motivational interviewing applied to group settings

the idea of agape.

session boundaries

• Length … , Break ….• A presentation, with opportunities for

comment / discussion, then a group activity.

• Focus – I will invite you to think about the effect of using agape in a group setting

• My bias: Agape is something I have used and found helpful. I will try to suspend this bias for the duration of the session.

definition

• It is one of the Koine Greek words translated into English as love

• Often translated as "unconditional love", • It has been used culturally, interpersonally

and individually. This presentation will suggest agape cabn influnce the opeartion of groups through each of these pathways.

• So will outline arguments for and against its use at each level.

cultural levelProponents1. Jesus – agape leads to

reward.2. Tertullian - agape

distinguishes Christians from others.

3. Q.C Quick – agape is an aspiration which bring us closer to god.

4. Stephen Pinker – ideas like agape restrain communal violence.

5. Agape models an (too?) advanced stage of moral development - Kohlberg

Challenges1. Agape is ethnocentric -

ignores responsibility of individual to the group

2. Somerset Maughen -Agape is a falsely superior morality unrelated to its functional outcome.

3. Thomas Hobbes- Agape lacks a social contract including the threat of overwhelming force necessary for peace.

interpersonal levelProponents1. Oord - Agape promotes

general wellbeing after abuse.2. Agape helps other people

change Carl Rogers, Paul Gilbert (ACT), in MI (Miler & Rollnick) it helps us resist a righting reflex.

3. Agape is one way to “Give rejection the finger, and [so] rejection gives it back’. Dutton

4. Agape tempers punitive reactions encouraging people to take risks and learn form their mistakes.

Challenges1. Experiencing agape makes

people open to abuse e.g. through seduction, and/or crucifixion.

2. Agape is contradictory with the motivational interviewing stance on curiosity

3. Agape encourages a abdication of responsibility. Behavioral speaking agape can be considered a non contingent reward.

individual levelProponents1. Agape can be

associated with useful cognitions / positive delusions e.g. “I am ok you are ok

2. Useful container for our other emotions

3. Facilitates self change Carl Rogers, Paul Gilbert (ACT), transitional object (Freud)

4. Feels good

Challenges1. Partial, blinds us to part

of reality2. Ignores individual

function of other emotions - information, evolution & influence e.g. hate

3. Suggests only one route to personal change

4. Agape is simply a narcissistic defence pretending our less loving parts do not exist.

group activity 1

• What to you is common/ the nature to all humans?

• and/or• What do you love

about all humans/humanity?

group activity 2

• IF we think is could be useful to experience agape in a group setting. What could we do to experience this in a group setting and induce others to experience it too?

• Alternatively IF we think this would not be useful in a group setting. What could we do to make this less likely to happen in a group setting?

group exercise 3

• Can we practise it in the here and now in this group…

• If this ok with you I will start ?