An hypothesis to unify IFS

In my study of Internal Family Systems (IFS) I have encountered many questions from clients and colleagues, in workshops, and online that reflect the difficulty many people have in understanding exactly what “Parts” and “Self” are in the human system. I have struggled to find a widely agreed-upon, concise description of the relationship of Parts to Self, their relationship to the human experience, and their origins. Despite Dr. Richard C. Schwartz’s chapter on Inner Physics (Schwartz and Sweezy, Internal Family Systems Therapy, 2nd ed.) and other authoritative sources, these issues remain ambiguous.

To be clear, the IFS model does not need further clarification—it is a successful psychotherapeutic model that has proven itself. However, I have a Part that wants to understand how Parts and Self fit into a model of the universe. What precisely is the Inner Physics of IFS? What can I contribute to a “unified hypothesis” that explains all aspects of IFS as revealed in clinical practice?

Dr. Richard Schwartz has described “Self” in several different ways. The description that resonates best with me is that Self is a transcendent “field,” rather than something material, or that it arises from each individual mind. In such a model, the “field of Self” permeates and surrounds the body/mind and is not entirely personal. It is considered immutable, always present, even if obscured by the burdens of Parts. The Self is said to have no agenda, but harmony and wholeness are its essence (along with the 8 Cs). So when sufficient Self-energy is experienced in the system, it fosters these transcendent qualities in and between Parts and, consequently, in the individual and in our relationships with others and the world. So this Self-energy is the source of humans’ transcendent qualities, such as balance, harmony, compassion, love without condition or agenda, connectedness, etc.

Parts, on the other hand, are thought to be personal. They are considered natural expressions of every mind, each Part with its own individual identity and roles. It has been suggested that Parts may be associated with individual neural networks within the brain. Though some Parts are said to be present at birth, more appear later in life and are associated with the stages of growth. An adult’s mind will be made up of many Parts, including many we may never get to know because their roles do not get, or need, our attention.

My current thinking is that all of the mind’s mental/emotional activity is performed by our Parts using the neural circuitry provided by the central nervous system. When living our daily lives, our Parts are what is doing that living. This is their purpose and why Parts exist. It’s not Self that lives our regular day-to-day life—it’s our Parts (whether burdened or not). Thus, it seems likely that consciousness (“the awareness by the mind of itself and the world”) would also arise from our Parts.

When Parts are fulfilling their natural roles (i.e., are not burdened), they provide the mental/emotional life that allows for a well-functioning mind and personality. Such a well-functioning system is informed and underpinned by the field of Self and its energy. In this kind of system, Self-energy’s qualities are readily accessible to these Parts as they live out our lives.

If Parts are what lives a life, then it seems probable that Parts are also the channels for experiencing Self-energy. In this proposed model, the Self is not a separate entity “living” in the mind; rather Self-energy is experienced by the mind’s Parts as a field permeating the mind and body. The less these Parts are burdened by unresolved trauma, the more Self-energy that can be accessed. However, as has been noted by Dr. Schwartz and others, even burdened Parts have access to Self-energy. In other words, the field is always present, regardless of how obscured it is by the burdens of the Parts.

It is unlikely that Self and Parts would be exclusive to the human species. The need for symmetry would suggest that the “field” of what we call “Self” may be a natural aspect of all living organisms. In addition, if the Parts hypothesis presented above is true for humans, it should also be true for other species with complex neurological systems (although the complexity of those Parts would be proportional to the level of neurological complexity in that species). Since humans seem to have the most complex neurological system on the planet, it follows that they would also have the most complex system of Parts.

As is well known, newborn humans enter life with significantly less maturity in their neurological systems than most other animals, partially due to the human brain’s neurological complexity. This makes human babies extremely vulnerable at birth and completely dependent on parental/caregiver support for survival. Because these neural networks are not fully developed at birth, it seems possible that the associated Parts would also be proportionally less developed at birth. Consequently, the immature Parts of a newborn may not yet be able to have easy access to Self-energy. This would increase their vulnerability to trauma and their dependency on parental/caregiver Self-energy to help resolve trauma, in order to prevent burdens from being taken on by these immature Parts.

A newborn’s immature systems (neurological and Parts) create greater dependence on both physical, mental, and emotional care by caregivers. This sets up the young human for potential exposure to significant amounts of unresolved trauma. If there is trauma in that child’s life that is not properly resolved by their own Self-energy or the Self-energy of a caregiver, the resulting burdens displace or distort the natural roles of Parts. Almost everyone grows up with some burdened Parts as a result—and this gets passed on to those we care for.

When burdened Parts are triggered they can completely take over the internal system and obscure Self-energy, what we call being fully blended (i.e., the burdened Parts dominate the system). In this situation, the Parts control the experience with misguided reactivity, leading to considerably less Self-energy that an individual can experience.

