Grinshpun Igor Borisovich (September 18, 1953 - June 7, 2013) - Russian psychodramatherapist, writer, professor at the Moscow City Psychological and Pedagogical University.

He worked at the Department of Developmental Psychology at Moscow State Pedagogical University, where he taught the course "History of Psychology", then at the Department of World Psychotherapy (later - individual and group psychotherapy) of the Faculty of Counseling and Clinical Psychology. He also worked at the Institute of Christian Psychology.

Author of more than 50 scientific and methodological works, among them "Introduction to Psychology" (4 editions since 1993), "Introduction to the profession" Psychology "," Psychodrama "in the book" The main directions of modern psychotherapy ". Translator of the book by K. Hall and G. Lindsay "Theories of Personality", "Dictionary of Psychological Terms".

Member of the editorial board of the Moscow Psychotherapeutic Journal.

Books (2)

Introduction to psychology

In our everyday life, we use the words “psychology”, “psychologist”, “psychological” and related words quite widely, without always thinking about their content ...

So psychology is the science of the mind. Therefore, for further advancement, we need to dwell on what science is (and thereby determine the specifics of the approach and method of analyzing the phenomena of interest to us).

Psychodrama

There is no single definition of psychodrama.

As a preliminary definition, we propose to use the one that is given in most cases (with some differences in wording): a group psychotherapy method that involves the use of theatrical (dramatic) improvisation for the client to explore his inner world, develop creative potential and, on this basis, productively change his attitude towards being in its various manifestations (including self-attitude) and expanding the possibilities of adequate behavior and interaction.

Hello dear Reader.

We, three very different people, have been living in the world of psychology for a long time and therefore - perhaps not without reason - considering ourselves professional psychologists, we invite you to enter this world - the way we see it, to touch the unusual profession that you, to be maybe you have chosen for yourself, or at least the one you are thinking about.

What you are about to read is the fruit of a collaborative effort. But this does not mean that we always think the same thing on this or that occasion. Let this not confuse you: psychology as a science and practice itself is not much older than us put together; besides, as you will see, it is special science and special practice; as in any area related to human existence, there is no indisputable here, and what seems obvious is most often the most incomprehensible, as the classic of French psychology (and brilliant practitioner) Pierre Janet said. Some difference in the views of the authors, in our opinion, is quite natural: somewhere, where, and in psychology, thank God, it is still far from the “only true”, “ultimately true”, “monolithic and unshakable” ideas, especially when it comes to It is about the professional self-determination of the psychologists themselves, because the essence of self-determination is freedom, and hence the heterogeneity, the uniqueness of the choice of the meaning of one's stay in psychology. Note that the rejection of the idea of "final truth" is also associated with the idea of personal and professional development, which is often based on rethinking and further improving one's own views and positions.

Therefore, we invite you not to listen, but to talk - as far as we manage to make it interesting for you. To paraphrase the words of another classic of psychology (and also a brilliant practitioner) Swiss Carl Jung, a psychologist for the one with whom he works can be likened to a guide in an unfamiliar area - not so much because he knows the area better, but because he imagines how navigate on it. We will try to be the same for you.

Let's introduce ourselves

Nikolai Sergeevich Pryazhnikov - Professor of the Moscow State University, specialist in the field of labor psychology and vocational guidance, the only one from the team of authors - Doctor of Science. If any thoughts in the book seem too abstrusely stated to you, know that these are precisely his thoughts.

Igor Viktorovich Bachkov - Candidate of Psychological Sciences, head of the laboratory of the Moscow Psychological and Pedagogical Institute, specialist in the field of psychology of self-awareness, author of original psychological training programs and leader of trainings; in addition, the author of scientific and artistic books on psychology for kids and schoolchildren. In this connection, he is a member of the Writers' Union. So if some parts of the book are significantly worse than others in stylistic and artistic terms, then you know it was he who wrote them.

Igor Borisovich Grinshpun- Associate Professor, Department of Developmental Psychology, Moscow Pedagogical State University, Head. Department of Practical Psychology, Moscow Psychological and Social Institute. Since he is somewhat older than the above co-authors and has been teaching psychology for a quarter of a century, he owns (besides the very idea of \u200b\u200bwriting this book together) the most boring fragments.

Let those who are already seriously interested in psychology to some extent forgive us, but we will proceed from the fact that you, the Reader, are not yet sufficiently experienced in it or even almost ignorant (why, by the way, we will first try to follow the popular science style). Therefore, by the way, in the book you will find inserts with brief comments on some of the names of researchers found in the text - in cases where there are no explanations directly in the text. Of course, we could not comment on all the personalities - this would expand the scope of the book to unthinkable dimensions - and chose those that are closely related to psychology, firstly, and directly related to our conversation, secondly. Inserts will look like this:

As practice shows, many first-year students imagine professional psychology very approximately, based on a kind of myths generated by everyday opinions, rumors, TV shows such as sessions by A. Kashpirovsky or A. Chumak, the image and statements of psychologists invited to programs like “About this ” or “I myself” (where they, in fact, act as popularizers), pseudo-psychological books like “How to bind a man to yourself”, etc.

Let's take a closer look at some of these myths. This is important, because, excuse me for being edifying, the choice of a profession is one of the most serious life choices; its randomness and lack of meaningfulness are potentially tragic.

So - myths about psychology and psychologists.

1. Psychology is a science that knows everything about a person and his soul, and a psychologist who has mastered this science is a person who “sees people through”.

2. A psychologist is a person who is naturally endowed with special abilities to communicate with others and understand others.

3. Psychologist - a person who knows how to control the behavior, feelings, thoughts of others, specially trained for this and owns the appropriate techniques (for example, hypnosis).

4. A psychologist is a person who knows himself thoroughly and controls himself in any circumstances.

5. A psychologist is a sage who knows more about life than others, and his mission is to show the true path to suffering, confused people with advice and instructions.

Generally speaking, there is some reality behind each of these myths, they have some foundation; but this reality is perceived exaggeratedly, acquires false shades, which is why it becomes illusory and “tempting”, leading along a path that is sometimes dangerous not only for oneself, but also for others (which will be discussed later).

Let's take a closer look at these myths. So:

1. Psychology is a science that knows everything about a person and his soul, and a psychologist who has mastered this science is a person who “sees people through”.

Indeed, the term "psychology" means "the science of the soul", "the study of the soul" or, if you like, "soul science". However, no absolutely complete knowledge about the soul (as well as about other objects, by the way) is fundamentally impossible - only movement towards this knowledge is possible; meanwhile, the soul, which - unlike objects and natural phenomena - cannot be directly seen, felt, measured, turns out to be a particularly difficult object to study, so much so that, as they say, Albert Einstein, having met and talked with the great Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget , exclaimed: "How easy then, itI do, compared to what you do You!". According to other versions, his words sounded like this: "Theoretical physics is child's play compared to mysteries child's play!" Another variant: “God, how much more complex psychology is than physics!”

Yes, the knowledge accumulated by psychology is rich and varied, but far from exhaustive and often contradictory. In the future, you will see that there are many psychological theories (if you want - a lot of psychology), and therefore one should not expect "ultimate truth" from teaching psychology. Doubts and search inevitably await you, which, you see, is not bad at all if you strive not for passive assimilation, but for creative development.

As for the pervasiveness of a psychologist, one should not exaggerate it. However, he can really see much better than most of those who are not involved in psychology - since the psychologist specifically thinks about this, studies it and works with it; he can talk about something better - because he “knows psychological words” with which you can designate certain events related to the world of mental phenomena. But remember that any opinion is probabilistic. A psychologist who categorically asserts that “everything is clear” to him regarding this or that person or event is either unprofessional, or inept, or “works for the public” - fortunately, due to the myth under discussion, there are plenty of such opportunities.

Atkinson Rita L., Atkinson Richard S. et al. Introduction to Psychology (Paper)

Elder A. Trading with Dr. Elder. Stock Game Encyclopedia (Document)

Shpet G.G. Introduction to Ethnic Psychology (Document)

Robertson R. An Introduction to Jungian Psychology (Document)

Galperin P.Ya. Introduction to Psychology (Document)

Chizh T.I. (comp.) Cheat sheets Psychology in flowcharts (Document)

Luria A.R. An evolutionary introduction to general psychology (Document)

Radina N.K. (comp.) Ethnopsychology. Electronic textbook (Document)

(Document)

Slobodchikov V.I., Isaev E.I. Fundamentals of psychological anthropology. Human Psychology: An Introduction to the Psychology of Subjectivity (Document)

Grinshpun I.B., Morozova E.A. Psychodrama (Document)

n1.doc

Grinshpun I. B. INTRODUCTION TO PSYCHOLOGY

Moscow International Pedagogical Academy 1994
Basic course aids:

1. Gamezo M. V., Domashenko I. A. Atlas of Psychology. M.," 1986.

2. Godfroy J. What is psychology. M., 1992.

3. General psychology. M., 1986.

4. Psychology. Dictionary, M., 1990.

5. Psychological dictionary. M., 1983.

INTRODUCTION

In our everyday life, we use the words “psychology”, “psychologist”, “psychological” and related words quite widely, without always thinking about their content. “This person is a good psychologist,” we say about someone who knows how to establish contact with people. “What an artist and what a psychologist!” George Sand said about Leo Tolstoy, referring to his ability to convey in works of art the subtlest movements of the human soul. "I am a psychologist! O, Here is science!” Pushkin’s Mephistopheles declares, crowning with this phrase the maxim “Boredom is the rest of the soul” and anticipating further discussions about the torment of Faust. “He (or me) has such a psychology,” we sometimes say, not quite, however, competently, trying to explain unexpected impulses and actions or stating the features of our own or someone else's personality. Sometimes you can hear a phrase like "Well, he's mental," meaning that someone, in the opinion of the speaker, is disabled or sick.

Such liberties in the use of the word are quite natural (although it is not clear how desirable) for colloquial speech, but it can confuse those entering the world of psychology, giving rise to involuntary terminological confusion, and hinder the first steps in this not quite ordinary discipline.

Meanwhile, the word “psychology”, which arose in the 18th century (its creator was the famous German scientist, teacher M.V. Lomonosov Christian Wolf) in the proper sense means “the doctrine of the soul” or “the science of the soul” - the corresponding Greek roots psyche ( soul) and logos (science, teaching). The concept of "soul" in science is now used relatively rarely; the concept of "psyche" is considered more scientific. Thus, in the strict sense of the word, psychology is understood as the science of the psyche (although this sounds somewhat tautological), and a psychologist is a person, professionally engaged in this science in theoretical and practical terms, including using its achievements, providing a variety of assistance to people in situations that will be discussed below. In other cases, we will consider the name "psychologist" metaphorical (for example, in relation to F. M. Dostoevsky, which does not exclude the significance of his observations and generalizations for science).

In general, science is understood as the sphere of human activity, the main function of which is the development of knowledge about the world, their systematization, on the basis of which it is possible to build an image of the world (the so-called scientific picture of the world) and build ways to interact with the world (scientifically based practice). The "body" of science is laws- open stable connections between phenomena, the formulation of which allows describing, explaining and predicting the phenomena of objective reality.

Of course, the knowledge produced by science cannot be considered absolute. Laws are formulated within certain theories; theories, on the other hand, are attempts at a holistic view of the regularities and essential properties of certain areas of reality and arise on the basis of hypotheses i.e., assumptions about these relationships and properties. Strictly speaking, general hypotheses claiming to be universal explanations are almost completely impossible to confirm; even if the entire foreseeable experience of mankind confirms the legitimacy of the hypothesis, this does not mean its universal validity - there is always the possibility of new data appearing that contradict it, and then the hypothesis must be revised. It's the same with theory; it is a systematic description, explanation and prediction of phenomena in a certain area on the basis of a widely confirmed hypothesis, it exists until a certain amount of data contradicting it accumulates, requiring a revision of the theory up to its rejection. Actually, the development of science basically represents the development and change of theories;

An honest scientist (or a group of scientists) who creates a theory is always aware of its probabilistic, "non-absolute" nature. At the same time, new theories cover an increasing number of phenomena and serve practice more and more reliably; this allows us to talk about the increasing reliability of knowledge, which determines the progress in science. (At the same time, situations of “return” of old and already seemingly rejected theories are quite frequent - they are rethought at a new level and open up with new, hitherto hidden sides and possibilities).

One should not think that science is limited to "pure theorizing". The development of scientific knowledge means access to new areas of phenomena and their correlation with the original ideas, that is, new interactions with the world.

The inability to explain the data within the framework of existing ideas gives rise to a cognitive contradiction, which is problem(usually it is formulated as a question); further formulated

RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF EDUCATION MOSCOW PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL INSTITUTE

I. V. Vachkov, I. B. Grinshpun, N. S. Pryazhnikov

Introduction to the profession of "psychologist"

Textbook Edited by I. B. Grinshpun

Russian Academy of Education for use

as a teaching aid

- 3rd edition stereotypical

Moscow-Voronezh

2004
UDC 159.9.01 BBK 88.4 V12

Chief Editor

D. I. Feldstein

Deputy Chief Editor

S. K. Boldyreva Members of the editorial board:

I. V. Dubrovina L. P. Kezina M. I. Kondakov V. G. Kostomarov O. E. Kutafin N. N. Malofeev

N.D. Nikandrov V. A. Polyakov V. V. Rubtsov E. V. Saiko V. A. Sweeteners I. I. Khaleeva

A. G. Asmolov

B. A. Bolotov

G. A. Bordovsky V. P. Borisenkov A. A. Derkach A. I. Dontsov

Bachkov I.V.

AT 12 Introduction to the profession of "psychologist": Proc. allowance / V. I. Bachkov, I. B. Grinshpun, N. S. Pryazhnikov; Ed. I. B. Grinshpun. - 3rd ed., erased. - M.: Publishing House of the Moscow Psychological and Social Institute; Voronezh: NPO MODEK Publishing House, 2004. - 464 p. (Series "Psychologist's Library"). ISBN 5-89502-596-X (MPSI) ISBN 5-89395-614-1 (NPO "MODEK") psychologist-practitioner, the basics of organizing the work of psychologists in cooperation with related specialists are discussed, the issues of professional development of a student psychologist and the improvement of a specialist psychologist after graduation are considered, useful advice is given to students and teachers on the organization of educational and professional activities.

The manual is addressed to students and teachers of psychological faculties and a wide range of readers interested in psychology.

UDC 159.9.01 BBK 88.4

£38026

ISBN 5-89502-596-X (IPSI)

^ ISBN 5-89395-614-1 (NPO "MODEK")

Russian Academy of Education (RAO), 2002, 2003

"MODEK", 2002, 2003
Introduction In "Introduction..."

Hello dear Reader.

We, three very different people, who have been living in the world of psychology for quite a long time and therefore - perhaps not without reason - consider ourselves professional psychologists, we invite you to enter this world - the way we see it, to touch the unusual a profession that you may have chosen for yourself, or at least that you are thinking about.

What you are about to read is the fruit of a collaborative effort. But this does not mean that we always think the same thing in one way or another. Let this not confuse you: psychology as a science and practice itself is not much older than us put together; besides, as you will see, it is special science and special practice; as in any field related to human existence, there is no indisputable here, and what seems obvious is most often the most incomprehensible, as the classic of French psychology (and brilliant practitioner) Pierre Janet said. Some difference in the views of the authors, in our opinion, is quite natural: already somewhere, and in psychology, thank God, it is still far from the “only true”, “ultimately true”, “monolithic and unshakable” ideas, more so when it comes to the professional self-determination of the psychologists themselves, because the essence of self-determination is freedom, and hence the heterogeneity, the uniqueness of choosing the meaning of one's stay in psychology. Note that the rejection of the idea of "final truth" is also associated with the idea of personal and professional development, which is often based on rethinking and further improvement of one's own views and positions.

The psychologist for the one with whom he works can be likened to a guide in an unfamiliar area - not so much because he knows the area better, but because he knows how to navigate it. Let's try to be the same for you.

Let's introduce ourselves

Nikolai Sergeevich Pryazhnikov- Professor of Moscow State University, specialist in the field of labor psychology and career guidance, the only one from the team of authors - Doctor of Sciences. If any thoughts in the book seem too abstrusely stated to you, know that these are precisely his thoughts.

^ Igor Viktorovich Bachkov - Candidate of Psychological Sciences, head of the laboratory of the Moscow Psychological and Pedagogical Institute, specialist in the field of psychology of self-awareness, author of original psychological training programs and leader of trainings; in addition, the author of scientific and artistic books on psychology for kids and schoolchildren. In this connection, he is a member of the Writers' Union. So if some parts of the book are significantly worse than others in stylistic and artistic terms, then you know it was he who wrote them. Igor BorisovichGrinshpun - Associate Professor of the Department of Psychology of Development, Moscow Pedagogical State University, Head. Department of Practical Psychology of the Moscow Psychological and Social Institute. Since he is somewhat older than the above-mentioned co-authors and has been teaching psychology for a quarter of a century, he owns (besides the very idea of writing this book together) the most boring fragments.

Let those who are already seriously interested in psychology to some extent forgive us, but we will proceed from the fact that you, the Reader, are not yet sufficiently experienced in it or even almost ignorant (why, by the way, we will first try to follow the style of scientifically - popular). Therefore, by the way, in the book you will find inserts with brief comments on some of the names of researchers found in the text - in cases where there are no explanations directly in the text. Of course, we could not comment on all the personalities - this would expand the volume of the book to unimaginable sizes - and chose those that

We will immediately warn you that in the text of the inserts we will use some abbreviations, namely: Academy of Sciences of the USSR - Academy of Sciences of the USSR, now the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). APN - Academy of Pedagogical Sciences. Now it is called the Russian Academy of Education (RAO).

