Guidelines for Philosophical Counseling of Exceptional Experiences Next, a set of guidelines will be presented that was developed in the

philosophical practice under discussion. Further comparison with methods used in other relevant practices,1 will result in the composition of a more general catalogue of guidelines for the philosophical counselor who works with exceptional experiences. In general, we suggest the philosophical counselor should steer a course in which the following items are of importance. (1) First and foremost, a philosophical counselor has to judge whether or not the clients experience could be either a warning sign indicative of an acute physical or psychological disorder, or could be the cause of such disorders. In both cases, regular medical treatment should be recommended to the client. Where no such risk is present, we may turn to the next items on the list. (2) From the start, the counselor has to make clear that he or she works with an open approach that does not conform to a purely reductionistic interpretation. The importance of this stance cannot be overestimated. To the experiencer, the counselors opinion on the content of exceptional experiences is a crucial and most decisive element. Reasons for doubts about the conceptual openness of a philosophical counselor may inhibit a client and may block off his or her real story. (3) The counselor should identify the range of positive and negative preconceptions and stereotypes that the experiencer may hold on exceptional experiences in general. (4) The counselor should inform the experiencer on exceptional experiences in general, and he or she should focus on the fact that such experiences generally may have a variety of possible interpretations. Some experiencers may have to learn to distance themselves from reductionistic inclinations they may have; others, in contrast, should be advised on the fact that the felt meaningfulness of the exceptional experience often does not guarantee exactness, nor detailed perceptions. In this latter case, the experiencer must be brought to understand that the experience may not be a reliable source of information on, for instance, Gods predestination of men, or on the phenomenology of a world of deceased loved ones, on experiencers past lives, or on what angels and devils look like. (5) With that in mind, the counselor has to work out a more detailed and transparent account of the experience. This requires a sequence of relevant and very specific questions, plus the counselors ability to refrain from premature, injudicious conclusions.2 (6) Being able to demonstrate this specific interviewing competence is therapeutically productive in itself: Showing a non-reductionistic expert attitude proves the counselor to be trustworthy and authenticqualities that will reassure the experiencer. (7) To characterize and illustrate the relativity of the often exotic nature of exceptional experiences, the counselor should point out that millions of people have gone through very similar experiences. This reduction of the perceived exclusiveness of the experience will obstruct any megalomanic pretension on the part of the experient that may be aroused by viewing the experience as a unique inspiration. It also will help to neutralize aspects of an experience that may be frightening to the experient, and it can offer a comforting recognition in the case the experiencer has feelings of isolation. (8) Although the particular experience may not always be desirable, the experiencer still has to deal with the fact that it is his or her own. To ascribe its cause to others or to inaccessible external conditions is not a constructive approach. Instead of encouraging such projections, the
1

These points are partly taken from Greyson (2000, pp. 330- 331) and Grof & Grof (1989, pp. 194- 195), partly also from Targ (2001, p. 243) and from Kramer (1993, pp. 131-137). 2 Failure to recognize a Kundalini-experience, may undo the therapeutic alliance and hinder spiritual growth (Scotton, 1996, p. 265).

counselor is well-advised to stimulate acceptance and subjective confrontation of the respective experience. (9) Certain aspects of exceptional experiences may contain verifiable elements, such as, for example, in cases of telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, out-of-body experiences, or presumed past-lives memories. Whenever possible, checking and confirming such facts is important, for although this will not strictly rule out multi-interpretability, it will undermine any normal reductionistic explanations, and it may facilitate viable interpretations in terms of numinosity.3 (10) It is important that counselor and experient agree on the presupposition that the experience may have a transformative or healing potential, and may even be an indication of some form of guiding influence in a process of self-realization and spiritual growth. (11) When appropriate, the experiencer may be advised to write down reports and reflections on his or her experiences. This method may stimulate the reflection on and integration of the experiences. It may also reveal motives that could underlie the process. (12) Depending on what has been discussed, a client may be directed to certain literature sources and/or to specific courses.

Tarazi described how a therapist stimulated his client (in the USA) to check the many verifiable elements of her imagery (a previous life in Spain) produced under hypnosis. Finding out that in reality nothing corresponded to her imagery, the therapist reasoned, would reduce her obsession with this former life. However, many correspondences were indeed found. This was important for judging the case through both client and therapist (Tarazi, 1990).