Philosophical Counselling Reading Group [and Hodges' model]

The discovery of a reading group on philosophical counselling (PC), through University of Liverpool, continues to prove helpful; to utilise professional experience, that included counselling, family therapy, cognitive therapy in psychoses, and practical experience as a mental health nurse (in-patient and community). There is overlap with Hodges' model, but it's fascinating and rewarding to listen and learn from practitioners of PC. As noted before, I was aware of PC through two popular philosophy magazines. This time around we read:

Ran Lahav, “Philosophical Counseling and Self-Transformation,” in Philosophy, Counseling, and Psychotherapy, eds. Elliot D. Cohen & S. Samuel Zinaich, Jr. (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2013), 82.

Abstract

This paper presents my approach to philosophical counseling, which is geared towards self-transformation, and is inspired by important thinkers throughout the history of Western philosophy whom I call transformational thinkers. I take from these thinkers the realization that our daily life is normally confined to rigid and superficial attitudes towards ourselves and our world. This is because individuals’ everyday attitudes are based on limited understandings of life, which form what I call the person’s perimeter, or perimetral worldview. The goal of philosophical counseling, as I see it, is to help counselees transcend their constricted perimetral worldview, or in the language of Plato – to realize that they are imprisoned in a “cave,” and then to step out of it towards a fuller reality. A case study is presented to illustrate the two main stages of the counseling process. 

I know there is the (biblical) phrase 'Seek and you will find'; but there is also the notion of seeing only what you seek, and missing other content - contexts. This is marked in beliefs and the development of delusional ideas. 

Of interest to me, Lahav discusses (as indicated above) a person’s perimeter, or perimetral worldview. 

We still hear how difficult it is for people to access help. I wondered (again) about referral pathways for PC? The nature of the person's problems that prompts them to seek help? Lahav acknowledges the complexity here. Speaking of 'prompt', of course now there is AI in the mix. Lahav points out how PC does not quite have the foundation and hence theoretical impetus (and rigour?) that Freud provided to psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. 

PC is, however, to some extent a broad field: '... philosophical practice has come to include several different formats in which it is practiced: one-time workshops for the general public, philosophical retreats, long-term self-reflection groups, the philosophical café, and of course philosophical counseling'. 

I wonder if philosophical counsellor's could have a role, post AI / agentic ai interventions. This could provide a step-down assurance, and be rolled into 'treatment / intervention programmes'. This could help retain the humanistic element of duty of care, underscore the person_al in care architectures/systems and provide a step-down - just in-case AI has missed, or upset something? The acknowledged strength of AI in not being subjective is balanced. Although evidence also points to misogynistic responses derived through what can be biased, and prejudiced learning sources: thus a reflection of 'society'.

In the introduction, more encouragement with reference to situated, a general map, and basic - fundamental aspects. There are (at least) two domains: 'the domain of philosophical discourse and the domain of everyday life and predicaments'. 

Hodges' model was created to facilitate the FIRST approach in PC, the Critical Thinking Approach, with an associated subtype of Problem-Solving Approach. 

It was also designed to help with the theory-practice gap. Lahav describes this in the how and what of philosophy and PC itself. I wondered to what extent if the approach of PC 'leave out the more important “what” of great philosophies.' then would a counselee be denied avenues to learning, as we may be drawn to specific philosophical schools of thought, and crucially reasoning?

The SECOND approach to PC is the Edification Approach. The author has adopted this second approach in practice.

Guess what? Yes, you've got it. Hodges' model can actually close a circle here. Or, more accurately help sustain the reflective, reflexive, recursive ... reasoning loop as needed. Another objective of Hodges' model is to produce reflective practitioners, critical thinkers and lifelong learners.

A take-away for me is the 'perimeter and the perimetral worldview'. A search for 'perimeter' here on W2tQ is null.^ I'm also wondering about transformation (in the title) and throughout the paper.

There may be an example here were a domain of Hodges' model can itself reflect the model, as in the Intra- Interpersonal domain below.

Lahav employs a case study to illustrate his thought and practice. The discussion really helped improve my reading and understanding of this.

individual

|
INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES             

humanistic ------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL   

|

group

Psychology   | Philosophy(-isms) ________________________________ Psycho-Social|  Psychotherapies	basic - fundamental general map
case study	referral pathways

^'Peripheral' does feature in posts.

Call for Papers: Bioethics and Philosophical Health - JECP

Submission Deadline: Thursday, 31 December 2026

Contemporary bioethics has developed sophisticated tools for ethical decision-making. Yet it often operates within assumptions that reduce life to physiological viability. Ethical questions are frequently treated as matters of procedure and consent. Meanwhile, patients and clinicians face questions that exceed these frameworks. What makes a life worth living? How does illness disrupt or reveal meaning? What forms of care support not just survival but existential coherence? These questions call for a deeper engagement between bioethics and the philosophy of existence.