APSN - Academy of Pedagogical and Social Sciences. Moscow State University - Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov. Leningrad State University - Leningrad State University. MSGU - Moscow Pedagogical State University.

They are closely related to psychology, firstly, and directly related to our conversation, secondly. Inserts will look like this:

As practice shows, many first-year students imagine professional psychology very approximately, based on a kind of myths generated by everyday opinions, rumors, television programs such as sessions by A. Kashpirovsky or A. Chumak, imid- and the statements of psychologists invited to

Programs like “About this” or “I myself” (where they, in fact, act as popularizers), pseudo-psychological books like “How to bind a man to yourself”, etc.

Let's take a closer look at some of these myths. This is important, because, pardon the edification, it is one of the most serious life choices; its randomness and lack of meaningfulness are potentially tragic.

So - myths about psychology and psychologists.

1. Psychology is a science that knows everything about a person and his soul, and a psychologist who has mastered this science is a person who “sees through people”.

2. A psychologist is a person who is naturally endowed with special abilities to communicate with others and understand others.

3. A psychologist is a person who knows how to control the behavior, feelings, thoughts of others, who is specially trained for this and who owns the appropriate techniques (for example, hypnosis).

5. A psychologist is a sage who knows more about life than others, and his mission is to show the true path to suffering, confused people with advice and instructions.

Generally speaking, there is some reality behind each of these myths, they have some basis under them; but this reality is perceived exaggeratedly, acquires false shades, which makes it illusory and “tempting”, leading along a path that is sometimes dangerous not only for oneself, but also for others (which will be discussed later in a special discussion).

Let's take a closer look at these myths. So:

1. Psychology is a science that knows everything about a person and his soul, and a psychologist who has mastered this science is a person who “sees people through”.

Indeed, the term "psychology" means "science of the soul", "teaching of the soul" or, if you like, "soul science". However, no absolutely complete knowledge about the soul (as well as about other objects, by the way) is fundamentally impossible - only movement towards this knowledge is possible; meanwhile, the soul, which - unlike objects and phenomena of nature - cannot be directly seen, felt, measured, turns out to be a particularly difficult object to study, so much so that, as they say, Albert Einstein, having met and talked with the great Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget exclaimed: “How simple is what I do compared to what you do!” According to other versions, his words sounded like this: "Theoretical physics is child's play compared to the mysteries of child's play!" Another variant: “God, how much more complex psychology is than physics!”

Yes, the knowledge accumulated by psychology is rich and varied, but far from exhaustive and often contradictory. In the future, you will see that there are many psychological theories (if you want - a lot of psychology), and therefore you should not expect "ultimate truth" from teaching psychology. Doubts and search inevitably await you, which, you see, is not bad at all if you strive not for passive assimilation, but for creative development.

As for the pervasiveness of a psychologist, one should not exaggerate it. However, he really

^ Piaget Jean(1896-1980) - Swiss psychologist, creator of one of the most authoritative theories of the child's intellectual development. Founder of the Geneva School of Genetic Psychology.

Can see better than most of those who are not engaged in psychology - insofar as the psychologist specifically thinks about this, studies it and works with it; he can talk about something better - because he “knows psycho-logical words”, with the help of which one can designate certain events related to the world of mental phenomena. But remember that any opinion is probabilistic. A psychologist who categorically asserts that “everything is clear” to him regarding this or that person or event is either unprofessional, or inept, or “works for the public” - fortunately, due to the myth under discussion, there are plenty of such opportunities.

Later we will talk about the temptation of a psychologist to feel like a "superman", for whom Truth is something like a little sister, who can be patted on the back.

2. A psychologist is a person endowed by nature with special abilities to communicate with others and understand others.

Generally speaking, the question of who is endowed with what by nature, and what is acquired during life (is brought up) is a difficult question, sorry for the banality. Indeed, we can talk about the natural (innate) component of many individual characteristics of a person, for example, about the properties of the nervous system, which are directly manifested in the speed of movements, fatigue, etc. However, we can speak unambiguously about the natural foundations of the ability to meaningful communication and empathy (empathy) is at least difficult. In any case, among practical psychologists - including outstanding ones recognized at the world level - people are the most diverse in their "natural data". Another conversation is that it is really important for a practical psychologist to have certain abilities, which will be discussed in the corresponding section, but - with rare exceptions (meaning some cases of pathology) - we are not talking about "congenital inability". The ability to communicate and understand others (sometimes called “communication competence”) can and should be developed, and not only in a psychologist (for which, by the way, there are appropriate psychological methods).

3. A psychologist is a person who knows how to control the behavior, feelings, thoughts of others, who is specially trained for this and who owns the appropriate techniques (for example, hypnosis).

Indeed, a practical psychologist has some ways of influencing the behavior of others. Actually, we are not talking about hypnosis in its common sense (plunging into a deep trance with the suggestion of certain images and behavior) is the prerogative of physicians, however, certain methods have been developed in psychology to create a situation of trust and goodwill, to mitigate conflicts ; at the same time, fears about the manipulative capabilities of psychologists who have certain knowledge about the patterns of behavior also have their grounds - any knowledge can be turned both for good and for harm. Behavior management in and of itself is not an end in itself. A terrible option when a psychologist revels in power over another. The temptation of power is another variant of the temptation of "superhumanity." Other, also unpleasant, options are when influence on another is used for selfish and pragmatic purposes. It is characteristic that psychologists who preach the importance of mastering techniques of this kind often use terminology from the arsenal of the military or fighters, seeing in the other an indispensable enemy who must be defeated - however, most often covering this with more humane masks. Characteristic in this respect is the title of the translation of one of the books of the very popular (and not quite justifiably considered a psychologist) D. Carnegie: "How to win friends." Friends - to fight. Sounds creepy, I agree.

4. A psychologist is a person who knows himself thoroughly and controls himself in any circumstances.

It is impossible to know yourself "to the end". A person who claims to know himself completely is mistaken or pretends to be. But the desire for self-knowledge, the desire to reach “to the foundations, to the roots, to the core” is indeed often characteristic of psychologists (but, we note, not for all psychologists and not only for psychologists). In any case, it is often - and, from our point of view, rightly - said that a practical psychologist should be personal foreman, that is, he must know his own aspirations, values, weaknesses, etc., so that in working with another person

Do not solve, without knowing it, your unconscious problems, namely, to help another (client).

Remember the film "Stalker" by Andrei Tarkovsky and the brothers Arkady and Boris Strugatsky (by the way, we strongly advise all present or future psychologists who have not done this to watch it): The Zone fulfills desires - but not declared ones, but only true ones, and one of the heroes - The writer - does not take a decisive step, because he understands that he does not know what he wants in fact.

In the same way, a psychologist who does not admit to himself those of his aspirations that he considers unworthy (for example, in a hidden need for power), will, without noticing it, strive to satisfy them, and the client will be the victim (this problem and others, with related to it, we will also discuss in the corresponding section of the book). As for self-control in any situation - this is also from the area of \u200b\u200b"superhumanity"; it is true, however, that some methods of self-regulation have been developed in psychology, and the person who owns them (not necessarily a psychologist) really behaves more confidently in difficult situations. In addition, a psychologist, professionally knowing, for example, the essence of conflicts of various types and ways of their prevention and productive resolution, turns out to be more prepared for adequate behavior in such cases.

^ 5. A psychologist is a sage who knows more about life than others, and his mission is to show the true path to suffering, confused people with advice and instructions.

As among other people, among psychologists there are wise and not too wise, but this is not about that. We are talking about yet another temptation of "superhumanity" - the temptation of the role of the Great Teacher, messiah, shepherd, guru - the temptation is all the more tempting because many who come for help are ready to recognize such in a psychologist. Of course, there are psychologists who claim such a role - as there are enough people in general who believe that it is they who know the main truths of life and call (or even drag them by force) behind them, believing that it is they who "know how to do it." But if someone knows the truth, it is only the One who is Higher, and self-deification is probably only a manifestation of petty pride and unsatisfied pride. The psychologist is not a priest and has no right to speak in God's name; he has no right to impose his own path and his worldview, he can only try to help another see his own - the other's - path or his opportunity.

As experience shows, people who come to the faculties of psychology and have not undergone prior special training, as a rule, are guided to one degree or another by one or more of the myths mentioned, behind how they formulate the reasons for their professional choice. . Most often it sounds like this:

"I want to understand myself better." The motive is humanly very worthy, but, you see, understanding oneself is not a profession.

"I want to help people." Very dignified and beautiful - to be honest. Indeed, a practical psychologist is one of those (but not the only one) who helps others. But what is behind this? Why choose psychology? After all, the priest, and the teacher, and the social worker help others, and philanthropist, and policeman, and many others.

"I want to learn to control myself."

"I want to learn how to communicate better."

"Interesting Science".

^ SOME PRELIMINARY WORDS REGARDING PSYCHOLOGY

First - about the very term "psychology", which is now encountered in our everyday language often enough for its meaning to be very, very indefinite - and therefore we need to designate it more strictly.

The concept of "psychology" arose at the turn of the XVI-XVII centuries; most often the authorship is recognized by the German theologian Goklenius. Etymologically, this word is derived from the ancient Greek "psyche" (soul) and logos (teaching, knowledge, science). It was first introduced into the scientific-philosophical (and not theological) language by the German scientist Christian Wolff in the 18th century, and now the most popular translation is "science of the soul".(If in any manual - and there are, unfortunately - you will come across a phrase like "Psychology is the science of the soul. Such a definition was given in Ancient Greece" - do not believe it. The ancient Greeks did not use such a word at all.) The concept of "science ”, however, in the modern sense, it is different from the concept of “teaching” - for science involves not only deep reflection and a systematic presentation of thoughts, but also a special research activity built on the basis of special methods (later we will devote a special section to this ).

Developing at first as one of the philosophical disciplines, psychology then, having adopted a number of ideas from experimental physiology, emerged as an independent science, which set itself the task of studying the soul, which at that time was understood as consciousness (and consciousness - as that a person does not - moderately aware). This happened at the end of the 19th century, and 1879 is considered the symbolic date of the birth of psychology as an independent discipline, when Wilhelm Wundt opened an experimental psychology laboratory at the Department of Philosophy of the University of Leipzig, and soon on its basis - the world's first psychological institute, existing to this day. Soon, similar laboratories and institutes began to open in the leading countries of the world (in Russia, the USA, France, and other German cities) - the so-called academic psychology, that is, research psychology, setting itself cognitive tasks proper.

At the end of the XIX century. ideas began to arise and develop about the possibility of applying psychological knowledge in various areas of practice - in pedagogy, medicine, in the organization of labor activity, that is, applied psychology, pursuing non-cognitive goals (more precisely, not only cognitive ones), but offering its developments in the form of recommendations for improving various areas of human activity. At the beginning of the 20th century, another form of psychology began to take shape, aimed at helping people who find themselves in a difficult or difficult life situation - when choosing a profession, when ties with society are broken, when painful emotional experiences; began to take shape psychological practice, assuming that a psychologist who has the relevant knowledge and owns the methods of practical work fulfills the client's request for the provision of psychological assistance in one form or another.

^ Research academic psychology, applied psychology and psychological practice, already developing, as you see, for a century or more, make up three main (very closely between related) spheres in which a psycho-log-professional can be engaged. We will consider them further on.

The meaning of our book is seen as follows:

1. Don't tell everything about psychology (which, in principle, is impossible), but to help you - a future specialist - navigate the main psychological problems and, perhaps, see or outline ways of your own participation in solving these problems.

2. Not just “charm-seduce” with stories about what a wonderful science psychology is (well, directly “the most, the most ...” and, of course, “best of all ...”), namely, “to interest” , that is, to help the future specialist find his personal meaning in psychology. Only when a specialist finds a personal meaning for himself, finds an opportunity to connect his best thoughts and talents With professional activity, one can truly say that he has self-determined as a professional.

Professional self-determination can last a lifetime; but how nice it would be to do this while still a student (and maybe even in the senior classes of a general education school, when many erroneous choices have not yet been made ...).

So what does professional psychology really represent? And what is a profession anyway? What does it mean to be "professional"? From this and let's start.

^ Professional activity of a psychologist

About professions and professionalism in general and about professional psychology in particular

Let's start with a very important question: how is choosing a profession fundamentally different from many other life choices? When answering, one should proceed from the fact that labor activity (and, in particular, professional activity) is, first of all, productive activity, when a person does not just “consume”, “observes”, allows himself to “bewilder” or “charm” (as in many other choices), but does something useful for others ... But in profession, a person also strives to realize all the best that he has, and it is in this that he creates full-fledged happiness for himself, that is, focusing on other people (society), a true professional ultimately asserts himself as a successful personality.

To an even greater extent, the above applies to the profession psychologist, because it is essentially focused on helping other people solve their most difficult problems in life. Therefore, the choice of a psychological profession implies a pronounced humanitarian orientation (orientation to a person with his problems), while many other professions allow more pragmatic (and even selfish) orientations associated with making money, with the production of some goods, with the creation of some objects (which it is not known who and how will use ...). But it is psychologists, together with representatives of other humanitarian-oriented professions (teachers, social workers, doctors, etc.), who should put in the first place the interests of those people who trusted them in the most essential issues - questions of the meaning of their lives, the question their development and decent behavior in difficult life situations.

^ Klimov Evgeny Alexandrovich. Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Education and the Academy of Social Sciences. From 1986 to 2000 - Dean of the Faculty of Psychology, Moscow State University. President of the Russian Psychological Society. Author of more than 150 works. The main area of scientific interests is the genesis, structure and functions of professional consciousness and self-awareness of a person as a subject of labor.

1. General idea of the profession

To begin with, it is useful to understand what is generally considered a “profession”. The famous psychologist E. A. Klimov considers different aspects of the concept of "profession" (Klimov,

1996. - S. 145-205):

1 . Profession as a community of people dealing with similar problems and leading approximately the same lifestyle (it is known that the profession still leaves its “imprint” on a person’s whole life). Of course, the standard of living (with the commonality of the very way of life) can differ among professionals with varying degrees of success (someone has learned to “make good money” for their work, and someone does not even strive for this, discover other "joys" in the profession "psychologist"), but the basic system of values among representatives of the profession "psychologist" is approximately the same, which allows them to talk about one of their colleagues as a more or less accomplished specialist (even regardless of the received "income").

2. ^ Profession as an area of application of forces associated with the separation (and clarification) of the very object and subject of the professional activity of a psychologist. Here the question is also solved in what spheres of life a psychologist can realize himself as a professional. Note that the entire history of psychology (and philosophy) is an ongoing attempt to understand what the soul (“psychic”) is, and how, with the help of what “method” it is better to research and develop it.

3. ^ Profession as an activity and area of personality manifestation. It is often forgotten that professional activity does not just allow you to “produce” some goods or services, but first of all, it allows a person to

Ku to realize their creative potential and creates conditions for the development of this potential (more K. Marx said that the main result of labor is not the goods produced, but "the person himself in his social relations").

4. ^ Profession as a historically developing system.

Interestingly, the very word "profession" goes back to the Latin profiteri - "to speak in public." “Thus, events that are the subject of both general and social psychology are primordially hidden in the phenomenon of the profession,” notes E. A. Klimov (ibid., pp. 177-178). Naturally, the profession itself changes depending on the change in the cultural and historical context, and, unfortunately, situations are possible when the original meaning of the profession can be significantly distorted. In particular, psychology, which is essentially focused on the development of a unique personality of a person, can be used in certain historical periods (“dark epochs”) to openly manipulate public consciousness and create in the minds of individuals the illusion of solving their problems. (especially when these psychological problems are deliberately not associated with social problems).

5. ^ Profession as a reality creatively formed by the subject of labor (in our case, by the psychologist himself). This means that even the cultural-historical situation (epoch) is not totally dominant; much (though not all) depends on individual people. It is they who should themselves determine the place of their profession (and their personal "mission") in the social system, and not just do the work "according to the instructions." It is thanks to specific psychologists that psychology develops as a science and practice. Probably, the true greatness of this or that psychologist is determined by how much he managed to contribute to the development of his science, not so much "thanks" to the prevailing circumstances (and socio-economic conditions), as "despite" these circumstances. And the ideal variant of creative self-realization in psychology is a situation where the psychologist will be able to use even adverse circumstances for good (there is no contradiction here, since often it is overcoming difficulties that allows you to do something really significant).

In addition to the concept of “profession”, it is useful to deal with other related concepts. In particular, the concept "speciality"- This is a more specific area of application of their forces. For example, in the profession of a psychologist, specialties can be: “social psychology”, “clinical psychology”, etc. An even more specific concept is "job title" or "labor post" which involves working in a particular institution and performing specific functions. concept "occupation", on the contrary, it is a fairly broad education, which includes both the profession and specialties, non-specific positions. For example, we can say that these specialists “deal with” issues of school vocational guidance, which involves considering both the problems of the age-psychological development of adolescents, and the problems of child-parent relationships, and general problems of socialization of the individual, and related issues of understanding the socio-economic characteristics of society (in which they are going to self-determine), and issues related to developmental disabilities, etc.

