The Derivation of A Psychological Theory - Gestalt Therapy

University of Wollongong
Research Online
University of Wollongong Tesis Collection University of Wollongong Tesis Collections
1983
Te derivation of a psychological theory: Gestalt
therapy
Allen Richard Barlow
University of Wollongong
Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the
University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW
Library: [email protected]
Recommended Citation
Barlow, Allen Richard, Te derivation of a psychological theory: Gestalt therapy, Doctor of Philosophy thesis, Department of
Psychology, University of Wollongong, 1983. htp://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/1685
THE DERIVATION OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL
THEORY : GESTALT THERAPY
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
from
THE UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG
by
ALLEN RICHARD BARLOW, B.A. (Hons.l)
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
(1983)
-i-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Tables xiv
Acknowledgements xv xvi
Abstract xvii
CHAPTER 1: Introduction
1.1 The aim of this dissertation 1
1.2 Principles of Gestalt therapy 7
CHAPTER 2: Sigmund Freud and psychoanalysis
2.1 Biography 12
2.2 Difficulties in comparing Freud's and Perls' works 13
2. 3 Freud ' s influence on Perls 16
2.4 Structure of the personality 20
2.4.1 Relationship between the three subsystems 22
2.5 Conscious/unconscious 24
2.6 Instincts 28
2. 7 Defence mechanism; 30
2.7.1 Regression 31
2.7.2 Repression 32
2.7.3 Reaction-formation 33
2.7.4 Introj ection 34
2.7.5 Proj ection , 35
2.7.6 Turning against the self (retroflection) 36
2.7.7 Rationalization 37
2.7.8 Denial 37
2.7.9 Identification 38
2. 8 Boundaries 39
-ii-
Page
2.9 Anxiety 41
2.10 Resistance 42
2.11 Transference 44
2.12 Catharsis/cathexis .
%
46
2.13 Neurosis 48
2.14 Therapeutic approach , 52
2.14.1 Aim of therapy 54
2.14. 2 The role of the therapist 55
2.14. 3 View of the patient 57
2.14.4 Style of therapy 58
2.14.5 Free association 59
2.14.6 Interpretation 61
2.14.7 Acting out 67
2.15 Dreams and , dreamwork 68
2.16 Conclusion 75
CHAPTER 3: Neo-Freudian influences
3.1 Carl Jung and analytical psychotherapy 76
3.1.1 Biography and acknowledgement by Perls 76
3.1.2 Individuation 76
3.1.3 Body-mind position 78
3.1.4 Intellect 78
3.1.5 Polarities 79
3.1.6 Collective unconscious.... 80
3.1.7 Neurosis 81
3.1.8 Aim of therapy 84
-iii-
Page
3.1.9 Therapeutic relationship 85
3.1.10 Therapeutic approach 86
3.1.11 Dreams and dreamwork 87
3.1.12 Conclusion 91
3.2 Wilhelm Reich and character analysis 92
3.2.1 Biography and acknowledgement of his work 92
3.2.2 Character and body armor 94
3.2.3 Defences and blocks 96
3.2.4 Psychosomatics 98
3.2.6 Neurosis 104
3.2. 7 Conclusion 106
3.3 Karen Horney 108
3.3.2 Here and now 109
3.3.3 Neurosis 109
3.3.5 Holism 115
3.3.6 Self-actualization 115
3.3.7 Potentialities
117
3.3.8 Conclusion
117
3.4 Otto Rank and Will Therapy 119
3.4.3 Integration 121
3.4.4 Therapeutic process 123
-iv-
Page
3.4.5 Transference 128
3.4.6 Neurosis 129
3.5 Alfred Adler and individual psychology 131
3.5.2 Holism . .. 132
3.5.4 Neurosis 137
3.5.6 Groupwork 143
3.6 Harry Stack Sullivan 145
3. 6.2 Language 145
3.6.3 Organism-environment interaction 146
3.6.4 Oral development 147
3.6.6 Dreams 149
3. 7 Sandor Ferenczi 151
3.7.2 Active therapy 152
3.7.3 Resistance 153
3.7.4 Therapeutic material 154
3.7.5 Neurosis 156
3.7.6 Conclusion .158
-v-
Page
3.8 Paul Federn. 159
3.8.2 Ego Boundaries 160
3.8.3 Contact boundaries 161
3.8.4 Demarcation at the boundaries. 164
3.9 Frieda Fromm-Reichmann. 166
3.9.4 Experience vs. intellectualization 169
3.10 Paul Schilder .' 171
3.10.1 Biography and acknowledgement of his work.. 171
3.10.2 Personality 172
3.10. 3 Experience 172
3.10.4 Psychosomatics 174
CHAPTER 4: Gestalt psychology
4.1 Introduction 175
4.2 Perls' grounding in Gestalt psychology 175
4.3 The naming of Gestalt therapy 176
4.4 Reactions of Gestalt psychologists 178
4.5 The organism-environment interaction 180
4.6 Figure-ground differentiation/Pragnanz 181
4 . 7 Closure 185
-vi-
Page
4. 8 The concept of equilibrium 186
4.9 The role of attention, awareness, and experience 187
4.10 The here and now 188
4.11 The concept of boundaries and neuroses.... 189
4.12 Mind-body position 191
4.13 Psychotherapy and integration 195
4.14 Conclusion 196
CHAPTER 5: Philosophy
5.1 Existentialism 198
5.1.1 Introduction 198
5.1.2 Martin Heidegger 201
5.1.2.1 Biography and acknowledgement by Perls. 201
5.1.2.2 Holism 202
5.1.2.3 Being 202
5.1.2.4 Being-in-the-world 203
5.1.2.5 Choice, responsibility and self-support... 205
5.1.2.6 Language 206
5.1.2.7 Authenticity 206
5.1.2.8 Conclusion 210
5.1.3 Soren Kierkegaard ; 211
5.1.3.1 Biography and acknowledgement by Perls 211
5.1.3.2 Individuality 211
5.1. 3. 3 Therapeutic approach 213
5.1.3.4 Polarities 216
-vii-
Page
5.1.4 Friedrich Nietzsche 218
5.1.4.1 Biography and acknowledgement of his work 218
5.1.4.2 Unfinished business 219
5.1.4.3 Daydreams and fantasies 219
5.1.4.4 Self-support and self-surpassing 221
5.1.4.5 Choice 223
5.1.4.6 Character 224
5.1.4.7 Incomplete individuals 225
5.1.4.8 Introjection 226
5.1.4.9 Retroflection 227
5.1.4.10 Style of writing 227
5.1.5 Hans Vaihinger 229
5.1.5.2 The role of fictions"as if" 229
5.1.5.3 Neglective fiction 232
5.1.5.4 Use of fictions 233
5.1. 5.5 Thought, fictions and neurosis 235
5.1.5.6 Equilibrium and fictions 236
5.1.6 Martin Buber 240
5.1.6.1 Biography and acknowledgement by Perls. 240
5.1.6.2 I-Thou and I-It 241
5.1.6.3 Different "l's" 243
5.1.6.4 I and It 244
5.1.6.5 Responsibility in the I-Thou dialogue 245
-viii-
Page
5.1.6.6 Individuality 246
5.1.6.7 Reflexion and retroflection 247
5.1.7 Paul Tillich 250
5.1.7.2 Polarities and organism-environment interaction 251
5.1.7.3 Anxiety 252
5.1.7.4 Health and neurosis 252
5.1.7.5 Role of the therapist 254
5.1.7.6 Kairos or critical point 255
5.1.8 Ludwig Binswanger .. .. 257
5.1.8.2 Therapeutic approach 258
5.1.8.2.1 Rej ection of explanations 258
5.1.8.2.2 Experiential basis 258
5.1.8.2.3 Role of therapist and patient 259
5.1.8.2.4 Dreams 259
5.1.8.2.5 Cure 260
5. 2 Phenomenology 261
5.2.2 Edmund Husserlbiography 262
5.2.3 Experience 263
-ix-
Page
5.2.6 Language 267
5.2.8 Figure-ground 270
5.2.9 Conclusion -. 271
5.3 Henri Bergson 272
5.3.2 Elan vital 273
5.3.3 Intuition 274
5.3.4 Past, present and future 275
5.3.5 The role of the body 276
5.4 Sigmund Friedlander 279
5.4.2 Polarities 280
5.4.3 Awareness and creative indifference 281
5.5 Jan Smuts and holism 282
5.5.2 Origin of holism 283
5.5.3 Holism and Gestalt therapy 284
5.6 Taoism 290
5.6.2 Centering 291
-x-
Page
5.6.3 Unity and polarities 292
5.6.4 Holism . 293
5.6.5 Organismic self-regulation ,. 293
5.6.6 Non-interference .__ 294
5.6.7 External destruction of man's "biological wisdom" 295
5.6.8 Character , 297
5.6.9 Wisdom and knowledge 29 7
5.6.10 Language 298
5.6.11 The fertile void , 299
5.6.12 Symbols 301
5. 6.13 Here and now 301
5.6.14 Figure/background 302
5.6.15 Systems theory 303
5.6.16 Conclusion . . 305
5.7 Zen Buddhism 306
5.7.3 Polarities
308
5.7.4 Sterile and fertile voids 310
5.7.5 Intellect and experience 311
5.7.6 Self-support
312
CHAPTER 6: Additional influences
6.1 Alfred Korzybski, general semantics and semantics 315
6.1.1 Semantics and general semantics 315
6.1.2 Biography of Korzybski and acknowledgement of his work... 316
-xi-
Page
6.1.3 Unitary language 318
6.1.5 Integration 322
6.1.6 The organism-as-a-whole. .. ._ 324
6.1.7 Boundaries 325
6.1.8 Blocks and fixations 326
6.1.9 Spontaneity 327
6.1.10' What is, is 328
6.1.12 Neurosis 329
6.2 Jacob Moreno and psychodrama 332
6.2.2 Psychodramatic approach 335
6.2.3 Spontaneity 338
6.2.5 Group psychotherapy 340
6.2.6 Boundary and boundary disturbances 341
6.3 William Stern and personalistic psychology 343
6.3.2 Here and nov? 343
6.3.3 Holism 345
6.3.5 Body-mind posit ion 347
6.3.6 Polarities and centering 347
-xii-
Page
6.3.7 Contact zones 349
6.3.8 Individuality 349
6.4 Andras Angyal. 352
6.4.2 Holism 352
6.4.4 Neurosis 354
6.5 Paul Moses and voice analysis. 362
6.5.1 Biography and acknowledgement by Perls , 362
6.5.2 Voice analysis....- 363
6.5.4 Neurosis 364
6.5.5 Respiration and anxiety 365
6.5.6 Listening 366
CHAPTER 7: Laura Perls
7.1 Introduction 368
7. 2 Biography 368
7.2.1 Germany 368
7.2.2 Post GermanySouth Africa 370
7.2.3 The U.S.A 371
-xiii-
Page
7.3 Acknowledgement of sources 375
7.4 Early theoretical contributions 375
7.5 Style of working 378
7.6 Gestalt therapists' views of Laura Perls' contribution.. 38O
7.7 Conclusion 381
CHAPTER 8: Conclusion
382
References .
3
"
APPENDIX I: A glossary of some terms used in this dissertation ^27
APPENDIX II: Summary of interviews with practising Gestalt therapists
II. 1 The interviewees 449
II. 2 The interviews 452
II.2.1 Reasons for choosing Gestalt as a major mode of therapy. 453
II.2.2 Differences between Gestalt and other therapies 455
II.2.3 Relationship between Gestalt therapy and psychoanalysis. 456
II.2.4 Most frequently used Gestalt techniques 457
II.2.5 Gestalt techniques avoided or seldom used 459
II.2.6 Important theoretical concepts in Gestalt therapy. 460
II. 2. 7 Individual versus group therapy 462
II.2.8 Fritz Perls' relevance in 1980... . 463
II.2.9 Combinations of other approaches with Gestalt therapy... 464
II. 2.10 Styles of Gestalt therapy 466
II.2.11 Limitations of Gestalt therapy ...... 467
II.2.12 The future for Gestalt therapy 468
II. 3 Conclusion 470
APPENDIX III: Index of the complete works of F.S. Perls 473
-xiv-
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1 Attributions of the theoretical precursors of Gestalt
therapy 1-4
Table 2 A summary of some of the major sources from which
F.S. Perls derived Gestalt therapy concepts 383-7
Table A Background and training of first generation Gestalt
therapists interviewed 450
Table B Background and training of second generation Gestalt
therapists interviewed 451
Table C Major training in Gestalt therapy: Second generation... 451
Table D Background and training of third generation Gestalt
therapists interviewed 451-2
Table E Major training in Gestalt therapy: Third generation.... 452
Table F Reasons for choice of Gestalt therapy x generation 454
Table G Distinctive features of Gestalt therapy x generation 455-6
Table H Favoured techniques x generation 458
Table I Unused techniques x generation 460
Table J Important theoretical concepts x generation 461
Table K Perls ' relevance x generation 463
Table L Criticisms of Perls' relevance x generation.. 464
Table M Combination of approaches x generation 465
Table N Limitations x generation 467-8
Table 0 Positive or negative future x generation 469
Table P Future predictions x generation 469
-xv-
Acknowledgements
My heartfelt thanks go to the following people whose assistance
enabled me to complete this dissertation:
To my supervisor, Dr. Don Diespecker, who introduced Gestalt
therapy to Australian universities, and who supported my decision to
research a theoretical dissertation. His critical- opinions and advice
were invaluable.
To my mother, Mrs. B. Barlow, who spent hundreds of hours typing
the dissertation from first drafts to its final form, and compiling the
index presented in appendix III.
To Mrs. D. Cavers, who photocopied much of the source material
referred to in the dissertation.
To Dr. D. Mixon, who read and gave critical comments on several of
the sections and made valuable suggestions for a general approach to the
topic.
To Dr. S. Chow, who took the time and trouble to assist with placing
the index on computer for editing and reproduction.
To the Gestalt therapists who generously donated their time to be
interviewed.
And lastly, to Dr. P.R. de Lacey, for his unfailing support and
advice, and Associate Professor N. Kennon, who has been a powerful influ-
ence on my education.
-xvi-
To Nicola
Who not only had to endure the dissertationand mefor its long
and often troublesome gestation and delivery, but was always
available to discuss the almost infinite problems encountered in
researching a topic of this kind. It could only be described as
a labour of loveone of which I hope I am worthy. Additionally,
her editorial, writing, computing and typing skills have all con-
tributed to the final form of this dissertation.
-xvii-
Abstract
This dissertation examines the theoretical precursors of Gestalt
therapy as proposed by F.S. (Fritz) Perls. Perls' complete published
works were examined, and his acknowledgement of other theorists and
philosophical/religious approaches noted. This examination yielded 27
individual theoreticians, plus Gestalt psychology, Zen Buddhism, Taoism
and phenomenology as the major sources mentioned by Perls.
Wherever possible, the original works of these individuals were scr-
utinized to reveal the extent of their influence on Perls. Where works
were originally published in languages other than English, English trans-
lations were used.
Comparison of the works of these theorists with those of Fritz Perls
showed that all had significant commonalities with Perls' works; often,
these commonalities lay in areas other than those acknowledged by Perls;
many of these have also been overlooked by other commentators. It was
concluded that Perls made extensive theoretical borrowings in formulating
Gestalt therapy, and often minimized his reliance on others' work, or
failed to credit them at all.
Additionally, the dissertation contains three appendicesa glossary
of terminology, a summary of interviews with 22 Gestalt therapists in the
U.S.A. in 1980 (in which they indicated the directions in which Gestalt
therapy has been developing since Perls' death) and an index to the com-
plete works of Fritz Perls.
Chapter 1
Introduction
-1-
1.1 The aim of this dissertation
In the 1970's Gestalt therapy became the third most widely prac-
ticed form of psychotherapy in the U.S.A. (Simkin, 1976). "Gestalt
therapy" was the name given to the psychotherapeutic approach "found",
"refound", "fathered" or "created" by Frederich (Fritz) Perls (Perls,
1969b).
This is a psycho-historical theoretical dissertation, examining
the psychological and philosophical theories from which Perls derived
Gestalt therapy. Perls freely admitted that elements of the Gestalt
approach were to be found in other theories. In The Gestalt Approach
and Eye-witness to Therapy (written mainly in the 1950's although pub-
lished posthumously) Perls wrote:
... most of the elements in it (Gestalt Therapy) are to
be found in many other approaches to the subject ... it
is the way they are used and organized which gives this
approach its uniqueness and its claim on your attention.
(1973, p.3)
Perls, Hefferline and Goodman stated the philosophy underlying the devel-
opment of the Gestalt approach more bluntly:
We believe that by assimilating whatever valuable substance
the psychological sciences of our time have to offer we are
now in a position to put forward the basis for a consistent
and practical psychotherapy.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.14)
It is argued in this dissertation that the theoretical "substances"
ingested by Perls were assimilated to varying degrees into Gestalt ther-
apy, some emerging virtually unchanged; frequently, however, Perls either
-2-
failed to acknowledge their original sources completely, or understated
his reliance on other theorists.
In his first book, Ego, Hunger and Aggression (published in South
Africa in 1942, in the U.S.A. in 1947) Perls described his approach as
a holistic-semantic revision of psychoanalysis. In Gestalt Therapy
(Perls et al., 1951), still regarded by Laura Perls as the best statement
of the theory of Gestalt therapy (personal communication, 3/1980), the
Gestalt approach was referred to as an assimilation of Gestalt psychology,
Freudian and para-Freudian analysis, Reichian armour theory, semantics
and philosophy.
Among Gestalt therapists who have published material on the theory of
Gestalt therapy, there are various opinions as to the theoretical precurs-
ors of Gestalt therapy. Those are presented in Table 1.
Table 1
Attributions of the Theoretical Precursors of Gestalt Therapy
Author(s) Date
Precursor(s)
Wallen
Van Dusen
Polster, E.
Polster, E., and
Polster M.
1957
1958, 1960
1966, 1975b,
1973, 1977
Gestalt psychology, Psycho-
analysis, Rank, Reich
Existential and phenomenol-
ogical philosophies , Zen
Existentialism (Buber), Fried-
lander, General semantics,
Gestalt psychology (Werthei-
mer, Kohler, Lewin, Goldstein),
neo-Freudians (Adler, Ferenczi,
Groddeck, Jung, Rank, Reich),
Psychoanalysis, Psychodrama.
-3-
Table 1 (cont)
Naranjo 1968, 1970,
1975
Existentialism (Buber),
Gestalt psychology, Holism,
Horney, Psychoanalysis,
Reich, Zen Buddhism.
Yontef 1969, 1979 Existentialism (Buber, Sartre,
Tillich), Gestalt psychology,
Holism, neo-Freudians (Horney,
Rank, Reich), operatlonalism-
behaviourism, Phenomenology,
Psychoanalysis, Semantics,
Taoism, Zen Buddhism.
Enright 1970, 1975a,
1975b
Exist ent ialism-phenomenology,
Gestalt psychology, Psycho-
analysis, Reich, Smuts.
Ruitenbeek 1972 Existential analysis, Gest-
alt psychology (Goldstein),
Rank.
Kogan 1973, 1976 Existentialism-phenomenology,
Freud, Friedlander, Gestalt
psychology (Gelb, Goldstein,
Kohler, Lewin, Wertheimer),
Judaism, neo-Freudians (Hor-
ney, Reich), Laura Perls,
Semantics (I.A. Richards),
Smuts.
Simkin 1973, 1975,
1976
Buber, Gestalt psychology
(Goldstein), Psychoanalysis,
neo-Freudians (Rank, Reich).
Fantz
1975a, 1975b Gestalt psychology, Jung,
Zen Buddhism.
Denes-Radomisli 1976
Existential analysis, exist-
entialism (Buber), Gestalt
psychology (Goldstein), Psy-
choanalysis, Reich.
Dublin 1976
Existentialism-phenomenology,
Freud, Reich.
Smith 1976a
Existentialism (Buber, Vai-
hinger), Friedlander, Gest-
alt psychology, phenomenology
(Husserl), Psychoanalysis,
Reich, Smuts, Taoism, Zen
Buddhism.
-4-
Table 1 (cont)
Behaviorism, existential-
ism (Buber, Heidegger, Kierk-
gaard), General semantics
(Korzybski), Gestalt psy-
chology (Goldstein, Kohler,
Lewin, Wertheimer), Holism,
Moreno, neo-Freudians (Jung,
Reich), Phenomenology, (Huss-
erl), Psychoanalysis, Taoism,
Zen Buddhism.

This thesis evaluates a broad range of influences on Fritz Perls' early
formulations, concentrating on the period which culminated with the publicat-
ion of Gestalt Therapy in 1951. Choice of theoreticians, therapists and
philosophers for consideration was made on the following criteria:
1. All theorists included were referred to by Perls in one or more
of his works.
other Gestalt therapists, either in published works or in
interviews conducted by the author in 1980, (see appendix
III and chapter 7) have referred to the theorist's influ-
ence on F. Perls.
Examination of the theorist's published works revealed ex-
tensive commonalities with Perls' formulations. Only those
works available in English translation were considered.
The sources selected for evaluation by this method were: Freud and
psychoanalysis; neo-Freudian theorists (Jung, Reich, Horney, Rank, Federn,
Ferenczi, Adler, Schilder, Sullivan and Fromm-Reichmann); Gestalt psychology;
existentialism and phenomenology (Heidegger, Buber, Tillich, Nietzsche, "Vai-
hinger, Kierkegaard, Binswanger, Husserl, Friedlander, Smuts, Bergson; Tao-
ism and Zen Buddhism); Korzybski and general semantics Moreno and psycho-
drama; Stern and personalistic psychology; Angyal and holistic psychology,
Moses and voice analysis; and lastly, Laura Perls.
Van De Riet, Korb, -1980
and Gorrell
2. (a)
and/or (b)
-5-
Three appendices are included: Appendix I lists a Glossary of
terminology used in this thesismost of these terms are in the area of
Gestalt psychology, and it is intended to explain jargon and scientific
terms. Appendix II contains a summary of the material collected in in-
terviews with practising Gestalt therapists conducted in the U.S.A.. in
1980. Appendix III is a working index of names and concepts/terms used
by Perls in his writings.
Biographical information about the theorists discussed is included
wherever possible, especially where Perls had personal contact with a
theorist (e.g., Perls was an analysand of Karen Horney and Wilhelm Reich,
and a friend of Sigmund Friedlander and Jan Smuts). In some cases, it
is possible that Fritz Perls' knowledge was acquired at least in part
from his wife Laura. This is especially true of the works of many of
the Gestalt psychologists (Laura Perls has a Ph.D. in Gestalt Psychology
from Frankfurt) and some existential philosophers with whom she had stud-
ied (e.g., Buber, Tillich). Thus, theorists' connections with Laura
Perls have been investigated, as, of course, has her own contribution.
Perls often referred to an author in one context, while neglecting
to acknowledge the same author's contribution in a much more important
area, e.g., Buber was criticized for his reliance on Judaism (Perls, 1969a,
p.17, 1969b, p.60), but no acknowledgement was made of Perls' approp-
riation of Buber's conception of "I" and "Thou".
The most charitable view of this is that various theorists "contrib-
uted" to Gestalt therapy, and that Perls was either unaware of their in-
fluence on his views or was remiss in his referencing. At the other
extreme is the view that Perls was a plagiarist extraordinaire, who ap-
propriated the most attractive and useful portions of others' work and
-6-
refused to acknowledge his precursors. The truth probably lies some-
where in between; Perls was not particularly scholarly or professional
in his writing, and probably seldom bothered to trace correct references
for his sources. Nonetheless, he does seem to have deliberately min-
imized the extent of his borrowings from some sources.
A crude measure of the influence of a theorist on Perls is simply
the total number of times that person is referred to in Perls' writings.
This information is provided in appendix III. Apart from Perls' fre-
quent references to Freud, however, such a measure is ambiguousespec-
ially given Perls' habit of referencing a minor acquisition while ignor-
ing a major borrowing.
In the case where a theorist has not been acknowledged as a source
for a particular concept, but where it can be shown that Perls was fam-
iliar with the work of that person, then direct borrowing can only be
inferred from the similarity between the original work and Perls' form-
ulations. For this reason, direct quotations are frequently presented
so that the reader can compare Perls' work with that of his predecessors.
The closer the wording and conception, and the greater Perls' demonstrated
familiarity with the source, othe more credence can be given to the hy-
pothesis that unacknowledged borrowing has taken place.
It is not the primary purpose of this dissertation to evaluate the
theoretical material being presented, but rather to assess the extent to
which this material has been assimilated (or introjected) into Gestalt
therapy. Similarly, the accuracy with which Perls applied others' con-
cepts is not specifically examined.
The data for comparison were derived from two major sources.
Firstly, wherever possible the original writings of the .theorists or
-7-
their authorized English translations were evaluated. Secondly, all
the published works of Fritz Perls, and to a lesser extent, Laura Perls
were examined. The major focus has been on all books and articles of
which Perls was either sole or co-author, including material published
posthumously up to 1978.
1.2 Principles of Gestalt therapy
Before the influence of Perls' teachers, colleagues and theoret-
ical precursors on the formulations of Gestalt therapy is examined, it
may be useful to present a brief description of the principles of Gest-
alt therapy. For a more detailed treatment, Gestalt Therapy (Perls et
al., 1951) or Gestalt Therapy Verbatim (Perls, 1969a) are recommended.
"Gestalt" is a German word, for which there is no exact synonym in
English. It implies a whole, a pattern or configuration, a complete
experiential unitsomething which cannot be broken down into component
parts without losing its identity (Perls, 1969a).
Gestalt therapy is concerned with interactions between organisms
and their environment. In a healthy organism, many needs are present
at any time. These organize themselves naturally into a hierarchy of
importance of urgency. The most dominant need emerges, or "becomes
figure". In order to satisfy this need, the organism searches its en-
vironment for the desired (or feared) objectsensory activity. When
the object is located, the organism acts to assimilate itmotor activ-
ity. When the needed object is assimilated, the Gestalt is closed.
The formerly dominant need recedes from awareness, and the energy thus
freed is directed towards the next need that emerges. Organisms are
-8-
self-regulating (Perls, 1969a).
Sometimes, however, this process is interrupted, and needs go un-
satisfied. These unsatisfied needs, or incomplete Gestalts, continue
to press for satisfaction, absorbing energy away from the ongoing pro-
cess of Gestalt formation. The vitality of the fully-functioning or-
ganism is lost; the organism must make new adjustments to accommodate
these unmet needs. By making these adjustments, the organism loses
some of its life potentialit has placed on itself restrictions which
affect all future interactions. Gestalt therapists believe that this
process occurs in people. Psychopathological unfinished business from
the past intrudes on present living:
From the Gestalt viewpoint the neurotic is not merely
a person who once had a problem, he is a person who
has a continuing problem ... He cannot get along in
the present, and unless he learns to deal with problems
as they arise, he will not be able to get along in the
future.
(Perls, 1973, p.63)
Perls believed that awareness of unclosed Gestaltsunfinished
businesswas disrupted through disturbances of the contact boundary
between the individual and his/her environment. The contact bound-
ary is of fundamental importance in Gestalt therapy:
It is at this contact boundary that the psychological
events take place. Our thoughts, our actions, our be-
havior and our emotions are our way of meeting these
boundary events.
(Perls, 1973, p.17)
Disturbances of the contact boundary lead to neurosis. Perls identif-
ied five types of boundary disturbance which result in five "neurotic
characters"confluence, introjection, projection, retroflection and
egotism. Common to all of these chara-cters is the individual's re-
linquishing his/her ability to support him/herself, relying instead
on his/her environment. The neurotic is no longer aware of his/her
needs or capabilitiess/he is a person "who does not see the obvious"
(Perls, 1969a, p.41).
The aim of Gestalt therapy is to restore awareness of incomplete
Gestalts and of the real possibilities df the environment so that the
individual can achieve maturityin Gestalt terms, "the transcendence
from environmental support to self-support" (Perls, 1969a, p.30).
In Gestalt therapy, awareness is regained through concentration on
what is going on here and now in the therapy session. A major technique
is the continuum of awareness, where the client describes his/her exper-
ience, usually prefacing each statement with "now I am aware of ..."
When the client approaches an area from which s/he has blocked awareness,
s/he will interrupt the flow of the present-centered continuum, perhaps
through intellectualization or fleeing into the past or future. At
this point, the therapist will point out to the client that s/he has aban-
doned present awareness, creatively frustrating the client's self-inter-
ruptions. Through being aware of what is, the person makes contact
with his/her environment, and the process of re-integration begins.
Gestalt therapy also makes frequent use of polarities, especially
disparities between what the client thinks s/he "should" do (called the
topdog) and what s/he "wants" to do (the underdog). Such "splits" in
the person are attacked through techniques such as shuttling, where the
person acts out a dialogue between the two extremes, playing both parts,
until integration is achieved. Dreams frequently provide material to be
worked on in this wayPerls regarded every dream element as a represent-
-10-
ation of part of the person, and also believed that every dream con-
tains an existential message for the dreamer.
Gestalt therapy also holds a holistic view of the individualPerls
wrote that we do not have a body, "we are somebody" (Perls, 1969a, p.6).
Thus, awareness is not confined to "merital" events such as thoughts and
dreams, but is also applied to physical events. For example, a client
might be asked by the Gestalt therapist whether s/he is aware of some
behaviour such as kicking a foot. If s/he is not, then the therapist
might attempt to foster awareness by having the client exaggerate the
action, or hold a dialogue with the foot to find out what the kicking
is expressing.
Gestalt therapists avoid probing for underlying "causes" of events,
being concerned instead with the process aspect of those events, what they
are doing for the client now. Thus, in the example above, a Gestalt ther
apist would not ask "Why are you kicking your foot?" but rather, "Are you
aware that you are kicking your foot? How does your kicking express your
feelings now?"
Since the goal of Gestalt therapy is self-support, the therapist en-
courages the client to take responsibility for his/her own life and to
"re-own" the choices s/he has projected onto the environment. For ex-
ample, the statement "It is scary talking to you ..." might be changed
to "I am scared to talk to you ..." or "I can't do it" to "I will not do
it". The therapy situation is used as a "safe emergency", where the
client can experiment with various courses of action to gauge their re-
sults, away from the pressures of "real" consequences.
Perls defined anxiety as "the tension between the now and the later"
(Perls, 1969b, p.174), a gap we fill with rehearsal, "thinking", planning
-11-
etc, so as to protect ourselves from the unknown. In doing so,
however, we prevent growth and change, refusing to give up our grip
on the tried-and-true present. By living in the here and now, we
permit the future to assume the characteristics of a fertile void,
full of excitement and possibilities.
Thus, Gestalt therapy is a present-centered, holistic approach which
aims to foster self-support through an emphasis on awareness, contact,
responsibility and integration. The chapters that follow will examine
the sources of the theoretical elements which Fritz Perls and his coll-
eagues combined into the Gestalt approach.
3 0009 03456130 3
Chapter 2
Sigmund Freud and Psychoanalysis
-12-
2.1 Biography
Freud was born in the small town of Freiberg in Moravia (now
Czechoslovakia). His family moved to Vienna when he was four years
old. He remained in Vienna until 1938, when he emigrated to
England, where he died in 1939.
Freud excelled as a student, and entered the University of
Vienna in 1873 to study medicine. Although he was not particularly
interested in medicine, he performed independent research in
histology, anatomy and neurology. At the age of 26 he received
his medical degree, and continued his work under Brucke. His
teacher, however, advised him to abandon his theoretical career
in view of his perilous financial situation (Freud, 1935).
By 1885, Freud held a prestigious post as lecturer at the
University of Vienna, conducting research into such areas as the
influence of cocaine. He later went to France, whei-e he worked
with Charcot in Paris and Bernheim in Nancy (Freud, -1932).
In 1896 Freud used the term "psycho-analysis" to describe
his method, embarking on what he described as self-analysis in
1897. His early works, some of which are among his most important,
included The Interpretation of Dreams (1900) and The Psychopath-
ology of Everyday Life (1901b).
Freud's influence quickly spread; a group of interested
physicians established a psychoanalytic society. They included
Adler, Jung, Ferenczi, Rank, Abraham and Jones. They published a
journal, and the communication of psychoanalytic ideas mushroomed.
-13-
In 1910 Freud delivered, his first lectures in the U.S.A. at
Clark University (Freud, 1925b). Although many of his early supporters
either left him or were dismissed by him, he continued to write and lect-
ure profusely. His last book was An Outline of Psychoanalysis (1938a).
2.2 Difficulties in comparing Freud's and Perls' works
There are significant difficulties in adequately assessing the
influence of psychoanalysis on the formulation of Gestalt therapy. One
of the major problems centers on the quality and accuracy of the trans-
lations of Freud's works from their original German into English.
Different versions of the same work often distort Freud's concepts and
terms; sometimes, one translation suggests a striking similarity between
Freud's and Perls
1
works, while another indicates practically no resem-
blance at all.
In evaluating the influence of Freud and Freudian psychoanalysis
on Perls' development of Gestalt therapy, I have relied solely on Eng-
lish translations. Some of the specific difficulties with these trans-
lations are discussed below. Obviously, Perls would have read and dis-
cussed Freud while he (Perls) was training as an analyst in Germany.
Bettelheim (1982) is one of the few authors to have addressed
himself to the adequacy of evaluating the anglicized version of Freud.
He stated, for instance, that reading and discussing Freud in English
induced quite a different impression than that derived from the original
versions.
Bettelheim
1
s (1982) interpretation of Freud gives the impression that
-14-
Perls' position is much closer to Freud's than any author to date has
indicated. One example discussed by Bettelheim was that of Freud's
regard for the soul. This discussion indicated that Freud often spoke of
the nature, structure, development and attributes of the soul as being
revealed in all a person does and dreams:
Unfortunately, nobody who reads him in English could guess
this, because all of his many references to the soul ...
have been excised in translation.
This fact, combined with the erroneous or inadequate trans-
lation of many of the most important original concepts of
psychoanalysis ... appear to readers of English as abstract,
depersonalized, highly theoretical, erudite, and mechanized ...
(Bettelheim, 1982, p.52)
Bettelheim further elaborated on Freud's use of language, suggesting
that the latter's choice of words and direct style encouraged the reader
to apply psychoanalytic insights to him/herself, thus gaining a true app-
reciation of his work. While language was all-important in Freud's work,
the same certainly cannot be said for the authorized translations (Bett-
elheim, 1982).
Another warning given by Bettelheim is that errors of translation may
be compounded by distortions arising from the length of time between the
publication of Freud's original works and their standard translations.
This means that the original works have been transferred not only into a
different language but also into a different cultural environment.
Ernest Jones, Freud's longtime friend, associate and biographer wrote
that the translations were not only "seriously inaccurate" but also "un-
worthy " of Freud's style, and grossly distorted, the impression of Freud's
personality and humanistic views (Bettelheim, 1982).
-15-
An examination of some of the "Freudian" terms translated into
English allows little understanding of Freud's ideas. While it is true
that Freud did coin various words, these were usually combinations of well-
known words, so that the new term would immediately be understood. Freud's
translators introduced words which were not only entirely new, but which
often defied any recognition and association. Such words as "parapraxis",
"catharsis", and "scopophilia" conveyed virtually nothing at all, partic-
ularly in the early years of psychoanalysis (Bettelheim, 1982). Whereas
Freud selected a term or word used in daily parlance, emotionally alive,
the translators used terms from Greek or Latin conveying merely erudition
rather than vitality and understanding.
In discussing possible reasons for the English translators' inaccur-
acies in communicating Freud's intended humanism, Bettelheim (1982) wrote
that the probable explanation is:
... a deliberate wish to perceive Freud strictly within the
framework of medicine, and, possibly, an unconscious tenden-
cy to distance themselves from the emotional impact of what
Freud tried to convey.
(Bettelheim, 1982, p.63)
The reason for the "medical model" approach taken by the English
translators may have been their inclination to consider Freud's early
writings, which are more "scientifically" and medically oriented.
Obviously, this type of language tends to be more precise, and is thus
more easily translated. However, Freud's later writings in particular
show a marked maturing of thought whose orientation was humanistic and
concerned with societal and cultural issues as well as those pertaining
to human problems and with matters of the soul (Bettelheim, 1982).
-16-
Much of the early theory, of Gestalt therapy was extremely close
to the more humanistically-oriented original Freud than to the anglic-
ized* medical,depersonalized model presented by the translators of Freud's
works.
The changing emphasis in Freud's theory from "scientific" to human-
istic over the years highlights a further difficulty in comparing Freud's
and Perls' theories. Both'men wrote for many years, and both were constant-
ly modifying and expanding their theories. Rather than comparing an idea
or concept at one specific point in time, therefore, it is often necessary
to consider the trends of thought of the two theorists.
2.3 Freud's influence on Perls
Freud, and especially his early works, was the single greatest influ-
ence on Perls. Perls (1969b,p.141) wrote: "In my youth, 1 took up Freud
as my ready-made savior." After fleeing from the Nazi political regime in
Germany to Holland, Perls, with Laura (his wife) later migrated to South
Africa, and founded the South African Institute of Psychoanalysis in 1935.
Perls was hoping to make a significant contribution to analytic theory
with a paper entitled "Oral Resistances" which he presented at the Psycho-
analytic Congress in Czechoslovakia in 1936. He expected that the paper
would be well received and that Freud would appreciate both his theoretical
work, and his establishment of the new Institute in South Africa (Perls,
1969b). Perls wanted to contribute to psychoanalytic theory and be ack-
nowledged for producing a "Freud-transcending paper" (Perls, 1969b, p.44).
Neither eventuated; the paper was not respected, and Perls' meeting with
Freud lasted a mere three or four minutes, standing in Freud's doorway.
-17-
The impression that Perls conveyed was that he was at this time
(1936) endeavouring to develop himself as a creative and "good" Freud-
ian analystdeveloping and extending psychoanalytic theory into other
areas such as oral resistances and hunger/oral instincts. It can be
hypothesized that had Perls been more widely accepted and respected by
the Freudians, then he may have developed in a similar manner to Reich,
or Adler, or perhaps, Erikson. This, however, is pure speculation.
What is certain is that Perls was greatly disturbed by his rejection.
After this series of events, Perls' attitude to Freud and psychoanalysis
became antagonistic and critical, sometimes outrightly hostile.
Freud, however, had left an indelible impression on Perls. For ex-
ample, Perls' first book Ego, Hunger and Aggression (1947) was subtitled
A Revision of Freud's Theory and Method. Perls later described his para-
doxical feelings towards Freud:
Many friends criticize me for my polemic relationship to
Freud. "You have so much to say; your position is secure-
ly grounded in reality. What is this continuous aggress-
iveness against Freud? Leave him alone and just do your
thing."
I can't do this. Freud, his theories, his influence are
much too important for me. My admiration, bewilderment,
and vindictiveness are very strong. I am deeply moved by
his suffering and courage. I am deeply awed by how much,
practically all alone, he achieved with the inadequate ment-
al tools of association-psychology and mechanistically-or-
iented philosophy. I am deeply grateful for how much I
developed through standing against him.
(Perls, 1969b, p.45)
Perls' Gestalt therapy thus evolved in an atmosphere of anti-
Freudian feelings, as well as respect for Freud's theory. The major
question is, just how much did Perls adopt from Freudian theory? Kogan
(1976) suggested that psychoanalysis provided a theoretical framework
-18-
against which Perls could check out similarities and differences in his
(Perls') theory. Polster (1975b) described Gestalt therapy as "an his-
torical extension of psychoanalytic theory and methodology" (p.151), but
one which assimilated many other theoretical areas.
In contrasting the Gestalt therapy approach with psychoanalysis,
Polster chose four cornerstone concepts from psychoanalysis which are also
reflected in, and basic to Gestalt therapy. These were outlined in the
following way:
1. In psychoanalysis there is the concept of the unconscious; in
Gestalt Therapy, it is figure-ground formation.
2. In psychoanalysis there is transference; in'Gestalt Therapy, it
is contactfulness.
3. In psychoanalysis, there is interpretation and insight; in Gest-
alt Therapy, there is awareness.
4. In psychoanalysis, there are free associations and dreams; in
Gestalt Therapy, there is experiment.
(Polster, 1975b, p.152)
Each of these psychoanalytic concepts (and many others) are discussed,
and their assimilation/introjection into Gestalt therapy examined, in this
chapter. Sometimes, however, the conclusions reached differ from Polster's.
Perls* first book (1947) represented a transition from orthodox psycho-
analysis. It was, as mentioned above, a revision of psychoanalysis:
... I intend to demonstrate the great changes in theory and
practice ... But they also involve a switching over from the
technique of "free associations" to a "concentration therapy "...
(Perls, 1947, p.79)
-19-
In his first book (1947), Perls made four specific criticisms of
Freud's theory:
1. It treats the psyche as distinct from the organism as a whole.
2. It is a linear association psychology.
3. It neglects the phenomena of differentiation.
4. It avoids the present, and overemphasizes the past.
Perls felt that these deficiencies were remedied in Gestalt therapy by
the inclusion of the concepts of holism, field theory, differential
thinking (polarities) and the here and now (Smith, 1976a). Perls (1969b,
p.35) regarded his developments as accomplishing "the next step" after
Freud in the history of psychiatry. However, even late in his life,
Perls still respected Freud, stating that it was Freud's philosophy and
techniques which had become obsolete, and not Freud's discoveries (1969b).
It can thus be seen that Freud had an immensely powerful and complex
fascination for Perls. Even after the disappointment of his actual meet-
ing with Freud, Perls-often wrote of him with flowing complimentse.g.,
Perls, 1947, 1948, 1978a. In his autobiography, Perls confessed that it
was difficult to tell of how brief and unsatisfactory his meeting with
Freud had been, because:
... in my exhibitionistic period I was often vague about
it and pretended that I knew more of Freud that was act-
ually the case.
(Perls, 1969b, p.51)
For Perls, Freud was both a hero to be admired and emulated, and a rival.
Certainly Perls seemed to constantly feel the need to compare his formu-
lations with those of Freud, revealing his familiarity with psychoanaly-
sis in the process:
-20-
Again ... I have to pull Freud in for comparison.
He said at the end of his life, "No analysis can ever
be finished," and I say before the end of my life, "There
is no end to integration."
He would say: you can always analyze and discover
new material.
I say: there is always something you can assimil-
ate and integrate. There is always a chance for grow-
ing.
Freud: Integration takes care of itself. If you
free the repressions, they become available.
(Perls, 1969b, p.276)
2.4 Structure of the personality
Freud found in his patients a seemingly disordered conglomeration
of psychic conflicts and compromises between instincts, social values
and biological drives, with which they had developed various ways of
coping. In an effort to produce some conceptual scheme for understand-
ing this confusion, Freud developed a tripartite model of the person-
ality, comprising the id, ego and superego.
The id is the most primitive, instinctual part of the personality;
it is inherited and present at birth. The ego develops from the id from
birth onwards as the infant interacts with the environment. The super-
ego develops from the ego and represents "moral conscience", the incul-
cation of societal (and often parental) values and standards.
One of the grossest mistranslations of Freud's work into English
was the use of the word "ego" for the German Ich, a word which has an in-
timate, personal connotation even stronger than the English word "I"
(Bettelheim, 1982). For Freud, the use of the word "I" encouraged the
individual to accept responsibility for his/her actions and emotions, help-
ing to make the unconscious conscious. This view was adopted by Perls.
-21-
Perls (1947, p.140) agreed with Freud that the ego is closely
related to identification, but he was at variance with Freud on the
outcome of fixed identifications which became pathological:
If we don't assimilate what is available, we can't make
it our own part of ourselves. It remains a foreign body
in our systemsomething which Freud recognized as intro-
jection. And this leads us to the ego theory. Freud
saw the ego, which in German is the same as "I", as a con-
glomeration of foreign substances ...
(Perls, 1973, p.189)
Perls (1947) was never content with Freud's theory of the ego;
to him, it always seemed that the ego was an "inconvenience" as one of
Freud's substructures of the personality. He believed that Freud
stopped halfway in transferring responsibility from the ego to the id.
For Perls, the ego was not a conglomeration of introjections but a
function, whose energies had to be reorganized and assimilated to ach-
ieve the proper functioning of the personality.
Perls regarded the ego as being integrative, connecting the actions
of the organism with its foremost needs. He elaborated on the conse-
quences of a dictatorial or bullying ego taking command, "blaming" the id
or the body as if they were somehow outside the self (Perls, 1947). In
outlining the role of the ego in relation to the id and superego he wrote:
The concept of the "id" is possible only as a countepoint
to the concept of the Super-Ego. Thus it is an artific-
ial, un-biological construction created by the alienation
function of the Ego. A boundary appears between the ac-
cepted and refused part of the personality, and a split
personality develops .... We have to accept the Ego's de-
pendency upon the demands of instincts, conscience and en-
vironment, and we have to agree fully with Freud's poor view
on the Ego's power.
(Perls, 1947, p.147)
-22-
According to Perls, if a split occurs in the personality of any
person, for instance, between conscience (superego) and instincts (id),
the ego may either become hostile toward the instinct and friendly to-
ward the conscience or vice versa (Perls, 1947). Although most of
Perls' concern was with what psychoanalysts would call the "ego", Perls
preferred the term "self", which he felt also incorporated aspects of the
id and superego:
Freud in describing the development of personality,
contributed to this confusion (of self and myself).
He talked about the ego, (the "I") the id, (the or-
ganic drives) and the super-ego, (the conscience) and
described the individual's psychic life as a constant
conflict between them ...
(Perls, 1973, p.41)
For Perls, the self was:
... flexibly various, for it varies with the dominant
organic needs and the pressing environmental stimuli;
it is the system of responses .... The self is the con-
tact boundary at work; its activity is forming figures
and ground.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.281)
2.4.1 Relationship between the three subsystems
Freud believed that the combination of the abovementioned struc-
tures constituted the personality of an individual (Freud, 1933). He
provided a comment on their interaction:
... the id and the super-ego have one thing in common:
they both represent the influences of the pastthe id the
influence of hereditary, the super-ego the influence, essent-
ially, of what is taken over from other peoplewhereas the
ego is principally determined by the individual's own exper-
ience, that is by accidental and contemporary events.
(Freud, 1938a, p.147)
-23-
The goal of the psyche is to maintain an acceptable level of dy-
namic equilibrium that maximizes pleasure and minimizes unpleasure.
The energy for the system originates in the id. The ego, derived from
the id, deals with the basic drives of the id and mediates between the
id, the superego, and the demands of external reality. The superego,
arising from the ego, acts as a moral director of the ego, defining and
limiting the flexibility of the ego. Freud conceived of the human per-
sonality as an energy system with the personality being a distribution of
energy between the three structures.
There is a striking parallel between Freud's and Perls' terminology
in referring to the ego. Freud wrote:
The ego ... is the external, peripheral layer of the id.
Now, we believe that on the outermost surface of this ego
there is a special agency directed immediately to the ex-
ternal world, a system, an organ, through the excitation
of which alone the phenomenon that we call consciousness
comes about.
:: . (1926a, p. 198)
Similarly, Perls wrote that in Gestalt therapy, the aim is to work with
the outermost surface of the personality, the "obvious" (1966a, p.19).
According to Freud, when a relatively stable balance between the
three systems exists, this contributes to the person's character struct-
ure. When the person is relatively happy and well adapted to the en-
vironment, s/he is considered healthy or normal. If capacity for pleas-
ure is relatively restricted and adaptation is relatively impaired, a
character disorder, a character neurosis or other pathological character
structure is said to exist. Freud saw the basic conflict in the per-
sonality as between the superego and the id. In Gestalt terminology, the
-24-
two opposing forces are called the topdog and the underdog. While the
topdog corresponds to the superego, the underdog is an "infraego" rather
than the id. For Perls, the only way to end the conflict between these
opposing poles of the personality was ' to achieve genuine integration,
in which the vying for control between topdog and underdog ceased.
2.5 Conscious/unconscious
The major thrust of psychoanalysis was its concern with consciousness.
Freud (1938a) regarded consciousness as the starting point for psychoanaly-
tic investigation, one which is unique and defies explanation or descript-
ion. Psychoanalysis is concerned with what is unique in a person's life,
what unique history has led to the individual being whatever s/he is at
any moment.
Freud defined the term unconscious in the following way:
... we call a process unconscious if we are obliged to
assume that it is being activated at the moment, though
at the moment we know nothing about it.
(Freud, 1933, p.70)
Psychoanalysts regard everything mental as being in the first instance
unconscious, though with the potential to become conscious (Freud, 1925b).
Freud warned that it was a mistake to assume that conscious/unconscious
coincides with the distinction between id and ego:
... everything that happens in the id is and remains uncon-
scious, and processes in the ego, and they alone, can become
conscious. But not all of them are, nor always, nor necess-
arily; and large portions of the ego can remain permanently
unconscious.
(Freud, 1926a, p.198)
-25-
Freud's view of unconscious aspect-s of personality was the
most systematic of any proposed (although not necessarily the first),
and was certainly the most comprehensive available to medicine and
psychology in the late 1890's. An iceberg analogy is often used to
illustrate the relationship between conscious and unconscious. The
major portion of the human personality is outside of awareness; the
important causative factors underlying behaviour exist in the unconsc-
ious. To comprehend or understand human behaviour, some sense must be
made of the unconscious (Freud, 1917a).
Freud proposed three levels of consciousness (Freud, 1926a, 1938a).
The unconscious, as outlined above, consists of all aspects of the per-
sonality of which we are unaware. The preconscious is that which is
not immediately at the level of awareness but can become accessible.
For instance, many thoughts or ideas are developed as a result of being
brought into awareness, but not always at the conscious level. At its
simplest, the conscious consists of that which is within awareness.
Perls expressed his sentiments on the unfortunate by-passing of
Gestalt psychology by the psychoanalysts. It was unfortunate because psy-
choanalysis had been hampered by an inadequate theory of awareness of the
patient. Gestalt psychology may well have provided an adequate theory
of awareness (Perls et al., 1951). Perls was impressed with the
utility of Freud's conception:
Almost from the start Freud hit on powerful truths of the
"unconscious" and these have proliferated into brilliant
insights into the psychosomatic unity, the characters of
men, the interpersonal relations of society.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.286)
-26-
Despite the sophistication of Freud's theory, however, Perls felt that
it still did not provide a satisfactory theory of the self, primarily
because of confusion surrounding the nature of the "conscious" part of
the individual:
Consciousness is still taken, in psychoanalysis and most
of its offshoots ... to be the passive receiver of im-
pressions, or the additive associator of impressions
.... It is what is swayed, reflects, talks and does noth-
ing.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.286)
Perls rejected the notion of a dichotomy between unconscious and con-
scious because if these are taken absolutely, they would make psycho-
therapy impossible; no patient can learn to know about him/herself what
is by definition unknowable (Perls et al., 1951). This artificial
split outlined by Freud provided an underestimation of the validity of
dreams, fantasy, imagery and play (among many others) and an overestim-
ation and emphasis on the reality of deliberate speech, thought, and
introspection.
One of the differences Perls observed between psychoanalysis and
Gestalt therapy was that orthodox Freudian therapists treat conscious
deliveries from the neurotic patient with little regard; deliberate eff-
orts by the patient are seen as lacking in energy (Perls et al., 1951).
In contrast, Gestalt therapists treat all deliveries from the patient
as valid communications and respect them. This does not imply that all
communications are unquestionably accepted as representing exactly what
the patient is feeling or doing. All communications, however, provide
something with which to work.
-27-
Wliat Freud called unconscious, Perls called: "at-this-moment-
unaware" (1973, p.54). Freud, he felt, equated consciousness with
deliberateness and self-control, at the expense of spontaneity.
For Freud, Perls argued, the terms "consciousness" and "ego" were
"fairly synonymous" (Perls, 1978a, pp.37-38). Perls' use of the term
"unaware", however, has a much wider scope than does Freud's "unconsc-
ious" (1969a). Perls (1947) suggested that the unconscious was one of
four factors that determined Freud's research, the other three being
libido theory, repression and mental process. Gestalt therapy however,
is an experiential therapy which is primarily' concerned with awareness.
Perls' advice reflected his stated opposition to Freudian analysis:
My advice is to deal not with the Unconscious but, as far
as possible, with the Ego. Once a better functioning of
the Ego is achieved, and the ability to concentrate is re-
stored, the patient will be more willing to co-operate in
the conquest of the Unconscious.
(Perls, 1947, p.124)
Interestingly, it is Perls here who appears to equate "consciousness"
with ego.
According to Freud, the repressed memories in the unconscious are
timeless. This implies that as long as they remain isolated in the un-
conscious and isolated from the rest of the personality, there is no
likelihood of change. Gestalt therapists do not accept this premise.
All past experiences, even if out of awareness at this moment can be
brought back into awareness with careful therapeutic work, particularly
if they are causing the person severe discomfort. Therefore, while
psychoanalysis endeavours to return to the personality those parts which
have been repressed, in Gestalt therapy, this is equivalent to regain-
ing awareness as avoidances are removed. For Freud, the avoidance or
-28-
acceptance of awareness is the co-ordination of the system of conscious-
ness and unconsciousness (Perls, 1947) whereas in Gestalt therapy it is
the functioning of figure-ground phenomena.
2.6 Instincts
The forces which Freud assumed to exist behind "the tensions caused
by the needs of the id" are called instincts (Freud, 1938a, p.148), or
according to Bettelheim (1982), impulses. For Freud, instincts repre-
sented the somatic demands upon the mind. The physical outlets for the
instincts are generally called needs, while mental aspects are called
wishes.
"Instinct" is one of the most crucial terms in the psychoanalytic
literature. According to Bettelheim (1982), however, it is a partic-
ularly regrettable translation because it completely depersonalizes the
term and reduces the human being to animal status. It is significant
that Freud used the German word "instinkt" only some half a dozen times
and then only to refer to the inborn instincts of animals (e.g., Freud,
1933). Freud had consistently used the German Trieb, which was trans-
lated into French as pulsion and if accepted in English, would have meant
the use of the term "impulse", and the adjective "impulsive." Nonethe-
less, the term "instinct" is so well-known that it will be used in this
discussion.
Instincts have four constituent parts: a source, an aim, an impetus
and an object (Fadiman and Frager, 1976). The source is where the need
arises; the aim is the reduction of the need until no further energy is
needed for its satisfaction; the impetus is the amount of energy required
-29-
to satisfy the need; the object is the thing, action or behaviour which
satisfies the need. Instincts may be fully or only partially satisfied.
The choice of options open to the individual is based on that person's
previous history of types of urges, wishes, ideas, habits and so on.
Freud saw mental and behavioural patterns in the "normal" healthy
individual as aimed at reducing tension to previously acceptable levels
(Freud, 1933), Freud called the cycle from relaxation to tension and
activity back to relaxation the tension-reduction model. In Gestalt ther-
apy the same cycle is outlined, the same processes occur, only the termin-
ology differs, e.g., once equilibrium is disrupted after needs have arisen,
sensoric and motoric activity occurs until the needs recede; the organism
then attends to the next most important need in the hierarchy. Of Freud's
theory, Perls wrote:
... Freud's theory is by no means negligible .... every
organism, says the theory, seeks to diminish tension and
reach equilibrium ...
(Perls et al., 1951, p.404)
It was in response to Freud's basic postulate of instincts that Perls
departed from classic psychoanalysis.
Perls regarded the individual as possessing a myriad of needs, both
psychological and physiological, all of which demand satisfaction (Fadiman
and Frager, 1976). Perls (1969b, p.39) wrote of his confusion over:
"whether of not I can claim originality for my 'no-instinct' theory, as if
this mattered a damn", and claimed':' "I want to show the therapeutic hope-
lessness of the Freudian (and every) instinct theory" (Perls, 1969b, p.65).
In "Instincts and their vicissitudes" (1915a), Freud outlined-his be-
lief that impulses or drives can be modified by various mechanisms such as
-30-
suppression or sublimation. This implies a conscious element, whereas
instincts are inborn, unconscious and basically unalterable. If human
beings are "ruled" by instincts no psychoanalysis nor any other therapy
would be possible.
Bettelheim claimed that Freud's well-known "death instinct"Thana-
tosis a mistranslation, because Freud never spoke of a death instinct.
Rather, he referred to a mostly unconscious drive or impulse that pro-
vokes the individual to aggressive, destructive, and self-destructive
actions. Perls appears to have capitalized on this faulty translation
to criticize Freud's theory; when comparing the destructive instinct with
his own notion of the implosive layer of neurosis, he stated:
This is the equivalent with what Freud sensed as the death
instinct. But it is not an instinct for death; if any-
thing, it is the opposite.
(Perls and Clements, 1968, p.24)
According to Perls, Freud attributed the energy organisms create to
the libido; Perls called it excitement. Excitement for Perls was thus
what Freud called impulse or drive. One of Perls' major criticisms of
Freud, which led to the publication of Ego, Hunger and Aggression was
that Freud overestimated the role of sex instincts, while neglecting the
importance of the hunger instinct. Perls wrote: "The proximity of the
emotion called love to the sex instinct made Freud commit his fundamental
mistake" (1947, p.83).
2. 7 Defence mechanisms
Perls adopted much of Freud's theory of defence mechanisms, some of
it with very little modification. Defence mechanisms are the ego's meth-
ods of protecting itself from the anxiety generated by unacceptable id
-31-
impulses (Harper, 1959). The use of defence mechanisms tends to in-
dicate a weakened ego state, which may be temporary or prolonged.
Defence mechanisms are assumed to operate unconsciously, modifying or
falsifying actual conditions to render them more acceptable to the person
(Nye, 1975). While Freud (e.g., 1926b) noted that there were general de-
fenses such as fantasizing and neutralization of the energy of dangerous
drives and instincts, there are many more specific mechanisms used by the
ego to defend against id impulses. Those most directly assimilated (or,
in some cases, introjected) into Gestalt therapy are: regression, repress-
ion, reaction-information, introjection, projection, turning against the
self (retroflection), reversal, rationalization, denial and identification
(Freud, A., 1936; Perls et al., 1951; Harper 1959; Nye, 1975; Fadiman and
Frager, 1976). These mechanisms are discussed below.
Defence mechanisms are not necessarily pathological; all operate to
some degree in normal behavioural development. Neither do they necessar-
ily operate singly, although each will be discussed separately.
The major difference between Freud's and Perls' conceptualization of
defence mechanisms is that while Freud regarded them as id-ego interact-
ions, Perls regarded them mainly as boundary disturbances. Freud's and
Perls' views of organismic boundaries will be compared in another section
(2.8).
2.7.1 Regression
Taken at its simplest, Freud's notion of regression is that when a
person encounters difficulties functioning in life, s/he regresses to
childish modes of behaviour. Regression is a frequently-used defence
-32-
mechanism (Freud, 1926b). Perls discussed this as follows:
Regression in the psycho-analytical sense is a
historical regression, a sliding back to infan-
cy ... a falling back to the true Self, a break-
down of pretences and all of those character feat-
ures which have not become part and parcel of the person-
ality and which have not been assimilated into
neurotic's "whole".
(Perls, 1947, p.89)
Perls however, regarded Freud's "indiscriminate" application of the
term regression as one of the most glaring and important "historical mis-
takes" in classical psychoanalysis (1947, p.98). Perls did not regard
regression as necessarily a pathological process, but as a withdrawal by
the person to a position from which s/he has been able to provide self-
support. Perls thus worked with regression as a means of contacting a
previously experienced self-supportive time in life (Perls, 1969a).
2.7.2 Repression
Freud considered repression the most fundamental factor at work in
the genesis of neurosis (Freud, 1933). In repression, threatening mat-
erial is banished into the unconscious, where it maintains an independent
existence outside the organization of the ego (Freud, 1926b). He wrote:
Symptoms are derived from the repressed, they are,
as it were, its representatives before the ego; but
the repressed is foreign territory to the egointer-
nal foreign territoryjust as reality ... is external
foreign territory.
(Freud, 1933, p.57)
Perls' use of the concept of repression diminished as he distanced
himself philosophically and theoretically from his psychoanalytic training.
-33-
Even in his first book, however, Perls' notion of repression varied
from Freud's:
Psycho-analysis has proved over and over again that
Repressions mean the avoidance of awareness. In
the long run nothing is gained by transporting an
impulse from the conscious to the unconscious field.
(Perls, 1947, p.66)
For Perls, there was nothing to be gained from regarding repressed
material as unconscious, because then: "it is out of reach of our
awareness and thus out of reach of any deliberate action" (Perls, 1978b,
p.54). Instead, Perls regarded repression as: "the forgetting of del-
iberate inhibiting that has become habitual" (Perls et al. , 1951, p.490).
Insomnia and boredom (habitually inhibited excitement) could thus be re-
garded as examples of repression (Perls et al., 1951).
2.7.3 Reaction-formation
Reaction-formation is the mechanism by which the individual resolves
ambivalent feelings. One of these feelings, usually the "feared" or less
acceptable one, is rendered unconscious and kept there by emphasizing the
other feelings. Thus, the ego is protected from threatening, aggressive
impulses towards others by experiencing only conscious feelings of love,
regard, protection and tenderness. Such positive feelings, however, tend
to be compulsive and exaggerated as they keep the opposite feeling supp-
ressed (Freud, 1926b).
Perls regarded reaction-formation as the avoidance of anxiety by the
throttling of excitement, giving as examples avoidance, disgust, defiance
and moral condemnation (Perls et al., 1951). Interestingly, Perls
-34-
focussed on negative expressions of feeling concealing unconscious
attraction, while Freud's examples are of outwardly positive feelings
concealing unconscious hatred and revulsion.
From the Freudian concepts of reaction-formation, involving as it
does the awareness on the part of the therapist of the possible exist-
ence of feelings opposite to those openly expressed by the client, Perls
may have developed some of his interest in polarities and dialectics:
A benefit which comes from developing your ability
to see things in reverseto be uncommittedly int-
erested in the oppositesis the power to make your
own evaluations.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.74)
2.7.4 Introjection
Freud regarded introjection as the ego's defence against the un-
conscious pressures of the id, by identifying itself with another per-
son or object. Freud viewed introjection as a means by which societal
norms and values are maintained across generations, and viewed a moder-
ate degree of introjection (incorporating the admired characteristics
of others) as healthy and desirable (Freud, 1930).
Perls disagreed with this view. Comparing introjection with the
consumption of nutrients in the digestive process, he argued that intro-
jects are "undigested" foreign bodies within the organism. To become
healthy, they must be broken down and assimilated, in the same way as
food must be broken down by the digestive system before being absorbed
by the body to provide nourishment and the means of growth (Perls, 1948).
Thus, Perls, (1973) made a strong distinction between introjection
-35-
(swallowing something whole) and assimilation (destroying and transform-
ing a substance, then selecting it into the organism according to need).
Elsewhere, Perls wrote that the reason the Freudian system could not
work was that it omitted the process of assimilation. "Freud had an oral
and anal zone but nothing in between" (Perls, 1969b, p.156). Perls felt
Freud had overlooked the fact that: "introjection means preserving the
structure of things taken in, whilst the organism requires their destruct-
ion" (1947, p.129).
2.7.5 .Projection
Projection in Freudian terms referred to the act of attributing to
another person or object the feelings or intentions that originate ih one-
self. The individual protects his/her ego from recognizing undesirable
id impulses by relocating the impulse in another person. As such, parts
of the person are displaced from within onto something else in the environ-
ment. The so-called threat is treated as if it were an external force
with which the individual has to come to terms. Projection has a deperson-
alizing effect because an individual can deal with actual feelings without
admitting or being aware that the feelings are his/her own. Freud saw in
phobias one example of projection:
... phobias have the character of a projection in that they
replace an internal, instinctual danger by an external, per-
ceptual one.
(Freud, 1926b, p.126)
Perls adopted Freud's concept of projection without modification.
For Perls, projection was one of four basic neurotic mechanisms or bound-
ary disturbances. In a sense, it is the opposite of introjection and in
-36-
the theoretical sphere, echoes the psychoanalytic approach, that is,
the tendency to make others responsible for what originates in the self.
This includes the disowning of various aspects of the self and attribut-
ing these qualities onto another.
Perls et al. (1951) noted that for'projections to occur, retroflex-
ions and confluences are also necessary; all neurotic mechanisms are funct-
ionally related to one another and are interlocking.
2.7.6 Turning against the self (retroflection)
This defence mechanism as discussed in the psychoanalytic literature
is generally seen in children (Harper, 1959). If a child feels an aggress-
ive impulse towards a parent or some other authority or powerful figure
and dares not to express it, perhaps not even consciously admit its pres-
ence, s/he may strike or even berate him/herself. Sometimes introjection
accompanies this behaviour. In effect, the child is taking on the role
of the hated person and thus striking the parent as s/he strikes him/her-
self. The ego is however, not interfered with and the aggressive impulse
is reduced without being directed in an overt way. Thus, the aggressive
impulse is diverted from a threatening, powerful (and possibly retributive)
target towards a non-threatening targetthe self.
Perls referred to this process as retroflection (Perls et al., 1951).
To retroflect means "to turn sharply back against," so that when a person
retroflects s/he does to him/herself what s/he either did or tried to do
to another person or object. The individual redirects activity (which
may be aggressive or loving) from the external environment inwards and sub-
stitutes him/herself as the target (Perls et al., 1951). The person who
-37-
retroflects, thus splits him/herself, and becomes both subject and
object of his/her actions.
2.7.7 Rationalization
In Freud's view, when an undesirable id impulse moves into conscious-
ness, the ego changes the nature of the thought or feeling in order to
make it more acceptable. A rationalization is likely to contain some
truthful elements, otherwise the ego could not be convinced of its "truth".
It is not, however, relevant to the person's actual motive for doing some-
thing. The ego is thus protected from understanding the underlying or
"real" motive.
Rationalization is the process of inventing or distorting reasons for
unacceptable thoughts or actions and are used to justify behaviour when
underlying reasons and motives are not commendable. Rationalizations are
often used to explain one's failure to achieve some particular goal (Freud,
1915b) .
Perls adopted Freud's concepts of rationalization without modificat-
ion, but often expressed it in more picturesque language:
I distinguish three classes of verbiage production:
chickenshitthis is "good morning," "how are you,"
and so on; bullshitthis is "because," rationalizat-
ion, excuses; and elephantshitthis is when you talk
about philosophy, existential Gestalt Therapy, etc...
(Perls, 1969a, p.47)
2.7.8 Denial
Denial, according to Freud, was most easily observed in severe
-38-
pathological conditions. Denial of reality is a form of repression
that prevents admission to consciousness of external stimuli that point
to the existence of id impulses. The ego is protected from facing the
disagreeable state of reality. Anxiety therefore, can be relieved, at
least temporarily, by denying the existence of this aspect of reality.
Denial may be accompanied by a misrepresentation of a fantasy for real-
ity (Fadiman and Frager, 1976).
Perls adopted the Freudian concept of denial without modification.
He wrote, for instance: "Denial of unpleasant facts, though saving dis-
comfort, creates the illusion of their non-existence" (Perls, 1947, p.63).
2.7.9 Identification
For Freud, identification involved the introjection or incorporation
of the qualities and characteristics of another person, sometimes with the
purpose of removing fear of that person or object. Identification en-
ables the person to alleviate threats and insecurities without having to
face them directly (Freud, 1933).
Perls adopted this concept, particularly in his early works (e.g.,
Perls, 1947, 1948). Perls et al. (1951) wrote of personal confluence as
unaware identification. They noted that all social solidarity depends on
identification with others, at a social level and in production, commerce
and so on:
They constitute the "we" that enlarges the "I". Like
anything that is assimilated, identifications become
unaware and they are healthy only if, should occasion
arise, they can again be noticed and then be once more
affirmed or else modified or discarded.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.157)
-39-
Perls additionally wrote of the necessity for efficient identification
and alienation functions. He suggested that the method of therapy was
as follows:
... to train the ego, the various identifications and
alienations ... until the sense is spontaneously re-
vived that "it is I who am thinking, perceiving, feel-
ing and doing this". At this point, the patient can take
over on his own.
(Perls, et al., 1951, p.282)
2.8 Boundaries
Freud's theory of organismic boundaries provided a basis for Perls'
development of his concepts of ego and contact boundaries. Freud wrote
that boundaries are formed as the individual learns, through deliberate
sensory and motor action, to differentiate between what is external (em-
anating from the outer world) and what is internal (belonging to the ego).
It is this process of differentation that enables the reality principle
to develop (Freud, 1930).
According to Freud, boundary disturbances may result in pathology:
Pathology has made us acquainted with a great number of
states in which the boundary lines between the ego and
the external world become uncertain or in which they are
actually drawn incorrectly.
(Freud, 1930, p.66)
Similarly, Perls regarded neurotic charactersconfluence, introjection,
projection, retroflection and egotismas different examples of boundary
disturbances (see Ronan, 1977). Perls hypothesized that if the inter-
action at the contact boundary is simple, then there will be relatively
little awareness or motor adjustment of the stimuli on the person.
-40-
However, where the interaction is difficult or complicated then there is
heightened consciousness because there is more selectivity (Perls et al.,
1951).
Another striking commonality between the two theorists lies in their
conceptualization of the role of the boundary at a time of love. Freud
(1930) wrote that at the height of being in love the boundary between ego
and the love object tends to dissolve, resulting in an individual who holds
the view that "I" and "you" are one and behaves as if it were a reality.
Perls (1947) adopted Freud's view, writing that when people are "in love"
they tend to be in confluence and as such behave as if the ego-boundary
were non-existent.
Some authors dispute any conception of a boundary. Wilber (1979)
suggested that there is no primary boundary. Bohm (1980) referred to
an "unbroken wholeness" or interconnectedness of the universe. Kroy
(1982) discussed the paradoxical nature of boundaries and divisions.
Perls was aware of both viewsthat there is no such entity as a con-
tact boundary, and that there is a contact boundary, which can be describ-
ed according to the organism-environment interaction. Perls defended
the use of the term "boundary", even though it sounded "odd" (Perls et al.,
1951). However, Perls also discussed the notion that no organism can be
defined in isolation from its environment. Thus, the definition of an
organism is the definition of an organism-environmental field, with the
contact boundary the specific organ of awareness of novel situations in
the field (Perls et al., 1951).
-41-
2.9 Anxiety
Anxiety plays a complex role in psychoanalytic theory. Freud
wrote that excessive anxiety betrays the presence of neurosis. He
also defined anxiety as an expectation of a trauma (Freud, 1926b).
Similarly, Perls regarded anxiety as an expectation of something
that is going to happen, or dread of something which has happened:
"anxiety is the gap between the now and the then" (Perls, 1969a, p.3).
Perls also described a close relationship between anxiety and ex-
citement: "anxiety equals excitement plus an inadequate supply of oxy-
gen" (Perls, 1947, p.77). The reference to oxygen supply relates to
the derivation of the word anxiety from the Latin angustus (narrow), a
feeling of narrowness or constriction in the chest. Perls attributed
his formulation of anxiety as undischarged excitement to Freud's concept
of free floating anxiety (Perls, 1947).
According to Freud, a person who is free of both guilt and anxiety
is healthy (Perls, 1973). While Perls agreed with this formulation, his
emphasis was slightly different. Anxiety in Gestalt therapy is the gap
between now and the later. When a person leaves the present and jumps
into the future s/he experiences "stagefright" and discomfort. These
aversive feelings can be avoided by filling present living with distract-
ions to disguise anxietynot a healthy method of avoiding anxious sen-
sations.
-42-
2.10 Resistance
Resistance is one of the most fundamental theoretical concepts of
psychoanalysis. As Freud wrote:
The whole theory of psycho-analysis is ... in fact built
up on the perception of the resistance offered to us by
the patient when we attempt to make his unconscious con-
scious to him.
(Freud, 1933, p.68)
Freud regarded resistance as a sure sign of internal conflict, between a
force attempting to express something and another striving to prevent
this expression (Freud, 1933).
In psychoanalysis, the therapist has the patient free associate.
As unconscious material begins to be revealed, resistances develop to
block further material being disclosed. These can include hesitations,
forgetting aspects of a story, sidetracking the discussion, postponing
further therapy and so on. Often these resistances are unconsciously
motivated. For instance, a hidden impulse or memory may be on the verge
of becoming conscious. The threatened resultant anxiety may overwhelm
the ego which then blocks the material. This may show that the person is
not willing at that, moment to accept this aspect of him/herself. Altern-
atively, the person may unconsciously be unwilling to give up neurotic
behaviours. In some cases, even physiological symptoms such as persist-
ent headaches, fatigue or insomnia may be useful to the person despite the
discomfort they may causethey may provide an excuse for avoiding re-
sponsibilities, or for temperamental behaviours. Such symptoms are diff-
icult to eradicate because of these advantageous "by-products". In order
for analytic therapy to proceed successfully, however, resistances must be
removed.
-43-
Perls referred to the Freudian approach to resistances in his early
works, although he later acknowledged that the notion of "resistance"
was an abstract one for him until he became familiar with Reich's work
(Perls, 1969b). Even "in his first book, Perls criticized the psychoan-
alytic approach for neglecting both oral and genital resistances, while
concentrating on anal resistance (Perls, 1947). He also felt that the
Freudian technique of free association frequently led patients to feel
that resistances were "bad" (Perls, 1948).
Conversely, Perls valued resistance as a form of contact:
We must not fall into the trap of believing that resistances
are bad and that the patient would be better off without them.
