BELONGING AND IDENTIFICATION

By Sadhana Kay Needham (December 2010)

Systemic family constellations provide an integral foundation for evoking and

supporting emergence of consciousness; out of human concepts of belonging.
Definitive concepts of belonging have consequences. Can processes of identification
provide a foundation for universal emergence of consciousness that moves beyond
belonging? Or are they a hindrance to the holism of being a human engaged in soul
movement?

“Theodore W. Adorno (September 11, 1903 – August 6, 1969) was a German-born

international sociologist, philosopher, and musicologist.

Adorno's work in the years before his death was shaped by the idea of "negative
dialectics", set out especially in his book of that title. A key notion in the work of the
Frankfurt School since Dialectic of Enlightenment had been the idea of thought
becoming an instrument of domination that subsumes all objects under the control of
the (dominant) subject, especially through the notion of identity, i.e. of identifying as
real in nature and society only that which harmonized or fit with dominant concepts,
and regarding as unreal or non-existent everything that did not. Adorno's "negative
dialectics" was an attempt to articulate a non-dominating thought that would
recognize its limitations and accept the non-identity and reality of that which could
not be subsumed under the subject's concepts. Indeed, Adorno sought to ground the
critical bite of his sociological work in his critique of identity, which he took to be
reification in thought of the commodity form or exchange relation which always
presumes a false identity between different things. The potential to criticize arises
from the gap between the concept and the object, which can never go into the
former without remainder. This gap, this non-identity in identity, was the secret to a
critique of both material life and conceptual reflection.” ( WIKAPEDIA- ADORNO )

As an exploration of how identification impacts upon concepts of belonging within

systemic family constellations (SFC); I would like to examine some of Adono’s ideas
mentioned above and relate them to SFC, for further understanding.

Man made western psychological, political, civic and social processes all facilitate
“….thought becoming an instrument of domination that subsumes all objects
under the control of the (dominant) subject, especially through the notion of
identity:” Left brain, logical and linear pathways incorporate, classify and include all
subjects that can be identified, categorized and contained within parameters of
intellect and thought alone. The very act of objectivity attempting to subsume
subjectivity via identity is out of order and yet this is what man made paradigms of
belonging attempt to do.

The real question is what came first: the subject or the identity, or the object? Now
asking what came first, the object or the subject is like asking, what came first the

1
chicken or the egg? It becomes indeterminable as to who came first. The question is a
dead end street. The path leads nowhere. The direction is purely philosophical, it
cannot facilitate growth. Those in family constellation that advocate loyalties to pure
presence or essence are also caught in an atmosphere that floats above growth
process. In conceptual consideration such as this, hierarchy, order and balance are
unobservable. Subjects and objects serve understanding for human transformation
when the mechanics of mind are able to organize life force (presence) within
parameters of existential hierarchy, order and balance. This orientates awareness
towards growth, transcendence and consciousness.

Conceptual misuse of identity as part of intellect, mind, conscience and belonging,

acts out of and executes a lesser authority to dominate, a higher authority. What came
second, or later (conceptualizing the known) insists to conquer, reorganize, systemize
and revolutionize what came first or earlier (the unidentifiable and the unknown.)
Second order social structures such as these are engineered to classify, “as real in
nature and society only that which harmonized or fit with dominant concepts,
and regarding as unreal or non-existent everything that did not.”

ESSENTIALLY AND EXISTENTIALLY “THE EVOLUTIONARILY LATER

ALWAYS SUBSUMES AND INCLUDES THE EVOLUTIONARILY
EARLIER.” (Frederick Turner.)

“Adorno’s “negative dialectics” was an attempt to articulate a non-dominating

thought that would recognize its limitations and accept the non-identity and
reality of that which could not be subsumed under the subject’s concepts.”

An articulate non-dominating thought that recognizes its limitations, and accepts non-
identity and reality of that which could not be subsumed, under the subject
“belonging’s” concepts, is “beyond belonging.” That non-dominating thought of
“beyond belonging” that could not be subsumed by belonging is entirely capable of
subsuming “belonging” itself, simply because it came later! It is able to do this
because it includes the evolutionary earlier level of belonging. Beyond belonging is
able to include, contain and embrace all identifications of order, balance and
hierarchy. Concepts of Man made belonging do not have this inherent capacity to
subsume concepts of beyond belonging. Man made belonging needs to consume
itself, transform itself; then capacity emerges.

“Indeed Adorno sought to ground the critical bite of his sociological work in his
critique of identity, which he took to be reification in thought of the commodity
form or exchange relation which always presumes a false identity between
different things. “

Can identity (concept) and belonging (object) in themself regard or treat “beyond
belonging” (subject), as if it had a concrete or material existence of its own? Identity
and belonging in the hands of mind, ego and conscience itself; demonstrate the innate
characteristic of reducing everything within a sphere of observation, into to a thing, a
possession. Even when social relations between people appear to be abstract and void
of any authentic energetic connection to life force; identifications fuelled by
belonging become relations between things. The “form or exchange relation”, of
identifying belonging, “which always presumes a false identity between different

2
things” begins to take precedence over qualitative reality, facts and revelation within
life, emerging out of states of beyond belonging. Left brain itself is identified with
form that inhibits actual exchange of formless influences in the exchange relation.

“The potential to criticize arises from the gap between the concept and the
object, which can never go into the former without remainder. This gap, this
non-identity in identity, was the secret to a critique of both material life and
conceptual reflection.”

The potential to criticise belonging arises from the gap between the concept it is, and
its objective observation of non-belonging. Aspects of non-belonging cannot fit into
the container of belonging and will always remain outside its smaller sphere of
influence. This gap, this non-identity (beyond belonging)…. in identity…
(belonging), was the secret to a critique of both material life and conceptual
reflection. This means that the concept of belonging is able to REFLECT elements of
non-belonging in material life. Reflection is the existential key to unravel
identifications of belonging. It is reflection that is able to turn those identifications
into platforms or building blocks that can successfully launch deep and necessary
understandings to experience life beyond belonging. Reflection only becomes
possible after embodiment i.e. body or container first as roots of sustainability. The
ability to dis-identify from mind sets of identification around belonging arises out of
meditation, detached observation and separation from mind and concepts of belonging
itself. This is achieved via conscious reflection of embodied states of belonging.

In fact aware reflection upon embodiment is the “gap” of non-identity in identity.

Being in a body, as pure human being and not identified with concept, subject or
object provides the opportunity for reflection.

“To remain in an unembodied presence is to remain outside the realm of

existential growth possibility with no possibility to reflect.”

Embodiment and entanglement are essential for emerging systemic growth of

individuals and greater systems.