On the whole the concept of "profession" includes the following characteristics:

This is a limited type of work, which for a psychologist inevitably involves cooperation with related specialists;

This is a job that requires special training and constant retraining (note that the profession of a psychologist involves only higher education);

This is work performed for remuneration (this profession often differs from non-professional activities and leisure activities);

This is socially useful work (this characteristic has not yet been truly comprehended even by psychologists themselves);

This is work that gives a person a certain status in society (for many, saying “I am a psychologist” means something ...).

In order to better understand the essence of the “profession”, it is useful to recall the definition that the well-known Russian psychologist S. M. Bogoslovsky gave at the beginning of the century: a person participates in the life of society and which serves him as the main source of ma-16

Terial livelihood... and is recognized for the profession by the personal self-consciousness of the person"(quoted from Klimov, Noskova, 1992. - S. 161). Note: E. A. Klimov writes that to this definition of a profession “to this day, not so much - in essence - has been added ... and perhaps something has been missed”(ibid., p. 161).

The last clarification by S. M. Bogoslovsky (“it is recognized as a profession by the personal self-consciousness of a given person”) allows us to single out the most important psychological aspect of professional activity and even identify some of the “paradoxes” of professionalization. In particular, a person can perform his duties very well (do everything that is required of him), but at the same time hate his job. In this case, it is difficult to say that such work is a “profession” for “this person”. E. Fromm spoke of such people as people with "alienated character", for which are characterized by a break in their essence with the main business of life, which gives rise to many mental problems and diseases over time, turning such “workers” into patients (Fromm, 1992).

As you know, many people consider themselves "good psychologists": after all, they communicate, solve some questions, "understand" each other, etc. "Everyday psychology" has every right to exist and even real psychologists (professional psychologists) to a large extent rely on the experience of everyday psychology, including their own everyday experience. However, the experts distinguish between scientific psychology and psychology of life. Yu. B. Gippenreiter identifies the following such differences: "

1. Everyday knowledge is specific, associated with specific life situations, and scientific psychology strives for a generalized

^ Fromm Erich(1900-1980) - German-American psychologist and philosopher, creator of the concept of "humanistic psychoanalysis", where one of the central problems of modern man is the problem of his alienation from nature, society, himself.

^ Gippenreiter Yulia Borisovna - Doctor of Psychology, Professor of the Faculty of Psychology, Moscow State University. Author of more than 75 works. Recently, her attention has been largely drawn to practical psychology in its various aspects.
In some ways, this is reminiscent of the situation with those young guys (“kach-kami”) who believe that for success in life it is important to “pump up their muscles”, and then “it will be seen”, but in the end it turns out that “strength is crazy” and leaves these guys, at best, "bodyguards" and "sixes" of various "bosses".

In the case of a “merely erudite” psychologist, we could say that we are dealing with a psychological “jock”, stuffed with various knowledge, but unable (without a scientific method) to use them for orientation in professional psychological problems .. As noted by the outstanding Russian teacher S. I. Gessen, the task of higher education “is not to make a person smarter ... but to make his mind more cultured, to ennoble him by instilling in him the method of scientific knowledge , teach him to pose scientific questions and direct him to the path leading to their solution " (Hesse, 1995. - S. 247). The method of scientific knowledge can be used by a specialist in relation to himself and to his scientific and practical activities, which forms the basis for his professional reflection, that is, “seeing himself from the outside” (the basis of the methodological basis of a psychologist).

3. Usage specialist special tools developed in psychology- methods, that is, scientifically substantiated and proven in practice specific methods of activity aimed at achieving a specific goal - scientific, diagnostic, formative. The essence of the technique is that it expands the possibilities of the researcher (empiricist and even theorist) and practice. If an amateur relies mainly on his existing talents (charm, experience, etc.), then if necessary, a specialist, as it were, compensates for the possible lack of some talents by a well-chosen technique.

For example, by nature “boring” and even “uninteresting” (in the ordinary and often unfair sense of the word, that is, not bright enough in communication), a psychologist must “make an impression” on some audience, that is, establish an emotional relationship with her. confidential contact or simply "like" this audience. His existing talents and abilities are clearly not enough for this, and then he chooses some interesting game procedure, an intriguing exercise, or tells some interesting story (teachers call them “tales”), after which the audience can even say about such psychologist: "What an interesting (cheerful, charming, etc.) he is."

Of course, the “amateur” can also use various techniques taken from available books, but often these techniques are used by the “amateur” unreasonably (nea-

Dequate to solve practical or research problems) is rather a “game of real psychology”. But for a specialist, it is important to choose methods that are adequate to the tasks set, but for this he must navigate the whole variety of available psychological and pedagogical means of working with different groups of clients.

^ 4. Special responsibility professional psychologist. If an “amateur”, helping his acquaintances, usually takes all the responsibility “on himself” (and many people like this, as it removes responsibility from themselves), then the task of a professional is more difficult - to gradually form a sense of responsibility in consulted clients (and not everyone likes it, which greatly complicates the work of a real psychologist).

5. Professional psychologist supports communication with their colleagues, as well as with former fellow students, teachers, related specialists, etc. All this allows the specialist to constantly keep abreast of events (learn about the latest in psychology in a timely manner), exchange experience through the activities of psychological professional communities and through informal conferences. tacts, finally, simply to receive moral-emotional and meaningful professional support and assistance in case of any failures and difficulties. Naturally, the “amateur” psychologist is deprived of all this.

6. Availability with a professional psychologist document on psychological education. Despite the fact that this difference, it would seem, is formal (and indeed, some “professionals” can still be inferior in many positions even to “amateurs”), but for the majority of clients it is very not indifferent who advises them, “ a real "psychologist" or "not real" ... In addition, in most cases, obtaining a diploma still requires some effort from the student and very rarely anyone gets it for nothing, that is, a diploma serves as a sign of professionalism.

7. ^ Special professional tact and adherence to professional and ethical standards from a professional psychologist.

The “lover” is often ill-mannered, interrupts another person in a conversation and, most importantly, deprives him of the right to solve his problems on his own (the main slogan of the “effective” “lover” is “Be calm! Rely on me!” ... " But don’t interfere, don’t argue with me!”...). The task of a good psychologist is to create conditions for the client to independently solve his life difficulties, and ideally, to teach him to do without a psychologist at all, no matter how paradoxical it may seem ... This is where real respect for the client’s personality is manifested,

Based on faith in his own ability to be

The object of solving their problems.

Even the ancients said: “It is important not only to feed

hungry for fish, it is important to teach him how to fish.”

8. ^ Ability for professional development and self-development professional psychologist. Of course, even an “amateur” can go to bookstores, buy and stock books on psychology, etc., but, as already noted, self-development is often unsystematic, although there can be quite a lot of zeal and desire. And a professional psychologist should be able not only to learn to independently master some kind of knowledge or a new technique, but to do it meaningfully and, most importantly, in a systematic way. Experience shows that the

The condition for true professional self-development is the passion for some idea. And then the real "miracles" happen: the book, which earlier could not be read for two or three months, is "suddenly" > mastered literally in one or two evenings. Reading “mind books in general” is often ineffective - this is, most likely, also a “game of science”.

9. ^ Developed professional mental hygiene labor with a specialist psychologist. The “amateur” usually does not have the problem of maintaining his health while providing psychological assistance to other people, because this is not the main business of the “lover”, and he simply does not have time [to emaciate emotionally and mentally (although with “lovers” there are exceptions). And sometimes a psychologist can be so exhausted in one hour and a half consultation that it will take several hours to restore strength.

Unfortunately, in psychology itself (and in medicine), the issues of maintaining the mental health of psychologists are still not given enough attention; therefore, the professional psychologist himself is simply forced to be a psychotherapist for himself, otherwise there is a risk of becoming a patient himself” of the relevant institutions.

We add that we are talking not only about mental health, but also about physical health. The psychologist's attitude towards

Health in general is extremely important from a professional point of view. Maintaining a good physical shape makes the psychologist more efficient and resistant to various stressful situations, which are many in professional activities. In addition, the psychologist, whether he likes it or not, often acts for those with whom he works as a kind of "model of the optimal person"; are guided by it; therefore, he must feel responsible in this respect as well.

10. An important characteristic of a professional psychologist is careful and critical attitude to existing and new methods emerging in considerable quantities, often claiming to be considered psychological, but at the same time based on systems of representations that historically are not, and more often than not, to some extent populist in their applications. We are talking about astrology, palmistry, Dianetics and the like. We are not saying that these areas are not worthy of the attention of a psychologist; on the contrary, you need to know the basics of these (and many other) approaches - if only because they make up a significant part of modern mythology and often enter into the individual ideas and language of clients. In addition, in the practice of esoteric and mystical trends, phenomena arise that need a psychological explanation, but so far have not found it - it is no coincidence that many psychologists pay serious attention to the so-called "special states of consciousness."

At the same time, it seems to us that professional psychology, which has long fought for the recognition of its scientific nature, must retain its subject and scientific criteria for analysis. Even if we admit the existence of psychic unknown phenomena in the interpretations of the listed (and many other) non-scientific approaches, psychologists must have a sense of their own (professional and scientific) dignity. Problems arise when some of the clients have already formed the conviction that a good psychologist is certainly “almost an astrologer” or “almost a parapsychologist”. Firstly, when working with such clients, it is not at all necessary to “criticize” the listed near-scientific areas (the client-patient will simply be offended and leave). Secondly, it would not be bad for a psychologist to get acquainted with the data himself.

Directions (in order to quickly find a common language with the consulted person, and then more “naturally” move on to the actual psychological problems and the corresponding scientific and practical methods of work). Thirdly, if a psychologist (or a student of psychology) nevertheless feels that astrology, etc., is closer and more understandable to him, then it is better not to deceive yourself, and also not to deceive your clients and colleagues, and simply leave psychology (why not!) and honestly be called an astrologer. A psychologist-astrologer is no longer just an "amateur", often it is closer to ordinary quackery and, even worse, to self-deception.

Let's say otherwise, without resorting to labels like "charlatanism" or "obscurantism". We are talking about the awareness of the boundaries of professional psychological competence and retention of the subject of psychology, the ability to distinguish in their activities the position of a professional psychologist from other positions (poet, artist, philosopher, religious thinker, etc.), which have an undoubted right to exist, but, interfering in professional activity, they can - provided there is insufficient reflection - turn out to be harmful.

Naturally, even far from all really working psychologists-specialists can fully meet all the characteristics of a real professional psychologist. Yes, and some amateur psychologists can still approach real professional lamas. These differences are highlighted conditionally and are rather a guideline for the self-development of a psychologist who seeks to add experience in psychological science and practice to his everyday psychological experience.

Professionalization in general, and in relation to the development of a professional psychologist in particular, it is a long and even contradictory process... Sometimes, speaking of professionalization, they single out the development of professional knowledge and professional skills, between which there are quite interesting relationships. Knowledge is more often conscious in nature (and therefore it is acquired much faster). But skills are less conscious and are acquired in a longer process. At first, skills are mastered at the level of consciousness (although a novice specialist does not yet have a real skill, he already knows how to

Work), then, as the skill is mastered, it is less and less realized, more and more “automated”, because it is impossible to think about all your actions and specific operations every time. Therefore, very often a good specialist can hardly tell how and why he works so well. But sometimes you still need to think about your work (for example, to improve it), and then the problem of combining conscious knowledge with an unconscious skill arises, which requires a new awareness of what has already been mastered. Constant reflection on oneself and one's activities is the basis of professional reflection and largely determines the level of creativity and self-development of a professional psychologist.

As you know, this problem is best solved when a professional begins to explain to someone how best to work, that is, he is engaged in teaching or “mentoring”. Apparently, this is why E. A. Klimov considers the level of “mentoring” to be the highest level of professional development, when a specialist not only works well himself, but is also able to transfer his best experience to other specialists (Klimov, 1996. - S. 423-424). But at the same time, the specialist himself continues his development (his professionalization continues), because, explaining something to others, he begins to understand it better - this is such a “paradox” of professionalization.

A professional psychologist must be prepared not only for the difficulties of building relationships with clients (as well as colleagues, administration, "customers", etc.), but also for internal difficulties associated with their own professional development and overcoming the so-called "Crisis of professional growth". One should not be afraid of these “crises”, because only overcoming some kind of difficulty, one can count on the true development of oneself not only as a professional, but also as a person. The only problem is to realize this "chance" of development, because crises, unfortunately, sometimes "break" a person. Therefore, one must not be afraid of crises, one must prepare for them (many sections of this manual will be devoted to these problems to a large extent).

As already noted, the professional activity of a psychologist is, first of all, labor activity. In this regard, it is useful to understand what can prevent a person from realizing himself in labor. In particular, what prejudices can become an obstacle to full-fledged self-realization in the profession of a psychologist. E. A. Klimov singled out the following basic "prejudices" about work(Klimov, 1998.-S. 21-32):

1. The ideal of "easy work".

For example, such an “ideal” could be the image of a person who does not make any effort in his work (then one asks why he needs abilities, skills), who does not strain his memory (why then knowledge and ways of orientation in the world of science) , who does not worry and does not worry about his work (why then feelings are needed), etc. It turns out something terrible, something that does not look like a person at all.

It is the ability to experience, to suffer (the famous "torments of creativity"), to take risks, to mobilize one's will that distinguishes a person from a machine, from a robot. But all this requires some effort.

2. Naive anti-entropism (that is, the desire to “reduce the degree of uncertainty”), manifested in the tendency to “put everything in order” and turn complex objects and phenomena into simple (and even primitive) schemes. But then there is no room for creativity: everything is “sorted”, there is “order” in everything, and any initiative, any creativity can destroy this “order” ... Actually, creativity to a large extent is the movement “not in step”, the rejection of the stereotype - that is, the usual vision of the order of things.

Any true system (including psychological), along with a tendency to self-preservation, strives for development, is in motion, and the relationship between the parts of this system is contradictory. This is what provides real life with its problems and complexities. Therefore, the work of a psychologist is not limited to “putting things in order” in everything. A more interesting task of a psychologist is to help a person discover the contradictions of life (including the contradictions of his own soul) and use the energy of these contradictions for self-development.

3. Psychic "blindness", manifests itself in the inability to "com-experience and co-have fun with another person." (on ^ A. N. Radishchev).

Since the psyche is not directly observable, the psychologist comes

Radishchev Alexander Nikolaevich(1749-1802) - Russian writer, philosopher, public figure. The posthumously published work “On Man, His Mortality and Immortality” can be regarded as one of the first significant philosophical and psychological works in Russian culture.

It is based on external manifestations and statements, on the analysis of various circumstances, to create a true image of another person, and very often a psychologist relies not only on his “methods” (tests, questionnaires), but also on the data of conversations, observations, or even simply on his own method. -ability to understand and feel the problems of this person.

4. The presumption of the superiority of the "scientist" over the "practitioner" is manifested in the fact that those who consider themselves "scientists" begin to teach "practitioners", although the so-called "practitioners" often have a much larger (and even more generalized) ) experience in solving certain human problems. Therefore, we can only talk about the mutual enrichment of psychological science and psychological practice. Note that many outstanding psychologists, which you will learn about from our further story (3. Freud, C. G. Jung, A. Adler, C. Rogers etc.), - people from the practice ...

Even in Soviet Russia, where for a long time some areas of psychological practice were banned (as "unnecessary"), many psychologists, who themselves were forced to turn out to be "theorists" and "researchers", treated the practice with great respect and hope. . And if we recall the 20s and early 30s, when in the RSFSR such a practical direction as “psychotechnics” (as labor psychology was called then) was actively developing, then its successes were immediately appreciated world psychological community.

In particular, the domestic psychotechnician I. N. Shpilrein was elected in 1930 in Barcelona as the President of the International Psychotechnical Association. Note that many modern domestic psychologists can only dream of this...

This is what a psychology that respects practice is all about.

In conclusion, we can say that the profession of a psychologist is more than a profession. Earlier, back in the 70s, they joked that "a psychologist is a specialist with a spoiled higher education." At that time, psychologists were trained in

^ Shpilrein Isaak Naftulevich (1892-1937 (?) - one of the founders of the domestic psychology of labor (in the terminology of those years - psychotechnics). Illegally repressed. Rehabilitated posthumously.
mainly in universities and were given a "universal" education, then in addition to “pure” psychology, there were many courses in other disciplines (biological, mathematical, philosophical, sociological, etc.) - The main idea of such a “universal” training of a psychologist is the formation of a specialist who is able to understand all the diversity of the surrounding world and on this basis better understanding the problems of a wide variety of people (working in different areas of production and manifesting themselves in different areas of life).

Perhaps the worst thing for a psychologist is to turn into a narrow specialist who is only able to conduct individual "methods" or who can read only specific "courses" and "special courses", but who does not understand what is happening in the world around him ... Known the American sociologist R. Mills wrote that it is social problems that often underlie the personal concerns and difficulties of many people, therefore “... the task of liberal institutions, like the task of broadly educated people, is to constantly turn people's personal misfortunes into social problems and consider social problems from the point of view of their significance for the life of the individual " (Mills, 1959. - S. 424-425).

^ 3. From the history of the formation of the psychological profession

So, since when can we talk about the emergence of the profession of psychologist? Above, you got acquainted with different approaches to what a profession is. Let's try, relying on this material, as well as on what we managed to discuss regarding various areas of the psychologist's activity, to answer the question posed.