On the contrary, resistances are as valuable to us as the re-
sistance movements were to the Allies ....
(Perls, 1973, p.48)
It is this author's contention, following Perls (1973) and Harris
(personal communication 1/1980) that in Gestalt therapy, resistance is
actually a signpost directing the therapist to the location of various
types of blocking of awareness. In keeping with Perls' (1969a) view
that Gestalt therapists examine the outermost layer of the person rather
than searching for deep structure, resistances represent surface struct-
ures insofar as they are clearly evident early in the therapeutic setting.
Resistance can therefore be regarded as contact with whatever needs to be
done in the therapeutic setting. Successful therapy may be achieved
more frequently by working on resistances than by concentrating on the
patient's "presenting problems". This is partly because, following psy-
choanalytic theory, some of the motivation for resistance is out of
awareness, and so genuine breakthroughs can often be achieved with relat-
ively little work by either patient or therapist.
-44-
Also, physiological symptoms such as headaches, which are some-
times regarded as resistance, can be worked upon. This often results
not only in the alleviation of inconveniencing symptoms, but also in a
genuine working-through of the underlying blocks.
In discussing types of resistance Freud outlined what he designated
as intellectual resistance. This often results in the patient mobilizing
arguments against treatment. Often these arguments are endeavours to make
the therapist:
... instruct him, teach him, contradict him, introduce him
to the literature, so that he can find further instruction.
He is quite ready to become an adherent of psycho-analysis
on condition that analysis spares him personally.
(Freud, 1917b, p.289)
Freud's argument bears striking similarity to some of Perls' statements.
For instance, Perls was aware of many patients' desire to argue and re-
sist any change in their lives (1969a). Additionally, Perls estimated
that ninety percent of patients enter therapy not with the aim of curing
their pathological behaviours, but rather to become more expert in resist-
ing therapy.
2.11 Transference
Freud used the term "transference" to describe an intense emotional
relationship which develops between the therapist and patient. This re-
lationship cannot be accounted for by the actual therapy situation, but
arises from the patient's "transferring" onto the therapist feelings to-
ward some other figure from his/her past. For Freud, these feelings
were derived from the patient's relations with his/her parentsthe Oedipus
complex (Freud, 1926c).
-45-
Transference may be either positive" or negative (resulting in
inappropriate feelings of affection or hostility toward the therapist,
respectively).
In psychoanalysis, transference is constantly discussed. Freud
felt that transference would be resolved when the patient became aware
that s/he was re-experiencing emotional events whose origins are in the
pastusually in childhood (Freud, 1925b). For some psychoanalysts,
discussion of transference also helps preserve the integrity of the ther-
apist; Hitschmann wrote that to be successful, the analyst must:
... endeavour at the close of the analysis to leave
him as much a stranger to the patient as he was be-
fore the treatment began; in this way, not only the
genuine cure of the patient but also his own independ-
ence is attained.
(1921, p.217)
For Perls, Freud's theory of transference represented an important
example of Freud's understanding of the operation of unfinished situat-
ions in the present (Perls et al., 1951). He wrote:
Thus, in transference the patient is acting out a form
of delusion; what he believes to be personal contact with
the therapist is actually an intraorganismic event of
his own making. It is not contact, but something that
prevents contact.
(Perls, 1973, p.56)
Perls regarded contact as an appreciation of the actuality of other-
ness and not a misconstrued view of otherness. However, transference rep-
resents contact of another type. The client is contacting an event or
situation from the past, although this contact is inappropriately directed.
Although it may not be optimal, it is contact, and may be used to facilitate
the development of awareness.
-46-
ftielsen (1980) made the point that the central psychoanalytic
concept of transference, though de-emphasized, criticized and disavowed
by Perls, is actually fundamental to the "deep" structure of Gestalt
therapy. The major difference between psychoanalysis and Gestalt therapy
lies in the method of working with transference. In psychoanalysis",
transference is used to explore past relationships and trauma, with a view
to uncovering repressed material, especially relating to family events in
childhood, which can then be interpreted by the therapist. In Gestalt
therapy, transference indicates a distortion of the client's perceptions o
the therapist. The therapist uses such techniques as creative frustrat-
ion and the empty chair to restore contact between client and therapist in
the here and now, rather than between the client and a fantasized parent
figure. Gestalt therapists thus attempt to prevent the development of
"transference neurosis" by forcing the client to contact the therapist as
an individual. In psychoanalysis, this is avoided, and the development
a "transference neurosis" is regarded as a pre-requisite for successful
therapy.
2.12 Catharsis/cathexis
Catharsis is a widely used but vaguely defined term. According to
Nichols and Zax (1977, p.l) it is generally understood to mean "a process
that relieves tension and anxiety by emotions," emotions that have been
hidden, restrained or unconscious. Catharsis is derived from the Greek
kathausis, meaning to clean or purify. Fadiman and Frager defined cath-
exis as:
...the process by which the available libidinal energy
Page47ismissinginoriginaldocument
-48-
a dominant figure emerging from a background (Perls, 1973, 1978a).
Elsewhere, Perls wrote that his use of the term "excitement" was ling-
uistically a good one, and included the "Freudian cathexis notion"
(Perls et al., 1951, p.15).
Perls outlined a model of organism\c self-regulation. Needs dis-
appear once they have been satisfied or discharged. This process was
referred to as the completion of a gestalt, or closure. Yawning and
sighing are examples of discharge of organismic self-regulation. When
satisfaction has not been achieved, anxiety can be produced. To diss-
ipate anxiety, a cathartic process of need satisfaction or emotional
discharge is encouraged (Nichols and Zax, 1977). Catharsis, with aware-
ness and responsibility, thus plays a key role in Gestalt therapy.
2.13 Neurosis
The simple formula for the origin of neurosis according to Freud
(1926a) is that the ego has made an-attempt to suppress aspects of the id
in an inappropriate and unsuccessful manner. This attempt at suppression
has failed and therefore certain instinctual strivings of the id come into
operation:
A neurosis is thus the result of a conflict between the ego
and the id, upon which the ego has embarked because ... it
wishes at all costs to retain its adaptability in relation
to the external world.
(Freud, 1926a, pp.203-204)
Sometimes these id wishes are forbidden even to enter consciousness,
which is habitually unaware of the strivings of these instinctual sources.
The impulses which are not allowed into consciousness, and survive only in
the unconscious, are described as being repressed. If these repressed
-49-
impulses somehow force their way into consciousness or into the move-
ments of the person, or into both, a whole range of neurotic symptoms
may arise. Freud (1932b) found that the maintenance of inhibitions arid
repressions imposes upon the person a great expenditure of energy from
which s/he would like to be relieved. ^One of the ways this relief can
occur is in the sleep state, (dreaming), since this involves a cessation
of motor activity and the superego is relaxed.
Perls' theory of neurosis is firmly rooted in psychoanalytic theory.
Perls felt the theory of neurosis to be one of Freud's greatest achieve-
ments :
One of Freud's grandest observations was the double nature
of a neurotic symptom: the symptom is both an expression
of vitality and a "defence" against vitality ...
(Perls et al., 1951, p.334)
This formulation provided Perls with the notion that the individual does
not necessarily aim at health and spontaneity; rather, some of the most
vital and creative abilities are precisely the neurotic ones. This is
known as neurotic self-regulation (Perls et al., 1951). Like Freud, ,
Perls regarded neurosis as having dual properties. Neurotic rigidity re-
flects a type of "character", and yet at the same time the neurotic symp-
tom expresses the individual's unique way of meeting the environment (Perls
et al., 1951).
Freud believed that every neurotic patient is influenced by a past
event that has not been successfully resolved. Often, his patients
would repeat traumatic situations from the past in their dreams:
It is as though these patients had not finished with the
traumatic situation, as though they were still faced with
it as an immediate task which has not been dealt with ...
(Freud, 1917a, p.275)
-50-
Thus, every neurotic, according to Freud, has a fixation with some as-
pect of their past, but not every fixation leads to a neurosis. One
"affective" fixation to something in the past is mourning, which, for
Freud (1917a), involved the almost complete alienation from the present
and future and concentration on the past.
Perls also adopted this view, and used language very similar to that
used by Freud. For Perls, psychopathological "unfinished business" (un-
closed gestalten) from the past absorbs energy from present living by its
continuing demands for satisfaction. The energy which is used by these
unclosed gestalten can be freed only by first making them aware, and then
resolving them.
This last stage represents the major divergence between psychoanalytic
and Gestalt therapy approaches to the treatment of neurosis. Perls wrote
that Freud:
... even went so far as to maintain that a neurosis is
cured once the childhood amnesia is undone, once the
patient has gained a continuous knowledge of his past.
(Perls, 1947, p.88)
For Perls, however, unclosed gestalten had to achieve closure, not merely
be recognized. Perls appeared to contradict this with his statement:
"awareness per seby and of itselfcan be curative" (Perls, 1969a, p.17).
Awareness for Perls meant not simply remembrance of traumatic events, but
also a return to organismic self-regulation, overcoming the interruption
which led to the unfinished business.
Freud (1926a) maintained that avoidance is an essential part of every
neurosis. According to Perls (1947), Freud included as one treatment app-
roach, the prescription of direct contact with the feared object or
-51-
situation as an antidote to its influence on the person. Freud was
aware that merely "talking about" a symptom was insufficient to ensure
recovery. This part of Freudian theory is clearly reflected in Gest-
alt therapy, when neurosis is seen as an avoidance of some feared object
or situation. Also, Perls (1969a) continually emphasized the necessity
for more than intellectual acknowledgement of problems.
Freud saw neurosis as resulting from a conflict between the individual
and society. Neurotics, he wrote:
... only carry on their collaboration with cultural activ-
ities by a great expenditure of force and at the cost of
an internal impoverishment, or are obliged at times to in-
terrupt it and fall ill.
(Freud, 1908b, p.191)
According to Freud, those persons who accept the demands of civil-
ization beyond their "limit" become neurotic because they cannot live to
their own specifications. Therefore, neurosis develops as a result of
the individual's inability to deal with various experiences (Freud, 1917a).
Perls freely acknowledged that he adopted this view from psychoanaly-
sis:
In order to avoid conflictsto remain within the bounds of
society or other unitsthe individual alienates those parts
of his personality which would lead to conflicts with the en-
vironment . The avoidance of external conflicts, however,
results in the creation of internal ones. Psychoanalysis
has correctly stressed this fact over and over again.
(Perls, 1947, p.149)
Perls disagreed, however, with Freud's notion that successful therapy would
adjust the individual to meet the demands of society; this, Perls felt:
"made for the advance of society and civilization at the expense of every
person's growth and happiness" (Perls et al., 1951, p.351).
-52-
For Perls, the well-integrated person was:
The man who can live in concernful contact with his society,
neither being swallowed up by it nor withdrawing from it
completely,is a well integrated man. He is self-supportive
because he understands the relationship between himself and
his society ... (he) recognizes the contact boundary between
himself and his society ...
(Perls, 1973, p.26)
When a person chooses neurosis as a way of living, it is usually the
best adjustment given that person's perceptions of the situation. Often
the choice is to make no further choices and exhibit fixed and stereotyp-
ed actions and reactions across a range of situations. The aim of ther-
apy is to facilitate awareness so that perceptions of situations expand,
and that intentional choice becomes a reality, replacing restricted, neu-
rotic choice (Perls, 1969a).
2.14 Therapeutic approach
There is no question of the world-wide popularity of the psychoana-
lytic approach to therapy (Fadiman and Frager, 1976). However, despite
its immense popularity and impact on Western thought and culture, Freud
held some reservations about its universality as a therapeutic approach.
In the thirty-fourth of his "New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis"
(1933) Freud discussed what he considered to be the main merits of psycho-
analysis and his lack of enthusiasm for it as a therapy. Freud viewed
psychoanalysis as valuable:
... not as therapy but rather because of what it
reveals to us about what concerns man most closely: his
oxm essence; and because of the connections it uncovers
between the widest variety of his actions.
(quoted by Bettelheim, 1982, p.63)
-53-
The main attribute of psychoanalysis according to Freud (1933) was
the communication of a theoretical approach which would promote wide-
spread insight for mankind in general, not just those who were under-
going treatment.
Perls was aware of Freud's reservations about the use of psycho-
analysis as a form of therapy. Perls clearly stated his (and others')
mistake in adopting Freud's approach to therapy:
Freud was a sincere scientist, a brilliant writer and
discoverer of many secrets of the "mind". None of us,
probably with the exception of Freud himself, realized
the prematurity of applying psychoanalysis to treatment;
none cf us saw psychoanalysis in its proper context.
We did not see it for what it actually was: a research
project.
(Perls, 1969b, p.142)
Freud (1918) discussed why he chose the term "analysis" which meant
"breaking up" or "separating out", and how it suggested an analogy with
the physical sciences. In advocating that psychological phenomena be
broken into constituent parts, Freud did not overlook the opposite pro-
cess, that is, "psycho-synthesis". He wrote (1918) of the neurotic pat-
ient as one who presents a torn mind, one divided by resistances:
As we analyse it and remove the resistances, it grows to-
gether; the great unity which we call his ego fits into
itself all the instinctual impulses which before had been
split off and held apart from it. The psychosynthesis
is thus achieved during analytic treatment without our
intervention, automatically and inevitably.
(Freud, 1918, p.161)
Perls criticized Freud for not taking sufficient interest in syn-
thesis as opposed to analysis. For Perls (1969a), therapy meant in-
tegrating or more precisely, collecting the split off parts of the per-
son and re-integrating them; in Freudian terms, recreating a former
-54-
synthesis into a complete person.
2.14.1 Aim of therapy
For Freud, the aim of therapy was to remove resistances in the
patient and to bring about a reunification and strengthening of the
patient's ego (Freud, 1918, 1922). The freeing of the energy other-
wise directed at maintaining repressions and internal conflicts all-
ows a more comprehensive and fulfilling life style. The removal of
symptoms is not a specific aim of analysis, but rather occurs as a
by-product of the analytic procedure when it is successful (Freud, 1922).
Similarly, Perls wrote:
In therapy the aim is to shift the "inner conflict",
that between impulse and the counter-attacking re-
sistance, into an open, aware conflict.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.89)
Thus, both psychoanalysis and Gestalt therapy have as their aim the in-
creasing of awareness and the freeing of energy bound up in repressing
conflict and resisting change. The freed energy can then be directed
towards growth and re-integration (Fadiman and Frager, 1976; Enright,
1970).
For- Perls, however, the psychoanalytic process was too goal-dir-
ected and future oriented:
... the futuristic, the teleological thinking plays its
part in psycho-analysis. We analyze a patient in order
to cure him. The patient says many things for the pur-
pose of covering up essential things. The analyst aims at
stimulating and completing developments which have been arr-
ested.
(Perls, 1947, pp.88-89)
-55-
More importantly, however, Perls fundamentally disagreed with
the emphasis placed by psychoanalysts on the understanding of child-
hood trauma. Far from accepting the view that a person who under-
stood all of his/her past would be "cured", Perls wrote:
Implicit in the emphasis of orthodox psychotherapy is
the point of view that the neurotic is a person who
once had a problem, and that the resolution of this past
problem is the goal of psychotherapy,.... From the Gest-
alt viewpoint the neurotic is not merely a person who
once had a problem, he is a person who has a continuing
problem, here and now, in the present. Although it
may well be that he is acting the way he is to-day "be-
cause" of things that happened to him in the past, his
difficulties to-day are connected with the ways he is
acting to-day.
(Perls, 1973, p.63)
2.14.2 The role of the therapist
In discussing the role of the therapist (analyst) Freud used the
simile of the midwife (Bettelheim, 1982). From this perspective the
analyst facilitates the safe process of developing a "new" personality.
The analyst performs a midwifery role of helping in the birth, of ass-
isting the individual to develop his/her personality rather than deter-
mining what or how it should be. Only the person who is undergoing
self-analysis in therapy can energize him/herself into a modified person.
Gestalt therapy echoed this approach without alteration, constant-
ly maintaining that the therapist can do nothing that the patient cannot
do for him/herself (Perls, 1969a).
Freud (1938a) always made a clear distinction between the therapist's
knowledge and the patient's knowledge. The therapist gains insights into
the patient's functioning through the trained interpretation of the
-56-
patient's associations and other behaviour. S/he only discloses this
knowledge, however, with extreme care and sensitivity, taking into acc-
ount the patient's readiness and ability to deal with the information.
Usually, the opportune time for disclosure is when the patient has very
nearly reached that point alone, and only a small step remains to be
taken. That step however, may well be the decisive synthesis. Prem-
ature disclosure will either have no effect or will provoke a resistance
which will then have to be worked upon. The therapist tries out his/her
insights to see how they fit in with the person's knowledge. The closer
the insights of the therapist and the knowledge of the patient come toget-
her, the more successful the therapy.
Perls wrote similarly of the role of the therapist in Gestalt therapy:
We ask the patient to become aware ... of himself....
In this process, the therapist is guided by what he
observes about the patient ... the therapist should be
sensitive to the surface the patient presents so that
the therapist's broader awareness can become the means
by which the patient is enabled to increase his own.
(Perls, 1973, p.65)
Elsewhere in the same work, however, Perls pointed out an important diff-
erence between the two approaches:
The therapist cannot make discoveries for the patient,
he can only facilitate the process in the patient.
(Perls, 1973, p.76)
Thus, Perls places more emphasis on the responsibility of the person in
therapy to make his/her own discoveries; the observations of the therapist
are never given more credence than the patient's own.
-57-
2.14.3 View of the patient
Freud wrote that in psychoanalytic therapy:
The analyst respects the patient's individuality and does
not seek to remould him in accordance with his ownthat
is, according to the physician'spersonal ideals; he is
glad to avoid giving advice and instead to arouse the pat-
ient's power of initiative.
(Freud, 1922, p.251)
Gestalt therapists adhere closely to this aspect of Freudian theory.
A Gestalt therapist does not give advice, but rather brings to the pat-
ient's attention various aspects of behaviour, for example, inconsisten-
cies in certain actions or speech, which may facilitate a decision-making
process in the person. This is a non-directive, non-interpretive app-
roach, and is compatible only with the individual's value system. The
main aim of the therapist is to promote initiative, self-responsibility
and the development of tools with which the person can handle not only
present problems but also those that arise in the future (Perls, 1969a).
Unlike the analyst, the Gestalt therapist does not attempt to lead,
guide, interpret or in any manner accept responsibility for the way an-
other person is acting/working. Rather, the individual is regarded as
possessing the ability to find his/her own solution; and in a better
position to do so than anyone else. This attitude of respect for the in-
dividual's own resources and integrity is an aspect that is lacking in
the analysts' position. Resnick encapsulated this notion:
The distinction between true support and help is clear:
To do for the other what he is capable of doing for him-
self ensures his not becoming aware that he can stand on
his own two feet.
(Resnick, 1975, p.142)
-58-
"Help" of this kind does not facilitate or constitute support, but
rather encourages dependency on the therapist, which is self-defeating.
Gestalt therapy aims to provide the patient with the means to be his/her
own therapist.
2.14.4 Style of therapy
Perls was extremely critical of Freud's method of conducting therapy,
which he described as resulting from Freud's own inability to relate to
people:
Freud had a deep phobia. He was embarrassed to look into
anybody's face or to be stared at, so he avoided the situat-
ion by putting the patient on a couch and sitting behind him.
Soon this symptom became standard procedure ... Now we have
to do the opposite.
(Perls, 1966a, p.37)
The cover of the Bantam edition of Perls' AutobiographyIn and Out the
Garbage Pail (1969b)shows a cartoon of Perls on an analyst's couch.
Sitting behind himand behind a desk, surrounded by diplomasis the
analyst, wearing a gas-mask. Perls reacted strongly against this thera-
peutic setting, conducting his later work face-to-face in a group (work-
shop) setting, often in an informal living area rather than an office.
Perls' personal styleflamboyant, outrageous, "shocking"extended to his
dress in later years, when he most frequently wore caftans or fluffy
"jump suits". All of this seems a deliberate reaction against the conserv-
ative "analyst" image.
In the 1950's, however, Perls was not so individualistic. In
the film series Three Approaches to Psychotherapy (1956), Perls wore a pin-
-59-
striped suit; his hair and beard were conservatively styled. In a
personal interview (3/1980) Laura Perls claimed that Fritz used a couch
when first working with Isadore From at the New York Gestalt Institute.
It would appear that Perls' violent rebellion against psychoanalytic tech-
niques did not occur until late in his life.
Although best-known for his use of individual therapy, Freud was not
unaware of the power and potential of group psychotherapy. In an article
entitled "Creative writers and day-dreaming" (Freud, 1908a, p.145) he
emphasized the value of group comparisons of fantasies, which each
individual believes are unique to him/her:
It may come about that ... he believes he is the only person
who invents such phantasies and has no idea that creations of
this kind are widespread among other people.
The person thus becomes aware that s/he is not "abnormal" or perverted.
This is very much the kind of use to which Perls put the group, where
the members form a kind of "Greek chorus" to the person who is working
with the therapist (Polster and Polster, 1973). Through observing and
participating in the group, the individual realizes that his/her feelings
and actions are similar to those experienced by others (Perls, 1966a).
Perls may thus have been influenced by Freud in one of the advantages of
using group psychotherapy.
2.14.5 Free association
Freud's technique of free association and Perls' continuum of aware-
ness are obviously related. The superficial similarity of these approach-
es, however, conceals a fundamental difference, perhaps one of Perls' most
-60-
valuable innovations.
Freud described the process of free association:
We instruct the patient to put himself into a state of quiet,
unreflecting self-observation, and to report to us whatever
internal perceptions he is able to makefeelings, thoughts,
memoriesin the order in which they occur to him .,,
We urge him always to follow only the surface of his conscious-
ness and to leave aside any criticism of what he finds, what-
ever shape that criticism may take ...
(Freud, 1917b, p.287)
In the Gestalt process of continuum of awareness, the patient is asked
to tell his/her present experience, often by prefacing each speech with
the words "now I am aware that ..." (Perls et al., 1951, p.114). When
the awareness approaches a conflict area, the person will attempt to
escape, by talking about the past or fleeing into anticipation of the fut-
ure, rationalization, or other means of avoiding contact. It is at this
point that the therapist will intervene and draw the person's attention to
the way they have interrupted the flow of their awareness. When a con-
flict has been identified in this way, techniques like a dialogue between
conflicting parts of the person, shuttling back and forth from one to the
other, can facilitate re-integration.
Thus, continuum of awareness work differs from free association in that
the patient is not required to let his/her attention wander freely, but to
concentrate that attention on present processesa feat which requires dis-
cipline, and which would be near-impossible if not for the intervention of
the therapist, who tells the patient when s/he has wandered from present
experience. Simply to instruct the patient to relax and not to censor
as did Freudis pointless; this is precisely what s/he cannot do, because
the way in which the inhibicion process develops is not in awareness (Perls
et al., 1951).
-61-
Perls called Freud's method of free-floating attention "free
dissociation" (Perls, 1969a, p.55) because it encourages the patient to
avoid critical issues in his/her conflict. Unlike awareness work, free
association is not anchored in present processes; indeed, the concentrat-
ion is more likely to be on the patient's memories of his/her past.
Perls regarded such verbalizations of remembered trauma as lies, inventions
of the person to justify his'/her existential position (Perls, 1969b).
Perls emphasized that the individual has a hierarchy of "thousands
of unfinished gestalts" (1973, p.121) which are organized so that the most
important emerges to the surface. The Gestalt therapist therefore does
not have "to dig a la Freud, into the deepest unconscious" (19.73, p. 121),
but rather to become aware of the obvious, what it is the patient is
either doing or not doing.
2.14.6 Interpretation
The usefulness of interpretation in therapy is one of the major
areas of divergence between Freud's and Perls' theories. Perls rejected
the psychoanalytic technique (Freud, 1926a) of properly timed, specific
interpretations, instructing Gestalt therapists: "never, never interpret"
(Perls, 1969a, p.131). This difference is more theoretical than pract-
ical; in the therapy situation, the goal of both approaches is to enhance
awareness (Barlow, 1978b).
Common psychoanalytic definitions of interpretation are varied,
however, most would support Greenson's definition:
To interpret means to make an unconscious psychic phen-
omenon conscious ... to enable the patient to understand
the meaning of a given psychic phenomenon.
(1967, p.309)
-62-
Other writers such as Edelson (1976), Erikson (1964) and Schafer (1976)
view the psychoanalytic process of interpretation as one whereby patient
and therapist join in a common enterprise to explicate various aspects of
and motivations underlying the patient's behaviour. The aim of this
procedure is come to some resolution of conflicts or a reduction of psych-
ological conflict, pain, and symptoms (Nielsen, 1980).
Perls was critical of the role of the interpretation in psychoanalysis,
because of its emphasis on the discovery of "causes" of behaviour (Perls,
1967) and because:
When a psychoanalyst interprets the unconscious for the
patient, he aims at increasing the patient's awareness,
but he diminishes the patient's tendencies to increase
that awareness and the initiative to do so.
(Perls, 1978b, p.57)
Gestalt therapy, Perls claimed, is experiential rather than verbal or
interpretive (Perls, 1973).
Freud (1926a) regarded the patient's remarks and associations as
distortions of, but nonetheless allusions to personal functioning.
These productions consist of memories, associations, dreams and so on.
This material is interpreted by the analyst; Freud warned, however:
You will do this, of course, with an eye to the expect-
ations you have formed as you listened, thanks to your
special knowledge.
(Freud, 1926a, p.129)
Although he advocated interpretation as a valuable and necessary part
of therapy, Freud was not pleased with the connotation of the word: "In-
terpret. A nasty word! I dislike the sound of it; it robs me of all
certainty" (Freud, 1926a, p.219). Interpretations are given in response
-63-
to the patient's productions and not necessarily according to precon-
ceived notions. The analyst must develop a degree of self-discipline,
and should make interpretations only with regard for the patient with
whom s/he"is working, independently of his/her (the analyst's) personal
makeup.
Perls wrote of Freud's approach to interpretation:
... Freud omits to show how interpretations are accepted,
and which resistances prevent the patient from digesting
the mental food.
(Freud, 1947, p.124)
This is one aspect of psychoanalysis that has been largely misunder-
stood and misrepresented by Perls and other Gestalt therapists. The art
of interpretation according to Freud if successful, may require tact and
practice by the therapist. This method:
... exposes the patient to the least possible amount of
compulsion, it never allows of contact being lost with
the actual current situation, it guarantees to a great
extent that no factor in the structure of the neurosis
will be overlooked and that nothing will be introduced
into it by the expectations of the analyst. It is left
to the patient in all essentials to determine the course
of the analysis and the arrangement of the material...
(Freud, 1925b, p.41)
This quotation provides much valuable information as to Freud's approach
to interpretation and significant precursors to Gestalt therapy. The
first significant point is that the patient is never compelled to necess-
arily accept any particular interpretation. In Gestalt therapy the ther-
apist will often offer an explanation or offer an approach to see how it
feels in the patient. The patient can readily reject the notion or else
accept it as a tool to enhance awareness.
-64-
Th e second part of the quotation to note is the Freudian notion of
never allowing contact with, the "actual current situation" to be lost.
Like Perls, Freud constantly referred to the actual situation or posit-
ion that the patient is in at that time. This tends to be one of the
most flagrantly disregarded aspects of Freudian theory, perhaps because
of the trend in English-speaking countries to follow a more "medical"
approach, where the patient is kept at a distance, the recipient of the
therapist's attention.
The third commonality is Freud's warning of the necessity for caut-
ion on the part of the analyst, to avoid introducing into the therapeutic
setting anything that does not come from the patient him/herself. Gest-
alt therapy adopted an identical approach in which the therapist does not
introduce anything, working exclusively with the material that comes from
the therapeutic interaction. Like the psychoanalyst, the Gestalt thera-
pist is there to facilitate awareness and therapeutic results for the pat-
ient, not for self-therapy.
The fourth part of the quotation points out that the patient deter-
mines the course of therapy and the arrangement of material. This view
is stringently adhered to in Gestalt therapy. Perls (1969a) wrote that
the patient must determine the course of therapy and the arrangement of
material. Because needs form into a hierarchy, the most pressing need at
any time is the one that is usually on the surface and the most obvious one
on which to work in therapy.
In the light of these demonstrable similarities between the psycho-
analytic and Gestalt therapy approaches to interpretation as a therapeutic
technique, it is interesting to speculate on why Perls so violently reject-
ed interpretation. One possibility is that Perls believed intellectual
-65-
awareness of a solution to his/her problems as insufficient to effect a
cure for most patients. Alternatively, acceptance of the efficiency of
interpretation may have threatened the internal consistency of Perls'
theory. If such themes as holism, self-support and self-responsibility
are accepted, then interpretations from an outside source can only be re-
garded as obstructions to the attempts of the patient to become genuinely
self-supportive.
It is my opinion, based on extensive reading, training, and conduct-
ing therapeutic sessions, that most Gestalt therapists use some degree of
interpretation in their work. Just as the psychoanalysts have a language
to describe emotional involvement by the patient, i.e., "resistance",
Gestalt therapists refer to "contact". Both emphasize the necessity of
"living" rather than "talking about" in the therapeutic process. However,
in aiming at creating contact and awareness Gestalt therapists are broadly
involved in interpretive work. While this may well be more implicit in
their own particular style than the overt interpretations of the psychoanal-
yst, it is nonetheless interpretation. Drawing attention to incompatible
behaviours and/or language, for example, is a form of interpretation that
many Gestalt therapists use to good effect in facilitating awareness in the
patient. An example of Gestalt interpretation (and one approach to exper-
iment) was given by Polster and Polster:
It is a common admonition that in therapy we do not tell
people how to behave. In gestalt therapy sometimes we
doselectively, and for exploratory purposes .... the
person who seems to be making speeches might be asked to
make one; the person who qualifies everything he says
might be asked to act out any qualifying remarks.
(1973, pp.251-252)
In dreamwork (discussed in section 2.15) Perls regarded all parts of
-66-
the dreams as parts of the self. Dialogue between parts is often used
and the aim is to re-integrate split off, denied, or underdeveloped
parts of the self. It is often the therapist who suggests the dialogue,
or ideftifies the parts of the person that appear to be missing.
Perls (1966a, 1969a, 1973) outlined what he called "Gestalt rules"
which have implicit interpretation evident. These rules are ongoing
interpretations which are recalled by the therapist in order to facilitate
therapeutic procedures.
The Gestalt therapist's stated position is that s/he is non-inter-
pretive, because a person can only be aware of, and in contact with him/
herself. And individual cannot possibly know how it feels to be another
person or experience another's conflicts or dilemmas. To interpret, there-
fore, is to inflict upon the patient a "fantasy" (of the therapist) as to
how or why s/he feels/acts/behaves as s/he does. Even if this fantasy is
correct, it is harmful because it deprives the patient of the experience
of discovering for him/herself how s/he lives and encourages dependence on
the therapist. Gestalt therapy attempts to promote self-support whereas
to interpret is to undermine self-support. Perls summed it up in this way:
We apply enough skillful frustration.so that the patient is
forced to find his own way, discover his own possibil-
ities, his own potential, and discover that what he ex-
pects from the therapist, he can do just as well himself.
(Perls, 1969a, p.40)
It would thus seem that the difference between Freud's and Perls'
opinions of interpretation and its usefulness are more theoretical than
actual. Certainly, Perls himself could sometimes just not resist the
temptation to interpret:
-67-
Perls: You know, I don't like to interpret, but to me,
this is so obvious that I think I will interfere here ... .
(Perls, 1966b, p.211)
2.14.7 Acting out
For Freud, acting out meant the living out of neurotic tendencies.
This he regarded as undesirable in most cases; Perls (1968, p.17) quoted
Freud's dictum: "You should not act out, but remember instead". Perls
interpreted this to mean that patients should maintain sufficient personal
distance from situations to work on the issues involved.
In Gestalt therapy, acting out means more literally to be an actor,
to "try out" behaviours in therapy so that the patient can become more
aware of his/her choices in dealing with conflict situations (Perls
and Clements, 1968). The experimenting with behaviours in fantasy, in the
"safe emergency" of the therapy situation and later in life situations, en-
ables the patient to assess probable consequences of various ways of be-
having (Perls, 1969a).
Although Perls claimed that his approach to acting out high-lighted
awareness, while Freud's stressed remembering, there is one area where
their approaches are similar; that is, the approach taken by Freud to
"mourning labour". Perls freely acknowledged this approach as a major
theoretical innovation. Basically, in mourning labour the person acts out
their grief here and now, reflecting what the dead person still means to
the mourner, not what s/he meant in life:
This process called "mourning labour" is one of the most
ingenious discoveries of Freud .... In order to regain the
possibility of making contact anew, the task of mourning
must be finished. Though the sad event is past, the dead
-68-
is not deadit is still present.
(Perls, 1947, pp.96-97)
Thus, Freud was by no means unaware of the powerful technique of
having a patient "act out" past conflicts in the present; unlike Perls,
however, he seems to have been afraid that most of the behaviours pat-
ients would want to act out would be aggressive, violent, sexual or
otherwise unacceptable. It should be.noted here that even Perls lim-
ited the amount of violent acting out permitted in his workshops, al-
though he often allowed patients to act out aggression against him
punching him, strangling him, etc. For Perls, however, acting out in
the therapy situation was aimed at preventing the patient from performing
unacceptable acts (e.g., rape, murder) in "real" life.
2.15 Dreams and dreamwork
Freud's approach to the interpretation of dreams was a major influ-
ence on Perls' theory. Freud's interest in dreams began when he noticed
towards the end of the nineteenth century, that two people who experience
similar events during the day or are subjected to the same stimulus during
sleep, will weave two entirely different dream stories around them. He
decided that noise and other stimuli perceived whilst sleeping, together
with events of the previous day, are just hooks on which we hang our inner-
most wishes and feelings (Freud, 1901a); we weave around them fantasies which
spring from the depths of the unconscious mind.
In developing psychoanalysis Freud used as part of his technique the
request to the patient to tell him without criticism or censorship whatever
came into his/her mind. He found that patients related, among other things,
-69-
their dreams as though they were the same as their other thoughts.
He felt that:
This was a plain hint that I should assign as much import-
ance to these dreams as to other, intelligible phenomena.
(Freud, 1932b, p.220)
Freud came to the conclusion that there could be no doubt that dreams
were a substitute for rational thought processes and could therefore be
interpreted and translated into the rational level of understanding.
Indeed, Freud came to believe that: "The study of dreams may be consid-
ered the most trustworthy method of investigating deep mental processes"
(Freud, 1920, p.13).
Freud discovered what he believed to be the secret of dreams with a
patient named Irma in 1895i.e., that the motive for the dream was a
wish, and its content was the fulfilment of that wish. He suspected that
the unconscious mind was capable of committing any crime in fantasy in
order to fulfil some hidden wish, some of which could be so horrifying to
the conscious that they must be heavily disguised and distorted before they
"dared" appear, even in a dream.
Freud (1901b) however, suggested that many dreams need no interpretat-
ion at all, since they embody a wish openly. These are mainly short, and
are the type of dreams which are experienced by very young children.
Later (with maturation) they become more complex and increasingly disguised,
until expert interpretation is required to expose the unconscious wishes
underlying them. Freud went on to suggest that although they are not in-
dicative of reduced or fragmentary physical activity, they are still dreams,
and not to be confused with day-dreams or similar fantasy activity.
-70-
Th e disguise or censorship function was thought to serve a dual
purpose. Not only does it allow for the harmless discharge of re-
pressed energy in the forbidden wishes, but also, by concealing the real
nature of the dream, allows the sleep process to be undisturbed. Thus,
the dream acts not only as a safety valve for the fantasized expression
of pent-up emotions, but also as the "guardian of sleep". Sometimes,
however, the disguise fails and the dreamer awakensa nightmare. Freud
later (around 1920) modified his theory to indicate that every dream rep-
resents an attempted wish fulfillment (Hadfield, 1954). Perls (1973)
insisted, however, that Freud's description of the dream as wish fulfill-
ment goes against the very essence of the dream.
Freud's views on the interpretation of dreams underwent a gradual
transition over time. In 1900 Freud discussed the manner in which dreams
could be interpreted (e.g., 1900, 1901a). He later wrote (1913) that
psychoanalysts were able to some .extent to translate and interpret dream
content independently of the dreamer's associations. The symbolic nature
of dreams allowed an interpretation without access to the person's associat-
ions. However, by 1925 Freud had modified his views and wrote:
Dream interpretation ... without reference to the
dreamer's associations would ... remain a piece of
unscientific virtuosity of doubtful value.
(Freud, 1925a, p.128)
This signified the view that the same symbol may have entirely different
implications for different people and that only an individual analysis of
the individual's unique associations could elicit some suggestion as to
the significance of any part of the dream. Freud gradually became convin-
ced that each part of the dream, each psychological event has its.own uniq-
ue origin and context and can only be understood within that framework.
-71-
He added that there are parts of the dream that the patient cannot
readily comprehend and are part of his/her unconscious. The analyst
helps the patient by assisting the patient with ideas and dreamwork so
as to bring to consciousness (awareness) the missing or unconscious el-
ements.
Freud insisted that a patient's associations to any particular dream
were "essential" to find its intepretation (1935, p.8). This was not
only because the association might lead to the discovery of much more
personal symbols, but also because even universal symbols and themes are
likely to have different specific meaning for each particular dreamer.
However, dreams must always be interpreted back to some objective event
in the dreamer's life, although this objective event might well be a fan-
tasy rather than actual experience. Thus, wherever possible, patients
were required to make their own connections with the objective basis of
their dreams, by means of the association process. If -this failed, Freud
(1901a) suggested memory could be regained if the disguise was penetrated.
Perls (1969a) also stressed the importance of individuals* drawing their
own connections between the dream as an existential message from the self
and awareness in the here and now.
Whereas Freud saw the dream as "the royal road to the unsconscious",
Perls (1966b, p.204) saw it as "the royal road to integration", uncovering
conflicts and disturbances on which to work. He saw the dream as:
... an attempt to find a solution to an apparent paradox
... an artistic creation in which two seemingly incompat-
ible strivings are set against one another.
(Perls, 1973, p.60)
-72-
Perls rejected any notion of an unconscious mind, preferring to
think of the personality as a rubber ball, floating in and turning in the
water, so that only one portion is visible at a time (Simkin, 1976).
Thus, Gestalt therapists, unlike Freudians, work with the portion that is
visible in the context of the moment. Instead of trying to trace a symp-
tom back to infantile trauma, the therapist always asks the person what it
is "doing for him" in the here and now.
Perls focussed attention on actual behaviourfacial expressions,
tone of voice, posture, gestures, reactions to other group members and so
onin order to discover "holes" in the personality. These holes have
been caused by the rejection of certain parts of the personality in order
to avoid pain. So the task of the therapist is to concentrate on what
the person is avoiding in his/her present existence, to help him/her act
out painful situations, and re-integrate the alienated parts of the person-
ality into his/her life. In Gestalt therapy, there are two elements in
every dream. First, there is a statement of who you are, and second, there
is often a missing part, upon which we must work to resolve that part (Sim-
kin, 1973).
Perls saw in the dream an added bonus in the form of an existential
message, which tells us exactly where we are in relation to ourselves and
to the world at the present time. It allows the individual the possibility
of reclaiming the lost parts of the personality and becoming whole (Simkin,
1973). Perls reiterated Jung's contention that one cannot live from any-
thing successfully except from "what one is".
Freud looked for the symbolism in every dream, and based his interpre-
tations on this. Perls also works on the basis of symbolism, insofar as
all of the characters, objects and in fact everything in the dream are
-73-
regarded as parts of the dreamer.
Perls proposed that there were two kinds of dreams, "wish fulfill-
ment, in the Freudian sense" and "frustration dreams" or nightmares
(1969a, p.213). Perls concentrated on the latter types of dreams:
These are the most important dreams and here I take a
completely different stand from Freud. Freud saw the
compulsive repetition ... and he concluded that this
was a function of the death instinct. I believe these
repetitive dreams are an attempt to come to a solution,
to come to a closure.
(Perls, 1973, p.186)
Perls therefore, saw that dreams are not necessarily wishful thinking
unless that can be interpreted as meaning the individual is endeavouring
to restore his/her wholeness; rather Perls believed that "nightmares"
are one of the ways a person frustrates him/herself (Perls, 1969a. p.96).
Perls did however, acknowledge one aspect of Freud's ideas on wishful
thinking:
If there is no environment present, which according to the
figure/background function can become reality, we visual-
ize, daydream ... required for our needs ... corresponds
to Freud's term of wishful thinking.
(Perls, 1946, p.10)
Freud discussed the concept of resistance and the forgetting of
dreams. In therapy, when a piece of work has been successfully com-
pleted and a resistance dissolved often a forgotten dream of part there-
of will re-emerge. Freud (1933) found by experience that often the
forgotten part of the dream is the most important part and the part on
which to continue further therapeutic work.
Perls (1969a) similarly had patients imagine what happened in
"forgotten" parts of their dreams. Perls believed that Freud's preferred
-74-
method of analysis (patient on the couch; therapist sitting behind him;
no attention to physical actions) reduced the potential of the therapist.
The Gestalt therapist usually works in a group. This method gives the
whole group the opportunity to observe any facial or bodily expressions
which provide clues to ongoing conflicts and to be aware of "themselves"
in relation to others.
Gestalt techniques differ from Freudian theory in their consideration
of the source, nature and purpose of the dream itself. Whereas Freud con-
sidered the "manifest content" of the dream as being a symbolization of
latent sexual and aggressive conflicts in the personality, in Gestalt ther-
apy, every single part of the dream is seen as a projection of ourselves,
a disowned part. A facilitator can guide the individual along the aware-
ness continuum, whereby s/he plays and experiences the roles of various
characters and objects in the dream, getting deeper and deeper into the
subtleties of the dream and deeper and deeper into the centre of him/her-
self (Perls, 1966a).
Perls acknowledged that the Gestalt approach to dreamwork was based
on Freudian theory. For example, he wrote:
The Freudians handle dreams in precisely this way, by
asking the patient to shuttle between the manifest content
of a dream and its associations.
(Perls, 1973, pp.86-87)
Perls also felt a deep admiration for Freud's theory.of dreams:
The exhaustive function of consciousness is, in essence,
Freud's theory of dreams .... This is very important to notice.
Freud's beautiful distinction between the "manifest" and the
"latent" dream means precisely that the dreaming consciousness
is isolated from both the environment and the organism; the
-75-
"self" that the dreamer is aware of is largely merely the
surface-boundary.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.310)
According to Freud (1933) the therapist can simply follow the
chronological order of events in the dream or else attention can be
directed towards those elements which are most striking. Freud
suggested that it "makes no difference" (1933, p.11) which approach is
used to bring out the main associations in the dream. Perls (1948)
while not in disagreement with this aspect of Freudian theory, suggest-
ed that the most important part of the dream is usually the end, be-
cause the dream is an attempt at a solution to a problem or an unfinish-
ed situation. If the dreamer finds the ending of the dream too disturb-
ing, s/he will wake and avoid an ending. Perls dealt with this situat-
ion by having the person fantasize an ending to the dream (e.g., Madel-
ine's Dream, Perls, 1973, p.188).
Thus, although Perls developed dreamwork in directions which diverg-
ed from Freudian dream analysis, Freud's theory of the interpretation of
dreams almost certainly stimulated his interest in this area and provided
him with basic concepts with which to work.
2.16 Conclusion
It can be seen from the material presented here that Freud had a
profound influence on Fritz Perls. Perls used his knowledge of psycho-
analysis as the basis for Gestalt therapy, making revisions and exten-
sions wherever he perceived inadequacies in Freud's conceptualizations.
Psychoanalysis thus provided Perls with the basic fabric of Gestalt
therapy.
Chapter 3
Neo-Freudian Influences
-76-
3.1 Carl Jung (1875-1961) and Analytical Psychotherapy
3.1.1 Biography and acknowledgement by Perls
Carl Jung was born in Switzerland, the son of a Protestant minister
and grandson of the Dean of the School of Medicine of the University of
Basel, who was also the founder of Basel's first mental hospital.
Jung gained his medical degree in 1902, and worked initially with the
noted French psychiatrist Pierre Janet. From 1900 until 1913 he work-
ed in the University of Zurich, the last eight years of this term as
lecturer in psychology.
Jung was associated with Freud from 1907 until his resignation from
the International Psychoanalytic Society in 1913, after which he founded
his own school in Zurich. Jung travelled extensively throughout the
world carrying out research, and held several professorial positions.
He was also editor of the Central Journal for Psychotherapy and Related
Fields. Jung has long been regarded as a neo-Freudian, although recently
his contribution to transpersonal psychology has been widely acknowledged.
Whitmont and Kauffman (1976) contended that Gestalt therapy devel-
oped "in unawareness of the theoretical concepts of Jung" (p.87). It
is clear, however, that Perls had met Jung and was familiar with his
writings (Perls, 1969b; Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980).
The number.of references Perls made to Jung is contained in appendix III.
3.1.2 Individuation
Jung (1954) regarded individuation as the aim of human development.
It is the process through which an individual becomes psychologically
-77-
complete. He wrote:
Individuation means becoming a single, homogeneous being,
and insofar as "individuality" embraces our innermost,
last, and incomparable uniqueness, it also implies becom-
ing one's own self. We could therefore translate indiv-
iduation as "coming to selfhood" or "self-realization".
(Jung, 1928b, p.171)
Individuation is achieved first by unveiling the persona (the person's
mask: "a compromise between the individual and society as to what a
man should appear to be"Jung, 1928b, p.156), and then by developing
the self. The self becomes the new "midpoint" of the psyche, bringing
about unity and integration of the person:
... the self is our life's goal, for it is the completest
expression of that fateful combination we call individual-
ity . ..
(Jung, 1928b, p.238)
Perls' concept of maturity is closely related to individuation.
Perls (1966a, 1969a) used the term maturity to mean self-support.
Thus, health results from realizing and using one's uniqueness, one's
individuality. Individuality and maturity result from being respons-
ible for the self. Perls wrote: "Every individual ... has only one
inborn goalto actualize itself as it is" (1969a, p.33). Jung's un-
veiling of the persona corresponds to Perls' breaking through layers of
neurosis (Perls, 1969a, 1973).
Thus, Jung stressed the importance of uniqueness and individuality
decades before Perls wrote about these notions. Even Perls' phrase
"What is, is" (1969a, p.133) may have been influenced by Jung's statement:
"as he is an individual, he can only become what he is" (1935a, p.10).
-78-
3.1.3 Body-mind position
Jung believed that the body and mind were one and the same, and,
unlike Freud, elaborated this theme in many places, e.g., "Psyche and
body are not separate entities, but one and the same life" (Jung, 1917,
p.113). Also:
I'm chiefly concerned with the psyche itself, therefore
I'm leaving out body and spirit ... Body and spirit are
to me mere aspects of the reality of the psyche. Psy-
chic experience is the only immediate experience. Body
is as metaphysical as spirit.
(Jung, 1973, p.200)
Similarly, Perls wrote: "body and soul are identical ... (and)
denote two aspects of the same thing" (1947, p.33).
3.1.4 Intellect
Jung used the term "intellect" to describe directed, conscious
thought processes. For Jung, the intellect had a limited role in psy-
chology:
A psychology that satisfies the intellect alone can
never be practical, for the totality of the psyche
can never be grasped by the intellect alone.
(Jung, 1917, p.117)
What is regarded as Perls' anti-intellectualism may have been influenced
by Jung's stance. Perls wrote: "...intellect is the whore of the intell-
igencethe computer, the fitting game" (1969a, p.24). Thus, both Jung and
Perls believed that working with the intellect alone cannot lead to succ-
essful therapy.
-79-
3.1.5 Polarities
Jung believed that the individual gained energy, balance and
rhythm through dialecticism (Haber, 1978). The dialectical process he
regarded as the process of growth and development. Jung wrote:
A being without opposites is completely unthinkable,
as it would be impossible to establish its existence.
(1971, p.26)
And: "Nothing so promotes the growth of consciousness as the inner con-
frontation of opposites" (Jung, 1971, p.345).
According to Jung, aspects of the psyche which the individual has
denied, and which are thus excluded from consciousness, exist as "shad-
ows" in the unconscious (Haber, 1978). Those parts of ourselves we re-
fuse to acknowledge may well be repressed in the shadow. Fantz (1975b)
gave as an example the person, who habitually thinks without feeling, and
casts a shadow in the feeling area. It is only by confronting the shad-
ow that the person can re-integrate him/herself (Fadiman and Frager, 1976).
Jung advocated the use of active imagination in therapy to re-unite opp-
osite poles in the person (Lathrop, 1976).
Perls, like Jung, acknowledged the importance of polarities and dia-
lectics :
The basic philosophy of gestalt therapy is that of nature
differentiation and integration. Differentiation by
itself leads to polarities ... By integrating opposite
traits we make the person whole again.
(Perls, 1965, p.7)
Perls' re-integration of opposite traits corresponds to Jung's "confront-
ing the shadow . Perls used various techniques to reveal shadowed or
-80-
disowned parts of the personality, including exaggeration, experiment
and role reversal. When the two opposing poles were clearly revealed,
Perls would have the person engage in a dialogue between them ("shutt-
ling" from one pole to the other) to achieve re-integration (Perls and
Goodman, 1950; Perls and Clements, 1968; Levitsky and Perls, 1970).
3.1.6 Collective unconscious
In keeping with his holistic view of mankind, Jung regarded psycho-
logical evolution as a parallel to our biological evolutionboth being
important determinants in our life style:
Just as the human body represents a whole museum of org-
ans, each with a long evolutionary period behind it, so
we should expect to find that the mind is organized in a
similar way. It can no more be a product without history
than is the body in which it exists.
(Jung, 1964, p.67)
According to Jung, each individual has a being that has evolved over
the history of mankind, and part of this is included in the collective
unconscious:
The collective unconscious ... is made up of contents
which are formed personally only to a minor degree and"
in essentials not at all, are not individual acquisit-
ions, are essentially the same everywhere, and do not
vary from man to man.
(Jung, 1973, p.408)
Perls in most instances disclaimed the existence of an "unconsc-
ious" as well as a collective unconscious (Perls et al., 1951? Perls,
1966a, 1969a). However, in various articles he did use the term in a
similar way to Jung (Perls, 1946, 1965, 1967). The extract below shows
-81-
a close parallel to Jung's concept of the collective unconscious:
Each generation inherits the fantasies of all pre-
ceding generations, and thus accumulates greater
knowledge and understanding.
(Perls, 1973, p.15)
This is one of the most significant indications of Jung's influence in
Perls' writings.
3.1.7 Neurosis
There are many similarities between Jung's and Perl's conceptual-
izations of neurosis. According to Jung, as long as the conscious is
able to integrate material which emerges from the unconscious and from
the outside world, the individual is healthy, balanced and self-support-
ing. If, however, the person is incapable of integrating this mater-
ial, s/he establishes a neurosis, relinquishing responsibility for whole
regions of normally controlled contents and producing split off fragments
of the person. This "splitting", however, is simply another form of
relinquished control; in neurosis, the unity of the person is at least
potentially preserved, and "split off" parts of the person can be re-
integrated, dispelling the neurosis (Jung, 1961). Thus, the neurotic
is responsible for creating his/her own neurosis; Jung saw in this cre-
ation an attempt by the psyche to force recognition of a growth disturb-
ance.
Perls also regarded neurosis as a growth disturbance, by which the
neurotic immobilizes him/herself against further growth and development
(Perls, 1973). The neurotic "shuts out" threatening parts of him/her-
self, and hence has lost touch or awareness with these parts:
-82-
Many of the neurotic's difficulties are related to his un-
awareness, his blind spots, to the things and relation-
ships he simply does not sense.
(Perls, 1973, p.54)
Perls further described the splitting process mentioned by Jung:
In a neurotic splitting, one part is kept in unaware-
ness, or it is coldly recognized but alienated from
concern, or both parts are carefully isolated from each
other and made to seem irrelevant to each other, avoid-
ing conflict and maintaining the status quo.
(Perls et al., 1951, p;287)
Like Jung, Perls realized that the "lost" parts of the person were not
really cut off forever, but that the person had simply chosen to be un-
aware of their existence. This selective unawareness takes the form
of blocks or fixations, which protect the individual from the environment-
al or unconscious factors which threaten him/her (Perls et al., 1951).
Both Jung and Perls stressed the neurotic's denial of responsibility
for his/her plight. Jung characterized the neurotic as a person who
wallows in self-commiserating memories and behaviours, often blaming some-
one or something in his/her past, and justifying his/her present behav-
iour in terms of past events (Jung, 1929a; Hadfield,1954). Similarly,
Perls defined the neurotic as:"a person who is unable to assume the full
identity and responsibility of mature behaviour" (1967, p.11). For
Perls, the neurotic was a person who would resort to any form of repet-
itive, self-defeating behaviours to avoid self-sufficiency, particularly
blaming other factors for his/her predicament. The neurotic experiences
him/herself as unable to be self-sufficient because s/he has prevented
him/herself from growing and maturing (Perls, 1973).
Jung wrote of the role of society in neurosis:
-83-
... when an individual ... ceases to conform to the canon
of collective ideas, he will very likely find himself not
only in conflict with society, but in disharmony with him-
self ... he will become neurotic.
(Jung, 1951, p.120)
This statement has considerable commonality with one of Perls' early
statements, that the majority of makind has the choice between indiv-
idual or collective neurosis (1947). Perls considered the neurotic
to be one on whom society impinges too heavily (Perls, 1978a), or as
this author sees it, a person who chooses to become burdened by the
demands and expectations of others. Perls (1947) realized that neur-
osis could be a disorganization of the smooth functioning of the pers-
onality within the environment. Thus, there is a striking similarity
between the two theorists; both believed that neurosis occurs when
the rules of society, i.e., collective ideas, conflict with the des-
ired mode of living of the individual.
Lastly, both Jung and Perls saw neurosis as a choice made by the
person in the present, not as a result of past experience or infantile
trauma. Jung wrote:
When the patient comes to us with a neurosis, he does
not bring a past but the whole of his psyche and with
it the fragment of world on which that psyche depends,
and without which it can never be properly understood.
(Jung, 1941, p.95)
For Perls:
... the neurotic is not merely a person who once had a
problem, he is a person who has a continuing problem,
here and now, in the present.
(Perls, 1973, p.63)
-84-
3.1.8 Aim of therapy
Jung outlined his approach to therapy in the following manner:
My aim is to bring about a psychic state in which my
patient begins to experiment with his own nature
a state of fluidity, change, and growth where noth-
ing is eternally fixed and hopelessly petrified.
(Jung, 1931a, p.46)
For Perls, the goal of therapy was maturity (self-support); this was
achieved through re-integrating split off parts of the person, en-
abling the natural process of growth to continue (Perls, 1969a, 1973).
Like Jung, Perls aimed at enabling the client to experiment, to be-
have creatively and spontaneously, first in the therapy situation and
then in the "real" world.
Jung regarded self-realization as a therapeutic goal:
... inasmuch as he is an individual he can only become what
he is and always was. To the extent that "cure" means turn-
ing a sick man into a healthy one, cure is change.
(Jung, 1935a, p.10)
This can be connected with Perls' statement that the individual can
only ever become what s/he is. We can never force change; it must come
as a result, not of trying to change, but rather of simply coming to
realize our own capacities (Perls, 1969a).
Lastly, both Jung and Perls recognized that therapy, like growth, is
an ongoing process. According to Jung, there is no final "cure"; no
change can be permanent, because life itself is always changing (Ford-
ham, 1953). Similarly, Perls wrote:
-85-
... there is not such a thing as total integration.
Integration is never completed; maturation is never
completed. It's an ongoing process for ever and
ever ... There's always something to be integrated;
always something to be learned.
(Perls, 1969a, p.69)
3.1.9 Therapeutic relationship
Jung emphasized that the therapeutic relationship is one of equal-
ity between analyst and analysand. Since the therapy session is a dy-
namic occurrence, not only the client but also the therapist must be
prepared to change as a result of the interaction. Jung stressed the
necessity of regarding and respecting the individuality of the patient.
He described individualized treatment as a decisive step in psychother-
apy (Jung, 1935b). He also wrote:
Since individuality ... is absolutely unique, unpredict-
able, and uninterpretable, in these cases the therapist
must abandon all his preconceptions and techniques and
confine himself to a purely dialectical procedure \..
(Jung, 1935a, pp.7-8)
Thus, Jung believed that:"my reaction is the only thing with which I as
an individual can legitimately confront my patient" (1935a, p.5).
This parallels the Gestalt therapists' contention that all a per-
son can bring is his/her own way of acting and reacting into the ther-
apeutic situation. The therapist does not bring a set of techniques
nor even a set theoretical framework on which to conduct the course of
therapy. Rather, s/he comes into the therapeutic relationship in an
open way. S/he frustrates, encourages, experiments and will employ
almost anything that has the potential to break through layers of neur-
osis and facilitate awareness.
-86-
Like Jung, Gestalt therapists recognize that therapeutic change
occurs for the therapist as well as for the client:
Gestalt theory confronts therapists as directly as
patients with reminders of the values and pleasures
of living that can get pushed aside by our occupat-
ional hazards of overemphasis on work, responsibility,
accomplishment, and study.
(Fagan, 1970, p.103)
Jung (1928a) constantly stressed the view that no counsellor or
therapist, irrespective of wisdom and experience, can ever prescribe
for another what is uniquely fitting for them. He suggested:
Therefore we have to teach them to listen to their
own natures, so that they can understand from with-
in themselves what is happening.
(Jung, 1928a, p.62)
Perls reiterated this approach and encouraged patients to listen
to themselves because: "True listening jis_ understanding" (Perls, 1965,
:
p.6). He had earlier warned that the therapist does not presume to
know more than the patient does him/herself.
3.1.10 Therapeutic approach
Perls may have derived his objections to the use of set techniques
in therapy ("A technique is a gimmick. A gimmick should be used only
in the extreme case"Perls, 1969a, p.l) from Jung, who wrote:
It is a remarkable thing about psychotherapy: you
cannot learn any recipes by heart and then apply
them more or less suitably, but can cure only from
one central point; and that consists in understand-
ing the patient as a psychological whole and approach-
ing him as a human being, leaving aside all theory and
-87-
listening attentively to all he has to say.
(Jung, 1973, p.456)
Each client is an individual, and thus effective treatment must be
individualistic, creative and experimental (Jung, 1924).
Jung stressed the need for experiential therapy, where the client
not only talks about his/her neurosis, but actually does something
about it (Jung, 1931a). He believed that successful therapy required:
... not merely the intellectual recognition of the facts
of the head, but their confirmation by the heart and the
actual release of suppressed emotion.
(Jung, 1929b, p.59)
Perls adopted this view wholeheartedly, insisting that no integration
could ever take place at the verbal level, and that the verbal level
is usually a lie. He wrote:
... the aim in therapy, the growth aim, is to lose more
and more of your "mind" and come more to your senses
... to be in touch with yourself and in touch with the
world ...
(Perls, 1969a, p.53)
3.1.11 Dreams and dreamwork
Perls adopted more of Jungian theory in the development of his
own theory of dreams and dreamwork than he borrowed from Freud, or
indeed from any other theorist. Both Jung and Perls regarded dreams
as an extremely important and useful therapeutic tool. Jung wrote:
... every dream is an organ of information and con-
trol ... dreams are our most effective aid in build-
ing up the personality.
(1931b, p.153)
-88-
He believed that the dream:
... shows the inner truth and reality of the patient as
it really is: not as I conjure it to be, and not as he
would like it to be, but as it is ... I take dreams as
diagnostically valuable facts ... It gives us not only
the aetiology of the neurosis but a prognosis as well-.
(Jung, 1931b, pp.142,143)
I especially prefer to work with dreams. I believe
that in a dream, we have a clear existential message
of what's missing in our lives, what we avoid doing
and living, and we have plenty of material to reassim-
ilate and reown the alienated parts of ourselves.
(Perls, 1969a, p.80)
While Freud regarded dreams as with fulfillments, Jung believed
dreams to be purposive, a guide to life. The dream has a biologic-
al function as a compensator, and thus represents an attempt to re-
solve unsolved problems in the life of the dreamer. Perls (1948)
wrote of the value of dreams, and, like Jung, stated that the dream
always works towards a solution (or resolution). For Perls, dreams
pointed the way to escape avoidances, and to make aware unaware parts
of the individual. In Gestalt therapy, dreams supply the "sign-
posts" for the individual to discover unexplored or denied potentials.
Jung opposed Freud's "disguise" theory of dreams (that dreams rep-
resent the fulfillment of id wishes too dreadful to be acknowledged
even in sleep, which are thus "censored" into seemingly harmlessif
bewilderingsymbols), claiming that it was too elaborate to be plaus-
ible. Instead, Jung would quote from the Talmud, which described the
dream as its own interpretation (Jung, 1963). He regarded the dream
as a natural event, not a device to lead us astray. Thus, to under-
-89-
stand the dreamer's meaning, the therapist must stick as closely as
possible to the dream images (Jung, 1934). In Jungian analysis the
patient is repeatedly focussed on dream images by the therapist's
question: "what does the dream say?" (Jung, 1964, p.29).. Perls
always used this technique of Jung's referring the dreamer back to the
dream itself.
Both Jung and Perls stressed the role df dreams in establishing
psychic equilibrium or centering between opposing poles in the person.
Jung wrote:
... the general function of dreams is to try to restore
our psychological balance by producing dream material
that re-establishes ... the total psychic equilibrium.
(Jung, 1964, p.50)
Perls adopted this view, and described the dream as:
... an attempt to find a solution to an apparent para-
dox ... an artistic creation in which two seemingly in-
compatible strivings are set against one another.
(Perls, 1973, p.60)
Jung (1953) suggested that interpretation of dreams proceed at
two levels. First, there is the objective level, where dream images
are equated with real objects. Second, there is the subjective
level, which is synthetic, and which removes from dream images their
associations with external causes and events, regarding them as parts
of the self, which may be re-integrated with the self. Additionally,
every dream contains a bonus, "an important practical hint which shows
the patient what the unconscious is aiming at" (Jung, 1931a, p.42).
-90-
Perls adopted Jung's subjective level of interpretation, re-
garding every image in the dream, whether human, animal, vegetable
or mineral, as an alienated portion of the self, projected onto that
image by the dreamer. Perls also believed that every dream is an
existential message (1969a).
Jung emphasized that:
... the whole dreamwork is essentially subjective and
a dream is a theatre in which the dreamer himself is
the scene, the player, the prompter, the producer, the
author, the public and the critic ...
(Jung, 1953, p.66)
Perls extended this theatrical metaphor. In Gestalt therapy, the
dreamer is asked to re-enact the part of each dream experience in
turn, and to re-experience the events of the dream from the stand-
point of the different dream elements (e.g., Perls 1969a, 1973).
Dialogues are conducted between the various images, often revealing
polarities (e.g., topdog/underdog) on which the person then works
(see section 3.1.5).
Both Jung and Perls require the person to interpret his/her own
dreams. Jung wrote:
... I get them to work out the interpretation as well.
In this way the patient learns how to deal correctly
with his unconscious without the doctor's help.
(Jung, 1931b, p.150)
Similarly, Perls' technique of having the client play all the parts in
the dream results in clients' working out their own interpretations, re-
gaining the capacity to resolve future problems in the process (Perls,
-91-
1965, 1969a, 1973).
Thus, Jung influenced Perls' theories of the meaning, function
and interpretation of dreams.
3.1.12 Conclusion
There are strong similarities between Jung's and Perls' theories
in the following areas:
1. Individuation/maturation
2. Unity of body and mind
3. De-emphasis of intellect
4. Polarities and centering
5. Collective unconscious
6. Fragmentation of the person in neurosis
7. Denial of self-responsibility in neurosis
8. Role of society in neurosis
9. Present-centered nature of neurosis
10. Re-integration and self-actualization as therapeutic goals
11. Ongoing nature of therapy
12. Equality in therapist/client relationship
13. Rejection of set techniques of therapy
14. Emphasis on experiential therapy
15. Preference for work with dreams
16. Regard for dream elements as parts of the person, rather than
disguised wish fulfillments
17. View of the dream as an existential message
It can thus be seen that Jung was one of the primary influences on
Perls, especially in the areas of dreamwork and therapeutic approach.
-92-
3.2 Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) and Character Analysis
3.2.1 Biography and acknowledgement
William Reich, physician and psychotherapist, was born in Austria
in 1897. Like Perls, he served in the First World War. In 1922,
when he had completed his medical degree, he became a member of the
psychoanalytic "inner circle" in Vienna. He was Freud's first clinic-
al assistant, and eventually became Vice-Director of Freud's psychoan-
alytic clinic (Rycroft, 1971).
Reich ended his association with Freud after a series of theoretic-
al disagreements between the two, which culminated when Freud refused to
accept Reich as an analysand.
Perls met Reich some time around 1930. At this time Perls had term-
inated his eighteen-month analysis with Harnick; although he was newly
married, he was filled with despair. Perls became a patient of Karen Hor-
ney, but her opinion was: "The only analyst that I think could get through
to you would be Wilhelm Reich" (quoted by Perls, 1969b, p.49).
Thus began what Perls described as a pilgrimage to Reich's couch.
Perls found Reich vital and alive, and willing to discuss any situation.
Reich's enthusiasm and energy contrasted favourably with Harnick's app-
roach of "passive analysis", of which Perls wrote:
... I went for eighteen months, five times a week, to
lie on his couch without being analyzed ... The most
he would speak was about one sentence per week.
(Perls, 1969b, p.48)
-93-
Perls lost contact with Reich in 1933, when both men left Germany
following Hitler's rise to powerPerls went to Amsterdam, then South
Africa, and Reich went to Norway. The two men next met in Marienbad
at the 1936 International Psychoanalytic Congress, of which Perls wrote:
"He sat apart from us and hardly recognized me" (Perls, 1969b, pp.49-
50). Their last meeting was ten years later, when they had both migrat-
ed to the U.S.A. By this time, Reich had considerably expanded and
varied his work, and little of his theory remained of interest to Perls.
Meeting Reich for the last time was a personal disappointment:
He was blown up like an immense bullfrog ... His voice
boomed at me pompously, asking me incredulously: "You
have not heard of my discovery, the orgone?"
(Perls, 1969b, p.50)
Perls concluded that the "enfant terrible" who had turned out to be a
genius had eclipsed himself as a."mad scientist" (Perls, 1969b).
There is no doubt, however, that Reich's influence was deeply import-
ant, both for Perls personally and for the formulation of Gestalt therapy.
Perls seldom made favourable acknowledgements of other theorists, and on
this criterion alone Reich's importance can be seen as powerful and long-
lasting.
Perls referred to Reich in his works more than to any other therapist
or theoretician with the exception of Freud. The pattern of this acknow-
, . Aiv TTT TTV>-i*rTi Hpfails the number of citings
ledgement is outlined in appendix III which aetaxxs
of all individuals in Perls' publications.
The association between Perls and Reich may not necessarily have in-
fluenced Perls to depart from psychoanalysis, but some of Reich s early
notions are strongly represented in Gestalt therapy.
-94-
3.2.2 Character and body armor
Perls mainly incorporated Reich's early formulations which were
based on psychoanalytic theory. Reich's concepts of character and
character armor were developed from Freud's notion that the ego defends
itself against instinctual forces. Reich was initially preoccupied
with psychological aspects of the individual, but he gradually became
aware of the role of specific patterns of muscular armoring, and adopt-
ed a more holistic stance. Thus, he emphasized loosening and dissolv-
ing of muscular armor, while at the same time examining psychological
material.
Reich's most significant contribution to psychotherapy was his em-
phasis on the importance of the body. Freud did not discount the body
and body symbolism, but he did not develop the significance of the role
of the body in the therapy situation. It remained for Reich to clarify
the notions of muscular armor and of resistances as total organismic
functions (Perls, 1969b). In therapy, the voice, posture, gestures and
"psychosomatic language" are at least as important as verbal communicat-
ion (Perls, 1969a).
While Freud did discuss the concept of character (Freud, 1908c), Reich
expanded on the notion and was the first analyst to treat patients by in-
terpreting the nature and function of their character, rather than relying
solely on the analysis of their symptoms. Character for Reich:
... involves a profound and chronic alteration in the ego
which serves the person as a sort of armor against those
stimuli, external or internal, that he has come to consid-
er dangerous.
(Munroe, 1955, p.264)
-95-
According to Reich, an individual's character included a consistent
habitual pattern of defences. Perls adopted this approach:
Once you have a character, you have developed a rigid
system. Your behaviour becomes petrified, predictable,
and you lose your ability to cope freely ... You are pre-
determined just to cope with events in one way, namely,
as your character prescribes it to be.
(Perls, 1969a, -p.7)
Character armor for Reich included the total of all repressing,
defensive forces associated with the ego. It represented the residual
rigidity from prior conflicts (Reich, 1948). It has been proposed that
Reich's character armor is tantamount to a chronic state of retroflect-
ion, where impulses to action are blocked or negated through opposing
sensorimotor tension (Enright, 1970).
In keeping with his psychoanalytic training, Reich initially dis-
cussed the concepts of habitual attitudes, consistent patterns of re-
sponses and character in psychological terms, before progressing to the
associated patterns of muscular armoring.
The concept of armor is well represented in the Gestalt therapy
literature. There are numerous references to it in most of Perls
major works from 1947 through to 1973. Perls (1969b) credited Reich
with giving Freud's resistance notion a body, which he designated arm-
or. Perls considered muscular armor Reich's most important contribut-
ion:
His first discovery, the muscular armor, was an import-
ant step beyond Freud. It brought the abstract notion
of resistance down to earth,
(Perls, 1969b, p.50)
-96-
Perls also credited Reich with directing his attention to the whole
area of body work and body awareness (Perls, 1947). This later be-
came an integral part of the Gestalt therapy technique of the contin-
uum of awareness, whereby the person uses body awareness and involve-
ment to facilitate organismic completion of emotions (Perls, 1966a,
1969a).
Many Gestalt therapists have written accounts of Perls' acquis-
ition of the concepts of character and body armor from Reichian theory,
including Polster and Polster (1973), Enright (1975a) Fagan (1976), Smith
(1976a, 1978) and Van De Riet et al. (1980). It has been well estab-
lished, by both Perls and other Gestalt therapists that these concepts
were derived from Reich's work.
3.2.3 Defences and blocks
In his chapter on "Psychic contact and vegetative current" Reich
(1933) referred to various types of blocks. In a later chapter "the
schizophrenic split" Reich's conception of blocks was more clearly out-
lined. Both Reich and Perls regarded blocks as impedances to the nat-
ural flow of energy. In an example of a schizophrenic split, Reich
wrote: "now the blocking occurs between excitation and perception"
(Reich, 1945, p.440).
Later in the same work, Reich diagrammatically showed an "affect
block" where the compulsive neurotic has blocked the bio-energy by arm-
oring, leaving a feeling of deadness,. a term used by Perls to describe
part of the neurotic's state.
-97-
Perls in most of his works referred to blocks of various types,
although it is significant that the term did not appear in Ego, Hunger
and Aggression. In Perls et al. (1951, p.73) there is ample evidence
of the use of the concept of blocks:
Situations in which you encounter blocks ... are con-
flict-situationsand, furthermore, the conflict is
between one part of your personality and another.
Reich regarded therapy as the facilitation of the free flow of en-
ergy throughout the body by loosening and dissolving blocks of muscular
tensions and armoring. Blocks were seen by Reich in his earlier writ-
ings as distorting and impeding natural feeling, and in his later works
as inhibiting sexual feeling and orgastic potency. It is the former
position which is most compatible with Gestalt therapy.
According to Reich, armor is the major obstacle to the growth of an
individual. He wrote:
The armored individual is incapable of dissolving his
armor. He is also incapable of expressing the prim-
itive biological emotions ... He is incapable of lett-
ing out an angry yell or convincingly imitating a fist
hitting the couch in anger.
(Reich, 1949, p.366)
Chronic tensions serve to block the free flow of energy and emot-
ions in the individual. According to Reich, emotions that are blocked
in this way are never fully expressed, rather they are dammed up in the
individual, and demand energy. Only by fully experiencing a "blocked
emotion" can the individual be free and more fully experience his/her
potential. Similarly, Perls wrote:
-98-
Imbalances of the personality are remedied ... (and)
re-establishment of harmony and integration comes
about through unblocking what is blocked.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.135)
Laura Perls (interviewed by Rosenfeld, 1978a) acknowledged
Reich's influence on the conceptualization of blocks in Gestalt ther-
apy, (referring her readers to Reich's book Character Analysis.)
3.2.4 Psychosomatics
Both Reich and Perls worked with the notion of psychosomatics, al-
though it was a paradoxical one for them because of their holistic be-
lief in the unity of "mind" and "body" (Perls et al., 1951; Perls, 1969b).
The term "psychosomatic", however, implies that: "psyche and soma.exist
separately and come together in certain instances" (Perls, 1969b, p.168).
Perls believed that Reich's most important contribution was his em-
phasis on a holistic approach to the person, and wrote: "Both in theory-
and in therapy, Wilhelm Reich has completely established psychosomatic
unity" (Perls et al., 1951, p.448). After working for many years with
character and body armor, Reich concluded:
The character armor now showed itself to be function-
ally identical with muscular hypertension, the muscul-
ar armor.