Once childhood trauma has led to Parts becoming burdened, the system’s tendency to reactivity will increase the likelihood that more burdens will be taken on when additional traumas occur. Since the previously burdened Parts obscure Self-energy, this system has less Self-energy available to self-heal any new trauma. Instead, protector Parts may step in to suppress the trauma, or Parts can become newly burdened and exiled. This pattern of increased burdening, with the subsequent increased reactivity, helps to explain the perpetual state of human-created suffering in the world.

Humans have been struggling for countless generations to overcome the reactivity of our traumatized and burdened Parts and their effects on the world. The best of spirituality, religion, and mental healthcare have offered some healing from the pain everyone experiences (or are trying to avoid experiencing), but these have never been enough to break the cycles of trauma. Only when Parts are unburdened (healed) can life be lived with Self-energy and the cycles of trauma passed from human to human reduced.

Based on this discussion, the healing goal of IFS is not to be “in Self” at all times. Instead the goal is to have Self-energy (balance, harmony, compassion, connectedness, etc.) accessible at all times—to no longer live life through the reactivity of burdened protectors or exiles. To achieve this, it is necessary to unburden (heal) the traumatized/wounded Parts and to help exiles and their protectors return to their unburdened natural roles.

I hypothesize that what we call “Self” is a field of impersonal, transcendent energy (“Self-energy”) that may be a natural aspect of all living organisms; all life is surrounded and permeated by this field. However, it seems logical that this Self field has a progressively more complex expression in organisms with more complex neurological systems. It is also possible that this field called Self extends beyond the individual living organism. While I cannot speculate on this, Dr. Schwartz has said “the Self can be either experienced as an “I” or an expansive sense of space and energy” (Schwartz and Sweezy, Internal Family Systems Therapy, 2nd ed., page 45).

Additionally, I would hypothesize that what we call “Parts” are only associated with higher organisms, in particular those with greater complexity in their neurological systems (i.e., a central nervous system). In fact, I suggest that Parts are a natural outgrowth of this neurological complexity; and that the internal system of Parts provides all the functions that we associate with the activities of the mind (i.e., consciousness, cognition, emotions, dreams, the self-identification as “I”, etc.). It would follow that the more complex the neurological system, the more complex its system of Parts would be. It also seems probable that greater complexity would bring with it more vulnerability to trauma, especially in young people.

Finally, since the mind is composed of the internal system of Parts and what we call “Self” is a field that permeates the mind and body, Self is not a separate entity “living” in the mind. Instead, when Self-energy is experienced, it is being channeled by Parts. Just as burdened Parts can become blended and dominate the system, it may be that Parts without burdens strongly blend with Self-energy. It may also be that, for some Parts, their natural role is to blend with and channel Self-energy. Such a “Self-infused” Part may be experienced by individuals as a field of Self-energy that flows through them (which is how I experience it). Alternatively, it could be experienced as an integral aspect of that individual’s mind and identity, which explains why people sometimes report experiencing Self as “my true self” (an entity). While this experience may be true on the impersonal transcendent level, based on this hypothesis, it would be a Part channeling Self-energy on the neurological and mind level.

This perspective can be summarized by the following axiom:

• “Parts” are a natural outgrowth of the complexity of our neurological system. All mental/emotional activity of the mind (i.e., cognition, emotions, consciousness, etc.) arise from the activity of these Parts. In other words, what we called a person’s “mind” is the totality of the activity of their Parts.
• “Self” is a field of impersonal energy (“Self-energy”) that surrounds and permeates us all. It is the source of transcendent qualities, like balance, harmony, compassion, love, connectedness, etc.
• Consequently, an individual’s life is lived by their Parts (whether burdened or not)—not the Self. But Parts in their natural roles (without burdens) have ready access to Self-energy and its transcendent qualities. If an individual experiences “Self” as an entity within their system, it is due to the presence of a Self-infused Part, a Part without burdens that is strongly blended with Self-energy.
• When Parts are burdened by trauma, the burdened Part (protector or exile) can obscure access to Self-energy. These burdened Parts are reactive and control an individual’s life, further reducing the system’s experience of Self-energy. The more traumatized the individual, the more their reactive burdened Parts will dominate and the less Self-energy will be experienced.
• When Parts are unburdened (healed) they return to their natural roles. Then, along with other Parts in their natural roles, they embody an individual’s life with Self-energy’s transcendent qualities informing and underpinning that life.

Editor’s note: For related reading on these topics, consider Many Minds, One Self: Evidence for a Radical Shift in Paradigm by Richard Schwartz and Robert Falconer (Center for Self Leadership, 2017).