Transmodernism

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Description

1. excerpt from Wikipedia: Transmodernism (2020):

“Transmodernism is a philosophical and cultural movement which was founded by Argentinian-Mexican philosopher Enrique Dussel. He refers to himself as a transmodernist and wrote a series of essays criticising the postmodern theory and advocating a transmodern way of thinking. Transmodernism is a development in thought following the period of postmodernism; as a movement, it was also developed from modernism, and, in turn, critiques modernity and postmodernity, viewing them as the end of modernism.

Transmodernism is influenced by many philosophical movements. Its emphasis on spirituality was influenced by the esoteric movements during the Renaissance. Transmodernism is influenced by transcendentalism and idealises different figures from the mid-19th century United States, most notably Ralph Waldo Emerson. Transmodernism is related to different aspects of Marxist philosophy, having common ground with dissident Roman Catholic liberation theology.

The philosophical views of the transmodernism movement contain elements of both modernism and postmodernism. Transmodernism has been described as "new modernism" and its proponents admire avant-garde styles. It bases much of its core beliefs on the integral theory of Ken Wilber, those of creating a synthesis of "pre-modern", "modern" and "postmodern" realities.

In transmodernism, there is a place for both tradition and modernity, and it seeks as a movement to re-vitalise and modernise tradition rather than destroy or replace it. The honouring and reverence of antiquity and traditional lifestyles is important in transmodernism, unlike modernism or postmodernism. Transmodernism criticises pessimism, nihilism, relativism and the counter-Enlightenment. It embraces, to a limited extent, optimism, absolutism, foundationalism and universalism. It has an analogical way of thinking, viewing things from the outside rather than the inside.

As a movement, transmodernism puts an emphasis on spirituality, alternative religions, and transpersonal psychology. Unlike postmodernism, it disagrees with the secularisation of society, putting an emphasis on religion, and it criticises the rejection of worldviews as false or of no importance. Transmodernism places an emphasis on xenophily and globalism, promoting the importance of different cultures and cultural appreciation. It seeks for a worldview on cultural affairs and is anti-Eurocentric and anti-imperialist.

Environmentalism, sustainability and ecology are important aspects of the transmodern theory. Transmodernism embraces environmental protection and stresses the importance of neighbourhood life, building communities as well as order and cleanliness. It accepts technological change, yet only when its aim is that of improving life or human conditions. Other aspects of transmodernism are those of democracy and listening to the poor and suffering.

Transmodernism takes strong stances on feminism, health care, family life and relationships. It promotes the emancipation of women and female rights, yet also promotes several traditional moral and ethical family values; the importance of the family is particularly stressed. Transmodernism is a minor philosophical movement in comparison to postmodernism and is relatively new to the Northern Hemisphere, but it has a large set of leading figures and philosophers. Enrique Dussel is its founder. Ken Wilber, the inventor of Integral Theory, argues from a transpersonal point of view. Paul Gilroy, a cultural theorist, has also "enthusiastically endorsed" transmodern thinking, and Ziauddin Sardar, an Islamic scholar, is a critic of postmodernism and in many cases adopts a transmodernist way of thinking.”


2. as on enacademic.com

"Transmodernism is a development in thought following the periodization of postmodernity. It sees postmodernity, or hypermodernity as the conclusion or culmination of modernism, and critiques modernism and postmodernism on material, social, and spiritual viewpoints.

Transmodernity consists of a set of criticisms aimed at theories it perceives as advocating relativism, pessimism, nihilism, and counter-Enlightenment, by embracing with a limited capacity foundationalism, absolutism, optimism, and universalism.

It draws elements from both modernism and postmodernism, and can therefore be seen as an amended and more tolerant form of modernization. Transmodernity is a loose term describing a development of thought that seeks a synthesis of the best of 'pre-modern,' 'modern,' and 'postmodern' reality.

Transmodernism appears to be in part influenced by the esoteric movements that sprang from the Renaissance. It is also influenced by the Transcendental movement and admires the American philosophy of mid-nineteenth century writers like Emerson and the Transcendentalists. Transmodernism often continues today in the rise of new religions and spiritualism. Its tendencies are also felt in humanitic and transpersonal psychology. It is thought to be 'leading edge and often subject to change'.

Transmodernism reacts against both modernism and postmodernism by opposing the wholesale secularization of society. It criticizes the rejection of all traditional worldviews and their truths as unproven, false, or of no importance. It encompasses social movements confluent with traditional systems of philosophy, religion, and morality. These movements often find themselves at odds with modernism and postmodernism, yet the Transmodernism sees tradition as self-propelled and adaptable at its own independent pace. There is room for both modernity and tradition."
(https://enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/2273461)


Characteristics

1. The emerging Transmodern or Integral Culture is summarized by Paul H. Ray as follows:

  1. Ecological sustainability, beyond environmentalism
  2. Globalism: Two of the top values for Cultural Creatives are xenophilism (love of travel to foreign places, of foreigners and the exotic)
  3. Feminism, women's issues, relationships, family
  4. Altruism, self-actualization, alternative health care, spirituality and spiritual psychology
  5. Well-developed social conscience and social optimism

— adapted from the Wikipedia article on Transmodernism, as around 2010

2. See the table proposed by Michael Mehaffy at: Modernism Post-Modernism Transmodernism


Typology

From Premodernism via Modernism and Postmodernism to Transmodernism

(written in the context of therapeutic practice)


Premodernism

(written in the context of therapeutic practice)

By Emiliano Gonzalez & Marie Faubert:

"People with premodern perspectives tend to not separate the spirit world from the physical world (Crouse, 2013; Feldman, 2000). One of the most important aspects to keep in mind about this way of thinking, the premodern perspective, is people think in terms of the whole rather than the division between body and soul or the physical and spiritual (Crouse, 2013). They embrace a holistic view of the world. Premodern perspectives can be understood as including both/and instead of either/or. Premodern perspectives do not see things as good or bad, beautiful or ugly; rather, aspects of life can be both good and bad, beautiful and ugly simultaneously. People who hold premodern views are not necessarily or strictly dichotomous. They were not influenced by the duality of René Descartes (1596-1650) and other thinkers and writers of the Enlightenment, which was at its height in Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, and emphasized individual rights and freedoms. Premodern thinkers construe the self as interdependent (Matsumoto, 1994); the group comes before the individual. Integral unity is part of identity when everyone depends on the whole community for survival (Levi-Strauss, 1966). The sense of the “other” (as different from “me”) was further strengthened by the scientific process of classification, which focuses on distinctions rather than similarities between phenomenon (Spary, 1999). When things are unclassified, they are left open to new possibilities and are undefined, whereas classifications lead to preconceptions and are often limiting. Crouse (2013) and Feldman (2000) describe the premodern framework of individuals as one that does not separate the spirit world from the physical or material world and frames explanations in spiritual terms. History shows that agrarian societies had a close relationship between the cosmological cycle of the days and change of seasons and their daily activities, and relationship between production and their livelihoods (Havens, 2015). This intimate connection with the forces of nature seemed to influence how people viewed the supernatural powers working behind the scenes. Premodern perspectives involve a way of making meaning of the world. Some may say, “My daughter is possessed”, or “my grandmother put a hex on me and I want to get rid of it.” Clients who embrace a premodern perspective may integrate prayer and God’s will into their stories or understandings of their lives. This follows the idea that spiritual beings are universal to all human cultures, understanding experience as an interaction of the spirit world and the physical world based on what can be gleaned from the earliest literature from China and Africa, and ethnographic studies carried out by anthropologists over the past century (Crouse, 2013; Feldman, 2000; Bellah,1964). Premodern thought has no problem with what cannot be counted and measured, and what cannot be verified. There are influences over which people do not have control. Instead, being able to interpret the environment in which one lives according to the spirit world brings peace and harmony to many clients. Counselors will encounter clients who will depend upon their faith and prayer to make major decisions. Collaborative-dialogic counselors use their professional understanding of premodern thinking to walk with their clients. The premodern perspectives presented by clients most likely will integrate other ways of thinking in their stories and ways of making decisions. The both/and perspective of premodern thinking is very different from the either/or thinking of the modern perspective. The philosophical underpinning of premodern philosophy does not challenge what is understood. No theory of counseling is premodern, but counselors will meet premodern thought among their clients. For instance, recently, a gentleman said, “I am doing what my grandfather and father have done before me. All I want is for them to be proud of me.” For this person, choice is limited to what was expected of him, and he is comfortable with fulfilling the expectations of his grandfather and father."

Characteristics:

1. Human behavior is highly influenced by the spirit world; people have a strong inclination to be fatalistic, that is, take life as it comes as shown by Evo;

2. People are part of a community in which they have influence on one another and are expected to meet the folk ways and mores of their society, especially in their close relationships in a given culture or familial connections;

3. People explain what happens to them as the Will of God. Many believe some members of the community have a special relationship with God and can act as a liaison between them and God;

4. The history of many people is transmitted by word of mouth who have learned it by hearing it through stories passed from one generation to another without questioning it;

5. Facts are explained by the “Power of God” over them. There are evil spirits, and some people believe they or others have access to the spirits. When a client says that a hex has been put on them, and only their grandmother can remove it, they are speaking within a premodern perspective. Such clients may find it difficult to relate to the idea of individual choice, especially when they come from a collectivist group;

6. What is expected of human behavior is embedded in family, community, and being in harmony with the world; and

7. Persons and environment are not separate; they are interacting in harmony, (Watters, 2010)."

(https://ijcp.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/ijcp-issue-9-p.-143-156-gonzalez-and-faubert-transmodern-and-collaborative-dialogic-practice-english.pdf)


Modernism

(written in the context of therapeutic practice)

By Emiliano Gonzalez & Marie Faubert:

(Logical Positivism)

"Modernism has been around since the turn of the 20th century and goes back to as early as the last decade of the 19th century (as exemplified in the works of Henry James, Joseph Conrad, Thomas Hardy, A.E. Housman and W.B. Yeats, to name a few (Yousef, 2017). Dussel (1996) ) states that modernism origins can be traced to the Iberian-peninsula before as the Americas were invaded in 1492. With time, modernism moved away from religious institutions and forms of governments as authority sources of information and knowledge (Crouse, 2013). Ultimately, the modernists started to look for relative truth instead of absolute reality. They also viewed the psyche as diverse, contradictory, multiple and inconsistent (Yousef, 2017). Perhaps the best definitions of modernism were provided by Matei Calinescu (1987) who outlined how enlightenment principles were founded on premodern concepts, while opposing those same concepts, and that is why modernism—as a system of thought—has been open to much selfcriticism and revision. Further, the duality of the physical world and the spirit world was accepted as a mental construct. The validity of the spirit world was often entirely rejected as not “real.” Modernism moved away from the authoritative omniscient point of view to the individual’s consciousness advocating the use of different viewpoints and multiple narrators (Yousef, 2017). From a modernist perspective, things are clearly defined where cohesion and unity, such as collective identities and social practices, are essential whereby individual identities become uprooted, and logic and reason are substantiated (Rodriguez Magda, 2004). Moreover, the traditional scientific methods of investigation embraced modernism (Crouse, 2013). The driving force behind modernism was ‘innovation’ but Rodriguez Magda (2004) calls it “having naïve faith in scientific and technological progress.” As such, modernism depends upon facts that are measurable and attainable (Klages, 2005). If something cannot be counted and measured, it does not have value. It is akin to what Rodriguez Magda (2004) claims: whatever cannot be transmitted simply does not count. Increasingly, social scientists are rejecting modernism both on philosophical and scientific grounds. Logical positivism requires that knowledge be verifiable; hence, anything that cannot be counted and measured cannot be verified. For example, values cannot be verified; they can only be inferred. Constructs of any kind cannot be verified; they can only be inferred. The fact that constructs cannot be counted and measured directly is problematic from a collaborative-dialogic counseling perspective where people’s motives and values, important variables in counseling, cannot be directly measured or counted. They can only be inferred from observable behavior or what clients tell their counselors. Modernism is being challenged by natural scientists and social scientists. What might be surprising to some is that even scientists are beginning to question modernism (Majid, 2012). For example, there are more basic “things” being found that scientists are naming as elementary particles. One can recall when the atom was considered the fundamental particle; then, it was protons, neutrons, and electrons. Presently, physicists and chemists are studying evidence of what they are naming fundamental particles, such as fermions, which are made up of quarks and antiquarks and leptons and antileptons. Scientists are still building a world gleaned from evidence, but they are taking much more care not to be definitive. Quantum mechanical concepts, such as nonlocality, tunneling, and entanglement have been proven by multiple experiments, but defy basic modernist ways of thinking, especially the “either/or” paradigm (Majid, 2012). The philosophical underpinning of traditional counseling theories embodies modernism. Modernism (Logical Positivism) tends to ignore the client’s history, culture, language, ways of being and knowing, feelings and sentiments; this is not client-centered but rather counselor driven (Yousef, 2017).

Characteristics:

1. "Human behavior can be objectively observed and measured and operates in a predictable fashion; as such, cause and effect can be inferred;

2. People can be separated from their environments for study, and they can be further subdivided for study;

3. Inferences are made from measuring observable facts that can be measured either directly or indirectly as articulated by Daniel;

4. The traditional scientific method is the accepted paradigm for identifying facts about human behavior; and

5. The contexts (environments) in which people operate are considered as neutral or relatively unimportant; thus, the focus of inquiry should be observable actions of individual human beings (Brown, Brooks, & Associates, 1990)."

(https://ijcp.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/ijcp-issue-9-p.-143-156-gonzalez-and-faubert-transmodern-and-collaborative-dialogic-practice-english.pdf)


Postmodernism

(written in the context of therapeutic practice)

By Emiliano Gonzalez & Marie Faubert:

(and Phenomenology)

"An alternative perspective to Modernism is postmodernism. Klages (2005) states that modernism gave way to postmodernism. Stapa (2016) affirms that the arrival of postmodernism was the end of modernism. The term “postmodern” can be traced to the historian Arnold Toynbee in the late 1940’s who applied this concept as a way to critique the rigid rationalism of the modernist approach, especially in what he called the “schism of the soul” experienced after World War II; however, he provided no definition.

Stapa (2016) states postmodernism tends to be complex and over time the definition changes making it difficult to define. He further states that specific and fixed terms, boundaries and truths are almost non-existence. This is important in how we understand counseling perspectives that have developed within a postmodern perspective. Toynbee was emulating the art historian Roger Fry who used the term “Postimpressionism” as a way to distinguish the artistic style made after society accepted Impressionism; the prefix “post” meant very little, except that time had transpired from one movement to another, but not that the previous style had expired (1911). In other words, Postimpressionism’s very definition and existence depended on the persistent advancements made by Impressionism; likewise, what is sometimes referred to as postmodern counseling today tends to be grounded in modernist practice approaches. With that said, modernism assumed, somewhat naively, that people were developing towards complete rational behavior and objectivity in an evolutionary sense. On the other hand, postmodernism recognizes that people and human behavior is complex, sometimes rational and sometimes emotional, and thus subjective. Crouse (2005) states that in postmodernism, there is “no one (true) world view that offers an explanation to all life’s issues and that paradigms are valid only within a community.”

Agger (1991) posits from a pragmatic perspective that the “social world from the multiple perspectives of class, race, gender and other identifying group affiliations” are examined to deconstruct existing versions of social reality and give voice to the ‘other’ whose voice may have been lost due to the positivism/modernism approach. Agger (1991) further adds that knowledge tends to be contextualized by its historical and cultural nature and that particular modes of knowledge can be defined by the multiplicity of people’s subject positions. Other authors emphasize this but also consider the different social, historical, political, financial, spiritual, cultural, and linguistic aspects, and each person’s varied experiences (Stapa, 2016; Crouse, 2013; Akuul, 2010; Ghisi, 2008; Schulte & Cochrane, 1995). From the perspective of postmodernism, clients are authorities of their own lives (Anderson, 1997).