(Reich, 1948, p.211)
Reich thus viewed the body and mind as one unit. He moved from ortho-
dox language-based psychoanalysis to analysis of both physical and psy-
chological aspects of character armor.
-99-
Similarly, Perls (1969a, p.6) argued that we do not have a body,
but rather: "we are a body, we are somebody".
Perls openly acknowledged his debt to Reich in the area of psycho-
somatics, although he argued that other processes are involved in recov-
ery and health:
... we are deeply indebted to Reich ... Reich's idea of
the motoric armor is doubtless the most important con-
tribution to psychosomatic medicine since Freud ...
though we find that in the recovery of the self there is
much more involved than the mere dissolving of the char-
acter armor.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.17)
Frederick Perls.was.an .analysand for "a couple of years" with Reich
(Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980). He had been referred to
Reich by his previous analyst, Karen Horney. It was thus no accident
that Perls and Reich worked together, and that Perls was deeply influenc-
ed in both his style as a therapist and his theoretical approach to ther-
apy (Perls et al., 1951).
For Reich, the goal df therapy was the dissolution of both psycho-
logical and physical armor. Especially in his later work, Reich saw
sexual release as the most important concomitant of successful therapy,
with the individual becoming freer and capable of experiencing a satis-
fying and absorbing orgasm.
Perls regarded integration and awareness as therapeutic, goals, but
was less exclusively concerned with sexual expression. He saw the healthy
person as one in whom blocks had been dissolved, and whose attention could
-100-
freely develop awareness of his/her needs and environmental possibilit-
ies (Perls, 1969a). . '
Both Reich and Perls worked in the here and now, regarding past ev-
ents as having importance only as they affect the person in the present.
Reich wrote:
... a childhood experience is capable of having an effect
from the past only insofar as it is anchored in a rigid
armor which continues to operate in the present.
(1945, p.384)
Perls' concept of "grooving" is similar:
In Gestalt therapy we call it a grooving process. This
means there is an after-image that links up the past and
the acquisition of expei-ience. And this grooving always
provides one part of the Gestalt: the background ...
(Perls, 1975, p.100)
Both Reich and Perls stressed the importance of body condition as
an indicator of psychological blocks. Reich viewed the therapy pro-
cess as aimed at dissolving blocks of muscular armoring and dealing an-
alytically with the psychological material released. He thus conclud-
ed that psychological and physical armor were essentially the same
emotions, for example, may be bound up in habitual behaviours.
Reich developed strategies to make clients aware of habitual behav-
ioural characteristicssometimes he would imitate gestures or manner-
isms; at other times, he would encourage the client to repeat or exagg-
erate various behaviours. All of these strategies were used by Perls,
who had learned from Reich the therapeutic importance of the client's
behaviours, e.g., manner, look, language, countenance, dress, handshake
(Reich, 1945).
-101-
Reich suggested that character resistance is revealed in the "how"
of the patient's mode of presentation of self or uniqueness. Thus, he
examined the client's total communications, rather than confining himself
to verbalizations. Indeed, Reich believed that language was often used
as a defence, rather than as a genuine form of communication (Reich, 1945).
Perls (1969a) wrote that Gestalt therapy walks on two legs, "now and
how". The Gestalt therapist focusses, like the Reichian; on voice qual-
ity, postures, gestures and body language. Perls goes so far as to sugg-
est that in therapy the verbal presentation is usually a lie, as pathology
produces distortion both of word meaning (incorrect vocabulary) and of
grammar (incorrect syntax) (Perls, 1969a).
Thus, Reich's innovative approach to therapy was a major departure
from psychoanalysis, with its emphasis on the verbal. As Naranjo (1970),
a prominent Gestalt therapist and theorist , wrote:
Wilhelm Reich's shift toward the present was the outcome
of his shift of interest from words to action ... There
can be no better way of doing so than by observing ...
conduct in the ongoing situation (p.52).
The shift in emphasis from words to action in therapy is one of the great-
est distinguishing features between Gestalt and. other therapeutic approach-
es.
Reich and Perls both attached considerable importance to the notion
of resistance in therapy. Reich wrote:
... every resistance has a historical meaning (an origin)
and a contemporary relevance. The impasse can be penetrat-
ed by first divining the contemporary meaning and purpose of
the resistance from the contemporary situation ...
(Reich, 1945, p.30)
-102-
Reich's approach to therapy centered around the skill of the ther-
apist to direct the course of therapy during those phases when the cli-
ent resists. The therapist interprets what the client is resisting,
then observes how the resistance is maintained, and what is being re-
sisted. For Reich, the term "interpretation" is used in a genetic
sense. Reich constantly drew the attention of the client to his/her
"character resistance" until that resistance was broken through. He
argued:
... I have learned from experience that the therapeutic
effect of analytic communications is lost as long as
there are unresolved resistances.
(Reich, 1945, p.30)
Perls outlined his approach to resistance in many places, for instance:
Every attempt at integrating is bound to bring to the
foreground some kind of resistance, and it is this bit
of resistance I am after and not the content of the
"unconscious". Every bit of re-sistance that is chang-
ed into personality as-sistance is a double gain as it
sets free the jailer and the jailed.
(Perls, 1948, p.55)
It is significant to note that Perls' original interest in psych-
ology was in the area of resistance. The paper he presented at the
Marienbad Psychoanalytic Congress held in Czechoslovakia in 1936 was
titled "Oral Resistances" (Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980).
As early as 1933, Reich had diverged from "classical" psychoanaly-
sis in emphasizing the importance of analysis of the personality as a
whole, rather than analysis of symptoms (Reich, 1945).
He also rejected the notion of fixed rules and procedures for ther-
a
PY> a position adopted by Perls. Reich, however, continued to use
-103-
interpretation as a therapeutic tool, with the proviso that:
... interpretation must be systematic and must be
carried out in keeping with the individual struct-
ure of the neurosis.
(Reich, 1945, p.38)
Perls took this notion even further, rejecting interpretation by
the therapist per se, on the grounds that the person knows more about
him/herself than any therapist, however skilled, can ever learn. There-
fore, the role of the therapist is not to make interpretations, but to
facilitate the person in making his own assessment of the significance
particular feelings, actions, or images have for him/her (Perls, 1969a).
Smith (1976a) wrote of the influence Reich had on Perls' style as
a therapist, arguing that Perls' confrontive and often frustrative app-
roach may have had its origins in Reich's work. As mentioned above,
Reich constantly attacked the client's resistances.
Perls certainly admired Reich's early approach to therapy:
Reich was vital, alive, rebellious. He was eager to
discuss any situation, especially political and sexual
ones, yet of course he still analyzed and played the
usual genetic tracing games.
(Perls, 1969b, p.49)
It may well be that Perls acquired some of his personal style:
"troublemaking, roughish, disruptive, impolite, demanding, a 'dirty old
man' " (Smith, 1976a, p.9)from Reich too.
-104-
3.2.6 Neurosis
Both Reich and Perls viewed neurosis as conflict between the indiv-
idual and society. In 1933, Reich wrote:
Originally, the neurosis was said to result from the
conflict between instinct and the outer world.
(Reich, 1945, p.232)
Similarly, Perls (1965) argued that neurosis occurs when the indiv-
idual denies his/her own needs, and lives according to the demands of ex-
ternal entities. Also:
All neurotic disturbances arise from the individual's
inability to find and maintain a proper balance bet-
ween himself and the rest of the world ... The neurot-
ic is a man on whom society impinges too heavily.
(Perls, 1973, p.31)
Each differentiated between neurotic character traits and neurotic
symptoms: _,
... an insight into the sickness is indicative of a
neurotic symptom, whereas lack of insight points to
a neurotic character trait.
(Reich, 1945, p.46)
He claimed that only when a neurotic character trait becomes patholog-
ical do the symptoms become apparent somatically. These symptoms are
perceived as being alien to the personality, and so engender the feeling
of being "ill" (Reich, 1945).
Perls did not make the distinction between neurotic character traits
and neurotic symptoms, but he did refer to the neurotic's perception of
his/her symptoms as alien. One of the major premises of Gestalt therapy
-105-
is that accepting responsibility for our symptoms, recognizing how we
produce our own illness, is curative, and results in growth and inte-
gration (Perls, 1969a). The similarity between Reich's and Perls'
positions is apparent:
We have ample clinical experience to show that the bound-
ary which the patient draws between health, and the out-
break of sickness, always vanishes in the analysis.
(Reich, 1945, p.46)
Perls described neurotic behaviours in terms of certain "charact-
ers" or sub-structures from which they are formed (Perls et al., 1951).
These "characters" represent creative boundary adjustments within the
distorted field of the neurotic person.
In addition to the "characters" of neurosis, Perls described what
he termed the "levels" or "layers" of neurosis (Perls, 1966a, 1969a,
1969b). He described these levels in various ways but most often as
cliches, roles and games, impasse, implosion and explosion. These
levels represent increasing levels of contact.
The closest parallel between Reich's and Perls' formulations of
neurosis is that between Reich's phase of breakdown of secondary narciss-
ism and Perls' progression through impasse, implosion and explosion (Smith,
1976a; Barlow, 1978b). Reich defined secondary narcissism as that energy
which is bound up in the conflict between inhibited primary impulses and
the inhibiting character armor (Smith, 1976a). When this energy is
freed through'
-
"successful" therapy, the patient is plunged into a mass of
impulses and emotions for which s/he has no control.
The concept of secondary narcissism is thus similar to Perls' layer
of implosion, where: "the person is paralyzed by opposing forces; he is
-106-
trying to pull himself in, hold himself safely together" (Smith, 1976a,
p.10); and the breakdown of secondary narcissism corresponds to Perls'
explosion, where emotions are genuinely experienced and expressed:
In both cases the essence is the dissolution of organ-
ismic (holistic) core defences in order to emerge, after
a "walk through hell", with an authentic (organismically
appropriate) behaviour.
(Smith, 1976a, p.10)
Perls, however, went beyond Reich in refusing to restrict the explosion
to sexual orgasm and potency, allowing the concept to refer to the ex-
pression of any authentic emotion; he named four kinds of explosions;
anger, joy, grief and orgasm (Perls, 1966a).
Smith (1976a) and Cohn (1970), referring to the impasse phenomenon,
were clear in their admiration of Perls' approach. For instance, Cohn
(1970, p.137) wrote:
It is the theory of this impasse phenomenon which I regard
as Perls' unique and most important contribution to psycho-
therapeutic practice.
This section has shown, however, that Perls' formulation of the
impasse-implosion-explosion phenomenon was strongly influenced by Reich's
prior work.
3.2.7 Conclusion
Reich's theory was thus of fundamental importance to the development
of Gestalt therapy. Perls adopted the following notions from Reich:
1. The concept of "armor" as the means by which the person
defends his/her body and character from instinctual forces
-107-
and external threatsarmor is thus the mechanism of
resistance
Rejection of "character" as a rigid, stereotyped collection
of behaviours and responses
"Blocks" as means by which the person prevents the natural
flow of his/her energy; analogous to unclosed Gestalten
Belief in unity of mind and body"psychosomatics"
Present centered therapy
Importance of all behaviours of the client in therapy, but
especially actions; de-emphasis of verbalization.
Concentration on resistances in therapy
Energetic, vital, confronting therapeutic style
Conflict between individual and society in neurosis
Impasse-implosion-explosion progression in successful therapy.
-108-
3.3 Karen Horney (1885-1952)
Karen Horney was born in Hamburg, Germany in 1885. She received
her medical degree from the University of Berlin in 1913 and later
studied and taught at the Berlin Institute of Psychoanalysis from 1920
until 1932, when she emigrated to the U.S.A. to take up an appointment
with the Chicago Institute of Psychoanalysis. After holding various
positions in psychoanalytic institutes in the U.S.A., she founded the
American Institute for Psychoanalysis in New York and served as its
Dean from 1941 until her death in 1952.
Horney was Perls' first analyst, in Berlin in the early 1920's.
In 1926 Perls went through a period of intense personal upheaval, and
at Horney's suggestion ended his analysis with her and left Berlin for
Frankfurt. In Frankfurt, Perls was analyzed first by Clare Happel, a
pupil of Horney's, and then by Harnik. The latter analysis was most
unsuccessful, and in another traumatic period in 1930 Perls returned to
Horney. This time she referred him to Wilhelm Reich, and was thus
instrumental in introducing Perls to one of the most influential people
in his early development (Perls, 1969b).
During the turbulent years from 1920 until 1930, Perls apparently
felt Horney was the one person he could completely trust; he later stat-
ed: "from Horney, (I got) human involvement without terminology"
(1969b, p.39). Horney was one of the theorists to whom Perls referred
most favourably, even using one of her examples (Perls, 1947, p.225).
-109-
3.3.2 Here and now
Horney approached therapy by specifically examining the present
moment (Munroe, 1955). She was one of the first psychoanalysts to
recognize the importance of the individual in therapy attending to
and reporting his/her feelings as they arise, as well as his/her
thoughts. In keeping with her psychoanalytic background, Horney was
interested in the history of the person, but her main concern was how
past events affected the individual in the present. . Naranjo wrote
of Horney's theory: "In her view, emotional disturbances that origin-
ated in the past are sustained now by a false identity" (1970. p.52).
Gestalt therapy also takes place in the present moment. Perls
(1966a) set out an equation where now is the equivalent of experience,
awareness and reality. For Perls, to stray from the present distracts
from the living quality of reality (Perls, 1969a). Like Horney, Perls
regarded past events as important only insofar as they occupy present
processes:
If therapy is successful the patient will inevitably have
taken care of the tag ends of his past problems, because
these tag ends are bound to cause trouble in the present
... But these tag ends of the past are also current prob-
lems which inhibit the patient's participation in the
present.
(Perls, 1973, pp.63-64)
3.3.3 Neurosis
The major concern of all Horney's works is the etiology of neur-
osis. Perls' familiarity with Horney's theory and practice in deal-
ing with neurosis is reflected in the literature of Gestalt therapy.
-110-
Horney (1939) defined neurosis as a peculiar kind of struggle for
life under difficult conditions and described it as:
... a process that grows by its own momentum, that with
a ruthless logic of its own envelops more and more areas
of personality.
1
(Horney, 1950, p.333)
Perls elaborated on this growth in identical terms when he re-
counted how neuroses take over the whole person, detracting from the
available energy and vitality, and weighing down the individual (Perls,
1969a, 1969b, 1973).
In her book The Neurotic Personality of Our Time (1937) Horney fo-
cussed on the role of the cultural milieu in neurosis. She described
the neurotic as an individual who retreats into living in his/her imag-
ination when s/he experiences intolerable internal pressure as a result
of conflict with the environment or outside world (Horney, 1946a).
Similarly, Gestalt therapists regard the neurotic process as be-
ginning when the needs of the individual conflict with those of the so-
ciety in which s/he must live. Neurosis occurs when the individual de-
nies his/her own needs and lives according to the demands of others
(Perls, 1965, 1969a). Perls (1973) also wrote:
inability to find and maintain a proper balance between
himself and the rest of the world .". . The neurotic is a
man on whom society impinges too heavily (p.31).
Horney also identified a basic conflict in neurosis, wherein the
neurotic is torn between "moving-toward", "moving-against" and "mov-
ing-away-from" people (1946b, p.19). It is not claimed that Horney's
concepts and Perls' classification of neurotic characters are analagous;
-111-
rather, it is clear that Perls used Horney's approach to clarify his
own ideas. He wrote: "Karen Horney's ideas about 'moving-toward' and
'moving-away' types have integrative value" (Perls, 1948, p.48). In
"Psychiatry in a new key" (1978b), Perls used Horney's terminology when
he wrot:e that Gestalt therapists interrupt: "not only the 'moving ag-
ainst
1
but likewise the 'towards' and 'away' tendencies" (p.57).
Both Horney and Perls regarded the neurotic as being split by the
inner conflicts s/he experiences. For instance, Horney (1946b, p.18)
wrote:
Because of his fear of being split apart on the one hand
and the necessity to function as a unity on the other,
the neurotic makes desperate attempts at solution.
Perls (1959) described the neurotic as being split
v
not only internally,
but also between self and others, and even between self and the rest of
the world.
Horney (1950) recognized that neurotic splitting, although destruct-
ive, was the "best" survival option available to the neurotic:
Although psychic fragmentation is essentially a dis-
integrating process, its function is to preserve the
status quo, to protect the neurotic equilibrium from
collapsing (p.180).
Perls adopted this very approach, stressing that neurotic behav-
iours represent the most favourable adjustment available to the person,
given his/her existential confusion (1969a, 1973).
One of the most striking parallels between Horney's and Perls' app-
roaches to neurosis is in their conception of the neurotic's inability
to make objective assessments of his/her own behaviour and of the situ-
ations in which s/he finds him/herself. Horney wrote:
-112-
The discrepancy between a neurotic's actual behaviour
and his idealized picture of himself can be so blatant
that one wonders how he himself can help seeing it.
(Horney, 1946b, p.132)
Perls used this notion in a definition of the neurotic: "The neurotic
is a person who does not see the obvious" (1969a, p.41), and wrote
that:
Many of the neurotic's difficulties are related to his
unawareness, his blind spots, to the things and relat-
ionships he simply does not sense.
(Perls, 1973, p.54)
In an article entitled "Maturity and the individual" (1947), Hor-
ney suggested that the neurotic blames his/her difficulties on others
his/her parents, society, fate or his/her unconscious. Perls also
held this opinion, stating that the neurotic disclaims responsibility
for his/her problems by projecting blame onto others: "rather than
taking responsibility for their own expectations, all they do is play
the blaming game" (Perls, 1969a, p.43).
Lastly, Perls credited Horney with presenting an excellent example
of the neurotic character, retroflexion:
A very interesting example of retroflection, which
sheds light on the inferiority complex, is given
by Karen Horney in The Neurotic Personality of
Our Time.
(Perls, 1947, p.225)
For Horney and Perls, successful therapy results in the develop-
ment of awareness and spontaneity, and in the re-integration of the
-113-
neurotic's "split" being. Of Horney's influence- on psychotherapy,
Rubins (1978) wrote:
Her insistence on the need to experience emotionally
all on-going feelings, that is, on emotional instead
of only intellectual awareness, has appeared in the
so-called experiential schools of psychology. These
include ... the Gestalt-therapy of Fritz Perls (p.316).
Horney (1946a) suggested that the road of analytic therapy leads
to reorientation through self-knowledge. She wrote that the analyst
helps the patient to become aware of all of the forces operating in
him/her, both obstructive or constructive. This approach has been
used by Perls and other Gestalt therapists (e.g., Perls, 1969a; Sim-
kin, 1973). Horney focussed particularly on the inadequacy of mere
intellectual awareness:
Why then is it important that the patient not only
thinks about the forces in himself but feels them?
Because the mere intellectual realization is
no realization at all ...
(Horney, 1950, p.343)
Perls adopted this position fully and unequivocally stated that
verbal acknowledgement is by itself but one small step taken by the
neurotic. To be effective, therapy must go beyond verbalization
and intellectualization, and reach the whole person (Perls et
al., 1951; Perls, 1969a, 1969b, 1973).
Horney also outlined her goals in therapy with words such as spon-
taneity and centering, writing that in therapy she aimed:
To restore the individual to himself, to help him regain
his spontaneity and find the centre of gravity in himself.
(Horney, 1939, p.11)
-114-
Similarly, Perls aimed to have the person find his/her center, and fill
in the holes s/he has developed in his/her personality (Perls, 1969a,
1973).
Perls' emphasis on integration may have been influenced by Homey,
who saw re-integration as a goal of therapy. Of the neurotic she wrote:
Despite his early attempts at solving his conflicts with
others, the individual is still divided and needs a firm-
er and more comprehensive integration.
(Horney, 1950, p.20)
Perls, in a like manner, regarded the neurotic individual as being
divided and wrote of the goals of therapy:
... the criterion of a successful treatment is: the
achievement of that amount of integration which fac-
ilitates its own development.
(Perls, 1948, pp.52-53)
Both Horney and Perls warned that the goals of therapy are goals
to be strived for, to chase and to satisfy to the greatest degree poss-
ible (Horney, 1946a; Perls, 1966a). Perls (1969a, p.69) wrote:
Integration is never completed; maturation is never
completed. It's an ongoing process forever and ever.
From the material presented above, it can be seen that both Horney
and Perls aimed at the growth of awareness, both of the self and of the
real possibilities of the environment. Additionally, both theorists
strove to develop feelings and authentic -relationships with others." .
-115-
3.3.5 Holism
Although Horney did not use the specific term "holism", it is
possible.that her emphasis on the importance of unity influenced Perls'
formulation of a holistic view of mankind. Horney wrote that:
"Every single factor must be seen in the context of the whole structure"
(in Sahakian, 1976, p.156).- In his introduction to Horney (1967), Kelman
described her theory:
... (her) growth-oriented, life affirming, freedom-seeking
philosophy was already evident ... Thus by 1917 Karen Hor-
ney had defined her holistic concept of blockage in contrast
to Freud's mechanistic notion of resistance.
(in Horney, 1967, p.13)
3.3.6 Self-actualization
In some ways, Horney's approach can be classified as human-
istic in orientation. For instance, in 1950 she referred to her psy-
chotherapy of character analysis as calling for self-actualization, (a
term introduced by Goldstein as early as 1926) to replace the neurotic's
self-idealization. Unlike numerous other psychoanalysts, Horney rec-
ommended self-analysis in which patients are given an opportunity to
exercise their own efforts in general development for self-realization.
Horney (1939) has stated that self-idealization is an attempt to
solve inner conflicts, and that its very "integrating" function account-
ed for the tenacity with which people adhered to it. Horney also sugg-
ested that neuroses usurp the drive to grow and to attain a realization
of potentials, once again a position adopted and extended by Perls (1969a,
1973).
-116-
In "Maturity and the individual" (1947), Horney outlined two ess-
ential criteria for individual maturity. The first was the ability to
appreciate the reality of oneself and the world outside. The neurotic
here restricts him/herself, and shows subjectivity and ego-centricity.
The second was the individual's capacity for taking responsibility for
him/herself and his/her own behaviour. Rubins described Horney's con-
tribution to psychoanalytic theory:
One of her most far-reaching contributions was the intro-
duction of the concept of self-realizationthe innate
tendency of the individual to grow in a healthy direct-
ioninto her systematized theory of personality and neur-
osis.
(Rubins, 1978, p.316)
Perls outlined a very similar position on self-actualization, self-
realization and responsibility. He wrote: "Every individual ...
has only one inborn goalto actualize itself as it is" (1969a, p.33),
and: "responsbility is the ability to respond and be fully responsible
for oneself and for nobody else" (1969a, p.107).
Horney distinguished between self-actualization and actualization
of the "ideal" self:
Among the drives toward actualizing the idealized self
the need for perfection is the most radical one. It
aims at nothing less than molding the whole personality
into the idealized self .... (the neurotic) tries to
achieve this goal by a complicated system of shoulds and
taboos.
(Horney, 1950, pp.24-25)
This distinction was adopted by Perls:
Many people dedicate their lives to actualize a concept
of what they should be like, rather than to actualize
themselves. This difference between self-actualizing
-117-
and self-image actualizing is very important ... This
is again the curse of the ideal.
(1969a, p.20)
3.3.7 Potentialities
In her paper entitled "The future of psychoanalysis (1946b),
Horney wrote of the nature of mankind:
We ... believe that man has potentialities for good
and evil and we see that he does develop into a good
human being if he grows up under favorable conditions
of warmth and respect for his individuality (p.66).
She believed, however, that only the individual him/herself could
develop his/her own potentialities (Horney, 1950) .
Perls similarly regarded the development of potentialities as of
prime importance; the unhealthy person, he believed, has lost touch
with his/her own potentialities, relying instead on outside support for
survival. Perls (1969a) wrote that in therapy the neurotic:
... is forced to develop his own potential .... is forced
to find his own way, discover his own possibilities,
his own potential, and discover that what he expects from
the therapist, he can do just as well himself (p.40).
3.3.8 Conclusion
Horney thus had a profound personal, professional and theoretical
influence on Perls. Major aspects of Gestalt therapy to which she
appears to have been a precursor are:
1. Here and now therapy
2. Logic of neurosis
-118-
Role of external world (society) in neurosis
Approach/avoidance conflict towards interpersonal contact
in neurosis
Neurotic splitting
Neurotics' ability to overlook the obvious
Denial of responsibility in neurosis
Emphasis of experience, spontaneity, awareness in therapy
Rejection of intellectualization
Centering
Integration, self-actualization, realization of potential-
ities as major goals of therapy
Holism
Rejection of self-image actualization
-119-
3.4 Otto Rank (1884-1939) and Will Therapy
3.4.1 Biography and acknowledgement
Otto Rank was born in Vienna of Jewish parents. He obtained his
doctorate at the University of Vienna in 1913. Sahakian (1976) has
suggested that Rank was to a large extent a self-educated scholar al-
though he was influenced by Schopenhauer, Nietszche, and Freud. Rank
worked with Freud from 1905 to 1926 as secretary of the Psychoanalytic
Society and later was appointed by Freud as director of his psychoanal-
ytic publishing house, Der Internationale Psychoanalyfische Verlag from
1919 to 1924.
From 1912 to 1914 Rank was editor of the first two psychoanalytic
journals, Imago and Internationale Zeitschrift for Psychoanaylse. He
parted from Freud and psychoanalysis in the early 1920's and particular-
ly after the publication of The Trauma of Birth (Rank, 1924). This work
generated controversy largely due to its departure from orthodox Freud-""
ianism and eventually forced Rank's resignation from Freud's Psychoanal- .,
ytic Society.
Jessie Taft, writing the translator's preface for the joint public-
ation of Will Therapy (1936) (which consisted of volume~II, 1929a, Volume
III, 1931, and Truth and Reality, 1929b), wrote that by 1931 Rank no long-
er considered himself a Freudian psychoanalyst in the orthodox sense.
He was required to incorporate the word "psychoanalysis" because of an
agreement with his publisher. It appears as though Rank, like Perls
after him, had become firmly committed to revising psychoanalysis. It
may well have been his freedom from the constraints of the medical model
-120-
which allowed him to regard neurosis as different from an illness
caused by external inputs, with the therapist acting as a "curer"
of the ailment. This position appealed to Perls, and was reflect-
ed in Gestalt therapy.
The influence of Rank's work and theoretical expositions are ack-
nowledged particularly in Perls' early works (refer to the number of
citings in appendix III). Laura Perls also credited Rank as being a
more important precursor than Jung or many of the other neo-Freudians:
I think perhaps even more from Rank and I. think that Rank
is not getting acknowledgement for it. But there is a
lot in Rank, perhaps still, in a different vocabulary that
you can translate directly into Gestalt therapy.
(Personal communication, 3/1980)
A number of Gestalt therapists have written of the influence of
Rank on the formulation of Gestalt therapy. These include Wallen (1957),
E. Polster (1966, 1975b), Simkin (1975), Fagan (1976), Rosenfeld
(1978b), Miller (1978), Yontef (1979) and Rosenblatt (1980). E. Polster
(1975b) perhaps provided the most extensive presentation of Rank's ideas
and contains a section on the manner in which human psychology tends to
reflect the social order, and is therefore ever changing.
3.4.2 Here and now
Rank's (1936) psychotherapy is based firstly on the therapeutic sit-
uation being a present experience instead of a mere reliving of the past
as in psychoanalysis. He regarded the individual as living in the pres-
ent, affected by the past. Rank considered causal relations such as
those sought by Freud to be historical explanations. These are merely
-121-
interpretations and extrapolations of past events, made in the present.
Rank proposed the thesis, one that Gestalt therapists also employ, that
the neurotic "clings to the past" because it is safer and more reliable
than the present:
The neurotic lives too much in the past anyway, that is,
to that extent he actually does not live ... he clings to
it in order to protect himself from experience, the emot-
ional surrender to the present.
(Rank, 1929a, p.27)
Rank criticized psychoanalysis for concentrating on the past.
He stated that the re-experiencing is much more forceful in the pres-
ent:
In the present experience we have, on the contrary,
his whole reaction pattern, all his earlier ways of
reacting plus the present.
(Rank, 1929a, p.37)
Perls was similarly adamant that healthy living can only be exper-
ienced in the present, or here and now. He considered that we can have
a residue from the past which intrudes upon the living reality of the
moment, but that essentially we can only ever be in the present. The
neurotic clings to the past insofar as his/her behaviours lack spontan-
eity and authenticity, thereby avoiding the necessity to react to incom-
ing stimuli in appropriate ways, favouring habitual modes of responses
irrespective of their appropriateness (Perls, 1969a, 1973).
3.4.3 Integration
One of the major themes in Rank's work is that of the integration or
-122-
unity of the individual. Rank described the process of integration:
"Identification thus shows itself to be a means to integration, an att-
empt again to arrive at a whole" (Rank, 1931, p.142). Rank also out-
lined the individual's sense of wholeness:
... the concept of character, psychologically ... always
means wholeness or at least the striving of the individ-
ual after unity ... (and) striving for wholeness.
(Rank, 1931, p.143)
For Rank, growth required the breaking down of the neurotic whole-
ness that an individual has established in order to achieve new inte-
gration. Thus partialization is the required or necessary means of
adaption to reality and growth occurs after differentiation and ident-
ification processes occur.
Perls in all of his works emphasized the ongoing process of inte-
gration of and by the individual as well as the associated concepts of
unity and wholeness. Although these concepts are represented in a num-
ber of theories it is claimed here that Perls was familiar with Rank's
writings, and that Rank's approach assisted Perls'clarification as rep-
resented in the Gestalt literature. Perls (1948, 1969a) wrote that
Gestalt therapy is distinctive as a psychotherapy because of the inte-
grative focus, i.e., the emphasis on facilitating the individual to in-
tegrate material previously unassimilated: "Our aim as therapists is to
increase human potential through the process of integration" (Perls, 1965,
p.l). Through awareness techniques and creative frustration, the Gest-
alt therapist attempts to break up the present mode of functioning of
the neurotic, so that it can be replaced by more efficient living.
-123-
3.4.4 Therapeutic process
Rank's greatest influence on Perls was in the area of therapy
and therapeutic processes. For Rank: "Therapy is through constant
discussion of the actual life situation" (Munroe, 1955, p.592).
The value of the therapeutic experience for Rank, as for Perls,
was in its spontaneity and uniqueness. This experience primarily
aims at assisting in the unfolding and enrichment of the self and per-
sonality. In a general way, Rank's approach was that the individual
should be helped to accept his own "willing" in both its negative and
positive aspects. Only in this manner can the individual achieve a
constructive re-integration of the basic conflict of existence and the
creative attitude toward life which alone can lead to optimal or eff-
icient living (Rank, 1936).
Like Rank, Gestalt therapists aim to aid the person in the way
s/he considers most beneficial: "To justify his hire, the therapist
must be able to move in the direction that he (the client) wishes"
(Fagan, 1970, p.96).
Rank (1936) described his form of therapy as distinctly different
from classic psychoanalysis. He viewed the reactions arising from the
therapeutic situation as projections and attempts at solution of the
particular ego conflicts of the patient. This approach puts the in-
dividual into the role of chief actor in the centre of the situation
set up by the analyst, a situation which the person creates and re-
creates according to his or her own psychic needs. This Rankian app-
roach is used also in Gestalt therapy, where the therapist is constant-
ly attending to various aspects of the individual's behaviour in the
-124-
therapeutic setting (Perls, 1948).
Unlike most psychoanalysts, Rank dispensed with set rules of
techniques in therapy. Like Perls, he regarded the therapeutic sett-
ing as vital to success:
Everything depends on understanding and correct man-
agement of the therapeutic situation and this lies
in the essential understanding and guiding of the in-
dividual reaction of the patient.
(Rank, 1929a, p.4)
The artistry of the therapist is shown to be in the manner in which
s/he can use the individuality of the patient as well as the ongoing
collective or universal characteristics common to all patients. Rank
wrote:
Experience has taught, however, that as the therapist can
only heal in his own way, the patient also can only become
well in his own way; that is, whenever and however he wills...
(1931, p.99)
Rank employed new and creative methods of working to facilitate
therapy, rather than adhering to set techniques for treatment of var-
ious client "symptoms" as do most orthodox psychoanalysts. The Rank-
ian therapist must attend to what a patient does or does not do as
well as how s/he behaves, rather than why. In complete compatibility
with the Gestalt approach, Rank outlined how the therapist "should" be
trained".
The therapist should learn therefore, not definite rules
and prescriptions, tricks and catches, general theories
and typical interpretations, no definite theory and tech-
nique of psychoanalysis but to analyze, which means, in
my opinion, the understanding and handling of the thera-
peutic situation.
(1929a, p.5)
-125-
Perls also refused to be constrained by definite rules or techniques.
He proposed: "my technique is based on function and experiment" (Perls,
1948, p.55).
Gestalt therapists use a Rankian-type approach which is reflected
in their concentration on the behaviour of the client. In therapy talk-
ing "about" is taboo, rather questions beginning with "what" and "how"
are evident, and elicit material beyond the mere games-playing, verb-
alized level of interaction. While Perls did outline various techniques
in therapy, he proposed these as possible tools, rather than as pre-
scriptions to be followed. Perls outlined what he called experiment by
the therapist, which comprises anything that will facilitate growth in
the patient.
The central focus in the Rankian therapeutic setting is thus on ex-
perience, particularly the spontaneity and uniqueness of the safe exper-
iment where the individual can be creative, can try out new modes of
behaviour and at the same time experience development and growth. ~-
Rankian therapists aim at the development of self-understanding, although
this must go further than mere conscious verbal formulations. Both Rank
and Perls tried to avoid the therapist's making conscious or aware some-
thing outside of the client's awareness, because that is actually inter-
preting. An alternative goal would be the facilitation of a.process of
becoming conscious whereby the client makes the correct connections or
gains insight into his/her self-defeating behaviour patterns. Usually,
this results in more healthy verbalization by the client, and partic-
ularly the verbalizing of the conscious emotions (Rank, 1929a), because
it is in the latter that long term cure becomes a distinct reality.
-126-
Although Rank regarded the individual as the central factor in the
therapeutic setting, and felt that it was that individual's efforts which
promoted success, he viewed the therapist's role as one of a helper who
assists in combining the fragmented parts produced by the client into a
meaningful whole.
Perls wrote in a similar manner and regarded the client as central
in therapeutic setting. The role of the therapist is to provide the
opportunity and situation in which the person can grow (Perls, 1969a).
This growth occurs as a result of the therapist's frustrating the pat-
ient. The patient is thus forced to develop his/her own potential, and
shown that what s/he expects from the therapist, s/he can just as eas-
ily do for him/herself. The therapist identifies the split off or frag-
mented parts and represents them to the patient so that s/he can re-
assimilate the parts.
Rank drew an interesting division between the therapeutic experience
and outside world experience. This overlapped considerably with Perls'
approach and the creation of a "safe emergency" in therapy:
The latter (real experience) is essentially an outer, the
therapeutic an inner experience which may be made external
and concrete only far enough for the patient to recognize
and accept it as his own self in the analytic reality cre-
ated by him.
(Rank, 1929a, p.96)
Perls also drew the distinction between the therapeutic setting and
the outside world. The therapeutic situation allows the patient to try
out various behaviours which, if successful, can be generalized and taken
into the outside world (Perls, 1973).
-127-
Many Gestalt therapists, like Perls, regard the successful
therapist as being his/her own instrument in therapy. Perls may have
been influenced by Rank's statement:
... I had already placed the ego of the patient, as will,
in the center of the analytic situation and reduced the
analyst with his "technique" to an instrument of healing . ..
(Rank, 1931, p.104).
There are similarities between Rank and Perls on what they consid-
ered to be the goal of psychotherapy. For instance, Rank stated that
the goal of psychotherapy was:
... with the adjustment of the patient to himself, that
is, with his acceptance of his own individuality, or of
that part of his personality which he has formerly denied.
(Rank, 1931, p.105)
Perls outlined a goal in the same manner when he wrote that the aim
in therapy is to facilitate growth in the person, to lose their "minds"
and conscious behaviours and regain their senses and spontaneity, aspects
of the neurotic patient that s/he usually denies (Perls, 1969a, 1973).
Rank suggested that the neurotic, in most instances, does not really
want to be cured or healed, because that in itself would mean the attain-
ment of a goal and the neurotic is one who engages in self-interruption.
Perls also was well aware of the self-interruption aspect of the neurot-
ic and the difficulty in facilitating a growth or cure: "Very few
people go into therapy to be cured, but rather to improve their neurosis"
(Perls, 1969a, p.42).
-128-
3.4.5 Transference
Rank's theory of transference influenced Perls:
The so-called transference, which for Freud represented
a reproduction of infantile behaviour, becomes a creative
expression of the growth and develpoment of the person-
ality in the therapeutic experience...
(Rank, 1929a, p.26)
Rank also wrote:
I value and utilize constructively as a proof, however
negative, of the strength of will on which therapeutic
success ultimately depends.
( 1936, p.19)
Simply, transference behaviour occurs when the client treats the
therapist or any other person as though they were someone else. In
psychoanalysis and other therapies that take notice of it, such material
is significant for the light it sheds on the relationship between the
patient (client) and the parent. Understanding the nature of that re-
lationship is the point of therapy. In Gestalt therapy, these issues
are considered issues of present contact and lack of contact (Perls et
al., 1951). If the individual treats the therapist as s/he would a
parent, then it is an indication that s/he is not in the present, and is
blocking awareness. The person is looked upon as not clearly disting-
uishing between the past (i.e., a fantasy parental relationship) and the
present (the reality of the therapist).
Just as Rank regarded transference as a creative expression of growth
and development, so the Gestalt therapist often focuses on the therapeutic
relationship and facilitates this contact as a means of increasing the
awareness of the individual. Perls et al. (1951) referred to Rank (among
-129-
others) as relying on creative expression as a means of re-integration:
"especially Rank hit on the creative act as psychological health itself"
(p.284). The transference is continually examined and reviewed in Gestalt
therapy. In Gestalt terms, the here and now relationship between the
individual and the therapist is one of the basic means of increasing the
person's awareness. This awareness results in the client's being able
to prevent him/herself from functioning largely in the past, and bec-
oming free to operate in the present.
3.4.6 Neurosis
Rank (1936) outlined a number of factors operating in the neurotic
personality. The neurotic has not been able to achieve full integration
of the opposing trend of life into a positive, constructive life. S/he
is likely to resist change with his/her neurotic defences. The neurotic's
effort toward differentiation and integration has been side-tracked or
defeated. Rank stated that "cure" must respect and build upon this
essentially "creative" effort on the part of the individual. This
parallels Perls' concept that the neurotic is skillful in functioning
with the hindrances s/he has created. For Rank, the therapist does not
have in mind specific social goals to which the patient "should" be
brought, instead the relationship with the therapist "should" offer
"the acceptance of self" (Rank, 1929a, p.65).
Rank did not regard neurotics as being sick in any medical sense.
Rather, he believed that their sufferings are emotional, with causes
rooted both in adjustment to society and in human development (Rank,
1929a), Also:
-130-
The concept of the neurotic has thus moved from the narrow
medical sphere to the broader social sphere...but in the
dynamic sense in which neurotic means unconstructive and
unproductive, that is, individualistic, without the collective
compensation of productivity.
(Rank, 1931, p.100)
Perls did not regard the neurotic as belonging to the medical
sphere either. He did, however, see the neurotic as a person who
does not see the obvious, who is entrenched in habitual, stale behav-
iours, and who is unproductive to the extent that s/he will not expand
his/her behaviour to include spontaneity and responsiveness.
3.4.7 Conclusion
Several of Rank's concepts influenced the formulation of Gestalt
therapy. These were:
1. Present centered therapy
2. Avoidance of present experience in neurosis
3. Differentiation, integration and identification in therapy
4. Spontaneity and responsibility in therapy
5. Importance of attending to the client's total behaviour in therapy
6. Rejection of set therapeutic "techniques"
7. "Safe emergency" situation in therapy
8. Motivation of neurotics requesting therapy
9. Creative function of transference
10. Adaptive nature of neurosis
-131-
3.5 Alfred Adler (1870-1937) and Individual Psychology
3.5.1 Biography^ and acknowledgement of his work
Adler, the second son of a middle-class Jewish merchant, was born
in a suburb of Vienna. He attended the University of Vienna, and was
awarded his medical degree in 1895.
As a young physician, Adler was invited by Freud to join the psycho-
analytic movement in 1902. He became a prominent member, and was highly
esteemed by Freud. He was eventually named Freud's successor as president
of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, and became co-editor of an early
psychoanalytic journal, the Zentralblatt Psychoanalyse. His first major
publication, titled Study of organ inferiority, appeared in 1907. After
having theoretical disagreements with Freud over the basis of neurosis and
the degree to which sexual aspects played a role in psychoanalytic think-
ing, he resigned all of his positions. With a small group of other diss-
idents, he established the Society for Free Psychoanalytic Research.
Later, he changed the name from "Psychoanalysis" to Individual Psychology.
He founded his own journal, the Zeitschrift fur Individualpsychologie in
1914 (Ansbacher and Ansbacher, in Adler, 1956).
During the first World War Adler served as a physician in the Austrian
army. Afterwards, he established 22 mental hygiene clinics for public
school children. For three years he lectured to teachers of "problem
children". He stated with pride that more than 600 teachers (a great part
of the total teaching staff in Vienna at that time) had been trained, in
part, by him (Adler, 1927). There were over 30 clinics by 1934.
-132-
From 1925 onwards, Adler travelled regularly to the U.S.A. He
finally emigrated there in 1935. He served as Professor of Medical
Psychology at the Long Island College of Medicine. He died in Aber-
deen, Scotland while on a lecture tour (Fadiman and Frager, 1976).
Perls referred extensively to Adler from his earliest writings
until his death (see appendix III), revealing his familiarity with many
fundamental Adlerian concepts.
Additionally, several theorists acknowledged by Perls were trained
or influenced by Adlerincluding Frankl, May, Horney and Fromm. It is
thus possible that Adler influenced Perls not only directly, but also
through his effect on other theorists.
3.5.2 Holism
The basis for both Adler's Individual Psychology and Perls' Gestalt
therapy is holism. Fadiman and Frager (1976, p.92) unequivocally att-
ribute to Adler the mantle of:
... the founder of the holistic system of individual psychol-
ogy which emphasizes an approach to understanding each person
as an integrated totality within a social system.
That Adler relied on Field Marshal Jan Smuts, the South African
statesman, philosopher and Prime Minister, for the concept of holism, is
beyond doubt. Ansbacher (1961, 1978) traced the personal relationship
between Adler and Smuts. The two men corresponded, and Adler had some
success in having Smuts' work published in Europe, translating and pub-
lishing some of it himself (Adler, 1933a). Adler (1933b) used the con-
cept of holism as a basis, with psychoanalysis, for his theory and in
support of his notion of "striving toward completion, superiority, or
evolution" (p.12).
-133-
One of the clearest indications Adler gave describing his attitude
to the unity of body and mind was his statement:
Individual psychology does not consider the part of mind
and psyche as separate but rather as a whole.
(Adler, 1927, p.316)
Perls adopted an identical approach: "We believe further that the
'mental-physical' or 'mind-body' split is a totally artificial one" (Perls,
1973, p.53).
In explaining the organism-environment interaction there are signif-
icant parallels between Adler and Perls, the former noting:
In the holistic relationship between man and cosmos ...
the environment molds men, but man molds the environment...
(Adler, 1937, p.28)
Perls (1975) regarded Gestalt therapy as being concerned with the
interaction between the organism and its environment. Neither an under-
standing of the organism nor the environment covers the whole situation:
Only the interplay of organism and environment constitutes
the psychological situation, not the organism and environ-
ment taken separately.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.19)
The theme of unity of life (and of the personality) is present in
most of Adler's works (e.g., see Adler, 1923, 1928a, 1930, 193.1a,
1935a, 1937). This theme reflects Adler's belief that aspects of the
individual must be regarded as part of a larger whole. To gain an under-
standing of any part of the individual*, whether it is..an act, an illness,
or a neurosis, that part must be seen in the context, of the whole individ-
ual. In reviewing the association between parts, he wrote:
-134-
Someday it will probably be proved that there is no organ
inferiority which does not respond to psychic influences
and does not speak their language, a language which corr-
esponds to the problem confronting the individual.
(Adler, 1934a, p.224)
Perls drew similar conclusions. He also observed the manner in which
the person physically presents him/herself (refer to chapter 3.2 on Wil-
helm Reich and Character Analysis). Perls gave examples of the way an
individual's physique reflects attitude towards both self and the world.
He traced through such examples as the drooping of shoulders in the case
of the individual neurotic who feels the world is on his/her back and the
asthmatic who restricts the capacity of his/her lungs, and thereby with-
draws from the world.
Adler worked towards treatment of the individual by examining the
manner in which a person acts or reacts in various situations:
The manner in which a child approaches a game, his choice,
and the importance which he places upon it, indicate his
attitude and relationship to his environment and how he is
related to his fellow man.
(Adler, 1928a, p.107)
Perls' publications and practical demonstrations provide similar
examples. In working with a patient, Perls drew attention to incon-
gruities in the personas a holistic theorist, he viewed any action
as part of a larger whole. For Perls, man was a unified organism:
Once we recognize that thoughts and actions are made of the
same stuffy we can translate and transpose from one level to
another.
(Perls, 1973, p.15)
-135-
Adler has written extensively on the therapeutic procedure. The
theme running through all Individual Psychology is that of the patient
taking an active part in the therapy. Even in the first interview,
the room or physical surrounds are arranged so that there is a variety
of chairs from which the patient must actually choose where s/he is to
sit (Adler, 1932a). Activity is encouraged as it promotes self-respons-
ibility.
Perls held the same attitude to activity and self-responsibility.
In Gestalt therapy it is not sufficient merely to verbalize views or
attitudes, complaints and so on. All therapy takes place in the here
and now and is accompanied by appropriate affect. There is a combinat-
ion of verbalization and activity.
Adler referred to the role of the therapist and the extent to which
the therapist can contribute to change:
The actual change in the nature of the patient can only
be his own doing .... the patient can learn nothing from
me that he, as the sufferer, does not understand better ...
(Adler, 1913, p.336)
Elsewhere:
One should always look at the treatment and the cure not
as the success of the consultant but as the success of the
patient. The adviser can only point out the mistakes, it
is the patient who must make the truth living.
(Adler, 1933c, p.336)
Similarly, Perls asserted:
... just as at the beginning the patient has come under his
-136-
own steam, so at the end he must go under his own steam.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.298)
In a later article, he stated: "As therapists we do not imagine we know
more than the patient does himself" (1965, p.6). Any unnecessary "help-
fulness" or support from the therapist is thus to be avoided; to do for
someone something which that person is capable of doing for him/herself
deprives the person of the opportunity to develop his/her strength, po-
tential and resources (Perls, 1967).
One of the techniques outlined by Adler is that of carefully phras-
ing questions, specifically, Adler recommended the use of "what" type
questions rather than "why" questions. In asking "what" questions, he
felt the therapist gets an answer that expresses the patient's attitude
as a whole. This, obviously, reflects a whole life style which gives
the therapist clues as to how to conduct therapy (Adler, 1931b).
Perls also discouraged the use of "why" type questions, which he
believed simply produced circulatory answers. "How" or "what" quest-
ions, he argued, elicit more information on the attitudes and feelings of
the total person (Perls, 1969a).
Another overlap between Adler and Perls lay in their approach to re-
integration of the patient:
The life style dominates. The person is cast all of one
piece. This you must find again in all its parts.
(Adler, 1932a, p.198)
Perls defined the neurotic as one lacking in integration (Perls, 1969a).
In his approach to therapy, the individual passes along a continuum of
-137-
awareness, integrating more and more of the split parts. In working
with patients: "one has only to collect all the dissociated parts of
the personality and reintegrate them" (Perls, 1946, p.11).
Adler described the process of therapy and the resultant cure. The
most important therapeutic aid, he noted, is the patient him/herself.
Cure comes about when the therapist persuades the patient: "to pull him-
self out of the swamp by his own bootstraps" (Adler, 1928b, p.192). The
cure therefore:
... must consist of reconciling the patient with the problems
of life. He must be made to see the defects in his life
style .... Only self-knowledge can achieve these results.
(Adler, 1931c, p.138)
Perls' position was very similar. In one of the most frequently
quoted extracts from his writings, he stated: "awareness per seby
and of itselfcan be curative" (Perls, 1969a, p.17). The goal of
therapy is generally to facilitate the means by which the patient can
solve his/her present and future problems (Perls, 1973).
3.5.4 Neurosis
Perhaps the most significant influence of Adlerian Individual Psy-
chology on Gestalt therapy was its theory of neurosis:
... the neurotic will be found to be an individual placed
in a lost situation who is attempting to solve his problems
in the interest of his own personal ambition ...
(Adler, 1932b, p.91)
And:
-138-
All neuroses grow out of the psychic tension of an
individual who is not socially well prepared when he
is confronted with a task which demands for its solut-
ion more social interest than he is capable of.
(Adler, 1932b, p.91)
The common theme running through all of the Adlerian discussions of
neurosis is that of the individual out of step with society; the indiv-
idual must adapt to standards and procedures dictated by others.
Neurosis is a form of safeguard, a strategy to cope with the demands and
expectations of society. It is also a way of meeting the social envir-
onment, and if this is oppressive, then the individual resorts to coping
by developing defence mechanisms.
Perls' description of the onset of neurosis as being the result of
a person's way of meeting the demands of a hostile environment closely
parallels Adler's expositions. The neurotic, according to Perls:
... has failed to surrender his individuality to society,
he has not adjusted himself to society's demand that he
become a well-behaved robot.
(Perls, 1946, p.19)
Adler discussed the way society impinges on the individual:
Society exacts certain obligations of us which influence
the norms and forms of our life, as well as the develop-
ment of our mind.
(Adler, 1928a, p.33)
On psychosomatic unity and the way neurosis is reflected in the
body Adler explained:
The raw material with which the Individual Psychologist
works is the relationship of the individual to the prob-
lems of the outside world .... (which) includes the in-
dividual's own body, his bodily functions, and the funct-
-139-
ions of his mind.
(Adler, 1935b, p.67)
Perls provided a very similar picture of the role of the body in
reflecting neurosis. In a subsection of his chapter titled " 'Mind',
'Body', and 'External World' " he discussed how "psychosomatic ailments"
originate and how there is a one to one relationship between the mind
(neurosis) and body (physical ailment) (Perls et al., 1951, pp.303-322).
Adler referred to the role of language in neurosis. The neurotic
tends to use language as a tool to avoid a realistic confrontation with
the situation or object that is causing internal blocks and neurosis:
"Neurosis is always behaviour which can be expressed in two words, the
words "yesbut" (Adler, 1934b, p. 302). Further:
... "but" is the epitome of all neurotic symptoms.
It offers an alibi to the neurotic. The neurotic
lives according to the formula "yesbut."
(Adler, 1932b, p.91)
Perls also warned against the use of the words "yesbut." He wrote:
It is very important to understand the word but. But
is a killer. You say "yes ..." and then comes the big
"but" that kills the whole yes More difficult to
understand is the but when it's not verbal, and comes
out in behaviour .... your attitude is but; your voice
or your gestures cancel out what you say. "Yesbut.
So there's no chance of growing or developing.
(Perls, 1969a, pp.174-175)
Adler illustrated the pervasiveness of neurosis and its influence
on life style. Among many examples is that of insomnia which he says
is sometimes a "tool of competition." He recorded that he was proud
to have discovered that sleeplessness is often a symptom of ambition
-140-
and often associated with headaches. Although this association was
described two thousand years ago by Horace, its impact on the individ-
ual is significant:
If somebody must use the night for conscious thinking,
if he is not satisfied to use only the day for this
purpose, then it can be assumed that he is an ambitious
person The patient thinks always either of his bus-
iness or his duties, and repeats what happened the day
before.
(Adler, 1929a, pp.235-236)
Adler outlined a treatment procedure whereby his/her sleeplessness is
used in a constructive manner, which usually dissolves the insomnia
syndrome because most individuals can only remain sleepless if it is
regarded as a disturbance and serving some function, e.g., an excuse
or rationalization.
Perls also discussed insomnia as an example of how the individual
interrupts him/herself:
... insomnia is an attempt of the organism to deal with
unfinished problems, unexpressed emotions, or other un-
resolved situations.
(Perls, 1946, p.9)
Elsewhere, Perls (1973) wrote of insomnia as a frequent complaint of the
neurotic, and one example of the inability to withdraw. Like Adler,
Perls also regarded headaches as an excuse for withdrawal from daily life.
Another similarity between Perls' and Adler's views of neurosis is
that both saw the neurotic as one who is often unaware of what is going
on around him/her. Adler wrote of neurosis as:
... a degree of contact feelings .... We cannot stress too
much that in the neurotic there is a lack of interest in
-141-
others, a lack of social interest.
(Adler, 1932b, p.90)
Perls described the neurotic as one who has lost parts of the self and
is out of touch with reality:
Many of the neurotic's difficulties are related to his
unawareness, his blind spots, to the things and relat-
ionships he simply does not sense.
(Perls, 1973, p.54)
There is considerable overlap between Adler and Perls on the theory
and practice of dreamwork. Adler gave an excellent extract from the
German poet Hebbel who wrote in 1850 about dreams as follows:
If a man would collect his dreams and examine them and
would add to the dreams which he is now having all the
thoughts he has in association with them, all the rem-
embrances, all the pictures he can grasp from them... he
would be able to understand himself much better by this
than by means of any other kind of psychology.
(quoted by Adler, 1936b, p.357)
Adler himself wrote of the integration of conscious and unconscious:
The so-called conscious and unconscious are not contradictory,
but form a single unity, and. the methods used in interpreting
the "conscious" life may be used in interpreting the "uncon-
scious" or "semi-conscious" life, the life of our dreams.
Only by considering dreams as one of the expressions of the
style of life may an adequate interpretation of them be found.
(Adler, 1936b, pp.6-7)
He regarded dreams as attempts by the dreamer to bring about a solution
to a problem in his/her life (Adler, 1931a). For Adler, the dream was
a repetition of the same processes that go on in waking life.
142-
Perls adhering to the holistic view of mankind, believed that every
part of the individual has a bearing on the whole. Thus, the dream can
be nothing else but a valid production which is another component of the
person and therefore a valid and useful therapeutic avenue. The dream
is:
... an attempt to find a solution to an apparent paradox.
The dream is an artistic creation in which two seemingly
incompatible strivings are set against one another ....
if we could solve our problems during the day we would
not need to dream at night.
(Perls, 1973, p.60)
Adler outlined a therapeutic approach which was adopted by Perls,
that is, how to proceed when the individual claims to have no dreams.
Adler instructed the patient to "make-up" a dream, because the therapist
knows that whatever is produced or created is reflective of the style of
life and makeup of the person. Thus "artificial" or fantasized dreams
are just as valuable to work with as "genuine" dreams (Adler, 1929b).
Perls also used this approach and had people produce "dreams" as if they-
had dreamt them the previous night.
The attitudes of Adler and Perls to recurrent dreams are very sim-
ilar. Adler (1936b) found that recurrent dreams give the clearest in-
dication of the style of living of the person. He noted that these
dreams provide a definite and unmistakable view of the individual.
The repeated dream is a continual direction towards answering the necess-
ities of a repeatedly confronted problem. Perls regarded any repetit-
ion as representative of an unfinished situation pressing for solution in
the present (Perls, 1969a).
-143-
3.5.6 Groupwork
As outlined in section 3.5.1, Adler realized that by training
teachers he could influence and help a greater number of children. He
began to conduct his clinics in front of audiences of teachers as early as
1922 (Adler, 1922, p.120). As a result of this type of work Adler re-
alized that the mere presence of an audience tended to have a significant
influence on the "therapeutic" value of his work. This resulted in the
principle of conducting all Individual Psychology clinics in public.
Adler suggested that the child's problem belonged not only to that indiv-
idual child, but was also societal, and was thus relevant to all members
of the society in which the child lived. Thus, not only do the child and
the parents learn, but there is also education of the audience or public.
It was for these reasons that Ansbacher and Ansbacher (in Adler, 1956)
wrote that Adler pioneered one form of group psychotherapy.
Perls' article titled "Group vs. individual therapy" (1967) provided
an excellent discussion of his views on the respective attributes and
limitations of the two forms of therapy. He rejected individual sessions,
declaring them obsolete. In an approach almost identical to Adler's, Perls
worked with an individual in front of a group:
In my workshops, I now integrate individual and group work.
This is effective with a group, however, only if the thera-
pist's encounter with an individual patient within the group
is effective.
(Perls, 1967, p.9)
Like Adler, Perls also found that significant therapeutic results
are achieved not only by those on whom attention is focussed, but addit-
ionally by members of the audience. This has also led to the development
-144-
of various forms of family therapy, e.g., Virginia Satir; and more
recently Gestalt family therapy, e.g., Walter Kempler, 1974.
3.5.7 Conclusion
Adler's theory thus provided Perls with material on the following
concepts:
1. Holism (with Smuts)
2. Responsibility
3. Experiential therapy
4. Avoidance of "why" questions
5. Conflict between individual and society in neurosis
6. Negative effects of "yesbut"
7. Insomnia and headaches as contact disturbances
8. Blind spots in neurosis
9. Regard for dreamwork
10. Importance of recurring dreams
11. Use of groupwork, with group members as audience
-145-
3.6 Harry Stack Sullivan (1892-1942)
Sullivan was born in Norwich, New York in a farming community in
1892. He completed his medical degree in 1917 at the Chicago College
of Medicine and Surgery. In 1919 he worked with the early American .
psychoanalyst, William Alanson White. After clinical research and an
appointment at the University of Maryland he helped establish the Wash-
ington School of Psychiatry in 1936. He later became head and pro-
fessor of psychiatry at Georgetown University Medical School, president
of the William Alanson White Psychiatric Foundation, editor of Psych-
iatry and chairman of the Council of Fellows of the Washington School
of Psychiatry (Weyent, 1973). Although Sullivan was a respected and
knowledgeable psychoanalyst, he never had direct contact with European
psychoanalysis.
Perls has referred favourably to Harry Stack Sullivan in a number
of his books, and freely acknowledged his indebtedness to him (refer to
appendix III). There are parallels between various aspects of Sulliv-
an's works and those of Perls. It is evident that Perls was familiar
with Sullivan's writings, and it can be shown that Sullivan's theory
provided Perls with valuable material in formulating Gestalt therapy.
3.6.2 Language
Sullivan was aware of the limitations of language as a form of comm-
unication. He wrote that verbal behaviour can communicate equally eff-
iciently both fictitious and true material, and usually transmits both:
-146-
Always an activity using symbolsin this case sounds
standing for something elsethe verbal operations that
include symbols standing for inner thoughts, feelings,
desires, have been equivocal, and man's growth in skill
at the task of inter communicating his inner life with
other men has been pathetically slow.
(Sullivan, 1932, p.3)
Perls was also aware of the limitations of language. He believed
that language was as often used to mislead others as for genuine comm-
unication; often, he felt, the verbal message was a lie (Perls, 1969a).
Perls was aware that to be effective the therapist must look beyond sec-
ondary symbols and attend to primary behaviours. He regarded real comm-
unication as "beyond words"the therapist pays attention to and listens
to sounds, posture, image and facial expressions (Perls, 1969a).
3.6.3 Organism-environment interaction
Gestalt therapy is concerned with the interaction between the organ-
ism and its environment (Perls, 1975), a position partly derived from
Sullivanian theory (Perls et al., 1951). The Gestalt therapist adopts
the position that neither an understanding of the organism nor the envir-
onment covers the whole situation: only the interplay of organism, and
environment constitutes the psychological situation, not the organism and
environment taken separately (Perls et al., 1951). The individual's
awareness develops with and is integrally a part of the organism-environ-
ment transaction. This transaction is always in the here and now and is
based on the current perceptions of the situation. The more aware the
person,, the more integrated and spontaneous will be the actions and re-
actions to those perceptions.
-147-
3.6.4 Oral development
One of the most significant overlaps between Sullivan and Perls
concerns their approach to oral factors in development. Sullivan (1932)
emphasized the connection between the activity of the oral zone and the
environment. He wrote:
In the growth of experience with reality, not only does
the mouth-nipple combination provide the root experience
for a separation of the "me" and the "not me", but also
the oral play provides the first or root experience of
that which we call autoeroticism.
(Sullivan, 1932, 102)
Sullivan, like Perls, regarded the activity of the oral zone as extreme-
ly important "in the consciousness of the organism" because it has a fund-
amental impact on the development of the personality. For Sullivan, the
development of any individual takes place with the progress through the
oral phases. He stressed the overwhelming importance of the oral zone
in the organism-environment interaction. He also left open the quest-
ion of:
... how much of the sum-total of adjustive activity,
functional activity in and within the environment, bio-
physical to psychobiological, takes place with special
relation to this oral-buccal-pharyngeal-laryngeal app-
aratus .
(Sullivan, 1932, p.103)
Sullivan suggested that the role of, oral factors is evident in any per
r
sonality maladjustment.
Perls' first paper was presented to the Marienbad International
Psychoanalytic Congress in 1936. It was titled "Oral resistances".
This paper was based on the documented experiences of his wife Laura
-148-
(Perls, L., personal communication 3/1980) and covered particularly
the weaning phase of the mother-child interaction. In Ego, Hunger and
Aggression (1947), Perls wrote that oral resistances are neglected and
proposed links between various oral phases of development and psycholog-
ical states. In Perls et al. (1951) there is a more detailed account
of the process of weaning and the resultant feeling of what is "I" and
what is outside of "I".
Sullivan's approach to therapy emphasized present experience and
flexibility of communication:
The patient is instructed to express in words, sounds,
gestures, grimaces, smiles, tears, intonationsin
short, in any suitable wayas much as possible of what-
ever comes to mind ...
(Sullivan, 1932, p.340)
Sullivan was well aware that the therapist does not have the answers:
... only the patient has the facts, and the physician's
skill is useful only in so far as he may recognize in-
completeness of recall, obscure manifestations of pro-
cesses that are hindering recall, and the like.
(Sullivan, 1932, p.340)
As therapists, we do not imagine that we know more than
the patient does himself ...
(Perls, 1965, p.6)
Like Sullivan, Perls emphasized (1969b, 1973) that the Gestalt thera-
pist uses anything as grist for the therapeutic mill.
-149-
3.6.6 Dreams
Sullivan regarded the dream as representing fragments of meaning
from the historic part (the past) of the individual. In a statement
completely compatible with Perls' position, Sullivan wrote: "Remember-
ed dreams are to be regarded as experience as valid as is any other"
(1932, p.281). He noted that dreams are rarely logical, nor immediate-
ly understandable, sometimes the content being couched in symbolic pict-
ures or terms.
According to Sullivan, any dream or even dream fragment that is suff-
iciently impressive to be recalled by the person is always to be consider-
ed as a part of the person that is of real importance. The dream there-
fore is a strong demand for the resolution of some event or factor in the
person. Any unresolved situation in normal wakefulness may well come to
the fore during sleep. The person is regarded as aiming at a resolution
even though the processes are occurring on other than a' "conscious",
wakeful level. Sullivan went on to state: "any strong unpleasant emot-
ion in a dream is apt to be indicative of sheer stress within the person-
ality" (1932, p.281).
Perls wrote about and used dreams considerably in his various public-
ations and work. He saw the dream as "the royal road to integration", a
complete expression of our life-script at uncovering conflicts and dis-
turbances on which to work (Perls, 1969a, 1975). He saw the dream as:
... an attempt to find a solution to an apparant paradox
... an artistic creation in which two seemingly incompat-
ible strivings are set against one another.
(Perls, 1973, p.60)
-150-
7 Conclusion
Perls thus adopted from Sullivan the following notions:
1. Limitations of verbal communication
2. Interaction between the organism and its environment;
awareness as a byproduct of this interaction
3. Importance of oral development on the development of health
or maladj ustment.
4. Present-centredness in therapy
5. Emphasis on total communication (not just verbal) in therapy
6. Dreams as valid experiences
7. Dreams as attempts to resolve life problems
-151-
3.7 Sandor Ferenczi (1873-1933)
Ferenczi was an analysand and close friend of Sigmund' Freud.
Freud entertained Ferenczi more than any of his other followers, and
the pair frequently vacationed together. Ferenczi practised psycho-
analysis in Budapest, and guided the first meeting of the Hungarian
Psychoanalytic Society in 1913. In 1918 he was elected President of
the International Psychoanalytic Society and was the first university
lecturer on psychoanalysis in Budapest.
Freud sent many manuscripts to Ferenczi, and highly valued his
written work. In his obituary to Ferenczi in 1933, Freud declared that
Ferenczi had "made all analysts into his pupils" (Roazen, 1971, p.362).
In 1923 Ferenczi published The Development of Psychoanalysis and
later Further Contributions to the Theory and Technique of Psychoanalysis
(1926) , part of which was written in consultation with his close friend
Otto Rank. In 1926 Ferenczi was invited to lecture in New York at the
New School for Social Research, also giving seminars to the New York
Psychoanalytic Society and the American Psychoanalytic Association. The
one issue that tended to diminish the relationship between Freud and Fer-
enczi surrounds their positions on "active therapy." It is specifically
in this area that there is the most commonality between Perls and Feren-
czi.
Perls referred to Ferenczi in a number of places (see appendix III).
Perls et al. (1951) referred to Ferenczi's "active" or "primitive" method
of therapy as a method for the cathartic release of tension.
-152-
3.7.2 Active therapy
There are many similarities between the methods of active therapy
and Gestalt therapy. For example, in a 1920 paper "The further devel-
opment of an active therapy in Psychoanalysis," Ferenczi described his
treatment of a young female musician. He had her repeatedly recreate
gestures, and reproduce a song exactly as she recollected her sister
having done. The method of recreation and exaggeration of mannerisms
and gestures was one frequently used by Perls (e.g., 1969a).
Active therapy approximates the experiment in Gestalt therapy. If
active therapy is applied, it must proceed on individual lines. There
are pitfalls in departing from the methods of classical analysis, partic-
ularly early in the treatment period. Ferenczi warned:
... the analyst must know that such an experiment is a
two-edged sword; ... Activity always works .... "against
the grain", that is against the pleasure principle ....
Indeed there is no kind of neurosis in which activity
might not be employed.
(Ferenczi, 1920, pp.208-209)
Active therapy employs the active assistance of the patient in the
therapeutic setting, as in Gestalt therapy. Introducing or even com-
pelling the patient into active therapy work is really showing him/her
further development and healing of the personality (Ferenczi, 1920).
The aim in active therapy is to encourage the person's active particip-
ation and often the therapist has the person enacting various impulses,
emotions and feelings in the therapeutic setting and "consciously con-
trolling" such activities and developing awareness. Enactment is a
technique frequently employed in Gestalt therapy (e.g., Perls, 1969a,
1973).
-153-
3.7.3 Resistance
Ferenczi (1925) continually repeated the premise that activity
stimulates the resistance of the patient. This approach increases
psychical tension by any procedure deemed necessary to gain access to
new material, be it frustration, injunctions or prohibitions of the
patient. The use of frustration by the therapist is often employed to
destroy transference and to uncover material on which to work. Perls
similarly saw "creative frustration" as an important function of the
therapist (1969a).
Ferenczi (1915) regarded talkativeness as a method of resistance.
Clients often discuss superficial or immaterial matters in order to av-
oid direct confrontation with important matters requiring work. Perls'
position was in complete agreement with Ferenczi's. He wrote: "Talk-
ing about things .... keeps out .any emotional responses" (1966a, p.15).
Ferenczi observed that one well known manifestation of resistance is
that of silence, because prolonged silence usually signifies the with-
holding of material. His approach to dealing with silence was to en-
counter the patient's silence with silence. Often however, there is a
need for the therapist to:
... explain all over again to the patient that he must
relate everything that goes on inside him, sensations,
therefore, as well as thoughts, feelings and impulses.
(Ferenczi, 1919, p.179)
Ferenczi observed as do most therapists, that frequently patients
say that they do not know what to relate because so much is going on.
He stated his belief that important matters would always tend to
-154-
surface at some time or other. This is a similar notion to that used
by Perls when he stated that anything of importance will come to the
surfaceevery need will be attended and discharged to some degree or
other (Perls et al., 1951).
3.7.4 Therapeutic material
Ferenczi, like Perls, emphasized the importance of the client's
taking responsibility for the course of his/her therapy:
Only when the patient of himself brings up memories and
ideas that strengthen the analyst's suspicions, that is
to say, after the patient's self-conviction, can one
count on an advance in analytic knowledge and also upon
an improvement in the condition.
(Ferenczi, 1912, p.64)
Perls also adopted this approach and discouraged the eloquent planned
speech or presentation in favour of the spontaneous production of mat-
erial as it occurs in the person (e.g., 1966a).
The awakening of a memory can bring forth an emotional reaction
and vice versa. The active technique tends to bring forth this type
of interaction. Ferenczi stated:
... active technique only plays the part of agent
provocateur; its commands and prohibitions ass-
ist in obtaining of repetitions that must then be
interpreted or reconstructed respectively into mem-
ories.
(Ferenczi, 1920, p.217)
Although the therapist does not engage in suggestion or direction, s/he
does enact "active therapy" insofar as s/he "forces" the patient to
confront self-defeating and phobic attitudes and behaviours with the ex-
-155-
press aim of obtaining access to relevant unconscious material. This
approach is clearly analagous to Perls* technique of skillful frustration.
Ferenczi reported on the reaction of the analyst to certain times in
therapy when the patient is not bringing forth worthwhile material. In
a footnote, he wrote of the analyst "dozing":
... dozing may happen .in these circumstances. Subsequent
scrutiny mostly shows that we were reacting unconsciously
to the emptiness and worthlessness of the associations just
presented ... at the first idea of the patient's that in
any way concerns the treatment we brighten up again.
(Ferenczi, 1919, footnote, p.180)
Perls may well have appreciated this aspect of Ferenczi's work and
regarded the "energy" levels in therapy as an important barometer of the
person's usual mode of working. For instance, if the patient launches
in long, uninspired monologues without expression, then the therpist may
well fall asleep or to a lesser extent become bored. Perls rarely all-
owed this to happen, (although he did record, 1969a, that he had dozed
off during a therapeutic session) and preferred to interact with the pat-
ient, telling them his reaction to their work. In this way more profit-
able therapy may commence.
Patients in therapy tend to exhibit an exaggerated rigidity of move-
ment. Ferenczi (1925) observed that during the process of therapy, the
release of mental tensions may be accompanied by the relief of muscular
tensions. If the latter does not occur, then specific work on the inhib-
itions may be required. Any gesture may be a sign of an emotion and can
be worked on in a similar manner as outlined by Perls (1966a).
Ferenczi outlined (as do most therapists) the double task to be un-
dertaken, firstly s/he must be able to observe the patient, how s/he
-156-
relates, and to construct a plan for tackling the troublesome behav-
iours and emotions. At the same time, the therapist is to be aware
of his/her own attitude towards the patient. Perls was aware of this
twofold task but tended to regard them as one entity. That is, the
manner in which the patient creates an impression on the therapist, gives
significant clues as to what type of work will be most beneficial (Perls,
1969a). Ferenczi had a "rule" in which he countered any question from
a patient with a request to know how the patient came to formulate that
question.
Perls also consistently discouraged questions during therapy, main-
taining that behind every question lay a statement or directive from the
instigator. He wrote (1966a) that he almost never answered questions
during therapy.
3.7.5 Neurosis
Ferenczi's and Perls' conceptions of the conditions which result in
neurosis are also similar. Both theorists (Ferenczi, 1908; Perls, 1969a,
1978a) wrote that no individual can live either for or by him/herself
alone, but must adapt their behaviours to a highly complex and almost un-
modifiable society. If this process of adaptation is not entirely succ-
essful then the person may retreat into neurosis:
Psychoanalysis showed us that an individual who finds no
way out of his mental conflicts takes refuge in a neuro-
sis or psychosis.
For Perls (1947), neuroses are the outcome of a conflict between the in-
dividual and the outside world. He wrote: "neurosis is an unbiological
-157-
attempt of solving man's social problems" (Perls, 1946, p.20).
Perls' position is virtually identical with that of Ferencziwhen an
individual's desires are unable to be satisfied owing to societal or
other constraints, then neurosis will develop as a compensatory sub-
stitute.
Ferenczi (1908, 1912) wrote extensively of the aims of psychoanal-
ysis and the manner in which treatment and cure eventuate. Analysis
is said to bring personal values and desires into harmony with those of
society. Also:
Psycho-analysis ... is a proceeding that seeks to cure
neurotic conflict not by a fresh displacement or temp-
orary repression, but radically ... to lay them bare,
to render them conscious.
Perls also adopted this view, and constantly strove for awareness of all
factors involving the individual. If they were outside of awareness
then various experiments are enacted to bring awareness out. He main-
tained that: "awareness per seby and of itselfcan be curative"
(Perls, 1969a, p.17). Ferenczi described the manner in which psycho-
analysts treated the patient:
Psycho-analysis occupies itself with excavating hidden
archaic memorials in the depths of the mind; from them
it deciphers the hieroglyphs of the neurosis.
Perls completely contradicted this psychoanalytic approach, care-
fully explaining that his method tries to get to the outermost surface
of the individual (Perls, 1966a). On closer examination, however, it
can be seen that Perls' position was not in fact as diametrically
-158-
opposed to that of Ferenczi as this statement would suggest. In fact,
Perls did not content himself with the outermost surface of his patients,
either theoretically or in application. In most of his works he stress-
ed the need to get through the verbal, cliche levels of "communication"
and to get to the more authentic levels of interaction. Perls and Clem-
ents (1968) described four layers of neurosis; Perls (1969a) gave numer-
ous examples of working not at a superficial or outermost level, but rath-
er probing at deep levels, which facilitates the achievement of awareness.
3.7.6 Conclusion
Ferenczi's active therapy and Perls' Gestalt therapy have several
similarities:
1. Use of recreation exaggeration in therapyexperiment
2. Development of self-support and responsibility in therapy
3. Use of creative frustration
4. Encouragement of spontaneity in therapy
5. Monitoring of energy levels in therapy
6. Discouraging of questioning of the therapist
7. Recognition of the compensatory function of neurosis
8. Use of awareness as a goal of therapy
Given Perls' familiarity with Ferenczi's work, some of the active style
of Gestalt therapy may have been derived from Ferenczi's therapeutic
approach.
-159-
3.8 Paul Federn (1871-1950)
Paul Federn, described as one of Freud's "oldest adherents"
(Roazen, 1971), developed a theory of ego psychology which transcend-
ed classical Freudian psychoanalysis. His major theoretical contrib-
utions are recognized as being: his pioneering work in modern ego psy-
chology; his classification of the ego, and especially ego boundaries;
his conception of the structure of the personality; and lastly, his
notions of the mechanisms of schizophrenia and psychosis (Federn, 1952;
Wyss, 1973).
Federn entered Freud's circle in 1903, becoming a member of Freud's
exclusive Psychological Wednesday Society, and thus became one of the
earliest psychoanalysts. He was one of the few never to have been an-
alyzed himself, but counted among his analysands Otto Fenichel, Wilhelm
Reich, and Edoardo Weiss (Roazen, 1971), all of whom were referred to by
Perls.
In October 1924, Federn succeeded Rank as Vice President of the
Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, and may well have been known to Fritz
Perls when he spent some time in Vienna working as a psychoanalyst.
Federn was known as Freud's personal substitute (Roazen, 1971), and Freud
himself is credited with describing him as:
... the most prominent member equally distinguished by
his scientific work, his experience as a teacher and his
success in therapeutics.
(in Federn, E., 1972, p.18)
-160-
Federn left Germany in 1938 and emigrated to the U.S.A. There
he became a leading figure in the New York Psychoanalytic Society, and
was regarded as: "an elder statesman of doctrinal orthodoxy" (Roazen,
1971, p.315).
Perls was certainly aware of Federn's work as was evidenced by his
acknowledgement of Federn in his first two books (Perls, 1947; Perls et
al., 1951). In Part 2, Chapter 7 of Ego, Hunger and Aggression (Perls,
1947) the ego as a function of the organism was discussed at length,
and Perls criticized Federn's conception of the libidinal ego. Federn
is mentioned by name on seven pages (see appendix III).
In Gestalt Therapy (Perls et al., 1951) there was a "Critique of a
theory, that isolated the self in fixed boundaries" (pp.442-445). in
this section, the strengths and weaknesses of Federn's concepts were out-
lined. The only other occasion on which Federn was named in Perls' works
was in Gestalt Therapy Verbatim, where Perls wrote:
Many agree with Federn, a friend of Freud, who maintained
that the ego is a substance, and I maintain that the ego,
the I, is merely a symbol of identification.
(Perls, 1969a, p.70)
3.8.2 Ego boundaries
One of the most important concepts in Federn's theory is that of
the ego boundary. Federn's recognition of the ego as a dynamic entity
and the ego boundary as its peripheral or external sense organ was new
and not contained in Freud's theory (Federn, E., 1972). The ego bound-
ary as described by Federn was the only precursor Perls acknowledged to
his concept of the contact boundary (Perls et al., 1951).
-161-
Although Perls criticized Federn for classing the ego as a sub-
stance (Perls, 1969a, p.70. quoted above), Federn himself argued that
all definitions which represent the ego as a distinct entity, inde-
pendent of so-called "external reality" are faulty:
"Ego feeling" can be described as the feeling of bodily
and mental relations in respect to time and content, the
relation being regarded as an uninterrupted or a restored
unity.
(Federn, 1952, p.25)
Federn, like Perls, emphasized the flexibility of the ego bound-
aries. These may undergo progressive changes throughout the life span
as well as those occurring during the everyday life of the individual
in different situations:
Federn attempts to define the extent to which the ego
feelings undergoes structural modification due to such
changes and to the normal fluctuations of daily life by
reference to "inner" and "outer" ego boundaries.
(Wyss, 1973, p.236)
Weiss (1952) in his introduction to Federals book, Ego Psychology,
mentioned the flexibility of the ego boundary as conceived by Federn
on several occasions, for example:
The geographical connotation of the term "boundary"
is unfortunate ... this term is an exquisitely dynamic
one, and that Federn has always emphasized the flexib-
ility of the ego boundaries.
(in Federn, 1952, pp 11-12)
3.8.3 Contact boundaries
Perls et al. (1951, p.275) defined the contact boundary as: "the
organ of a particular relation of the organism and the environment".
-162-
Theoretical works on Gestalt therapy, often refer to the role of
the contact boundary as though it were a single and definite entity.
For instance, Perls et al. (1951, p.275) stated:
. .psychology studies the operation of the contact-boundary
in the organism/environment field...the contact-boundary...
limits the organism, contains and protects it, and at the
same time it touches the environment.
Like Federn, Perls wrote of the ego boundary and the self boundary
as separate entities. The self boundary is the limit of the senses.
Taken literally, this means that the self boundary could extend to the
limit of, say, vision or hearing. Federn also outlined this notion.
Weiss wrote in his introduction: "The dynamic ego boundary ... includes
the physical sense organs" (Federn, 1952, p.12).
As mentioned above, these may vary depending on the senses utilized.
Perls (1969b) gave an example of when we are in contact with, say, an
object 200 yards away. Through vision, our self-boundary lies at the
surface of that object. Perls was vague in describing this boundary.
;
The ego boundary he described in one place as: "like a bed of Procrust-
es" (Perls, 1969b, p.273). Perls did not elaborate on what the simil-
arity to Procrustes' bed implied. it may be the indication that the ego
boundary represents the limits we set upon ourselves through our self-
image. Commenting in the text of his typist's confusion after reading
this passage, he wrote:
I know that I left many loose threads hanging, but I also
know that I am not yet ready to write a systematic account
of Gestalt philosophy. I am still discovering...
(Perls, 1969b, p.276)
-163-
As Perls himself believed, shortly before his death, that there were
"loose threads" in his work on ego and self boundaries, it is not sur-
prising that the current literature reflects his confusion.
In his paper "Morality, ego boundary and aggression" (1953) Perls
probably provided the best definition of the ego boundary. The dis-
criminatory function of the organism identifies with or alienates ob-
jects, persons, and "abstractions" like values in the environment.
The ego boundary is the point where opposite sets of emotions (integrat-
ion/destruction) meet.
Like Federn, Perls outlined in numerous places that the contact
boundary is the point at which "I" ends and "not I" begins. Therefore,
what is inside the boundary we identify as ourselves. What is outside
is "not-us" and is alienated. What is identified as ours is valued and
approved; what is not-ours is strange and different. The boundary is:
... the zero-point between good and bad, identification
and alienation, familiar and strange, right and wrong,
self-expression and projection. -=
(Perls, 1969b, pp. 277-278)
Thus, where the ego is involved, the self/other dichotomy of the bound-
ary becomes one of alienation/identification, or even good/bad. Perls
outlined this in the following way:
As the term "identification" has become synonymous with
introjection, Federn (possibly realizing that introject-
ion is not the only existing form of identification) cre-
ated the conception of the Ego and its boundaries.
(Perls, 1947, p.141)
-164-
3.8.4 Demarcation at the boundaries
Wyss outlined Federn's concepts of inner and outer boundaries in
a very similar manner to Perls':
The "outer ego boundary" is the line of demarcation
between the ego and external reality, the "inner ego
boundary" that between the ego and the inner reality
of the id. These boundaries are dynamic ...
(Wyss, 1973, p.236)
The contact boundary may thus be seen as the edge of the organism
in any areathat point where "me" ends and "not me" begins. This,
according to Ronan (1977) is as true of abstractions like values and
memories as it is of the physical body. The boundary is determined by"
the identification/alienation function.
Whereas Federn outlined two zones, viz., an inner and outer zone,
Perls described three zones of contact. These are the inner (or self)
zone, the middle zone, and the outer zone. In the inner zone, we make
contact with our own feelings and perceptions. This is possible be-
cause we have the ability to "split" ourselves into "observer" and "sub-
ject" parts (Polster and Polster, 1973). In the outer zone we make
contact with the environment outside of us. In the middle zone, we make
contact with our thoughts, plans, rehearsals, dreamsour "computer."
The middle zone was the least well defined by Perls and it is difficult
to see why Perls' middle zone cannot fit comfortably into Federn's inner
zone. Perls outlined healthy awareness where contact moves smoothly
between the inner and outer zones, indicating movements towards the en-
vironment, and withdrawal into the self (1969b, 1975).
-165-
3.8.5 Conclusion
In a discussion of the historical roots of Gestalt therapy, Smith
(1976a) listed the concept of the contact boundary being the focus of
psychological events as a unique contribution of Perls'. The evidence
presented in this section, however, shows that Smith's contention is
mistaken; Perls' conceptualization of the role of the contact boundary
relied heavily on the work of Paul Federn.
-166-
3.9 Frieda Fromm-Reichmann (1889-1957)
Frieda Fromm-Reichmann was the daughter of a middle class banker
and an energetically progressive mother. She always aspired to be-
come a doctor, and graduated in medicine in 1914. During World War
I she was a member of Kurt Goldstein's staff, caring for brain-injured
soldiers, in the institution where Perls later worked. From her
work there she gained valuable experience in the physiology and pathol-
ogy of brain functioning which enabled her to develop a special under-
standing' of psychotic, panic states (Weigert , 1948, p.v).
In the early 1920's she became interested in psychiatry and psy-
chotherapy. She worked in Dresden with Schultz and studied his relax-
ation therapy, "autogenous training". She later worked in Munich, where
she studied psychoanalysis.
After completing her psychoanalytic training, she established the
private Psychoanalytic Training Institute of Southwest Germany, and was
a member of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society while Perls was in Vienna,
working and training as an analyst (Roazen, 1971).
In early 1935, when Germany was in the power of National Socialism,
Fromm-Reichmann emigrated to Palestine to escape anti-Jewish persecut-
ion. She later moved to the United States, where she joined Dexter
Bullard at his sanatorium in Maryland. She also had strong connections
with the William Alanson White Institute and the Academy of Psychoanaly-
sis, both in New York. In 1952 she received the Adolf Meyer Award for
-167-
her contributions to the understanding of neurosis.
Fritz Perls' references to Fromm-Reichmann are presented in appen-
dix III. Additionally, Laura Perls referred to Fromm-Reichmann as one
of her first teachers of psychoanalysis (personal communication, 3/1980).
It is therefore possible that, in addition to her direct influence on
Perls, Fromm-Reichmann could have influenced the formulation of Gestalt
therapy through Laura Perls.
For Fromm-Reichmann the aim of therapy was to bring:
... rejected drives and wishes, together with the patient's
individual and environmental moral standards, which are the
instruments for his rejections, into consciousness and in
this way place them at his free disposal.
(Fromm-Reichmann, 1941, p.49)
This approach, emphasizing the neurotic's rejection of parts of him/
herself that are unacceptable to introjected "moral standards" and
the need to restore awareness of these rejected parts, is strikingly
similar to Perls' position. Perls often stated that the primary
aim of therapy was the facilitation of awareness. The neurotic he
believed, has rejected certain parts of him/herself, which are outside
immediate awareness. The therapist works at re-integrating rejected,
fragmented parts of the personality, and thus freeing the person from
self-imposed restrictions (Perls, 1969a, 1973).
Fromm-Reichmann also stressed that successful therapy encourages
the development of responsibility and independence:
-168-
... by aiming psychotherapeutically at the development of
growth, maturation, and inner independence of the patient
... and his capacity for self-realization ...
(Fromm-Reichmann, 1949, p.82)
Perls adopted this approach; he worked to develop growth and maturity.
As previously noted, Perls defined maturity as: "The transcendence
from environmental support to self support" (1969a, p.30). Since
Gestalt therapy encourages the individual to take responsibility for
his/her own life, therapy does not aim to "solve" his/her life problems
and thereby make the client even more dependent on external support via
the therapist. Rather, the aim of the therapeutic process is to en-
able the patient to develop inner independence, where s/he is fully
capable of self-support and responsibility for self. As Perls wrote,
in therapy, the aim is:
... to give him (the patient) the means with which he can
solve present problems and any that may arise tomorrow or
next year.
(1973, p.63)
This belief may have been influenced by Fromm-Reichmann's state-
ment that:
... psychotherapy should furnish the patient with the
tools for the maintenance of his stability during per-
iods of uncertainty ...
(1949, p.83)
Fromm-Reichmann was reluctant to offer her own interpretations
and listened to what her clients were saying, refusing to be prejudiced
\
\
\
-169-
by her theoretical past. Weigert, in the introduction to her 1959
book, wrote:
She was ready to learn from her patient, and if he was
able to arrive at interpretations himself, this was so
much the better for the fortification of his weak self-
esteem.
(in Fromm-Reichmann, 1959, p.vii)
As early as 1941 Fromm-Reichmann had written of the need to interpret
parsimoniously, for fear of unduly "intellectualizing" and thus obscur-
ing therapeutic benefits. She stated:
Left alone, the patient will discover the unconscious
meaning of many of his experiences without interpretat-
ion.
( 1941, p.53)
Perls also rejected interpretation (e.g., Perls, 1969a). He be-
lieved that the therapist must work at all times to facilitate insight
by the individual into his/her own life difficulties. He wrote: "As
therapists we do not imagine we know more than the patient does himself"
(Perls, 1965, p.6)
3.9.4 Experience vs. intellectualization
Fromm-Reichmann (1941, p.52) wrote of the need for the individual to
develop an understanding of his/her problems both intellectually and
emotionally. This understanding comes most clearly while the indiv-
idual is re-experiencing problems, and then working through the dy-
namics of the conflicts or problems:
Hence our attitude now is to help our patients, in
neutrality, to re-experience and re-evaluate emot-
ional reactions.
-170-
Perls outlined a similar approach and clearly shows that any dis-
crepancy between the verbal concept of the self and the actual exper-
ience of the self results in neurosis (Perls et al., 1951). It is not
sufficient in Gestalt therapy to simply acquaint the individual with
the "whys", or underlying causes of a problem, but rather problems must
be worked through and re-experienced (Perls et al., 1951). Both Fromm-
Reichmann and Perls regarded intellectual acknowledgement of any diff-
iculty as being insufficient to adequately overcome obstacles. Rather,
an emotional component as well as an intellectual working through by the
individual, is necessary for long term gains to be made.
3.9.5 Conclusion
Fromm-Reichmann's and Perls' theories are similar in the following
areas:
1. Importance of awareness in therapy
2. Fragmentation of neurotic personality
3. Need for responsibility and independence in health
4. Need for self-support
5. Rejection of interpretation by therapist
6. Importance of experiencing problems, physically and emotionally
as well as intellectually.
In view of Perls' familiarity with Fromm-Reichmann's writings, as
well as Laura Perls' study with her, it is possible that Perls was in-
fluenced in these areas by Fromm-Reichmann's work.
-171-
3.10 Paul Schilder (1886-1940)
3.10.1 Biography and acknowledgement of his work
In 1927 Fritz Perls accepted a psychiatric assistantship at the
Vienna mental hospital directed by Schilder and Wagner-Jauregg.
During this period Perls was supervised by Schilder, and attended his
lectures. He described his superior as being bright, possessing a
good understanding of the structure and function of the organism (Perls,
1969a).
Schilder was recognized as a brilliant psychiatric practitioner and
theoretician (Roazen, 1971); as a member of the University of Vienna and
of the Vienna Society, he played an important role in European psychiat-
ry. Although he never completely acknowledged his allegiance to Freud,
he nonetheless furthered psychoanalytic theory, particularly in the aca-
demic world. Freud is said to have commented to Joseph Wortis:
... Schilder shares most of our views. In some respects,
though, he has opinions of his own, to which every man is
certainly entitled, and is thus outside the psychoanalytic
group.
(quoted in Roazen, 1971, pp.337-338)
In view of Schilder's position both as an eminent academic and as
Perls' superior, it is probable that Perls was influenced by the issues
which Schilder discussed. As these were primarily of a psychoanalytic
nature, they tend to be credited to Freud's influence. Laura Perls,
however, acknowledged Schilder as an influence on the formulation of
Gestalt therapy, and claimed that Schilder had already started combin-
ing analysis with Gestalt concepts well before the birth of Gestalt
-172-
therapy (Gaines, 1979).
3.10.2 Personality
Schilder wrote of the personality:
Phenomonologically speaking, every personality appears
to be a dissociated personality; personality disorders
only bring this physiological dissociation into great-
er relief.
(Schilder, 1925, p.22)
This view has some similarity to Perls' work. He regarded the person-
ality as always existing in a state of flux, with always something to be
attended to, always something to be done. For Perls, the personality
was always split or fragmented to some degree, because there was always
something to be integrated, something to be assimilated. The process
of figure-background formation and destruction is an ongoing one.
Perls may have interpreted the second part of the quotation and reform-
ulated it in his conception of the manner in which the body reflects the
emotions. Psychosomatic/somatopsychic unity is continually stressed in
Gestalt therapy and Schilder's work may have underlined other theorists
who expressed similar views which were acquired by Perls.
3.10.3 Experience
Schilder stressed the role of experience in a person's life:
... experience also demonstrates that all these dissociated
and part-selves express themselves in the experience of the
individual in an integrated manner.
-173-
Perls discussed the role of experience and the manner in which
experience transforms the whole person in a similar way. He real-
ized that past experience plays a role in the perceptual apparatus,
and that the way in which a person perceives, as well as what s/he
perceives is a function of the experience of the past (Perls et al.,
1951). In his 1947 book, Perls illustrated this point with reference
to scotoma and linguistic blocks.
Schilder described the manner in which the individual acquires
experience and how it is encoded:
... all experience arranges itself ... into a natural
order. Each individual experience becomes especially
related to its logically appropriate sphere, as well as
to its related individualistic-personal sphere ...
Perls' writings are largely in agreement with Schilder's position.
When the organism responds to the hierarchy of needs, the need which is
most dominant at any moment becomes figure. This figure is attended
to by bdth motoric and sensoric activity. Thus, the organism can only
arrange experience into a natural order. Perls wrote of the manner in
which past experiences are transmitted into the present. He outlined
the thesis that when attention and awareness are combined the person
experiences the present or "now" (Perls, 1969a, 1973, 1975). The great-
er the intensity of the "now" experience, the greater the chance of
tracing, or what Perls referred to as a grooving process. This means
that there is an after-image (or residue image) which links up the past
and the acquisition of experience. This process always provides one
part of the Gestalt, the background against which foreground stands.
-174-
Like Schilder, Perls regarded experience as being related to an indiv-
idualistic personal sphere.
3.10.4 Psychosomatics
Schilder (1929, p.416) described what he regarded as the somatic
core of neurosis:
If one asks whether a neurosis has an organic background
or not, one must answer that of course every neurosis must
have an organic basis because normal life, normal psychic
life, also has an organic background, and one cannot make
a distinction between the organic and the psychic.
Perls similarly regarded neurosis as a characteristic of the whole per-
son, physical as well as psychological. According to Perls' holistic
view of mankind, every stimulus affects the organism as a whole, and not
specific parts in isolation. Therefore, Perls, like Schilder, did not
make a distinction between the organic and the psychic.
3.10.5 Conclusion
Although it is difficult to separate the influence of Schilder
from that of Freud, he may have clarified Perls' understanding of the
following areas:
1. Ongoing fragmentation of the personality
2. Importance of experience
3. Natural ordering of experience
4. Psychosomatic indivisibility
Chapter 4
Gestalt Psychology
-175-
4.1 Introduction
Gestalt psychology evolved from the work of a number of individuals
working primarily in the field of perception. Among its founders were
Wertheimer, Kohler, Koffka and Gelb. Goldstein and Lewin, who later
went on to develop their own theoretical orientations, also contributed
to Gestalt psychology in their early work (Perls, L., personal communic-
ation, 3/1980). Wertheimer (1970) wrote of the phenomenological method
as being basic to Gestalt psychology and listed among its phenomenologic-
al predecessors Edmund Husserl and Carl Stumpf. The phenomenological
method was similarly basic to Gestalt therapy (see section 5.2).
4.2 Perls' grounding in Gestalt psychology
Perls, in many of his works, made passing reference to the influence
of Gestalt psychology, but gave little indication of the extent of that
influence. This may well be explained at least partially by the fact that
Perls did not have a solid background in Gestalt psychology. However,
Laura Perls did have a thorough grounding and orientation in this discip-
line (refer to chapter 7 on Laura Perls), and she provided much of the
framework or skeleton of Gestalt therapy. This view is supported by
Rhyne (1980), who wrote that in her talks with Perls, configurational
thinking and understanding did not freely flow in a natural, spontaneous
manner. In similar conversations with Laura Perls, Rhyne sensed an "easy
access to basic ideas underlying both Gestalt psychology and therapy"
(1980, p.80).
Perls expressed his lack of knowledge of Gestalt psychology in the
-176-
following way: "I have not read any of their text-books, only some
papers of Lewin, Wertheimer and Kohler" (1969b, p.62). Laura Perls
quoted him "in his last year" as saying to her, "You know, I really
wish I had understood Goldstein better when I was working with him"
(personal communication, 3/1980).
Perls was primarily psychoanalytically oriented, both as a therapist/
analyst and as a patient. It is significant that Perls did not use the
word "Gestalt" in any title nor in any significant manner when he wrote
Ego, Hunger and Aggression (1947), his first major attempt to outline his
theory. Rosenfeld (1978b, p.13) commented on this point:
There's not a lot in Ego, Hunger and Aggression that
points to the really extensive development that he
made of the whole metaphor of Gestalt ...
4.3 The naming of Gestalt therapy
The very fact that Perls called his method of therapy "Gestalt ther-
apy" (over strong opposition from Laura Perls and his co-authorssee
section 1.3 and chapter 7) indicated that he saw significant links and
connections between his therapeutic approach and the tradition of Gestalt
psychology. Perls regarded Gestalt therapy with its "dependence on the
laws of Gestalt dynamics" as "the next step after Freud in the history of
psychiatry" (Perls, 1969b, p.34). Simkin reported Perls as saying of
Gestalt psychology:
... the thing that fascinated me was the Gestalt approach.
. For the first time, the breaking away from the piecemeal
consideration and getting perspective.
(in Ruitenbeek, 1972, p.117)
-177-
A number of Gestalt therapists have discussed Perls' choice of the
name "Gestalt" (e.g., Enright, 1975b; Smith, 1976a; Rosenfeld, 1978b;.Yon-
tef, 1979). There is no consensus, however, on the extent to which the
principles of Gestalt psychology contributed to the development of Gest-
alt therapy. Enright (1975b), for example, suggested that the name
Gestalt therapy was an. historical accident and that it is misleading to
attach too much weight to it. According to Enright, Perls chose the
name Gestalt because Gestalt psychology was the most recent theoretical
influence, and "was uppermost in his (Perls') mind" (Enright, 1975b, p.127).
This "historical accident" theory, however, is not upheld by Perls'
own work. In his autobiography (1969b), Perls described his relation to
the Gestalt psychologists as a peculiar one, but in no way denied that such
a relationship existed. He acknowledged his adoption of the fundamental
idea of the unfinished situation, or incomplete gestalt, to Gestalt therapy.
He also stated his admiration for their work, although disagreeing with
their logical positivism. Perls' gratitude for the contributions made by
classical Gestalt psychology to Gestalt therapy was reflected both in his
dedication of his first book to the memory of Max Wertheimer, and in this
poem which appeared in his autobiography:
Reality is nothing but
The sum of all the awareness
As you experience here and now
The ultimate of science thus appears
As Husserl's unit of phenomenon
And Ehrenfeld's discovery:
The irreducible phenomenon of all
Awareness, the one he named
And we still call
GESTALT.
(Perls, 1969b, p.30)
178-
Laura Perls (1978) discussed why, in retrospect, "we" called
the approach Gestalt therapy:
"Gestalt" is a holistic concept A gestalt is a
structured entity that is more than, or different from,
its parts. It is the foreground figure that stands
out from its ground, it "exists" For the develop-
ment of Gestalt therapy the work of Wertheimer, Gold-
stein and Lewin become particularly important. Any-
body who wants fully to understand Gestalt therapy would
do well to study Wertheimer on productive thinking, Lewin
on the incomplete gestalt and the crucial importance of
interest for gestalt formation, and Kurt Goldstein on the
organism as an indivisible totality (p.33).
4.4 Reactions of Gestalt psychologists
In 1950 Laura Perls warned that the academic Gestalt psychologists
would not accept the name "Gestalt" for a therapeutic approach (person-
al communication, 3/1980). She was correct, and Perls later wrote:
"The academic Gestaltists of course never accepted me. I certainly was
not a pure Gestaltist" (1969b, p.62).
One of the first Gestalt psychologists to broach the subject of the
relationship between the two approaches was Arnheim (1974), an "old
Wertheimer disciple" (Perls, L., personal communication 3/1980). His
one paragraph letter to Contemporary Psychology was insufficient to gain
any understanding of his views. He did, however, believe that Wertheim-
er would "fly into one of his magnificent rages" at the use of "Gestalt"
in Gestalt therapy (Arnheim, 1974, p.22). This projection of Arnheim's
was completely rejected by Laura Perls, who said simply: "he wouldn't
have" (personal communication, 3/1980).
-179-
Henle, one of the leading Gestalt psychologists in the United
States was described by Laura Perls as being hostile towards the use
of "Gestalt" in this way, a view also gained by this author in personal
communication with Henle. In her article (Henle, 1978) titled:"The
relations between Gestalt psychology and Gestalt therapy", she was highly
critical of the use of the word "Gestalt" in relation to therapy. To
back up her argument, she quoted from Perls' workinaccurately and out
of context. This suggested a complete lack of understanding of Gestalt
therapy. Her final conclusion was that: "the two approaches have nothing
in common" (p.23).
This chapter, previously published in part in The Gestalt Journal
(Barlow, 1981) proposes, however, that the two approaches have much in common.
No claim is made that Perls used the framework and terminology he acquired
in the same way that these were used by the Gestalt psychologists.
Rather, Perls simply collected terms and concepts from many diverse discip-
lines and freely interpreted and modified them to suit his own purposes..
There is an unusually high number of quotations throughout this diss-
ertation, and particularly this chapter. However, only through a critical
analysis of quotations and extracts from earlier writings in the Gestalt
literature can a meaningful conclusion be drawn as to the degree to which
Perls adopted, developed and integrated certain notions and concepts from
Gestalt psychology.
-180-
4.5 The organism/environment interaction
Basically, Gestalt therapy is concerned with the interaction be-
tween the organism and its environment (Perls et al., 1951). The
organism grows by assimilating from the environment what it needs for
its growth (Perls et al., 1951). In the healthy organism, many needs
are present at any one time.- The individual chooses the importance of
various needs to him/herself and organizes them into a hierarchy of im-
portance. The most dominant need forms, or becomes figure. In order
to satisfy this need, the organism searches its environment for the des-
ired object (sensory activity); when the object is found, the organism
acts to assimilate it (motor activity). The concept of the connection
between the sensoric and motor activities has been extensively discussed
by the Gestalt psychologists for many years (e.g., Koffka, 1935; Hartmann,
1935). When the needed object has been assimilated, the Gestalt is
closed, and a state of equilibrium is reached. The formerly dominant need
recedes from awareness (becomes ground), and the energy thus freed is
directed towards the next most dominant need. Organisms are thus self-
regulatory or homeostatic (Smuts, 1926; Lewin, 1935; Goldstein, 1939;
Perls, 1973; Latner, 1973). In this way, the organism was regarded as
being "born with the capacity to cope with life" '(Simkin,'1976, p.17).
Goldstein for instance was said to have emphasized:
... the inner determinants of behaviour and the principle
that the organism finds the environment which is most app-
ropriate for "self-actualization", (although of course, the
organism) ... is not immune to the events in the external
world.
(Hall and Lindzey, 1957, p.304)
-181-
4.6 Figure-ground differentiation/pragnanz
Perls worked with Kurt Goldstein at the Goldstein Institute for
Brain Damaged Soldiers in 1926. Goldstein expanded Gestalt psychol-
ogy as a study of perception to that of the study of the whole person,
based largely on Koffka's (1935) work. His views later appeared in
The Organism (Goldstein, 1939), and came to be known as "organismic
theory".
Goldstein argued that the primary organization of organismic funct-
ioning is the figure-ground. He proposed three dynamic concepts: (i)
the equalization processes or tension reduction systems that keep the or-
ganism centered or balanced; (ii) the processes of "getting what one wants
in the world" (a concept adopted by Perls extensively in psychotherapy);
and (iii) the notion of self-actualization. In this theory, self-actual-
ization was the "master motive." The satisfaction of any specific need
becomes figure when it is the dominant need at that time for the whole or-
ganism. This notion was also incorporated almost verbatim from Goldstein
(see Perls, 1969a). It was not until much later that Perls fully under-
stood and acquired the concept. Perls (1969b) wrote that while he worked
for Goldstein, he had not understood the term self-actualization; twenty
five years later, when he heard it used by Maslow, it acquired more meaning.
Perls (1973, p.3) stated that the first premise of Gestalt therapy is
that:
... it is the organization of facts, perceptions...and not the
individual items of which they are composed, that defines them
and gives them their specific and particular meaning.
-182-
Wheeler (1931) had recorded this notion as the first of his eight
"organismic" laws, which hold that any item of reality is in its own
right an integrated whole, that is more than the sum of its parts.
Fantz argued that academic Gestalt psychologists did not fully apply
the principles of Gestalt formation (similarity, symmetry, pragnanz)
to organic perceptionse.g., feelings, emotions or body awareness:
"nor did they integrate the problems of motivation with those of percep-
tion" (Fantz, 1975a, p.81). Fantz claimed that this integration was
successfully introduced by Perls. It may be, however, that Fantz had
overlooked the work of Goldstein and other Gestalt psychologists, which
shows how the figure-ground and other principles can be applied to the
total motivation and action processes of individuals, and how physical
and mental pathologies may be viewed in terms of these principles.
It is significant that Goldstein subtitled his book A Holistic Approach
to Biology: Derived from Pathological Data in Man. In fact, Perls
appears to be simply the first to apply such principles, and especially
that of the figure-ground, to psychotherapy.
This figure-ground concept was quickly assimilated into the main
body of Gestalt therapy and today it is almost synonymous with it.
The figure-ground principle stated that every perception is organized
into a figure which stands out from a background. However, these are
not necessarily properties of the stimulus object, but rather of the
psychological field. Koffka (1935) devoted five chapters to the en-
vironmental field, and to figure-ground differentiation. Although
Koffka did attempt to incorporate memory, will and action, and referred
to the "silent organization" of human experience, figure remained limit-
ed essentially to inside-the-form visual phenomena, and ground to outside-
-183-
the-form phenomena.
Perls et al. (1951), introduced the concept of needs into the
"psychotherapeutic" figure-ground concept (i.e., needs arise and the
Gestalt recedes when the need is satisfied). Koffka, however, re-
ferred to a super sensory ground, from which all sensory figures arise,
and to which all figures return once needs have been satisfied. It can
be argued that in Gestalt psychology as in Gestalt therapy, Gestalt form-
ation is considered a primary characteristic of organismic functioning.
Perls (1973, p.9) discussed the connection between needs and figure-
ground differentiation:
Formulating this principle in terms of Gestalt psy-
chology, we can say that the dominant need ... be-
comes the foreground figure , and the other needs rec-
ede, at least temporarily, into the background.
A field that is poorly organized is still organized by the individ-
ual. The Gestalt psychologists' principle of pragnanz suggested that any
psychological field is as well organized as conditions permit at that
time. Thus it is possible, as was recognized by Koffka and Kohler years
ago, that certain circumstances can interfere with the Gestalt formation
process (e.g., stress
}
motivation). This concept was adopted by Perls,
who went on to argue that in neurotic self-regulation, certain forces are
prevented from having their full effect on the individual. Thus, the
meeting or contact between the self and the environment may be less than
optimal, resulting in a distorted perception of the contact process.
Kohler (1947, p.169) stated: "To a degree, the organization of the field
may yield to stress", where stress referred to the particular balance ass-
ociated with the parts of the field. This position was endorsed by Perls
(e.g., 1947).
184-
The impression that the Gestalt principle of figure-ground is merely
the equivalent of "attention" in other systems is not implied here. The
Gestalt psychologists emphasized figure-ground as a spontaneous and nat-
ural organization which does not depend on learning, but is an inevitable
consequence of man's perceptual apparatus.
Perls et al. (1951), criticized the Gestalt psychologists for not
having sufficient interest in the meaning of "ground". To Perls > ground
is everything that is progressively eliminated from attention in the ex-
perienced situation.. This criticism may be seen as an overstatement,
for it is contrary to the principle of "what is, is" (implying acceptance
of the self) (Perls, 1973); it is also contrary to the anti-analytic
position generally espoused by Gestalt therapists and Gestalt psycholog-
ists. The later introduction of the concept of grooving shows how Perls'
attitude to this concept changed (Baumgardner, 1975). Both the Gestalt
psychologists and Perls adopted the position that the figure is more im-
pressive, it dominates consciousness and is usually mentioned before the
ground. For instance, an examination of Kohler's work (1924) provided
a clear, unambiguous picture of figure-ground differentiation:
The ground ... is generally localized behind the figure,
is less structured or differentiated, less penetrating,
less independent, less meaningful, and in a sense, less
"real" and lively than the figure ... The figure has
"thing"character and the ground "stuff"character, a
thing being considered as stuff plus form ...
(in Hartmann, 1935, p.26)
Koffka followed Rubin when he stated:
Ground is more simply structured, more unordered than figure,
which is more penetrating, stable and thing-like ...
(in Calkins, 1926, p.137)
-185-
Both the Gestalt psychologists and Perls adopted the position
that the figure is more impressive, it dominates consciousness and is
usually mentioned before the ground.
4.7 Closure
One of the important laws in Gestalt psychology was that of closure
(Koffka, 1935). One characteristic of perceptions is the individual's
movement towards closure. Closure for Perls was achieved by concentrat-
ing on the now, by rejecting intellectualization and flights into the past
or future, and by accepting responsibility for ourselves (Ronan, 1977).
Polster and Polster (1973) suggested that closure was more than a percept-
ual reflex. Rather, it is a personal reflex which is frequently thwart-
ed by societal constraints and thus interrupts some processes which are
forced into the background where they remain as "unfinished business".
Perls stated the place of "closure" in Gestalt therapy:
... one of the basic laws of Gestalt formationthe tension
arising out of the need for closure is called frustration, .-.
the imbalance is annihilated, it disappears. The incident
is closed.
Just as balance and discovery are met on all levels of
existence, so are frustration, satisfaction and closure.
(Perls, 1969b, pp.86-87)
Once closure has allowed the dominant need to recede from awareness,
the individual returns to a state of equilibrium for that need, and the
next most dominant need emerges.
-186-
4.8 The concept of equilibrium
Many of the broad philosophical features of the Gestalt psychol-
gists' work, such as the laws of pragnanz and closure, are related to
a fundamental concept which runs through the whole of Gestalt therapy
and Gestalt psychologythat of equilibrium. The perceptual field
and its underlying isomorphic cortical field are said to be dynamic
wholes, which, like a magnetic field of force in physics, tend towards
equilibrium. When the psychological field is disturbed, by the intro-
duction of new forces, the whole undergoes a new alignment of forces un-
til equilibrium is once more established. In short, it is a fundament-
al property of percepts to tend towards stability, and to remain as
stable as conditions permit. Perls stated:
Man seems to be born with a sense of social and psycho-
logical balance as acute as the sense of physical bal-
ance ... difficulties spring not from the desire to re-
ject such equilibrium, but from misguided movements aimed
towards finding and maintaining it.
(Perls, 1973, p.27)
Gobar (1968) discussed the Gestalt psychologists' conception of
equilibrium. He saw "psychological equilibrium" as analagous to the
concepts of "physical equilibrium" and "physiological equilibrium"
(p.147). He did repeat the Gestalt psychologists' contention that
psychological disorders involve "bad configuration" and a pervasive
disturbance of the equilibrium of the psychological system as a whole
(p.128).
-187-
4.9 The role of attention, awareness and experience
Attention is important in Gestalt therapy because the therapist
usually endeavours to facilitate the individual towards attending to
cortical processes or phenomena. Ternus (1926, p.156) stated that
attention:
...embraces the entire figure unless instructions to the
contrary are given ... and the centre of attention typic-
ally coincides with the figural centre of the presented
object.
Attention for Perls (1969a) was a deliberate way of listening or attend-
ing to the foreground. Fantz (1975a) regarded perception as a function
of the figure-ground relationship. A direct result of the focus of
attention and activity is called the figure or Gestalt; what does not be-
come part of the focus remains background (Latner, 1973). Perls would
probably have concurred with Henle (1961, p.163) when she stated that
"attention intensifies the process which underlies the perception of an
object."
The role of awareness in Gestalt therapy is somewhat obscure, al-
though it is of fundamental importance. Polster and Polster (1973) des-
cribed awareness or experience as one of the three touchstones of Gestalt
therapy, the other two being contact and experiment. Enright described
awareness in the following manner:
... awareness is a state of consciousness that develops
spontaneously when organismic attention becomes focused
on some particular region of the organism-environment
contact boundary at which an especially important and
complex transaction is occurring.
(Enright, 1970, p.108)
-i88-
A technique of Gestalt therapy is the development of the continuum of
awarenessthe therapist facilitating a person increasing awareness in
him/herself. Most people interrupt or block awareness if it is unpleas-
ant, and avoid it, developing defence mechanisms such as intellectualiz-
ation or flights into the past or future, anxiety, denial, deflection or
other "coping" strategies. Kreuger (1928) had foreshadowed such tech-
niques when reflecting that an emotional state tended to be dissipated
by paying attention to it as such. When attention and awareness come
togetherthe "fuzzy twin"there is an experience of the "now" (Baum-
gardner, 1975).
The greater the experience of the now, the more choices become
available to the person. And, although it is not apparently mentioned
elsewhere, Baumgardner (1975) credited Perls with saying that the great-
er the awareness, the greater the chance of tracingotherwise called a
"grooving" process. This means that there is an after-image that links
up the past and the acquisition of experience.
This concept is firmly rooted in Gestalt psychology. Gottschaldt
(1926) wrote that past experience is an explanatory concept in that such
experience constitutes an independent force, capable of modifying subse-
quent perception in a specific manner. Baumgardner (1975) concurred to
a large degree. The grooving always provides one part of the Gestalt
the background.
4.10 The here and now
Perls (1966a, p.14) set out an equation: "now = experience = aware-
ness = reality." The only awareness is here and now, whether it be the
-189-
past (memories) or the future (anticipation)past and future events
are experienced in the present, as they occupy present processes.
Naranjo (1970, p.66) contended that Gestalt therapy "aims at the sub-
ordination of these thought forms to life."
Perls insisted that to stray from the present distracts from the
living quality of reality (Perls, 1969a). This emphasis on the "now"
is consistent with the Gestalt psychologists' definition of psychology
as the study of the immediate experience of the whole organism, the "now"
as it is perceived (Marx and Hillix, 1973).
Asch (1968, p.170) in writing a brief outline of Gestalt psychology
suggested that it: "assigns a place of crucial importance in psycholog-
ical enquiry to the data of immediate experience."
Murphy and Jensen set out the Gestalt psychologists' position with
regard to personality and present immediate experience, a position endor-
sed by Perls:
Just as the parts fail to explain the whole, so the past
fails to explain the present or the present the future ...
at the present instant the future seems simply non existent . ..
(Murphy and Jensen, 1932, p.24)
4.11 The concept of boundaries and neuroses
Hartmann (1935) referred to the work of Rubin who discussed the role
of contours and boundaries (Koffka, 1935) between figure and ground.
Koffka went further and distinguished between the self and others. Kohler
(1922, 1947) outlined the process whereby the environment meets the
self (or the individual). Every part of the organism is said to be
-190-
constantly influenced both by the outside world and by other parts
within. Kohler's concept of boundaries suggested:
... the inner states of any finite system develop relative to
more or less fixed conditions along its boundaries and its
interior.
(Kohler, 1922, p.61)
These then are boundary problems, the state of any region of the system
at any particular time is also influencedeven determined by the state
of every other region. This principle constitutes the fundamental
thought underlying the theory of Gestalten. Gestalt therapy practically
reiterated this principle when it stated that neuroses occur at the
boundary.
Perls has incorporated this concept and amplified it in most of his
books (e.g., Perls et al., 1951; Perls 1969b, 1973). He stated:
The study of the way in which a person functions in his
environment is the study of what goes on at the contact
boundary between the individual and his environment. It
is at this contact boundary that the psychological events
take place. Our thoughts, our actions, our behaviour,
and our emotions are our way of experiencing and meeting
those boundary events.
(Perls, 1973, p.17)
In fact, Perls did not make a clear distinction between the contact
boundary and the ego boundary, which is the differentiation between the
self and otherness. However, this concept of Koffka's has been largely
incorporated, as shown by Perls' description of the identification and
alienation functions of the ego boundary. Inside the ego boundary there
is cohesion, love and co-operation, while outside the ego boundary is
suspicion and strangeness (Perls, 1969b).
-191-
In Gestalt therapy neuroses are regarded as disturbances at the
contact boundary:
inability to find and maintain a proper balance between
himself and the rest of the world ...
(Perls, 1973, p.31)
In the healthy individual, the process of Gestalt formation and
recession flows smoothly. If Gestalten are not adequately fulfilled,
blocked energy thus results in anxiety. Perls (1973) interpreted
Goldstein's view of anxiety as implying that anxiety is the result of
"catastrophic expectations". This can lead to detachment and isolation
of organismic parts, or in other words, a "splitting" of the personal-
ity. Baumgardner (1975) suggested that anxiety indicates that the indiv-
idual has left the present for an imaginary journey into fantasy or the
future. Anxiety is regarded as a substitute emotion which blocks aware-
ness of what is really going on inside the individual. This is the view
of Perls (1969a) and other Gestalt therapists who have reiterated Gold-
stein's (1939) description of the manner in which neurosis can result from
anxiety.
4.12 Mind-body position
Perls adopted the "holistic doctrine", which stated that man is a
unified organisma fact Perls suggested was ignored by psychiatry and
psychotherapy, which: "are still operating in terms of the old mind-body
split" (Perls, 1973, p.9). However, we only need to refer back to
Wertheimer, who, discussing the mind-body split stated: "The principle
-192-
here, is that something mental is meaningfully coupled with something
physical" (Wertheimer, 1925, p.8). Thus, to observe the physical is
to infer the mental. It was further expanded by Wertheimer, who care-
fully explained how often it is that various physical processes are
"Gestalt identical" with mental processes,
Gestalt psychologists formulated the law of "psycho-physical iso-
morphism" which began from the prima facie dualism of mind and body:
... molar events in experience are structually ident-
ical to the corresponding molar physiological events
in the brain.
(Henle, 1978, p.25)
This is, in fact, a dualist position. Perls' position on the body-
mind debate is not entirely clear. He espoused a "monist" position
some places when he maintained that we do not have a body but rather:
"We are a body, we are somebody" (Perls, 1969a, p.6). In Ego, Hunger
and Aggression, he suggested that: "body and soul are identical 'in re,'
though not 'in verbo'; the words 'body' and 'soul' denoted two aspects
of the same thing" (Perls, 1947, p.33). He further suggested that dual-
istic and parallelistic theories are based on an artificial split which
has no existence in reality. Although Perls considered himself a monist,
a number of extracts from his writings suggest that he was an uncertain
dualist, referring (1947, p.110) to "purely mental experiences" which
comprise: "wishes, phantasies and daydreams"; hardly the words of a pure
monist.
The position espoused by Perls was not dissimilar to that of Werth-
eimer (1925) who stated that when a person is timid, afraid or energetic,
happy or sad, it can be shown often that the course of his/her physical
-193-
process is "Gestalt identical" with the course pursued by the mental
process. Perhaps such statements influenced Perls when he introduced
"the concept of the unified field" which stated that in psychotherapy,
what a person does gives the therapist clues as to what s/he thinks
(Perls, 1973, p.12). Gobar (1968) in referring to psychotherapy, stat-
ed that the concept of "psychological equilibrium" is analogous to the
concepts of "physical equilibrium" and "physiological equilibrium".
If Gobar is adopting the word "analogous" in the same way that the Short-
er Oxford Dictionary (1973) outlined its meaning, i.e., "equality of
ratios" or "equivalency" then the respective positions of Gestalt psych-
ologists' usage and that of Perls may be seen as somewhat confused.
Henle stated in her book Documents of Gestalt Psychology (1961)
that Gestalt psychologists hold that expressive behavior reveals its
meaning directly in personality. The approach according to Henle, and
one adopted by Perls, (1947, 1969a) was based on the "principle of iso-
morphism" (Henle, 1961, p.308), whereby processes in one medium are sim-
ilar in their structural identity to those in a different medium. App-
lied to body and mind, this means that:
... if the forces which determine bodily behavior are
structurally similar to those which characterize the
corresponding mental states, it may become understand-
able why physical meaning can be read off directly from
a person's appearance and conduct.
(Henle, 1961, p.308)
Another direct quote from Henle is compatible with the views ex-
pressed by Perls in most of his works:
-194-
The way a person dresses, keeps his room, handles the
language ... can be called expressive in that they per-
mit conclusions about the personality or the temporary
state of mind of the individual.
(Henle, 1961, p.302)
The following quotation illustrated the Gestalt approach outlined from
1951 onwards:
... everything the patient does, obvious or concealed,
is an expression of the self. His leaning forward and
pushing back, his abortive kicks, his fidgets, his subt-
leties of enunciation, his split-second hesitations be-
tween words, his handwriting, his use of metaphor and
language ... all are on the surface, all are obvious,
and all are meaningful.
(Perls, 1973, p.76)
Henle's criticisms are somewhat diluted when considering one section of
Hartmann's book Gestalt Psychology, published in 1935. Hartmann stated
that: "the monism of Gestalt is implied" when it is asserted that the
psychological and the physical are "one of the same reality (and) are
expressed in two different conceptual systems" (Hartmann, 1935, p.71).
(It is a Zen notion that mind and body are not one, not two, but between
one and two). Further, Gestalt psychology equated bodily with mental
events, since the same configuration is found in both. It is this con-
cept which appears to be one of the most important in Gestalt therapy.
The therapist can only ever be in touch with a client from various extra-
polations and "interpretation" of physical processes from mental material.
The total organism is not to be analyzed into parts. Perls stated that:
We believe further that the "mental-physical" or "mind-
body" split is a totally artificial one, and that to
concentrate on either term in the dichotomy is to pre-
serve neurosis, not to cure it.
(Perls, 1973, p.53)
-195-
4.13 Psychotherapy and integration
Gobar (1968) was one of the few authors to have discussed the role
and purpose of psychotherapy in Gestalt psychology. He suggested that
in Gestalt theory, all psychological disorders involve, in some form or
other, the destruction of a basic psychological structure and a concom-
itant generation of a "bad configuration". This results in a pervas-
ive disturbance of the equilibrium of the psychological makeup as a whole.
It is important to examine the rationale for therapist assistance/
intervention with clients. Perls (1973) suggested that: "successful
therapy frees in the patient, the ability to abstract and to integrate his
abstractions" (p.103). The long-term goal of therapy:
... must be to give him the means with which he can solve
his present problems and any that may arise tomorrow or
next year.
(Perls, 1973, p.63)
If successful therapy integrates the personality (Perls, 1973),
then the approach described by Gobar (1968) has much in common with that
of Perls. According to Gobar, the concept of "cure" in psychotherapy
(cure comes from the Latin cura meaning "care") can be seen as:
... the process of the reconstruction of the psychological
system and the resultant restoration of equilibrium.
(Gobar, 1968, p.128)
For Gobar, the principle of equilibrium holds for all psychological pro-
cesses including the perceptual and cognitive at all genetic levels. It
also: "constitutes the explanatory principle for the fundamental process
of adaptation of the organism-environment" (Gobar, 1968, p.147).
-196-
Perls adopted a position on awareness similar to that espoused by
various writers on Gestalt psychology such as Hartmann (1935). One of
Perls' statements which has been popular in the literature gave a clear
insight into the nature of cure in psychotherapy: "awareness per seof
and by itselfcan be curative" (1969a, p.17). Hartmann wrote that:
"an emotional state tends to be dissipated by attention to it as such"
(1935, p.83). Kreuger also .added to this concept of cure when he
stated:
An emotional complex loses in its intensity and plasticity
of its emotional character to the degree that it becomes
analyzed, so that its parts become relatively separated, or
that the partial moments in it come out clearly as such.
(1928, p.62)
Once again, the writings of early psychologists appear similar to
those of Perls.
4.14 Conclusion
This chapter has shown that Gestalt psychology and Gestalt therapy
have the following concepts in common:
1. Figure-ground interaction
2. Homeostasis
3. Self-actualization
4. Centering and equilibrium; need for stability
5. Psycho-physical parallelism
6. Hierarchy of needs
7. Pragnanz/organization
8. Importance of closure
-197-
9. Attention and awareness.
10. Present-centeredness
11. Importance of boundary events
12. Mind-body position fluctuating between monism
and dualism.
Henle's (1978) conclusion that the two approaches have nothing
in common is thus mistaken. Rather, Fritz Perls adopted many of
the perceptual observations made by the Gestalt psychologists, and
used them as powerful metaphors in developing a simple, effective
model of organismic behaviour and change. Gestalt psychology there-
fore, was one of the fundamental theoretical orientations which con-
tributed greatly to Perls' formulation of Gestalt therapy.
Chapter 5
Philosophy
-198-
5.1 Existentialism
5.1.1 Introduction
Existential psychology and psychotherapy are concerned with the
individual as a person, rather than with mental illness. Existent-
ialism addresses itself to the estrangement of the person from him/
herself, and seeks to overcome the resultant split between subject
and object, to facilitate awareness of reality and existence.
According to Friedman (1962) existentialism can be described as
a reaction against the static, the abstract, the rational and the
stringently scientific and mechanistic. There is instead a regard
for the dynamic and the concrete, for personal involvement, choice,
and commitment, and to the actual existence of the person as a start-
ing point for therapy. The existential therapist relates to the in-
dividual as a whole, attempting to grasp his/her way of being.
Being has a special meaning in existentialism, reflecting self-support,
choice, free will and responsibility. Conversely, non-being reflects
environmental support, reliance on the standards of others. Each per-
son structures his/her world, creating their "being-in-the-world".
The interaction between the person and the environment is understood as
a system in itself.
The sense of "being" is not part of environmental forces. It is
one's own experience of existence, entirely individualistic and beyond
manipulation or influence from outside. It is the ability or capacity
to be conscious and aware of oneself as being in the world, as a person
who can choose to do various activities, who initiates what is happen-
ing in the world around (Kemp, 1970).
-199-
Although many authors do not distinguish between existentialism
and phenomenology, this distinction will be made here. Existential-
ism takes cognizance of the whole structure of the individual's exist-
ence, recognizes participation in more than one "world" and strives to
reconstruct the world or existence of the individual. Existential
psychotherapy thus operates in a larger frame of reference than does
phenomenology, which is primarily concerned with the inner world of
the individual's existence (Spiegelberg, 1959).
Perls (1957) described Gestalt therapists as existentialists.
He later wrote (1969a) that Gestalt therapy was one of three types of
existential therapy, the other two being Frankl's Logotherapy and Bins-
wanger 's Daseins Therapy. He went on to describe Gestalt therapy as
"the first existential philosophy to stand on its own two feet" (Perls,
1969a, p.17).
In attributing his introduction to existentialism, Perls complete-
ly ignored his wife Laura's background, and the influence she had on
the formulation of Gestalt therapy. He wrote that while he was in
Frankfurt he was preoccupied with psychoanalysis, and therefore:
... remained uninvolved with the existentialists there:
Buber, Tillich, Scheier. This much had penetrated:
existential philosophy demands taking responsibility
for one's existence.
(Perls, 1969b, p.60)
Laura Perls, however, studied under Buber and Tillich in the late 1920's
and early 1930's (Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980). It was
from this source that Gestalt therapy developed with strong existential-
ist notions.
-200-
The following existentialists were particularly important to the
development of Gestalt therapy: Heidegger, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche,
Vaihinger, Buber, Tillich and Binswanger. Their theories> and their
influence on Perls, will be examined in this chapter.
-201-
5.1.2 Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)
5.1.2.1 Biography and acknowledgement by Perls
Martin Heidegger was born in Messkirch (Baden). He was educated
at the Gymnasium at Konstanz, and later at the University of Freiburg,
where he studied theology and philosophy. He later studied mathemat-
ics and physics, before deciding in 1914 to read for his doctorate.
His dissertation was titled The Theory of Judgement in Psychologism
(O'Connor, 1973b). When Husserl came to Freiburg in 1916 he exerted
a profound influence on Heidegger, who became his assistant in 1920.
Heidegger next took up an academic position at the University of Mar-
burg under Professor N. Hartmann (Kockelmans, 1967). He returned to
Freiburg in 1928 as professor ordinarius. When Husserl went officially
into retirement, he recommended Heidegger as his successor.
Heidegger is generally considered to be the single most influent-
ial figure in existentialist philosophy (Shaffer and Galinsky, 1974).
Harper (1959) listed the foremost contemporary exponents of existential
philosophy as Heidegger and Buber, and these two have been most influent-
ial in the psychoanalytic movement. Of the European analysts who have
applied existential philosophy in therapy, Binswanger, Frankl and Boss
are the best known, and all followed Heidegger's form of existentialism.
Perls referred to Heidegger in a number of places (refer to appendix
III). In discussing various existentialists Perls wrote that:
... none of the existentialists, with the possible except-
ion of Heidegger, can really carry through their existent-
ial idea to ontological behaviorthat a thing is explained
through its very existence.
(Perls, 1966a, p.16)
-202-
He also wrote of Heidegger in the following way: "I feel a little bit
like Heidegger, getting deep into language to the point where language
meets existence" (Perls, 1969b, p.278).
5.1.2.2 Holism
Heidegger, in a departure from Husserl's theories, showed that phen-
omenology could not be constrained to the investigation of experience and
of "pure" consciousness; human existence, he believed, could only be un-
derstood as a unitary whole. Edie (1964) regarded this discovery as
marking the continuity between Husserl's "transcendental" analysis and the
"existential-analytics" of later existential phenomenology (p.250).
Perls made this distinction when he refused to look at experience
and consciousness in isolation. Rather, he viewed mankind holistically,
evaluating every part of the person (and the person's existence) in an
individual manner (Perls et al., 1951)
5.1.2.3 Being
Heidegger suggested we live with a vague, often undifferentiated
understanding of Being. He explained Being in this way:
We do not know what "Being" means. But if we ask, "What
is 'Being'?" we already hold ourselves within and under-
standing of the "is", without being able to fix concept-
ually what the "is" signifies.
(quoted by Sallis, 1978, p.30)
-203-
The mode of Being manifests itself as "being able to". Kockelmans
(1972) explained that original understanding always pertains to a
person's way of Being-in-the-world as a whole. This includes the
various ways of being concerned for others and for things as well
as for the world. This always assumes that the person is able to
have regard for him/herself as well as for the sake of him/herself.
This somewhat elusive concept is reflected in Gestalt therapy.
Perls regarded the individual as being. For instance, he wrote:
"We have all these catastrophic fantasies by which we prevent our-
selves from living, from being" (1969a, p.42). Elsewhere, Perls
wrote:
... some people have an existential embarrassment. They
are embarrassed to exist, to be. So they always have to
justify their existence .... just take existential philo-
sophy as a philosophy which is concerned with being. The
first question of course, is: How is there being rather
than not being?
(Perls, 1969a, p.132)
This quotation clearly shows that Being was a fundamental part of
Perls' view of the individual.
5.1.2.4 Being-in-the-world
According to Heidegger, every person is born into a world, or in
his terminology, thrown into a world, an existing, structured world that
is not of the person's making. Since this world is shared with others
and is not his/her world, the person faces existence in a mood of
anxiety or dread.
-204-
Heidegger described a relationship between Daseins (loose trans-
lation: an individual's way of Being-in-the-world) and the world
that moves in a circle. In his view, Daseins is not only affected by
the world it is thrown into but also affects it. Daseins and the world
interact and affect each other. Daseins has not only world, but inter-
prets it according to its understanding. Heidegger calls this situat-
ion a hermeneutic circle (1927). He acknowledged the pioneering work
of Dilthey in this area, and yet felt that Dilthey, as well as Scheier,
Bergson and Husserl concentrated too much on the personality as such
at the expense of developing the Being or Daseins. According to Heid-
egger every aspect of human existence participates in this kind of a
circle, suggesting that the decisive step is not how to get out of the
circle, but how to get into it in the right way (Heidegger, 1927).
Perls also viewed the person as entering a world not of his/her
choosing. This means that an individual must learn adaptive behaviours
in order to maximize his/her potential. The choice of the individual is
in what behaviours to use, how to deal with the world s/he encounters.
Perls went further than Heidegger and described how the person relates to
the world, by two systems:
... the motoric system of manipulation, acting, handling;
and the sensory system, or system of orientation, how we
see and feel.
(Perls, 1966a, p.31)
In participating in the world, Perls regarded the individual not as
being self-sufficient but rather, reliant on assimilating various parts
of the environment for nourishment and so on. While Heidegger outlined
J hermeneutic circle, Perls considered a simple interchange between the
-205-
person and environment. While this process proceeds smoothly the indiv-
idual maintains a healthy state.
5.1.2.5 Choice, responsibility and self-support
Existential psychotherapy based on the philosophy of Heidegger
views humanity as Daseins. The analysis or structure of Daseins shows
humans to be constantly in a state of process, developing different as-
pects of themselves. Individuals mould their personality by freedom
and choice, and accept responsibility for themselves. This exercise
of freedom and choice represents authenticity. It is through choice,
awareness, and self-responsibility that a person transcends him/herself,
and chooses his/her own personality (May et al., 1976).
The existential therapist's task is to encourage patients to make
their own choices and decisions. The goal of existential therapy is
for the patient to experience existence as real, often by having a de-
cisive inner experience which can transform the person's life.
Gestalt therapists view the individual in a very similar manner.
Their goal is to have the individual move from environmental support to
self-support. Thus, the facilitation of responsibility for the self
is paramount in Gestalt therapy. In the therapeutic setting this re-
quires the patient to realize that s/he is blocking awareness and as
such, choice. Assuming responsibility for blocking of awareness en-
ables the patient to "reown" power previously "disowned". The reac-
quisition of responsibility increases contactfullness within the self
as well as with the environment, thus increasing freedom and choice as
well as the ability to be whatever one wants to be.
-206-
5.1.2.6 Language
Heidegger regarded mankind as living in language (Ott, 1972).
Everything a person does comes about in the realm of language. The
person can only act within the realm of language insofar as the poss-
ibilities about which any decision can be made are disclosed as exist-
ential possibilities through language, through communication with
others. Language establishes world (Heidegger, 1927). One of the
criticisms Perls had of Heidegger's philosophy was its reliance on lang-
uage (1969a). Like Heidegger, however, Perls regarded mankind as liv-
ing in language and also developing language for both healthy as well as
unhealthy means of communication and self-expression. Gestalt therap-
ists are careful to use language which directs the individual to an ex-
pansion of awareness. Often word choice is habitual and unaware, par-
ticularly in the case of the neurotic. Perls in all of his writings
emphasized the necessity for precise expression, stating that pathology
produces distortion both of meaning (incorrect vocabulary) and of gramm-
ar (incorrect syntax).
5.1.2.7 Authenticity
The goal of existential therapy is authenticity. For Heidegger,
it is to be genuine, to make one's own (autonomous) choices, to avoid
losing one's identity by blending in with the crowd (Sahakian, 1976).
The existential psychotherapist is convinced that any client can freely
choose his/her personality at any stage of life, and in any condition
of human existence.
-207-
Heidegger asserted that we are our choices. For him, an authentic
self is not alienated from the past, or even from the present, but inte-
grates past and present with the future. The aim of existential therapy
is for the patient to experience existence as real. The purpose is that
the patient becomes fully aware of his/her existence. This includes be-
coming aware of his/her potentialities and recognizing his/her ability to
act on the basis of them.
According to the existentialist approach, the basis of the curative
process is the fundamental being-togetherness of therapist and patient,
a form of empathy or empathic understanding. By avoiding preconceived
notions of the nature and goals of patients, existentialists hold that
they have discovered that the essential nature is a basic kind of "be-
ness" and in therapy a "being-togetherness".
We can see that there are significant commonalities between parts of
Heidegger's philosophy and Perls'. The long-term goal of Gestalt therapy
is, as it was for Heidegger, to become genuine or authentic. For Perls
this also meant: to become self-supportive and self-sufficient, finding
one's own centre, and not living according to the demands and rules of
others. In Gestalt therapy the individual is considered to be in control
of his/her life with the ability to choose whatever s/he wants from life
and the environment (Perls, 1966a, 1969a).
The aim of Gestalt therapy is identical to that of existential ther-
apy outlined above, that is to expand awareness and become free to act on
the basis of re-integrated potentials. The therapist enters into an em-
pathic relationship with patients and explores the ways of overcoming self
-defeating behaviours or blocks. In a similar manner to the existential-
ist, the Gestalt therapist does not hold preconceived notions of the nature
-208-
and goals of the patient further than facilitating awareness and the
potentialities of that individual.
The discussion on what constitutes self and of how we manipulate
various forms of self goes back to very early periods in history.
Mankind has developed a sense of the difference between disguising our
true selves and revealing our true selves. This has been done by the
wearing of masks, which seem to provide a sense of protection for the
wearer. The hiding behind an actual face mask, withdrawing identity
and recognition, protects the individual from restriction and respons-
ibility. There are two interacting processes; first, masks tend to
fool others; second, even more frequently to fool ourselves. The
individual is aware of this self-deception, but does not necessarily
have a conscious awareness of the degree to which a change in behaviour
results. What is the purpose or reason for this type of activity?
Heidegger (1927, p.68) argued this question and designated the revelat-
ion of the true or unhidden self authenticity and the masked or hidden
self inauthenticity (Gelven , 1978 , was dissatisfied with this translat-
ion stating that no English words quite match the German). Heidegger
used those terms to provide: "that essential difference in the ways we
exist such that thinking about the meaning of existence is possible"
(Gelven, 1978, p.237).
In analyzing the major ways in which the individual exists, Heid-
egger suggested that we can either cover up our reality or else reveal
it. Among the forms of behaviour discussed were listed talking, being
alone, suffering, inquiring, and being guilty. These behaviours become
intelligible when seen in the context of either revealing or covering
up. Heidegger's proposition considered that what is covered up by the
-209-
inauthentic way of being, and what is revealed in the authentic way of
being, is the meaning of being itself (Heidegger, 1927). An example
of this could be the process of talking. Talking can illuminate some-
thing, or talking can well be used as a tool to cover something up (Heid-
egger, 1927). The act of speaking can be both authentic and inauthentic.
This feature of the structure of human existence had been outlined by
Kierkegaard, and Heidegger built on some of these. The individual con-
structs him/herself by freely choosing from alternatives, becoming either
an inauthentic or an authentic modality of existence. Inauthentic living
denotes living with values other than one's own. Authentic existence de-
velops as a result of self-support and self-responsibility. In order to
pass from the inauthentic to the authentic the patient suffers the ordeal
of despair and existential anxiety which is anxiety of the person facing
the limits of his/her existence with its fullest implications such as death
and nothingness.
Perls was similarly aware of the value of authenticity. He wrote:
Authenticity, maturity, responsibility for one's actions
and life, response-ability, and living in the now, having
all the creativeness of the now available, is all one and
the same thing.
(Perls, 1969a, p.56)
Central to Perls' Gestalt therapy is the organismic, autonomous
self which can, if left to its own devices and free of various exter-
nal demands and shouldisms, find a way to an aware, authentic existence.
The problem lies in actualizing the real self as opposed to the self-
concept. The neurotic for example, lives by rules which are not his/her
own (although s/he has chosen them), and thereby exhibits phony and role-
playing behaviours"behind the mask"-type behaviours. This emphasis
-210-
by Perls on the person's search for a healthy authentic existence, to-
wards a way of becoming whole and what s/he fundamentally is, owes its
impetus to existentialism.
Heidegger's statements on both authentic and inauthentic existence
and the passage from the latter to the former bear significant parall-
els to those in Gestalt therapy. Perls, using the terms, "health" and
"neurosis" in place of "authentic" and "inauthentic" proposed a process
based on a model that can be translated from existentialism. To fac-
ilitate health from neurosis the patient does suffer and proceeds along
a route which includes a number of stages. These were outlined in the
following way by Perls as levels or layers of neurosis. There are five
levels , which are designated; the "cliche" level, the "roles and games"
level, the "impasse" or "sick point" level, the "implosive", and the "ex-
plosive" levels. As the person passes through these levels s/he grows
from being inauthentic to the authentic mode of living.
5.1.2.8 Conclusion
Heidegger's philosophy thus has the following commonalities with
Gestalt therapy:
1. Holistic approach to mankind
2. Need to understand person's way of Being-in-the-world
3. Person-environment interactions (hermeneutic circle)
4. Importance of choice, responsibility, self-support
5. Emphasis on language usage
6. Authenticity, integration as goals of therapy. Corresponding
rejection of inauthentic behavioursroleplaying, etc.
-211-
5.1.3 Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
Kierkgaard was born in Copenhagen, son of a prosperous Lutheran
merchant. He experienced a personal conversion to Lutheranism in
1838. He became prominent in Denmark after the publication of Either/
Or (in 1843), and has been called the father of existentialism (Hill,
1966).
Perls referred to Kierkegaard in a number of places (see appendix
III). He regarded Kierkegaard as an existentialist operating within
the conceptual framework of Protestant theology (Perls, 1965), and claim-
ed that Kierkegaard's description of despair enriched his notion of the
existential impasse (Perls, 1967).
5.1.3.2 Individuality
Kierkegaard defined individuality as the extent to which a person
is realizing his/her potentialities. He wrote: "the greatest thing
is not to be this or that but to be oneself, and this everyone can be"
(Kierkegaard, 1944, in Strickland, 1966, p.232). Individuality re-
sults from an active endeavour, the acknowledgement of one's own potent-
ialities and the acceptance of the challenge to seek them.
Perls had the same respect for individuality. His well-known
Gestalt Prayer contains the line: "You are you, and I am I" (Perls, 1969a,
frontispiece), and in the introduction to Gestalt Therapy Verbatim , Perls
advised youth:
-212-
... to become real, to learn to take a stand, to develop
one's center to understand the basis of existentialism:
a rose is a rose is a rose. I am what I am, and at this
moment I cannot possibly be different from what I am.
(1969a, p. 4)
Kierkegaard was deeply influenced by Socrates, the great philos-
opher and reflective thinker. Kierkegaard asserted that Socrates was
able to live his philosophy by respecting his specific situation. In
our culture, however:
The majority of men are curtailed l's. What was planned
by nature as a possibility capable of being sharpened in-
to an I is soon dulled into a third person.
(Kierkegaard cited in Hamilton, 1969, p.35)
Perls adopted the use of "I" or first person language to indicate
the acceptance of responsibility for the self from a number of sources,
including Kierkegaard. In therapy, every "it" is changed to "I".
This develops a sense of responsibility and a sense of belongingness of
language by the producer of the verbiage. This relates not only to
language but also feelings, thoughts and emotions, thus expanding aware-
ness and recovery of projected parts of the personality.
According to Kierkegaard, Socrates developed a dialectical strategy.
This prompted Kierkegaard's method of indirect communication, which is
aimed at stimulating others in a way that encourages personal pursuit of
one's own truth. In this the individual not only reflects on an object
or situation, but also upon him/herself, thus presupposing no results and
no finality.
This indirect method advocated by Socrates and Kierkegaard in their
teaching plays a part in Gestalt therapy. Perls developed what he called
-213-
"healthily supportive questions" (Perls, 1973, p.74), such as "what"
and "hox\'" types of questions which are psychotherapeutically challeng-
ing. The patient answers such questions to the degree that his/her
own awareness makes possible, focussing attention on areas not so easily
examined. These types of communications and questions:
... throw him on his own resources, bring him to a recog-
nition of his own responsibility, ask him to muster his
forces and means of self-support. . They give him a sense
of self because they are directed to his self.
(Perls, 1973, p.75)
Although the patient verbalizes his/her answers, the total response is
observed and evaluated by the therapist. This includes hesitations,
stutterings and incorrect use of words and grammar, and also voice,
posture and body language in general. By using supportive questions,
the therapist directs attention to holes or oversights by the patient
and thus brings awareness to these areas. Perls concluded, in much the
same way as Kierkegaard, that the therapist cannot produce insight nor
awareness for the patient, butrather can help the patient to focus on
these areas. In Gestalt therapy the healthy person is in touch with the
obvious, and in keeping with the holistic doctrine, the therapist can work
with surface occurrences and behaviours (Perls, 1969a). The therapist
continually respects the individuality of every person and approaches every
patient as a new beginning.
5.1.3.3 Therapeutic Approach
Strickland (1966) outlined a number of characteristics of an approach
to counselling based on Kierkegaard's philosophy. Many of these also
characterize Gestalt therapy.
-214-
For example, Kierkegaard wrote that: "Instruction begins when
you, the teacher, learn from the learner"(in Strickland, 1966, p.234);
thus, the therapist adopts the role of learner rather than teacher,
since the client's understanding of him/herself is superior. Accord-
ing to Kierkegaard, until a person's individual frame of reference is
understood, than another person can be of limited value. Using this
approach, the therapist does not make assumptions, but rather tries to
understand what the client understands.
Perls held similar views, advocating that the therapist enter the
therapeutic relationship ready to be exposed to the mode of living of the
patient. The therapeutic material comes from the patient, not from what
the therapist thinks or wants to do (Perls, 1966a). The effective Gest-
alt therapist enters into the therapeutic arena free from preconceived
notions, convictions and expectations. This allows spontaneity of app-
roach in therapy. Perls wrote: "As therapists we do not imagine we know
more than the patient does himself" (Perls, 1965, p.6).
Choice was a fundamental notion to Kierkegaard. His idea of exist-
ence implied the kind of individual who strives, considers alternatives,
chooses, decides and then is committed to the task (Stumpf, 1966). The
individual faces an array of personal choices in an existential situation.
Kierkegaard disagreed with Plato's assumption that to know good would be
to do good; for Kierkegaard, the predicament of choosing between good
and evil could not be dispelled through knowledge. Acts of will or choice
lead to a progression through the "stages of life's way", leading to self-
actualization.
Thus, according to Kierkegaard, the therapist assists each client to
find "truth", but at a personal level. Each individual has the freedom
-215-
to decide and choose his/her own course of action and living. It is
only by exercising this freedom that s/he can find self-awareness and
truth (Kierkegaard, 1941; in Strickland, 1966).
Similarly, Perls regarded neurosis as the denial of choice, writing
of the neurotic:
He has lost his freedom of choice, he cannot select appro-
priate means to his end goals, because he does not have
the capacity to see the choices that are open to him.
(Perls, 1973, p.24)
The goal of Gestalt therapy is to re-establish awareness of the
choices that are available to the client, so that s/he can live to his/
her fullest potentials.
Kierkegaard wrote that man "lives at once in hope and recollect-
ion" (1941; quoted by Strickland, 1966, p.236); past and future are
synthesized into present reality. Thus, therapy concentrates on pres-
ent processes. This approach is adopted in Gestalt therapy, where
clients operate in the here and now, discovering that the past and fut-
ure are important only as they are experienced in the present (Perls et
al., 1951).
Kierkegaard believed that in society, people knew not too little
but rather too much, and had forgotten how to exist. He suggested that
it was necessary to destroy false knowledge before arriving at "proper"
knowledge, which was not "about" proper existence but was proper exist-
ence itself. Kierkegaard advocated throughout his writings the Socrat-
ic notion, "Know thyself" (Johnson, 1964). Perls also advocated dis-
tinguishing between speaking "about" something and understanding it.
Understanding, he believed, came only from experiencing the event or sit-
uation (Perls, 1969a). Thus, Gestalt therapy is action-oriented (with
-216-
an emphasis on experimentation) rather than "intellect" oriented.
5.1.3.4 Polarities
Perls (1969b) was interested by Kierkegaard's references to the re-
lation of the self to the self. Selfhood, as Kierkegaard wrote, is
neither finite nor infinite but rather a dialectical relation between the
two. The self is a synthesis of the finite which has a limiting factor
and the infinite which is the expanding factor (Cole, 1965). Selfhood
is a state of balance between the two poles. Thus, selfhood is a dia-
lectical relation between necessity and possibility.
Perls discussed dialectics, redefining the concept as polarities,
with a zero point or point of creative indifference (refer to Friedland-
er chapter 5.4). Perls wrote of the personality as containing polar
tendencies. These tendencies generate tensions which are the essence of
the personality itself. These polar elements oppose as well as attract
each other. The balance and integration of the personality results from
the synthesis of the poles:
The basic philosophy of gestalt therapy is that of nature
differentiation and integration. Differentiation by itself
leads to polarities .... By integrating opposite traits we
make the person whole again.
(Perls, 1965, p.7)
5.1.3.5 Conclusion
Kierkgaard's existential philosophy was familiar to Perls, therefore,
the following notions of Kierkegaard's may have been incorporated into
Gestalt therapy :
-217-
1. Individuality
2. Use of first person language
3. Therapist as a learner in therapy
4. Choice
5. Rejection of intellectualization in favour of experience
6. Dialectics/polarities
-218-
5.1.4 Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
5.1.4.1 Biography and acknowledgement of his work
German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche was born in Saxony,
the son of a Lutheran pastor. He later described himself as
shattered by the blow of his father's death, which occurred when
Nietzsche was four years old. After schooling in Naumburg he
enrolled in the University of Bonn in 1864, and later moved to
Leipzig to study classics with Friedrich Ritschl. His early
publications in classical philology were so impressive that he was
invited to begin a teaching career at the University of Leipzig
at the age of twenty four, before he completed his degree (O'Connor,
(1973a).
He later moved to Basel, where his teaching was frequently
interrupted by prolonged bouts of sickness, largely as a consequence
of syphilis. In 1879 failing health led him to resign his teaching
appointment, but over the next decade he produced ten substantial
books. In 1889 he collapsed in Turin, Italy. When he regained
consciousness he was by all accounts insane, and his health steadily
declined until his death in August, 1900.
Nietzsche's anticipation of, and influence on psychological theo-
ries was remarkable. Broad acknowledgement of Nietzsche's work could
not have escaped Perls' notice. For example, Freud, in an auto-
biographical sketch, complimented Nietzsche in the following way:
Nietzsche's premonitions and insights often agreed in the
most amazing manner with the laborious results of psycho-
analysis.
(in Kaufman, 1954, p.25)
-219-
Freud also credited Nietzsche with having:
... a more penetrating knowledge of himself than any othei
man who ever lived or was ever likely to live.
(in Kaufman, 1954, p.27)
Perls acknowledged his reliance on Nietzsche more generously than
he did most of the other theorists considered in this dissertation
(see appendix III).
5.1.4.2 Unfinished Business
Nietzsche conceptualized time as a circle, which sabotages the
willhe referred to this as the doctrine of eternal recurrence.
According to this doctrine, both good and evil recur. True re-
demption is achieved when the individual lives as though his/her
life will recur eternally. If this premise is accepted, then every
moment must be given all the meaning possible, so that the best poss-
ible life will be repeated (Jaspers, 1965).
Eternal recurrence is the core of Perls' concept of unfinished
business. Perls realized that an individual must completely finish
one situation (close the Gestalt), derive energy and satisfaction from
it, and then move on to the next situation or need that arises.
Failure to successfully satisfy that need and therefore finish the
activity results in an energy-binding residue that continues to demand
attention. This is recurrence in its purest form.
5.1.4,3 Daydreams and fantasies
Nietzsche believed that it was possible for an individual to
-220-
build a personal or fantasy world on the basis of intuition and
experience:
Daydreams or fantasies are ways of manipulating the images
we produce in such a manner as to gratify certain emotion-
al requirements without having to make the adjustments or
to take the risks required were we to seek satisfaction of
them in reality.
(in Danto, 1965, p.48)
He thus regarded fantasies (in which category he included reading
novels and other forms of "escapism") as vicarious wish-fulfillments.
Nietzsche warned of the danger of allowing fantasy or art to impose on
reality, which he believed was to court pathological functioning.
He did see some benefits to be derived from dreams or from art, but only
so long as the "dreamer" preserves a sense of reality with which they
can contrast themthis process can promote growth.
Similarly, Perls asserted that taking fantasy for reality signif-
ies neurosis. He warned:
Assure yourself of the difference between fantasy and mater-
ial reality, for this is just what the projector confuses.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.256)
Like Nietzsche, Perls saw some benefits to be derived from care-
ful use of fantasy. He advocated the use of both daydreams and fan-
tasy in therapy. One technique is for the person to withdraw to a
situation from which support is derived. By mobilizing inner resour-
ces and reowning the fantasized material, a return to reality with
self-support is brought about.
Perls also acknowledged in several places Nietzsche's illustrat-
ion of memory as a fantasy we have in the now, not an "accurate"
-221-
representation of past events and certainly not a method of trans-
porting the individual back to past events:
Nietzsche once said, memory and pride were fighting. Memory
said it was like that and pride said it couldn't have been.
And memory gave in. You see, we treat the memory as something
belonging to the now. Whether memory is true or distorted, we
still keep it. We don't assimilate it. We keep it as a
battleground or a justification for something. Really, we
don't need it.
(Perls, 1973, p.179)
5.1.4.4 Self-support and self-surpassing
Nietzsche believed that truths and thoughts are communicated only
insofar as they awaken an appropriate personal response. In other
words, he "refers everyone to himself" (Jaspers, 1965, p.21). Nietzsche
wrote:
Thus I answered those who asked me for "the way". The way?
There is no such thing! .... I should like to consort only
with men who have their own model and do not pattern them-
selves after me, thus making me responsible for them and en-
slaving me.
(in Jaspers, 1965, p.21)
Perls similarly warned against the danger of acceding to the de-
mands clients place on the therapist. If the therapist is to foster
maturity (in Perls' view, self-support) then s/he must:
... apply enough skillful frustration so that the patient
is forced to find his own way, discover his own possibil-
ities, his own potential, and discover that what he expects
from the therapist, he can do just as well himself.
(Perls, 1969a, p.40)
-222-
Interestingly, Perls paid tribute to Nietzsche's treatment of potent-
ialities:
If you understand Nietzsche correctly .... He talks about
the person who is capable of using his potential up to any
great possibility. Again I say, it only comes about if you
allow the growth process to take place.
(Perls, 1969a, p.203)
In Three Metamorphoses (1883), Nietzsche outlined the concept of
self-surpassing, which is akin to self-actualization. A character
called Life declares: " 'Behold', said she, 'I am that which must
ever surpass itself " (p. 126).
Perls adopted and extended this concept, writing: "Man trans-
cends himself only via his true nature, not through ambition and art-
ificial goals" (1973, p.49).
For Nietzsche, a person's true nature was an integration of spon-
taneity and deliberateness, both of which are necessary for a sound ex-
istential choice. Nietzsche elaborated on these Three Metamorphoses
by relating that it is not easy to acknowledge we alone are responsible
for our own creation; that at some point in the changing process the
conviction that all is false will be felt. "It is necessary to first
become ashes before becoming new", and there must be many such deaths
for a rich life (Nietzsche, in Jaspers, 1965, p.57).
Perls' notion of the impasse or death layer of neurosis is very
similar; he wrote: "To suffer one's death and be reborn is not easy"
(Perls, 1969a, rear cover). He also described the impasse as the ex-
perience of helplessness and despair we feel when environmental or ob-
solete self-support is withdrawn before adequate self-support has been
-223-
achieved. If, with the help of the therapist, the client is able to
confront the impasse, s/he will most probably find that it is a fan-
tasy; the person only thinks that-s/he does not have the resources for
self-support. When s/he realizes this, s/he can re-own his/her own
resources. S/he awakens into satori, often with an explosion of joy,
grief or orgasm; more of his/her true potentialities are available for
present living (Perls, 1969a).
5.1.4.5 Choice
Nietzsche propounded the hypothesis that if a person has a reason
for living, a "why" of living s/he can overcome any "how" or endure any
obstacle that s/he may confront (Nietzsche, 1909-1911). In the exist-
ential philosophy of Nietzsche and the psychotherapy derived from it,
choice, freedom and responsibility, not pleasure, are aims for a full
and successful life. Pleasure will not endure and withstand the bur-
dens encountered in life, but a reason for living will. Nietzsche is
quoted as saying: "if we have our own reason for living, we shall en-
dure almost any mode of life" (in Sahakian, 1976, p.299). This implies
that the individual can freely choose his/her mode of existence.
Perls had a deep respect for choice. For instance, he saw the neu-
rotic as a person who has given away his/her freedom of choice, i.e., his/
her ability to select appropriate means to satisfy his/her needs. The
neurotic person does not have the capacity to see all the choices avail-
able (Perls, 1973).
In describing a therapeutic session, Perls showed how a patient had
an "existential choice" between being an angry man or a stutterer (Perls,
-224-
1969a, p.80). Discussing the dream as an existential message from
yourself, to yourself, Perls wrote: "No choice in the dream is coin-
cidental" (1966a, p.27). This theme of the importance of choice in
all aspects of life may well have been influenced by Nietzsche.
5.1.4.6 Character
Nietzsche (1887, 1908) proposed that belief in God is evil and
interferes with spiritual development. To transmit fixed and rigid
values, such as a wholly perfect God, is to reject the reality of a
constantly changing world. There are dangers in the concept of a
stable world without change and no creations. Of character, for in-
stance, Nietzsche wrote: "If a man has character, he has also his
typical experience, which always recurs" (1886a, p.73).
Perls individualized this concept, noting that a person must con-
stantly attend to various needs if s/he is to survive:
It is when the individual is incapable of altering his tech-
niques of manipulation and interaction that neurosis arises.
(Perls, 1973, p.25)
When the individual develops a strong character or adapts one role, with
one way of acting and reacting, then s/he is less capable of adequately
satisfying his/her survival or social needs. Perls wrote:
The more character a person has, the less potential he has
... a character is a person that Is predictable, that has
only a number of fixed responses...
(Perls, 1969a, p.35)
-225-
5.1.4.7 Incomplete individuals
Perls credited Nietzsche with the discovery of the incomplete
person. He wrote: "the idea of the incomplete person was first
brought about by Nietzsche, and very soon afterwards by Freud" (Perls,
1969a, p.30).
Zarathustra (the mythical teacher/guru whose journeyings Nietzsche
chronicled in Thus Spake Zarathustra, 1883) was surrounded by beggars as
he crossed a bridge. One of them, a hunchback, beseeched him to heal
his and his companions' deformities. Zarathustra replied that to re-
move their deformities might well throw them off balance, because they
had all developed compensations for their ailments (Nietzsche, 1883, pp.
147-152). An "inverse cripple" is one who has developed a faculty at
the expense of the development of the whole person. He gave as an ex-
ample the conscientious man in the forest who had an overdeveloped con-
scious. The drain of energy to maintain his conscientiousness burdened
the man. While Nietzsche explained that the inverse cripple developed
one faculty at the expense of another, Perls focussed on the holes, the
sections that have not been developed:
I believe that every one of us has holesdn his personal-
ity)... where something should be, there is nothing ....
these missing holes are always visible. They are always
there in the patient's projection onto the therapist
(Perls, 1969a, pp.39,40)
-226-
5.1.4.8 Introjection
Nietzsche (1883) related the ways in which man can build new
values in a world where the old foundation of values, religion, is
disintegrating. He stated that if man is to build new values, there
must be a rejection of all externally imposed systems. Those who do
accept these are "condemned". A person can find a self-sufficient
and sustaining existence only through setting goals which are within
his/her limitations. The acceptance of unquestioned, artificial ex-
ternal standards cannot be maintained, even though these values have
been acquired and developed for some purpose.
Perls expounded a similar idea:
... if you carry this ideal, this perfectionistic ideal
around with yourself, y
G
u have a wonderful tool to play
the beloved game of the neurotic, the self-torture game
... It hides under the mask of "self-improvement". It
never works.
(Perls, 1969a, p.19)
Nietzsche re-emphasized the importance of discovering one's own
values, as Zarathustra warned creative individuals to turn their backs
on the great mass of mankind, and lean on their own resources. Niet-
zsche thus originally articulated Perls' theory of introjection.
Rather than saying that values have been imposed, Perls said that they
have been introjectedaccepted piecemeal without having been chewed,
digested and assimilated.
-227-
5.1.4.9 Retroflection
In a section titled "Neighbour love", Nietzsche (1883) clearly
described a form of neurotic behaviour which is known in Gestalt ther-
apy as retroflection (Perls, 1969a). Nietzsche wrote:
Ye crowd around your neighbour, and have fine words for
it. But I say unto you: your neighbour-love is your
bad love of yourselves.
Ye cannot endure it with yourselves, and do not love your-
selves sufficiently: so ye seek to mislead your neighbour
into love, and would fain gild yourselves with his error.
Ye call in a witness when ye want to speak well of your-
selves; and when ye have mislead him to think well of you
ye also think well of yourselves.
(Nietzsche, 1883, p.75)
Perls described the process referred to indirectly by Nietzsce
as proceeding in two phases. First, there is a projection onto an-
other; second, a retroflection back onto the individual:
For projection to occur, retroflections and confluences
also are necessary ... and, in general ... the neurotic
mechanisms are all functionally related to one another
and interlocking.
(Perls et al., 1951, pp.254-255)
5.1.4.10 Style of writing
Perls revealed his familiarity with Nietzsche's idiosyncratic
writing style: "It feels good to play preacher and enjoy a pompous
Nietzsche style" (Perls, 1969b, p.103).
Elsewhere, some of Perls' writings are strikingly similar to
Nietzsche's tales of Zarathustra. Perls wrote, for instance:
-228-
Until then, beware of any helpers. Helpers are conmen who
promise something for nothing. They spoil you and keep you
dependent and immature.
(Perls, 1969b, p.103)
There are significant parallels between the above statement of Perls
and Zarathustra dismissing his disciples (helpers). He tells them to go
free and organize their own lives, thus freeing themselves as well as him
(Nietzsche, 1883).
Perls' style of doing demonstrationshis showmanshipis very like
that displayed by Zarathustra in his journeyings and lectures.
5.1.4.11 Conclusion
Fredrich Nietzsche was more readily acknowledged than many other theo-
rists by Fritz Perls. Among the notions he may have contributed to Gest-
alt therapy were:
1. Eternal recurrenceunfinished business
2. Need to differentiate fantasy from reality.
3. Memory as a fantasy of the past
4. Need for self-support
5. Self-surpassingself-actualization
6. Impasse
7. Choice
8. Limitation of having "character"
9. Incompleteness and compensation in the individual
10. Introjection and retroflection
11. Writing style
-229-
5.1.5 Hans Vaihinger (1852-1933)
Vaihinger was born in a Swabian parsonage near Tubingen in Germany.
He was a brilliant and enthusiastic student, and devoured material on a
wide range of philosophical theories, as well as anthropology. He was
influenced by many authors, including Hoeder (a forerunner of Darwin),
Schiller, Plato and Kant. In 1870 he entered Theological College at
the University of Tubingen. In 1874 he graduated with a prize dissert-
ation on Recent Theories of Consciousness, in which classical and German-
ic philology appeared as subordinate sections (Vaihinger, 1924).. In
1876 he heard Wundt lecture in Leipzig. In 1876 he moved to Strassburg,
where he took up a lecturing post. In 1894 he was appointed Professor
in Halle, and later founded the Kant Society. When his eyesight failed
he relinquished this post, but he continued to discuss his philosophical
ideas.
Vaihinger's theories are reflected in Gestalt therapy. Perls re-
ferred to his work in a number of places (refer to appendix III).
5.1.5.2 The role of fictions"as if"
Vaihinger's major theme was the role which fictions play in living.
He referred to false pre-associations as constructs that come about throu
belief in fictions, those fictions being either half-fictions or real
fictions. The difference between these is that half-fictions contradict
reality, whereas real fictions are self-contradictory (Vaihinger, 1924).
This contradiction with reality shows itself in two ways. First, the
-230-
premises or form of the ideas and judgements involved do not harmonize
with facts, laws and phenomena which are generally accepted as "true".
Second, the conclusions and extrapolations derived from these ideas and
judgements contradict immediate reality.
In his chapter "The main characteristics of fictions" (1924) Vai-
hinger stated that violence is a special characteristic of fictions.
Thus, violence must be done not only to reality but, in real fictions,
also to thought. The purely arbitary way in which thought operates
corresponds to the violence to which it subjects reality:
I find this confirmed with regard to the fiction of the
general idea in Flugel, Probleme der Philosophie, p.136.
"Logical concepts are in reality never finished and com-
pleted concepts but rather demands upon thought, logical
ideals where the greater the degree of the abstraction
the greater the violence done to thought!"
(Vaihinger, 1924, p.98)
A second characteristic of fictions is their disappearance. Half-
fictions disappear over time; real fictions are dissolved by logic.
Fictions can only have value while the individual operates under a cert-
ain set of premises (Vaihinger, 1924).
A third characteristic of fictions is the awareness of conscious-
ness of their fictional nature and the absence of any claim to actual-
ity (Vaihinger, 1924). Many fictions are adopted as facts after the hy-
potheses are tested and laws or theories developed, and the realization
that they are premature or even fictional develops later. For example,
scientific fictions are maintained as if true, and are used whilst exped-
ient, often irrespective of criticism and inconclusiveness.
Perls saw the value of Vaihinger's approach, and acknowledged its
usefulness:
-231-
As biological beings we lead a life connected with, and
steeped in nature; as social beings we carry on an "as
if" existence (Vaihinger: Philosophy of "as if") in
which there is a considerable confusion of reality, fan-
tasy and pretending.
(Perls, 1969b, p.4)
Perls incorporated Vaihinger's "as if" notion into various techniq-
ues in Gestalt therapy. For example, the dream is regarded as a part
of individual who experiences itusually an alienated or projected
part of the personality (Perls, 1966b). One of the basic instructions
is for the person to take each part of the dream as if it were part of
the self and describe the feelings that occur. All the communication
is done in the here and now. Even past events are treated as if they
were currently being experienced. This serves to enhance the client's
awareness. The "as if" is usually discarded when awareness has been
expanded and the person comprehends more of what s/he has been doing, or
as Vaihinger noted, when experience has become richer.
For Vaihinger, fictions were the products of normal (logical) funct-
ioning of the psyche of the individual. The function of the logical
process is to preserve and enrich the life of the individual, as well as
serving as an intermediary between people. Perls referred to Vaihinger's
logical process as the DMZ (demilitarized zone), the middle zone between
self and the world, or intellect. The function of the DMZ is to compute,
plan, remember, rehearse, fantasize and generally engage in "head work"
(Perls, 1969a).
As outlined above, the individual tests out thoughts and ideas by
comparing them with reality and becoming aware of contradictions. The
usual modes of thought and beliefs are based on subjective and fictional
evaluations. We test our representations against reality to test their
-232-
authenticity. It is not surprising according to Vaihinger (1924, p. 15)
that "thought also strikes out along other lines" because ideas can be
viewed as instruments for finding out more information of the world.
The inputs are often formidable. Introjected material does not truly
belong to the individual, and thus the logical function makes use of art-
ifices and creates artificial classes:
In our psychological terminology it means that it provis-
ionally substitutes for the correct constructs others which
do not directly correspond to reality. It then operates
with these fictional classes as if they were real ones.
5.1.5.3 Neglective fiction
One type of fiction that is particularly relevant to Gestalt therapy
is neglective fiction, where deviations from reality occur by neglecting
certain elements. Vaihinger attributed this to the intricate and com-
plex nature of arbitrarily derived facts. The logical functions are then
unable to operate freely "because it is not possible to keep the various
threads out of which reality is woven, apart from one another" (Vaihinger,
1924, p.19). The psyche neglects certain elements and attributes this
to the complex nature of the facts.
Perls took this part of Vaihinger's theory and developed it. Some
individuals have blind spots or scotoma. This generally refers to the
development of a condition that enables the indiviual not to see, feel or
hear, (perceive) anything that s/he does not want to perceive. This
withdrawal is generally a response to material which is perceived as threat-
ening, and which results in negative cathexis (Perls et al., 1951).
-233-
5.1.5.4 Use of fictions
The value of fictions for the individual is shown when they are
used for an undefined period and discarded when they no longer serve
their original purpose, or when a more natural process develops (Vai-
hinger, 1924). Such fictions, when rigidly applied, can lead to contra-
dictory perceptions of reality:
The psyche weaves this aid to thought out of itself;
for the mind is inventive; under the compulsion of
necessity, stimulated by the outer world, it discovers
the store of contrivances that lie hidden within itself.
The individual therefore experiences an environment of contra-
dictory sensations. In the face of hostile sensations, and to preserve
itself, various means are found, both externally and internally. Vai-
hinger wrote:
In necessity and pain mental evolution is begun, in
contradiction and opposition consciousness awakes,
and man owes his mental development more to his enem-
ies than to his friends.
Vaihinger proposed that all external stimuli act on consciousness
according to the nature of that consciousness. Perls partly adopted
this approach. He claimed that individuals receiving external stimuli
mould these stimuli according to their makeup; they either assimilate
it into their life pattern or else "swallow it whole" without digestion
and integrationa process Perls called introjection. The con-
-234-
dition that develops as a result of introjection is one where the
person accepts too much of the environment inside the self boundary,
resulting in a maladjusted, undeveloped personality.
Vaihinger outlined the notion that conventional ways of social in-
tercourse and communication are based on fiction, as are all of the so-
called nobler aspects of life such as morality, ethics, religion and so
on. The thesis is that we act "as if" we were to be judged on our be-
haviour. As soon as the individual changes the "as if" to a "because"
then s/he starts to live by the rules of society and outside the high
ideals of the "as if" situation.
Perls referred to this situation in different terminology, that is,
as the difference between acceptance, and manipulation and obstruction
(Perls, 1969a). It is the change from the "as if" situation to the "be-
cause" situation that causes most damage to the individual.
Hume was quoted by Vaihinger as saying that we never know anything
but our own perceptions. This results in the individual never object-
ively perceiving anything as it "really" is. In applying Hume's idea
to the concept of freedom Vaihinger concluded that we are therefore lim-
ited by our own perceptions.
Gestalt therapy aims at expanding our awareness by increasing the
scope of our perceptions of both internal and external states. As aware-
ness expands, our perceptions change automatically and more choices are
seen to be available. As more fictions are dispelled, more contact with
reality and acknowledgement of self-responsibility becomes possible.
This usually comes about as a result of working with the awareness contin-
uum (Perls, 1966a).
-235-
Perls wrote of two levels of existence:
One is reality, the actual, realistic level Reality
is awareness of ongoing experience .... The other level
we don't have a good word for, so I choose the Indian
word maya. Maya means something like illusion, or fantasy,
or philosophically speaking, the as if of Vaihinger.
(Perls, 1969a, p.50)
5.1.5.5 Thought, fictions and neurosis
Vaihinger referred to thought as being roundabout and devious.
Fictions are temporary refuges for thought and have little corres-
pondence with reality:
The whole world of ideas, the whole subjective edifice
of man, lies between sensation and movement (which in
the end can also be reduced to sensation).
Ideas are transit points by means of which the connection between
sensations is established. Vaihinger regarded the psyche as a mechan-
ical process or machine, following certain laws of its own mechanics.
Any machine produces something more efficiently than other methods, with
less energy investment. The human psyche also acts as an energy saving
device. It enables the person to perform as effectively as possible
with the least expenditure of energy. The "psyche machine" is outlined
as follows:
Thus the psyche is a machine which is continually improv-
ing itself, and whose purpose it is to perform as safely,
expeditiously and with the minimum expenditure of energy,
the movements necessary for the preservation of the organ-
ism; movements in the broadest sense of the word, as the
ultimate objectives of all our acts. All our mental life
is rooted in sensation and culminates in movement; what
-236-
lies between are mere points of transit.
(Vaihinger, 1924, pp.101-102)
This position is reflected in the Gestalt therapy view of neurosis.
The fictions that Vaihinger referred to as "mere points of transit"
become ingrained in the neurotic or immature person until s/he is un-
willing to relinquish them and to move from environmental support to
self-support and self-responsibility. Gestalt therapists regard healthy
living as:
... a continuous process of transcending environmental
support and developing self-support, which means an in-
creasing reduction of dependencies.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.9)
The transcendence from environmental support to self support is considered
the defining feature of maturity (Perls, 1969a).
One of the therapeutic techniques which is used to encourage this
transcendence is that of skillful frustration, in which the patient is
forced to mobilize his/her own resources. Perls drew a parallel be-
tween the healthy body which produces bacteria to fight off disease, and
the healthy, mature person who needs frustration to grow, to prevent
stagnation of the psyche. If stagnation occurs, the person no longer
grows and improves, considerable energy is expended in retaining out-
moded fictions and behaviours.
5.1.5.6 Equilibrium and fictions
Vaihinger (1924) outlined the law of ideational shifts, which sugg-
ests that a number of ideas pass through the following stages of develop-
ment: fiction, hypothesis, and dogma (or vice versa, dogma, hypothesis
-237-
and fiction). The psychical elements as referred to earlier can be
divided into fixed and well established ideas and groups of ideas.
Every person holds dogmas or groups of ideas that serve as expressions
and representations of reality. Also, there are hypotheses, which are
ideas of doubtful objective validity. .Vaihinger compared these two
standpoints and suggested that hypotheses involve a condition of tension
which must be "exceedingly disagreeable" to the mind or psyche. The
person has a tendency to bring all ideational contents into equilibrium
and to establish an unbroken connection between them. As the hypothesis
has been provisionally admitted by the psyche, it tends to interfere with
the general push towards adjustment. Thus, an accepted objective idea
has an equilibrium, the hypothesis is unstable.
Vaihinger referred to this in the following way:
The psyche tends to make every psychical content more stable
and to extend this stability. The condition of unstable
equilibrium is as uncomfortable psychically as it is physic-
ally. This condition of tension, involving as it does a
feeling of discomfort, quite naturally explains the tendency
of the psyche to transform every hypothesis into a dogma.
The transformation of a fiction into a hypothesis is a natural process
where constructs are similar to each other. Often, however, fictions
become dogmas without the intervention of a hypothesis (Vaihinger, 1924).
He pointed out that tension in the psyche resulting from a fiction is
more important than that resulting from a hypothesis. In a scientific
fiction, we assume something that we are not necessarily convinced is
the case at all. This interferes with the tendency towards equilibrium
of ideational constructs. The hypothesis only hampers it directly and
positively. One way of dispersing tension is.to recognize a fiction as
-238-
a dogma, thus creating a basis on which to evaluate their equality:
Thus fiction becomes simply a dogma, and the as if a
because and a so that. The other method, which is
just as frequent, passes through the stage of the hy-
pothesis; and the as if becomes if.
Perls acquired clarification of some of his concepts from Vaihinger.
As a Gestalt therapist, his aim was not to produce a philosophy so much
as to enhance and promote a more efficient form of psychotherapy. He
constantly maintained the view that the individual strives for equilib-
rium:
Man seems to be born with a sense of social and psycho-
logical balance as acute as the sense of physical balance
... difficulties spring not from the desire to reject
such equilibrium, but from misguided movements aimed to-
wards finding and maintaining it.
(Perls, 1973, p.27)
Even in neurosis, the individual achieves what s/he considers to be
the best possible adjustment to prevailing conditions. The aim of the
therapist is to facilitate awareness, and so broaden the number of choices
available to the person. Skillful frustration by the therapist may lead
to disequilibrium, perhaps through the displacement of fictitious beliefs
or attitudes. If so, then the achievement of a new equilibrium will en-
able the person to live a healthier existence.
5.1.5.7 Conclusion
Vaihinger's major contribution to Gestalt therapy concerns the role
of fictionsfantasies, pretences and illusionsin health and neurosis.
In health, fictions serve as a time-saving devicethe person compares
-239-
his/her fictions with "reality", and discards those which fail to
correspond. In neurosis, however, the distinction between fiction
and reality becomes blurred, and the person clings to inaccurate fict-
ions. Thus, the neurotic behaves "as if" s/he is incapable of self-
supportfiction has been replaced by dogma.
-240-
5.1.6 Martin Buber (1878-1965)
Martin Buber, Jewish theologian and philosopher, was born in Vienna.
He was raised by his paternal grandparents in the Ukraine. His grand-
father Solomon Buber was an outstanding scholar of the Haskalah, the Jew-
ish Enlightenment (Diamond, 1960). Buber left home to study at a secul-
ar secondary school in Lwow. From 1896 to 1904 he studied philosophy,
religion and art history at the universities of Vienna, Berlin, Leipzig,
and Zurich. He received his doctorate from Vienna in 1904, with a diss-
ertation on mysticism. He was influenced by the writings of Kierkegaard,
Nietzsche and Dostoevsky among others, and by his close friend Gustave
Landauer.
Buber founded and edited the influential Zionist journal Der Jude in
1916 (Woelfel, 1973b). In 1923 he was appointed to a Chair of Jewish
Philosophy of Religion in the University of Frankfurt. In 1938 he went to
Palestine to become Professor of Social Philosophy in the Hebrew University
of Jerusalem. He retired in 1951 and remained in Jerusalem. In 1960 he
was elected first President of the newly established National Academy of
Sciences of the State of Israel.
In an overview of Buber's life, the translator of the Fontana Library
edition of Between Man and Man (published in 1960) claimed that Buber's
works had influenced a number of disciplines, including psychology, educat-
ional theory, philosophy, theology and sociology (in Buber, 1961).
-241-
Fritz Perls avoided making references to Buber, apart from crit-
icizing Buber's philosophy because of its reliance on Judaism (e.g.,
Perls, 1969a, p.17, 1969b, p.60).
Evidence of Buber's influence on Perls must therefore be obtained
from secondary sources and extrapolation. It is interesting to note,
however, that Laura Perls had studied with Buber for a year during her
University training in Frankfurt (Perls, L., personal communication,
3/1980). It can also be shown that there are significant commonalities
between Buber's and Perls' writings.
5.1.6.2 I-Thou and I-It
Diamond provided a warning of the difficulty encountered in attemp-
ting to convey Buber's I-Thou and I-It terms:
The terms are striking but highly artificial, especially
in English, which does not indulge in the philosopher's in-
clination to create his own vocabulary as does the German
in which the work was written.
(Diamond, 1960, p.20)
Buber described in poetic style how the pronoun "I" has two very
different meanings, depending on its relation to a "thou" or a "him"/
"her". In the sphere of the I-Thou, I is expressed with one's whole
being and expects reciprocity. It is the sphere of the encounter, of
the primary human relationships, and of the Spirit. In the sphere of
I-Him (or I-Her), I is expressed with a part of one's being; it is the
sphere of utilitarian relationships: "The primary word I-Thou can only
be spoken with the whole being" (Buber, 1923, p.3). Also:
-242-
The world of It_ is set in the context of space and time.
The world of Thou is not set in the context of either of
these.
(Buber, 1923, p.33)
Particularly important in this relationship is what Buber called
"seeing the other", "experiencing the other side", "inclusion" and
"making the other present" (Buber, quoted by Friedman, 1955, p.188).
"Seeing the other" is not a matter of identification or empathy,
but rather a concrete imagining of another persons perspective which
does not at the same time lose sight of one's own:
The primary word I-Thou can be spoken only with the whole
being. Concentration and fusion into the whole being
can never take place through my agency, nor can it ever
take place without me. I become through my relation to
the Thou; as I become I, I say Thou.
(Buber, 1923, p.11)
Later in his life, for instance in the postscript to I and Thou which
appeared in 1958, Buber suggested that a Thou relationship may take
place without full mutuality such as in a teacher-pupil or psychother-
apist-patient relationship.
The "I-Thou" is mankind's supreme relationship. Buber however,
stated that the "Thou" cannot forever remain a "Thou", no matter how
exclusive its properties, because the "I" can only maintain the "Thou"
rather fleetingly. The "Thou" continually becomes an "It". The "It",
however, can fleetingly become a "Thou" again.
It is evident that Perls was well acquainted with Buber's I-Thou
concept, and incorporated it into Gestalt therapy. In one section in
paticular of Gestalt Therapy (Perls et al., 1951) there is an acknow-
ledgement of the structure of the three grammatical persons of I, Thou,
-243-
and It. Although these were directly acquired from Buber, there is no
mention of their source. For example, Perls wrote:
Speech is good contact when it draws energy from and makes
a structure of the three grammatical persons, I, Thou and
It; the speaker, the one spoken to, and the matter spoken
about, when there is a needto communicatesomething.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.374)
5.1.6.3 Different "l's"
The difference between the world of "Thou" and "It" is quite pro-
nounced. In each case the "I" also changes. Buber wrote:
The "I" of the primary word "I-Thou" is a different "I"
from that of the primary word "I-It".
The "I" of the primary word "I-It" makes its appearance
as an individuality and becomes conscious of itself as
subject (of experiencing and using).
The "I" of the primary word "I-Thou" makes its appearance
as person and becomes conscious of itself as subjectivity
(with a dependent ^genitive) ....
The one is the spiritual form of natural detachment, the
other the spiritual form of natural solidarity of connex-
ion.
(Buber, 1923, p.62)
While individuals live in a world of "Its" and constantly inter-
act on this level they can elevate themselves into a world of "I" and
"Thou", where "I" and "Thou" interact freely. The world of fate and
causality, and the world of freedom and choice exist as a polarity.
Each person determines how s/he will exist. If the world of things
(Its) is seen as most important, then s/he becomes passive and submiss-
ive, a mere link in a cause-and-effect syndrome. If the choice is
mutually ("I-Thou"), both the "I" and the "Thou" exercise their ultim-
ate freedom in spite of the causal world in which they live.
-244-
Perls, as has been quoted earlier, discussed in a number of places
I, Thou and It terms. For instance, in outlining the meaning of "I"
he wrote:
The self-awareness is symbolized by the word "I" and the
world by the word "you". I and Thou. And if you have
too much I, you are self-centered, withdrawn and so on.
If you have too much thou, you're paranoic or aggressive...
(Perls, 1973, p.131)
This quotation shows that while Perls was well able to use the terms "I"
and "Thou", he did not completely comprehend the nuances of meaning pro-
posed by Buber. The thou (lower case + in thou) is described by Perls
as pertaining to the paranoid or the aggressive. Buber does not use
thou but rather Thou meaning a form of mutuality and respectful acknow-
ledgement, the opposite to Perls' usage.
5.1.6.4 I and It
If Perls was remiss in his usage of Buber's term Thou, and it is
only speculation that it was due to either his ignorance or misinterpre-
tation, there is certainly no dispute on both authors' use of I and It:
"each time you translate an it into an I, you increase in vitality and
your potential" (Perls, 1969a, p.75). In Gestalt therapy, the use of
third person language, for example, using a noun and particularly "it",
is a means of avoiding growth, avoiding responsibility for the self.
Perls wrote of this in the following way:
The "I" is used as an antidote to the "it" and develops
the patient's sense of responsibility for his feelings,
thoughts, and symptoms. The "am" is his existential
symbol.
(Perls, 1973, p.65)
-245-
Perls' position reflected his familiarity with Buber's work.
Both acknowledged the "it" level of interaction with the world, but, more
importantly, both stressed the lack of fulfillment at that level. Both
authors proposed the I-Thou level or mode of living as the one which en-
ables the. individual to live up to his/her full potentials and vitality.
This, according to both authors, is a style of living that is the optim-
al one, one that comes from the individual, for the individual.
Perls explained the use of it and I in the following way:
... the patient's "I" and not his "It" is responsible for
his illness. Only then does he recognize the purpose and
the cause.
(1947, p.217)
Also:
If you put "It is raining" and "It occurred to me that
..." on the same plane, your ability to differentiate
between inside and outside world does not look too per-
fect.
(Perls, 1947, p.217)
5.1.6.5 Responsibility in the I-Thou dialogue
The I-Thou dialogue leads to a discussion of responsibility and
self-responsibility:
The idea of responsibility is to be brought back from the
province of specialized ethics, of an "ought" that swings
free in the air ... Genuine responsibility exists only
where there is real responding.
(Buber, 1929, pp.33-34)
Similarly, Perls wrote that responsibility should be spelled response-
ability (Perls, 1969a).
-246-
5.1.6.6 Individuality
In outlining an existentialist philosophy, Buber believed in the
uniqueness of each person and the right of each person to his/her par-
ticular uniqueness. Each person acts and reacts in an individual way
in relation to various situations. While some generalization can be
made on what is required in similar situations or in response to simil-
ar events, it is significant that each situation is different and not-
able in its own right, despite similarities and commonalities. As such,
each requires a distinctive approach which cannot be prepared beforehand
or rehearsed in any way. Each new situation does not rely on what is
past; rather:
It demands presence, responsibility; it demands you.
I call a great character one who by his actions and
attitudes satisfies the claim of situations out of
deep readiness to respond with his whole life, and in
such a way that the sum of his actions and attitudes
expresses at the same time the unity of his being and
his willingness to accept responsibility.
(Buber, 1939, p.143)
The term character for Perls had a significantly different connot-
ation to that employed by Buber. However, like Buber, Perls believed
in the uniqueness of each individual. He stated that the "healthy"
functioning person is not one who has rehearsed behaviours in anticipat-
ion of meeting certain situations, but rather one who displays spontan-
eity and uniqueness in response to situations, be they similar to or difi
erent from those s/he has previously experienced (Perls, 1969a).
-247-
5.1.6.7 Reflexion and retroflection
Buber described individuals who live outside an 1-Thou existence
as living in the I-It mode, or the life of monologue. The I-It relat-
ionship is one-sided and tends to be one of subject-object, relating a
person's world to the world of things. The world of I-It is one where
the individual exists at the side of objects, without contact or mutual-
ity:
He who is living the life of monologue is never aware of
the other as something that is absolutely not himself ...
(Buber, 1929, p.38)
Buber outlined one of the movements developed by the person who is involv-
ed in monologue living:
The basic movement of the life of monologue is not turning
away as opposed to turning towards; it is "reflexion"-
(Buber, 1929, p.41)
What does "reflexion" denote? The translator's notes for his 1929
article "Dialogue" suggested that "reflexion" for the German Ruckbiegung
is by no means a perfect translation. It stated that:
Buber, however, makes clear that he is here describing the
essence of the "monological" life, in which the other is
not really met as the other, but merely as a part of the
monological self, in an Erlebnis (German term) or inner ex-
perience which has no objective import: what happens is that
the self "curves back on itself".
(Quoted in Buber, 1929, p.250)
What is evident yet again is the difficulty encountered in adequately
assessing the contribution of theoretical precursors to the development
of Gestalt therapy, and particularly those from the German. Obviously
-248-
Perls was fluent in German and many of his notions could well have been
more accurate translations and interpretations than "official" translat-
ions.
Perls outlined in most instances four (sometimes five) basic neurotic
mechanisms or boundary disturbances. These were introjection, project-
ion, confluence and retroflection. The first three have a great deal
in common with Freud's defence mechanisms (refer to chapter -2 on Freud and
Psychoanalysis). Retroflection does not appear to Perls' satisfaction to
have been outlined by Freud nor the neo-Freudians, nor did Perls acknow-
ledge any prior source of influence on formulating this mechanism. It is
asserted here that Buber's "reflexion" and Perls' "retroflection" have a
virtually identical basis. For Buber, "reflexion" meant that the self
"curves back on itself". For Perls, "retroflection" means literally "turn-
ing back against" (Perls, 1966a). Retroflecting individuals turn against
themselves and instead of directing their energies towards environmental
manipulation, direct those energies toward themselves Perls wrote:
Retroflection means that some function which originally is
directed from the individual towards the world, changes its
direction and is bent back towards the originator.
(Perls, 1947, pp.119-120)
And:
Retroflection is characterized by the word "self". Self-
love, self-control .... In retroflection one part of the
personality is split from the other but it remains in act-
ive connection. Object relationship is replaced by an "I
and Self" relation.
(Perls, 1948, p.65)
-249-
5.1.6.8 Conclusion
Thus, is appears that Perls adopted his formulation of I and Thou,
with its corollaries of responsibility for self, genuineness in commun-
ication, and the uniqueness of each individual, from the philosophy of
Martin Buber.
-250-
5.1.7 Paul Tillich (1886-1965)
Tillich was born in Prussia, the son of a Lutheran minister.
He studied at several Universities in Germany, receiving his doctorate
in 1911 (Woelfel, 1973a). He was ordained as an Evangelical Luth-
eran minister in 1912, and served as a chaplain with the German army
in World War 1. Between 1919 and 1929 he taught theology and phil-
osophy at the Universities of Berlin, Marburg, Dresden and Leipzig.
From 1929 until 1933 he taught philosophy at the University of Frank-
furt. Laura Perls studied with him for several years during this per-
iod (Perls, L. , personal communication, 3/1980). Tillich was involved
in the religious-socialist movement, and was an outspoken opponent of Naz-
ism. When Hitler rose to power in 1933 Tillich was dismissed from
his position and emigrated to the U.S.A., where he resumed his teaching
activities until his death.
Tillich was profoundly influenced by depth psychology, to which he
also contributed. His major work in this area was The Courage To Be
(1952). Although this book was publshed after Perls' first books, it
will be referred to here, as Tillich had proposed the ideas it contains
in the 1920's and 1930's (Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980).
Like Buber, Tillich received scant acknowledgement from Perls
simply a mention as an existentialist whose theory relies on support from
Protestantism (e.g., Perls, 1969a, p.17; 1969b, p.60). Laura Perls,
however, is certain that Tillich's theories, as related by her to Perls,
were represented in the formulation of Gestalt therapy (Perls, L., persona:
-251-
communication, 3/1980). There are certainly several areas of con-
currence between the two theories.
5.1.7.2 Polarities and organism-environment interaction
Tillich pointed out that ontological principles have a polar char-
acter, that of self and that of the world. "The first polar elements
are individualization and participation" (Tillich, 1952, p.89). In-
dividualization refers to the affirmation of the self as a self, i.e.,
a separated, self-centred, free, self-determining agent. Participation
refers to the individual meeting with, and interacting with the environ-
ment. According to Tillich, the self is self because it is part of a un-
iverse, to which it belongs and from which it is separated at the same
time. This relationship between self and the world is one of correlation,
and interaction. Participation for Tillich means being a part of some-
thing from which the individual is, at the same time, separated.
Perls also wrote of the interaction between the person and his/her
environment. He believed that the healthy, centered person experiences
him/herself as self-supporting, and at the same time adequate in interact-
ion with the environment (Perls, 1975). Polarities were also a funda-
mentally important concept in Gestalt therapy. "The basic philosophy of
Gestalt therapy is that of naturedifferentiation and integration"
(Perls, 1965, p.7).
-252-
5.1.7.3 Anxiety
Tillich regarded anxiety as the result of anticipating a certain
type of unknown situation:
... anxiety is the painful feeling of not being able to
deal with the threat of a special situation .... It is
the anxiety of not being able to preserve one's own be-
ing which underlies every fear and is the frightening el-
ement in it.
(Tillich, 1952, p.47)
It is the quality of anticipation in this definition that is so
similar to Perls' formulation. Perls defined anxiety as "the tension
between the now and the later" (1969b, p.174). He also referred to
anxiety as stage fright, and wrote that it disappeared when the person
would let go of his/her expectations of a catastrophic future, and get
in touch with the present (Perls, 1969b).
5.1.7.4 Health and neurosis
Tillich regarded health as a spontaneous, creative relationship
between the individual and his/her world:
Spiritual self-affirmation occurs in every moment in which
man lives creatively in the various spheres of meaning.
Creative, in this context, ... (means) of living spontan-
eously in action and reaction with the contents of one s
cultural life.
(Tillich, 1952, p.53)
Conversely, neurosis is characterized by a loss of potential, and by a
"distorted relation to reality as a whole" (Tillich, 1952, p.72). The
healthy person "is adjusted to reality in many more directions than the
neurotic" (Tillich, 1952, p.73).
-253-
Perl's approach to health and neurosis is strikingly similar.
He described the healthy person as "completely in touch with himself
and reality" (Perls, 1969a, p.50), and the neurotic as one who has
lost vitality and spontaneity to adopt stereotypic "safe" behaviour-
al patterns, who is "nothing but a set of obsolete responses" (Eliot,
quoted by Perls, 1969a, p.35).
The fixed, sterotypic quality of neurotic responses had been rec-
ognized by Tillich:
...the neurotic personality, on the basis of his greater
sensitivity to non-being and consequently of his pro-
founder anxiety, has settled down to a fixed though lim-
ited and unrealistic, self-affirmation.
(Tillich, 1952, pp.72-73)
The profound anxiety experienced by the neurotic has its roots in the
anticipation of a threatening future (see section 5.1.7.3) which must
be avoided by limiting future possibilities.
This concern with the future in neurotic functioning was noted by
Perls, who described the neurotic as having lost touch with the world
of which s/he is in command (Perls, 1946). S/he feels that s/he can-
not support him/herself. Instead s/he finds ways to manipulate the
environment for support, often becoming control-mad, concerned with
"coping" and "handling" rather than just living (Perls, 1969a). The
neurotic undervalues his/her own resources, believing that s/he cannot
function without the support of others, and lives in the shadow of cat-
astrophic expectations of what will occur if that support is withdrawn.
Tillich's view of health and neurosis is thus clearly reflected
in Gestalt therapy.
-254-
5.1.7.5 Role of the therapist
Tillich referred to the state of self-affirmation which, in spite of
the "anxiety of guilt", is something that enables the individual to trans-
cend the self (Tillich, 1952, p.161). He regarded the person as not being
able to appreciate self-acceptance unless it is mirrored in his/her exist-
ence. The therapist (or helping healer) according to Tillich does his/her
patient a disservice by distorting realityfor instance by convincing
someone of their innocence if in fact they are guilty. The therapist can
help the patient to "transform displaced, neurotic guilt feelings into
genuine ones" but s/he cannot insist on there being no guilt (Tillich, 1952,
p.162).
Perls' view of the role of the therapist in facilitating awareness
resembled Tillich's. In Gestalt therapy, the therapist aims not at ad-
justment but at the facilitation of genuine awareness, and thereby per-
sonal growth. Perls defined maturity as: "the transcendence from en-
vironmental support to self-support" (1969a, p.30). The patient is en-
couraged to take responsibility for his/her own life. The therapist does
not try to change nor to solve the life problems of the patient (thereby
facilitating even more dependence on external support via the therapist);
rather, the aim is the development of his/her own acceptance and support.
Of psychotherapy, Perls wrote:
... fundamentally, no conflicts should be removed by psy-
chotherapy; but the goal of psychotherapy is to make
awares unawares conflicts and to remove false conflicts.
(Perls and Goodman, 1950, p.41)
-255-
5.1.7.6 Kairos or critical point
Kairos is a Greek word from Hippocratic medicine, and refers to
the moment when an acute disease is expected to change its course, for
better or worse. So-called critical symptoms will appear at this
time, indicating the new direction of the illness. The physician would
show his/her skill in handling the situation. Tillich (1944) revived
this long forgotten concept.
Tillich (1967) reminded the reader of Paul (the apostle) speaking of
the kairos in describing the feeling that the time was ripe, mature or
prepared. The richness of the Greek language is shown in this instance,
the English language having only one word for time whereas Greek has two,
chronos meaning clock time and kairos meaning the qualitative time of the
occasion or the "right" time:
Kairos is the time which indicates that something has
happened which makes an action possible or impossible.
We all experience moments in our lives when we feel that
now is the right time to do something, now we are mature
enough, now we can make the decision. This is the kairos.
(Tillich, 1967, p.l)
It was of this time in history, the right time for the coming of Christ,
that Paul spoke to the early Church.
Therapists have used this concept to determine when the patient is
ready for a certain kind of intervention, and therapy at this time is
highly successful, whereas before and after it may have little influence.
An instance of a critical or decisive pointof kairosis the point
in Gestalt therapy between impasse and explosion, the point of the fertile
-256-
void in which the person can go either forward into explosion and authen-
ticity, or regress to another impasse, once again seeking environmental
support (Perls, 1966a). This concept may well have given Perls some
elements of the notion of "don't push the river, it flows by itself"
(Perls, 1969b, p.176).
5.1.7.7 Conclusion
Tillich's philosophy and Gestalt therapy have the following signif-
icant common elements:
1. Polar nature of existence
2. Importance of person-environment interaction
3. Anticipation as a root of anxiety
4. Spontaneity and creativity of healthy living
5. Awareness rather than change per se as a goal of therapy
6. Critical pointkairosin therapy (in Gestalt therapy, the
point between impasse and explosion)
-257-
5.1.8 Ludwig Binswanger (1881-1966)
Binswanger was born in Switzerland, and came from a family with a
medical background. His father and grandfather both held the position
of Chief Medical Director of the Bellevue Sanatorium in Kreuzlingen;
Binswanger himself directed the same institution from 1911 until 1956
(Brice, 1978). He took his medical degree from the University of Zurich
in 1907 and was an intern under the supervision of Eugen Bleuler. It
was through Bleuler and later Jung that Binswanger became acquainted with
Freudian theory. He met Sigmund Freud in 1907 (Schur, 1972), and a friend-
ship began between the two which lasted until Freud's death in 1939 (Bins-
wanger, 1957).
Binswanger's expansion from psychoanalysis came as a result of an in-
terest in the writings of Kierkegaard, Husserl, Heidegger and Buber.
Binswanger became one of the first proponents of psychiatric phenomenol-
ogy in the early 1920's. In his first paper "Dream and existence" (1930)
and his studies on mania (1931-1932) he moved towards existential analysis
(May, Binswanger and Ellenberger, 1976). Binswanger's Daseins Analysis
or existential analysis (proposed in the 1920's and 1930's) represented a
synthesis of psychoanalysis, phenomenology, and existentialist concepts.
It is primarily a reconstruction of the inner world of the patient s ex-
perience with the help of the conceptual framework inspired by Heidegger's
studies on the structure of human experience. Binswanger was also xn-
fluenced by Martin Buber's concept of I and Thou (1923). Binswanger
brought together Heidegger's phenomenological ontology and Buber's phxl-
osophy of dialogue into one system.
-258-
Perls (1969a) stated that Binswanger's Daseins Analysis, with
Logotherapy and Gestalt therapy, was one of the three forms of exist-
ential therapy.
5.1.8.2 Therapeutic approach
Binswanger (1956) noted five major trends in existential analysis,
all of which are represented in Gestalt therapy. These were:
5.1.8.2.1 Rejection of explanations
Existential analysis investigates the life-history of the patient
by understanding it as modifications to the total structure of the pat-
ient's Being-in-the-world, not by explaining it (Binswanger, 1956).
This approach is strongly represented in Gestalt therapy. The ther-
apist tries to understand and empathize with the patient. There is no
need to explain anythingrather the task of the therapist is to observe
the way the patient operates in the world
an(
j
see w
hat is missing (Perls,
1969a).
5.1.8.2.2 Experiential basis
Binswanger described his approach as follows:
A psychotherapy on existential-analytic bases thus proceeds not by
showing the patient where, when and to what extent he has failed to
realize the fullness of his humanity, but it tries to make him ex-
perience this ...
(Binswanger, 1956, p.146)
-259-
In Gestalt therapy the aim is to increase awareness which is equated
with experience: "Now = Experience = Awareness = Reality"(Perls, 1966a, p.14) .
Perls also wrote of experiential therapy, where the patient is brought
to: "re-experience problems and traumas in the here and now" (1973, p.64).
5.1.8.2.3 Role of therapist and patient
The existential therapist regards the patient as an existential part-
ner, and therapy as an encounter of existence in the world, as being-to-
gether with one another.
Perls regarded patients in much the same manner. In therapy, the
therapist and patient go hand in hand towards a common goal. It is a
partnership in which the patient provides the directions and the thera-
pist provides the means or tools to assist the patient in the direction
the patient desires (Perls, 1965).
5.1.8.2.4 Dreams
The existential therapist understands the dream as a way of being-in-
the-world. In the dream is the whole person in a different existential
modality than in wakefulness (Binswanger, 1956). As such it is of great
importance in therapy, because the dream shows the structure of being-in-
the-world in our "over-all manner" and opens up new areas of behaving and
existing.
Dreamwork is one of the fundamental modes of working in Gestalt ther-
apy. Perls conceived of it as an existential message from the self, to
the self. The dream is an attempt to solve a problem, usually endeavour-
ing to finish a situation:
-260-
In dreams we find holes in the personality .... Whatever
is missing in the dream is missing in this person's ex-
istence. The dream directly points out these avoidances
to being whole.
(Perls, 1975, p.120)
5.1.8.2.5 Cure
Binswanger stated that existential therapy can be therapeutically
successful only insofar as it succeeds in opening or expanding a person's
understanding of the structure of human existence. This means the per-
son can find the way out of his/her neurosis into the freedom of being
able to utilize his/her own capacities for living.
Gestalt therapy incorporates this concept. The individual is en-
couraged to work on anything that is blocking awarness, to find and de-
velop new ways of behaving and acting so as to free him/herself from the
limited self-defeating patterns that have characterized his/her neurosis.
If cure means accomplishing the introjection of societal standards
and morals, then this is not an existential approach nor goal. If cure
is to go much more deeply into becoming oriented toward the fulfillment
of one's existence, then the person discovers his/her being, or Dasein
(Binswanger, 1958).
Perls' attitude concurred with that outlined above. He rejected ab-
solutely the introjection of external standards.
5.1.8.3 Conclusion
Binswanger's Daseins Analysis may thus have assisted Perls in the
development of the Gestalt approach to therapy.
-261-
5.2 Phenomenology
5.2.1 Introduction
Perls and other authors (e.g., Kepner and Brien, 1970; Yontef,
1969, 1979; Zinker, 1975; Miller, 1981) have described Gestalt ther-
apy as a phenomenological psychotherapy. Perls wrote:
If you put these two togetherthe phenomenological app-
roach, the awareness of what is, and the behavioral app-
roach with its emphasis on behavior in the nowthen you
have in a nutshell ... Gestalt therapy.
(Perls, 1966a, p.14)
The literature does not, however, evaluate the role of phenomenologic-
al theory in the formulation of Gestalt therapy in any significant way.
Perls et al. (1951) wrote that the phenomenology of awareness was
one of a number of disciplines from which parts were extracted to be or-
ganized into a theory of Gestalt therapy. Therefore, although there is
considerable overlap between phenomenologists and existentialists (Ver-
haar, 1973), phenomenology is an influence of sufficient importance to be
considered separately from existentialism (see section 5.1).
After examining and evaluating all of Perls' works, it is evident
that Husserl was the major phenomenologist referred to by Perls (see app-
endix III). In addition, Laura Perls named Husserl as a phenomenologist
who had particularly influenced Gestalt therapy. Phenomenology when dis-
cussed here will therefore refer primarily to Husserl's work.
According to Gurwitsch (1953) phenomenology was established by Husserl
as a philosophical discipline, not a positivistic one. It is therefore
-262-
concerned with the. fundamental problems of knowledge and experience of
the perceptual world and of how it influences everyday life.
5.2.2 Edmund Husserl (1859-1938) Biography
Husserl was born in a village in Czechoslovakian Moravia. He was
schooled in the Realgymnasium in Vienna, after which he studied mathemat-
ics, physics and astronomy at the University of Leipzig. He received his
Ph.D. in mathematics from the Friedrich Wilhelm University of Berlin in
1883. Between 1884 and 1886, he attended the lectures of Franz Brentano.
On Brentano's advice, he went to the University of Halle where he became
an assistant to Stumpf. This provided him with a great opportunity to
attain a thorough grounding in early general psychology. In 1916 he re-
ceived a full professorship at Freiburg, where he remained until his re-
tirement in 1928. He continued writing after his retirement, producing
several major works. Unfortunately, very few of these were published,
whilst others were not translated into English until recently (Kockelmans,
1967).
Most of Husserl's works in English translations tend to be edited
commentaries, relying to varying extents on his original writings. Spieg-
elberg (1972) warned that it is not easy to translate many of the German
terms developed and/or used by Husserl, or indeed, even to find approxim-
ate equivalents. Accordingly, different translations of the same source
work give different impressions of Husserl's theoretical stance.
-263-
5.2.3 Experience
The specific concern of phenomenology is experience (Keen, 1975).
It is when we investigate the phenomenon of experience, however, that
the difficulties of phenomenological psychology become apparent (Husserl,
1925). For the phenomenologist, experience is always organized by or in
situations. Language is employed to distinguish various aspects of the
situation. Gendlin (1973, p.292) wrote:
... we will not be studying "pure" experience as if it
were some kind of putty; rather experience is always
organized by the evolutionary history of the body, and
also by culture and situations organized partly by lang-
uage .... The role of language does not get at all of an
experience .... Language is already involved in experience.
The task of phenomenological psychology is to investigate the various
types of experience. One method is to:
... start with uncovering the world of our immediate ex-
perience, thus unveiling our factual experiencing of
this real world.
(Husserl, in Kockelmans, 1967, p.162)
Perls' appreciation of the role of awareness was enriched by his and
Laura Perls' knowledge of phenomenology. In outlining a set of instruct-
ions to be followed when working with "undirected awareness" (or as he
later called it, the awareness continuum) he wrote:
From the philosophical point of view this is a training
in phenomenology: the realization that your sequence
of thoughts, your surface experience ... is first of all
something that exists in its own right.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.114)
The instructions he gave clients were:
-264-
(1) Maintain the sense of actualitythe sense that your
awareness exists now and here.
(2) Try to realize that you are living the experience; ...
(3) Attend to and follow up all experiences, the "internal"
as well as the "external" ...
(4) With regard to every experience without exception, verb-
alize: "Now I am aware that ..."
(Perls et al., 1951, p.114)
Phenomenological psychology based on Husserl's writings concerns
itself with our own conscious life, and with the experience of others
and of the community in general (Kockelmans, 1978). Husserl also re-
ferred to the unity of the individual in various places. For instance,
he wrote: "the physical and 'spiritual' are inseparably intertwined in
the world of pure experience" (Husserl, 1925, p.104). He further stat-
ed that every experience has an impact to some degree or other on the
individual's body:
Here alone I experience in an originally perceptual manner
this unity of body and psyche, this intermingling of bodily
and animating happening.
(Husserl, 1925, p.81)
Perls' view was very similar. He set out the equation: "now =
experience = awareness = reality" (Perls, 1966a, p.14), and Polster and
Polster (1973) described experience or awareness as one of the three
touchstones of Gestalt therapy (the other two being contact and experi-
ment). Perls (1975) referred to experience as contact, being in touch
with ourselves through our bodies and emotions, and being in touch with
and experiencing the world through our senses.
-265-
5.2.4 Here and now
Gendlin (1973) regarded Husserl as the first person to base phil-
osophy on the experience of the now, as people actually live. The rec-
ognition of the importance of the now is one of the most significant par-
allels between phenomenology and the Gestalt approach. Gurwitsch (1929)
wrote:
As far as the present experience, the Now, is concerned,
the claim is ipso facto redeemed because of its privil-
eged position as point of reference in which the chain
terminates and from which it descends into the past (p.275).
Similar comments are made by Strauss (1966) and Keen (1975).
Perls for his part wrote:
There are two legs upon which Gestalt therapy walks: now
and how ... Now covers all that exists. The past is no
more, the future is not yet.
. (1969a, p.47)
The recognition that the past is no more, and that reminiscence is
thus a present activity, is an important one in phenomenology. For in-
stance, Keen (1975, p.90) wrote:
... decisions made now in relation to a recalled past be-
come meaningful in that they will change the sum total of
my past in the future and make the best of what cannot be
changed, thus in effect changing it; they will build upon,
rather than try to undo or repeat the past ... we live into
the past in recall ... past is subject to changes even though
the events themselves are over.
The past and the future are both aspects of being-in-the-world, of being
a self in time. In recalling, therefore, we create a new past, one
based not in reality but on our impressions of reality as it then was.
-266-
xn
Since the past cannot be present, it cannot be preserved whole and i
the fullness of its possibilities. The preservation of the past is
necessarily fragmentary (Strauss, 1966).
For the phenomenologist what is called "pathological" is a matter
of one's identity or self in time. It is therefore unreasonable to label
all experiences such as reminiscence as pathological, because they are part
of the spectrum of experience. It is only when the individual becomes
locked or fixed in reminiscing that allows no sense of freedom that the ac-
tivity becomes pathological.
Perls recognized that "memories" are creations made in the now:
.-..memory is an abstraction.. .You always abstract the rel-
evant gestalt from the total context. Now if you take
these abstractions and file them away, then you call them mem-
ories. If these memories are unpleasant, especially if
they are unpleasant to our self-esteem, we change them.
(1969a, p.45)
Like the phenomenologists, however, he did not suggest that all memories,
all reference to the past is pathological; indeed, he stated that without
memory of the past, we would be unable to comprehend present experience.
What Perls regarded as pathological was unfinished business from the past
which drains energy from present living, but of which the person in un-
aware (Perls et al., 1951).
Gendlin (1973) wrote that a psychotherapy is phenomenological if :
its words and vocabulary are used in relation to experience" (p.310).
It is only through referring to the concrete experience of the client,
-267-
he believed, that therapy can be successful. Phenomenological psycho-
therapies endeavour to clarify the concept of existence, and the diff-
erent aspects of the meaning of existence (Gurwitsch, 1961). Gestalt
therapists continually expound this view and always aim at examining and
clarifying the mode of experience of existence in all clients. Phenem-
ologists, like Gestaltists, abstain from operating with any preconceived
notions or frameworks, because these hinder clear understanding of the
subject matter at hand.
By focusing on a patient's experience, as well as on his/her behaviour,
psychologists are being both phenomenological and humanistic (Keen, 1975).
The Gestalt therapist is concerned with the present behaviour and experience
of the patient. In a demonstration of therapy, Perls outlined:
... what I'd like to do in the beginning is to take a few
of you and ask you to come on the hot seat and work on the
phenomenological basis. This means work on the awareness
of the on-going process. If you live in the present, you
use whatever is available.
(Perls, 1973, p.128)
5.2.6 Language
Gendlin (1973) discussed the phenomenologists' contention that
language and living develop together, and continue to do so, as
experience and situations go hand in hand. He wrote that Husserl
discussed the "experiential sense" which influences our use of language
and an "emotional sense" which "fills" verbal sound patterns. For
Husserl therefore, experience, language and situations are inextricab-
ly interwoven, and language usage is of fundamental importance in under-
standing a person's way of being-in-the-world.
-268-
Gendlin outlined what he designated as signposts which help us rec-
ognize when phenomenological explication occurs. Some of these signposts
are used in Gestalt therapy, e.g.,
Precise defined meanings of words and the defined as-
pects of situations are used ....
Demonstrative words such as "this" or "it" are used
importantly, and yet such words alone convey little
or nothing.
Several different descriptive words may be used for
the "same thing," despite the fact that literally they
mean different things ....
Whatever one now says is held to be what the experience
"was" all along.
What is at first physically "felt" becomes explicated in
words that are about situations and world (not in feeling-
tone words such as "dull" or "sharp" or "intense").
(Gendlin, 1973, p.304)
These steps guide us toward a process of hearing not merely what the
statement says, but rather how the statement reflects the individual's
experience.
Gendlin (1973) raised an interesting phenomenological issue which
parallels one aspect of Gestalt therapy. He stated that we can only say
that we "feel" how an expression fits when it succeeds in expressing that
feeling. We can say also that we often feel a change in what we are ex-
pressing in the process of expressing it. This has considerable use in
therapy as shown in the numerous examples Perls' reports of having patients
express what they feel and to continue to express themselves until they get
the correct expression to fit the feeling and vice versa.
Husserl proposed that expression can be used for one of two purposes:
-269-
Expression and what is expressed (are) two layers that
are congruent, one covers the other .... One must not
expect too much from this image of layers, expression
is not something laid on ... rather it affects the in-
tentional underlayer ...
(in Gendlin, 1973, p.289)
Perls adopted and extended this view, discussing the situation in
pathology where expression and what is expressed are not congruent:
In Gestalt therapy we look at the way a person manipulates
his language, and we see that the more alienated he is from
himself, the more he will use nouns instead of verbs, and
most especially, the word jLt .... When I'm alive, I talk, I
am "voicing". When I'm dead, I "have"
a
voice with words;
this language will have an expression; etc.
(Perls, 1966a, p.20)
Phenomenologists consistently argue that to know what we are doing,
to feel and experience all through our being, is much more important than
to know why we do what we do. If the individual fully knows the "what",
the "why" will make itself known, but the reverse is not possible (May et
al., 1974). Asking "why" type questions is generally aimed at getting
power over something or somebody, whereas asking "what" type questions is
a way of participating in the phenomenon (May et al., 1976).
Perls was well acquainted with this approach, and discouraged "why"
type questions:
I know you want to ask why, like every child, like every
immature person asks why, to get rationalization or ex-
planation. But the why at best leads to clever explan-
ation, but never to an understanding.
(Perls, 1969a, p.47)
He regarded most therapists as using "why" questions to little effect,
because these questions produce only pat answers, defensiveness, excuses
-270-
and a causal "explanation"calculated to best satisfy the curiosity
of the questioner (Perls, 1973).
The primary objective of phenomenology is the direct investigation
and description of phenomena as consciously experienced. This is done
without causal explanations, and as far as possible free from preconcept-
ions and presuppositions. The phenomenologist attempts to describe phen-
omena as faithfully and accurately as is possible, given that no science
can be value-free (Spiegelberg, 1978b).
One of the major tenets of Gestalt therapy concerns the role of in-
terpretation (Perls et al., 1951). Perls stated his position as follows:
It is not the therapist's task to make value judgements
about his patients' existential needs (but) to facil-
itate for each of them the development that will enable them
to find goals ... in a mature way.
(Perls, 1973, p.45)
The Gestalt position is non-interpretive and anti-analytic. All
individuals are considered holistically and must have their wholeness re-
spected (Perls et al., 1951). Thus, Perls regarded Gestalt therapy as
the most effective of any of the psychotherapies, because the person is
not directed, analyzed or evaluated (Perls, 1969a).
5.2.8 Figure-ground
Husserl (1931) described the perception of the world by the individual:
I am aware of a world ... I discover it immediately, in-
tuitively, I experience it. Through sight, touch, bear
-271-
ing, etc., ... things somehow spatially distributed are
for me simply there, in verbal or figurative sense "pres-
ent", whether or not I pay them special attention ....
They too are present as realities in my field of intuit-
ion, even when I pay them no attention.
(in Kockelmans, 1966a, p.69)
Perls followed Husserl's views on intuition, although he used an
alternative terminologythat of Gestalt psychology and field theory.
Thus, Perls would speak of figure and ground, foreground and background.
Gestalt therapy outlined the role of the contact boundary, which is the
point where the individual and the environment meet. Like Husserl, Perls
saw this awareness as a product of the senses (Perls, 1969a).
5.2.9 Conclusion
Perls (1966a) described Gestalt therapy as a phenomenological psycho-
therapy. Phenomenological aspects of Gestalt therapy are:
1. Its focus on experience and ongoing awareness
2. Its present-centeredness
3. Its recognition of the importance of language usage in reveal-
ing ways of being-in-the-world
4. Its concentration on process rather than causation
5. Its rejection of interpretation and analysis by the therapist
6. Its figure/ground conceptualization of the individual's way
of perceiving his/her world.
-272-
5.3 Henri Bergson (1859-1941)
French philosopher Henri Bergson was born to a Jewish family of
Polish and Irish ancestry. He obtained his Doctorate in 1889, and
taught for a number of years in Angers. He became a Professor at the
College de France (Paris) in 1900; his lectures were enormously pop-
ular. He was elected to the French Academy, and received the Nobel
Prize for Literature in 1927 (Langley, 1973).
Bergson's philosophy is often referred to as vitalism. He opposed
mechanism and determinism, while asserting the importance of intuition,
duration and liberty (Langley, 1973).
One of the major difficulties in assessing the degree of overlap
between Bergson and Perls is the lack of precision of terminology in the
translations of Bergson's work. An example is the 1907 book Creative
Evolution. The authorized translation by Arthur Mitchell varies signif-
icantly from Gallagher's (1970) translation. The differences appear so
great as to change the concept from one which is clearly reflected in
Gestalt therapy (in the case of Gallagher, 1970) to one which is barely
recognizable, much less significantly overlapping with Gestalt therapy
(e.g., Mitchell's translation of Bergson, 1907). The term "life force"
is translated by Mitchell literally as life force, whereas most authors
such as Chevalier (1928), Perls (1947) and Gallagher (1970) use elan vital,
and others such as Solomon (1912) use elan de vie.
The clearest indication of Bergson's impact of Perls is the number
of times both he and the concept of elan vital are referred to in Perls'
-273-
works. Bergson defined elan vital as "life, consciousness, mind, eff-
ort and freedom" (in Gallagher, 1970, p.4). Perls referred to elan vital
on at least nine occasions, and to "life force" on several others.
5.3.2 Elan vital
Gallagher (1970) wrote:
Bergson conceived the inner directing principle, which he
called elan vital, as an inexhaustible conscious force, a
prolific energy that proceeds in a creative and altogether
unpredictable manner without a definite direction and with
no end in view (p.41).
Life force is an inner feeling which motivates and encourages the individ-
ual to transcend various limitations and nature itself. Evolution for
Bergson is best explained in terms of this vital impulse, the elan vital
which drives all organisms towards constantly striving for higher forms
of living. The elan vital is the essential internal element of all liv-
ing beings: "All things are motivated by this elan vital; the elan vital
is the fundamental reality" (Bergson, quoted in Stumpf, 1966, p.392).
Solomon (1912) suggested that Bergson was the modern Heraclitus, in-
sisting that existence is a state of perpetual change. He referred to
the individual actions in the following manner:
... for the deliberate action characteristic of man, for
action which is purposed before it is executed. Physic-
al causes will limit in various ways the action possible
to him; but they will not determine it. It is a life
force (elan de vie) in him, a spiritual or psychological
principle of active adaption, that determines it.
(Solomon, 1912, p.46)
Perls' views on this concept parallel Bergson's. He compa
-274-
Bergson's elan vital with Freud's libido: "Freud applies this energy
in the sense of Bergson's elan vital" (Perls, 1947, p.86).
The aspect of Perls' theory which was enriched by Bergson's con-
cept of elan vital (together with Freud's concept of libido and Reich's
concept of the orgone) was that of excitement. Perls wrote:
We use the term "excitement" to cover the heightened
energy mobilization which occurs whenever there is ...
strong contact ...
(Perls et al., 1951, p.164)
Perls regarded excitement as the energy people create, reflected in such
fundamental processes as respiration. He wrote:
We have no name for the energy we create. Bergson
called it elan vital .... I call it excitement, be-
cause the word excitement coincides with the physio-
logical aspect, excitation.
(Perls, 1966a, pp.30-31)
5.3.3 Intuition
Another concept Perls acquired from Bergson was that of intuition.
Perls regarded language as inadequate to describe aspects of being such
as emotions and feelings:
Bergson has reinstated the term "intuition" for the deep-
est knowledge of our existence which stretches beyond im-
ages and words.
(Perls, 1947, p.212)
Bergson contrasted intuition with analysis. While analysis requires a
breaking down of the object under consideration into its component parts,
intuition is:
-275-
... The kind of intellectual sympathy by which one places
oneself within an object in order to coincide with what
is unique in it and consequently inexpressible.
(in Stumpf, 1966, p.389)
Perls' position was also non-analytical. Gestalt therapy does not re-
duce the individual to his/her "component parts," but rather respects
wholeness and unity. Perls believed that to analyze into parts is to
destroy one of the major tools of therapy (Perls, 1969a). He regarded
neurosis as a sign that the biological self is demanding attention.
Thus, neurosis indicates the loss of contact between the deliberate and
the spontaneous selfin the Bergsonian sense, the neurotic individual has
lost intuition (Perls 1966a, 1969a, 1973). Perls' concept of awareness
also overlaps with Bergson's intuition:
Self-awareness means ... that subjective state of primary
feeling that one exists, as well as the feel of how one
exists, a state which psychoanalysis calls "primary nar-
cissism." The term "intuition," in the sense of Bergson
would be appropriate ...
(Perls, 1947, p.255)
5.3.4 Past, present and future
Another notion of Perls' which was influenced by Bergson's theory
is that of the continuum of past, present and future, with healthy liv-
ing centred in the present. Of the present, Bergson wrote:
The past is powerless; the present is sensori-motor,
and therefore active .... My present is that which
interests me, which lives for me, and, in a word, that
which summons me to action; whereas my past is essent-
ially powerless.
(1896, p. 176)
-276-
This quotation reflects parts of the Gestalt approach to living
in the now and the role of the past. According to Perls, the present
is where action happens. All therapy must be done in the here and now
rather than the there and then (Perls, 1966a). The present is sensori-
motor because the individual acts and reacts to various stimuli. Even
if various Gestalts cannot be immediately closed these Gestalts are in-
tegrated into a hierarchy and continue to demand closure. The only
awareness is here and now, whether it be the past (memories) or the fut-
ure (anticipation)past and future events are in the present as they occ-
upy present processes (Perls, 1969a).
5.3.5 The role of the body
In his book Matter and Memory (1896), Bergson demonstrated that the
past is preserved within the individual in two different forms. Firstly,
in the form of a memory which catalogues the course of time and is pre-
served by the mind. Secondly, in the motor mechanisms of the body as dis-
played by certain behaviours and which are registered in the body. Berg-
son outlined the role of the body and the way in which it is affected by
life-style:
Our body occupies its centre; it is, in this material
world, that past of which we directly feel the flux;
in its actual state of actuality of our present lives.
(Bergson, 1896, p.178)
Also:
... the body retains motor habits capable of acting the
past over again ... it can furnish to remembrance a point
of attachment with the actual, a means of recovering its
lost influence upon present reality ...
(Bergson, 1896, p.299)
-277-
Perls' position overlaps considerably with this association of
experience being reflected in the body (See Chapter 3.2 on Wilhelm
Reich and Character Analysis which provides a comprehensive discuss-
ion of this association). For the Gestalt therapist the individual
lodges emotional responses in the body's musculature. One of the
major premises of Gestalt therapy is that of accepting responsibility
for our symptoms and of recognizing how we produce our own illness.
This is curative, and .results in growth and integration (Perls, 1969a).
In maintaining a holistic position Perls was clear that the body retains
motor habits capable of reviewing previously unresolved experiences.
He argued (1969a, p.6) that we do not "have" a body, but rather: "We are
a body, we are somebody."
5.3.6 Experience
Bergson's philosophy drew upon "experience both internal and exter-
nal, and experience integrale" (Gallagher, 1970, p.29). Furthermore,
Bergson is quoted as saying:
I have always been an irreducible empiricist, only I
take the whole of experience: first external experience,
then internal experience.
(in Gallagher, 1970, p.29)
Perls outlined a very similar approach to experience. In giving
a set of instructions to be followed when working with undirected aware-
ness, one of the instructions was: "Attend to and follow up all exper-
iences, the 'internal' as well as the 'external' " (Perls et al., 1951,
P.114).
-278-
Perls also suggested a process of differentiation:
Try first to attend mainly to external eventssights,
sounds, smellsbut without suppressing other exper-
iences. Then, in sharp contrast, concentrate on inter-
nal processesimages, physical sensations, muscular
tensions, emotions, thinking.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.117)
5.3.7 Conclusion
Perls' concept of excitement can therefore be seen to be related
to Bergson's elan vital. Bergson's views on intuition, present-
centredness, the way in which life-style is reflected by the body, and
the importance of experience are also represented in Gestalt therapy.
-279-
5.4 Sigmund Friedlander (dates of birth and death unobtainable)
Sigmund Friedlander was described by Perls as "one of my three
gurus" (1969b, p.70). It has proved impossible, however, either to
obtain any biographical details or even a copy of his book Creative
Indifference. Perls referred to this work in Ego, Hunger and Aggress-
ion (1947) and In and Out the Garbage Pail (1969b), but did not give
a full reference. Kogan made a comprehensive but unsuccessful search
for the book in the U.S.A. (Kogan, 1973); a similar search in Australia
has failed to locate any book by this author. The only person who claims
to have seen a copy of Creative Indifference is Wills (1978a), who found
a copy in Germany in an unspecified library in Berlin (Wills, personal
communication, 8/1978b). Even Laura Perls said: "I can't find the book.
I am looking in Germany and it is out of print and nobody knows" (personal
communication, 3/1980).
Laura Perls also stated that Fritz Perls knew Friedlander, although
she didn't. She was familiar with his work as a satirist/poet (apparently
published under the pseudonym "mynona""anonym" reversed); he was better
known for this than as a philosopher (personal communication, 3/1980).
According to Perls (1969b), Friedlander provided him with a bridge
between Gestalt psychology and Zen Buddhism. Perls adopted from him the
concept of nothingness (no-thingness) and credited Friedlander with clarif-
ying Goldstein's term "self-actualization" (Perls, 1973).
-280-
5.4.2 Polarities
Perls developed his concept of polarities from Friedlander's notion
of creative indifference (Perls, 1947). As Gestalt therapy expanded and
developed, the concept of polarities became increasingly important (Baum-
gardner, 1975). Perls (1965, p.7) stated:
The basic philosophy of Gestalt therapy is that of nature
differentiation and integration. Differentiation by
itself leads to polarities.
Polarities are the extremes of the continuum, and yet attract and
seek each other, e.g., love-hate (Fantz, 1975a). As Perls (1969b, p.76)
explained:
If you are caught by one of the opposing forces you are
trapped, or at least lopsided. If you stay in the noth-
ing of the zero center, you are balanced and in perspect-
ive.
This notion of the creative zero centre was derived from Friedlander's
work: "Creative indifference is full of interest, extending towards
both sides of the differentiation" (Perls, 1947, p.19). Thus, the cente-
red (creatively indifferent) person experiences him/herself as self-supp-
orting and adequate in his/her interactions with the world (Naranjo, 1970;
Baumgardner, 1975).
The Gestalt therapist facilitates discovery of the zero point by
identifying polarities in the person (e.g., by creative frustration).
The person then works on both poles, through shuttling or dialogue, un-
til s/he achieves integration, and the zero point is reached (Perls, 1947,
1969a).
-281-
5.4.3 Awareness and creative indifference
Awareness of dichotomies in the here and now, simultaneously,
renders the Gestalt complete, and energy is restored in that area
(Wills, 1978a). There is no longer an impasse blocking awareness and
the flow of energy.
Kogan (1973) outlined the influence of Friedlander when he suggest-
ed that Perls' equation (1966a, p.14): Now = Experience = Awareness =
Reality, offered the necessary connection between Friedlander's philos-
ophy of differential thinking and creative indifference and Perls' hol-
istic/organic phenomenology of Gestalt therapy. Kogan wrote that the
connection between Perls and Friedlander "now seems obvious" (1973, p.52).
Without having any of Friedlander's writings available, it is difficult to
be as positive as Kogan appears to be in his assertions. However, Wills
(1978a) also attributed the concepts of impasse, zero-point and creative
indifference to Friedlander:
From Zen he (Perls) learned the necessity of looking for
the obvious, and from Friedlander, the value of locating
the structure of impasses within a polarity and then re-
solving it by taking awareness to the zero-point of "cre-
ative indifference," to use Friedlander's term.
(Wills, 1978a, p.183)
5.4.4 Conclusion
In spite of the difficulty in locating Friedlander's original works,
it seems clear from Perls' acknowledgements that the Gestalt therapy con-
cepts of polarities, awareness and creative indifference were influenced
by Friedlander's formulations from the original Zen.
-282-
5.5 Jan Smuts (1870-1950) and Holism
Jan Smuts (1870-1950) was a South African soldier, statesman and
philosopher. He was an almost legendary figure who began his career
as a geologist and later became a biologist. He became President of
the Centenary Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement
of Science in 1931.
Smuts fought against the British in the Boer War of 1899-1902
and subsequently held various cabinet positions in the Union of South
Africa. He was elected its Prime Minister from 1919 to 1924 and again
from 1933 to 1948. After the First World War, he was instrumental in
founding the League of Nations. After the Second World War he partic-
ipated in the creation of the United Nations.
According to his son, J.S. Smuts Jr., (1952, p.27), Smuts was "above
all, a scientist". It was after his defeat as Prime Minister in the
1924 elections that he wrote Holism and Evolution (1926), a book which
marked the collection and clarification of many of his views from as
early as the mid-1890's.
It is difficult to assess the contribution Smuts made to the form-
ulation of Gestalt therapy, partly because Smuts' work has been confused
with that of the Gestalt psychologists and other theorists who adhere
to holistic notions. Fritz and Laura Perls lived in South Africa between
1935 and 1946. During this time, Fritz Perls became acquainted with
Smuts' works, and met Smuts in person (Perls, 1969a, p.51). Smuts had
-283-
agreed to write the foreword to Ego, Hunger and Aggression, but the
outbreak of World War II made this impossible. Perls appreciated
many of Smuts' ideas, and incorporated them into his works. Laura
Perls, who was trained in Gestalt psychology, however, saw great simil-
arities between the philosophy of Smuts and the theoretical position
of the Gestalt psychologists, particularly Wertheimer, Koffka and Kohler.
She felt that while Fritz gained his appreciation of holism from Smuts,
her own parallel views had been gained from her studies in Gestalt psych-
ology (Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980).
5.5.2 Origin of holism
There is confusion in the literature concerning the origins of the
word "holism" and the conception that the whole is greater than (or at
least, different from) the sum of its parts. Focht (1935) accused Smuts
of adopting the ideas of the Gestalt psychologists without acknowledge-
ment. Smuts' theories, she claimed:
... bear a resemblance to those of the Gestalt-theorists,
although the author was presumably acquainted with their
workat least he makes no mention of them or it anywhere
in his book.
(Focht, 1935, pp.35-36)
What Focht and others fail to realize or appreciate is that Smuts had
proposed the holistic doctrine"in 1906 and alluded to it in 1892-3,
long before any Gestalt psychologists had published their theories.
For instance, Smuts had written in 1895:
We do not get at the whole by a careful study and summing
up of the parts; for the whole is greater than the sum of
P
ar
ts. ^
N
(Smuts, 1895, p.58)
-284-
It should be emphasized that the words, whole, holy, health and
holism are all derived from the same root "xailaz", Greek meaning "whole".
Goldstein was one of the first to adopt the spelling "holistic" in 1939.
Smuts stated that the activity of the whole expressed itself through-
out all space and time in:
... the cosmic process of individuation ... if ever an
operative factor deserved a name of its own, this self
developing, self realizing power of the whole deserves it.
Hence I propose for it the name of Holism (from holos =
whole) with special reference not only to it as the activ-
ity of the whole, but more especially to its "holizing" or
whole-producing tendency ...
(Smuts, 1926, pp.97-98)
5.5.3 Holism and Gestalt therapy
Smuts' influence on Perls is particularly clear in Ego, Hunger and
Aggression (1947). Part 1 was titled "Holism and psychoanalysis", and Perls
referred to holism (field conception) as one of two new "intellectual
tools" (p.7). Enright wrote of three major precursors to Gestalt ther-
apy: Gestalt psychology, Reichian analysis and "the phenomenology of
Jan Smuts who was an existentialist before the term was coined" (1975a,
p.127). The term and concept of "holism" has been extensively incor-
porated into Gestalt therapy. Perls stated in virtually all of his
works that the basic premise on which Gestalt therapy rested was that of
holism (e.g., 1966a, 1969a, 1969b, 1973). Most Gestalt therapists and
theorists also reiterated this notion, e.g., Latner who wrote: "The
foundation of the first principle of Gestalt therapy is holism" (1973,
p.6). This basic premise was adopted by all of the humanistic and exis-
tential psychologies (Back, 1973; Ansbacher, 1978).
-285-
Perls wrote (1947, p.33) that the Gestalt approach differed
from Smuts' because Smuts referred to a "universal holistic concept-
ion" rather than a specific organismic one. Smuts, however, des-
cribed the growth of the individual in various writings between 1906
and 1914 (Hancock 1962). He believed that his conception of person-
ality as a unified structure, "with the capacity of organic growth
latent in it" (p.296), was more realistic than the aggregative con-
structions of association psychology.
Various excerpts from Selections of the Smuts Papers. Volume 1,
June, 1866May, 1909 (Hancock and Van der Poel, 1966) revealed Smuts'
early appreciation of many of the concepts which have become major
theoretical notions in Gestalt therapy. These include such statements
as: "Life has been defined as the adjustment of internal relations to
external relations" (Smuts, 1892-3, p.49). The notion that life can
be regarded as the adjustment of internal relations not only resembles
the work of Jung but also is similar to the notion of the contact bound-
ary in Gestalt therapy. In one sense, the contact boundary is the de-
lineation between self and others, or between the individual and the en-
vironment (Perls, 1973).
Smuts also wrote:
Every individual form of life is a unity ... It is this
ultimate internal unity that shapes the innumerable prod-
ucts of life into an orderly and harmonious whole ... each
human individual is a perfectly distinct entity, animated
by a single, indivisible unity of life, which has its own
distinct laws and forms of growth. This distinct indiv-
isible unity of life in each individual I call the person-
ality of that individual.
(Smuts, 1895, p.61)
-286-
The above quotation referred not only to integration but also to the
related concept of unity and wholeness. The primary or basic prin-
ciple which runs through the whole of Gestalt therapy reiterated this
notion of Smuts', indeed, the notion is crucial for Gestalt therapy.
The essence of the holistic conception^of life is that all nature in-
cluding mankind, is a unified and coherent whole. This understanding
of the individual regarded the physical, the emotional, thoughts, all
mental events and so on as expressions of a unified being. They are
aspects of the one individual. Holistically we cannot understand our-
selves by merely summing up our partsthe whole is greater than the
sum of its parts. Gestalt therapy is a philosophy of life based on the
holistic epistemology outlined above. It is descriptive, integrative,
and structural, emphasizing phenomenology, the here and now, and a pos-
itive wholeness which requires our creating our own lives and discovering
our strengths.
Smuts provided compelling arguments on the striving of the organism
towards physiological holism, and considered the psychological domain in
the same way. In the preface to the first edition of Holism and Evolut-
ion (1926), Smuts informed the reader that the subject of personality
had interested him as an undergraduate at Cambridge University and he
wrote a short work titled "Walt Whitman: A study in the evolution of
personality." This was never published, but gradually over a period of
time he came to realize that personality was a "special case" of the
universal phenomenon of the existence of wholes and the tendency towards
wholeness (p.x). His views were clearly stated: "Personality is the
latest and supreme whole which has arisen in the holistic series of ev-
olution" (Smuts, 1926, p.261).
-287-
The following quotation from Smuts was not only the lengthiest,
but also one of the most significant of any presented in Perls' works:
Any element of a foreign, alien or hostile character
introduced into the Personality creates internal frict-
ion, clogs its working and may even end in completely
disorganizing and disintegrating it. The Personality,
like the organism, is dependent for its continuance on
a supply of sustenance, intellectual, social and such-
like, from the environment. But this foreign material,
unless properly metabolized and assimilated by the
Personality, may injure and even prove fatal to it.
Just as organic assimilation is essential to animal
growth, so intellectual, moral and social assimilation
of the part of the Personality becomes the central fact
in its development and self-realization. The capacity
for this assimilation varies greatly in individual cases.
A Goethe could absorb and assimilate all science and art
and literature.
He could assimilate this vast mass of experience,
could make it all his own, and make it all contribute
to that splendour and magnificence of self-realization
which has made him one of the greatest among men.
(J.C. Smuts)
(Perls, 1947, p.105)
This quotation contains many of the raw ingredients of what was to be-
come known as Gestalt therapy. The first sentence for instance, clear-
ly influenced Perls' view that for the organism to accept anything from
outside that is not readily assimilated (introjected material) requires
energy which could otherwise be used in healthier pursuits. Addition-
ally, for Perls, no part or portion of an organism can be touched or
altered without the totality of the structure being reorganized.
The next three sentences in the quotation foreshadowed starkly Perls'
attitude to the necessity for organism-environment interaction for life
-288-
to be sustained. Basically, Gestalt therapy is concerned with this
interaction (Perls et al., 1951; Perls, 1969a, 1975). As various
needs arise, the most dominant becomes figure. In order for satis-
faction to be found, the organism searches the environment for the de-
sired object (sensory activity) and when the object is found, the or-
ganism acts to assimilate it (motor activity). For the Gestalt ther-
apist, neither the organism nor the environment can be considered sep-
arately. Rather:
Only the interplay of organism and environment . . . con-
stitutes the psychological situation, not the organ-
ism and environment taken separately.
(Perls et al., 1951, P-19)
In a similar way to the transaction outlined by Smuts above, Gestalt
therapists considered the healthy organism in its environment as con-
stantly attending to matters of importance that maintain survival (En-
right, 1970). It is the manner in which the individual structures
these organism-environment transactions which dictates whether or not
there is smooth functioning and resultant equilibrium or incomplete
gestalts and unfinished situations that result in non-assimilation, and
in psychological terms, neurosis. The healthy individual can clearly
distinguish the boundary between self and the environment and can assim-
ilate novel and alien encounters with the environment while the unhealthy
cannot participate in these transactions without dislocation. Just as
Smuts in the quotation above outlined the development of self-realizat-
ion as a result of organism-environment interaction, so did Perls. In
Gestalt therapy the individual's awareness develops with, and is inte-
grally a part of the organism-environment transaction. This transaction
is always in the here and now and is based on the current perceptions of
-289-
the situation. The more aware the person, the more integrated and
spontaneous will be his/her actions and reactions to those perceptions.
Smuts stated, as did Perls, that each individual is truly an indiv-
idual in his/her own right, and can be regarded as unique. The individ-
ual's capacity for assimilation is unlike any other's, and to generalize
is to overlook the potential of each person. Each organism-environment
transaction is a new, unique expression of individuality.
One of the best examples of Smuts' influence on Perls is the following
extract, which states that no organism is self-sufficient, but:
... requires the world for the gratification of its needs.
To consider an organism by itself amounts to looking upon
it as an artificially isolated unit, whereas there is always
an inter-dependency of the organism and its environment.
(Perls, 1947, p.38)
Perls developed Smuts' statement (p.61 in 5.5.3) and referred in
many places to the organism-environment compromise, whereby the organism
strives to regulate itself. The personality of the individual can only
develop by interaction with the environment. The healthy individual is
one who can constantly move the boundary between self and others, assim-
ilating what will be beneficial and rejecting that which is not regarded
as beneficial.
5.5.5 Conclusion
It can thus be shown that Perls' holistic stance was significantly
influenced by his contact with Smuts. Smuts' conceptualization of the
nature and importance of the organism-environment interaction, and of
the need for thorough assimilation of external material by the organism,
was also adopted by Perls.
-290-
5.6 Taoism
5.6.1 Introduction
Tao means literally "way" or "path". It is the way of ultimate
meaning: the rhythm, the ordering principle which underlies all life;
the way a person can live in harmony with nature, at one with the en-
vironment (Houston Smith, 1958; cited in Doelger, 1978). A central
concept of Taoism is the Wu Wei:
Wei is a verb corresponding to the English dc_ or act
.... Wu is a negative. Thus, clumsily, Wu Wei is do
without doing, to act without action. Put positively,
it means to get along as nature does. The world gets
created, living things grow and pass away without any
sign of effort .... Wu Wei is a man's part, he is to be
still, quiet and passive so that the universe of being
may act through him.
(Blakney, 1955, p.39)
The Wu Wei makes no appeal to logic or common sense but rather re-
quires the surrender of dominance and purposeful action. It involves
a return to one's original nature. Welch (cited by Doelger, 1978)
described the Wu Wei as the doctrine of inaction; it means performing
only actions that are natural and spontaneous, because every action pro-
duces a reaction. The practice of non-action means taking no unnat-
ural action, flowing with the forces of the natural order rather than
fighting against them.
The connection between Taoism and Gestalt therapy has been described
by a number of authors (e.g., Perls et al., 1951; Perls, 1969a, 1969b;
Yontef, 1969; Naranjo, 1970; Kempler, 1973; Gagarin, 1976; Smith, 1976a).
The most comprehensive evaluation of the commonalities between Gestalt
-291-
therapy and Taoism is that of Doelger (1978) in his doctoral dissertation,
titled "A systematic comparison of Gestalt therapy as written by Frederick
S. Perls and the philosophy of the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu". In this the-
sis, Doelger developed fourteen categories of similarities between Taoism
and the Gestalt approach.
5.6.2 Centering
Doelger regarded this as the single most significant common element
between the two approaches. Lao Tzu wrote:
Poem 47 (W. Bynner)
There is no need to run outside
For better seeing,
Nor to peer from a window. Rather abide
At the center of your being;
For the more you leave it, the less you learn.
(in Doelger, 1978, p.74)
Doelger suggested that Lao Tzu used other metephors to depict
centering, and provided examples (1978, p.74). Lao Tzu saw that upon
leaving the center, the individual leans on an unstable existence, and
that a return to centering will restore optimal living. This balancing
and the avoidance of extremes was a recurring theme throughout the Tao
Te Ching.
Organismic self-regulation is a fundamental concept in Gestalt the-
rapy, and is a function of the centering process. Health is experienced
when the individual is in appropriate balance and co-ordination (Perls
et al., 1951). Perls outlined the cycle of self-regulation in Ego, Hunger
and Aggression (1947, p.69). Neurosis results when a state of disequil-
ibrium persists.
-292-
5.6.3 Unity and polarities
Many of Lao Tzu's poems reflected his conceptualization of unity,
affinity, and the integration of polarities. Lao Tzu thought, as did
Perls, that the balance of forces brings a state of harmony whereby man-
kind flows with the natural universe.
The Taoists recognized that integration was of paramount importance
to the optimum functioning of the individual (Naranjo 1970). Thus, the
concept of equilibrium runs through Taoism; conflicting forces must be
brought into balance and harmony, or centered. Gestalt psychology,
Gestalt therapy and Taoism all aim at balancing forces until equilibrium
or centering is effected and awareness is increased. All adopt a confid-
ence in phenomenological and experiential "feelings" as opposed to ration-
al intelligence.
In an effort to illustrate the balance and unity of polarities, Perls
(1959) made reference to the ancient principles of Yin and Yang:
In taoism there is the yin/yang symbol which represents
the interplay of opposites. The white half of the circle
is growing darker, and the dark half is growing white.
The two interact to make the round of existence.
You can enjoy the yin or the yang of opposites in this
Chinese symbol, or experience it as a unified balance,
which we call, simply, awareness. As the yin and yang
interplay our consciousness is rich, varied, changing,
exciting, not quite predictable, surprising.
(Perls, 1959, pp.71-72)
To reconcile opposing forces, to unify yin and yang, or to integrate
what he called the top-dog/underdog dichotomy, is to facilitate health and
overcome splits and neurosis. This quotation illustrates clearly Perls'
conception of balance as dynamic, involving the interplay of opposites,
-293-
rather than opposites cancelling each other out. "Balance" thus
results, paradoxically, in continual change.
5.6.4 Holism
Lao Tzu proposed that the essence of the Tao is unity, oneness and
wholeness (Doelger, 1978). Perls held that a balanced center cannot be
maintained in an incomplete structure (Perls, 1969a). The Gestalt law
of closure enabled a conceptualization of the unfinished situation which
motivates the organism to complete its business and to re-establish bal-
ance and harmony:
It is a basic tendency of the organism to complete
any situation or transaction which for it is unfin-
ished ...
(Perls et al., 1951, p.109)
Lao Tzu had a similar view of holistic functioning. Interestingly, he
appears to have produced the forerunner of the Gestalt maxim: the whole
is more than the sum of its parts (Perls et al., 1951). In Blakney's
(1955) translation of Poem 39 appears the line: "Truly, a cart is more
than the sum of its parts" (in Doelger, 1978, p.115). He cautioned
against splitting, reducing the wholes of nature into parts.
5.6.5 Organismic self-regulation
Doelger (1978) reiterated the concept of the Wu Wei discussed pre-
viously. He suggested that an understanding of this concept is abso-
lutely essential to the comprehension of Gestalt therapy and the Tao Te
Ching. It is often called the doctrine of inaction. It brings a
-294-
descriptive cohesion to the process of centering, organismic self-
regulation and the unification of polarities. The Wu Wei is a spon-
taneous, natural, innate and free response, as opposed to controlled,
manipulative, "socialized" behaviour. It is a type of biological
wisdom that comes to the fore, if the individual allows him/herself
the freedom to be.
Perls did not reference the Wu Wei directly but wrote of his con-
cern with the life energy or biological energy (1969a). He explained:
We have no name for the energy we create. Bergson
called it elan vital; Freud called it libido or death
Instinct ... Reich called it orgone. I call it ex-
citement . . .
(Perls, 1966a, p.31)
Perls' definition of organismic self-regulation encapsulated the essence
of the Wu Wei, stressing that it cannot be achieved by deliberate intent-
ion but rather by spontaneous organismic function. Perls et al. (1951)
suggested that it is not necessary to deliberately schedule, plan or in-
hibit such aspects of functioning as appetite and sexuality in the inter-
est of health or morality. If these are left to themselves, the person
will spontaneously regulate these needs or requirements and produce sat-
isfaction. As Perls wrote: "Don't push the river, it flows by itself"
(1969b, p.22).
5.6.6 Non-interference
Whereas Lao Tzu wrote of showing others by example, Perls advocated
establishing organismic self-regulation by serving as a catalyst (Perls
et al., 1951). More usually, Perls proposed a relationship of non-inter-
ference, non-intervention.
-295-
Following Nietzsche, he cautioned: "Beware of any helpers. Helpers
are con men who promise something for nothing" (1969b, p.103). The
therapist refrains from making interpretations or giving advice because
to do for others what they can do for themselves is to deny them the
opportunity to develop true self-support and discover their own abilit-
ies. Perls also stated that the goal of therapy is to bring about
awareness of the self so that not only present problems but also those
that arise in the future can be confronted and overcome (1973). Change
cannot be brought about in either ourselves or in others as a deliberate
strategythis was referred to by Perls (1969a) and Beisser (1970) as
"the paradox of change ' Perls (1969a, p.20) wrote that "we realize
that we cannot deliberately bring about changes in ourselves or in. others ".
Lao Tzu referred to this type of action or inaction in a similar mann-
er, having characterized the most efficient leader as one who allowed his/
her people the control of their own process: "A leader is best when people
barely know that he exists" (Bynner, Poem 17 quoted by Doegler, 1978, p.
137). Lao Tzu did not divorce himself completely from guiding others, but
did suggest that it should only be done infrequently.
5.6.7 External destruction of man's "biological wisdom"
In this category Doelger (1978) concluded that both Perls and Lao
Tzu attributed mankind's failure to retain awareness of his/her own
inner nature to various forms of external interference. Lao Tzu present-
ed the notion that the Wu Wei had been compromised by the meddling of
society. He described the sane individual:
-296-
Poem 65 (W. Bynner)
This man of few words, because his one care
Is not to interfere, but to let nature renew
The sense of direction me undo.
Lao Tzu warned against reliance on "outward forms of social conduct",
and recommended the reliance on "one's true nature" (in Doelger, 1978,
p.154). It is evident that Lao Tzu rejected institutional control as
a substitute for the Wu Wei.
Similarly, Perls regarded the introjection of societal demands by
the individual as one of the most common sources of neurosis (Perls et
al., 1951). The greater the degree of control by "civilization" or soc-
iety, the more potential for neurotic functioning as a means of protection
from those demands. However, not everyone chooses to adjust to the in-
flexible norms of society:
If you are centered in yourself, then you don't adjust any
morethen, whatever happens becomes a passing parade and
you assimilate, you understand, you are related to what-
ever happens.
(Perls, 1969a, p.32)
One of Perls' prime aims in Ego, Hunger and Aggression was to elucidate
a theory to account for homeostasis, the mechanism of organismic self-
regulation and healthy naturalistic functioning. He described the rever-
sal of societal infringement on the individual as "undoing", and wrote:
"In this book we call a reversal 'undoing' ('re'-adjustment)" (1947, p.247).
-297-
5.6.8 Character
Lao Tzu believed that "character" was an oppressor of genuine
existence (Doelger, 1978). Lao Tzu did not use the term character,
but did employ a variety of comparable constructs such as "masqueradd'.
Doelger (1978) cited poems of Gia-Fe Fang and J. English (poem 33 and
poem 64) to show that Lao Tzu expressed disdain for masquerade.
Additionally, Lao Tzu had little regard for the cultivation of surface
appearances as a substitute for the enhancement of one's own essential
nature.
Perls also opposed the development of a surface character designed
deliberately for use in social concepts. For Perls, character consisted
of stereotypic behaviour patterns which deny spontaneous interaction with
the environment. Character formation is thus the development of a fixed,
stagnating role (Perls, 1969a).
Only in the absence of character can the individual realize potential
in his/her organismic nature rather than by artificial means. Perls (1969a)
referred to the seemingly apparent paradox that the richest, most product-
ive and creative person is s/he who has no character.
5.6.9 Wisdom and knowledge
Both Lao Tzu and Perls distinguished between the nature of wisdom
and knowledge. Wisdom they regarded as a product of the naturalistic
function of the organism, while knowledge is an external product of so-
ciety. Both theorists saw the acquisition of knowledge as a potential
interference with the wisdom of organismic self-regulation, the flow of
-298-
Wu Wei (Doelger, 1978).
5.6.10 Language
According to Lao Tzu, the essential message of the Tao, the Wu Wei,
was beyond the power of words:
Poem 1 (W. Bynner)
Existence is beyond the power of words
To define:
Terms may be used
But none of them absolute
In the beginning of heaven and earth there were
no words,
Words come out of the womb of matter;
And whether a man disspassionately
Sees to the core of life
Or passionately
Sees the surface
The core and the surface
Are essentially the same
Words making them seem different.
(in Bynner, 1944, p.25)
He felt that written words by defining and limiting could have dubious
effects (Bynner, 1944, p.8). Lao Tzu according to Bynner was concern-
ed with the origin and meaning of life, but knew and declared that no
single explanation could be definitive or absolute. He considered
words distasteful, wasteful and often a source of imbalance; verbalizat-
ion often interferes with experiential learning.
For Perls, information gained from language resulted in knowledge;
-299-
the wisdom of organismic self-regulation, however, was beyond verbal
description. Perls felt that most verbalizations were lies, and like
Lao Tzu, declared that: "real communication is beyond words" (1969a,
p.57).
Words, like knowledge, can interfere with the process of organismic
self-regulation. Perls et al. (1951) described this condition as a
"word disease." The neurotic who employs this form of avoidance lives
the substitute life of verbiage, isolated from his/her organismic existence.
Verbalizations can be pathological, if they divorce the individual from
life and contact, erecting a wall and staying in the "DMZ", an intermediate
zone of fantasy and verbal trances (Perls, 1969a). Both Lao Tzu and Perls
wrote descriptions of life processes but warned that adequate descriptions
of these were impossible to formulate; they are of an experiential nature,
not conducive to verbalization or teaching.
5.6.11 The fertile void
Lao Tzu wrote of the power of internal emptiness and silence:
Poem 16 (Gia-Fu Feng and J. English)
Empty yourself of everything.
Let the mind rest at peace.
The ten thousand things rise and fall while the
Self watches their return.
They grow and flourish and then return to the
source.
Returning to the source is stillness, which is the way
of nature ...
-300-
Perls similarly described the cessation of verbiage, and the cul-
tivation of internal silence in the void that occurs. Internal silence,
he believed, allows the wordless wisdom of the biological self to be
heard (Perls, 1969a).
The void, (Perls) or emptiness (Lao Tzu) implies the absence of in-
terference, social (environmental) demands, verbiage, and so on. When
the void is permitted to develop, the wisdom of the organism has a space
in which to flourish (Doelger, 1978). Perls acknowledged the Tao in this
way:
This is the great principle of the Tao-philosophers:
make a void, so that nature can develop there; or, as
they express it, stand out of the way.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.194)
Perls found that most people cannot tolerate the feeling of a void,
nothingness or emptiness and anxiously fill it with different activities
or beliefs. These tend to occupy the void and block the experiences of
organismic self-regulation. He suggested that in "our" culture a void
is a nothingness, emptiness and something deathlike whereas in Eastern
philosophy, nothingness is expressed as no-thingness or nothing there
(Perls, 1966a). There is only process there. Perls emphasized that the
emptiness of the void can be changed into a fertile void:
The ability to do this depends again on the understand-
ing of nothingness. The sterile void is experienced
as nothing, the fertile void as something emerging.
(Perls, 1969b, p.141)
Awareness can only be facilitated in the presence of internal silence, in
the absence of interference, in the fertile void.
-301-
5.6.12 Symbols
Both Lao Tzu and Perls chose "childhood" as an image to represent
the basic nature of mankind. For Lao Tzu, childhood characterized the
spontaneity and flexibility of the Wu Wei and organismic self-regulation.
Perls was of the opinion that the spontaneous organismic self-reg-
ulation found in children was of significance in the treatment of individ-
uals, especially neurosis. For both authors, the child represented the
spontaneity, flexibility, purity, wholeness and balance: "achieved through
the biological wisdom of the organism" (Doelger, 1978, p.237).
5.6.13 Here and now
Doelger (1978) concluded that an understanding of the vital dimensions
of extension and duration is basic to Gestalt therapy and Taoism. Time and
space are parameters of being and non-being. According to Doelger (1978,
p.205), the here and now concept appeared dramatically throughout the Tao
Te Ching. Lao Tzu made however, only one direct reference to the present:
Poem 14 (Gia-Fu Feng and J. English)
Stay with the ancient Tao,
Move with the present.
The time dimension is central to Gestalt therapy. Perls stated:
There are two legs upon which Gestalt therapy walks:
now and how. The essence of the theory of Gestalt
therapy is in the understanding of these two words.
Now covers all that exists. The past is no more, the
future is not yet.
(Perls, 1969a, p.47)
-302-
The concept of the here and now was discussed in all of Perls' major
works, because of its fundamental importance to the theory and pract-
ice of Gestalt therapy.
Both Lao Tzu and Perls realized that whatever exists in the present
is not necessarily as it was in the past, nor as it will be in the
future. The present is the zero-point of life, with the past on one
side and the future on the other. However, to live in the zero-point is
to remain balanced, centered and healthy.
5.6.14 Figure/background
According to Doelger (1978), Lao Tzu considered the Tao as the back-
ground of all existence, the ultimate ground. It (the tao) has no shape,
no figure, and cannot be perceived because it springs or exists in a state
of non-being, from which all else originates and to which they will return.
Lao Tzu also considered the free flowing interchange between the figures of
existence and the ultimate ground.
Perls also saw the figure-ground relationship as a flowing process:
he described it as dynamic and ever-changing (Perls et al., 1951). This
figure-ground phenomenon is a perceptual process of the present state of
need/need reduction. Any need becomes figure against a background com-
prising of lesser perceived aspects of existence. The free-flowing inter-
change between figure and ground is essential to organismic balance:
"Figure" is the focus of interestan object, pattern
etc.with "ground" the setting or context. The inter-
play between figure and ground is dynamic ...
(Perls et al., 1951, p.51)
-303-
For Perls, the flow from ground to figure and the return to ground
is a delicately balanced exchange process. Perls considered this pro-
cess to be a system of homeostatic governance of organismic need where
Lao Tzu regarded the figure-ground relationship or process as the mat-
erialization of matter upon the ground of all existence. According to
Lao Tzu, the wise person avoids a dichotomous view of the scene of pass-
ing existence. This person remains still, follows the Wu Wei and is
never split by the opposing forces of matter as they rise and fall from
existence (Doelger, 1978).
5.6.15 Systems theory
Lao Tzu viewed mankind and environment as an interdependent system.
Although this notion tends to be a subtle influence throughout the Tao
Te Ching, he spoke more directly of this theme in the following poem.
The most direct reference was to the "sound man" sustaining him/herself
from outside and never being shut in within oneself. The sound man is
one who is open and growing:
Poem 7 (W. Bynner)
The universe is deathless,
Is deathless because, having no finite self,
It stays infinite.
A sound man by not advancing himself,
Stays the further ahead of himself,
By not confining himself to himself
Sustains himself outside himself;
By never being an end in himself
He endlessly becomes himself.
-304-
We are part of the universe, not separate. We and our
environment are one. We cannot look without something
to look at. We cannot breathe without air. We cannot
live without being part of society.
(Perls, 1966a, p.30)
Any investigation must consider the context and interaction of the organ-
ism and its environment. Any living organism consists of thousands of
processes that require an interchange and assimilation of energies and
processes outside of its own physical boundary. No organism can be self-
sufficient, no animal can be complete within its own skin, without needing
gratification and as such exhibiting a reliance or dependency of the envir-
onment (Perls, 1947). A physical environment in which to exchange air,
food and so on is necessary, as a social environment in which there is an
exchange of friendship, love and anger (Perls, 1969a). There is no funct-
ion that is definable except as a function in an environmental context.
The loss of contact with the environment leads to catastrophic results,
atrophy, illness, and eventually death. The organism and its context are
not independent entities, but together form a functioning, mutually influ-
encing, total system (Perls, et al., 1951).
Doelger (1978) concluded that for both writers, from a systems per-
spective, that a precise balance is necessary to maintain the properties
of an efficient living system. The person is confronted, with the delic-
ate situation of maintaining internal balance while assimilating the vital
and potentially descriptive requirements for sustenance and energy from
the environment.
-305-
5.6.16 Conclusion
The Gestalt approach thus has the following commonalities with
Taoism:
1. Emphasis on organismic self-regulation and centering
2. Dynamic harmony and the integration of polarities
3. Holistic, anti-analytic view of mankind
4. Need for development of self-support rather than reliance on
a therapist
5. Rejection of adjustment to societal norms
6. Opposition to the development of surface "character"
7. Respect for natural wisdom rather than "knowledge" or intellect
8. Recognition that verbalizations may be inaccurate or misleading
9. Development of a fertile void in which the wisdom of the organ-
ism may flourish
10. Nothingness seen as no-thingness rather than emptiness or death
11. Childhood used as a symbol of health"natural" spontaneous
functioning
12. Importance of remaining in the here and now
13. Dynamic interchange between figure and background (Tao)
14. Organism and environment as an interdependent system
Taoism provided Perls with an important philosophical insight into the in-
tegrity of natural processes if allowed to function freely.
-306-
5.7 Zen Buddhism
5.7.1 Introduction
One of the major concerns of Zen monastic instruction is to
provide the monk with a degree of spiritual maturity and freedom,
enabling a self-supportive life and guidance towards "the path to
enlightenment" by the traditional practice of Buddhist precepts
(sila), meditation (dhyana), and wisdom (prajna) (Merton, 1961,
p.217). The ultimate aim is for the individual to attain direct
spiritual insight and therefore self-sufficiency.
In describing Zen Buddhism, Merton (1961, p.225) wrote:
Where the Christian has Christ on the Cross, the Zen
Buddhist has not Buddha as a person but Sunyata, the
Void.
Buddhism is primarily the search for truth, the ultimate truth
of all things, but not through logical reasoning. Much of the phil-
osophy of Zen Buddhism is incapable of proof, but is based on exper-
iential knowledge and intuitive insights (Suzuki, cited by Myers Owens,
1975).
Merton (1961) suggested that Zen is an Asian form of religious
existentialism. Its aim is to break the conventional strictures of
thought and behaviour, so that authentic personal meaning and exper-
ience of meaningful living can be developed.
Gestalt therapy has been compared to Zen:
Gestalt therapy's focus on a Zen-like way of knowing and
growing presents Western man with a dilemma, both exper-
iencing the value of this process, yet finding little in
the environment that supports this way of life. Gestalt
therapy may often offer a promise of integration, freedom,
-307-
and satori that is very difficult to achieve in this
culture.
(Shepherd, 1970, p.238)
Similarly, Rosenfeld (in Gaines, 1979) stated:
We need American systems, and I think Fritz did some-
thing typically Western ... and unique, tapping off'
some of that Eastern influence (p.318)
Of the connection between Gestalt therapy and Zen Buddhism,
Gia-Fu Feng wrote:
I feel a great similarity between Fritz' ideal and Zen
Buddhism. In 1965 before every session he'd say, "what
I'm going to do here is to assist you to have a sudden
awakening". And a sudden awakening is, of course, sat-
ori which is Buddhism's main point.
(quoted in Gaines, 1979,
p.170)
Perls et al. (1951), Perls (1973), Polster and Polster (1973)
and other Gestalt therapists emphasized the "aha!" nature of any
authentic or creative learning experience. From 1965 onwards,
Perls referred to these experiences as "satoris" (enlighten-
ments" in Japanese), indicating his recognition of the influence
and usefulness of Zen Buddhism. Perls wanted to make Zen princip-
les available to Western man. His interest in Zen culminated in a
trip to Japan in the early 1960's where he studied with Zen master
Roshi Ihiguru and at the Daitoriyi temple in Kyoto. Perls describ-
ed these experiences as disappointing; the "godless religion" re-
quired bowing to a statue of Buddha; he did not "achieve" anything
in Zen; and the practice of Zen was as time-consuming as that of
psychoanalysis. Nonetheless, Perls was fascinated by the philos-
ophy of Zen, its wisdom and non-moral attitude.
-308-
5.7.2 Here and now
Stallone (1976) explored some of the commonalities between
Gestalt therapy and Zen Buddhism. He concluded that the most
significant area of convergence between the two approaches is
their recognition of the importance of the present, the here and
now.
The Buddha himself preached the notion of the Eternal Now
as "the timeless stillpoint and ever-present awareness in human
consciousness" (Stallone, 1976, p.204). An example such as the
ringing of a bell illustrates the importance of the now. The
sound of the bell can only be experienced in the now; if we try
to think about it, we can only do so as future (anticipation) or
past (memory).
Perls constantly stressed that an individual can only live in
the now: "To me, nothing exists except in the now. Now = exper-
ience = awareness = reality. The past is no more, the future not
yet" (Perls, 1966a, p.14). All therapy takes place in the present,
and memories or anticipations are dealt with as they affect the
person now.
5.7.3 Polarities
Myers Owens (1975) wrote of Buddha's dialectical skills which
are recorded for instance in one of the written scripts, the Suran-
gama sutra. His questioning and dialogue with his most famous
pupil, Ananda was reminiscent of Socrates' dialect in the Platonic
-309-
dialogues. It was, for Buddha, only by the reconciliation and
integration of opposites such as time and eternity, life and
death, reason and intuition that "oneness" could be achieved.
His enlightenment saw the oneness of all existence; man with the
universe, with all people and all things, and the unity of body
and mind.
When he gained enlightenment, Buddha saw into the nature of
being and of different forms of existence. Nirvana (changeless-
ness, inner peace and freedom, bliss) stands against samsara
(birth against death) and sunyata (emptiness or void). Suzuki
wrote:
The doctrine of sunyata is neither an immanentism nor
a transcendentalism ... it is both .... A contradict-
ion is felt only when we are out of sunyata .... it is
to be experienced and not conceptualized .... To be a-
ware of sunyata, according to Zen, we have to transcend
this dichotomous world.
(quoted in Myers Owens, 1975, p.164)
In Zen, the enlightened person is regarded as having achieved
harmonious integration of the "intuitive unconscious" and the "dis-
criminating conscious" (Myers Owens, 1975, p.185). Perls adopted
this position when he stated that:
In a neurotic splitting, one part is kept in unaware-
ness, (unconscious), or it is coldly recognized but
alienated from concern, or both parts are carefully
isolated from each other ... avoiding conflict and main-
taining the status quo.
(Perls et al. , 1951, p.287)
According to Shepherd (1970), Western society supports and re-
inforces a dichotomous view of "reality". Attempts to unify these
polarities are met with strong resistance. Perls used therapeutic
310-
techniques such as creative frustration to force clients to ident-
ify the duality underlying their conflictsthe best-known of these
dualities being the topdog-underdog conflict. When the client
has recognized the underlying polarity, s/he confronts the im-
passe, which is: "the ultimate expression of two strivings pull-
ing in opposite directions" (Cohn, 1970, p.137). Perls also des-
cribed the impasse as the sterile void (1969a).
5.7.4 Sterile and fertile voids
The Zen term wu nien or "no mind" refers to emptiness, nothing-
ness or the void. Kapleau (1971) concluded that in Zen experience:
... human consciousness arises from pure consciousness
and is indistinguishable from itthe Void-universe.
The life of the individual is linked to the Formless
Self. Man's life is like a wave of the ocean, appar-
ently separate from it but having arisen from the sea
will return to become the sea
(quoted in Myers Owens, 1975, p.169)
Perls adopted this concept from Zen, encouraging openness and
the acceptance of non-experience or "no-thingness". Perls (1969a)
emphasized this point, regarded the successful therapeutic process
as one leading from the sterile void into the fertile void. Perls
referred to nothingness as "no thingness" in the Eastern sense of
the term, meaning "nonarticulate undifferentiated awareness"
(Schoen, 1980, p.121).
For Perls, the sterile void was transformed into fertility
by accepting the experience of despair and emptiness. He describ-
ed the fertile void as:
-311-
... something like a trance, ... accompanied by full
awareness ... (the person) becomes aware of everything
calling his attention (hallucinations, broken up senten-
ces, vague feelings, strange feelings, peculiar sensat-
ions) .
(Perls, 1973, p.100)
If the person can "stay with" this sometimes frightening exper-
ience, enlightenment and understanding will be achieved. In the
fertile void, the person becomes aware of the full extent and power
of his/her own resources (Perls, 1973).
s. 7 5
"" " Intellect and experience
Zen Buddhism discourages the intellectual approach. Emphasis
rather is on the practice of zazen (Zen meditation), and the implim-
entation of a state of selflessness and oneness. Buddha believed
the intellect or the conscious mind was limited, and that the know-
ledge derived from it and from the senses continually changes. There-
fore, reason is not to be trusted as a guide to ultimate truth. In-
tuition on the other hand is changeless and permanent, capable of par-
taking of the universality of the universal mind. Intuition and not
reason is the source of ultimate truth and wisdom.
For the Zen monk, learning was by direct experience rather than
by gathering the abstract and theoretical knowledge acquired by read-
ing and study. While reading and study was never expressly forbidden,
the harm from this pursuit came from neglecting the direct grasp of
life which can only evolve from living in all its existential reality.
Buddha emphasized to his followers that they were to rely on nothing but
"the truth" as they experienced it directly (Suzuki, in Merton, 1961).
-312-
Perls defined learning as the discovery that something is poss-
ible (1969a). Thus, he adopted the Zen view that optimal learning
is experiential rather than intellectual.
Myers Owens (19 75) gave a clear insight into the enlightenment
state in Zen, where the individual leaves the mind and returns con-
sciousness to the body and its needs, and to his/her relations with
self and othersthe person functions more efficiently and is more
aware of the universe. This state is not dissimilar to the break-
through after progressing through the five layers of neurosis (cliche,
role playing, impasse, implosion and explosion). Perls wrote:
The task of all deep religions, especially Zen Buddhism,
or of good therapy, is the Great Awakeningthe coming
to one's senseswaking up from one's dream, especially
from one's nightmare.
(Perls, 1966b, p.215)
Like Myers Owens, Perls felt that ultimate awareness could only be
achieved by losing'the "mind", and coming to the senses (Perls,
1966a).
5.7.6 Self-support
Buddha stressed the importance of self-support in a conversat-
ion with his favourite pupil:
So, Ananda, you must be your own lamps, be your own ref-
uges. Take refuge in nothing outside yourselves.
Hold firm to the truth as a lamp and a refuse, and do
not look for a refuge in anything besides yourselves.
(in Merton,
1961, p.218)
-313-
Perls adopted this view, and defined maturity as the transition
from environmental support to self-support (Perls, 1973). He dis-
couraged clients from developing dependence on him, (using similar
words to those of the Buddha) by telling them to "be their own Fritz",
to do for themselves all those things they were convinced only he could
do for them (Perls, 1969a).
In Zen, nothing is "done to" the individual; rather, Zen en-
lightens, showing the way to "uncover, recover, discover the neglect-
ed part of his nature that too often lies dormanthis Essential
mind" (Myers Owens, 1975, p.157). Thus, Zen is a way of allowing
one's true self to emergea process of self-actualization. Similar-
ly, Gestalt therapy encourages the person to take responsibility (re-
sponse-ability) for him/herself (Perls, 1969a). Therapy does not
aim to solve or "fix" problems, (which would create a dependencey on
the therapist's support); the aim of the therapeutic process is to
enable the individual to develop his/her own supportive functions
(Greenwald, 1975 ), to the point where s/he is capable of self-support.
5.7.7 Conclusion
Perls' familiarity with Zen teachings thus influenced his formulat-
ion of the following Gestalt therapy concepts:
1. Aha! experiences; satori or awakening
2. Importance of the present, the "eternal now"
3. Dialectics and polarities
4. Integration of conscious and unconscious
5. Emptiness or voidsterile and fertile voids
6. Impasse
-314-
7. No-thingness
8. Anti-intellectual emphasis
9. Importance of self-support and responsibility
T 150.1982
14
BARLOW, A.R.
The derivation of a
psychological theory.
FORM 4
THE UNIVLKSITY OJ WOLLONGONG
DECLARATION RELATING TO DISPOSITION OF THESIS
This is to certify that I . . . ')*>*<:. - :\
:
?:ii'
}
. .':'':
U
^. - being a candidate for
the degree of .*?
J
.
C
.'.< i\ ..
,c
. . . .
/)
.
W
."??\
0
/Ml am fully aware of the poiicy
of the University relating to the retention and use of higher degree theses,
namely that the University retains the copies of any thesis submitted for
examination and that the University holds that no thesis submitted for a
higher degree should be retained in the Library for record purposes only, but
within copyright pnvileges of the author, should be public property and
accessible for consultation at the discretion of the Librarian.
In the light of these provisions I declare that I wish to retain m y full privil-
eges of copyright in m y thesis and request that neither the whole nor any
portion of the thesis may be published by the University Librarian nor may
he authorize the publication of the whole or any part of the thesis and I
further declare that this preservation of m y copyright privileges in the thesis
shall lapse from the V.l... day of . . . ^ 19 #.. unless it shall
previously have been extended or revoked in writing over m y hand.
I also authorise publication by University Microfilms of:
(a) a 350 word abstract in Dissertation Abstracts International (D.A.I.)
(Doctoral theses)
(b) a 150 word abstract in Masters Abstracts (Masters theses).
/i
Siyiidture LA-LW
/ 'A. /; Ci C <f - w
fy
-y^y
n
Date
Witness . .
THE DERIVATION OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL
THEORY ; GESTALT THERAPY (VOLUME 2)
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
from
THE UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG
by
ALLEN RICHARD BARLOW, B.A. (Hons.l)
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
(1983)
Chapter 6
Additional Influences
-315-
6.1 Alfred Korzybski (1879-1950), General Semantics and Semantics
6.1.1 Semantics and general semantics
The term "semantic is derived from the Greek semantikos, meaning
"significant", and from semainein, "to signify" or "to mean". It was
introduced in 1883 by Michel Breal in his Essai de Semantique (Korzy-
bski, 1933). Semantics is now described as "the meaning of meaning".
The branch of linguistics known as "semantics" is concerned with the
nature, structure and meaning of words. There are basically three
groups who identify themselves with the term "semanticists". The first
group centers around pioneer semanticists Ogden and Richards, whose major
work The Meaning of Meaning was published in 1923. Their primary con-
cern was the use of words and language, particularly word-object confusion
and the influence and effect of the use of language upon thought and be-
haviour.
The second group was founded by Korzybski, and included Hayakawa,
Chase, Lee and Johnson. Korzybski regarded language as an imperfect re-
flection of the "real" external world, and emphasized the distinction which
separates words from the things they signify, a distinction which had been
recognized earlier by Ogden and Richards. Korzybski called his system
"general semantics", and was primarily concerned with the way language
could be used to promote human co-operation. Johnson (1946) regarded
general semantics as a systematic attempt to formulate general methods of
science with the aim of enhancing the quality of human experience in daily
life.
The third major group of semanticists originated with the logical
-316-
positivists Wittgenstein, Carnap and Tarski, who were philosophers.
This group regarded semantics as a tool for the acquisition, system-
ization and eventually, the unification of knowledge. The leading U.S.
spokesman for this group was Morris (1946).
In referring to the role of semantics, Fritz Perls did not dis-
tinguish between these groups. Indeed, he tended to use the terms "sem-
antics" and "general semantics" interchangeably. His primary acknow-
legement was to Korzybski and general semantics, although he did make occ-
asional references to Ogden and Richards, showing that he was aware of
their work. The main focus of this chapter, therefore, will be on general
semantics as described by Korzybski.
6.1.2 Biography of Korzybski and acknowledgement of his work
Alfred Habdank Skarbek Korzybski was born in Warsaw, Poland. He was
educated as an engineer. During World War 1 he served in Intelligence
in the Russian army. He was wounded in battle, and in 1915 went on a
military mission to Canada and the U.S.A., where he remained after the
fall of the Czarist regime in 1917. He became a U.S. citizen in 1940.
Under the guidance of William Alanson White, Korzybski observed psy-
chiatric patients at St. Elizabeth's hospital in Washington, D.C. from
1924-1926. From this and other research evolved his best known book,
Science and Sanity (1933). This work contained a critique of prevalent
assumptions about language and a comparison of sane and insane methods of
language usage. These were embodied in a system of linguistic retrain-
ing called general semantics. Training in general semantics, Korzybski
stated, released intellectual potential crippled by pathological linguist-
-317-
ic habits.
Korzybski taught his system at the Institute for General Semantics
(Chicago) from 1936-1946, and then in Connecticut. He died in 1950.
Fritz Perls' references to Korzybski showed his admiration for the gen-
eral semantics approach. Perls' treatment of Korzybski was more favour-
able than that he afforeded many other theorists.
In 1946, Perls wrote that Gestalt therapy was a comprehensive and
efficient method of therapy, and: "except for Reich's and Korzybski's
approach, more methodical" (p.12). Perls' major criticism of Korzybski
was that general semantics was a purely psychologistic concept, and thus
one-sided.
Perls' references to Korzybski are contained in appendix III. In his
autobiography, Perls admitted t*at he had read Korzybski's work: "I had,
of course, known (mainly through dreams and reading Korzybski) of a non-
verbal level of existence" (Perls, 1969b, p.108).
Laura Perls also stated that Perls was very much influenced by Korzy-
bski, and that the two met in South Africa (personal communication, 3/1980).
Dublin (1976) suggested that Perls' attempt to relate language and the con-
cept of self was due to the writings of Korzybski and other semanticists.
Other authors who have examined the influence of the semanticists on Gest-
alt therapy include Yontef (1969), E. Polster (1975b), Kogan (1976), Smith
(1976a), Rosenblatt (1980) and Van De Riet et al. (1980).
Perls (1947, p.7), described semantics as one of two new intellect-
ual tools, which enhances: "our theoretical outlook ... tremendously
The other tool was holism, or field conception. He further wrote:
-318-
The holistic-semantic approach is made which reveals a
number of shortcomings even in the best developed of
the psychological methods: namely, psycho-analysis.
(Perls, 1947, p.7)
He wrote of Science and Sanity (Korzybski, 1933) that it:
... represents a far deeper semantic analysis than I have
ever attempted .... Nobody can read his book without de-
riving the greatest benefit from it. Later on I hope to
be able to deal extensively with his magnificent approach
to the psycho-"logical" problem.
(Perls, 1947, pp.212-213)
Unfortunately, this work never eventuated.
6.1.3 Unitary language
Korzybski expressed the difficulty encountered in developing and
communicating notions of the organism-as-a-whole. This difficulty re-
sulted in the establishment of the beginnings of a suitable vocabulary
and language, that could convey these notions without ambiguity (Korzy-
bski, 1933). Perls experienced a similar difficulty, and according to
Laura Perls (personal communication 3/1980), their initial adoption of
psychoanalytic jargon tended to stifle the creative development of Gest-
alt therapy until they broke away from it and established their own term-
inology.
In outlining the need for a new language and its aim, Korzybski
proposed that:
... the structurally new language is similar to the
structure of our experience, and involves profound
methodological and, therefore, psycho-logical, sem-
antic factors.
(Korzybski, 1933, p.244)
-319-
Perls (1947) expressed a "hope" to incorporate some of Korzybski's
"magnificent" concepts into Gestalt therapy. He partially realized this
aim in an article entitled "Theory and technique of personality integrat-
ion" (1948). The influence of Korzybski emerged strongly. In this article,
he discussed the need for a unitary language, and the way in which use of
such a language encouraged unitary personalities and ijtegrated personal
and social structures (Perls, 1948). Perls later wrote: "From one angle,
it is useful to define 'personality' as a structure of speech habits"
(Perls et al., 1951, p.372).
Korzybski highlighted the difference between the language used to de-
scribe events and those events themselves. The representation symbolizes
what we perceive in ourselves or "inside of our skins", while the events
themselves are "outside of our skins". Language, then, is the link between
them, and is regarded as being structurally similar but not the same.
Therefore, any language, as a medium of communication and expression, can
maximize its usefulness by being as similar as possible in its structures
to the structures of the events that is is supposed to reflect or represent.
Perls appreciated and concurred with this view:
... the general effort of semantics in recent years has
been to reconnect words to at least the environmental non-
verbal reality by insisting that each word refer to a non-
verbal something ... and thus avoid getting around to the
semantic problems of what is "in here
(Perls et al., 1951, pp.139-140)
He believed that individuals use language for whatever reasons they see
fit. His theoretical expositions outlined how the individual colours a
particular event so that it will fit in with his/her life, i.e., per-
ceptual apparatus, moods, values, attitudes and so on. While a unitary
-320-
language, for Perls, would considerably improve intra- and inter- per-
sonal communications, we do not possess such a language (Perls et
al., 1951). Thus, our verbal communications are faulty, and very
often "a lie" (Perls, 1969a).
Korzybski warned that individual often overlooks the discrepancy
between the words s/he uses and the objects or feelings they describe.
The verbal level, be believed, always differed from the objective level:
We use organism-as-a-whole methods and achieve organism-as-
a-whole results. We find in the language of "semantic re-
actions", "non-elementalistic meanings", psychophysiologic-
al means to integrate the "emotional" with the "intellectual"...
(Korzybski, 1933, pp.503-504)
Perls agreed, and throughout all his writings stressed the need to
use organism-as-a-whole methods to reverse neurosis and other unhealthy,
self-defeating modes of behaviour. The Gestalt therapist encourages
the client to work on an emotional, feeling level as well as on a verb-
al level, because unless insight and awareness is accompanied by emotion,
no therapy can be performed. Mere verbalization is insufficient to
alter the person in any lasting manner (Perls, 1969a, 1969b, 1973).
Ogden and Richards quoted Gardiner (1922) on the definition of mean-
ing: "The meaning of any sentence is what the speaker intends to be un-
derstood from it by the listener" (1923, p.193). This definition, how-
ever, begs the question of consistency, and assumes a clear intention to
communicate on the part of the speaker. Language has numerous nuances
of meaning, where meaning can point to that which the speaker intends the
recipient to feel or to do. This issue particularly impressed Perls, and
was incorporated into Gestalt therapy. In association with somatic
-321-
observations (Reich) and voice analysis (Moses) he always drew attent-
ion to confused, paradoxical or unclear communications.
Another aspect of Ogden and Richards' work reflected in Gestalt
therapy is their focus on emotional connotations associated with words
such as "good", "love", or "liberty". Although it is valid to suggest
that the speaker tends to use these, types of words based on their mean-
ing associated with previous emotional reactions as well as abstractions
from other sources, this in itself was insufficient for Perls. In Gest-
alt therapy, emotionally charged words are discouraged and are usually
translated into language reflecting feelings, into solid terminology rath-
er than vague "emotive" terms (Perls, 1966a).
6.1.4 Here and now
The concept of here and now has been discussed by a number of theo-
rists. This dissertation outlines at least ten antecedent influences on
Perls' formulations in this area. E. Polster (1966) named semantics as
one of four major influences on Perls' conceptualization of the here and
now.
Korzybski outlined how the residue from past experience passes into
the present. In a vivid example, he discussed an experiment by Yerkes
in 1912 in which earthworms were conditioned to various stimuli. When
the worms were sectioned and fed to other worms or when their heads were
removed and grew back, some of the previous conditioning was evident.
Perls used exactly the same example in his "Four lectures" (1966a), al-
though he did not reference the source nor name the experimenter. While
Korzybski acknowledged some residue from the past, he recognized that the
-322-
individual can only ever be in touch with the present. For him, neur-
otic and pathological behaviours were characterized by being out of
touch with temporal aspects of living, i.e., living in the past or the
future. Healthy functioning could only be reflected by living in the
present for Korzybski, or the here and now for Perls.
Perls wrote that nothing exists except in the here and now. The so-
called past (i.e., memories) and the future (i.e., anticipations) can
only be experienced in the here and now. This emphasis on the present
is reflected in Gestalt dreamwork, where the first request of the therapist
is for the client to "tell" his/her dream, using the present tense.
6.1.5 Integration
One of Korzybski's major concerns was with the integration of the in-
dividual (Rapoport, 1954). He wrote:
... in the language of "semantic reactions" ... psycho-
physiological means to integrate the "emotional" with the
"intellectual" ... The organism by structural necessity
acts as-a-whole ... (and) helps to re-integrate.
(Korzybski, 1933, pp.503-504)
The basic goal of Gestalt therapy was stated by Enright: "therapy
consists of reintegration of attention and awareness" (1970, p.108).
Perls recognized that:
The essential requirement for reintegration would be
the production of an adequate tool, and this instrument
would have to be the unitary language.
(Perls, 1948, p.46)
Korzybski pointed out that the common division between thinking and
-323-
feeling is an artificial one. He echoed a commonly held belief:
"Thinking" and "feeling" are not to be divided so
simply. We know how "thinking" is influenced by
"feeling"; but we know very little how "feeling"
is influenced by "thinking" ...
Perls in most instances agreed with this position. For him, think-
ing was a kind of "energy saver" whereby the individual silently and inter-
nally rehearse certain behaviours. However, in line with the holistic
view of mankind, all thinking and feelings are made of the "same stuff"
and when we artificially split thinking and feeling we invite fragment-
ation and therefore pathological behaviours.
Korzybski (1933, 1954) discussed the individual's perceptions of
similarities and differences. The assumption of "allness" leads to ten-
sion and conflict, resulting in ignorance and the blocking of further
learning. This can become pathological, whereas observations of differ-
ences can be most beneficial. Korzybski further suggested that a good
habit to develop is "consciousness of similarities in differences and diff-
erences in similarities" (Korzybski, 1954, p.23).
This process has parallels in the theory of Gestalt therapy. First,
healthy functioning results when there is a free flow between figure and
ground phenomena. Second, Perls asserted that to attain and maintain a
healthy equilibrium a person must be able to appreciate and act upon diff-
erences, in various situations as they occur. Indeed, an organism can
only live by maintaining its difference from the environment, and more im-
portantly by assimilating required parts of environment to its difference
(Perls et al., 1951). Perls (1959) wrote that full awareness of similar-
-324-
ities and differences enriches our lives and that all contact is the
result of creative adjustments of the organism and environment. Also:
"Contact is the appreciation of differences" (Perls, 1969a, p.271). He
further outlined that when similarities and differences (or polarities)
are observed:
... there is a mutual learning until we come to an
understanding, and an appreciation of differences,
until we come to a oneness and integration of the
two opposing forces.
(Perls, 1969a, p.74)
6.1.6 The organism-as-a-whole
One of the clearest indications that Korzybski made an impression on
Perls was Perls' acquisition and use of Korzybski's term "crganism-as-a-
whole". Perls did not acknowledge Korzybski (as he neglected to acknow-
ledge other major influences such as Smuts, Moreno and Jung); neverthe-
less, he used the term three times in one article (Perls, 1948). Perls
implied that the term was derived from Goldstein or one of the Gestalt
psychologists. He wrote:
The concept of the organism-as-a-whole is the center
of the gestalt psychological approach which is super-
seding the mechanistic association psychology.
(Perls, 1948, pp.49-50)
For Korzybski, the notion of the organism-as-a-whole:
... implies that an organism is not a mere algebraic sum
of its parts, but is more than that, and must be treated
as an integrated whole.
-325-
This notion is basic to both the Gestalt psychologists and Gestalt
therapists. Korzybski (1933) did not cite nor reference Gestalt psych-
ology or any other influences which may have influenced this formulation,
but he used the term many times in Science and Sanity.
Smith (1976a) traced some of the early influences on Gestalt therapy,
but overlooked the extent of Perls' borrowings from Korzybski. In out-
lining what was "unique" to Perls, he mentioned two concepts, "the explic-
ation of the here and now reality (and) the organism as a whole" (p.6).
The evidence presented above, however, clearly indicates that Korzybski had
used the term organism-as-a-whole and discussed its implications long be-
fore any of Perls' writings were published.
6.1.7 Boundaries
Korzybski clearly outlined his concept of inner and outer aspects
of the person. Although many other theorists, e.g., Federn and Moreno
had done this previously, it is proposed here that Korzybski's approach
assisted Perls:
The difference between "inside of the skin" and the
"outside of the skin" establishes the organism-as-a-
whole. The interplay between the inside and the out-
side is structural and supplies the energies which act-
ivate the organism.
Perls adopted Korzybski's conceptual approach and redesignated the
division between inner and outer as the contact boundary. For Perls
"inner" means literally inside of the skin, with anything "outer" lit-
erally meaning the environment outside of the body. Like Korzybski,
-326-
Perls regarded this as delineating the whole person. Also like Kor-
zybski, Perls considered the interplay between the two as imperative for
the existence of life, because no-one can exist in isolation and the in-
dividual must take in and satisfy various needs so as to continue life.
6.1.8 Blocks and fixations
Korzybski frequently elaborated on what he regarded as a block in the
person. He employed the term to refer to any form of stoppage in the
person, whether physical or emotional. He wrote:
Once the linguistic character of the issues is fully
realized, the psycho-logical, semantic blockage is
removed, freedom of analysis is inwardly established,
and even "non-geniuses" will produce important creat-
ive work.
(Korzybski, 1933, p. 327)
Perls' conception of "blocks" was not as encompassing as Korzybski's.
Nonetheless, Perls did use the concept of blocks in most of his works (e.g.,
(Perls, 1948, 1965, 1966a, 1969a, 1969b, 1973). He also acknowledged
Freud's use of the term. A block for Perls was any process that inhibits
or prevents the individual from experiencing awareness. Any interruption
to awareness can be considered a block, whether it is interruption of an un-
pleasant or pleasant experience (Perls, 1966a). The concept of a block as
a difficulty in verbalizing feelings or thoughts, i.e., in semantic trans-
actions, may well have been influenced by Korzybski's writings.
Perls often used the term "fixed" or "fixation" to refer to habitual
or recurring responses to various situations. He suggested that a per-
son with "character" is a person who is so fixed in his/her behaviours that
-327-
there is little flexibility or spontaneity. Perls et al. (1951) saw
every neurotic mechanism as a fixation.
Korzybski had presented a similar picture of semantic fixation.
He stated that instead of "fixation":
... we should have means and efforts to preserve and
foster semantic flexibility. This last is accomp-
lished by acquiring the semantic reactions connect-
ed with the consciousness of abstracting.
Thus, for Korzybski, healthy functioning is characterized by flexibility
while neurotic or outmoded behaviour is characterized by fixation.
Korzybski suggested that semantic flexibility:
... eliminates very serious psychological fixities
and blockages, which analysis shows to be ... path-
ological for man.
Perls would probably have agreed with Korzybski's position as stated
above, and broadened the need for flexibility from semantics into every
facet of the individual makeup. Perls encouraged complete flexibility
via awareness in all of his patients. This included such aspects as
thinking, feeling, expressing, communicating and so on. Inflexibility,
he observed, results in character build up, in the form of fixed
and predictable modes of behaviour, particularly on an interpersonal level
(Perls, 1969a).
6,1.9 Spontaneity
Polster and Polster (1973) credited the semanticists with defining
-328-
the notion of spontaneity, claiming that Perls derived his conception
of the importance of spontaneity from this source. A study of both
Korzybski (1933) and Ogden and Richards (1923), however, indicates that
this assertion is unfounded. Indeed, the concept of spontaneity does
not even appear in the index of Science and Sanity. The concept of
spontaneity was actually adopted by Perls from the work of Jacob Moreno
(see section 6.2.3).
6.1.10 What is, is
This well-known maxim of Perls' (1969a, p.133) may have originated
from Korzybski's very similar law of identity, which stated: "whatever
is, is" (1933, p.404).
Korzybski (1933) discussed the role of semantics in psychotherapy:
"A patient whose unconscious semantic difficulty is made conscious either
improves or is entirely relieved" (p.492). Therapy, he suggested:
... is only successful when it succeeds in making the
patient not only "rationalize" his difficulties but
also makes him "emotionally" revivelive through again
his past experiences.
Korzybski viewed therapy as a process "by the aid of which everyone
can solve his problems by himself" (Korzybski, 1933, p.529). Thus,
although no therapist can ever fully understand the situation in which
another person finds him/herself, with training in general structural
-329-
semantic methods, any person can solve his/her own problems (Johnson,
1946; Kelley, 1951).
Gestalt therapy, with its emphasis on the curative power of aware-
ness, the need for change to be experienced as well as verbalized, and
the importance of self-support, is strikingly similar to that recom-
mended by Korzybski.
6.1.12 Neurosis
Korzybski outlined the early disruptions which lead to neurotic
modes of living:
Any semantic disturbance ... introduces some deviations or
resistances .,. and the organism is at once on the abnormal
non-adjustment path.
Perls highlighted similar disturbances, and saw semantic disturb-
ances as reflecting other disturbances. The long term goal of Gestalt
therapy is to re-integrate all aspects of the person, eradicating not only
semantic but all disturbances, (neuroses) and making the person whole once
again.
In the wider societal context, Korzybski wrote that semantic disturb-
ance affects nearly all of us and is at the foundation of the majority of
human difficulties.
Semanticist/counsellor Pemberton (1955) wrote of the aim of semantic
therapy for neurosis:
... to help differentiate between events and thoughts about
them. The maladjusted appear to lack this differentiating
ability ... the neurotic (has) no predictability, no
-330-
foresight, and so (behaves) inappropriately.
(Pemberton, 1955, p.64)
The manner in which Pemberton discussed the neurotic is very similar to
that of Perls. The aim of Gestalt therapy, according to Kepner and
Brien (1970, p.43) is to develop intelligent behaviour, that is:
... to enable the individual to act on the basis of all
possible information and to apprehend not only the rel-
evant factors in the external field, but also relevant
information from within .... The goal of such direction
is non-interrupted awareness.
The parallels between Perls and Pemberton are strikingboth are re-
ferring to the outmoded and inappropriate forms of behaviour of the
neurotic personality. This approach may have encouraged Perls to
concentrate oh the acting out of various experiences and blockages,
rather than simply relying on verbal interactions.
Chase (1938) wrote of the neurotic as a person who over-generalizes
and does not see differences in various situations. For instance, the
neurotic often uses absolute terms such as "all", "never" and "always",
and does not appear able to differentiate the present from the past nor
future. S/he generalizes everything into absolute terms and cannot
appreciate differences in situations as they occur. Perls regarded the
neurotic likewise as a person who is stuck, who does not see the obvious,
and one who regards living with helplessness and defeatism.
6.1.13 Conclusion
Perls derived several important concepts from the work of Korzybski,
other general semanticists and semanticists. These included:
-331-
1. Need for unitary language
2. Emphasis on here and now
3. Integration
4. Indivisibility of thinking and feeling
5. Differentiation and polarities
6. The organism-as-a-whole
7. Boundaries, inner and outer aspects of the person
8. Blocks and fixations
9. Obsolete, inappropriate behaviours in pathology
10. What is, is
11. Awareness, experience, self-support
12. Semantic disturbance in neurosis
-332-
6.2 Jacob Moreno (1892-1974) and Psychodrama
Jacob Moreno was born in Bucharest, Romania in 1892. Initially
a student of philosophy he also studied medicine at the University of
Vienna and received his M.D. in 1917. In 1918 he was appointed super-
intendent of Mitterndorf State Hospital (near Vienna). Between 1919
and 1925 he was a health officer at Voslau in Austria. During this
time he continued in his private psychiatric practice, founding the Spon-
taneity Theater i
n
1921. In 1923 he began the first "living newspaper"
and psychodrama (Sahakian, 1976).
In 1927 Moreno emigrated to the U.S.A. He practiced psychiatry in
New York City at the Plymouth Institute in Brooklyn and later at Mt. Sinai
Hospital (New York) in 1928. He established the Moreno Sanitarium in
Beacon, New York, in 1936. He later founded the first theatre of psycho-
drama called "Therapeutic Theatre The following year he published the
first issue of Sociometry: A Journal of Interpersonal Relations, and later
founded the Moreno Institute for sociometry and psychodrama.
Moreno was honorary president of the first and second International
Congress of Psychodrama, fellow of the American Medical Association and
president of the American Sociometric Association (1945) . In the academ-
ic arena, he was an adjunct professor of sociology at the New York Univ-
ersity's graduate school between 1951 and his death in 1974. He also
lectured at the New School for Social Research and Teachers' College at
Columbia University (Sahakian, 1976).
-333-
Moreno had a profound influence on humanistic psychology in general,
and certainly on Fritz Perls. Although the significance of his work to
modern psychotherapy is inadequately acknowledged, we have only to examine
his theories, concepts and techniques to realize that he was a pioneer in
psychotherapy (Barlow, 1978b). He has-been regarded as a rival to Freud
(Moreno, 1934; 1953), and was the major impetus behind sensitivity train-
ing, groupwork, group psychotherapy, encounter, psychodrama and sociometry.
Many of these terms were in fact coined by Moreno.
Perls referred to Moreno and to psychodrama in a number of his works,
but never clearly acknowledged the extent to which he had been influenced
by Moreno's work in developing Gestalt therapy.
In Ego, Hunger and Aggression (1947), Moreno was mentioned only in a
footnote describing his technique for treating psycho-neuroses:
... urging the patients to write, produce and act their
own plays as a means of self expression, and self realiz-
ation (p.222).
In Gestalt Therapy (Perls et al., 1951), Moreno's work in dealing
with delinquents with a group therapy approach was mentioned, as an exam-
ple of a theory of psychotherapy.
In a later work (1969a, p.130), Perls provided a clearer indication
of his own approach to role play by contrasting it with that outlined by
Moreno:
... if I let the patient do all the roles himself, we
get a clearer picture than when we use Moreno's tech-
nique of psychodrama ...
