Origins of IDL
Every approach is built upon borrowed and adapted knowledge from other schools and approaches, and IDL is no different. If something in the work rings true or is effective it is because it resonates with something that is innate and universal, and therefore can be found in many places. Therefore, IDL does not claim to offer anything new in that sense. Because of this, IDL has no problem with people borrowing or taking parts of the work and adapting them for their own uses, with or without attribution. While this is the greatest flattery, the purpose is to get good tools out to as many people as possible, as effectively as possible, not to receive credit for doing so.
It is natural whenever we come across some body of knowledge to classify it in terms of those systems with which we are already familiar. This allows us to make assumptions about the new work that save time in both assessment and application. The danger is that we will draw incorrect or partial conclusions about it and then either close our minds or pass incorrect information on to others. We have seen this happen with Integral Deep Listening Dream Yoga, particularly among therapists who have not experienced an interview themselves. There is a tendency to observe its superficial resemblance to other methodologies and conflate it with them. This is most likely to be done with gestalt, Voice Dialogue, or more remotely, Jungian approaches. Various versions of the interviewing questionnaire are out there, and it is not uncommon for people to think that IDL was derived from one of them. It was not.
The roots of Integral Deep Listening are in the sociometric methodology developed by J.L. Moreno, who also developed psychodrama and was a source for many of the concepts and methods later appropriated by Fritz Perls. While Dillard was also trained in psychodrama, gestalt, transactional analysis, hypnotherapy, psychodynamics, rational-emotive therapy, reality therapy, cognitive emotional therapy, and was familiar with a number of other schools, such as Jungian analysis, and psychosynthesis, none of these were major sources for IDL. Dillard did not hear about Voice Dialogue until about 2005, as a response of exposure to Genpo Roshi’s “ Big Mind” process. Dillard learned sociometry in 1978 in graduate school and applied the methodology to dreams beginning in 1981. Several “commentaries,” were created at that time that are generated based on a series of questions developed by the author. They did not come from any outside source. Rather, they evolved organically out of the sociometric methodology. While the questions used in the IDL protocol were developed by the author and their order worked out by him, they are basic enough that it can be expected that similar questionnaires derived from other sources will be found. However, the particular questions and their order were worked out in the early 1990’s, in an effort to simplify the questions that are associated with the various commentaries of the Dream Sociometric method, which was created in 1981. You can find an example of the commentary questions here:
There are slightly different versions of the questionnaire based on whether one is interviewing a dream or a life issue:
http://www.integraldeeplistening.com/learn-idl/interviewing-formats
There is also a version for children:
http://www.integraldeeplistening.com/learn-idl/interviewing-formats/interviewing-format-for-children
Comparisons and contrasts with various modalities, including Voice Dialogue, Gestalt, Jungian, and NLP can be found at:
http://www.dreamyoga.com/integral-deep-listening/comparisonscontrasts-2