New materialism(s) and systemic psychotherapy: Does it matter? (PART 1)

This paper is one part of a two-part series. Part one provides the theoretical groundwork for New Materialisms (NMs), while part two establishes the connections between these theoretical foundations and systemic practice. Therefore, the aim of this work is to delve into the core concepts of NMs in the field of systemic psychotherapy. Its genesis is inspired by our collaboration as doctoral students in systemic psychotherapy. New Materialisms represent a contemporary and heterogeneous movement that has emerged from the works of key proponents from diverse fields: philosophy (e.g. Deleuze and Guattari), anthropology (e.g. Viveiros de Castro and Ingold) and physics (e.g. Barad). They are characterised by a theoretical and practical ‘turn to matter.’ We will outline how NMs differentiate themselves from the ‘linguistic turn’ proposed by a moderate version of social constructionism, which we believe is endemic in much of systemic psychotherapy research and practice. We will discuss both the potential innovations that NMs could bring to the systemic psychotherapy field and the criticisms they could provoke. An invitation to consider the implications of NMs upon the systemic field is extended. Although we acknowledge that systemic psychotherapy and NMs are two disciplines driven by heterogeneous drivers, we posit that both are practices of freedom from stability and identity, which open up fields of differences where new possibilities for life can be invented.