In The ,Gestalt Approach and Eyewitness to Therapy (Perls, 1973)
-334-
Moreno is mentioned only once, with an outline of his method of having
the client switch from one role to another, re-owning parts of the self.
In the manuscript published in 1975 which was recorded in Perls' res-
idence at Lake Cowichan, the reader is given the clearest statement of
Perls' attitude to Moreno's work. Perls was describing the dream tech-
nique:
I just want to say a bit more about ... the dream technique.
In the historical context, it, so to say, derives its source
from two other psychiatrists; one is Moreno and his psycho-
drama . . .
(Perls, 1975, p.157)
Many authors in the Gestalt therapy literature mention the relation-
ship between the two therapists and their approaches. Laura Perls (1976,
p.222) wrote:
Fritz Perlswith a pre-psychiatry history of interest
and active involvement in the theaterwould use a psy-
cho-dramatic approach.
Van De Riet et al. (1980, p.14) were more explicit:
One of the most spectacular of these Gestalt therapy tech-
niques, wherein the individual acts out dialogues between
opposing parts or feelings, is related to psychodrama as
developed by J.L. Moreno (1946).
It should be noted, however, that Moreno's psychodrama was developed well
before 1946, dating back to as early as 1912. Cohn (1970), Dublin, (1976)
and Rosenblatt (1980) also mentioned Moreno as an influence on Perls.
Thus, it is clear that Perls was well acquainted with Moreno's writt-
en works as well as his work with the theatre, arid that this knowledge
dated back to their days in Germany, well before both became residents of
-335-
New York.
A number of terms coined by Moreno (1934, 1953) such as psychodrama,
group therapy and role playing, began to appear in the Gestalt literature
in the late 1940's and 1950'sa number appearing in Gestalt Therapy (1951)
and in many of Perls' later publications. As Shepard (1976, p.63) wrote:
... he (Perls) took advantage of observing, attending,
and being affected by such pioneers.as ... J.L. Moreno.
6.2.2 Psychodramatic approach
Moreno wrote that drama is a transliteration from a Greek term
meaning action or a thing done:
Psychodrama can be defined, therefore, as the science which
explores the "truth" by dramatic methods. It deals with
inter-personal relations and private worlds.
(Moreno, 1953, p.81)
Haskell (1975) a leading sociometrist arid psychodramatist regarded
psychodrama as a spontaneous action production in which the person can
examine both interpersonal and intrapersonal relationships in the here
and now and in the safety of a workshop or laboratory setting. Using
this method, the individual can work on past events, present activities
and relationships as well as experimenting with possible future behav-
iours :
What is most important to me, however, is that it provides
a method by which people may examine relationships in which
they are involved, and experiment with alternative patterns
of interaction.
(Haskell, 1975, p.154)
-336-
Perls was not consistent in his attitude towards the use of
psychodramatic techniques. In some places he regarded the group members
as being akin to a Greek chorus, (Perls, 1969a), but in other places wrote
of a carthartic effect and self therapy during group therapy sessions,
(Perls, 1966a). He even acknowledged the occasional usefulness of alter
egos (Perls, 1975).
Moreno (1946) outlined five main instruments used in psychodrama:
the stage; the subject or actor; the director or therapist; auxiliary or
alter egos (played by other members of the audience or group); and the
audience. Perls adopted all of these instruments with the exception of
alter egos.
Dublin (1976) stated that Perls regarded his own theoretical require-
ments as being too stringent to fit comfortably into Moreno's framework.
There were three reasons for this: first, it was theoretically incompat-
ible to have roles played by group members j second, in psychodrama the
facilitator is too directive; third, group members do not allow the person
who is working full expression, i.e., bodily mannerisms, projections and
the like.
Perls outlined his departure from Moreno's theoretical position when
he wrote:
... if I let the patient do all the roles himself, we get
a clearer picture than when we use Moreno's technique of
psychodrama, pulling people who know very little about you
because they bring in their own fantasies, their own in-
terpretations.
(Perls, 1969a, p.130)
Polster and Polster stated that psychodrama led to the technique of
the individual's participation in an experience rather than merely
-337-
talking about it. However:
Naturally in the hands of the Gestalt therapist, the
psychodramatic production is quite different from what
Moreno had in mind.
(Polster and Polster, 1973, p.315)
The difference according to these writers is that in Gestalt ther-
apy the drama is improvised by the individual rather than from others'
interpretations or re-enactments. This "difference" is more theoret-
ical than real and shows that the authors may not have fully appreciated
psychodramatic methods/techniques. Moreno was explicit in stating that
psychodrama need not be regarded only as a psychotherapeutic group tech-
nique: "Psychodrama is here a form of individual psychotherapy" (Moreno,
1953, p.723).
Other writers (e.g., Zinker, 1971; Barlow, 1978a) described Perls'
use of psychodramatic techniques, particularly in working with dreams.
Zinker (a predominant Gestalt therapist) recognized that the whole group
participates in a phenomenological experience:
... once the individual "played out" his own dream and came
in touch with himself in it, the whole group could take
parts in the drama, and actively participate in it ....
Everyone becomes involved. People exchange roles, play
alter-egos for each other and try out different inter-
pretations of the dream's content.
(Zinker, 1971, pp.19-20)
Zinker precdded his thesis by writing that it "occurred" to him
that the group could be incorporated to act out various roles. It
would seem as though Zinker was not entirely conversant with psycho-
dramatic techniques nor Perls' statements on his changes to Moreno's
theory.
-338-
Another important acquisition from psychodrama was the "hot seat":
In the eclectic Gestalt spirit he (Perls) adapted the
"hot seat" from psychodrama and preferred to work one-
to-one .. .
(Kitzler, 1980, p.27)
6.2.3 Spontaneity
The major concept underlying Moreno's theory is that of spontaneity:
We decided to stick by all means to the principle of spontane-
ity ... (and) devised a technique to support individuals in the
attempt at spontaneous group production.
(Moreno, 1953, p.7)
Spontaneity has been defined as: "the adequate response to a new situat-
ion, or the novel response to an old situation" (Moreno, 1953, p.337).
Perls regarded spontaneity as essential for healthy functioning.
Outmoded and habitual behaviours result in a rigidity and lack of genuine
responsiveness:
If you are in the now ... the excitement flows immediately
into ongoing spontaneous activity ... you are creative,
you are inventive.
(Perls, 1969a, p.3)
We can appreciate that Perls' position had much in common with that
of Moreno. For both, spontaneity was essential for healthy living and
the avoidance of neurosis. Spontaneity demands the disciplined dispos-
al of our "character" and the acquisition of the ability to "be freely
responsive.
-339-
Both authors are undoubtedly correct in their assertions that spon-
taneity is essential for ongoing healthy living. However, both appear
to have overlooked the advantages or benefits to be derived from habitual
behaviours. Most obviously, habits are a time and energy saver for the
individual. It is only when the individual begins to rely on habits and
inhibits spontaneity that this becomes debilitating and potentially path-
ological.
6.2.4 Here and now
The emphasis on the here and now can be traced to a number of differ-
ent sources. Moreno in 1934 was one of the first to use it; it recurred
in a number of his other publications. He wrote:
... in order to produce change in people ... you cannot change
the world ex-post-facto, you must do it now and here ...
(Moreno, 1953, p.115)
He further emphasized:
the subjects must therefore be approached in the midst
of an actual life-situation and not before or after it.
(Moreno, 1953, p.118)
Moreno's emphasis on the present can be evaluated from the quotat-
ions above, as well as those in the preceding section. The here and now
is an essential part of psychodramatic theory because the individual can
only work on the subject matter as it is perceived and felt at that moment,
irrespective of whether it has to do with past events or the anticipation
of future occurrences.
-340-
Perls similarly valued the here and now. He referred to Gestalt
therapy as emphasizing two principles that need to be integrated in or-
der to produce a meaningful psychotherapy; the absolute working in the
here and now and the full concern with the phenomenon of awareness
(Perls, 1966a ) .
Thus, Perls' position was similar to that of Moreno, who stated that
in psychodrama:
Instead of searching after past-experiences, the subject
turned his mind to the present, immediate production.
(Moreno, 1953, p.9)
It can be seen that the emphasis that Moreno put on the present is reflect-
ed in Perls' work.
6.2.5 Group psychotherapy
The term "group psychotherapy" was coined by Moreno and has passed
into common usage. While Moreno acknowledged that there was definitely
a place for individual therapy, he worked primarily
n a
group situation.
Moreno emphasized the use of the total group in any therapeutic trans-
action. The audience or group acts as a background of positive regard
and acceptance. Discussing group therapy he stated:
The term and concept of group psychotherapy which-I have
introduced refer to the treatment of the total group.
(Moreno, 1953, p.501)
Perls initially advocated individual therapy sessions. He then progressed
to a combination of individual plus group therapy sessions, and finally to
group workshops (1967).
-341-
Moreno, (1953) set out the basic conditions underlying all group
psychotherapy. An examination of Perls' (1967) publication and the book
edited by Feder and Ronall (1980), Beyond the Hot Seat: Gestalt Approach-
es to Group shows striking similarities in their views of the way groups
become coherent.
There has been relatively little written on the concept of group in
Gestalt therapy. Perls highlighted his regard for group therapy:
... in the group situation something happens that is not
possible in the private interview. To the whole group it
is obvious that the person in distress does not see the ob-
vious ... In the face of this collective conviction of the
group, he cannot use his phobic way of disowning the ther-
apist when he cannot manipulate him.
(Perls, 1967, pp.13-14)
6.2.6 Boundary and boundary disturbances
The notion of boundaries and boundary disturbances was discussed by
Moreno in the early 1930's, (e.g., Moreno, 1934). He suggested that "the
individual function is a system which is confined by two boundaries: an
inner boundary of his own personality, whereby the individual's own em-
otional expansiveness can be restricted by impeding or blocking of aware-
ness; and secondly, a socio-emotional boundary between self and others.
Perls (1975), in almost an identical manner to Moreno, distinguished be-
tween two types of boundariesself boundaries and ego-boundaries. An
examination of these boundaries and Perls' later concept (e.g., 1969a,
1969b) of the contact boundary would indicate that the self boundary
parallels Moreno's inner boundary, whilst Moreno's socio-emotional bound-
-342-
ary paralleled Perls' contact boundarythe boundary between self and
others.
6.2.7 Conclusion
It can be seen from the evidence presented in this section that
Moreno profoundly affected the development of the Gestalt approach.
The major concepts and techniques Perls adopted from Moreno and psycho-
drama were:
1. Spontaneity, creativity and excitement
2. Use of dramatic techniques (literally, acting out) in therapy;
hence, experiential therapy.
3. The hotseat
4. Present-centeredness
5. Groupwork, especially group members as an audience to work
between one individual and the therapist
6. Inner and socio-emotional boundaries
Perls the actor was strongly attracted to Moreno's theatrical
techniques, and they form the basis for many of the most useful, effic-
ient and successful aspects of Gestalt therapy.
-343-
6.3 William Stern (1871-1938) and Personalistic Psychology
William Stern was a German Jewish psychologist and philosopher.
He was born and educated in Berlin, where he worked as a researcher and
academic before moving to Hamburg. From 1918 to 1933 he published many
books on theoretical and applied psychology and early childhood develop-
ment , as well as Person und Sache: System des kritischen Personalismus,
a three-volume presentation of his philosophicalpsychological system
(Stern, 1924, 1938; Heider, 1968). Stern fled Nazi Germany in 1933, and
like Perls sought refuge in Holland. He later emigrated to the U.S.A.,
where he joined the Department of Psychology which was headed by William
McDougall at Duke University. His major areas of interest there were
holistic psychology, phenomenological description and teleological ex-
planation, existentialism, personal experience and degrees of conscious-
ness (Heider, 1968).
It is difficult to assess the direct influence of Stern on Perls.
Perls referred to personology in 1948. He did not indicate the extent
of his familiarity with Stern's theories; however, the following discussion
reveals many similarities between the two theorists.
6.3.2 Here and riow
Both Stern and Perls used the term "here and now." Stern wrote:
Consciousness is thereby released from its dimensional re-
striction to the simple present; it becomes stratified.
"Here and now I experience that which is not here and now."
(1938, p.214)
-344-
Thus, Stern believed that experience could only take place in the present.
The present is of great significance in Gestalt therapy. There is
an experience of the "now" when the "fuzzy twin" of attention and aware-
ness come together (Baumgardner, 1975). The greater the experience of
the now, the more choices the person becomes aware of. Baumgardner
(1975) credited Perls with saying that awareness is here and now, regard-
less of whether it is directed towards the past (i.e., memories), or the
future (i.e., anticipation). Perls insisted that to stray from the pres-
ent distracted from the living quality of reality (1969a).
Stern also wrote (1938, p.249):
Remembrance ... represents not merely some effect of "the
past upon the present, but a reaching back into the past,
from the present.
Perls' view was similar:
... the actual process of remembering or anticipating
always proceeds from the present moment, and that,
though you are either looking backwards or forwards,
you always do this from the bearing of the present.
(Perls, 1947, p.208)
Perls thus believed that present processes could operate to alter
"memories ", making them more congruent with the individual's self-
concept (Perls, 1969a).
Stern, in the preface to the German edition of General Psychology
from the Personalistic Standpoint (1938) wrote: "thinking points to-
ward future ends" (p.viii). Perls also stated that when a person thinks
s/he mostly talks to others in fantasy, plans and organizes "in order" to
do what s/he wants to do in the future (Perls, 1969a).
-345-
6.3.3 Holism
A concept which is basic to both Gestalt therapy and personalis-
tics is that of wholeness. According to Stern, anything mental is
either itself a whole or is part of a whole. The person is a whole,
or unity (Stern, 1938). Both Stern and Perls believed that the indiv-
idual's awareness develops with and is integrally a part of the organism-
environment transaction. This transaction is always in the here and
now and is based on the current perception of the situation. The more
aware the person, the more integrated and spontaneous will be the actions
and reactions to those perceptions. As Stern wrote: "The person is a
whole meaningful in himself" (1938, p.17). Stern also regarded sickness
as a part of the unified person's way of living:
... sickness is not an isolated condition of a single
organ or a part of the personality, but is an alterat-
ion of the person as a whole.
(Stern, 1938, p.33)
Thus, we create our own "illth."
Perls consistently argued that individuals choose sickness as a way
of life. Like Stern, Perls believed that sickness included and alterat-
ion to the whole person, and not just to one ailing organ or body part
(Perls et al., 1951; Perls, 1973). In therapy, Perls wrote: "we shall
have to reintegrate the social and the biological functions" (19 78b, p.
63).
k
-346-
6.3.4 Experience
Another of the foundations of personology is the concept of ex-
perience. Stern wrote:
Experience is fragmentary. The sum total of life pro-
cesses and contents is not convertible into experience,
nor does it need to be. Only such particular occurren-
ces within life as involve tensions are at the same time
experienced internally.
(Stern, 1938, pp.75-76)
Perls' theories have some parallels with this position, especially
with regard to tensions, or in Gestalt terminology, needs. Stern re-
garded needs as internal experiences. The more acute are the tensions
experienced by the individual, the greater is the dislocation to his/her
lifestyle:
The individual is mirrored in his own experience in so
far as he is in a struggling state, i.e., in so far as
internal resistance and inhibition interrupt the plain
current of life.
(Stern, 1938, p.76)
The person is in a constant state of movement and change, where every-
thing s/he does results in a acknowledgement of the various tensions or
needs, to which s/he then responds.
Similarly, Perls wrote that experience is acquired in a idiosyn-
cratic manner (Perls et al., 1951). The manner in which the individ-
ual has developed his/her "personality" influences what will become fig-
ure (or foreground) in gestalt formation. Unsatisfied needs demand on-
going energy investment and attention, and tend to reduce the vitality
of living at the potential optimum level. Stern expressed similar views
-347-
insofar as the individual: "experiences the world in such a way that
the foreground appears large, the background small" (1938, p.77).
6.3.5 Body-mind position
Stern suggested that the personalistic approach to the mind-body
debate is one from a "new" direction. The individual is not partly
body and partly mind, but a whole person capable of experiencing the
world of which s/he is a part:
The life of the person includes both accordingly there
is no experience and no capacity for experience that
is not bound up with the physical aspect of life and
with bodily functions.
(Stern, 1938, p.84)
Feeling could not be "experienced" at all if it did not at the same time
achieve bodily expression (Stern, 1938, p.88). Perls adopted the holis-
tic "doctrine", in which man is regarded as a unified organisma fact
which Perls suggested was ignored by psychiatry and psychotherapy (Perls,
1973). For an in-depth discussion of Perls' views on this issue, see
Barlow (1981). Like Stern, Perls maintained that we do not have a body,
we are a body (Perls, 1969a). Perls wrote that: "the 'mental-physical'
or 'mind-body' split is a totally artificial one" (1973, p.53).
6.3.6 Polarities and centering
Stern outlined in a number of places (e.g., 1938, p.92) the concept
of polarities:
-348-
The polarity of the inward-outward dimension involves the
assumption that person and world confront each other in
basic opposition. Wherever they are one ... this dimens-
ional polarity is lacking.
Both polarities and dichotomies are basic to Gestalt therapy:
The basic philosophy of Gestalt therapy is that of nature
differentiation and integration. Differentiation by '
itself leads to polarities.
(Perls, 1965, p.7)
Stern wrote of centering:
The personal world has a natural center f
r0
m which and
toward which everything pertaining to it exists ...
This center is essential and indispensible as long as
the person and his world exist.
(Stern, 1938, pp. 91-92)
I also emphasize the process of centering the reconcil-
iation of opposites so that they no longer waste energy
in useless struggle with each other, but can join in
productive combination and interplay.
(Perls, 1966a, p.19)
The center for Perls, as it was for Stern, was an essential ingredient
for successful and integrated living. To lose the center is to get
out of balance; this necessitates the acquisition of artificial aids
to maintain the self (Perls, 1966b). The centered person experiences
him/herself as self-supporting and adequate in his/her interaction with
the world (Perls, 1975).
-349-
6.3.7 Contact zones
In personalistic terminology, there is an inward outward dimension
of a person's world. This world involves: "those extensions in def-
inite directions through which every person actualizes himself and his
personal world" (Stern, 1938, p.91). According to Stern, the interact-
ion between the person and the world can be seen as follows:
The person-world relationship is thus the relationship
of two systems of dimensions, and this relationship may
in turn be expressed dimensionally as inward-outward.
(1938, p.92)
In his early writing, e.g., Ego, Hunger and Aggression Perls
clearly delineated the inner and outer world dimension (e.g., Perls, 1947,
pp.46, 109, 163-4, 206, 217, 244), and the necessity for harmony and bal-
ance. In his later writings (e.g., Perls, 1969a, 1973), this inner-out-
er dimension is characterized as inner and outer zones, with the addition
of a middle (DMZ) zone.
6.3.8 Individuality
Stern wrote: "Every person knows for himself alone how any feeling
... is immediately experienced" (1938, p.47). Perls in most of his
works stressed that the experiential world of an individual can only be
understood from that individual's experiences and description of his or
her own unique situation. The therapist is anti-analytic and is comm-
itted to assisting the individual. Each individual is unique, and is
treated accordingly.
-350-
Personalistic theory was greatly concerned with such functions as
imagination, fantasy and dreams. This theoretical position has some
similarities with that of Gestalt therapy. Stern (1938, p.347) wrote
of dreams and reality:
For in reality ... thought and fantasy are joined into
a more or less strained unity. It is for this reason
that the imaginational fantasy phenomena occuring in
dreams have personal experience ...
Perls regarded dreams as: "the royal road to integration" (1966b, p.204),
uncovering conflicts and disturbances on which to work.
On the interpretation of dreams, Stern (1938, p.348) wrote:
... the sole object of interpretations of dreams can be
but the dreamer himself, in terms of those strata of his
personality ... and the total personal structure.
Perls elaborated considerably on interpretation, particularly interpre-
tation of dreams. Like Freud and Jung, Perls worked on the basis of
symbolism but only insofar as all of the characters, objects, and in
fact everything in the dream are regarded as parts of the dreamer (Perls,
1969a, 1973).
6.3.10 Conclusion
Perls thus may have derived several concepts in part from Stern's
personalistic psychology, including:
1. Present^centerednesseven remembering and anticipating take
place in the present
-351-
Holism; interrelatedness of "body" and "mind"
Importance of experience
Centering between polarities
Inner and outer contact zones
Uniqueness of each individual and his/her experience
Dreams as a valid part of personal experience
Rejection of interpretation by anyone but the experiencing
individual
-352-
6.4 Andras Angyal (1902-1960)
Angyal was one of the major proponents of the holistic view of
mankind. He received a Ph.D. in psychology from the University of
Vienna in 1927 and an M.D. from the University of Turin in 1932.
After obtaining the latter qualification Angyal travelled to the U.S.A.,
working initially at Yale University as a Rockefeller fellow under the
direction of Edward Sapir. He later worked for twelve years at a state
hospital in Worcester, Massachusetts, particularly with schizophrenic
and neurotic patients. From 1945 until his death in 1960 Angyal had a
private practice in Boston, and was a visiting lecturer, teacher, super-
visor and trainer at various institutions, including Harvard and Brandeis
Universities (Hanfmann, 1968).
Perls was familiar with Angyal's work, and described Angyal's as one
of the sounder theories which regarded the individual as a coherent whole
(Perls, 1978a).
6.4.2 Holism
A number of Angyal's notions are represented in the literature of
Gestalt therapy. The major emphasis in all his works is on the primacy
of wholes, and it is possible that his work provided a clarification of
the concept which Perls had adopted from Smuts, Gestalt psychology and
others (see chapter 4 and section 5.5).
One of the major problems for Angyal, as for Fritz and Laura Perls,
-353-
was the need to develop a new set of concepts to take account of the
holistic view of mankind. Angyal (1941) favoured William Stern's
terminology when he stated that all concepts and terms should be psycho-
physical^ neutral. The precise formulation of this new set of concepts,
was for both Angyal and Perls one of the most important tasks in develop-
ing a holistic theory.
Angyal wrote of the relationship between the organism and its en-
vironment: "the life process does not take place within the organism,
but between the organism and the environment" (1941, pp.31-32).
Perls similarly regarded the individual and the environment as in-
divisible. He wrote:
Only the interplay of organism and environment ...
constitutes the psychological situation not . ..
taken separately.
(Perls et al., 1951, p.19)
The place where the individual and the environment meet is where contact
is created and the contact boundary becomes evident (Perls, 1969a).
Both Angyal and Perls saw individuals as homeostatic, seeking equil-
ibrium, but also acknowledged that, paradoxically, this process is a dy-
namic one. Angyal wrote of self-regulation: "Good instances of self-
regulation are those functions which make it possible to maintain 'homeo-
stasis' " (1941, p.35). For Perls, the homeostatic process was:
.... the process by which the organism maintains its
equilibrium and therefore its health under varying
conditions ... the process by which the organism sat-
isfies its needs. ,_ ,-,-,> cs
(Perls, 1973, p.5)
-354-
Angyal emphasized the dynamic nature of the organism:
Since the existential form of the organism is a dynamic
one, it has to be studied from the dynamic point of
view, that is, as a process.
(Angyal, 1941, p.50)
Perls adopted this view, he saw the individual as constantly attending
to a hierarchy of needs; as the dominant need is satisfied, it recedes
from awareness for the moment, to be replaced by the next most import-
ant need. As Perls et al. (1951) wrote: "the interplay between figure
and ground is dynamic" (p.51).
6.4.4 Neurosis
Angyal regarded neurosis as a condition which affects the whole per-
sonality. He wrote:
It is itself an organization with its own goals, attitudes,
and motivations, its own pains and pleasures ... with its
own vitality, which is sustained and perpetuated ...
(Angyal, 1965, p.71)
Perls' Gestalt therapy emphasizes the holistic nature of man. This
means that neurosis results in impairment of the functioning of the whole
person as energy and vitality are deployed to bolster up unsatisfied needs.
Neurosis becomes all-encompassing and can slowly affect the entire funct-
ioning of the individual. Perls also recognized that neurotic behaviours
are organized and functionaltheir aim is to procure environmental supp-
ort for the individual whose belief in his/her capacity for self-support
has been eroded, and they represent the best adjustment available to the
person under these circumstances (Perls, 1969a, 1973).
-355-
One of the most striking parallels between Angyal and Perls is in
their theories of the neurotic's view of time. Angyal suggested of
the neurotic that: "His life is not lived in the present" (1965, p.83).
He believed that the neurotic is either bound to the past by unfinished
tasks, or waiting for a magical future,.when s/he will derive satisfact-
ion from life. The present is experienced either with impatience (for
the future) or guilt (for the past).
Perls used the term "unfinished business" to refer to those situat-
ions Angyal called unfinished tasks. Unfinished business, like unfin-
ished tasks, demands ongoing attention and depreciates the living qual-
ities of the individual (Perls et al. , 1951). Additionally, Perls wrote:
... here comes our neurotictied to the past and to out-
moded ways of acting, fuzzy about the present because he
sees it only through a glass darkly, tortured about the
future because the present is out of his hands.
(Perls, 1973, p.44)
Angyal referred to the neurotic's inability to respond to situations,
and the inadequacy of the responses s/he does make. Often, he observed,
the neurotic individual would respond in excessive or inappropriate ways.
Neurotics may also tend to be fixed in their manner of responding to diff-
erent situations, their behaviour marked by a repetitiveness across sit-
uations owing to incorrect assessment or interpretation of relevant inform-
ation (Angyal, 1941).
Perls viewed the neurotic in a similar way, i.e., the neurotic re-
sponds to various situations without spontaneity, using obsolete, in-
appropriate responses (Perls, 1966a, 1969a).
Angyal also suggested that most neurotics do not come into therapy
-356-
because of a desire to be "cured". Nor do they want to be encouraged
to break out of their self-defeating, circulatory behaviours. Usually
they come because some of the consequences of their way of life are pain-
ful and are impeding various aspects of their lives. Owing to their
reliance on well developed neurotic patterns of operating in the world,
many of which having been very successful in avoiding any anxiety pro-
ducing situation, they find it extremely difficult to give up well en-
trenched neurotic defence mechanisms in favour of more healthy ways of
living.
Perls made very similar observations, and estimated that ninety per
cent of patients do not come into therapy to be cured but rather to polish
their neuroses and show how much smarter they are than the therapist, of-
ten with sophisticated arguments and debates and semantic haranguesthe
last of which are described by Perls as being lies (Perls, 1969a). They
are comfortable within their familiar neuroses.
In the therapeutic setting Angyal stressed the need to pay attention
to details that do not seem to fit into the person's identity, such as
contradictions, inconsistencies, exaggerations or any other behaviours
that may be inappropriate to the situation:
The rigid use of these (repetitive) patterns in inapprop-
riate situations, in spite of their failure to achieve
the desired results, marks them as neurotic devices.
(Angyal, 1965, p.215)
Therefore, the therapist must learn to maintain concentration on what the
person is saying, both for detail, such as the verbal, as well as for the
-357-
merging whole, such as the overall presentation and body language of
the person.
Perls had a very similar view:
...the Therapist's primary responsibility is not to let go
unchallenged any statement or behavior which is not rep-
resentative of the self ...
(1973, p.80).
He also instructed the therapist to attend to the total response of the
client, to see the client's behaviour as a function of his/her "total
personality" (1973, p.75).
Angyal stated that neurosis is not overcome by insight alone, but
that the individual must take a chance by discovering neurotic forms of
behaviour. This may lead to despair and isolation but this is usually
necessary before even a glimpse of healthy functioning can be experienced.
This stage of despair is identical to Perls' impasse and Tillich's kairos
(see section 5.1.7);
... the patient may feel empty, passive and numb . . .
this emptiness, this emotional and volitional neutral-
ity, is a momentous advance along the road of recovery;
the inertness of the neurotic organization provides the
ideal conditions for the emergence of the basic healthy
pattern ...
(Angyal, 1965, p.226)
An interesting parallel btween Angyal and Perls is that both theorists
saw a positive function of the client's resistance in therapyhis/her man-
oeuvers to obstruct therapy. Angyal (1965) believed that resistance could
act as a protective device, shielding the individual from the possibly
detrimental impact of premature insights. Similarly, Perls wrote:
We must not fall into the trap of believing that resistances
-358-
are bad and that the patient would be better off with-
out them ... the patient does not think of his resist-
ance as resistance; he usually experiences it as assist-
ance. He wants to help.
(1973, p.48)
One of the major resistances to contact in therapy is what Perls
called "aboutism", where the individual seems to be stuck in the intell-
ectual chasm of talking about things, describing things and gossiping
(Perls , 1969b, 1973). Unless the therapist is vigilant in constantly
drawing attention to this,then therapy will be largely a futile exercise.
Angyal discussed the role of various defences used by individuals, es-
pecially verbalizations. In a manner virtually identical to Perls'
position, Angyal recommended that the therapist redirect "about"-type
language into active language. Angyal (1965, p.77) stated:
The therapist can further this by changing the wording
from passive to active; e.g., when the patient talks
of becoming confused, the therapist can ask him to what
purpose or by what means he has confused himself.
Linguistic transactions and their impact on the individual's per-
ception of him/herself are one of the major tools in Gestalt therapy (see
section 6.1). Neurotics, Perls believed, frequently project responsib-
ility for their lives onto others, especially their parents, and see them-
selves in a passive role (e.g., Perls, 1969a, 1973). Thus, the neurotic
is often unwilling to acknowledge responsibility for him/herself. Perls
wrote:
If his language is reorganized from an "it" language to
an "I" language, considerable integration can be achieved
with this single adjustment.
(Perls, 1948, p.65)
-359-
In a treatment situation a therapist may be often given information
with the assumption that the "problems" are presented and the therapist
will "fix" up the problem. Angyal constantly stressed the necessity to
get the individual involved in therapy, and to encourage the individual
to interpret or come up with insight into any problem. In a manner com-
patible with Gestalt therapy, Angyal wrote:
Gaining insight, important as it is, particularly in the
first half of the therapy's course, has the function of
paving the way for the dynamic processes which alone can
displace the entrenched neurotic pattern from its position
of dominance.
(Angyal, 1965, p.219)
Indeed, Angyal regarded it as near-impossible to even perceive the par-
ameters of another's problem, let alone solve it:
It is well known that one of the most common sources of
error ... is the tendency to interpret the behaviour of
other people in terms of one's own culture.
(Angyal, 1941, p.193)
Perls was aware of this "common source of error" and constantly main-
tained that the therapist should never never interpret (1966a, 1969a).
At all times the therapist aims at freeing the individual and promoting
self-sufficiency so that any or all problems can be dealt with by the in-
dividual. Perls wrote: "As therapists we do not imagine we know more
than the patient does himself" (1965, p.6). Thus, the Gestalt therapists'
position i
s
that we can only be aware of, and in contact with ourselves.
We cannot possibly know how it feels to be another person or experience his/
her conflicts and dilemmas. To interpret is to inflict upon the individual
-360-
a "fantasy" (of the therapist) as to how or why s/he feels, acts and behaves
as s/he does (Enright, 1970). Even if this fantasy is in fact correct,
it is harmful, it deprives the patient of discovery for him/herself, and
of self-sufficiency and self-support.
Although Angyal did not expound upon a comprehensive theory of dream-
work, what he wrote has much in common with Gestalt therapy:
...dreams and fantasies should not be left in some remote
corner, even when he cannot understand a dream, the patient
should begin to think of it as something _he dreamed, that
reflects his current concerns, not just a funny dream but
his life.
(Angyal, 1965, p.214)
Perls wrote in a very similar manner, and regarded the dream as an
existential message , from the self to the self. As such, the dream is the
individual's own production and every part of the dream denotes aspects
of the person:
In attempting to interpret a dream ... as parts of your own
personality ... you are the maker of the dream...
(Perls et al., 1951, pp.265-266)
Angyal discussed the role of daydreams and "delusions" (imagination
or fantasy): "Daydreams and delusions may be considered as examples of
short cuts" (1941, p.340). Perls regarded mental activity similarly:
"mental activity seems to act as a time, energy, and work saver for the
individual" (1973, p.13).
-361-
6.4.8 Conclusion
Angyal's theory may thus have influenced Perls' formulations in the
following areas:
1. Holism
2. Dynamic nature of equilibrium
3. Indivisibility of organism and environment
4. Function and organization of neurosis
5. Avoidance of present in neurosis
6. Inappropriateness of neurotic behaviours
7. Lack of motivation for therapeutic change in neurosis
8. Impasse
9. Positive features of resistance
10. Need to change passive language into active voice in therapy
11. Rejection of interpretation
12. Respect for dreamwork
-362-
6.5 Paul Moses and Voice Analysis
It is difficult to assess the influence which Paul Moses had on
Perls. (References to the work of Moses are not readily available
in the literature). Moses held a medical degree, had a psychoanaly-
tic background, and was the Assistant Clinical Professor in charge of
the Speech and Voice Section of the Division of Ontolarynology at
Stanford University School of Medicine. Moses was of Western European
Jewish origin. His first paper was presented at the inaugural meet-
ing of the International Society for Experimental Phonetics in Bonn in
1930. He later published a number of papers on speech and vocal therapy,
as well as psychosomatic ailments (and vocal dysfunction). Moses direct-
ed an intensive study of neurotic and psychotic voices which was conduct-
ed by Gregory Bateson with a grant from the Rockfeller Foundation.
Perls gave little indication of the extent to which he was familiar
with Moses' work; however, he was obviously impressed with the research
and wrote of it in the following way:
Verbal communication is usually a lie. The real communic-
ation is beyond words. There is a very good book available,
The Voice of Neurosis, by Paul Moses .... He could give you a
diagnosis from the voice that is better than a Rorschach test.
(Perls, 1969a, p.57)
Although The Voice of Neurosis was not published until 1954, Moses' views
were established in papers and lectures well before that date, as early
as 1930 (Moses, 1954).
-363-
6.5.2 Voice analysis
Moses discussed the evolution of the study of vocal function.
He credited Quintilian with the first analysis of quantity and quality
of voices in the first century A.D., whilst physicians, philosophers,
poets and others have contributed theories of vocal function. Despite
the profusion of approaches, however, there exists little empirical ev-
idence. Moses traced the derivation of the word "personality" and
concluded that originally there was a close connection between voice and
personality. Personality comes from the Latin persona which originally
described the mouthpiece of the mask used by actors. Persona in turn
came from per sona meaning "the sound of the voice passes through".
Over a period of time the meaning of the term shifted from the mask to
the actor or the "person" in a drama. The word eventually came to mean
any person and finally "personality", the symbolic connection with the
voice having being lost (Moses, 1954). Moses reversed this movement and
using a holistic framework, regarded the voice as indicative of the per-
son whom it expresses.
Moses suggested that various emotional states such as fear will be
revealed in the voice as well as in other aspects of the body such as
posture, gestures and language. Voice, however, "is the primary express-
ion of the individual, and even through voice alone the neurotic pattern
can be discovered" (Moses, 1954, Introduction, p.l).
Learning to understand the voice of the client is important for a
therapist. Moses held a holistic view of mankind which is evident through-
out his writings. For instance, he wrote that neurotic misuses of the
voice may irritate the vocal apparatus and result in organic dysfunction,
-364-
just as organic dysfunction can result in neurosis.
Moses found that one of the functions of the voice is to give cues
or clues as to how particular verbal statements are to be interpreted.
One of the major aspects of this theme was adopted and elaborated on by
Perls; often the vocal and verbal expressions contradict one another,
and it is likely that the vocal expression is closer to the personality
of the speaker than is the verbal expression. Perls (1969a, 1973)
warned not to listen to the words, but rather, to listen to what the
voice tells about the person. The sound tells everything. The voice
and body language will supply all that is required by a therapist to
know where the person is blocked and stifled. Perls et al. (1951)
suggested that two questions be asked:
(1) What is your emotional reaction to the particular
qualities of a voice?
(2) What is the emotional background in the patient
that produces the particular qualities in the voice?
Most people/patients are unaware of vocalizations which often contradict
what they are saying. Often the voice quality attempts to elicit a
particular response, irrespective of what the spoken words signify.
Thus, it is not what the verbalizer says, but how he speaks that is import-
ant (Perls et al., 1951).
6.5.4 Neurosis
There are remarkable similarities between the two theorists in their
views of neurosis. Moses wrote that:
-365-
The patient's neurosis is an unsuccessful attempt to
solve a problem in the present by means of a behav-
iour pattern that failed to solve it in the past.
(Moses, 1954, p.81)
He also believed that a neurotic symptom is a failure of control, devel-
oped from the basic tendency of neurotic individuals to achieve control
over both their internal and external environment. Living creates tens-
ion (to use Moses' terminology) and a release from tension re-establish-
es homeostasis.
Perls adopted this approach. For the Gestalt therapist, neurosis
is also seen as an attempt to solve a problem in the present by means of
behaviours that have proved inadequate in the past. Neurosis may be the
best adjustment available to the person at any particular time (Perls,
1969a); however, it is not a successful long-term solution, but rather an
immediate "band-aiding" process that allows the individual to function,
but only at a reduced level of efficiency. Neurotic behaviours are thus
self-defeating.
Moses regarded the neurotic as one who had become control-mad. He
asserted that health and maturity could be achieved only through the lib-
eration of the self from environmental supports, and the development of
the capacity for spontaneous and healthy self-support. Perls (1969a)
also held this view.
6.5.5 Respiration and anxiety
Moses related respiration and vocal productions: "In the voice of
neurosis a vocal abnormality is always accompanied by respiratory irreg-
ularities" (Moses, 1954, p.31). He also wrote:
-366-
Emotional effects on breathing are well known... (they)
change respiration ... but the recollection of emotions
does the same thing.
(Moses, 1954, p.32)
Perls (1947) appreciated the relation between vocalization and
respiration. The term "anxiety", for instance, was traced back to the
Latin root "angustus", which describes a narrowing or constriction.
For Perls (1969a), anxiety is characterized by a narrowing of the chest
and the subsequent lack of oxygen, suffocating the person's ability or
capacity to react. Perls often used imagery and fantasy in his work
(1948, 1965). In this he was aware of the tremendously forceful impact
of emotions on breathing, and vice versa. In some of his workshops
(e.g., those described in Perls, 1969a and 1973) we can appreciate the num-
ber of times that patients are requested to breathe deeply, to re-estab-
lish contact with their emotions and feelings, and then to work on those
emotions and feelings.
6.5.6 Listening
Moses specifically outlined what he classified as the listening
process. The therapist must be willing to listen carefully and to note
first impressions of the patient, and to be aware of the distractions of
the patient's eye contact, gestures and general behaviour. After noting
first impressions the therapist will evaluate the structure of the voice,
and later compare it with first impressions so as to maximize the aware-
ness of any discrepancy. In discrepancies there may lie clues to the
neurotic parts of the patient. The therapist may also repeat the observ-
ations until s/he detects the nature of the discrepancy.
-367-
Perls adopted this approach. The most notable indication of
Perls' familiarity with and support for this procedure was his state-
ment that a therapist can work without eyes but never without ears.
The voice is the primary medium by which a person communicates and
despite the knowledge that communication takes place on many levels
(e.g., gestures or body language), voice is regarded most highly be-
cause it generally represents the person without distortion or cens-
oring. One of Perls' poems illustrated this point:
No need to listen to the content.
The medium is the message.
Your words lie and persuade
But the sound is true
(Perls, 1969b, p.221)
6.5.7 Conclusion
It therefore appears that Perls was influenced by Moses' theory
of vocal analysis, and integrated its major features into the fabric
of Gestalt therapy.
!k
Chapter 7
Laura Perls
-368-
7.1 Introduction
Relatively little had been written of Laura Perls' contribution
to the development of Gestalt therapy prior to the publication of Ed
Rosenfeld's interview with her in the first edition of The Gestalt
Journal (Rosenfeld, 1978a). She had published very little.
In attempting (in an earlier work) to evaluate Laura Perls' con-
tribution, I wrote:
It is difficult to adequately assess the contributions
made by Laura Perls to the formulations of Gestalt ther-
apy. In the early formative years, it was a substantial
contribution, although rarely acknowledged... Perls eff-
ectively relegates Laura to a minor position in the devel-
opment of Gestalt therapy (Perls, 1969b), although from some
of her writings (e.g., Perls, L., 1970), it is clear she had
a precise and clear understanding of psychoanalysis, phen-
onemology, existentialism and Gestalt psychologyan inte-
gration of which accounts for a major portion of the theory
of Gestalt therapy. Although Laura continued to reside in
v
.*<'
New York, and had close association with all of the East
Coast Gestalt Institutes, she was to an extent outside the
more highly publicized West Coast developments. Her contrib-
ution to Gestalt therapy, however, has been one of major sig-
nificance.
(Barlow, 1978b, p.135)
When interviewed in 1980, Laura Perls stated that she had "no
objection at all" to this assessment. Although there has been a
proliferation of material about her since 19 78, it remains difficult
and perhaps impossible for anyone except Laura Perls herselfto
separate out her contribution to the erarly development of Gestalt
therapy.
7.2 Biography
7.2.1 Germany
Laura Perls was born Lore Posner in Pforzfeim near Frankfurt in
-369-
1905. Her parents were prosperous, upper middle class Jewish merchants.
From an early age she stood out from her peers; she gathered consider-
able acclaim which she felt burdened her with expectations. She was
schooled in a gymnasium, where she was the youngest student in class (by
more than a year), the only girl, and the only Jew. Under these circum-
stances she developed the habit of keeping to herself, which remained
with her in later life (Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980).
She began learning to play the piano at the age of five, taught by
her mother. Soon she had absorbed all that her mother could teach her,
and began taking lessons outside. By the age of eighteen she was ready
to play professionally. She rejected a career as a concert pianist, how-
ever, to pursue a university education.
Laura Posner met Fritz Perls when she was a twenty one year old
student at Frankfurt University, an inexperienced girl from a small town.
Perls was twelve years older, came from Berlin, and was experienced in
"life, war and sex" (Perls, L., personal communication, 3/1980). Laura
was studying with one of the pioneers of Gestalt psychology, Adhemar
Gelb. Her doctoral dissertation, supervised by Gelb, was on visual >
perception. After a break in her studies, she completed her orals in
1932.
Laura met Fritz Perls during one of Kurt Goldstein's seminars.
Although he worked with Goldstein and she was trained as a Gestalt psych-
ologist, Gestalt psychology was of little more than academic interest to
Perls (Shepard, 1976). Gestalt psychologists were interested in an ex-
perimental approach to psychology, and had not endeavoured to research a
psychotherapeutic application of their findings.
-370-
Over strong objections from her father who felt that Perls might
not be able to look after her adequately, Laura married Fritz Perls
in Berlin in 1930. Even at this time she described her relationship
with him as: "always a very on-and-off affair" (Gaines, 1980, p.7).
Some of Perls' views on Laura and marriage are expounded in In and Out
the Garbage Pail (1969b), in which he made some three hundred referen-
ces to her (Gaines, 1979).
Laura Perls undertook her analytic training while researching her
doctoral dissertation. In the course of this "double-barrelled" train-
ing she worked with many eminent scholars, including Adhemar Gelb, Kurt
Goldstein, Max Wertheimer, Karl Landau, Frieda Fromm-Reichmann, Paul
Tillich and Martin Buber. She was awarded her Doctorate in Science in
1932.
7.2.2 Post GermanySouth Africa
Fritz and Laura Perls left Germany for Amsterdam in April, 1933,
more for political reasons (they were members of the anti-fascist league
and Perls was teaching a course at the Workers' University) than be-
cause of their Jewishness, although anti-semitism was already prevalent
(Gaines, 1979). The move left them penniless. They had been forced
to sell their furniture and library for virtually nothing, and Laura's
allowance from her family decreased as her parents' business floundered
in prewar Germany.
In desperation, Perls went to London to ask his friend, the analyst
Ernest Jones, if he could recommend a position. Jones sponsored their
migration to Johannesburg, South Africa.
-371-
In Johannesburg Laura and Fritz Perls prospered immediately and
enjoyed political and therapeutic independence. As trained analysts
with full time practices, they created the South African Institute of
Psychoanalysis. Fritz spent some four and a half years in the army
and later went to the U.S.A. Meanwhile, Laura remained in private
practice in Johannesburg until 1947. Of their departure from Europe
and time in South Africa she said:
I think it was for us really a good thing, we were
apart from everybody and everything else in South
Africa. There was nobody who knew more or could
teach us anything and so we could really do what we
wanted and develop in any way we felt .... I was
completely cut off and there was no communication.
(personal communication 3/1980)
7.2.3 The U.S.A.
In 1946, Perls decided to migrate to the U.S.A., with Laura and
family following him a year later. They settled in New York, where
Perls was able to begin an association with Paul Goodman, an author
whose work they had admired while living in South Africa. "Gestalt
therapy" did not exist at this time; Fritz and Laura Perls were known
as "non-orthodox Freudian analysts", "left-wing psychoanalysts" and
even "deviant analysts" (Rosenblatt, 1980, p.6).
Perhaps their life-style and political views were in a sense "left-
wing", anarchistic and certainly free. While neither Laura nor Fritz
Perls was ever formally aligned with socialists or communists, some of
their firmest friends were, including Paul Goodman.
In 1950, at a time when Fritz Perls had left for Los Angeles with
-372-
Isadore From, Laura Perls formed a professional training group for
therapists. Among the members of this group were Paul Goodman, Ralph
Hefferline, Paul Weisz, and Jim Simkin. On re-entering the New York
Gestalt therapy circle, Perls outlined a book (Gestalt Therapy) which
he invited both Hefferline and Goodman to co-author. Hefferline had
taught Fritz's "Concentration Therapy" to his students at Columbia Un-
iversity with some success, and Goodman was an experienced writer.
According to Laura Perls (Shepard, 1976), Hefferline wrote nearly all
of the first section, and Goodman wrote nearly all of the second part,
whilst Perls commuted several times a month from the West Coast to con-
sult on the manuscript.
Perls contributed ideas and the title for the new approach"Gestalt
therapy"this last over strong objections from Laura and his co-authors.
To Laura Perls, the new therapy had little relation to the academic Gest-
alt psychology that she had studied. Goodman thought the title too es-
oteric, while Hefferline wanted to adopt the name Integrative Therapy.
Despite these objections, the book was published in late 1951. In the
beginning of 1952, Fritz and Laura Perls established the Gestalt Instit-
ute of New York. Laura Perls has maintained her association with the
New York Institute until the present day, while at the same time training
therapists all over the U.S.A. and in Europe. According to Rosenblatt:
"It is safe to say that she has had a part in the training of more Gestalt
therapists than anyone else" (1980, p.6). By the end of their first dec-
ade in New York, Perls decided to leave Laura and continue his work on a
circuit between Miami and the West Coast,
Laura Perls felt that her husband could never take any criticism,
-373-
from her or from anyone else. He could never stay very long with people
who were his peers. For instance, Perls became arrogant and distanced
himself from Paul Goodman after the publication of Gestalt Therapy and
also later from Paul Weisz, both of whom were described by Laura Perls as
being "very outstanding", "fantastic lecturers" and "just overflowing
creatively "
She is reported as saying:
I think he (Fritz) left New York because he wasn't the
only one ... was not the only big fishnot the lead-
ing psychotherapist, nor even the leading Gestaltist.
What he showed afterwards, was that he would rather be
a big fish in a comparatively small pond in Florida or
on the West Coast. But when the operation became
bigger and there were more people involved either in
New York or at Esalen, he couldn't stand it anymore.
(Shepard, 1976, p.68)
Shepard (1976) in a highly subjective analysis of the relation-
ship between Laura and Fritz Perls, suggested that Laura exhibited a
mixture of feelings of superiority over Fritz and the hurt reaction
of an abandoned wife. He concluded that both Laura and Fritz appear
to have been of very similar personalities, and there was intense
competition between them. In his autobiography (Perls, 1969b), Fritz
Perls showed his feelings of rivalry when he stated that in nearly
every "contest" Laura won, a situation he had difficulty accepting:
For many years my wife and I played the "Aren't you
impressed by me? Can you beat that?" games until I
realized that I always got clobbered and that I could
not possibly win.
(Perls, 1969b, p.3)
There is no evidence that Laura Perls felt this way; indeed, she
stated:
-374-
Oh sure! I gave everything to him when I was so much
in love with him, I didn't care. He needed and I knew
he needed the acknowledgement and the applause, recog-
nition, and I didn't need it.
(personal communication, 3/1980)
It is perhaps possible that Perls used his projections of Laura's
superiority in an attempt to spur himself to achieve. Laura Perls
reported that when they were in South Africa at a very early state,
Fritz said:
"You know, I am disappointed in you. I thought you
would make me work, and you are just as lazy as I am.
(personal communication, 3/1980)
What he did not realize or appreciate was that Laura Perls provided him
with clear emotional and physical space that would enable him to explore
and develop his creativity and writings.
The split between Laura and Fritz Perls had repercussions on the
style of training, and in turn working, of Gestalt therapists on the East
Coast and in Cleveland as opposed to the West Coast. The East Coast
Gestalt therapists (influenced primarily by Laura), active since the late
forties and early fifties, tended toward a more inter-active Gestalt group
therapy, longer term therapy, a greater respect for intellection and a
greater variety of personal styles of conducting therapy (Downing and Mar-
morstein, 1973). "West Coast" Gestalt (influenced by Fritz) tended to
pay more attention to issues of individual responsibility, centering and
self-awareness (Simkin, 1976).
I spoke to Laura Perls first in New York, and later at the Gestalt
Institute in Los Angeles. My impression of her is similar to that re-
-375-
fleeted in the contribution's to The Gestalt Journal's "Festchrift
for Laura's 75th birthday"she is a sophisticated, highly intell-
igent, gentle person, with great inner strength and sensitivity to
others.
7.3 Acknowledgement of sources
Fritz Perls was loath to acknowledge sources or other influences
on the formulation of the theory of Gestalt therapy. In contrast,
Laura Perls is ready and willing to clarify developmental influences
going back to her student days. Rosenblatt (1980) stated that in the
early 1970's Laura listed the names and major contributions of about
ten individuals who played a leading role in influencing Perls' and her
own thinking.
In her interview with me, she listed as major contributors:
Buber, Tillich and Smuts (Existentialism)
Husserl, Scheier (Phenomenology)
Freud and Psychoanalysis
Reich
Ferenczi
Gestalt Psychology (and Lewin)
Jung
Rank
Friedlander
Fromm-Reichmann
Korzybski
-376-
7.4 Early Theoretical Formulations
Ego, Hunger and Aggression was first published in 1942,
under the sole authorship of Fritz Perls, while they were living in
Johannesburg. Laura Perls wrote that this book started the grad-
ual shift from a psychoanalytic to a gestalt orientation (Perls, L.,
1978). She described her own contributions to the book:
I contributed to it two chapters that are predominantly
gestaltist: "The Dummy Complex" which is the fixed gestalt
that prevents change, and "The Meaning of Insomnia," which
is the incomplete gestalt, the unfinished situation which
does not let us sleep. In Ego, Hunger and Aggression we
changed from the historical-archeological Freudian view-
point to the existential-experiential, from piecemeal ass-
ociation psychology to a holistic approach, from the pure-
ly verbal to the organismic, from interpretation to direct
awareness in the Here and Now, from transference to actual
contact, from the concept of the Ego as a substance having
boundaries to a concept of it as the very boundary phenom-
enon itself, being the actual contact function of ident-
ification and alienation.
(Perls, L., 1978, p34)
She allowed Fritz Perls to take credit for the book, recognizing that
he needed and wanted the acclaim more than she did. In the first
edition, Fritz acknowledged Laura in the foreword, which read:
In writing this book I have had much help, stimulation
and encouragement from books, friends and teachers; but
above all from my wife, Dr. Lore Perls. The discuss-
ions I have had with her of the problems brought for-
ward in this book have clarified many issues; and she has
made valuable contributions to this work; as for instance,
the description of the dummy attitude.
(quoted by Gaines, 1979, p.28)
Unfortunately, Laura's generosity in allowing Perls sole author-
ship was to have far-reaching effects. As she said later:
-377-
I was hurt mostly by the repercussions that Fritz was,
and still is, to a great extent, regarded as the sole
founder of Gestalt therapy Gestalt therapy has
been developing through the years, you know, so it's
not possible to sort out who thought or .said what.
(quoted by Gaines, 1979, p.29)
Referring to the first part of Gestalt Therapy she said that it
is a little antiquated in its approach. The second part, "the
theory, is still very valid, very interesting" (personal communicat-
ion, 3/1980). This section was written partly by Paul Goodman who
was a writer, a philosopher and a sociologist. Goodman was first
hired as an editor for the whole book, but ended up contributing so
much to the second part that he became a co-author. Laura Perls was
extremely impressed with Goodman's contribution, and stated: "without
Paul Goodman I don't think there would be a coherent theory" (personal
communication, 3/1980).
The concepts presented in Ego, Hunger and Aggression were in their
formative stages, still ill-defined, tentative and confused; they became
organized over the next ten years into the coherent theory presented in
part II of Gestalt Therapy : Excitement and Growth in the Human Personality.
This book Laura Perls regarded and still regards as the "basic" book of
the theory of Gestalt therapy and one that is indispensable for a thor-
ough grounding in, and understanding of Gestalt therapy.
Discussing the change in orientation between Ego, Hunger and Aggress-
ion and Gestalt Therapy, Laura Perls said that the foundations were laid
in the first book, even though: "we weren't phenomenologically clear at
that time" (personal communication, 3/1980). She continued: "We were
still using a lot of psychoanalytic vocabulary which we gradually found
-378-
was becoming a handicap".
7.5 Style of working
It is difficult to assess precise differences in Gestalt therapy
as practised by Fritz and Laura Perls, at least in part because Laura
Perls fiercely resists such comparisons:
When someone asked her (Laura) to compare her style of
working with Fritz', Laura's manner changed instantly.
The graciously smiling little lady became taut and stern.
When she said, "I don't like your question and I won't
answer it," Laura was formidable.
(Rhyne, 1980, p.83)
From Fritz Perls' writings and the films and transcripts of his
therapeutic work, it can be seen that he adopted a very high profile,
and was always at the center of any interaction. He was direct, frus-
trative, authoritarian and sometimes aggressive. Before he advocated
the establishment of therapeutic communities he worked in a group sett-
ing, but used the "hotseat" technique. He worked with one person at
a time, while the other group members looked on, forming a sort of
"Greek chorus" when required, otherwise remaining in the background.
While his focus was on the therapeutic process, the general focus was
often on him and his style of interaction.
Laura Perls needs less attention of the group, and allows herself
to spend more time in the background. She places more emphasis on
group process (Andrews, 1980; Rosenblatt, 1980). Although she can ex-
hibit strong leadership and direction if necessary, she establishes
flexibility to let the group run its own course. Andrews (1980) gave
an excellent review of the way Laura interacts on an individual basis
-379-
with every member of a group. Laura Perls' style is far less abrasive
than was Fritz Perls', but she works more effectively with body aware-
ness and breathing.
In one of her rare comments comparing her style with that of Fritz,
Laura Perls said that she was sure that people who had worked with them
both (like Isadore From or Ed Rosenblatt) appreciated her more as a
therapist, because: "Fritz had no patience. Fritz started something
but could never sustain it" (personal communication, 3/1980).
Interestingly, both Fritz and Laura Perls would interpolate in-
struction in theory into their therapy sessions. One therapist wrote
of working with Laura:
Laura lectures as she works. The feeling of a scholar
imparting wisdom to the student was thick, I enjoyed the
didactic quality of her work and personally found all of
the work more meaningful because of this. "Work with
the obvious. What is right in front of you". And she
did just that.
(Andrews, 1980, p.70)
Laura Perls felt strongly that it is not sufficient for the therapist to
do something, it is just as important to additionally know what they are
doing and to be able to discuss that. She suggested that Gestalt ther-
apy : "will not be taken seriously until we can do that" (personal comm-
unication, 3/1980).
For Perls, "mini-lectures" were a way of communicating the funda-
mentals of Gestalt therapy to as wide an audience as possible, through
his workshops (see for example, Perls, 1966a, 1969a, 1973).
-380-
7-6 Gestalt Therapists' Views of Laura Perls' Contributions
As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, there has been a
growing awareness in the last few years of Laura Perls' role in the
development of Gestalt therapy. In 1980 an entire issue of The Gest-
alt Journal was devoted to Laura as a gift on her seventy-fifth birth-
day. One of the contributors wrote:
I maintain that it was not only her theoretical sophis-
tication which was significant, but also her openness
to new ideas, her nurturing of talented individuals, and
her support for Fritz, which was so critical for the de-
velopment of Gestalt therapy.
(Rosenblatt, 1980, p.12)
Another wrote that Laura Perls personified what she characterized as the
three main concerns of Gestalt therapy: "to be experiential, experiment-
al and existential" (Rosenfeld, 1980, p.52).
The views of the Gestalt therapists interviewed by this author in
1980 covered a broad spectrum (see appendix II). Most of the first gen-
eration therapists were generally of the opinion that Laura Perls' con-
tribution has been totally underestimated. The second generation ther-
apists were in general, non-committal because many did not know of the
background and development of Gestalt therapy and had little knowledge
of, or opinion about her role. None of the third generation therapists
interviewed, had any comment to make at allthe most usual response be-
ing that they simply did not know enough to have formed an opinion of her
contribution.
-381-
7.7 Conclusion
It can be seen from the evidence presented in this chapter that
Laura Perls herself and other Gestalt therapists who have worked with
her regard her contribution to Gestalt therapy as fundamentally impor-
tant. Laura Perls' training was academically far solider than Fritz',
and her broad knowledge of psychotherapy, Gestalt psychology and philo-
sophy influenced Fritz Perls' formulations. Perls never full acknow-
ledged his reliance on Laura; only the original foreword to Ego,
Hunger and Aggression (1947), deleted from the American edition, came
close to giving her full credit for her help and support.
Chapter 8
Conclusion
-382-
Conclusion
It has not been the intention of this dissertation to reduce Gestalt
therapy to its component parts. Even a novice in Gestalt therapy would
immediately respond that the whole is more than the sum of its parts, and
that although the elements of Gestalt therapy were derived from other sou-
rces, they have been combined to produce a novel and effective therapy.
Nonetheless, the author believes that it is vital to recognize, (as Perls
himself freely admitted) that Gestalt therapy is not an invention, but
a synthesis of psychological and philosophical theories, one that is con-
stantly changing to take account of newer discoveries and ideas.
Tracing'the "roots" of Gestalt therapy enables the psycho-historian
and theoretician to appreciate how the theory developed, and where it fits
into the matrix of twentieth century thought. It also provides a fascin-
ating insight into theoretical creativity. Perls voraciously "consumed"
influential theories of his day, arranging and interpreting them into his
own approach. Perls' basic training in psychotherapy was the psychoanalytic
approach, and this provided him with a theoretical grounding to modify or
oppose as he encountered other approaches and ideas.
In this dissertation, the work of 27 individuals and the Gestalt psych-
ologists has been examined and evaluated; Taoism and Zen Buddhism were also
considered. In each case, some commonalities with Gestalt therapy were
revealedoften in areas other than those acknowledged by Fritz Perls.
In some cases, the commonality was strong enough to be considered a "source"
for the Gestalt therapy concept; in other cases, the commonality was weaker,
but indicated at least an influence which may have assisted Perls to make
his formulations. Table 2 presents a summary of the major sources of various
Gestalt therapy concepts.
-383-
Table 2
A Summai-y of Some Major Sources From Which F.S. Perls Derived Gestalt
Therapy Concepts
Anti-intellectualism
Jung
Horney
Fromm-Reichmann
Kierkegaard
Taoism
Zen Buddhism
Anxiety (nature of)
Freud
Tillich
Armor
Reich
As If
Vaihinger
Attention
Gestalt Psychology
Authenticity
Heidegger
Awareness
Sullivan
Ferenczi
Fromm-Reichmann
Gestalt Psychology
Tillich
Phenomenology
Friedlander
Korzybski
Being-in-the-world
'.' . 'Heidegger
Phenomenology
Blocks/Defences
Freud
Reich
Boundaries/boundary zones
Federn
Freud
Gestalt Psychology
Moreno
Korzybski
Stern
Centering
Jung
Horney
Taoism
Stern
Gestalt Psychology
Character
Reich
Nietzsche
Taoism
Choice
Freud
Heidegger
Kierkegaard
Nietzsche
-384-
Table 2 (cont)
Closure
Gestalt Psychology
Conscious/unconscious
Freud
Taoism
Continuum of awareness
Freud
Gestalt Psychology
Creative frustration
Reich
Ferenczi
Creative indifference
Friedlander
Dreamwork
Freud
Jung
Adler
Sullivan
Binswanger
Stern
Angyal
Energy
Ferenczi
Bergson
Excitement
Bergson
Freud
Moreno
Experience
Jung
Adler
Schilder
Binswanger
Phenomenology
Bergson
Korzybski
Stern
Experiment
Freud
Ferenczi
Fantasy
Vaihinger
Nietzsche
Figure/ground
Gestalt psychology
Phenomenology
Taoism
Groupwork
Moreno
Adler
Freud
Hierarchy of
Gestalt
Holism
needs
Psychology
Smuts
Jung
Horney
Adler
Heidegger
Taoism
Stern
Angyal
-385-
Table 2 (cont)
Homeostasis
Gestalt Psychology
Taoism
Angyal
Hotseat
Moreno
I and Thou
Buber
Impasse
Zen Buddhism
Reich
Nietzsche
Angyal
Individuality
Kierkegaard
Interpretation
Freud
Fromm-Reichmann
Phenomenology
Stern
Angyal
Introjection
Freud
Nietzsche
Intuition
Bergson
Kairos
Tillich
Language
Korzybski
Heidegger
Kierkegaard
Phenomenology
Angyal
Maturation
Jung
Memory
Nietzsche
Neurosis
Freud
Jung
Horney
Rank
Adler
Ferenczi
F r omm-Re i chmann
Schilder
Angyal
Non-verbal communication
Moses
Reich
Sullivan
Taoism
No-thingness
Taoism
Zen Buddhism
Oral development
L. Perls
Sullivan
Organism-as-a-whole
Korzybski
Organism/environment interaction
Gestalt Psychology
-386-
Table 2 (cont)
Sullivan
Heidegger
Tillich
Taoism
Angyal
Polarities
Friedlander
Zen Buddhism
Taoism
Jung
Rank
Kierkegaard
Tillich
Korzybski
Stern
Potentialities
Horney
Pragnanz/organization
Gestalt Psychology
Present centeredness
Reich
Horney
Rank
Sullivan
Gestalt Psychology
Phenomenology
Bergson
Taoism
Zen Buddhism
Korzybski
Moreno
Projection
Freud
Psychodrama
Moreno
Psychosomatics
Reich
Schilder
Bergson
Questions (rejection of)
Ferenczi
Adler
Resistance
Freud
Reich
Angyal
Retroflection
Freud
Buber
Nietzsche
Safe emergency
Rank
Satori
Zen Buddhism
Scotoma
Adler
Self-actualization
Gestalt Psychology
Jung
Horney
Nietzsche
Self-support and responsibility
Freud
-387-
Table 2 (cont)
Horney
Rank
Adler
Ferenczi
Fromm-Reichmann
Heidegger
Nietzsche
Taoism
Zen Buddhism
Korzybski
Spontaneity
Moreno
Horney
Rank
Ferenczi
Tillich
Taoism
Topdog/underdog
Freud
Transference
Freud
Rank
Unfinished business
Nietzsche
Voice
Moses
Voidssterile and fertile
Taoism
Zen Buddhism
"Why" questions '
::
Adler
Binswanger
Phenomenology
Yes-but
Adler
As Table 2 shows, most concepts can be traced to more than one source.
In these cases, it is very difficult to assess how much weight to attach
to different sources. As mentioned in Chapter 1, Perls showed himself
to be familiar with the work of all the theorists mentioned in this diss-
ertation; in many cases (e.g., present centeredness, responsibility) con-
cepts seem so over-determined that Perls himself may not have relied on
any one source, but rather on the prevalent theoretical "Gestalt" he per-
ceived from his education and reading.
Gestalt therapy is recognized as one of the most popular and effective
forms of psychotherapy in the 1980's. It has continued to develop since
-388-
Perls' death in 1970 (see appendix II). Its responsiveness to change and
its applicability to the lifestyle of the 60's, 70's and now 80's is per-
haps related to its eclectic roots; certainly, it provides an ideal example
of theoretical opportunism, adopting the "best" of psychological, philo-
sophical and social theories to provide a useful, effective theory and
method.
References
-389-
REFERENCES
Adler, A. Individual psychological treatment of neuroses (1913).
In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.), The indiv-
idual psychology of Alfred Adler. London: George Allen
& Unwin Ltd., 1956.
Adler, A. Progress in individual psychology (1923). In H.L. Ans-
bacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.), The individual psychol-
ogy of Alfred Adler. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.,
1956.
Adler, A. Feelings and emotions from the standpoint of individual
psychology (1927). In M.L. Reymert (Ed.), Feelings and
emotions: The Wittenberg symposium (1927). New York:
Arno Press, 1973.
Adler, A. Understanding human nature (1928a). London: George Allen
& Unwin Ltd., 1928.
Adler, A. Visit with Dr. Alfred Adler. Interview with Artur Ernst
(1928b). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.),
Superiority and social interest: A collection of later
writings (2nd ed.). Illinois: Northwestern University
Press, 1970.
Adler, A. Sleeplessness (1929a). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher
(Eds.), Superiority and social interest: A collection of
later writings (2nd ed.). Illinois: Northwestern University
Press, 1970.
Adler, A. The science of living (1929b). London: Allen & Unwin, 1930.
Adler, A. The education of children. London: Allen & Unwin, 1930.
-390-
Adler, A. The differences between individual psychology and psycho-
analysis (1931a). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.),
Superiority and social interest: A collection of later writ-
ings . New York: Viking, 1964.
Adler, A. The case of Mrs. A (1931b)..In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbach-
er (Eds.), Superiority and social interest: A collection of
Press, 1970.
Adler, A. Compulsion neurosis (1931c). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbach-
er (Eds.), Superiority and social interest: A collection of
Press, 1970.
Adler, A. Technique of treatment (1932a). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ans-
bacher (Eds.), Superiority and social interest: A collection
of later writings (2nd ed.). Illinois: Northwestern Univers-
ity Press, 1970.
Adler, A. The structure of neurosis (1932b). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R.
Ansbacher (Eds.), Superiority and social interest: A collect-
ion of later writings (2nd ed.). Illinois: Northwestern Univ-
ersity Press, 1970.
Adler, A. On the origin of the striving for superiority and of social
interest (1933a). In H.L. 'Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.),
Superiority and social interest: A collection of later writ-
ings. New York: Viking, 1964.
Adler, A. A Challenge to mankind (1933b). New York: Capricorn Books,
1964.
-391-
Adler, A. Der sinn des lebens (1933c). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ans-
bacher (Eds.), The individual psychology of Alfred Adler.
London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1956.
Adler, A. Physical manifestations of psychic disturbances (1934a). In
H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.), Superiority and soc-
ial interest: A collection of later writings. New York:
Viking, 1964.
Adler, A. Lecture to the medical society of individual psychology (1934b)
In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.), The individual psy-
chology of Alfred Adler. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.,
1956.
Adler, A. The fundamental views of Individual Psychology (1935a). In
H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.), The individual psychol-
ogy of Alfred Adler. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1956.
Adler, A. Typology of meeting life problems (1935b). In H.L. Ansbacher &
R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.), Superiority and Social Interest: A coll-
ection of later writings (2nd ed.). Illinois: Northwestern Univ-
ersity Press, 1970.
Adler, A. On the interpretation of dreams (1936b). In H.L. Ansbacher &
R.R. Ansbacher (Eds.), The individual psychology of Alfred
Adler. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1956.
Adler, A. The progress of mankind (1937). In H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Ans- .
bacher (Eds.), Superiority and social interest: A collection
of later writings. New York: Viking, 1964.
Adler, A. The individual psychology of Alfred Adler: A systematic pres-
entation in selections from his writings. (H.L. Ansbacher &
R.R. Ansbacher, Eds.). New York: Harper, 1956.
-392-
Allport, F.H,
Andrews, J.
Angyal, A.
Angyal, A.
Ansbacher, H.L.
Ansbacher, H.L.
Arnheim, R.
Asch, S
Aslin, A.
Back, K.W.
Barlow, A.R.
Barlow, A.R.
Barlow, A.R.
Theories of perception and the concept of structure.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1955.
Reflections of a weekend with Laura Perls. The Gest-
alt Journal, 1980, III (i), 69-75.
Foundations for a science of personality. New York:
The Commonwealth Fund, 1941.
Neurosis and treatment: A holistic theory (E. Hauf-
mann & R.M. Jones, Eds.). New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., 1965.
On the origins of holism. Journal of Individual Psychol-
ogy, 1961, 17, 142-148.
Rogers' "formative tendency," Smuts, and Adler: A human-
istic consensus. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Summer,
1978, 18 (3), 87-92.
Gestalt misapplied. Contemporary Psychology, 1974, 19,
570.
Gestalt theory (1968). In D.L. Sills (Ed.), International
Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Vol.16). U.S.A.:
Macmillan, 1968.
Personal communication, January 24, 1980.
Beyond words. Baltimore, Maryland: Pelican Books, 1973.
Recent developments in the practice of gestalt dreamwork.
Small Groups Newsletter (Aust.) 1978a, JL (2), 31-32.
The evolution of Gestalt therapy from Gestalt psychology.
Unpublished Thesis. University of Wollongong, 1978b.
GestaltAntecedent influence or historical accident. The
Gestalt Journal, 1981, IV (2), 35-54.
-393-
Baumgardner, P,
Baumgardner, P,
Beisser, A.R.
Bergson, H,
Bergson, H.
Bettelheim, B.
Binswanger, L.
Binswanger, L.
Binswanger, L.
Binswanger, L,
Blakney, R.B.
Bohm, D.
Legacy from Fritz (Book 1) Palo Alto: Science &
Behavior Books, 1975.
The paradoxical theory of change (1970). In J. Fagan
& I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt therapy now. Palo
Alto, California: Science & Behavior Books, 1970;
New York: Harper Colophon, 1971.
Matter and memory (1896). London: George Allen & Co.,
Ltd., 1913.
Creative evolution (1907). (A. Mitchell, trans.).
London: Macmillan & Co., 1960.
Reflections: Freud and the soul. In The New Yorker,
New York, March 1, 1982, 52-93.
Dream and existence (1930). (J. Meedleman, trans.).
Being-in-the-wo)rld: Selected papers of Ludwig Binswang-
er. U.S.A.: Basic Books, Inc., 1963.
Existential analysis and psychotherapy. In F. Fromm-
Reichmann & J. Moreno (Ed's.), Progress in psychotherapy.
New York: Grune & Stratton, 1956.
Sigmund Freud: Reminiscences of a friendship. New York:
Grune & Stratton, 1957.
The existential analysis school of thought. In R. May,
E. Angel, & H.F. Ellenberger (Eds.), Existence. New York:
Basic Books, 1958.
The way of life. New York: The New American Library, 1955.
Wholeness and the implicate order. London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, 1980.
-394-
Brice, C.W. Ludwig Binswanger. In R.S. Valle & M. King (Eds.),
Existential-phenomenological alternatives for psych-
ology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.
Buber, M. I and thou (1923). New York: Charles Scribners, Sons,
1958.
Buber, M. Dialogue (1929). In M. Buber (Ed.), Between man and man
(1947). London: Fontana Library, 1961.
Buber, M. The education of character (1939). In M. Buber (Ed.),
Between man and man (1947). London: Fontana Library, 1961.
Buber, M. I and thou (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1958.
Buber, M. (Ed.), Between man and man. London: Fontana Library, 1961.
Bynner, W. The way of life according to Lao Tzu (1944). New York:
Capricorn Books, 1962.
Calkins, M.W. Critical comments on "gestalt-theorie". Psychological Re-
view
r
1926, 33, 135-138.
Chase, S. The tyranny of words. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Company,
Inc., 1938.
Chevalier, J. Henri Bergson (1928). New York: Books for Libraries Press,
1970.
Clendenen, J. Personal communication, January 21, 1980.
Cohen, D. Personal communication, February 13, 1980.
Cohn, R.C. Therapy in groups: Psychoanalytic, experiential, and gest-
alt (1970). In J. Fagan and I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt
therapy now. New York: Harper Colophon, 1971.
Cole, J.P. The existential reality of god. A Kierkegaardian study
(1965). In L.A. Lawson (Ed.), Kierkegaard's presence in
contemporary American life. Metuchen, New Jersey: The
Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1970.
-395-
Danto, A. Nietzsche as philosopher. New York: Macmillan,
1965.
Denes-Radomisli, M. Existential-Gestalt therapy. In P. Olsen (Ed.),
Emotional flooding. New York: Human Sciences Press,
1976.
Diamond, M.L. Martin Buber: Jewish existentialist. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1960.
Doelger, D.K. A systematic comparison of Gestalt therapy as writt-
en by Frederick S. Perls and the philosophy of the
"Tao Te Ching" by Lao Tzu.: Doctoral Dissertation.
Saint Louis University, 1978. Ann Arbor, Mi.: Univ-
ersity Microfilms International No. 78-14550.
Downing, J., & Marmorstein, R. (Eds.). Dreams and nightmares: A book of
Gestalt therapy sessions. New York: Perennial Library,
1973.