At a minimum, the following is required:

Firstly, it is necessary that the concept of "psychology" exist in the sense of the special battle of the sphere of human activity, be it a separate science or a special practice. This activity should have its own pronounced specificity in terms of subject and methods, that is, in our case, it should not be philosophy, pedagogy, medicine, physiology, etc., although not lose touch with them.

^ 28

Secondly, there must be communities of people engaged in this activity as the main one in their lives and thus earning.

Thirdly, it is necessary specialist training system in this area.

In this regard, the emergence of the psychological profession should probably be associated with the separation of psychology into a separate discipline, that is, with the organization Wilhelm Wundt(1832-1920) in Leipzig, the first experimental psychological laboratory already known to you in 1979 and on its basis - the Leipzig Psychological Institute, which can be considered both as a research and as a kind of educational institution.

The emergence of a specialized psychological institute is a truly significant moment: psychology separated from philosophy and, having absorbed, in addition to philosophical ideas, achievements and some methods of experimental physiology, gained independent existence. In essence, from this moment on, the formation of the profession of "psychologist" can also be counted: many outstanding psychologists of the world, including our compatriots - a psychologist, physiologist, neurologist, doctor, were trained at the institute in various forms. Vladimir Mikhailovich Bekhterev(1957-1927), who created the first experimental psychological laboratory in Russia at Kazan University in 1885, and in 1908 - the Psychoneurological Institute in St. Petersburg; psychologist and philosopher Georgy Ivanovich Chelpanov(1862-1936), founder of the first psychological institute in Russia (began work With 1912, officially opened in 1914; now it is the Psychological Institute of the Russian Academy of Education), one of the pioneers of experimental psychology in Russia, an Odessa psychologist Nikolay Nikolaevich Lange(1858-1921), founder of the Georgian psychological school Dmitry Nikolaevich Uznadze(1886-1950) and others. The first professor of psychology in history, an American psychologist, also studied there. James Catgell(1860-1944).

The emergence of an institution is a milestone event; however, psychology, as you remember, is now not only an academic research area (which it acted at the named institute); it is also oriented to the needs of various areas of the human being in self-knowledge, the disclosure of one's potential and in personal growth.

In Russia, for various reasons, including ideological and socio-political in the post-revolutionary years, the development of professional psychology followed special paths. Nevertheless, let us highlight those events that have become fundamental for the formation of Russian professional psychology, including some already mentioned.

^ Bekhterev Vladimir Mikhailovich (1857-1927) - great Russian psychologist, physiologist, neuropathologist. Based on the theory of the reflex, he developed a science that was consistently called "objective psychology", "psycho-reflexology", "reflexology". Founder of the St. Petersburg Scientific School of Psychology.

The opening by V. M. Bekhterev in 1885 of the first domestic experimental laboratory at the Department of Nervous Diseases of Kazan University (and soon the opening of psychological laboratories in other clinics of nervous and "mental" diseases), ten year - a similar laboratory in St. Petersburg and in 1908 - the Psycho-Neurological Institute in St. Petersburg, which was the world's first center for a comprehensive study of man. The opening of the first psychological institute in Russia by G. I. Chelpanov - the Psychological Institute at Moscow University (as already mentioned, he began work in 1912, the official opening took place in 1914). It should be noted that in those years it was the largest psychological institute in the world.

Development since pre-revolutionary times of pedology - a practice-oriented direction, which aimed at a comprehensive study of the child (the literal translation of the word "pedology" - "the science of the child"). In 1936, pedology ceased to exist by a special Decree of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks

^ Chelpanov Georgy Ivanovich (1862-1936) - an outstanding Russian psychologist and philosopher, founder and first director of the Psychological Institute. In 1923, he was dismissed from the post of director due to the fact that he did not share the philosophy of Marxism, and in the future he actually had no opportunity for active scientific work.

As not corresponding to the ideological principles of that time.

The formation of domestic labor psychology and psychotechnics, especially intensively - in the 20s. 20th century Creation in Moscow in 1925 of the Psychoanalytic Institute (I. D. Ermakov), soon closed for ideological reasons.

Formation of the main scientific schools of domestic psychology in the 20-30s. 20th century

Reconstruction in 1943 by S. L. Rubinshtein of the Department of Psychology and on its basis - the Department of Psychology at the Faculty of Philosophy -

Those of the Moscow State University. Creation in 1945 by SL Rubinshtein of the Department of Psychology at the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

Creation of the Society of Psychologists of the USSR. 10. Opening in 1966 of the first faculties of psychology - in Moscow (the first dean - ^ A. N. Leontiev) and Leningrad (first dean - B. F. Lomov) university.

Holding in 1966 in Russia the XVIII International

Rubinshtein Sergei Leonidovich(1889-1960) - Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Laureate of the State Prize. An outstanding domestic philosopher and psychologist, co-creator of the personal-activity approach, founder of the scientific school.

^ Leontiev Alexey Nikolaevich (1903-1979) - doctor of psychological sciences, professor, academician of the APS, laureate of the Lenin Prize. An outstanding domestic psychologist, the creator of one of the most authoritative theories in Russian psychology - the “activity theory”.

Native Psychological Congress (Moscow), when, after a long break in relative scientific isolation, a se-

Serious scientific dialogue between domestic and foreign psychology.

12. Creation in 1971 in Moscow of the Institute of Psychology of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (the first director - B. F. Lomov).

2. Order No. 4406.

Lomov Boris Fedorovich(1927-1989) - Doctor of Psychological Sciences, Professor, Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences, author of fundamental works on the theory and practice of psychology. Director of the Institute of Psychology of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR with 1
13. Intensive development and organizational design of domestic practical psychology (80-90s of the XX century), in particular, psychological services, counseling and non-medical psychotherapy.

For the reasons mentioned above, psychology in Russia for a long time developed primarily as an academic one (the Decree of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of 1936 “On pedological perversions in the system of the People’s Commissariat of Education” dealt a blow not only to pedology, but also to practical psychology in general) In this regard, at present, Russian psychology, in many respects surpassing the foreign one in scientific and theoretical terms, is temporarily forced to be partly in the role of a student in terms of practical (D. I. Feldstein, 1999).

^ Feldstein David Iosifovich - Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Academician of the Russian Academy of Education and the Academy of Social Sciences, President of the Moscow Psychological and Social Institute. Specialist in the field of developmental psychology.

Later you will meet

With some details of the formation of psychology in terms of content when considering academic and applied psychology and psychological practice in the following sections.

Now let's approach the issue from the other side. What problems - within its subject - does professional psychology deal with? To do this, let us turn again to historical material and compare what was in the sphere of interest of psychology in attempts to systematize it in different years; these attempts were reflected in schemes suggesting the distribution of psychological literature (and the number of publications by the end of the 19th century was approaching 7,000) according to headings corresponding to the main areas of research.

For the first time, the question of the systematization of psychology was specially raised at the IV International Psychological Congress in 1900. A specially created committee proposed the following scheme:

1. General section.

Textbooks and systematizing works.

General problems, methods, terminology and equipment.

History of psychology and biography.

Collections, scientific notes, dictionaries, bibliography.

2. Anatomy and physiology of the nervous system.

General issues.

Elements of the nervous system.

The brain and its functions.

Spinal cord, nerves and sympathetic nervous system.

Reflex and automatic functions.

Pathological anatomy.

3. Feelings.

General issues. Synesthesia.

Sense organs - general questions.

Psychometrics.

Psychophysics.

Vision and oculomotor functions.

Other sensations.

General pathology of sensations.

4. Characteristics of consciousness.

General issues.

Attention, apperception, selection.

Associations.

Habit, adaptation, adaptation.

Work and fatigue.

Temporal relations in consciousness, mental chronometry.

5. Cognitive processes.

General issues.

Perception and representation, reading.

Perception of time, space and movement.

Memory and imagination.

Judgment and faith, inference.

Reflection and self-knowledge.

Normal illusions and normal suggestion.

General pathology of cognitive processes.

6. Affective sphere - feelings and emotions.

General questions, pleasant and unpleasant.

Emotions and their expression.

General pathology of feelings.

7. Conscious striving and movement.

General issues.

organs of movement.

Instinct and impulse (imitation, play, etc.).

Special motor functions (language and singing, handwriting and drawing, gait, other motor functions).

Will and effort.

Free will.

General pathology of motor functions.

8. The highest manifestations of the mind.

Logic and science, methodology.

ideals and values.

Theory of knowledge.

Aesthetics.

Religion.

9. Sleep, trance state and pathology.

Sleep and dreams.

Hypnosis and trance.

Parapsychological research.

General questions of pathology.

Nervous diseases.

Mental illnesses.

Forensic Medicine.

10. Genetic, social and individual psychology.

Evolution and heredity.

Comparative psychology.

Mental development.

Individual psychology. Psychology of groups.

Psychology of peoples.

Social Psychology.

Racial psychology.

This is how the structure of psychology appeared at the beginning of the 20th century. Compare her now with how she looked in the mid-60s.

1. General section.

History of psychology.

Philosophy.

Parapsychology.

Theories and systems.

Organizations.

Education and training of psychologists.

Professional problems of psychology.

General guides and reference books.

Bibliographies and reviews.

2. Methodology and methodology.

^ Rogovin Mikhail Semenovich (1921-1994) - doctor of psychological sciences, professor, specialist in the field of history and philosophical problems of psychology, methodology of psychological research, psychology of thinking and memory, author of more than 10 monographs and teaching aids.

Models and mathematical models.

Mathematical statistics (experiment schemes, formulas and calculations, statistical analysis).

Work on calculating machines and programming. Tests (test design, test standardization,

test evaluation).

Technique of experimentation and observation. Equipment.

We give both schemes with minor reductions from the book: Rogovin M. S. Introduction to psychology. - M., 1969; there they are given, respectively, from Psychological Review, 1901, Jan. and Psychological Abstracts, 1965, Vol. 40, no. 1.

3. Experimental psychology.

Theories.

Psychophysics.

Perception (illusions, time).

Vision (perception, color vision, eye movement).

Hearing (perception, discrimination of speech sounds, audiometry).

Biochemistry of the sense organs.

Kinaesthesia and "general feeling".

The influence of the environment.

Sleep, fatigue and dreams.

Hypnosis and suggestibility.

Motivation and emotions.

Attention, expectation, installation.

Motility.

Learning.

Memory.

Thinking (problem solving, concepts).

Decision and behavior in a situation of choice.

4. Physiological psychology.

Neuroanatomy.

Brain damage.

Brain stimulation.

Electroencephalography.

Physiology of the sense organs.

biochemical effects.

cardiovascular effects.

The influence of the environment (stress).

Genetics.

personality correlates.

5. Psychology of animals.

Comparative psychology.

Observation in natural conditions.

Early experience.

Emotion and motivation.

Learning.

social and sexual behavior.

Complex processes.

6. Genetic psychology (developmental psychology).

The period of infancy.

Childhood.

Adolescence.

Manhood.

Gerontology.

7. Social psychology.

Culture and social processes.

sexual behavior.

Relationships and opinions.

Group processes (management problems).

Language and communication.

8. Personality.

Intelligence.

Creative skills.

Dimensions of personality.

physical correlates.

9. Clinical psychology.

Psychotherapy and analysis.

Organizational issues of therapy and hospitalization.

Psychodrama.

Psychoanalytic interpretation.

Psychodiagnostics.

Pathology of behavior.

Psychosomatics.

Casuistry.

Psychohygiene and rehabilitation.

Counseling (family and marriage, social problems).

Defectology (blindness, deafness).

Speech disorder.

neurological disorders.

Mental retardation.

10. Pedagogical psychology.

Programmed learning.

Tendencies and adaptation.

Testing.

Physical training.

Special types of training.

Extracurricular guidance.

Teaching staff.

11. Military psychology and personnel selection.

Professional advice and guidance.

Selection and distribution to positions.

Workout.

Job and workflow analysis.

Job performance and job satisfaction.

Leadership and organizational issues.

Special environment.

Engineering psychology.

Psychology of transport professions and safety issues.

As you can see, ideas about the structure of psychology have seriously changed: the gap between the natural-scientific and philosophical approaches to the psyche is not so pronounced (although it remained), the share of applied branches of psychology has increased, sections related to the doctrine of higher nervous activity, with psychoanalysis.

The currently accepted rubricator, used by librarians, is quite cumbersome and, like the previous ones, does not avoid repetitions and intersections at the base of the classification.

1. History and theory.

2. Research methods and statistics.

3. Animal behavior.

4. Sensory and motor processes.

5. Attention and perception.

6. Neuroscience.

7. Neuropsychology.

8. Emotions and motivation.

9. Conditioning and learning.

10. Memory and cognition.

11. Language, speech and communication.

12. Cognitive science and intelligent systems.

13. Human factor and ergonomics.

14. Stages of development.

15. Development processes.

16. Psychology of education.

17. Personal processes and supra-individual differences.

18. Social psychology.

19. Social problems.

20. Sex differences.

21. Psychology and law.

22. Cross-cultural psychology.

23. Political psychology.

24. Clinical and consulting psychology.

25. Psychology of health.

26. Psychology as a scientific discipline.

As you can see, the creation of a unified classification of psychological disciplines is an extremely difficult task. In our country, the classification most often used is focused on those industries that have received the greatest development in Russia and which employ the majority of qualified specialists. This classification corresponds to the list of specializations in which specialists are trained: 1. General I am psychology;

Given from the reference guide: Modern psychology. - M., 1999.

2. Psychology of personality;

3. Social psychology;

4. Political psychology;

5. Psychology of management;

6. Organizational psychology;

7. Legal psychology;

8. Psychology of work and engineering psychology;

9. Clinical (medical) psychology;

10. Psychophysiology;

11. Special psychology;

12. Developmental psychology I age-related psychology;

13. Pedagogical psychology;

14. Psychological counseling.

In the following, you will get to know some of these industries in more detail.

Literature

1. Bondarenko A.F. Psychological assistance: theory and practice. - M .: Publishing House of the Institute of Psychotherapy, 2000.

2. Gessen S.I. Fundamentals of Pedagogy. Introduction to applied philosophy. - M.: School-Press, 1995.

3. Gippenreiter Yu. B. Introduction to general psychology. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1988.

4. Klimov E. A. Psychology of professional self-determination. -Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 1996.

5. Klimov E. A. Introduction to the psychology of professions. - M.: Culture and sport, UNITI, 1998.

6. Klimov E. A., Leskova O. G. History of labor psychology in Russia. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1992.

7. Mills R. ruling elite. - M.: Publishing house of foreign literature, 1959.

8. Rogovin M. S. Introduction to psychology. - M., 1969.

9. Modern psychology. - M.: Infra-M, 1999.

10. Feldstein D.I. Introduction to psychology. Video recording of lectures. - M.: MPSI, 1999.

11. Fromm E. Man for himself. - Minsk: Collegium, 1992.

“HISTORY OF PSYCHOTHERAPY LECTURE 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF PSYCHOTHERAPY I.B. GRINSHPUN Psychotherapy, psychological counseling, psycho-correction We are starting a new course...»

Counseling psychology and psychotherapy, 2015, no. 2

HISTORY OF PSYCHOTHERAPY

LECTURE 1. INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY

PSYCHOTHERAPY

I.B. GREENSPUN

Psychotherapy, psychological counseling,

psychocorrection

You and I are starting a new course called "History of psychothe

The first question we need to answer is to

know about the history of what we are going to talk about - what is psychotherapy?

But it turns out that this question is very complicated, because it is impossible to give a definition of psychotherapy - it is an ever-expanding field, a living process.

We can preliminarily agree that psychotherapy, in a broad sense, is a type of psychological assistance to a person in resolving internal or interpersonal problems. And for now, I will put an end to this, because then we will see in what ways this was implemented, what it all resulted in. I repeat, this is a very rough definition, and further, as the historical path progresses, we will probably give more subtle, more differentiated definitions.

I will offer you some historical entry into the problem of distinguishing between psychotherapy, counseling and psychocorrection.

By the way, why did it so historically happen that these three intersecting regions coexist? They came from different sources.

Psychotherapy, like the term itself, arose from medicine, although it then went beyond it.

Counseling has grown out of various social practices: legal consulting, medical consulting, and so on. But what is most often said is that what we call personal counseling, and what we call “counseling” in English,1 came from the movement of Protestant clergy in the United States on the eve of World War II, when they went out of business. English has several words for counseling, we have it all in one.

Lectures to reach people with an offer of help, advice, support. This was called counseling. And although counseling later moved into the secular space, in many ways it began like this.

Why Protestant priests? In Protestantism, the priest never speaks on behalf of God. He always appears as a man, because in Protestantism the relationship between man and God is more intimate. For example, there a priest (who is often called a "preacher") does not accept confession, does not forgive sins. It is no coincidence that among psychotherapists, especially those of an existential nature, there are quite a lot of people with a religious education or practicing priests. For example, Rollo May, Carl Rogers. Although, of course, Protestantism is not the only source of counseling, and we can find its premises much earlier, from the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century, including in Russia.

As for psycho-correction, these are pedagogical, defectological or medical models in which it is clear (or at least it is stated that it is clear) what the norm and deviations are, and accordingly what is defined as a deviation is corrected.

The boundaries between psychotherapy, especially the non-medical model of psychotherapy, and counseling on personal problems are rather arbitrary. As a possible distinction, I offer you this idea. If the client, let's call him that, has internal resources to solve the problem, and psychological help consists in supporting him and helping him to discover these resources, then this is more like counseling. If the resource is insufficient, it must be created, and a long-term in-depth dialogue and companionship of a person is needed, mutual movement in this dialogue - then it is rather psychotherapy. Although in a real process it is very difficult to distinguish between them.

Now about what concerns psychotherapy and psychocorrection. Indeed, when we understand what a norm is, we undertake to correct it. What does a proofreader do in a publishing house? - Corrects text errors. If the disease is a mistake of the body, then we correct it.

When we talk about the bodily existence of a person, everything is more or less clear here. But it becomes very little clear when we talk about his mental or spiritual existence. After all, let's say, suffering can be healing. Difficulties arise in this regard, and essentially two types of psychotherapy emerge. One therapy that still carries a corrective model. It is behavioral psychotherapy, or that therapy which undertakes the task formulated as the re-education or re-education of a person. (This applies, for example, to A. Adler or V.N. Myasishchev, who directly said: “For Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy, giving psychotherapy is re-education, reshaping of personality”). And the second therapy, which refuses this. V.N. Tsapkin, in his article on the psychotherapeutic field2, says that there is psychocorrective therapy and there is psychotherapy itself (he calls it psychotherapeutic therapy), which does not undertake to determine the norm and where a completely different model of work arises - a joint movement in the direction of uncertainty. It is indeed difficult to define what a psychotherapeutic good is. Well, psychoanalysis occupies a special space in the psychotherapeutic field, because in general, almost the entire history of modern psychotherapy is dialogues with Freud.

Major periods in the history of psychotherapy In order to advance and somehow evaluate what happened in psychotherapy, we will first have to find out when, in fact, it arose, perhaps even without such a name. There is reason to believe that psychotherapy did not originate until the eighteenth century.

And this was connected, of course, with the general historical cultural situation, because the request for help in a personal, individual problem is something that has not always accompanied mankind. For example, fear has probably always existed. Probably, starting from primitive times, this is an integral, completely natural part of life.

But has it always been a problem? In this regard, the cultural background on which psychotherapy arose was primarily characterized by a person's turning to himself, a special type of turning, which went, perhaps (I say this very carefully), beyond the limits of religious consciousness. By the way, I want to state my position here: from my point of view, a truly religious person does not need any kind of psychotherapy. K.G. Jung also wrote about this: from time immemorial, therapeutic functions have been performed by religion, and the problem probably arises just when, for various reasons, it could not be a full-fledged support for a person. In this sense, the skepticism about religion, which has been observed since the end or even the middle of the 17th century, could give rise to those problems, for the solution of which they no longer went to the priest, but to some other type of people.

We will talk about several periods in the history of psychotherapy.

First - about the period of its prototypes. In the sense that at that time some actions seemed to be taking place, very similar to modern therapy, but it was not therapy yet, since there was no corresponding position Tsapkin V.N. Toward a New Cartography of the Psychotherapeutic Field // Consultative Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2008, No. 1.

Lecture hall of the therapist and the corresponding reflective ways of working.

Then comes the period which I would refer to as the prehistory of psychotherapy. When something very similar to psychotherapeutic activity has already arisen, but has not yet emerged into an independent sphere and has not turned out to be equipped with its own theories. This period lasts from the 18th to the end of the 19th century. And finally, the actual history of psychotherapy. Some authors believe that it is necessary to start with Z. Freud, because a full-fledged psychotherapeutic theory arose there. From my point of view, this period can begin with Pierre Janet, his figure seems to me no less significant. In general, he was ahead of Z. Freud in terms of the creation of his psychodynamic concept, but, unfortunately, for a number of reasons, he is less popular than Z. Freud. Others attribute the beginning of psychotherapy to the advent of hypnotic techniques.

Factors in the Development of Psychotherapy Now let's take a broad look at what factors determine the development of psychotherapy. Indeed, at the moment there are a huge number of areas of psychotherapy that designate themselves as separate. More recently, it was said that there were more than five hundred of them.

A.I. Sosland says that according to some sources, there are about five thousand of them. That is, there is a constant expansion, and it is not clear where all this will lead. But anyway, why are there so many psychotherapies in our culture?

There are factors, let's say conditionally, objective ones. This is a cultural and historical situation that poses challenges of the time, and you have to respond to these challenges. This is what I had in mind when I said that psychotherapy could have arisen no earlier than in modern times, because in the Middle Ages individuality was not a value at all. Just the culture of the New Age drew the attention of a person to himself, to his personal problems. Also, you may remember that in the time of S. Freud, the problem of meaning in life as a therapeutic problem did not stand. That is, it arose, but appeals on this occasion were very rare.

And Freud said that a normal person should not think about the meaning of life, he should live. But V. Frankl showed that this was the leading problem, at least in the middle of the 20th century and beyond, that this was a completely normal question that time itself posed. For each direction, we will pay attention to what caused it.

The second factor is the ambitions of the therapists themselves: they get tired of being second and want to be first. For example, A. Adler until 1908 generally repeated Z. Freud and was an apologist for psychoanalysis, then he became Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy to do something different. Perhaps here, in addition to new problems and scientific discoveries, there were these ambitious motives. But given the influence of ambition, we may have some fear that the new directions of psychotherapy are a sham, a sham. There are such examples, and they are recorded in history3.

We also cannot be sure that the cases described by psychotherapists are reliable. This also applies to the case of Anna O., and the cases of Freud's patients, who, indeed, later, posthumously, were caught on some inaccuracies. When historians found these patients and talked with them, for some reason they offered some other version of the presentation of events. For example, Pankeev, Freud's patient Wolfsmann (we translate it as "Wolf Man"), recalled conversations with Freud and what happened in the old days in a completely different way. But here a question arises. Freud, on the other hand, did not write down anything while working, he later recalled. And here, of course, projections can work, and just an unconscious desire for everything to be beautiful, harmonious and understandable, or perhaps it was a deliberate falsification, we don’t know4.

Another factor is the personality of the therapists and their fates. And this is a very serious thing, which was written about, for example, by M.E. Burno and A.I. Sosland. Psychotherapists are people who are mostly reflective, they are people who have suffered in their lives and who understand. This happens not only in relation to psychotherapy. Do you remember what the biogenetic law is? Ontogeny is a brief and rapid repetition of phylogenesis. E.G. Haeckel, who formulated it on the basis of the study of the embryo, showed that the human embryo, as it were, repeats the stages of evolution. But since all stages of evolution are repeated, it means that there is probably a moment when the embryo should look like a fish and have gills. Actually, it is not. But Haeckel took and painted the gills on the embryo so that the drawing would correspond to the idea. Gregor Mendel, the creator of genetics, knew very well that the ratio of 1 to 3 is also far from always successful. But he simply did not describe those cases when this was not respected. This is not to mention more complex options.

On this occasion, I want to refer you to one book that fans of psychoanalysis should not read at all. This is a book by the Italian author Lucia no Mecacci called The Case of Marilyn M. and Other Failures of Psychoanalysis. In it you will meet the personalities of psychoanalysts, the complexities of psychoanalysts' relationships with each other and with patients, and the terrible fates of many of them. This will allow you to enter into a personal context.

And, perhaps, a little scary, because according to this book, it turns out that psychoanalysts, many of whom came out of patients in a fairly typical way, are some strange group of people with very serious psychological characteristics, and what they produce as a theory psychotherapy raises some doubts.

Lecture hall life through their suffering. And in many ways, what therapists offer is, first of all, self-addressed therapy. Freudian psychoanalysis was actually based on self-analysis, from which the psychotherapeutic system was then created. The fate of people turns out to be one of the decisive factors in history. Where it is important, I will talk about it. Where it is less important, I will omit.

In addition, there is one more thing - this is political history. This is especially important for our country, for totalitarian regimes and strong political systems, because psychotherapy grows in a specific situation. The fate of psychoanalysis in our country was largely determined by the political situation, where in the 1930s the normal psychotherapeutic approach essentially disappeared and only hypnosis and rational therapy remained for a long time.

Types of psychotherapy The next question that we need to discuss is what types of psychotherapy can be distinguished in order to evaluate emerging trends, to determine the parameters by which they can be evaluated.

First, we will distinguish between medical and non-medical psychotherapy. As I already mentioned, psychotherapy and the term itself were born in the mainstream of medicine. But in history one can trace how psychotherapy gradually goes beyond medicine - does not run away from it, but embraces ever wider spaces. For example, Z. Freud in the 20s said that psychoanalysis is part of psychology, not medicine. He began to allow people who did not have a medical education to enter psychoanalysis. Still later, we will see how humanistic psychology will formulate the concept of metapathology, which is not pathology from the point of view of medicine. And psychotherapy will turn to help in personal growth, in support on the path of self-fulfillment or self-actualization. Now physicians quite harshly say that psychotherapy is a part of medicine. For example, B.D. Karvasarsky insists on this. And in the system of the Ministry of Health and Social Development, you will not have the right to be called psychotherapists, even if you are doctors of science in clinical psychology. Another thing, call it "counseling" and do the same. But psychotherapy is what medical professionals try to keep. In the Soviet Union, during the period of perestroika, it was even suggested that psychotherapy be left in the hands of physicians, and psychoanalysis should be given to psychologists, or that what a psychologist does should be called correction. On the other hand, when they immigrated to the United States, they were in big trouble, because medical education there was recognized as compulsory, and they were considered amateurs.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy The position is that psychotherapy is not part of medicine, but of humanitarian knowledge and humanitarian practice. In particular, this position was presented in 1990 at a conference of European psychotherapists. We will simply keep in mind that there are psychotherapists who work with diseases in accordance with their classification in psychiatry, and there are psychotherapists who work with something else: either with diseases from minor psychiatry (neurosis, borderline states), or with no medical diagnosis at all. This dialogue continues6.

A second possible basis for classifying psychotherapy is the distinction between symptom-oriented therapy and problem-oriented therapy. There are a number of areas of therapy that aim at the disappearance of symptoms and go no further. This has a lot to do with behavioral therapy. But there are approaches that are not satisfied with this, believing that there are some problems behind the symptom that cannot be solved by eliminating it. By the way, it was no coincidence that Freud once abandoned hypnosis as such. One of the explanations: yes, with the help of hypnosis, a symptom can be removed, but the problem will find another “home” in our body, so we need to work with the problem.

Another classification option is directive and non-directive therapy. This distinction began with Carl Rogers, who called his psychotherapy "non-directive," that is, non-directive.

Here we are talking about the extent to which the therapist has the right to give advice, to make harsh interpretations. From Rogers' point of view, the therapist has no right to direct the patient's life in any way. In many ways, he claims this because of his phenomenological position - standing on it, we understand that everyone, both the therapist and the client, sees the world in his own way, and no advice is simply possible. Rogers has a concept of interpretation, but it is more about expressing one's feeling, rather than presenting a certain truth to the client. True, Rogers later abandoned the concept of "non-directive therapy", because it is impossible to be completely non-directive. It is clear that I am building a dialogue, organizing a security situation, but this is what I organize. Therefore, further his therapy will be called "client-centered therapy", "person-centered therapy". But in general, this principle is still true. I can honestly tell you that I have no clinical experience, I am not a doctor, but a psychologist by education, so I will speak as if in general, but for yourself, keep in mind that these discrepancies exist. It should be noted that, say, Rogers also did not have a medical education, so in this regard I have good partners.

The lecture hall is used to evaluate different types of therapy. Rogers identified the fundamental non-directiveness and defended it, but this position is also characteristic of other authors. Therefore, all directions can be located on the line from the most directiveness to the least. Obviously classical hypnosis is directive, behavioral therapy is directive, Eric Berne's transactional analysis is directive, because he teaches that one must always be an adult. To a much lesser extent, psychoanalysis is directive, because it interprets rather than teaches. Well, Rogers is on the other pole of this line.

Another possible basis introduced by V.N. Tsapkin7, - the idea that there are allopathic and homeopathic therapy. I remember that these are medical terms, and since ancient times, medicine has offered either to treat with the same or to treat with the opposite. Allopathy is a treatment by the opposite, and then the therapist is faced with the task of, say, "casting out" a neurosis, as they used to cast out demons. And here comes the metaphor of war8: the therapist “fights” with some kind of malfunction inside the person, “fights” with the symptom, silences him. And homeopathy is the treatment of the like. And we can see such therapy. For example, a suffering person comes to Freud, and paradoxically, in the process of psychoanalysis, a new neurosis, a transference neurosis, is purposefully formed. Or Viktor Frankl's technique of paradoxical intention: people come to him saying “I don't want to remember this”, “I don't want to think about it”, and he answers them: “On the contrary, think about it!”, “You are scared - so experience even more intense fear!”.

I will offer you two more classification options.

One of them is rather conditional. I would suggest considering psychotherapies of different types, depending on which sphere of being they are more focused on, using the traditionally Christian triad "body soul spirit".

There is a body-oriented therapy, which, of course, also deals with the soul, but mainly works with the body (what began with Wilhelm Reich or with some attempts to introduce self-hypnosis by E. Jacobson).

There is actually psychotherapy, which deals with what we, very conditionally setting boundaries, call the “soul”. This is therapy with the help of psychological means familiar to us - imagination, speech. it

Tsapkin V.N. Unity and diversity of psychotherapeutic experience //

Moscow Psychotherapeutic Journal, 1992, No. 2.

In this, Tsapkin refers to D. Lakoff and M. Johnson, authors of the remarkable book Metaphors We Live By, which is not addressed directly to psychotherapy.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. An introduction to the history of psychotherapy is a significant part of approaches that do not pretend to go into the spiritual sphere, and even artificially limit themselves in this. For example, A. Adler once expelled Viktor Frankl from his group because he proposed to depsychologize psychotherapy, that is, to go into spiritual issues.

And there is spiritual psychotherapy. This is quite a remarkable thing in our time, many people are noticing an increase in this type of therapies that are spirit oriented. Although it did not start now - we can find it in K.G. Jung, and J. Moreno, and R. Assagioli.

And here there is therapy oriented religiously and even confessionally. For a long time, the church, if it used the concept of psychotherapy, then put its meaning into it (for example, the patristic therapy of V.K. Nevyarovich - there are completely different ways of working). Now contacts between the church and psychotherapy are being established, and more and more productive dialogues are emerging. Now the practice of spiritual and religious therapy is very active. For example, in Moscow there is the Society of John of Kronstadt, located in the Krutitsky Compound, where they work very effectively with addictions. But spiritual therapy is not necessarily religious. There is some non-religious spirituality. Let's say transpersonal therapy is spiritual. V. Frankl, who himself was a religious person, never insisted on any confession, but nevertheless he worked with the problem of the meaning of life, and this is a spiritual problem. Existential therapy is also spiritual, although there is atheistic existentialism and religiously oriented existentialism.

It is clear that there are no narrowly focused approaches in their pure form.

And finally, I propose to distinguish psychotherapy according to the anthropological basis on which this or that direction stands.

Here we will talk about the psychodynamic tradition. That is, about the therapy that considers a person as an internal conflict being. This is not only psychoanalysis and its derivatives, but also, for example, reconstructive therapy by V.N. Myasishchev.

The second branch is existential humanistic therapy. Although later we will divide it into American humanistic and other approaches. There are similar foundations: man as a moving, striving, growing, changing, responsible being. However, I will immediately make a remark: Irvin Yalom believes that existential therapy is also a variant of dynamic therapy, only there conflicts and problems are different - associated with the ultimate givens of being9.

Later I.B. Grinshpun attributed existential therapy in a broad sense to the psychodynamic branch, referring to the above point of view of I. Yalom. - Approx. ed.

Lecture hall In addition, we will talk about behavioral therapy, which is based on the behavioral schema. It is a rare case when psychotherapy is based on psychological theory. In this anthropological branch, a person appears in the scheme of an "acting organism", reacting or predicting, but "organism" first of all. We will also mention here cognitive therapy, where a person is considered as a system of information processing, a system of cognition. We also include cognitive behavioral therapy here, because, in general, it is derived from the idea of an intermediate variable.

And finally, we will talk about eclectic therapy as a special kind of therapy that combines a lot of things that, it seems, should not be combined. A typical eclectic technology is NLP. Eclecticism can be seen in the psychodrama of G. Moreno, and in the gestalt therapy of F.

Perls, and many therapists who created their concepts in this way. I do not invest in the concept of "eclectic" negative meanings. In Soviet science, it was believed that eclecticism was bad, it was necessary to create a new unified system within which it would be possible to do something. And if you turn to the Americans with the words "But this is eclecticism!", They will gladly answer you: "Yes, this is eclecticism." Probably, the movement towards ever greater eclecticism and technologization is the general vector of development of modern psychotherapy. There is a gradual rejection of "school" therapy.

Prototypes of psychotherapy If we talk about where psychotherapy came from, then here, as far as possible, we will have to turn to very ancient practices, in which medicine, therapy, and much more were merged, to those practices that were implemented by sorcerers, shamans, etc. I will refer to the book by the Swiss philosopher and psychologist Henry Ellenberger, The Discovery of the Unconscious. This is a book about the history of dynamic psychotherapy. Ellenberger is convinced that psychoanalysis historically grew out of these ancient practices.

Ancient practices Prototypes of psychotherapy we can find in very early practices - shamanic, witchcraft. As an example, I will tell you a certain case that was recorded by two German ethnographers at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries, and then discussed by Claude Levy. As well as the book by F. Alexander and S. Selesnik "Man and his soul".

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy by Strauss in the book "Structural Anthropology", in the chapter entitled "Efficiency of the Symbol".

A few words about the approach of K. Levi Strauss, historically also very curious. Levi Strauss was born in Belgium, but he is either a French philosopher or an ethnographer - ethnographers believe that he is a philosopher, philosophers believe that he is an ethnographer, his works are published in the books of the Classics of Psychology. Levi Strauss was a very special person who knew psychoanalysis well, knew philosophy well, loved geology,11 the French sociological school, and music. Like any philosopher, he was interested in the essence of the world. But he believed that this essence can be penetrated by understanding a person, his thinking. He suggested that human thinking is based on binary oppositions - pairs of opposites that are impossible for us at the level of common sense. We can understand what these binary oppositions are by analyzing myths12 (although a myth is identified with a fairy tale, nevertheless a myth is a kind of truth, subjective or accepted by many). For example, what is a fire? For you and me, spoiled by civilization, this is a way to warm ourselves, cook food, etc. For an ancient person, this is what connects the earth and sky, this is a sacred thing. When an Indian puts a piece of meat on a hot stone so that it is fried, for us it is a frying pan, but for him it is that a piece of meat absorbs the power of the sun and the earth13. So Levi Strauss believed that we should try to penetrate into these oppositions, and then we will understand a lot of things, including, as we will see, the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic work.

And you can get there through the structural analysis of myths.

For example, there is life and there is death, and it is really not very clear to a person how both can be together. Contradictions are removed through less sharp confrontation. In our experience there is something close to life and death, but not identical. For example, close to life - housekeeping, raising livestock, crop production.

Close to death - war, hunting. An even less sharp opposition is a carnivorous animal and a herbivore animal. The last opposition is overcome by something that could be both alive and dead and predatory, and by the way, psychoanalysis is similar to geology, with all these cuts, and to archeology. Freud was very sorry that the word "archeology" was already taken.

Although Levi Strauss believed that music expresses this most clearly (he loved Wagner and so on). He has a series of books called "Mythologies", where each section is labeled as a musical genre.

We see opposites in modern life. For example, in France it is customary to kiss a chimney sweep on a holiday. This unity of opposites is pure dirty. Where do they put presents at Christmas in France?

In an old worn shoe or in an old darned stocking, old new.

Lecture hall for herbivores. What animal is this? Carnivore - jackal or raven. It is clear that we are talking about fairy tales, since these are typical heroes of fairy tales: crows - northern, jackals - southern. Interestingly, the raven and the jackal in fairy tales appear to be very contradictory: either they are wise, or complete idiots, or they are noble, or they are vile. Even if you take a raven in Russian fairy tales, you will easily see that, on the one hand, of course, it is something sinister, on the other hand, it is something wise: a raven brings living and dead water, etc. But we read a fairy tale and do not really understand that in such a controversial hero - a trickster - there is a powerful resource, by the way, also a psychotherapeutic one.

If we talk about different cultures, tricksters can be found in very curious ways, not necessarily animals. For example, a typical trickster is Hermes, who will steal the cows from Apollo, do nasty things, but bring sandals to Perseus. A typical trickster is the god Loki.

In Scandinavian mythology, there are Asgardian gods ases, such as the Greek Olympians, there are their enemies - the giants grimtursen. So Loki is a grimtursen who lives among the aesir. Moreover, everyone knows that the end of the world, Ragnarok, will come in connection with Loki, and yet they endure it. Actually, all the Eddas14 are based on the fact that Loki does bad things to the gods and corrects them himself. A typical trickster is Khoja Nasreddin, who is also either a complete idiot or a sage. Typical tricksters are jesters, this is already very close to psychotherapy or therapy prototypes. Because who is the jester? This is a wise fool who is therefore allowed what is not allowed to anyone else.

If we take literary jesters (of which the wisest are Shakespearean jesters), we see that they act as psychotherapists.

Remember "Twelfth Night": there is Countess Olivia, to whom Duke Orsino is wooing, and Olivia is in mourning for her lost brother and does not accept anyone. In the scene that unfolds there, her jester appears and says: “What is the matter with you? Why are you sad?" - "You know, I lost my brother and am in mourning" - "Ah, probably, his soul is in hell?" - says the jester. “No, she is in paradise” - “So why are you sad? This is silly". Typical psychotherapeutic work. There is one very interesting point in King Lear that K.G. Jung: the jester suddenly simply disappears from the play, he was, he spoke, he sang songs - suddenly nothing, not a word. At what point? When Lear goes mad and becomes a wise fool himself, a trickster. Baba Yaga is also a typical trickster.

Back to Levi Strauss. He believed that myth and mythological consciousness are built in such a way that there are binary oppositions, from them, like the bill of the Edda - the Elder Edda and the Younger Edda, the main works of German Scandinavian mythology. - Approx. ed.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy yard ball, thought runs and somehow builds this myth.

And we need to understand what is behind it. To do this, the myth must be read correctly. What does it mean to read correctly? We read it as a kind of story, in fact, sequentially: first one, then another, then a third - and we make the same mistake that an alien would make who arrives on Earth and, trying to understand earthly culture, goes to the library and finds out that books are mostly read from left to right and top to bottom. And among other texts, he comes across a musical orchestral score. How will he read it, what will he hear? The same melody performed by different instruments sequentially.

As an example, Levi Strauss cites the myth of Oedipus, which, if told in its entirety, does not begin with the story of Oedipus. It begins with the story of his ancestor Cadmus, the same one who, like his sister, was stolen by Zeus in the form of a bull. The story of Cadmus is the story of a search for his sister Europa. In this search, he, who loves his sister very much, kills a dragon, warriors grow out of the dragon's teeth, he copes with them, they kill each other. Then there is the story of Oedipus' grandfather, whose name was Labdak, then there is the story of Oedipus' father, whose name was Laius, then the story of Oedipus himself. He is thrown out because it is foretold that he will kill his father and marry his mother. He is picked up by other parents. Oedipus, having learned about the prediction, leaves, kills his father on the way, having come to Thebes, finds out that there is a widow, and marries his mother, and children are born there. When Oedipus leaves, tearing out his own eyes, Eteocles and Polynicus, his sons, start a fight with each other. Eteocles kills Polynices, Polynices is forbidden to bury, but Antigone, their sister, buries him and then leaves with her father.

There are recurring issues here, repetitive lines. One of them, quite obvious, is the theme of family relations, taken either with an exaggerated plus sign (Cadmus is looking for a sister, Oedipus marries his mother, Antigone buries her brother), or with an exaggerated minus sign (fratricidal war, Oedipus kills his father ). This is one pair of opposites. The second pair is less obvious. Here, says Levi Strauss, two concepts of the appearance of man are arguing. Either a person was born by the earth, or by another person (behind what lies an even greater mystery: is a person born by one or two? It seems that a woman gives birth, but a man also seems to have something to do with it). There is a chthonic theory that states that people have an earthly or even underground origin.

This line is shown in the fight against monsters: Cadmus killed the dragon, Oedipus defeats the Sphinx (the Sphinx is a woman, so I do not persuade her). Monsters are chthonic creatures, and when the hero defeats them, the Lectorium triumphs in another line - the human one. But the names of the heroes (Labdak - “lame”, Lai - “left-handed”, Oedipus - “with swollen legs”) confirm the chthonic line, because according to these chthonic myths, the man born of the earth was very clumsy.

What does all this have to do with psychotherapy? In the chapter "Efficacy of the Symbol," Levi Strauss describes a procedure that was carried out by a shaman of a South American Indian tribe.

An unusual situation occurred there - an Indian woman cannot be relieved of her burden. She is ready to give birth, she bleeds, but the baby does not appear. The midwife of the tribe cannot cope with this and goes after the sorcerer. The sorcerer comes, sits down next to the patient, who is lying in a hammock, and speaks. As a result of the conversation, a child will be born. But what is behind this? The fact is that in this tribe there was a curious idea about the causes of the disease. It was believed that there is a certain force responsible for the body, an analogue of our concept of "soul". This force is called phurba, and as long as it does its job, the body is healthy. But each organ has its own soul. And the disease is that this partial soul has rebelled, so the phurba cannot cope with it, and the body becomes dysfunctional.

I draw your attention to the fact that we will see the same idea of the incompleteness of the soul, split off parts that have their own strength, in Pierre Janet - in the ideas of fixed ideas, in Carl Jung - in the idea of a complex, in Fritz Perls - in the idea of a split off gestalt.

In this case, the soul of the uterus rebelled, and it needs to be returned to its former “duties”. The sorcerer sits down, makes clay and wooden assistants for himself, who will be the heroes of his story and who, like him, will never touch the patient. While he is making them, he says something like this: "The midwife wakes up, the midwife gets up, steps with her right foot, steps with her left foot, but the midwife pushes the door of the hut, the door of the hut creaks, the midwife leaves the hut, the midwife scatters pearls." That is, a long and tedious story about what the midwife did on the morning when she was called to the patient.

Then in this story the midwife, unable to cope with the situation, goes to him, the sorcerer, and says how she "woke up, got up, took a step with her left foot, took a step with her right foot, pushed the door of the hut, the door of the hut creaked ..." - absolute repetition. What for? Levi Strauss reflects. Probably, then, so that the patient, who is psychologically “not in this world”, can be returned to everyday realities, to simple experience.

Next, the sorcerer begins the story of how his assistants will enter "into the inner space of a woman," as we would say. Because their task is to go through the path of Muu (Muu is the soul of the uterus) to the house of Muu, to defeat Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy going in and out. And not to kill, but to win. Physiologically speaking: through the vagina - into the uterus - and back through the vagina. Further in the story of the sorcerer, these opposites will constantly be combined - the cosmic and physiological beginning, starting with the words that “the patient lies in a hammock and bloody rains merge onto the earth”, that is, she herself, as it were, becomes the sky. Then these assistants take on obvious phallic forms: they grow stronger, their hats begin to glow, they step onto the Muu road one by one, causing quite obvious physiological reactions in the woman. They meet walls that need to be drilled, they call other helpers, they drill.

This is a symbol of muscle clamps. How the sorcerer knows about this is completely incomprehensible. They meet threads and curtains that need to be cut. They meet different animals that need to be defeated.

In fact, this is really a psychodynamic picture of the internal struggle, movement. Long way there, pretty fast they win

they trample the road and, if they entered the column one at a time, in single file, now they are gradually reorganized into a line of four.

Symbolically, this is an extension of the passage. And with the last words: “A child comes into the world,” a child really comes into the world. At the same time, the sorcerer did not even touch the woman.

Levi Strauss reflects: why was this work effective? They also tell us: “You are sick, you have viruses,” but we do not recover from this. First, we are dealing with a single mythological consciousness. Secondly, we again encounter opposites here: both in the story and in the very pair of the sorcerer and the patient. Because the sorcerer is the excess of her Self, this is a superpower, and the sick person is not the sufficiency of the Self. But in the process of work, she begins to approach this Self more and more. And isn’t the same, says Levi Strauss, happening in psychoanalysis? Isn't psychoanalysis a kind of myth?

For those who believe that there are characters I, It and Super-I, who also fight among themselves, pushing something out, the work will be effective. For those who do not believe - will not. So in that sense, a symbol can actually be effective. Analyst and patient are also a pair of opposites. It is only in psychoanalysis that the analyst is silent and the patient speaks, but this does not change the general structural relationship.

Therefore, the actions of a shaman are something similar to psychotherapy. Yu.V. Cannabich writes that medicine began as psychiatry, and these old practices were directed essentially towards psychotherapeutic work. In general, if we think about the explanations given by the people to the causes of diseases in the Lecture Hall, we will see a correlation with modern therapy.

Evil eye. What does the healer do in this case? He directly or indirectly fights with those who inflicted this evil eye - that is, we enter the context of interpersonal relationships.

Angry gods, did something bad. It is necessary, as it were, to “serve” - in this case, reacting, turning into a positive will help.

Punishment for sins of ancestors. We really carry within ourselves the “messages of our ancestors” and, without knowing it ourselves, we repeat their mistakes - for example, in the concept of family psychotherapy, a genogram is built.

That is, you can really find a lot of what defined psychotherapy. It arose in many ways from mythology, from mysticism, its roots are sometimes peculiar and even creepy.

Let us turn, first, to ancient philosophy. Greek specialist M.L. Gasparov believes that philosophy appeared when people began to settle in large communities and the problem arose of streamlining life, introducing some kind of norms and laws by which one must live. In its desire to order the world, philosophy has a psychotherapeutic meaning (the book of the "last Roman" Boethius was even called "Consolation of Philosophy").

Together with the idea of order, the question arises: “are there laws in the world?”

The “weeping” philosopher Heraclitus believed that there are no solid foundations in the world - everything flows, everything changes, there is no beauty without ugliness, strength without weakness. Although the concept of “logos” appeared precisely with him16.

Philosophers were also practitioners. Pythagoras (if he really existed), the man who coined the term "philosophy", was also a healer. He believed that if the gods created a person as they created it, then another person, including a doctor, has no right to interfere in the structure of the body - that is, to cut off nothing. Illness is a violation of harmony, and harmony can be restored with the help of music and poetry. The music used was a special kind of music, the strings. We will not consider the East, since its influence on the future psychotherapy that arose in Europe is not very clear.

The term “Logos”, introduced by Heraclitus, acquired a great many meanings over time, but for him it meant the law according to which “all those even”, phenomena pass into each other (M.G. Yaroshevsky). - Approx. ed.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy, we cannot reproduce it, and as poetry, the texts of Homer, because they are written in dactyl-based hexameter17, and the dactyl was considered an invention of the god Dionysus, and therefore had a healing power. And cases are described when in this way he saved a person from pathological emotional states, etc.

If you take Socrates, there is a direct influence on the future of psychotherapy. I remind you that he did not write anything. Why?

He also knew how to write. It is believed that Socrates, as he himself said, "has a demon that makes him wonder." For us, a demon is a kind of evil force. This idea is due to the fact that since the heyday of Christianity, all the ancient gods began to be regarded as demons. But initially, the Demon is an ancient god, as he was called - “the god of this moment”, that is, something that pushes to an act, very close to what we call spontaneity18.

Constant questions, finding an answer, but finding an answer means more questions. And the more answers, the more questions.

And any record is a stop. Socrates had the courage not to stop, so he really did not write anything. Plato was probably "frightened" and therefore wrote down the dialogues, but he gave very contradictory answers, although to almost all questions of philosophy.

Why are we interested in Socrates? First, in the dispute between Socrates and the Sophists, man became the subject of philosophical reflection. Concerning man, Socrates and the Sophists argued in two directions. One of them is the problem of morality (now you will see why this is important for psychotherapy). Where do moral laws come from? Either people came up with them, agreed, or they are given by God and are innate. If it is man-made, here we see the prototypes of two positions. First, by translating this thought further, we come to England, which has no constitution and where everything is decided in Parliament, and from there to some types of group therapy, where you need to be able to negotiate. Secondly, we come to democracy. Although this is a rather terrible thing, because, for example, it is not good to eat a person, now we think so, but if we are hungry, we will agree and eat someone. So the sophists thought.

It is very difficult for us to understand what it is, because the Russian poetic dactyl does not correspond to the Greek. In Greece, there were not stressed and unstressed syllables, but long and short ones, and the stress could be different. That dactyl had one long syllable, two short ones. It's like a finger: a long phalanx and two short ones.

By the way, we will also meet with the demon. For example, in the title of the magazine "Daimon", which was published after the First World War in German-speaking Europe and in which Adler, Moreno, Buber and others participated.

Lecturer And Socrates believed that moral laws have already been given to man, they live in him, they are divine, only they are not awakened in everyone.

And here we see, probably, the first prototype of the future humanistic psychology and psychotherapy - the belief that the essence is already given. When we talk about the existential tradition, what precedes what? Essence of existence or existence of essence?

In this case, essence precedes existence.

The second question: is the world cognizable? Can a person know the truth with the help of thinking? Again, there are two answers: either no or yes. The Sophists believed that it was not, and, unfortunately, some amazing art began to be born out of this - to convince people of anything, even of any stupidity. For example, which of you can prove that he is a millionaire? Tell me, do you have something that you have not lost? - Yes. - Have you lost a million? - No, I didn't. So you are a millionaire. What happened? I didn't make a mistake - you made a mistake logically. Because the many things you have and haven't lost are less than the many things you haven't lost. We fall for the bait. From here, again through many mediating links, through the rational therapy of P. Dubois, for example, we come to the same cognitive-behavioral or behavioral therapy, which claims that a person feels bad because he thinks wrong, and he needs to be taught to think correctly, to teach logic. These ideas arise as an attempt to resist the sophists, who began to teach eloquence to orators, politicians, whose task is to convince people of their ideas.

Unlike the sophists, Socrates believed that truth, like morality, is already hidden in the soul of every person and given by the gods (or by God - Socrates and Plato claimed a single creator god and helper gods), only it must be revealed, and for this you need to ask questions. It is an eternal movement towards divine truth. Socrates opens dialogue as a form of philosophical existence. Moreover, his dialogue is external. He had students, but he did not broadcast the truth, or almost did not broadcast - he asked questions, but in such a way that the students themselves found answers. This was called "maeyvtika", that is, obstetrics (this word is not accidental, because Socrates was the son of a midwife). Asking questions and "not giving" answers, creating a situation of dialogue - this is what we see in K. Rogers, what we meet with a direct reference to Socrates in V. Frankl19. This is a direct exit to psychotherapy, to the very non-directive therapy that we talked about today.

If we talk about Plato, who wrote "Dialogues", where Socrates is one of the participants, then apparently it was he who had the idea. Frankl's dialogue is as impersonal as Socrates's, Rogers's is empathic.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of internal dialogue psychotherapy. Plato speaks to himself, he sets himself various interlocutors. Most likely so. But besides, Plato is interesting because through the mouth of Socrates in the dialogue "Phaedo" he shows one of the first serious psychodynamic pictures of a person. According to Plato, the soul is threefold. There is a rational, passionate (or furious) and lustful soul. By the way, this is how the state in Atlantis, described by Plato, is arranged: the city consists of three concentric circles, where sages live in the center, warriors in the middle part, and ordinary people along the outskirts. Therefore, the soul is in conflict. Passion draws upward, lust pulls downward, and the human soul is like a chariot drawn by two stallions, black and white, who pull the chariot in different directions. Souls rush about, wheels break, horses break legs. What determines the fate of the chariot? From the charioteer, and, from the point of view of Plato and, probably, Socrates, the charioteer on this chariot should become the mind, he must master the passions and lust. If this succeeds, then after the death of the body, passions and lust die, and the soul returns to the star, then comes to someone else, enriched with experience. Wouldn't Freud say the same thing? By realizing the causes of their problems, a person can at least partially control their behavior and their feelings. The idea of rationalism, as a powerful idea that has entered psychotherapy, of course, comes from there.

Philosophers also talked about mental illness, some of which were already known. Epilepsy was known, mania was known, melancholy was known, although it was explained more materialistically: melancholia is a disease associated with an excess of black bile, therefore, one must give emetics, from an excess of other vital juices - other things. But if we talk about medicine, indeed, in Greece it was very developed. There were two types of medicine, to varying degrees they will be relevant to future psychotherapy.

First, there was municipal medicine, secular. She took on all diseases, but often failed. Its most prominent representative was Hippocrates. He is interesting in that, firstly, he gave us a certain medical code, the basic provisions of which will, of course, be accepted by the first therapists who leave medicine (and they still sound now). The main one is "Do No Harm". Although in relation to mental phenomena it is difficult for us to say what is harm and what is not harm, and where harm will turn into benefit.

If we use the concept of F.E. Vasilyuk "psychotherapeutic hopes", i.e. what the therapist hopes for, the very first and very long-standing was the reliance on the mind, on awareness, on the control of feelings with the help of the mind.

Lecture Hall But even more interesting is the fact that Hippocrates pointed to the healing value of the relationship between the doctor and the patient, urging the doctor, in particular, to be empathic (as we would say): “Doctor, treat the patient as you would like to be treated. to you if you were sick." The healing significance of the relationship is close to us, since psychotherapy is, first of all, a relationship built in a special way.

Hippocrates was not a philosopher, he did not build what we would call the theory of substance, etc., he took ready-made ideas. Democritus had the greatest influence on him in his time. This is a fairly well-known story about how, when Democritus was already old, the inhabitants of the city of Abdera decided that he was crazy, because he led a rather secluded lifestyle, did not enjoy life very much, and so on. And they called on Hippocrates to be an expert and testify to the madness of Democritus. And according to this story, Hippocrates came, talked with Democritus and decided that Democritus was the only healthy person in the city of Abdera. In the future, they talked a lot, as a result of which Hippocrates established himself in materialism. For example, for him, epilepsy is not a disease of the gods, but an ordinary organic disease that needs to be treated. Despite the fact that Hippocrates was a materialistic thinker, looking for organic sources of diseases, in his Code he surprisingly singles out psychological factors (without naming them as such), which also contribute to the cure. For example, he suggests gathering people close to him near the patient's bedside, joking.

For us, another medicine is more interesting - temple medicine. At the temples of the god of healing Asclepius21, clinics were organized - asclepiions. And at these temples there were priests22. What they did is very much like psychotherapy.

Asklepions were located in very picturesque places. Behind this stood its own philosophy: illness is a violation of the harmony of the four internal elements - air, water, earth, fire. In beautiful harmonious places, that is, where the four elements of the world are combined, harmony is restored. Now there is a well-known technique - treatment by the environment: the environment should give what is lacking inside. This is especially evident in the example of some Eastern practices, when the future clergyman, Yes Asclepius (his other name is Esculapius) is a kind of god: he died, imagine - a mortal god. For the fact that he began to make people immortal, Zeus incinerated him. Historically, apparently, he is not a god, but a real doctor, in any case, in Homer he is not a god, but the Thessalian king, his two sons are doctors in the Trojan War. Physicians considered themselves descendants of Asclepius.

By the way, Hippocrates was the son of the priest of the temple of Asclepius.

A specialist in ancient Greek culture - S.A. Zhebelev, you can read about it.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy, if he is poor, he is placed in a rich environment, if he is rich, on the contrary, in a poor one. That is, he must live life, understanding its fullness.

The one who came to the gates of the Asklepion saw numerous tablets with inscriptions of gratitude from the cured. The asclepions did not know failures (by the way, not all diseases were taken there, and failures, apparently, were well hidden). And everyone was convinced that the cure would be for sure. As you understand, this is half the battle - if a person believes, the placebo effect works.

Those who came to the Asclepion were put to sleep. They probably used the then known forms of hypnosis24 and suggestion, because those who awakened from sleep said that Asclepius or some other god appeared to them in a dream and gave recommendations on what to do and how to live.

It is also known that in addition to phytotherapy and a prototype of future hydrotherapy, the theater was used as a healing tool in the asclepions. Theater in ancient Greece is a very special thing, it is not at all the same as medieval or modern theaters. In the Middle Ages, actors were not even buried within cemeteries, because acting was sinful, it was considered an attempt to create your own world, competing with God, etc. In ancient Greece, the opposite is true: the gods spoke through actors, the original masks arose from there, the word “person” will come from there (but this is already from Rome). It didn't take long for the actors to show up.

At first it was a chorus, then they came up with an actor who comes from somewhere and talks about the fate of some hero, then another actor. Aristotle, discussing in the "Poetics" the influence of tragedy on the viewer, introduced the term "catharsis" - purification by empathy with the hero, by experiencing such affects. Much later, this term will enter psychotherapy, early psychoanalysis, or even pre-psychoanalysis, because the method from which a new era in psychotherapy, discovered by Anna O. and J. Breuer, began is the “cathartic method”, purification through talking about trauma. This method will pass into the psychodrama of J. Moreno, it is even used in behavioral therapy in the “flood” technique - it consists in strengthening negative experiences and also involves a cathartic effect. According to some reports (although this is not confirmed), patients could be not only spectators, but also actors in this theater - this is already very close to psychodrama, although Moreno himself derived it not from there, but from ancient mysteries.

Underground labyrinths were found at the excavations of the asklepions.

What they were used for is not very clear. Labyrinths are a very curious thing, and it is no coincidence that they act as a symbol of life. The word “hypnosis” did not yet exist in medicine (there was the name of the god of sleep - Hyp nose), and the term “hypnosis” will become only in the 40s of the XIX century.

Lecture hall of different interpretations25. It is quite possible that patients were led through these labyrinths, arranging for them various symbolic tests, passing through which the patients healed. It really is very similar to psychotherapy.

Very therapeutic was the way in which healers were paid in ancient Greece - reduced copies of healed organs made from precious or semiprecious materials. In the Balkans, whole excavations were found with figures of small ventricles made of silver, etc. So the doctor, through a symbolic payment, was given responsibility for the organ.

So in Greece you can find prototypes of very, very many things.

Middle Ages Now let's step into the Middle Ages, which, despite the horror of the time, turned out to be a very successful period for therapy.

The period of the Middle Ages is long, and I will speak of it in general terms.

At that time, the attitude towards doctors was very wary, because, on the one hand, a doctor seems to be needed for the body, and a priest for the soul, but, on the other hand, the doctor interferes in some kind of God's providence.

And therefore, it is no coincidence that many outstanding doctors were considered the confidants of the devil. The fear of the devil is one of the main problems of the medieval man.

In addition, there was a very strict religious morality, church morality, let's say, which did not appear immediately. If you read Aurelius Augustine,27 you will see that he is still very receptive to Ancient Greece, working with Aristotelian and Neoplatonic ideas. But in the future, a number of topics that were completely free and obvious in Greece were closed. In particular, an ogre is superimposed. I want to remind you of the most famous Greek labyrinth - the labyrinth in Crete, and the myth of Theseus, from a symbolic point of view. The Minotaur, whom Theseus killed, lived in this labyrinth. Let's try to get a little Jungian. Where did the Minotaur come from? Poseidon, who turned into a bull, fell in love with the wife of King Minos, she reciprocated. Minotavra's earthly father is King Minos, and the divine father is Poseidon. Who is Theseus' father? The earthly father is Aegeus, and the divine father of Theseus is also Poseidon. In fact, Mi Notaur and Theseus are brothers. Two faces of the same thing: terrible and beautiful. With the help of Ariadne, that is, the feminine principle, Theseus defeats the Minotaur and exits the labyrinth.

The most famous physician of the late Middle Ages is Dr. Faust, who actually existed. His rival Paracelsus was also sometimes suspected of having connections with the devil.

Augustine's life years 354-430 AD - Approx. ed.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy

ignorance of corporality, because the body is a vessel of sin, a woman is generally a complete evil. There were few literate people, and they were exclusively monks28.

Despite all this, in the Middle Ages, some, I would say, culturally developed means of therapy arose (they, of course, were not called that).

For example, one such means was carnivals, which existed in many leading countries. Carnivals are a time when you can do everything that is impossible at all other times, and you can laugh at everything that is scary. In order not to be afraid of the devil, one must laugh at him. That is, laughter acts as a remedy. Carnival culture is very subtly analyzed by M.M. Bakhtin in his work on Francois Rabelais. He writes that during carnivals, bottom and top changed places in a variety of ways, in particular, social top and bottom.

Remember the "Night of the Beggars"30 in Notre Dame, when the beggars are the kings of Paris? In many ways, a comic carnival culture, which was described by M.M. Bakhtin, in this regard, was therapeutic. And this “laughing attitude” will then partially come into therapy. For example, V. Frankl believed that humor is a form of freedom.

The fear of the devil was indeed very strong. For example, numerous cases were described that we now understand as cases of hysteria (then, of course, there was no such concept yet, in the 19th century hysteria will become what psychotherapy will largely be based on). In the XIV century in France, there was literally an epidemic among the inhabitants of convents, when these women assured that they were victims of violence from an evil spirit. They had a pregnancy, which ended in imaginary childbirth, that is, the tummy tic descended like a balloon. One can imagine how a medieval person had to relate to imaginary childbirth: the belly rises, then falls, and it comes out ... what? Spirit? Air? It is not clear what it is.

It was considered obscene for a nobleman to be literate - this is not a noble thing!

This work, by the way, can be seen as a kind of Bakhtin's idea of psychoanalysis, with which he was familiar. And whether he is under the name Voloshinov, or really his student V.N. Voloshinov once wrote the work "Freudianism", which I highly recommend reading, because in fact it is not a picture of contemporary Soviet society through the idea of bottom and top, conscious and unconscious.

By the way, this is of ancient origin: once in ancient Rome there was a Day of Slaves, when slaves and masters changed places. What then it turned out to be for the slaves, I do not know.

Lecture hall What is a disease from the point of view of a medieval person? This is, as a rule, the introduction of an evil spirit, demonization. Let me remind you that in the Middle Ages, individuality was not a value, if by individuality we mean dissimilarity. Being different from others was not only not welcomed, but quite the opposite31. Those whom we now call mentally ill people, they are not similar, they behave “not like that”. And in those days they were considered either the products of an incubate32 or people possessed by the devil. Therefore, in this regard, it is necessary to drive the demon out of it. This was carried out by a variety of means, but mainly, of course, by exorcism. Exorcism as a kind of practice still exists, although it is clear that it is no longer so extensive.

Exorcists were often very efficient in their activities.

In the 18th century, for example, there was a Protestant priest named Gassner who publicly demonstrated the exorcism of demons and was very effective in doing so. He was usually called to those who were called "possessed", that is, people with epileptic or epilepto-like seizures. He came during the period of intermission, as we now call it, and, turning to the patient, said: "If you are a demon, show yourself." If after this phrase the patient began to have a fit, then Gassner cast out the devil. And - what is curious - if not, then he said: "This is for a doctor, this is not for me." That is, he, without knowing it, distinguished between real epilepsy and hysterical.

Exorcism, in a sense, is also the prototype of psychotherapy.

We will still remember the exorcists, because the struggle with neurosis as something that has arisen and must be expelled is also a kind of exorcism33.

For psychotherapy, as you understand, attention to childhood is very important. In the Middle Ages, probably, childhood was not seen as a special period of a person's life. In developmental psychology, there are works on this subject. The great personalities of the Middle Ages were rather models, not individuals. For example, Charlemagne is the bravest, the strongest, but everyone else must also be brave and strong, respectively.

An incubus is an evil male spirit that rapes women, and then either someone is born who carries the demonic in himself, or air comes out. The only positive child of the incubate that I know of was the wizard Merlin, who was constantly struggling with his inner devilry and who even sent the Knights of the Round Table in search of the Holy Grail, after which he disappeared, having fulfilled his destiny.

The roots of exorcism can also be found in primitive society: it was believed that when something from the outside penetrated inside, it should be expelled. For example, the sorcerer pressed his lips to the cheek of a patient who had a toothache, and spat out a dry lizard - and, interestingly, the tooth passed.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy by Philippe Aries34. He tried to understand the vision of childhood at different times by analyzing the picturesque images of the child. Children in those days were dressed in adult clothes. Look at the German medieval icons, there is a small adult in the hands of the Virgin. F. Aries showed that in the Old German language the word "child" meant "half-wit", or rather the word "half-wit" was a synonym for our "child".

Another characteristic feature of that period is a very complex attitude towards creativity. In medieval theology, two types of creativity were distinguished. One was called "creation", and the other - "invention". So creation - literally, creation - was considered divine creativity. And invention, that is, invention, is a reworking of what is, and it was considered the work of the devil35. Therefore, the invention is sinful.

And against this harsh background, when the Inquisition was also engaged in the persecution of the devil and checking a person for cleanliness, in the Middle Ages, nevertheless, prototypes of psychiatric hospitals arise.

I emphasize that these are prototypes. It was something like shelters at monasteries, where different people could come. Such shelters are known in Spain36. Since the 14th century, clinics have been known in Ireland, which at that time was a very developed, enlightened country, a storehouse of science, there were rich libraries, excellent translations were made. In the late Middle Ages, the famous London Bedlam arose, which, however, was more a prison than a hospital. Nevertheless, it was a space where the sick were kept, albeit along with criminals and in chains. But still, during this period, the disease was demonized.

I repeat that we know little about the Middle Ages. Medievalist A.Ya. Gurevich, in one of his books, called it "the culture of the silent majority" because we really know little about what happened outside of the texts that have come down to us.

In the Middle Ages we also find serious prototypes of a developing intellectual rationalism. This is due to the fact that many of those we were banned, while the problems of thinking remained open. And medieval scholasticism just paid attention to this. Aries had two very interesting works: one about childhood - “The Child and Family Life under the Old Order”, and the other - “Man in the Face of Death” - about the problem of attitudes towards death in different cultures.

The devil had one of the names "Craftsman". In this sense, when we read The Master and Margarita, some other planes of understanding arise about what it is about.

But Spain is a special country. For a long time she remained under the rule of the Moors, i.e. Muslims, and Muslim medieval medicine was very developed (remember, for example, Avicenna). And for a long time Islam was very tolerant of other spaces, including religious ones.

Lectures on the issue: argumentation, evidence. Indeed, it is very peculiar. In the Middle Ages, for example, an argument could be a reference to authority, and an unquestionable argument: so Augustine said, so it is, or a reference to the Holy Scriptures37.

Rationalism would be strengthened in the late medieval period by Protestantism. I have already said that Protestantism played a very important role in the emergence of psychotherapy in the future. But in general, it differed from Catholicism and Orthodoxy in that it was the Protestants who began to translate sacred texts into national languages. Before that, the church was not just a special organization - they spoke dead languages (Latin, ancient Greek), which the people, of course, did not know - that is, it was something esoteric. Protestants began to make translations into their native languages38.

As we have said, in Protestantism the connection with God is more intimate.

There is also an idea that each person is already predestined for his destiny and you need to understand it in order to behave as correctly as possible on this path. By the way, Protestantism did not recognize wealth as sinful - it's just God gave you, and if you are destined to be poor, then you will be poor, but you still need to be on your way. Therefore, Protestantism is a very individually oriented religion. And rationalistic, because most of the sacraments do not exist there, there is no confession, there is no remission of sins, there is a renunciation of the inner church luxury and, moreover, there is no Sacred Tradition.

Therefore, one can rely only on the analysis of the texts of the Holy Scriptures. Rationalism appears from here, which will later pass into the philosophy of the New Age, and even Catholics, such as Descartes, will experience a very strong influence of Protestantism. Reason begins to be perceived as a kind of force that can cognize the Truth, reveal it.

