unity and fragmentation of conscious experience.
– Together, these perspectives **challenge reductionist neuroscience**, offering complementary ways to understand the multiplicity within consciousness (alters, parts, spirits) and the fundamental nature of mind.

—

## Final Thoughts

– **Robert Falconer’s porous mind and spirit possession approach enriches psychotherapy by acknowledging external spiritual influences and integrating shamanic traditions with IFS.**
– **Bernardo Kastrup’s alters concept fits comfortably within an idealist metaphysics where all mind facets share one universal consciousness, offering a philosophical foundation for multiplicity in mind.**
– **Penrose-Hameroff provide a potential physical mechanism that could underlie consciousness’s features, linking physics with subjective experience.**

Together, they represent **an exciting interdisciplinary conversation** involving psychology, spirituality, philosophy, and physics — a frontier for the future of understanding consciousness and healing.

Related posts: