¹Bima Bayusena,²Erlina Zulkifli Mahmud,³Irma Khoirot Daulay

^1,2Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia

³Institut Agama Islam Negeri, Kediri, Jawa Timur, Indonesia

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i1-16

Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT

Existential Positive Psychology embracing the importance of meaning of life received supports from many other fields of study, including cognitive linguistics and hypnotherapy. This paper analysed the source domain used by clients and compared the domains with those found in the manuals and scripts. The discussion then shifted to the role of consistent, positive conceptual metaphor to support active meaning construction in hypnotherapeutic manuals and scripts, starting from the pre-induction talk to its termination and evaluation. The research began with the acknowledgement of client’s life experience that could provide help for the hypnotist in constructing the event structure of the schema, resulting, if required, in potential unique script for particular condition. This research was not based on maladaptive schema and it relied heavily on the potential internal strength found from the historical background information, interview and discussion during the pre-induction talk. This interview and discussion were treated as data for the analysis of the subjective function of the conceptual metaphor as it was applied in the treatment. The source domains used by the clients were then compared to those provided on Indonesian board of hypnotherapy manuals and scripts. The research then continued to find one possible consistent source domain to be applied throughout the manuals and scripts, based on recent findings from other disciplines that also focus on cognition and neuroscience. We proposed energy as the source domain and discussed the possibility to use this source domain, not only to deal with self as a single entity, but also to relate one entity to other entities and beyond.

KEYWORDS:

Cognitive linguistics, hypnotherapy, meaning coherence, meaning purpose, meaning significance,

REFERENCES

1) Amin, T. G., Jeppsson, F., & Haglund, J. (2015). Conceptual Metaphor and Embodied Cognition in Science Learning: Introduction to special issue. International Journal of Science Education, 37(5–6), 745–758. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1025245

2) Boyns, D., & Luery, S. (2015). Negative emotional energy: A Theory of the “dark-side” of interaction ritual chains. Social Sciences, 4(1), 148–170. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci4010148

3) Ciarrochi, J., Atkins, P. W. B., Hayes, L. L., Sahdra, B. K., & Parker, P. (2016). Contextual Positive Psychology: Policy Recommendations for Implementing Positive Psychology into Schools. 7(October), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01561

4) Coello, Y., & Fischer, M. H. (2015). Perceptual and Emotional Embodiment. In Perceptual and Emotional Embodiment. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315751979

5) De Aquino, F. (2012). Quantum Reversal of Soul Energy. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01129313

6) Hampe, B. (2017). Embodiment and discourse: Dimensions and dynamics of contemporary metaphor theory. Metaphor: Embodied Cognition and Discourse, 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182324.002

7) Holly, P. W. (2021). A unifying theory of physics and biological information through consciousness. Communicative and Integrative Biology, 14(1), 78–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2021.1907910

8) Ibrahim Ayassrah, M. A., & Latiff Azmi, M. N. (2019). Conceptual Metaphor of Eliot’s Waste Land Versus Al-Sayyab’s Rain Song. KnE Social Sciences, 2019, 446–463. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i19.4877

9) Khoury, B., Knäuper, B., Pagnini, F., Trent, N., Chiesa, A., & Carrière, K. (2017). Embodied Mindfulness. Mindfulness, 8(5), 1160–1171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0700-7

10) Lomas, T., Waters, L., Williams, P., Oades, L. G., & Kern, M. L. (2021). Third wave positive psychology: broadening towards complexity. Journal of Positive Psychology, 16(5), 660–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2020.1805501

11) Martela, F., & Steger, M. F. (2016). The three meanings of meaning in life: Distinguishing coherence, purpose, and significance. Journal of Positive Psychology, 11(5), 531–545. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2015.1137623

12) McFadden, J. (2020). Integrating information in the brain’s EM field: The cemi field theory of consciousness. Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2020(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/NC/NIAA016

13) McVeigh, R. (2020). The Body in Mind: Mead’s Embodied Cognition. Symbolic Interaction, 43(3), 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.476

14) Peck, S., Corse, G., & Lu, D. F. (2017). Case report: Energy field changes approaching and during the death experience. Integrative Medicine (Boulder), 16(6), 36–42.

15) Pepperell, R. (2018). Consciousness as a physical process caused by the organization of energy in the brain. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(OCT), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02091

16) Pereira, C. (2015). Soul & Consciousness. Scientific GOD Journal, 6(7), 311–315.

17) Rai, D. V., & Kumar, G. (2020). Soul and mind as quantum states of an embedded human system. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(1), 550–558.

18) Reddy, J. S. K., & Pereira, C. (2018). The emergence of mind as a quantum field phenomenon. NeuroQuantology, 16(11), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.14704/nq.2018.16.11.1846

19) Stott, R., Mansell, W., Salkovskis, P., Lavender, A., & Cartwright-Hatton, S. (2010). Oxford Guides to Metaphors in CBT (First). Oxford University Press.

20) Sugarman, L. I., & Linden, J. H. (2021). Hypnotic conversations with the embodied mind. European Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 5(3), 100166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejtd.2020.100166

21) Wissing, M. P. (2022). Beyond the “Third Wave of Positive Psychology”: Challenges and Opportunities for Future Research. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(January), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.795067

22) Wnuk, E., & Ito, Y. (2021). The heart’s downward path to happiness: Cross-cultural diversity in spatial metaphors of affect. Cognitive Linguistics, 32(2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2020-0068

VOlUME 06 ISSUE 01 JANUARY 2023