Akuul (2010) suggests that there is always more than one perspective and each perspective represents a particular world view. As such, collaborative-dialogic practice requires counselors to relate to clients from an open, accepting, and respectful perspective (Schulte & Cochrane, 1995). And, to try to understand a client’s reality and world view. Clients understand themselves better than anyone else. Therefore, Collaborative-dialogic counselors want to listen to hear, wondering and being curious, and always wanting and trying to make sure they understand what they hear, what the client wants them to understand. Prochaska & Norcross (2010) suggest Collaborative-dialogic counselors guide clients through the processes of change in general. That is, most clients come to counseling because they want to change or want something in their lives to change. They may even have successfully changed in the past and may have developed strategies and techniques (their knowledge) with which they are already comfortable and competent.

Durning (1993) states that postmodernism rejects the tenets of positivism and uses phenomenology to interpret the nature of knowledge by using a hermeneutic paradigm of inquiry. The ideas of order, coherence, sequence, scientific truths, cause and effect are questioned and challenged; and life experiences and situations may be thought of as open-ended.. Acknowledging the client’s knowledge of their life is part of a redistribution or equalization of power and allows counselors to participate and walk with their clients in a process of deconstructing, constructing and reconstructing their knowledge and thus new ways of knowing evolve. The client is involved in this process of making decisions. Not every counselor is comfortable with this approach. A redistribution of control over the direction of therapy can be seen as a loss of power or being in charge; many have no qualms with moving from the familiar to the unfamiliar while for others, this process can be nerve wracking (Castillo, 1983).

Anderson (1997) and Anderson & Gehart (2017) point out the subjective view of clients about their own lives is essential to effective outcomes in therapy. Anderson (1997) uses the phrase not knowing to describe this sensitivity to the world views and perspectives of clients. Another way of thinking about collaborative-dialogic practice is to think of counselors walking with clients. The conversation between them is mutual and reciprocal as they engage with each other in a dialogic process of looking into what the client is concerned about. The word dialogic in collaborative-dialogic practice is essential. Dialogic implies equality and equity between counselors and clients. counselors can be dialogic with clients only when they respect clients as equal human beings, equal persons; when there is no one true world view (Crouse, 2013)."


Characteristics:

1. "All aspects of the universe are interconnected; it is impossible to separate figure from ground and subject from object;

2. There are no absolutes; thus, human functioning cannot be reduced to laws or principles, and human behavior cannot be reduced to notions of cause and effect;

3. Human behavior can be understood only in the context in which it occurs;

4. The subjective frame of reference of human beings is the only legitimate source of knowledge;

5. Truth is relative from one individual to another as personal views and opinions differ respecting and valuing inclusive beliefs of each individual; and

6. Events occur outside human beings. As persons understand their environment and participate in these events, they define themselves and their environment."

(https://ijcp.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/ijcp-issue-9-p.-143-156-gonzalez-and-faubert-transmodern-and-collaborative-dialogic-practice-english.pdf)


Transmodernism

(written in the context of therapeutic practice)

By Emiliano Gonzalez & Marie Faubert:

"First coined by Spanish philosopher Rosa Maria Rodriguez Magda in her essay La Sonrisa de Saturno: Hacia un teoria transmoderna (1989), transmodernism employs structures of transparency in becoming open to all people retaining the values they hold dearly in identity. (See also Ateljevic, 2013 and Dussel, 1996,) This identity can be spiritual, historical, cultural, political, social, linguistically, and economical where it is transcendence in nature. Transmodernism transcends premodernism, modernism, and postmodernism by showing genuine openness and validating inclusivity of what the person brings to the table. People are in a constant state of influx and change; as such, transmodernism aims to identify what is transforming in real time as new phenomena gives perspectives to new revelations. Increasingly, social scientists are realizing that people make meaning by integrating premodern, modern, and postmodern ways of viewing the world (Ateljevic, 2013). Transmodernism (Rodriguez Magda, 1989; allows one to move from the modern framework of measurement to a more global approach in validating people’s values and worldviews through different traditions of thoughts being mindful of emotional and spiritual responsibilities for interconnectedness and betterment of humanity. Transmodernism criticizes pre/modernism but does not totally reject it; it borrows and draws from the elements of premodernity, modernity, post modernity and transmodernity with the goal of moving into a new state of being (Ghisi, 2008, Sardar, 2004). Jarowski (1996) refers to this new state of being as a synchronicity phenomenon. Rodriguez Magda (2004) refers to this synchronicity phenomenon where the individual hears and receives information in real time and act accordingly based on on-going event(s)."

