I’m doing an existential counselling module at school this term, and have two things to say.
First, again, that there are some academic writers who win the gold obfuscation award for disservice to information dissemination.
That’s ironic actually; what I’m saying is that the writers wallow in words, omit punctuation and generally obscure and hide information in rambling, self-aggrandizing waffle.
Put it another way, there’s a lot of academic writing that needs to have a red pen put through it by someone who knows grammar and marked for clarity of communication.
I’ve got a background in information technology writing (Technical Writing), specifically user manuals. My remit was always to Get To The Point as clearly and in as few words as possible. It was a very efficient style of writing that’s really helped with my more creative writing to-date. So this is, perhaps, why I find a lot of academic writing complete bunk.
I present Exhibit “A” which, frankly, gets a 2/10 See Me written on the page.
So what this is saying is that there are practitioners of counselling (the “they” in the paragraph) who mix different styles of counselling in with Existential counselling practice. The counsellors do this, apparently, without due consideration of whether these other counselling practices actually work well with Existential counselling.
The second thing I was going to say is that I might have to actually sit down and do this for all the readings for this (and other) subjects. And if I have time, I’ll put them on here for future reference.
That is all. We now return you to your regularly scheduled surfing.
Existential Phenomenology is where “all reflections, analyses and interpretations regarding every aspect of human existence are inter-relationally derived” (Spinelli, 2007). Everything is related in other words and there’s no way to extrapolate observation from what is being observed.
My question therefore is whether this is culturally biased or whether it’s hard-coded.