New time And now we have imperceptibly approached the New time. The demonization mostly goes away, a new situation arises.

And I’m not specifically talking about the Renaissance - this is not a chronological era, but a cultural one, including the later Middle Ages. In our country, in Soviet times, the Middle Ages will arise in the same sense: Marx said so, so it’s right, and God forbid it's something to dispute.

If you remember “Faust”, at the beginning of the play the protagonist translates the Gospel into German and cannot translate, because what we know as “in the beginning was the Word”, in Greek sounds like “in the beginning was the Logos”. And the Logos turns out to be everything: deed, thought, and meaning.

In Catholicism, these are the speeches of the Pope of Rome, which are accepted as absolute truth; in Orthodoxy, these are the decisions of the Councils.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy - centuries, early modern times. But just the Renaissance began to return attention to individuality. This was manifested, for example, in the fact that portraiture appeared at this time. Not symbolic, religious, but precisely portrait40, requiring attention and understanding of certain “psychological” nuances. In the development of portraiture, one can see how at first it was just a depiction of faces. Then the entourage appears - a kind of language that sets the understanding of this portrait. This was also reflected in the appearance of love poetry (Petrarch, Boccaccio), sculpture, such hooligan books as Gargantua and Pantagruel.

A curious moment - Alexey Fedorovich Losev41, a student of V.S. Solovyova, in the book "Aesthetics of the Renaissance" writes that attention to individuality has led to two opposite trends in culture.

One of them is obvious - it is humanism, which originates in Antiquity. The same sophists said: "Man is the measure of all things."

On the other hand, it led to the emergence of fascism. How?

What is Losev's logic? When a person becomes the center, then the idea of a god-man is implicitly replaced by the idea of a man-god - a person determines his own destiny. From the idea of a man-god we make a step to the idea of the Nietzsche superman. From the idea of the superman, which immediately created the opposite trend42 (the "negative" of the superman) - having "broken" it a little more, we get the idea of a supernation that believes that we are us because we are good, and the rest are bad because they are not we, which begins to dictate how to live, how to believe, and so on.

F. Nietzsche is usually extremely misinterpreted; in fact, he had nothing to do with fascism. Its main idea is that “the will to power” is not necessarily the will to political power, it is the desire for self-development, self-affirmation43 (which is very close to the idea of self-actualization).

True, something similar can be found in Giotto, who portrayed the Virgin as a person, although it is not clear whether it is specific or not.

You probably know this philosopher. And I even still remember him, because A.F. Losev lived for more than 90 years and in recent years he taught where I studied at the Faculty of Psychology - at the Lenin Pedagogical Institute, at the Department of Methods of Teaching Foreign Languages.

An example of such a "negative" superman can be found in Jack London in the image of the sea wolf Larsen. And in his own novel "Moon Valley", however, very weak, on the contrary, the life of physically and morally perfect supermen is described.

Although, paradoxically, Nietzsche did not like Christianity. He believed that this was the religion of the Roman slaves, which calls for humility, but, on the contrary, you need to assert yourself.

Nietzsche's lecture hall will play a big role in the history of psychotherapy, introducing the very idea of motivation, internal conflicts, movement. He has a different attitude towards truth, because, strictly speaking, Nietzsche does not argue anything, he simply writes beautifully44, and this turns out to be sufficient argument. In addition, Nietzsche will be familiar with Lou Salome. She was such an interesting woman in the history of psychoanalysis - the non-reciprocal love of Nietzsche, the non-reciprocal love of Rilke. Perhaps, speaking of psychoanalysis, we will remember it again. And let me remind you that one of the books by I. Yaloma is called “When Nietzsche Wept” - this is also no coincidence.

It is important for us that attention to individuality generates attention to oneself, an attempt to understand oneself. And if we talk about the New Age (XVII-XVIII centuries), then we see this attempt at self-understanding in philosophy - in R. Descartes, who refers to himself, in J. Locke, who formulates the idea of reflection45 as a look at oneself.

By the way, it all started much earlier. I mentioned Aurelius Augustine, who in the 5th century wrote the first reflective book in history, The Confession, where he tries to analyze himself from childhood, to understand himself, his relationship with the world. The first question Augustine asks is: “Why am I writing this book? So I'm talking about myself, I'm not telling the priest, I'm talking to people... I would like to think that I want to help others. Or maybe it's my ambition? May be. What is a person from childhood - good or bad? Bad, - says Augustine, - Why did I like to steal apples from my father's garden as a child?

I could come and take. But I loved to steal. I loved to play. What is a game? The game itself is a wonderful thing, but I beat someone and thereby humiliate him. Look: the 5th century, the early Middle Ages, one of the fathers of the church (blessed in the Orthodox tradition, saint in the Catholic one), reflects: “How can I know the truth? God is too high, I can't reach. The earth is too low. Through yourself, knowing yourself. The idea of self-knowledge is that, having passed through the Middle Ages, and, as it were, having disappeared there, it will appear again in the New Age.

Trying to understand himself and his possible future, a person finds himself in the face of responsibility for his life. Erich Fromm wrote about this in his work Escape from Freedom. He believes that the phenomenon of freedom arises only in modern times. So, in the Middle Ages, a peasant, with no effort, could become a nobleman, he had no need to save and write briefly and succinctly. Due to the fact that he suffered greatly from an illness (early syphilis), he had headaches, and in the intervals between attacks he wrote his aphorisms.

` In philosophy, there was such an emphasis - reflection. In psychology, they often say: reflection.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy There are large reserves because they were taken away from him, and in modern times, it turns out, new opportunities appear46. For example, you can serve yourself a title of nobility. Recall the era of Peter the Great, the Table of Ranks: a person who in military service deserves the lowest officer rank (ensign), receives the nobility and passes it on to later kams, now it turns out to be possible to build his future life.

The new time is also the time of the development of mechanics, so a person will often be seen as a half-machine (by R. Descartes), and in the 18th century simply as a machine (by E.B. de Condillac).

Moreover, mechanism is not only because many machines appear, it is a way of seeing:

the whole world as a mechanism.

For us, if we are talking about psychotherapy, it is important that the idea of a person as a mechanism will be one of the lines that will eventually lead to behaviorism. First of all, this will be connected with Descartes, who, being an “inconsistent dualist”, divided a person into two substances: mental and bodily, attributing the properties of thinking to the soul, and extension to the body (thus, only a person has a soul, no one else has47 ). He was the first to create the theory of the reflex arc. Descartes believed that there are animal spirits that dwell in the nerves. Nerves are tubes similar to the circulatory system (and he already knew the circulatory system, knew W. Harvey and studied anatomy himself). How is the movement? A person steps barefoot on hot coal - animal spirits begin to move along the nerves (these are the lightest blood vapors that are released through the blood circulation into the nervous system), move towards the brain, valves open there, mechanical reflection occurs. The angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection - and along other nerves (centrifugal, as we say), they move to the muscles of the organs of movement, the muscle inflates and the leg rises.

One way or another, the idea of a reflex will be tenacious - it will come to medicine, it will come to I.P. Pavlov, then “will move” to the behaviorists. This is a special picture of a person. And from here, future psychotherapeutic ideas will arise that it is necessary to create and form the right skills, in fact, different types of reflexes.

In Europe in modern times there were already free peasants, artisans, and guild brotherhoods. And in no other country, except Russia, were serfs the majority.

One of the followers of Descartes, N. Malebranche, believed that since animals do not have a soul, when they scream, these are mechanical vibrations, they do not feel pain - therefore, they cut them alive. Descartes, on the other hand, believed that animals can feel pain, only they do not understand it - the thought of pain, and not the feeling of pain, belongs to the soul.

Lecturer Property of the soul, according to Descartes - thinking. In modern times, the future associationism is partially born, attempts to understand the method of correct thinking appear, faith appears in the possibility of reason in the knowledge of truth. This is where the problems of methodology and correct knowledge arise (F. Bacon, R. Descartes and others). This is important for you and me, because attempts to find the right to assert the truth concern, among other things, both the understanding of a person and the understanding of therapy.

Here we will deviate a little from a systematic story and discuss the question of the cognizability of the world. The fact is that in the 17th century classical science (Descartes, Newton) was born - the idea arises that the world can be known.

But what needs to be done for this? We need to take an objective, external position in relation to the world, look at it from the side, and if we have the right method of thinking, then we will, as it were, “draw out” those laws that exist in the world. It is assumed that these laws exist a priori, they can be “scooped out” and formulated.

In this classical era, it was actually about thinking about ideal objects. We will not meet the laws that Newton wrote about in life - there are other forces that are ideally not taken into account, but, in general, these laws exist. And when Newton formulated them, everyone believed that the world had already been explained, and there was no need to explain further.

Here a question arises. Do you agree that a person, putting himself in an external position and taking the right method, can really say the truth about the world? This belief has existed for a long time and has manifested itself in the natural sciences. According to Descartes, in order to know the truth, one must doubt everything, accept the undoubted as truth, and deductively transfer all this to the world. Time will pass and it will turn out that this is not true.

The picture we get is very dependent on the method. And, in fact, we get a picture not of the world, but of the world with our method. This will manifest itself very clearly, for example, in physics. J. Maxwell, who studies the magnetic field, finds out that the introduction of a device into a magnetic field changes the properties of this field. That is, the data that we read in the device is not about the magnetic field that we want to study, but about the magnetic device.

Also in the 20th century, this will manifest itself in logic, when it turns out that Aristotle's formal logic (seemingly a reliable tool) is also not reliable. Scientist and philosopher Bertrand Russell, thinking But not in early psychology. The psychologist could not take an external position in relation to the world. He tried to take an external position in relation to himself. This is reflection, and its method was introspection.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1. Introduction to the history of psychotherapy about set theory, will divide all sets into normal and abnormal. How do they differ? The fact that the abnormal include themselves as elements. For example, "a list of all lists" is also a list, so it must include itself.

Question: what will be the set of all normal sets? Nenor small? Whereas the set of all normal sets - it must include itself as abnormal, and then it will be a set of both normal and abnormal. Does not work. It cannot be either one or the other.

This is what Russell considered expressed in the famous sconce paradox. Remember? There is a city where a barber lives, he does not leave it anywhere and shaves all those and only those residents of the city who do not shave themselves. Who shaves the barber? A question that has no answer. If he shaves himself, he has no right to shave himself, because he only shaves those who do not shave themselves. And if he does not shave himself, he is obliged to shave himself, because he shaves everyone who does not shave himself.

A. Tarski will build a theory of metalanguages from this: we cannot speak about multilevel things from one level, we must rise each time. For example, "this is a table" is one level. "The statement 'this table' is true" is another level. "The statement that 'the statement 'this is a table' is true" is true" is the third level.

By the way, this theory of metalanguage is included in NLP. There is even a similar exercise: here I am sitting - here I am sitting, looking at myself - here I am the third, looking at the first two (such artificial schizophrenia - do not forget to come back later).

Thus, the methodology that arose and existed in modern times does not justify itself.

If we are talking about psychotherapy: when I try to understand something therapeutically, can I give up my moral values, my attitudes, beliefs? Turns out, it doesn't either. And what I formulate in this plan is also me - in the context of the world, the method and myself. This is called post-nonclassical rationality49. We deal with it in any psychological practice, and it is precisely this that is meant when psychotherapy is considered as a scientific discipline, as a way of knowing the therapeutic attitude to the world.

Of course, earlier it was believed that science is the most correct knowledge, and philosophy is the highest form of this knowledge. That's how we were taught in school. But now we are in a completely different attitude towards science, recognizing other forms of knowledge - religion, art, and simply our spiritual existence.

Lecture hall Let's return to New time. During this period, the attitude towards the disease changes50. Since the argument of referring to authorities disappeared, distrust began to arise in church, as it were, absolute truths. After all, there was a paradox: when Harvey once discovered the circulatory system, the church sharply opposed it, because the circle is a divine form and a dog, for example, cannot have it. Also, the elliptical shape of the orbits of the planets was not recognized for a very long time, since there should be a circle in the celestial sphere, not an ellipse. There were skeptics who began to understand the situation differently. And it was no longer the possession of the devil that was considered the main cause of mental illness. Although exorcism in modern times still continued to exist, but, as a rule, the mentally ill were now equated with criminals and treated in the same way. They were kept on chains in the same Bedlam prisons. In Germany, in the early modern times, such an invention appeared - “ships of fools”, which served as floating prisons, where people were put, chained and let through the rivers. The ship could land in some cities, people were fed there and sent further. And in the end, the ship sailed into the sea, where it disappeared.

Thus, the attitude towards the disease was secularized, i.e. became more secular. The main argument was that these people interfere with the social order, which was then seen as something very significant.

And now we have come to a very important moment, which will end the period of prototypes in the history of psychotherapy. We have come to the end of the 18th century, when the situation will begin to change radically for various reasons, including political ones.

During this period, two important things happened for us.

First, at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries, psychiatry emerged - not prototypes, not prerequisites, but psychiatry as a part of medicine. And it occurs in a rather paradoxical situation. In the wake of a rather terrible event - the French Revolution, which began with romance - “freedom, equality, fraternity”, but turned into terror and death, the French doctor Philippe Pinel managed to “remove the shackles from the mentally ill”. At what to remove both in direct, and in figurative sense. In the Bicêtre clinic, which, in fact, was then a prison, he created a special social space for the mentally ill, calling for a humane treatment of them. (True, at the same time it was allowed to douse them with cold water, to bind violent ones, but in this case I recommend looking at the books of A. Lorenzer “The Archeology of Psychoanalysis” and M. Foucault “The History of Madness in the Classical Era” on this topic.

This situation continued for quite a long time, it began to change only at the beginning of the 19th century. Karl Marx recalled that he saw a woman in a workhouse in England who had spent 40 years chained to a wall on rotten straw. Similar terrible pictures can be seen, for example, in old films about Sherlock Holmes or about Jack the Ripper.

Grinshpun I.B. History of psychotherapy. Lecture 1 Pinel described this in his Treatise on Alienation, published in 1801. I would like to draw your attention to some of the problems that appear here. Let us recall the slogan of the Revolution: "freedom, equality, fraternity." When patients are separated into a special space, the question arises: where is freedom here? equality? This ethical and legal paradox still exists: do the mentally ill have any rights, and if so, what? And this makes us all the more responsible to think about what is the criterion of disease52. Then it was not realized as a problem, alienation was considered a boon.

For us, the advent of psychiatry is important because psychotherapy arose largely from clinical experience. Very rarely it was based on psychological theories. If we take the ratio "psychotherapy - psychology", psychotherapy has given psychology more than it took from it. Z. Freud is primarily a psychotherapist, K.G. Jung is first of all a psychotherapist, K. Rogers is first of all a psychotherapist. Their theories followed practice. The reverse situation in behavioral and cognitive psychotherapy. Indeed, behaviorism and cognitive psychology predate their respective therapeutic approaches. Everything else was the opposite.

The second event will be associated with the emergence of a practice that has not yet formulated psychotherapeutic tasks, but in fact carried out precisely psychotherapy in the context of medicine. I have already mentioned the exorcist I.I. Gassner, whose activities unfolded in the XVIII century. The Austrian physician Franz Anton Mesmer did not believe in demon possession and believed that Gassner's success in healing was due to very strong animal magnetism. The description of animal magnetism will be one of the decisive moments in the birth of future psychotherapy, and with F. Mesmer begins what can be called its prehistory, and possibly psychotherapy itself.

Arts and Cultures, Institute for the Humanities FSBEI HPE "Naval State University named after Admiral G. I. Nevelskoy" MUSICAL CREATIVITY IN THE PROTESTANT CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT Annotation. In s...” Federal University The myth of the tragic fate of Orpheus and Eurydice occupies an exceptional place in the history of world art....” 7 #8, 2015 UDC 316.032 DOI: 10.17748/2075-9908-2015-7-8-91- 96 BARSUKO... "COOPERATIONS" VLADIMIR BRANCH ANNOTATION OF WORK PROGRAMS OF EDUCATIONAL DISCIPLINES Direction of training 38.03.06 TRADE BUSINESS Profile: COMMERCE Vladimir 2015 ANNOTATION OF THE WORKING PRO... "MAOU lyceum No. 6 The article is devoted to the problem of f..." but with ydersky art of the 20th century, is of particular interest not only to art historians studying ... "

"Economic policy. 2015. V. 10. No. 5. P. 91-141 DOI: 10.18288/1994-5124-2015-5-05 Analytics and forecast BRIEF HISTORY OF RAILWAY FREIGHT RATES IN RUSSIA Farid KHUSAINOV academy of a real st ... "

2017 www.site - "Free electronic library - various documents"

The materials of this site are posted for review, all rights belong to their authors.
If you do not agree that your material is posted on this site, please write to us, we will remove it within 1-2 business days.

Grinshpun I. Introduction to psychology - file n1.doc. B. Introduction to Psychology Grinshpun Introduction to Psychology

Presentation on biology on the topic "biosphere" Presentation on the topic of the biosphere on biology

Facial care - how to care for your skin at home

Classic recipes, in a double boiler, on water and from proteins

Vitamins for hair loss in women: a list of the best drugs and customer reviews

"Stalker: Path to Pripyat": walkthrough, description, secrets and guides Path to Pripyat where to find 5 pda

Mod guide - Game of Souls Origins (Walkthrough mod Game of Souls Origins)

Another Zone Mod - Repack by SeregA-Lus