(https://ijcp.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/ijcp-issue-9-p.-143-156-gonzalez-and-faubert-transmodern-and-collaborative-dialogic-practice-english.pdf)


Discussion

Irene Ateljevic:

"My motivation in writing this paper is to propose to use the concept of transmodernity as an umbrella term that connotes the emerging socio-cultural, economic, political and philosophical shift. I suggest this merger not as a theoretical exercise, but out of heartfelt sympathy with the shift, and a genuine conviction that in order to be visible, effective and compelling, any movement needs a unifying name (Eisler, 2002). I will take the elaboration of the concept of transmodernity as given by Ghisi (2001, 2006, 2008) as a starting point. However, in recognition that most of the works I review here are written by Europeans/Americans, I also looked at the opinions of postcolonial and subaltern writers who similarly offer a positive view of the transmodern world potentialities. Here, transmodern ideas are primarily advocated by the Argentinean philosopher and historian Enrique Dussel. In sketching Ghisi’s and Dussel’s main ideas, I need to alert the reader that I will present them as given, so the general picture of their notions of the concept of transmodernity is obtained. In order to avoid the trap of the postmodern deconstruction process which Rifkin (2005) claims brought us to “modernity reduced to intellectual rubble and an anarchic world where everyone’s story is equally compelling and worthy of recognition” (p. 5), I am tracing the commonalities of what transmodernity offers in this fresh and promising move towards a new era of humanity. "

(http://www.integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf?


Transmodernism according to Ghisi

Irene Ateljevic:

"The concept of transmodernity is a very complex thesis which Ghisi (1999, 2006, 2008) primarily explains as a new paradigm of the world which communicates certain underlying values that humans rely on to make their judgments and decisions in all areas of their activities— economy, politics and everyday life. Ghisi begins his thesis with an overview of five levels of change, which he describes through an iceberg metaphor of human global (un)consciousness and (un)awareness. Like the submerged parts of an iceberg floating in the sea, Ghisi’s lower levels of societal change are the least visible to humanity. So, the first level is at the darkest and coldest bottom where our global civilization finds itself today, at the edge of unsustainability and what Ghisi describes as the slow death and collective suicide of humanity. The next higher level relates to the death of command, control and conquest patriarchal values which have turned the world into a competitive and territorial battleground. Level three refers to the death of modernity as a dominant paradigm through which we see the world as an objective reality rooted in impartial truth. Level four refers to the death of the industrial type of businesses and decline of the material economy, while level five concerns the overall crisis of overly bureaucratic and pyramidal institutions. While such critical deconstruction of Eurocentric thesis of modernity (based around key mantras of growth, progress and competition) is nothing new and has been very much part of the postmodern critical turn in social science and humanities since late 1980s, Ghisi continues to explain, a transmodern way of thinking is now emerging, as our hope for a desperately needed and newly reconstructed vision. It is claimed that the everything goes of the postmodernists needs to go silenced. Whether they like it or not, there are things that have to have value, there is meaning that must be preserved, otherwise we drown in the coarsest cynicism, an expression of deep disdain for life (Boff, 2009). After the endless postmodern (albeit necessary) deconstructions of modernity in which many intellectuals engaged for the last few decades have led us to eclectic relativity and fundamentalisms that in many ways has paralysed us to claim any possible way forward.