Despite growing interest in person-centred care, conceptual tools for clinical evaluation remain limited. Frameworks for assessing philosophical sense-making and existential orientation are underdeveloped. The Philosophical Health perspective addresses this gap by going beyond physical and psychological health. It asks how we cultivate meaningful lives through bodily experience, self-understanding, relational belonging, engagement with possibility, purposeful action, and philosophical reflection. The concept draws on the ancient tradition of bios philosophikos. It proposes that healthcare should attend not only to pathology but to the philosophical dimensions of human existence.

This special issue creates space for exploring how philosophical health can deepen bioethical inquiry as an embodied ethics of the good life. It challenges reductive assumptions and fosters practices that support purpose and meaning in lives, even when disrupted by health challenges. We welcome transdisciplinary contributions from philosophers, bioethicists, clinicians, medical humanists, and social scientists. Topics include how philosophical frameworks enrich clinical practice, how healthcare shapes existential experience, how the 4E cognitive approach may inform bioethical theory, and how dialogical methodologies can be integrated into institutional contexts. The issue aims to rediscover bioethics as a genuinely philosophical and existential enterprise, that is as bios ethikos.

Topics of interest for this call for papers include but are not restricted to:

• Philosophical frameworks for enriching or transforming bioethical practice and clinical evaluation;
• Philosophical dimensions of clinical encounters: embodiment, selfhood, temporality, and meaning-making;
• Critiques of the reduction of ethical deliberation to procedure, regulation, or risk management;
• How healthcare practices shape or constrain the philosophical dimensions of human existence;
• The 4E cognitive approach (embodied, extended, enactive, embedded) applied to bioethical theory and practice;
• Integration of philosophical inquiry and dialogical methods into clinical or institutional contexts;
• Empirical and conceptual engagement with the Philosophical Health methodology, including SMILE_PH;
• Cross-cultural and planetary perspectives on philosophical health and the good life;
• Methodological innovations in clinical philosophy, philosophical counselling, and reflective practice.

More details here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/page/journal/13652753/call-for-papers/si-2026-000772

_______

Dr Luis de Miranda

Associate Professor (Docent) in Bioethics, Uppsala University

Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellow, Turku Institute for Advanced Studies
Associated Researcher, Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics,

Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University

https://www.luisdemiranda.com/

My source: Philos-L "The Liverpool List" is run by the Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy/philos-l/ Messages to the list are archived at http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/philos-l.html. Follow the list on Twitter @PhilosL. Follow the Department of Philosophy @LiverpoolPhilos

Philosophical Counselling - Reading group: Taylor 2002 'Central Value of Philosophical Counseling'

In addition to Kantian Desert (this p.m.) it is proving helpful to join a reading group on Philosophical Counselling. Being able to combine clinical and therapy experience* with philosophy is a welcome and rather overdue development. The reading for tomorrow (online for me I hope) is: 

Taylor J.S. (2002) The Central Value of Philosophical Counseling. International Journal of Philosophical Practice. 1 (2):1-9.

ABSTRACT: The title of this paper is deliberately ambiguous. It could refer either to the central value that philosophical counseling has for philosophy in general, or else it could refer to something (such as personal autonomy, or personal well-being) that philosophical counselors believe to be of value, and that they are able to help their clients pursue. In fact, this paper will be addressing both of these topics in order to demonstrate
the links that hold between them, and, in so doing, will attempt to further elucidate the nature of philosophical counseling itself.

Taylor (and related papers) also joins the dot (object?) that is Hodges' model, for example (with my emphasis):

'In this vein philosophical counseling is viewed as a Socratic drawing out of the knowledge that the client already possess, and that may be revealed through the careful questioning of a well-trained practitioner of the elenchic method.' pp.1-2.

I've long used guided discovery, by which the students (usually)/audience co-produce the model through a discussion.

'However, the difference between Socrates as a seeker after truth and the philosophical counselor as a professional who helps his or her client map out his or her own world-view in order to address particular problems that he or she is concerned with should not be overstated.' p.2.

'Furthermore—and perhaps most galling of all to philosophical counselors—academic philosophers often seem to view philosophical counseling as not being “real” philosophy at all, but more perhaps a species of social work, or an unsophisticated variant ofpsychotherapy.' p.4.

'Again, this information may be used by the counselor to help the client reflect more acutely upon her own views concerning the morality of abortion.' p.6.

'Given these two senses of “autonomy” it appears that the philosophical counselor is most concerned with enhancing autonomy in the second, Millian, sense of this concept. This is because philosophical counselors often try to aid persons in making decisions (or discoveries) about what it is that they really want to do, what their personal value-system or world-view really consists of.' p.11. 
(A contribution to person-centredness? Critical thinking is also noted by Taylor.)

 See also: https://www.igpp.org/english

 *Including, counselling, family, cognitive and behavioral therapies, plus psychosocial intervention.