The postmodern rubble in which we have found ourselves is quite neatly captured by Rifkin (2005):

- If post-modernists razed the ideological walls of modernity and freed the prisoners, they left them with no particular place to go. We became existential nomads, wandering through a boundaryless world full of inchoate longings in a desperate search for something to be attached to and believe in. While the human spirit was freed up from old categories of thought, we are each forced to find our own paths in a chaotic and fragmented world that is even more dangerous than the all-encompassing one we left behind. (p. 5).


According to Ghisi then, the very concept of transmodern implies that the best of modernity is kept while at the same time we go beyond it. As such, it is not a linear projection which takes us from (pre)modernity via postmodernity to transmodernity; rather, it transcends modernity in that it takes us trans, i.e. through, modernity into another state of being, “from the edge of chaos into a new order of society” (Sardar, 2004, p. 2). "

(http://www.integral-review.org/issues/vol_9_no_2_ateljevic_visions_of_transmodernity.pdf?


Why Transmodernism?

(written in the context of therapeutic practice)

By Emiliano Gonzalez & Marie Faubert:

"Transmodernism looks at the everyday aspects of life including the socio-cultural, economic, political (Ghisi, 2008) and philosophical experiences of individuals “towards a new era of humanity” (Ateljevic, 2013; Sadar, 2004). An important component transmodernism focuses on how people use and manipulate language. Language is the ultimate semiotic (σημάδι) sign, of communication in the context of culture; language and culture cannot be separated from one another. Language is a system of signs that express ideas (Deely, 2002). This system of signs is complex. Even when both clients and counselors have the same native language, misunderstanding can often take place. Bandura (2002, 1995) suggests that there are no generalized signs. Deely (2002) writes about the “linguistic sign” where semiotics is expressed through language. How language is used includes folk ways and mores in the context of what is acceptable in a community. Language is not static; it is dynamic. Acceptable language is in flux depending upon place, time, situation, and culture. Collaborative-dialogic practice requires understanding or listening with the heart (Gonzalez & Faubert, 2017; Faubert & Gonzalez, 2016) to be able to walk with clients. This is no easy task. It calls upon being collaborative and engaged in dialogic (generative) conversations with clients about what they are focusing on and what their language is conveying. The linguistic sign reminds collaborative-dialogic counselors that the semiotics of clients is unique; language unfolds-people as the bud unfolds to display the beautiful flower. Although counselors and clients share the human condition, their experiences, understandings and ways of expressing themselves can be a complex combination of premodern, modern, postmodern, and transmodern. The linguistic signs chosen by clients to communicate with their counselors are cardinal to collaborative-dialogic practice. Effective transmodern counselors can enter into the linguistic signs of their clients as they can cross the premodern, modern and postmodern approaches. Because enlightenment - modernism - developed as a harsh critique on pre-modern concepts, and now, postmodernism is reacting against the rigidity of modernism, today there is need for less critiquing and more integration between science and religious counseling. It is significant that 85% of the current global population adhere to some belief in spiritual or supernatural forces (Pew Forum, 2017). Effective counseling must accept people where they are and respect their worldviews. In reality, most clients are a complex combination of premodern, modern, and postmodern perspectives; hence, we use the term “transmodern” that is inclusive of the many aspects of client’s points of view. Clients may believe they have few choices, when, in fact, their choices may be limited but not negligible. These same clients may construct reality in conjunction with their environments. Collaborative-dialogic practice requires counselors to work in a transmodern perspective; they are ready to work with premodern, modern, and postmodern thinking even within the same client. Transmodern thinking crosses the spectrum of thinking and making meaning of the road to decision making through informed choice. In some cases, counselors will meet clients who are more premodern or modern, or postmodern in their thinking about how they present their desire to change. Counselors engaged in collaborative-dialogic practice can meet their clients where they are in a given moment. As Prochaska and Norcross (2010) gave the counseling theory world the transtheoretical model, we suggest a transmodern model as they use language in the collaborative-dialogic practice."

(https://ijcp.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/ijcp-issue-9-p.-143-156-gonzalez-and-faubert-transmodern-and-collaborative-dialogic-practice-english.pdf)