Dublin, J.E. Gestalt therapy, existential-Gestalt therapy and/
versus "Perls-ism" (1976). In E.W.L. Smith (Ed.), The
growing edge of Gestalt therapy. New York: Brunner/
Mazel, 1976.
Edelson, M. Language and interpretation in psychoanalysis. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1976.
Edie, J.M. Transcendental phenomenology and existentialism (1964).
In J.J. Kockelmans (Ed.), Phenomenology: The philos-
ophy of Edmund Husserl and its interpretation. New
York: Anchor Books, 1967.
Ellis, W.D. Gestalt psychology and meaning. Berkeley: The Sather
Gate Book Shop, 1930.
-396-
Ellis, W.D. (Ed.). A source book of Gestalt psychology. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1938.
Enright, J.B. An introduction to Gestalt techniques (1970).
In J. Fagan, & I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt
Enright, J.B. An introduction to Gestalt therapy (1975a). In
F.D. Stephenson (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer.
Springfield, Illinois: Thomas, 1975.
Enright, J.B. Gestalt therapy in interactive groups (1975b). In
F.D. Stephenson (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer.
Springfield, Illinois: Thomas, 1975.
Erikson, E. The nature of clinical evidence. In E. Erikson (Ed.),
Insight and responsibility. New York: W.W. Norton &
Co., 1964.
Erskine, R. Personal communication, February 13, 1980.
Fadiman, J., & Frager, R. Personality and personal growth. New York:
Harper & Row, 1976.
Fagan, J. The tasks of the therapist (1970). In J. Fagan &
I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt therapy now. New York:
Harper Colophon, 1971.
Fagan, J. The Gestalt approach as "right lobe" therapy (1976).
In E.W.L. Smith (Ed.), The growing edge of Gestalt
therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1976.
Fagan, J. Personal communication, February 19, 1980.
Fagan, J., & Shepherd, I.L. (Eds.). Gestalt therapy now. New York: Harper
Colophon, 1971.
-397-
Fantz, R. Fragments of Gestalt theory (1975a). In F.D. Stephenson
(Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer. Springfield, Illinois:
Thomas, 1975.
Fantz, R. Polarities: Differentiation and integration (1975b). In
F.D. Stephenson (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer. Spring-
field, Illinois: Thomas, 1975.
Fantz, R. Personal communication, January 31, 1980.
Feder, B. & Ronall, R. (Eds.). Beyond the hot seat: Gestalt approaches
to group. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1980.
Federn, E. Thirty-five years with Freud in honour of the hundredth
anniversary of Paul Federn, M.D. Journal of the History of
the Behavioral Sciences< 1972, 8^ (i), Special Monograph
Supplement.
Federn, P. Ego psychology and the psychoses. New York: Basic Books, 1952.
Feng, Gia-Fu, & English, J. Lao Tzu, and the Tap Te Ching. New York: Vint-
age Books, 1972.
Ferenczi, S. Actual- and psycho-neurosis in the light of Freud's investig-
ations and psycho-analysis (1908). In S. Ferenczi (Ed.),
Further contributions to the, theory and technique of psycho-
analysis (1926) . London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute
of Psycho-analysis, 1960.
Ferenczi, S. Suggestion and psycho-analysis (1912). In S. Ferenczi (Ed.),
Further contributions to the theory and technique of psycho-
analysis (1926) . London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute
Ferenczi, S, Talkativeness (1915). In S. Ferenczi (Ed.), Further contrib-
utions to the theory and technique of psycho-analysis (1926).
-398-
Ferenczi, S,
Ferenczi, S
Ferenczi, S
Ferenczi, S
Focht, M.
Fordham, F.
Freud, A.
Freud, S.
Freud, S.
London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psycho-
analysis, 1960.
On the technique of psycho-analysis (1919). In S. Fer-
enczi (Ed.), Further contributions to the theory and tech-
nique of psycho-analysis (1926). London: The Hogarth Press
and The Institute of Psycho-analysis, 1960.
The further development of an active therapy in psycho-an-
alysis (1920). In S. Ferenczi (Ed.), Further contributions
to the theory and technique of psycho-analysis (1926).
London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psycho-anal-
ysis, 1960.
Contra-indications to the "active" psycho-analytic tech-
nique (1925). In S. Ferenczi (Ed.), Further contributions to
the theory and technique of psycho-analysis (1926) . London:
The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psycho-analysis, 1960,
Further contributions to the theory and technique of psycho-
analysis (1926)..London: The Hogarth Press and The Institute
What is Gestalt-theory? New York: George Grady Press, 1935.
An introduction to Jung's psychology. Harmondsworth, Middx.:
Penguin, 1953.
The ego and the mechanisms of defence (1936). London: The
Hogarth Press, 1937.
The interpretation of dreams (1900). New York: Avon Books,
1965.
On dreams (1901a). New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc..,,
1952.
-399-
Freud S. The psychopathology of everyday life (1901b). In J. Strachey
(Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psycho-
logical works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. VI). London: The Hogarth
Press, 1960.
Freud, S. Creative writers and day-dreaming (1908a). In J. Strachey (Ed.
and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological
works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. IX). London: The Hogarth Press,
1959.
Freud, S. "Civilized" sexual morality and modern nervous illness (1908b).
In J. Strachey (Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the
complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. IX).
London: The Hogarth Press, 1959.
Freud, S. Character and anal erotism (1908c). In J. Strachey (Ed. and
trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological
works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. IX). London: The Hogarth Press,
1959.
Freud, S. The claims of psycho-analysis to scientific interest (1913).
complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XIII).
Freud, S. Instincts and their vicissitudes (1915a). In J. Strachey (Ed.
and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological
works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XIV). London: The Hogarth Press,
1957.
Freud, S. The unconscious (1915b). In J. Strachey (Ed. and trans.), The
standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund
Freud (Vol. XIV). London: The Hogarth Press, 1957.
-400-
Freud, S. Fixation to traumasthe unconscious (1917a). In J. Strachey
(Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psych-
ological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XVI). London: The Hogarth
Press, 1963.
Freud, S. Resistance and repression (1917b). In J. Strachey (Ed. and
works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XVI). London: The Hogarth Press,
1963.
Freud, S. Lines of advance in psycho-analytic therapy (1918). In J.
Strachey (Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the com-
plete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XVII).
Freud, S. Beyond the pleasure principle (1920). In J. Strachey (Ed. and
works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XVIII). London: The Hogarth Press,
1955.
Freud, S. Two encyclopaedia articles: (A) Psycho-analysis (1922). In J.
Strachey (Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the complete
psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XVIII). London: The
Freud, S. Some additional notes on dream-interpretation as a whole (1925a)
complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XIX).
'.London: The Hogarth Press, 1961.
Freud, S. An autobiographical study (1925b). In J. Strachey (Ed. and
works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XX). London: The Hogarth Press,
1959.
-401-
Freud, S. The question of lay analysis (1926a). In J. Strachey (Ed.
and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psycho-
logical works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XX). London: The Ho-
garth Press, 1959.
Freud, S. Inhibitions, symptoms and anxiety (1926b). In J. Strachey
(Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the complete
psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XX). London: The
Freud, S. Psycho-analysis (1926c). In J. Strachey (Ed. and trans.),
The standard edition of the complete psychological works of
Sigmund Freud (Vol. XX). London: The Hogarth Press, 1959.
Freud, S. The future of an illusion (1927). In J. Strachey (Ed. and
works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XXI). London: The Hogarth Press,
1961.
Freud, S. Civilization and its discontents (1930). In J. Strachey (Ed.
and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psycholog-
ical works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XXI). London: The Hogarth
Press, 1961.
Freud, S. My contact with Josef Popper-Lynkeus (1932). In J. Strachey
(Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psych-
ological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XXII). London: The
Freud, S. New introductory lectures on psycho-analysis (1933). In J.
Strachey (Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the com-
plete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XXII).
-402-
Freud, S. An autobiographical study: Postscript (1935). In J. Strachey
(Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psy-
chological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XX). London: The Ho-
garth Press, 1959.
Freud, S. An outline of psycho-analysis (1938a). In J. Strachey (Ed.
and trans.), The standard edition of the complete psycholog-
ical works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XXIII). London: The Hogarth
Press, 1964.
Freud, S. Some elementary lessons in psycho-analysis (1938b). In J.
Strachey (Ed. and trans.), The standard edition of the, com-
plete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. XXIII).
Freud, S. The standard edition of the complete psychological works of
Sigmund Freud (Vols. 1-24). In J. Strachey (Ed. and trans.)
London: The Hogarth Press, 1953-1966.
Friedman, M. Martin Buber: The life of dialogue..New York: Harper & Row,
1955.
Friedman, M. Existential psychotherapy and the image of man (1962). Jour-
nal of Humanistic Psychology, 1964, IV (2), 104-117.
From, M. Personal communication, February 22, 1980.
Fromm-Reichmann, F. Recent advances in psychoanalytic therapy (1941).
In F. Fromm-Reichmann (Ed.), Psychoanalysis and psycho-
therapy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1959.
Fromm-Reichmann, F. Notes on personal and professional requirements of
a psychotherapist (1949). In F. Fromm-Reichmann (Ed.),
Psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1959.
-403-
Fromm-Reichmann, F. Psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1959.
Fromm-Reichmann, F. & Moreno, J.L. Progress in psychotherapy. New
York: Grune & Stratton, 1956.
Gagarin, C. Taoism and Gestalt therapy (1976). In E.W.L.
Smith, (Ed.), The growing edge of Gestalt therapy.
New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1976.
Gaines, J. Fritz Perls: Here and now. Millbrae, California:
Celestial Arts, 1979.
Gallagher, I.J. Morality in evolution. The moral philosophy of Henri
Bergson. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1970.
Gelven, M. Authenticity and guilt. In F. Elliston (Ed.), Heid-
egger 's existential analytic. The Hague: Morton Pub-
lishers, 1978.
Gendlin, E.T. Experiential phenomenology (1973). In M. Natanson
(Ed.), Phenomenology and the Social Sciences (Vol. 1).
Evanston, U.S.A.: Northwestern University Press, 1973.
Gobar, A. Philosophic foundations of genetic psychology and
Gestalt psychology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1968.
Goldstein, K. The Organism. New York: American Book Co., 1939.
Gottschaldt, K. Gestalt factors and repetition (1926). In. W.D. Ellis
(Ed.), A source book of Gestalt psychology. London:
Greenberg, E. Personal communication, February 13, 1980.
Greenson, R.R. The technique and practice of psychoanalysis (Vol. 1).
New York: International Universities Press, 1967.
-404-
Greenwald, J.A. The ground rules in Gestalt therapy (1975). In F.D.
Stephenson, (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer. Spring-
Gurwitsch, A. Phenomenology of thematics and of the pure ego:
Studies of the relation between Gestalt theory and
phenomenology (1929). In A. Gurwitsch (Ed.), Studies
in phenomenology and psychology. Evanston, U.S.A.:
Northwestern University Press, 1966.
Gurwitsch, A. The phenomenological and the psychological approach
to consciousness (1953). In A. Gurwitsch (Ed.), Studies
in phenomenology and psychology. Evanston, U.S.A.:
Gurwitsch, A. The problem of existence in constitutive phenomenology.
(1961). In A. Gurwitsch (Ed.), Studies in phenomenology
and psychology. Evanston, U.S.A.: Northwestern Univers-
ity Press, 1966.
Haber, R.A. A synopsis and synthesis of the theories and techniques
of Carl Gustav Jung and Frederick Saloman Perls. The
Gestalt Journal, 1978, 1 (2), 104-119.
Hadfield, J.S. Dreams and nightmares. U.S.A.: Penguin, 1954.
Hall, C.S., & Lindzey, G. Theories of personality. New York: John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., 1957.
Hamilton,'K. The promise of Kierkegaard. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippin-
cott Co., 1969.
Hancock, W.K. (Ed.). SmutsThe sanguine years 1870-1919. London: Cam-
bridge University Press, 1962.
-405-
Hanfmann, E.
Hancock, W.K. , & Van Der Poel, J. (Eds.). Selections from the Smut's
papers. June 1886-May 1909 (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Univ-
ersity Press, 1966.
Andras Angyal. In D.L. Sills (Ed.), International en-
cyclopedia of the social sciences (Vol. 1). U.S.A.:
The Macmillan Company and The Free Press, 1968.
Psychoanalysis and psychotherapy (1959). New York:
Jason Aronson, 1974.
Gestalt psychology. New York: The Ronald Press Company.
1935.
Harper, R.A.
Harris, E.
Hartmann, G.W.
Hayakawa, S.I
Heidegger, M.
Heider, F.
Haskell, M.R. Socioanalysis: Self direction via sociometry and psycho-
drama . U.S.A.: Anderson, Ritchie & Simon, 1975.
Hatcher, C., & Himelstein, P. (Eds.). The handbook of Gestalt therapy.
New York: Jason Aronson, Inc., 1976.
Language, meaning and maturity. New York: Harper, 1954.
Being and time (1927). Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962.
William Stern. In D.L. Sills, (Ed.), International En-
cyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Vol. 15). U.S.A.:
The Macmillan Company & The Free Press, 1968.
Documents of Gestalt psychology. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1961.
Gestalt psychology and Gestalt therapy. Journal of the
History of the Behavioural Sciences, 1978, JL4, 23-32.
Soren Kierkegaard and educational theory (1966). In L.A.
Lawson (Ed.), Kierkegaard's presence in contemporary Am-
erican life. Metichen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press,
Inc., 1970.
Henle, M.
Henle, M.
Hill, B.V.
-406-
Hitschmann, E. Freud's theory of the neuroses. London: Kegan Paul,
Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1921.
Horney, K. The neurotic personality of our time. London: Rout-
ledge & Kegan Paul, Ltd., 1937.
Horney, K. New ways in psychoanalysis. New York: W.W. Norton,
1939.
Horney, K. Self analysis. New York: W.W. Norton, 1942.
Horney, K. Our inner conflicts. New York: W.W. Norton, 1946a.
Horney, K. The role of imagination in neurosis. American Journal
of Psychoanalysis, 1946b, 6_
y
56.
Horney, K. Maturity and the individual. American Journal of Psy-
choanalysis, 1947, 7 (85), 85-87.
Horney, K. Neurosis and human growth (1950). London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, Ltd., 1951.
Horney, K. Feminine psychology. New York: W.W. Norton, 1967.
Husserl, E. Phenomenological psychology (1925). (J. Scanton, Ed. and
trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1977.
Isenberg, S. Personal communication, February 7, 1980.
Jackson, W. Personal communication, January 30, 1980.
Jaspers, K. Nietzsche: An introduction to the understanding of his
philosophical activity. Tucson: The University of Ariz-
ona Press, 1965.
Johnson, W.A. The anthropology of Soren Kierkegaard (1964). In L.A.
Lawson (Ed.), Kierkegaard's presence in contemporary
American life. Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow
Press, Inc., 1970.
-407-
Johnson, W. People in quandaries: The semantics of personal adjust-
ment . New York: Harper & Brothers, 1946.
Jung, C.G. The psychology of the unconscious (1917). In H. Read,
M. Fordham, & G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.
G. Jung (Vol. 7). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1953.
Jung, C.G. Analytical psychology and education: Three lectures (1924).
In H. Read, M. Fordham, & G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected
Works of C.G. Jung (Vol. 17). London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul, 1954.
Jung, C.G. Child development and education (1928a). In H. Read, M.
Fordham, & G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G. Jung
(Vol. 17). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1954.
Jung, C.G. The relations between the ego and the unconscious (1928b).
In H. Read, M. Fordham, & G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works
of C.G. Jung (Vol. 7). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1953.
Jung, C.G. Some aspects of modern psychotherapy (1929a). In H. Read, M.
Jung, C.G. Problems of modern psychotherapy (1929b). In H. Read, M. Ford-
ham, & G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G. Jung
Jung, C.G. The aims of psychotherapy (1931a). In H. Read, M. Fordham,
& G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G. Jung (Vol. 16).
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1954.
Jung, C.G. The practical use of dream analysis (1931b). In H. Read, M.
-408-
Jung, C.G. The practical use of dream analysis (1934). In H. Read, M.
Jung, C.G. Principles of practical psychotherapy (1935a). In H. Read,
M. Fordham, & G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G.
Jung (Vol. 16). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1954.
Jung, C.G. What is psychotherapy? (1935b). In H. Read, M. Fordham, &
G. Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G. Jung (Vol. 16).
Jung, C.G. Psychotherapy today (1941). In H. Read, M. Fordham, & G.
Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G. Jung (Vol. 16).
Jung, C.G. Fundamental questions of psychotherapy (1951). In H. Read, M.
Jung, C.G. Psychological reflections. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,
1953.
Jung, C.G. The practice of psychotherapy. In H. Read, M. Fordham, & G.
Adler (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G. Jung (Vol. 16).
Jung, C.G. Freud and psychoanalysis. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,
1961.
Jung, C.G. Memories, dreams, reflections. London: Collins & Routledge
& Kegan Paul, 1963.
Jung, C.G. (Ed.-). Man and his symbols. New York: Doubleday, 1964.
Jung, C.G. Psychological types. In II. Read, M. Fordham, G. Adler & W.
McGuire (Eds.), The Collected Works of C.G. Jung (Vol. 6).
-409-
U.S.A.: Bollingen Series XX Princeton University Press,
1971.
Jung, C.G. Letters. (G. Adler, Ed.), Princeton: Princeton Univers-
ity Press, 1973.
Kaufman, W. The portable Nietzsche (1954). U.S.A.: Penguin Books, 1976.
Keen, E. A primer in phenomenological psychology. U.S.A.: Holt, Rine-
hart & Winston, Inc., 1975.
Kelley, D.M. The use of general semantics and Korzybskian principles as
an extensional method of group psychotherapy in neurotic neu-
roses. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, September,
1951, 114 (3), Serial No. 837, 189-220.
Kemp, C.G. Existential counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 1970,
2 (3), 2-29.
Kempler, W. Gestalt therapy. In R. Corsini (Ed.), Current psychotherap-
ies. Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publisher, 1973.
Kempler, W. Principles of Gestalt family therapy (1974). California:
The Kempler Institute, 1978.
Kepner, E., & Brien, L. Gestalt therapy: A behavioristic phenomenology
(1970). in J. Fagan, & I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt ther-
apy now. New York: Harper Colophon, 1971.
Kierkegaard, S. Either/or (1843)- (W. Lowrie trans.) Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1944.
Kitzler, R. The Gestalt group. In B. Feder, & R. Ronall (Eds.), Beyond
the hot seat: Gestalt approaches to group. New York: Brunner
/Mazel, 1980.
Kockelmans, J.J. What is phenomenology? (1966a). In J.J. Kockelmans (Ed.),
Phenomenology: The philosophy of Edmund Husserl and its
-410-
interpretation. New York: Anchor Books, 1967a.
Kockelmans, J.J. Husserl's phenomenology and "existentialism" (1966b).
In J.J. Kockelmans (Ed.), Phenomenology: The philos-
ophy of Edmund Husserl and its interpretation. New York:
Anchor Books, 1967.
Kockelmans, J.J. Edmund Husserl's phenomenological psychology. A hist-
orico-critical study (1967b). N.J.; Humanities Press, 1979.
Kockelmans, J.J. Language, meaning, and ek-sistence (1972a). In J.J.
Kockelmans (Ed.), On Heidegger and language. U.S.A.: North-
western University Press, 1972.
Kockelmans, J.J. On Heidegger and language. U.S.A.: Northwestern Univers-
ity Press, 1972b.
Kockelmans, J.J. Heidegger on the self and Kant's conception of the ego
(1978). In F. Elliston (Ed.), Heidegger's existential an-
alytic. The Hague: Morton Publisher, 1978.
Koffka, K. Principles of Gestalt psychology. London: Kegan Paul,
Trench, 1935.
Kogan, G. The history, philosophy and practice of Gestalt therapy:
Theory of human nature and conduct in Frederick Perls'
psychology. Ph.D dissertation, University of California,
Berkeley, 1973; University Microfilm, A Xerox Company,
Ann Arbour, Michigan: 1973..
Kogan, J. The genesis of Gestalt therapy (1976). In C. Hatcher, &
P. Himelstein (Eds.), Handbook of Gestalt therapy. New
York: Jason Aronson, Inc., 1976.
Kogan, J. Personal communication, January 14, 1980.
-411-
Kohler, W.
Kohler, W.
Korzybski, A.
Korzybski, A.
Kohler, W. Some Gestalt problems (1922). In W.D. Ellis (Ed.), A
sourcebook of Gestalt psychology. London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, Ltd., 1938.
Gestalt psychology. New York: Liveright, 1929.
Gestalt psychology. New.York: Liveright, 1947; New York:
Liveright Paperbound Edition, 1970.
Science and sanity: An introduction to non-Aristotelian
systems and general semantics. Conneticut: International
Non-Aristotelian Library Publishing Company, 1933. (4th
ed.). Massachusetts: The Colonial Press, 1958.
A veteran's readjustment and extensional methods. In S.I.
Hayakawa (Ed.), Language, meaning and maturity. New York:
Harper, 1954.
Wittenberg symposium on the feelings and emotions. U.S.A.:
Clark University Press, 1928.
The phenomenological foundations of transpersonal psychol-
ogy . The Australian Journal of Transpersonal Psychology,
1982, 2 (2), 83-106.
Bergson. In The McGraw Hill Encyclopedia of World Biography,
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973.
Jung and Perls: Analytic psychology and Gestalt (1976).
In E.W.L. Smith (Ed.), The growing edge of Gestalt therapy.
New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1976.
Latner, J. The Gestalt therapy book. New York: The Julian Press, Inc.,
1973; U.S.A.: Bantam, 1976.
Kreelman, M.
Kreuger, F.
Kroy, M.
Langley, R.J,
Lathrop, D.D.
-412-
Lee, I.J. Language habits iii human affairs. New York: Harper, 1941.
Levitsky, A. Personal communication, January 17, 1980.
Levitsky, A., & Perls, F.S. The rules and games of Gestalt therapy (1970)
In J. Fagan, & I.L. Shepherd, (Eds.), Gestalt therapy now.
Lewin, K. A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company, Inc., 1935.
Marx, M.H., and Hillix, W.A. Systems and theories in psychology. (2nd
ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1973.
May, R., Binswanger, L., & Ellenberger, H.F. Existential psychotherapy.
In W.S. Sahakian (Ed.), Psychotherapy and counseling
(2nd ed.). Chicago: Rand McNally Publishing Co., 1976.
Merton, T. Mystics and Zen masters. New York: Dell Publishing Co.,
Inc., 1961.
Miller, M.V. (Ed./Moderator). The future of Gestalt therapy: A sympos-
ium. Participants: Laura Perls, Miriam Polster, Gary
Yontef and Joseph Zinker. The Gestalt Journal, 1981, iv
(1), 3-18.
Moreno, J.L. Who shall survive? A new approach to the problem of human.
interrelations. Washington, D.C.: Nervous and Mental Dis-
Moreno, J.L,
Moreno, J.L.
Moreno, J.L.
ease Publishing Co., 1934.
Psychodrama. (1946) (Vol. 2). (4th ed.). New York: Beacon
House, 1977.
Who shall survive? (2nd ed.). New York: Beacon House Inc.
1953.
Psychodrama: Foundations of psychotherapy (1959) (Vol. 2)
New York: Beacon House, 1975.
-413-
Moreno, J.L. Psychodrama: Action therapy and principles of practise
(1969) (Vol. 3). New York: Beacon House, 1975.
Morris, C. Signs, language, and behavior. New York: Prentice-Hall,
1946.
Moses, P.J. The voice of neurosis. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1954.
Munroe, R.L, Schools of psychoanalytic thought. New York: Holt, Rine-
hart & Winston, 1955.
Murphy, G., & Jensen,.F. Approaches to personality. New York: Coward-
McCann, Inc., 1932.
Myers Owens, C. Zen buddhism (1975). In Tart, C.T. (Ed.), Transpersonal
psychologies. New York: Harper & Row, 1975.
Naranjo, C. Contributions of Gestalt therapy (1968). In H.A. Otto, &
J. Mann (Eds.), Ways of growth: Approaches to expanding
awareness. New York: The Viking Press, 1968.
Naranjo, C. Present-centeredness: Technique, prescription and ideal
(1970). In J. Fagan, & I.L. Shepherd, (Eds.), Gestalt
Naranjo, C. I and thou, here and now: Contributions of Gestalt ther-
apy (1975). In F.D. Stephenson, (Ed.), Gestalt therapy
primer. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas, 1975.
Nichols, M.P., & Zax, M. Catharsis in psychotherapy. New York: Gardner
Press, Inc., 1977.
Nielsen, A.C. Gestalt and psychoanalytic therapies: Structural analy-
sis and rapprochement. American Journal of Psychotherapy.
1980. Vol- XXXIV (4), 534-544.
Nietzsche, F.W. Thus spake Zarathustra (1883). In F.W. Nietzsche. The
philosophy of Nietzsche. New York: The Modern Library, 1927.
-414-
Nietzsche, F.W. Beyond good and evil (1886a). In F.W. Nietzsche. The
philosophy of Nietzsche. New York: The Modern Library,
1927.
Nietzsche, F.W. An attempt at self-criticism (1886b). In F.W. Niet-
zsche. The philosophy of Nietzsche. New York: The Mod-
ern Library, 1927.
Nietzsche, F.W. The genealogy of morals (1887). In F.W. Nietzsche.
The philosophy of Nietzsche. New York: The Modern Library,
1927.
Nietzsche, F.W. Ecce homo (1908). In F.W. Nietzsche. The philosophy of
Nietzsche. New York: The Modern Library, 1927.
Nietzsche, F.W. The twilight of the idols. In F. Nietzsche (Ed.), The
Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche (Vol. 17). New
York: Macmillan, 1909-1911.
Nye, R.D. Three views of man. Monterey: Brooks/Cole Publishing
Company, 1975.
O'Connor, D. Nietzsche. In McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of World Biography.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973a.
O'Connor, D. Heidegger. In McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of World Biography.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973b.
Ogden, C.K., & Richards, I.A. The meaning of meaning (1923). (10th ed.).
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, Ltd., 1949.
Oldham, J., Key, T., & Starak, I.Y. Risking being alive. Melbourne: Pit
Publishing, 1980.
Ott, H. Hermeneutic and personal space (1972). In J.J. Kockelmans
(Ed.), On Heidegger and language. Evanston: Northwestern
University Press, 1972.
-415-
Pemberton, W.H. A semantic approach to counseling (1955). In K. Thurman
(Ed.), Semantics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1960.
Perls, F.S. Planned psychotherapy (1946). The Gestalt Journal,
1979, I_I_ (2), 4-23 (Edited and with footnote commentary
by Laura Perls).
Perls, F.S. Ego, hunger and aggression (1947). Woking, England: Un-
win Bros., 1947; New York: Vintage Books, 1969.
Perls, F.S. Theory and technique of personality integration (1948).
In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real People
Press, 1975.
Perls, F.S. Morality, ego-boundary and aggression (1953). In J.O.
Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real People Press,
1975.
Perls, F.S. Three approaches to psychotherapy: Rogers, Perls, Ellis
(1956). Calif.: Psychological Films, Inc., 1965. (Motion
picture) .
Perls, F.S. Cooper union forumlecture series: "The Self"; "Finding
self through Gestalt therapy" (1957). The Gestalt Journal,
1978, 1 (1), 54-73.
Perls, F.S. Resolution (1959). In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab,
Utah: Real People Press, 1975.
Perls, F.S. Gestalt therapy and human potentialities (1965). In J.O.
Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real People Press,
1975.
Perls, F.S. Four lectures (1966a). In J. Fagan. & I.L. Shepherd, (Eds.),
Gestalt therapy now. New York: Harper Colophon, 1971,
-416-
Perls, F.S. Dream seminars (1966b). In J. Fagan & I.L. Shepherd
(Eds.), Gestalt therapy now. New York: Harper Colophon,
1971.
Perls, F.S. Group vs. individual therapy (1967). In J.O. Stevens
(Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real People Press, 1975.
Perls, F.S. Gestalt therapy verbatim (1969a). New York: Bantam Books,
1974.
Perls, F.S. In and out the garbage pail (1969b). New York: Bantam
Books, 1972.
Perls, F.S. The gestalt approach and eyewitness to therapy (1973).
New York: Bantam Books, 1976.
Perls, F.S. Legacy from Fritz. Palo Alto, California: Science & Be-
havior Books, 1975.
Perls, F.S. Psychiatry in a new key. The Gestalt Journal, 1978a, JL
(1), 32-53.
Perls, F.S. Psychiatry in a new key: Part 2. The Gestalt Journal,
1978b, 1 (2), 48-65.
Perls, F.S., & Clements, C.C. Acting out vs. acting through ( ). In
J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real People
Press, 1975.
Perls, F.S., & Goodman, P. The theory of "the removal of inner conflict"
(1950). In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah:
Real People Press, 1975.
Perls, F.S., Hefferline, R.F., & Goodman, P. Gestalt therapy: Excitement
and growth in the human personality (1951). Harmondsworth,
Middx.: Penguin, 1976.
-417-
Perls, L. Two instances of Gestalt therapy (1956). In P.D.
Pursglove (Ed.), Recognitions in Gestalt therapy.
New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1968.
Perls, L. One Gestalt therapist's approach (1959). In J. Fagan
& I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt therapy now. New York:
Colophon, 1971.
Perls, L. Comments on the new directions (1976). In E.W.L. Smith
(Ed.), The growing edge of Gestalt therapy. New York:
Brunner/Mazel, 1976.
Perls, L. Concepts and misconceptions of Gestalt therapy. Voices:
Journal of the American Academy of Psychotherapists,
1978, 14, 31-37.
Perls, L. Personal communication, March 1, 1980.
Polster, E. A contemporary psychotherapy (1966). In P.D. Pursglove
(Ed.), Recognitions in Gestalt therapy. New York: Funk
& Wagnalls, 1968.
Polster, E. Sensory functioning in psychotherapy (1970). In J. Fagan,
& I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt therapy now. New York:
Colophon, 1971.
Polster, E. Techniques and experience in Gestalt therapy (1975a). In
F.D. Stephenson (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer. Spring-
Polster, E. Trends in Gestalt therapy (1975b). In F.D. Stephenson
(Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer. Springfield, Illinois:
Thomas, 1975.
Polster, E., & Polster, M. Gestalt therapy integrated: Contours of
theory and practice (1973). New York: Vintage Books, 1974.
-418-
Polster, E., & Polster, M. Gestalt therapy. In B.B. Wolman (Ed.),
International Encyclopedia of Psychiatry, Psychology,
Psychoanalysis & Neurology (Vol. 5). New York:
Aesculapius Publishers, Inc., 1977.
Pursglove, P. (Ed.). Recognitions in Gestalt therapy. New York:
Funk & Wagnalls, 1968,
Rank, 0. The trauma of birth (1924). New York: Robert Brunner,
1952.
Rank, 0,
Rank, 0.
Rank, 0,
Rank, 0.
Rapoport, A.
Reich, W.
Reich, W.
Reich, W.
Will therapy. Part One (1929a). In 0. Rank, Will ther-
apy and truth and reality (1936) (J. Taft, Ed. and
trans.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945.
Truth and reality (1929b). In 0. Rank, Will therapy and
truth and reality (1936). (J. Taft, Ed. and trans.).
New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945.
Will therapy. Part Two (1931). In 0. Rank, Will therapy
and truth and reality (1936). (J. Taft, Ed. and trans.).
New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945.
Will therapy and truth and reality (1936). (J.Taft, Ed.
and trans.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945.
What is semantics? In S.I. Hayakawa (Ed.), Language,
meaning and maturity. New York: Harper, 1954.
Character analysis (1933 and 1945). New York: Orgone
Institute Press, 1949; New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 1972.
The function of the orgasm. New York: Orgone Institute
Press, 1948.
Character analysis. New York: Orgone Institute Press,
1949.
-419-
Reich, W. Selected writings: An introduction to orgonomy.
New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1951.
Resnick, R.W. Chicken soup is poison. In F.D. Stephenson (Ed.),
Gestalt therapy primer. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas,
1975.
Gestalt psychology/Gestalt therapy: Forms/contexts.
The Gestalt Journal, 1980, III (1), 76-84.
Freud and his followers. Middlesex, England: Penguin,
1971.
Personal communication, February 12, 1980.
The contact boundary in Gestalt therapy: Some insights
and recommendations. Unpublished Honours Thesis, Univer-
sity of Wollongong, 1977.
& Barlow, A.R. An introduction to the theory and techniques
of Gestalt therapy. In M.Scott (Ed.), Human Drama Woll-
ongong: University of Wollongong, 1979.
Rosenblatt, D. Introduction: A festschrift for Laura Perls in celebrat-
ion of her 75th birthday. The Gestalt Journal, 1980,
III (1), 5-15.
Rosenfeld, E. An oral history of Gestalt therapy. Part one: A convers-
ation with Laura Perls. The Gestalt Journal, 1978a, JE
(D, 8-31.
Rosenfeld, E. An oral history of Gestalt therapy. Part two: A convers-
ation with Isadore From. The Gestalt Journal, 1978b,
I (2), 7-27.
Rosenfeld, E. Laura Perls: Experiential experimental existential: An
appreciation. The Gestalt Journal, 1980, HI (1), 52-53.
Rhyne, J.
Roazen, P.
Ronall, R.
Ronan, N.J.
Ronan, N.J.,
-420-
Rosenfeld, E. (Ed.). The Gestalt bibliography. New York: The Center
for Gestalt Development, Inc., 1981.
Rubins, J.L. Karen Horney. Gentle rebel of psychoanalysis. London:
Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1978.
Ruitenbeek, H.M. The new group therapies. New York: Avon, 1972.
Rycroft, C. Reich. Great Britain: Fontana/Collins, 1971.
Sahakian, W. (Ed.). Psychotherapy and counseling (2nd ed.). Chicago:
Rand McNally College Publishing Company, 1976.
Sallis, J. Where does "being and time" begin? (1978). In F. Ell-
iston (Ed.), Heidegger's existential analytic. The
Hague: Morton Publishers, 1978.
Schafer, R. A new language for psychoanalysis. New Haven: Yale Uni-
versity Press, 1976.
Shaffer, J.B.P., & Galinsky, M.D. Models of group therapy and sensit-
ivity training. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-
Hall, Inc., 1974.
Schilder, P. Introduction to a psychoanalytic psychiatry (1925),,
New York: International Universities Press Inc., 1951.
Schilder, P. The semantic basis of the neurosis. Journal of Nervous
& Mental Diseases, 1929, 70, 502-519.
Schoen, S. Gestalt therapy and Buddhist teachings. In S. Boorstein
(Ed.), Transpersonal psychotherapy. Palo Alto: Science
& Behavior Books, Inc., 1980.
Schur, M. Freud: Living and dying. New York: International Univ-
ersities Press, 1972.
Shepard, M. Fritz. New York: Bantam Books, 1976.
-421-
Shepherd, I.L. Limitations and cautions in the Gestalt approach (1970).
In J. Fagan and I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt therapy now.
New York: Harper Colophon Books, 1971.
Shepherd, I.L. Personal communication, February 19, 1980.
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1973.
Sills, D.L. (Ed.). International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences
(Vol. 15). U.S.A.: The Macmillan Company and The Free
Press, 1968.
Simkin, J.S. The development of Gestalt therapy (1973). In C. Hatcher
& P. Himelstein (Eds.), Handbook of Gestalt therapy.
New York: Jason Aronson, Inc., 1976.
Simkin, J.S. An introduction to Gestalt therapy (1975). In F.D.
Stephenson, (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer. Springfield,
Illinois: Thomas, 1975.
Simkin, J.S. Gestalt therapy mini-lectures. Milbrae, California:
Celestial Arts, 1976.
Smith, E.W.L. The roots of Gestalt therapy (1976a). In E.W.L. Smith
(Ed.), The growing edge of Gestalt therapy. New York:
Brunner/Mazel, 1976.
Smith, E.W.L. Part III. Gestalt therapy and Jungian psychology.
(1976b). In E.W.L. Smith (Ed.), The growing edge of
Gestalt therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1976.
Smith, E.W.L. (Ed.). The growing edge of Gestalt therapy. New York:
Brunner/Mazel, 1976c.
Smith, E.W.L. The impasse phenomenon: A Gestalt therapy experience
involving an altered state of consciousness.
-422-
The Gestalt Journal, 1978, JL (1), 88-93.
Smuts, J.C. On the application of some physical concepts to bio-
logical phenomena (1892-3). In W.K. Hancock & J. Van
Der Poel (Eds.), Selections from the Smuts papers.
Cambridge: The University Press, 1966.
Smuts, J.C. Draft letter to the editor of the Nineteenth Century
(1895). In W.K. Hancock & J. Van Der Poel (Eds.),
Selections from the Smuts papers (Vol. 1). June 1886-
May 1902. Cambridge: The University Press, 1966.
Smuts, J.C. Holism & evolution (1926) (3rd ed.). London: Macmillan
& Co., 1936.
Smuts, J.C.Jr. Jan Christian Smuts: A biography.' New York: Morrow,
1952.
Solomon, J. Bergson. London: Constable & Co. Ltd., 1912.
Sommers, C. Personal communication, January 25, 1980.
Spiegelberg, H. Husserl's Phenomenology and Sartre's Existentialism
(1959). In J.J. Kockelmans (Ed.), Phenomenology: The
philosophy of Edmund Husserl and its interpretations.
New York: Anchor Books, 1967.
Spiegelberg, H. Phenomenology in psychology and psychiatry. U.S.A.:
Spiegelberg, H. The phenomenological movement (2nd. ed.). (Vol. 1.).
The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1978a.
Spiegelberg, H. The phenomenological movement (2nd. ed.). (Vol. 2.).
The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1978b.
Stallone, J.A. Gestalt psychotherapy, Zen buddhism and transcendental
meditation. In E.W.L. Smith (Ed.), The growing edge of
-423-
Stephenson, F.D. (Ed.). Gestalt therapy primer. Springfield, Illinois:
Thomas, 1975.
Stern, W. Psychology of early childhood up to the sixth year of
age (1924). New York: Arno Press Inc., 1975.
Stern, W. General psychology from the personalistic standpoint.
New York: Macmillan, 1938.
Strauss, E.W. Phenomenological psychology. New York: Basic Books, Inc.,
1966.
Strickland, B. Kierkegaard and counseling for individuality (1966). In
L.A. Lawson (Ed.), Kierkegaard's presence in contemporary
American life. Metuchen, N.J.: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.,
1970.
Stumpf, S.E. Socrates to Satre: A history of philosophy. U.S.A.:
McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1966.
Sullivan, H.S. Personal psychopathology (1932). New York: W.W. Norton
& Company, 1965.
Suzuki, D.T., Fromm, E., & De Martino, R. Zen buddhism and psychoan-
alysis. New York: Harper & Row, 1960.
Ternus, J. The problem of phenomenol identity (1926). In E.W. Ellis
(Ed.), A source book of Gestalt psychology. London:
Thurman, K. (Ed.). Semantics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1960.
Tillich, P. Existential philosophy. Journal of the History of Ideas,
1944, 5 (1), 44-70.
Tillich, P. The courage to be (1952). London: Collins, 1967.
Tillich, P. A history of christian thought (1967). U.S.A.: A Touch-
stone Book, 1968.
-424-
Tobin, S.
Vaihinger, H.
Vaihinger, H.
Van De Riet, V
Van Dusen, W.
Van Dusen, W,
Verhaar, J.W.M
Wallace, R.
Wallen, R.
Watkins, T.
Weigert, E.V.
Personal communication, March 2, 1980.
The philosophy of "as if" (1924). New York: Harcourt
Brace, 1925.
The philosophy of "as if" (2nd ed.). London: Rout-
ledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1935.
, Korb, M.P., & Gorrell, J.J. Gestalt therapy: An
introduction. U.S.A.: Pergamon Press Inc., 1980.
Wu Wei, no-mind, and the fertile void (1958). In J.O.
Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real People
Press, 1975.
Existential analytic psychotherapy (1960). In P.D.
Pursglove (Ed.), Recognitions in Gestalt therapy. New
York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1968.
Phenomenology and present-day linguistics. In M. Nat-
anson (Ed.), Phenomenology and the social sciences.
(Vol. 1). Evanston, U.S.A.: Northwestern University
Press, 1973.
Gestalt therapy and Gestalt psychology (1957). In J.
Fagan, & I.L. Shepherd (Eds.), Gestalt therapy now.
Forewardadapted from a memorial paper for Dr. Frieda
Fromm-Reichmann (1958). In F. Fromm-Reichmann (Ed.) Psycho-
analysis and psychotherapy. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1959.
-425-
Weinstein, J. Buber and humanistic education. New York: Philosoph-
ical Library, 1975.
Wertheimer, M. Gestalt theory (1925). In W.D. Ellis (Ed.), A source
book of Gestalt psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul Ltd., 1938.
Wertheimer, M. A brief history of psychology (1970) (Rev.ed.). U.S.A.:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1979.
Weyent, R.G. K.S. Sullivan. In McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of World Bi-
ography. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973.
Wheeler, R.H. The laws of human nature. London: Nisbet & Co. Ltd.,
1931.
Whitmont, E.C., & Kaufmann, Y. Analytical psychology and Gestalt ther-
apy (1976). In E.W.L. Smith (Ed.), The growing edge of
Wilber, K. No boundary. Eastern and Western approaches to personal
growth. Los Angeles: Center Publications, 1979.
Wills, G.H. The here and now in Gestalt therapy. Australian Psychol-
ogist, 1978a, 13 (2), 183-191.
Wills, G.H. Personal communication August, 1978b.
Woelfel, J.W. Tillich. In The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of World Bio-
graphy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973a.
Woelfel, J.W. Buber. In The McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of World Bio-
graphy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973b.
Wysong, J. (Ed.), The Gestalt directory. Highland, New York: Joe Wysong,
1979.
Wysong, J. Personal communication, February 2, 1980.
-426-
Yontef, G.M.
Wyss, D. Psychoanalytic Schools from the beginning to the
present. New York: Jason Aronson, Inc., 1973.
A review of the practice of Gestalt therapy (1969).
In F.D. Stephenson, (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer.
Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1975.
Gestalt therapy: Clinical phenomenology. The Gest-
alt Journal, 1979, 11 (1), 27-45.
Personal communication, March 2, 1980.
Young-Villiers, A. Personal communication, February 8, 1980.
Zinker, J.C. Dreamwork as theatre: An innovation in Gestalt therapy.
Voices, 1971, J7_ (2), 18-21.
Zinker, J.C. On loving encounters: A phenomenological view. In F.D.
Stephenson (Ed.), Gestalt therapy primer. Springfield,
Illinois: Thomas, 1975.
Yontef, G.M.
Yontef, G.M
Appendix I
A Glossary of Some Terms Used in This Dissertation
-427-
Glossary
Aboutism: Intellectualization; talking "about" things, science,
description, gossiping (Perls, 1969a; also Perls, 1969b,
p.210; Perls, 1973, p.150).
Acting Out (Psychoanalysis): Performing in a new setting behaviour
learned in, and appropriate to, another situation. Usually
discouraged.
(Gestalt therapy): Literally, acting a "script" from a dream
or fantasy in therapy, to increase self-awareness (Perls and
Clements, 1968; also Ronan, 1977, p.52).
Actualization: The primary goal of all organisms: "Every individual,
every plant, every animal has only one inborn goalto act-
ualize itself as it is"(Perls, 1969a, p.33).
Alienation: Disowning, rejecting as part of the self; suspicion,
strangeness, unfamiliarity (Perls, 1969a).
Analysis (Gestalt psychology): A scientific procedure for dividing
up a complex experience into simpler components. Functional
analysis is a method of influencing the conditions under which
an event occurs for the sake of determining the factors essential
to the event (Hartmann, 1935, p.307).
Anxiety: "the gap between the now and the then" (Perls, 1969a,
p.3). Anxiety results from the stifling of the flow of creative
excitement. Physiologically, anxiety is the experience of
breathing difficulty during blocked excitement (Perls et al.,
1951).
-428-
Armor (Reich): The total defense apparatus of the organism, consis-
ting of the rigidities of the character and musculature, which
functions essentially as a defense against the breakthrough
of the emotionsprimarily anxiety, rage and sexual excitement
(Reich, 1951).
Attention (Gestalt therapy): "a behavioural focusing of parts of the
organism towards relevant parts of the environment, with musc-
ular tonus, sensory tracking, etc." (Enright, 1970, p.107).
(Gestalt psychology): Intensification of the process under-
lying perception (Henle, 1961).
Authenticity: Responsibility for one's own actions; living creativ-
ely in the now (Perls, 1969a).
Awareness: "a state of consciousness which develops spontaneously
when organismic attention becomes focused upon some particular
region of the organism/environment boundary at which a parti-
cularly important and complex transaction is occurring" (En-
right, 1970, p.107). According to Perls, "awareness per se
by and of itselfcan be curative" (1969a, p.17).
Blocking: The avoidance of awareness, a screen put up with the intent
of avoiding something (Perls, 1966a).
Catharsis (Psychoanalysis); "the release of tension and anxiety
by recounting and/or acting out past experiences" (Harper,
1959, p.158).
(Psychodrama): Literally, the purging of the system. The con-
cept comes from Aristotle's theories on drama; when the prot-
agonist acted out his/her struggle, s/he was purged, and so were
-429-
members of the audience. Catharsis is a reorganization of the
internal roles of the person to bring about greater integration
(Moreno, 1959).
Cathexis (Psychoanalysis): "the amount of psychic energy which is
directed toward or attached to the mental representation (i.e.,
memories, thoughts, fantasies) of a person or thing" (Harper,
1959, p.158).
Change: In Gestalt therapy, "change" is a paradoxical term"Change
occurs when one becomes what he is, rather than when he tries
to be what he is not" (Beisser, 1970, p.77).
Character (Gestalt therapy): "Character" is a fixed role, a set
of responses developed to gain approval rather than to express
the real needs of the individual (Perls, 1965, 1969b).
(Psychoanalysis): Sometimes confused with personalitythe
relatively consistent behaviours of the individual in relation
to moral issues and decisions affecting interaction with others
(Harper, 1959).
(Reich): An individual's typical, stereotyped manner of acting
and reacting. The orgonomic concept of character is functional
and biological (Reich, 1951).
Character armor (Reich): The sum total of typical character attitudes
which in an individual develops as a defence against his/her emot-
ional excitations, resulting in rigidity of the body, lack of
emotional contact, "deadness". Functionally identical with
muscular armor (Reich, 1951).
Closure (Gestalt psychology): "a term introduced by Wertheimer to
-430-
designate one of the basic principles of mental organization,
in which certain segregated but imperfect wholes (such as per-
ceptions, memories, thoughts and actions) tend towards complete
or closed forms. The word also refers to the way in which
changing, incomplete systems eventually attain equilibrium.
Closure is a special dynamic variant of the more general principle
of pragnanz (or precision)" (Hartmann, 1935, p.308).
Closure, the Law of (Gestalt psychology): This law states that Gestalt-
en tend to maintain maximum stability; semi-stable Gestalten
tend towards completion or closure (Ellis, 1930).
Collective unconscious: A Jungian term meaning that part of the indiv-
idual's unconscious which is hereditary and which the individual
shares with other human beings.
Configuration (Gestalt psychology): "Any organized whole in which
there is reciprocal influence between the members and the whole,
so that 'the totality contains more than a mere sum of what anal-
ysis would call its parts and their relations'" (Hartmann, 1935,
p.309).
Contact: The meeting of the organism and the environment. Contact:
"refers literally to the nature of the way we are in touch with
ourselves, our environments, and the processes that relate them"
(Latner, 1973, p.65).
Contact boundary: The contact boundary is the boundary between self and
others (Perls, 1969a). Thoughts, actions, behaviour and emotions
are ways of experiencing events which occur at the contact bound-
ary (Perls, 1969a).
Continuum of awareness: Remaining aware as you move from contact to
-431-
withdrawal and back; following awareness through all three con-
tact zones (Perls, 1975). Also refer to Naranjo, 1970, p.36;
Greenwald, 1975, p.103.
Contour (Gestalt psychology): "the outline or boundary of a plane
figure" (Hartmann, 1935, p.309).
Creative indifference: Friedlander's term and title of his book:
"the organism at its zero point, open to what will come" (Latner,
1973, p.69).
DMZ: A "demilitarized zone" between the inner and outer contact
zones; filled with thoughts, fantasies; our "computer" (Perls,
1969a).
Dasein, or "being there" (Phenomenology): Factual experience, contrast
between "thatness" and "whatness" (Spiegelberg, 1978a).
Daseinsanalyse (Binswanger): Analysis of man's being-in-the-world;
used primarily in existential psychotherapy (Spiegelberg, 1978a).
Defence mechanisms (Psychoanalysis): Sometimes called ego defences.
Any psychological instrumentality used by the individual to
protect his/her ego from anxiety-inducing id impulses. Includes
regression, repression, rationalization, projection, introjec-
tion, turning against the self (retroflection), isolation, thought
dissociation, reaction formation and denial.
Diagnosis: "In sickness men have types; in health, all men are unique
(Perls ,et al., 1951).
Differentiation: A process of separating possibilities into opposites
(Latner, 1973).
Dreams: A dream is regarded in Gestalt therapy as an existential message,
-432-
a complete statement of our life-script at any given time. Perls
called the dream the "royal road to integration", arguing that all
the parts of the dream represented alienated parts of the personality
(Perls, 1969a, p.71).
Dynamic theory (Gestalt psychology): "a view suggested by Wertheimer and
developed by Kohler that physiological events are regulated by
forces in the central nervous field as a whole, rather than by
specific neural structures and connections" (Hartmann, 1935, p.310).
Emerging Gestalt: "one phenomenon exists at a time. Unfinished situat-
ions reveal themselves in the flow of background material into
foreground figure" (Baumgardner, 1975, p.14).
Emotions: "emotions are the very language of the organism; they modify
the basic excitement according to the situation" (Perls, 1973,
p.24).
Empty chair: In Gestalt therapy, a person may be asked to act the part
of another person, an element in a dream, a part of his/her body,
an emotion, etc., and conduct a dialogue between him/herself and
this other ("writing a script"). When the person moves to the empty
chair, s/he becomes the other element in this dialogue. The empty
chair is thus: "a projection/identification gimmick" (Perls, 1969b,
p.244).
Enactment: "a deliberate and conscious effort to find a non-destructive,
often symbolic, expression of otherwise repressed unconscious con-
tents" (Whitmont and Kaufmann, 1976, p.95).
Environment (Gestalt therapy): "The external world in which the organism
lives" (Perls, 1969a, p.5).
(Gestalt psychology): "a milieu in which the (psychic) organism is
-433-
immersed. A description of any organism's environmental world would
thus include reference to supposed objects and the qualities which
the organism is thought of as ascribing to them; it would also
include mention of the physical body of that organism and as much
of its former psychic states as could be inferred from a descrip-
tion of present behaviour" (Ellis, 1930, p.136).
Excitement: "the term used to refer to the manifestation of energy in
our physiological and experiential levels" (Latner, 1973, p.39).
When suppressed, excitement becomes anxiety (Perls, 1969a).
Existential analysis: The approach to psychotherapy which combines some
of the teachings of existential philosophy with some of the theories
and techniques of psychoanalysissee especially Binswanger.
Experience: "experience is contact. We are in touch with ourselves
through our bodies and our emotions. We experience the world throu-
gh our five senses" (Baumgardner, 1975, p.14).
Experiential therapy: Therapy where the patient is brought to re-exper-
ience problems and traumas in the here and now (Perls, 1973, p.64).
Experiment: "To experiment is simply to try something out...in therapy,
experimentally safe emergencies are created. That is, the indiv-
idual is placed into situations where the relevant anxieties are
dealt with, but they are dealt with under circumstances which are
more instructive and supportive than those found in every-day life"
(E. Polster, 1975, pp.158-159).
Fantasy: "that activity of the human being which through the use of
symbols tends to reproduce reality on a diminished scale" (Perls,
1973, p.12). See "mental activity".
Fertile void: "something like a trance, but accompanied by complete
-434-
ological phenomena and in nature generally. Form is a fundamental
law; it is the way things appear to the perceiver. When one per-
ceives an object, that object tends, psychologically, to take on
form; and forms establish themselves, and persist, independently
of the stimulus, as a property of the perceiving organism. Phen-
omenological experience comes in gestalten" (Allport, 1955, p.113).
Free association: A Freudian term, whereby disowned parts of the pers-
onality can be uncovered by simply allowing mental activity free
rein. Similar to "stream of consciousness" in literature. What
Freud called association, Perls called dissociation, or schizophr-
enic dissociation, in order to avoid experience (Perls, 1969a).
Frustration: "Tension arising from our need for closure" (Perls, 1969b,
p.86).
Gestalt (Gestalt therapy): "Gestalt" is a German word, whose meaning
is difficult to translate into English. It implies a whole, a
pattern or configuration, a complete experiential unit; something
which cannot be broken down into component parts without losing
its identity (Perls, 1969a).
(Gestalt psychology): "the capitalized noun refers to the theory
that all mental experiences come organized in the form of structures
which, when relatively incomplete, possess an inherent tendency
toward their own completion. It rejects the assumption that isol-
ated local determination of psychic processes ever occurs and main-
tains that all organic and inorganic stresses tend towards the end-
state of equilibrium" (Hartmann, 1935, p.311).
Gestalt therapy: See section 1.2.
Gestalt prayer: (see over page)
-435-
awareness...(the person) becomes aware of everything calling his
attention (hallucinations, broken up sentences, vague feelings,
strange feelings, peculiar sensations)" (Perls, 1973, p.100). If
the person can stay with this sometimes frightening experience,
enlightenment and understanding will occur. In the fertile void,
the person recognizes the full extent and power of his/her own res-
ources (Perls, 1973).
Field: "Organization plus environment equals field" (Perls, 1973, p.19).
Figure (Gestalt therapy): "is the focus of interestan object, pattern,
etc.with 'ground' the setting or context" (Perls et al., 1951,
p.51).
(Gestalt psychology): The outstanding, highly "formed", "lively",
and vivid foreground of phenomenal experience, wherein "thing char-
acter" is predominant and stability tends to triumph over merger-
ability; definition here is necessarily with reference to "ground",
from which the figure is distinguished (Ellis, 1930).
Figure-ground (Gestalt therapy): If a need is genuinely satisfied, it
recedes from figure into background, and the next most important
need becomes figure (Perls, 1948).
(Gestalt psychology): "a general dual characteristic of perception
first emphasised by Rubin. When a total field is so structured
that different portions exhibit varying degrees of integration,
the most highly articulated ones are called "figures", while the
simpler and more homogeneous areas are "grounds". In ordinary
perception, what is ground for one figure will be a figure on another
ground" (Hartmann, 1935, p.310).
Form-concept: "The central idea of Gestalt theory is form, both in psych-
-436-
"I do my thing, and you do your thing.
I am not in this world to live up to your expectations
And you are not in this world to live up to mine.
You are you and I am I,
And if by chance we find each other, it's beautiful.
If not, it can't be helped."
(Perls, 1969a, p.4)
Grooving: "Attention and awareness meet ... the dynamic transformation
of painful or unpleasant experience" (Perls, 1975, p.97). See also
awareness, attention.
Ground (Gestalt psychology): The receding, relatively unformed, dull
field upon which a figure is experienced as resting; quick fusion
and relative instability characterize this part of the phenomenal
experience. "Mere ground without figure would be equivalent to no
consciousness at all ... The ground serves as a general level on
which the figure appears" (Ellis, 1930, p.140).
Group therapy: Any form of psychotherapy in which one or more people
are treated in front of peers.
Guilt: "Projected resentment" (Perls, 1969a, p.51),
Health: "Health is an appropriate balance of the coordination of what we
are" (Perls, 1969a, p.6); "An absolutely healthy person is comp-
letely in touch with himself and with reality" (Perls, 1969a, p.50).
"Helpfullness": The role of "helper" is avoided by Gestalt therapists,
on the ground that: "To do for another what he is capable of doing
for himself ensures his not becoming aware that he can stand on his
own two feet" (Resnick, 1975, p.95)>. See also "helping" in Latner,
1973, pp.210-211.
Holistic doctrine: "Once we recognize that thoughts and actions are
-437-
made of the same stuff we can translate and transpose from one
level to another" (Perls, 1973, p.15). Man: "is a unified organism"
(Perls, 1973, p.9). "In psychotherapy, this concept gives us a tool
for dealing with the whole man" (Perls, 1973, p.15).
Homeostasis: "The homeostatic process is the process by which the organ-
ism maintains its equilibrium, and therefore its health under varying
conditions ... the process by which the organism satisfies its needs"
(Perls, 1973, p.5); "the process of self-regulation, the process
by which the organism interacts with its environment" (Perls, 1973,
p6).
How: "If you ask how, you look at the structure, you see what's going
on now, a deeper understanding of the process ... The how gives us
perspective, orientation" (Perls, 1969a, p.47). An examination
of ongoing process, what is going on and the way it is happening.
Contrast with the "Why Merry-Go-Round" (Perls, 1969a).
Ideation (Phenomenology): The act by which a universal essence (or eidos)
is obtained, starting from particulars; opposed to isolating abstr-
action of parts within a whole (Spiegelberg, 1978b, p.718).
Identification: Owning, accepting as part of the self; cohesion, love,
co-operation (Perls, 1969a, p.8).
Impasse: "the position where environmental support or obsolete inner
support is not forthcoming any more, and authentic self-support
has not yet been achieved" (Perls, 1969a, p.31).
Insight (Gestalt therapy): The process by which the meaning, significance,
pattern, or use of an experience becomes clear; the understanding
which results from this process.
(Gestalt psychology): "The term refers to the fact that, when we
-438-
are aware of a relation, of any relation, this relation is not
experienced as a fact by itself, but rather as something that follows
from the characteristics of the objects under consideration" (Henle,
1961, p.6). Also: "appropriate or meaningful behaviour and exper-
ience in the presence of any life situation. The suddenness of
perceptual or imaginal reconstruction of the field is the most
characteristic, but not necessarily essential, feature of the process"
(Hartmann, 1935, pp.311-312).
Instinct (Psychoanalysis): An unlearned (genetic) and enduring tendency
to act in an organized way that is characteristic of a given species.
In his later life, Freud recognized two irreducible instincts,
Eros (sex) and Thanatos (translated as death) (Harper, 1959).
Integration (Gestalt therapy): "Gestalt therapy has an integrative app-
roach. We integrate. We don't cut things up further and look for
reasons and insights" (Perls, 1969a, p.155).
(Gestalt psychology): "The putting together of separate items to
constitute a total complexhence a notion inapplicable to gestalten"
(Ellis, 1930, p.141).
Intellect: "intellect is the whore of intelligence" (Perls, 1969a, p.24).
Interpretation: The therapist offers an opinion as to what the exper-
ience of the client "means". Rejected in Gestalt therapy (Perls,
1969a).
.Is-ism: Phenomenology or existentialism, e.g., "Nobody can at any given
moment be different from what he is at that moment, including the
wish to be different" (Perls, 1969b, p.210).
Learning (Gestalt therapy): "Learning is nothing but the discovery that
something is possible. To teach menas to show a person that some-
-439-
thing is possible" (Perls, 1969a, p.27).
(Gestalt psychology): "in Gestalt theory, this is equivalent to
the process of acquiring insight into a situation; or more gener-
ally, the process of establishing new organized wholes" (Hartmann,
1935, p.312).
Libido (Psychoanalysis); The sexual instinct, Eros.
(Jung): A life force which has been somehow vaguely desexualized
(Harper, 1959, p.64).
(Gestalt therapy): Comes close to excitement (Perls, 1969a).
Maturity: "The transcendence from environmental support to self-support"
(Perls, 1969a, p.30), reducing dependency.
Maya: Delusion, fantasy, dream; the region of "as if". Part of the
middle zone, or DMZ.
Memory: "a memory is an abstraction (of reality)" (Perls, 1969a, p.45);
a fantasy about the past, experienced in the present.
Mental activity: "activity of the whole person carried on at a lower
energy level than those activites that we call physical" (Perls,
1973, p.14). Mental activity thus allows us to function as effic-
iently as possible, by planning, constructive thinking, etc. "It
is not thinking per se that is undesirable, but rather sterile
intellectualization and empty fantasizing that prevents awareness
of present living" (Ronan, 1977, p.56).
Mind-body split: Is rejected in Gestalt therapy: "to concentrate on
either term in this false dichotomy is to preserve neurosis, not to
cure it" (Perls, 1973, p.53).
Mini-satori: "A small awakening from the trance of delusions" (Perls,
1965, p.77). An insight, or "aha!" experience (Perls, 1973).
-440-
Muscular armor (Reich): The sum total of the muscular attitudes (chronic
muscular spasms) which an individual develops as a defence against
the breakthrough of organ sensations and emotions.
Need (Gestalt psychology): "a condition of the tissues or system which
provokes searching or striving behaviour" (Hartmann, 1935, p.312).
Neo-Freudian analysts/analysis: (i) the psychoanalytic theories and
practices of therapists who claim to have revised, rather than
rejected, Freud's theories; (ii) those therapists who were initially
identified with Freudian theory.
Neurotic: "a person who does not see the obvious" (Perls, 1969a, p.14).
A person who has disowned his/her potentials.
Now: A functional concept of what the organism is doing. Past and future
events are part of the now inasmuch as they occupy present processes,
e.g., nostalgia, remembering, planning, anticipation (Yontef, 1969).
Perls defined the "now" as: "the balance of being here, experiencing,
involvement, phenomenon, awareness" (1969a, p.47). He also wrote:
"Nothing exists except the here and now. The now is the present,
is the phenomenon, is what you are aware of, is that moment in which
you carry your so-called memories and your so-called anticipations
with you" (Perls, 1969a, p.45).
Ontology (Heidegger): The study of Being as opposed to that of things-
in-being in metaphysics.
(Husserl): Study of the essential or a priori structure of possible
beings. A general theory of objects and their properties as a part
of pure logic, e.g., theory of the whole and its parts (Spiegelberg,
1978b).
Organization (Gestalt psychology): Is a term used in characterizing
-441-
Gestalten relative to one another. "Whenever psychophysical forces
produce integrated and stable groups, organization is said to occur.
The name may refer either to the process or the product" (Hartmann,
1935, p.312).
Organism: "Any living being that has organs, has an organization, that
is self-regulating within itself" (Perls, 1969a, p.5).
Organismic self-regulation: See homeostasis.
Outer zone: "the world around us" (Perls, 1969a, p.135).
Parapraxis: A term coined by the English translator of Freud's writings,
meaning a minor error in behaviour, such as a slip of the tongue
or pen, memory blockings, small accidents, misplacing objects and
so on. In psychoanalysis, psychopraxis is never considered accid-
ental, but as the result of some unconscious conflict.
Part (Gestalt psychology): "Is a name for that which is looked upon as
deriving its relevant, contextual significance from the whole from
which it has been sundered" (Ellis, 1930, p.143).
Pattern (Gestalt psychology): "a functional integration of discriminable
parts, which operates or responds as a unitary whole. Considered
to occur in the nervous system, in thought, and in social behaviour"
(Hartmann, 1935, p.312).
Persona (Jung): The mask of conscious intentions and fulfillments of
social requirements of the individual behind which s/he hides (from
him/herself as well as from others) his/her more deeply-rooted
components of personality; the role which a person plays (Harper,
1959, p.165).
Personality (Gestalt psychology): "from the Gestalt standpoint, this is
a field property of an individual's total behaviour pattern" (Hart-
-442-
mann, 1935, p.312).
(Psychoanalysis): (i) all the mental or behavioural traits of a
person, the sum total of psychological traits; the individual's
integrated system of traits or behaviour tendencies; (ii) those
aspects of the individual's nature which have developed in social
relationships and have other persons or social values as their object
(Harper, 1959, pp.165-166).
Phenomenal field (Gestalt psychology): "The immediate experience-world
in which we live; the ideas and notions current in our mind concer-
ning our environment; the product of certain functions of the
organism and environment" (Ellis, 1930, p.143).
Phenomenology: "the theoretical hypothesis that an individual's behav-
iour may be entirely understood and explained in terms of his/her
phenomenal field" (Harper, 1959, p.166).
Polarities: Polarities and dichotomies are basic to Gestalt therapy.
Perls (1965) stated: "The basic philosophy of Gestalt therapy
is that of naturedifferentiation and integration. Differentiat-
ion by itself leads to polarities" (p.7). Polarities, the extremes
of any continuum, attract and seek each other (Fantz, 1975). As Perls
(1969b) explained: "If you are caught by one of the opposing forces
you are trapped, or at least lopsided. If you stay in the nothing
of the zero center, you are balanced and in perspective" (p.76).
Pragnanz (Gestalt therapy): Any field will be as well organized as the
global conditions will allow at that time (Perls, 1969a).
(Gestalt psychology): An untranslatable German word meaning prec-
ision, or better, completeness. The term is used to signify that
everything (physical, perceptual, conceptual) tends to become as
typical as it can. The law of precision is stated in English in
-443-
this way: "A Gestalt becomes as sharply defined as conditions
permit; the second of two sounds is heard as higher or lower or
equal to the first rather than by itself because a comparison is
a more pregnant Gestalt than two uncompared sounds" (Ellis, 1930,
p.143).
Primary process (Psychoanalysis): The characteristic functioning of the
id, whereby there is immediate and direct satisfaction of an ins-
tinct. According to Freud, the id does not discriminate between
fantasy and reality; hence, if an instinct fails to obtain disch-
arge through motor activity, it will take an unconscious sensory
route (e.g., through dreams) via the remembered perception of a
previous satisfaction (Harper, 1959, p.166).
Psychoanalysis: Usually refers to the hypotheses and techniques of
Freud and his followers as opposed to those of the psychoanalytic
deviants or revisionists (Harper, 1959).
Psychodrama : A method developed by Dr. J..L. Moreno by which a person
explores his/her personal growth or health in dramatic action,
rather than with words alone.
Psychosomatic (disorder): A sign of bodily malfunctioning which is
believed to have originated from, or to have been aggravated by a
psychological influence (Harper, 1959, p.168).
Questions: Attempts to manipulate the environment for support, and thus
avoid the need for self-support. "Every time you refuse to answer
a question, you help the other person to develop his own resources"
(Perls, 1969a, p.38).
Reality principle: The process by which the ego becomes aware of the
demands of the environment and works out an adjustment between these
-444-
demands and the basic needs of the id. The reality principle
utilizes the secondary process (Harper, 1959, p.168).
Resistance (Psychoanalysis): Opposition to any attempt to get at the un-
conscious; or more generally, opposition offered by the patient
to the orders, actions, recommendations or suggestions of the ther-
apist (Harper, 1959).
(Gestalt therapy): Can be regarded as a form of contact and at the
same time, a sign post for the therapist and patient as to where to
work, or in which domain to concentrate.
Responsibility: Response-ability. Simply, "the ability to respond,
to have thoughts, reactions, emotions in a certain situation ... the
ability to be what one is" (Perls, 1969a, p.70).
Roles (Moreno): "Role taking is 'being' in a role in life itself, within
its relatively coercive and imperative contexts, for instance,
being a mother, a father, a policeman, etc. The roles are social
conserves, they have, or at least pretend to have, a finished form"
(Moreno, 1953, p.722). Role playing is "playing" a role, by choice,
in a chosen setting, for the purpose of exploring, experimenting,
developing, training or changing a role. Playing a role can take
the form of a test or an episode in the course of a psychodrama or
sociodrama (Moreno, 1953).
Secondary process: The characteristic functioning of the ego in which it
fulfills id impulses by indirect routes (in contrast to the primary
process) while at the same time meeting the demands of the envir-
onment (Harper, 1959, p.169).
Self (Gestalt therapy): A unitary concept. "It encompasses our physical,
emotional and cognitive aspects. Each of these is a different man-
ifestation of the activity of the self. Body, feelings and brain
-445-
are not separate, although they can be distinguished" (Latner, 1973,
p.59).
(Psychoanalysis): "that aspect of the person which comes out of
psychological, as distinguished from physiological, activities"
(Harper, 1959, p.170).
Self zone: The inner zone, the biological animal (Perls, 1969a).
Semantics: The meaning of meaning, i.e. of words or other signs.
Shuttling: A therapeutic device, used for the integration of parts of
the self into the personality (Beisser, 1970). It involves moving
from one aspect of experience to another (e.g., body awareness-
fantasy-memory) , being constantly aware of similarities and differ-
ences between these experiences, and their effects on each other
(Polster, 1975a).
Sickness: "is the unfinished situation par excellence, it can be fin-
ished only by death or by cure" (Perls et al., 1951, p.318).
Skillful (or creative) frustration: A therapeutic technique to "stop
the patient in his/her tracks" when s/he tries to avoid awareness
by roleplaying, fantasy, flight into the past or future, etc. (Ronan,
1977). "A strategy ranging from the most abortive of gestures
through a brief verbal message or angry confrontation to turning
away in withdrawal from the patient" (Baumgardner, 1975, p.58).
Spontaneity (Moreno): "Is the variable degree of adequate response
to situations of a variable degree of novelty. Novelty of behaviour
by itself is not a measure of spontaneity. Novelty has to be
qualified against its adequacy in situ. Adequacy of behaviour by
itself is also not the measure of spontaneity. Adequacy has to be
qualified against its novelty" (Moreno, 1953, p.722).
-446-
Support: See helpfullness.
Symmetry (or goodness of form): "A figure, as contrasted with ground,
is self-bounded. The configuration and state tend to be self-
closing and to be simple, balanced and symmetrical. The tendency
is towards 'good' form" (Allport, 1953, p.114).
Tension (Gestalt psychology): "a state of strain or disbalance in an
organism which leads to behaviour in the direction of restored
equilibrium" (Hartmann, 1935, p.313).
Therapy: "consists of the reintegration of attention and awareness"
(Enright, 1975a, p.15). "Our aim as therapists is to increase
human potential through the process of integration" (Perls, 1965,
p.73).
Thinking: "mental activity seems to work as a time, energy and work
saver for the individual" (Perls, 1969a, p.13).
Topdog: Equivalent to the Freudian superego. Righteous, authoritarian,
perfectionist, demanding (Perls, 1969a).
Topdog/underdog game: Topdog and underdog represent two extremes of a
continuum. "The more powerful underdog becomes. At the point
of resolution, topdog and underdog are both aspects of the same
dog" (Perls, 1959, p.72). This game of self-torture thus continues
until both extremes can be integrated as parts of the self.
Transference (Psychoanalysis): "the displacement of affect from one
object to another; specifically, the process whereby a patient
shifts feeling applicable to another person, often a parent, onto
the therapist"(Harper, 1959, p.172).
Unawareness: Gestalt therapists do not make use of the Freudian notion
-447-
of unconscious, meaning mental activity not available to the consc-
ious mind. Rather, they use the concept of unawareness, referring
to everything that is not in present awareness. Simkin (1976)
compared the personality to a hollow rubber ball, floating in
water. At any time, only a small portion is exposed, while all the
rest is submerged. This "submerged" part is unawareness.
Unfinished business: "Any incomplete Gestalt is unfinished business
demanding resolution. Usually, it takes the forms of unresolved
and incompletely expressed feelings"(Yontef, 1969, p.189).
Verbal: "the non-verbal is always more important than the verbal. Words
lie and persuade; but the posture, the voice, the non-verbal behav-
iour is true" (Perls, 1969a, p.61).
Void: "the concept of 'nothingness'" (Perls, 1969a, p.61).
Weltanschauung: A difficult term to translate from the German. Freud
suggested that it "is an intellectual construction which solves all
the problems of our existence uniformly on the basis of one over-
riding hypothesis, which, accordingly, leaves no question unanswered
and in which everything that interests us finds its fixed place"
(1933, p.158).
Whole (Gestalt psychology): The name "whole" is reserved to designate
Gestalten which are experienced as prior to and without reference
to "parts" (Ellis, 1930, p.145).
Withdrawal: Opposite polarity to contact: "withdrawal (is) being isol-
ated from the world while in tough with inner feelings or occupied
with DMZ functioning" (Baumgardner, 1975, p.20).
Why Merry-Go-Round: The search for causal determinants of behaviour.
usually unsatisfactory, as most events are over-determined. Also
-448-
encourages concentration on the past, and a fatalistic attitude,
rather than a lively examination of present means of living and
relating (Simkin, 1975, p.6).
Appendix II
Summary of Interviews With Practising Gestalt Therapists
-449-
II.1 The Interviewees
22 Gestalt therapists, eleven females and twelve males, were inter-
viewed during January and February, 1980. Interviewees were classified
"generationally" in terms of their distance from Fritz and Laura Perls,
using an adaptation of Kogan's (1973) system:
First generation: Therapists principally trained by Fritz and/or
Laura Perls.
Second generation: Therapists principally trained by first gener-
ation Gestalt therapists.
Third generation: Therapists principally trained by second gener-
ation Gestalt therapists.
All those interviewed were practising therapists whose basic train-
ing (at least) could be considered to be complete. All therapists were
selected from their entries in the Gestalt Directory (Wysong, 1979).
Those interviewed, and the generations into which they were classified,
were:
First generation:
Second generation:
Third generation:
Patricia Baumgardner (Palo Alto, Calif.)
Rick Erskine (New York, N.Y.)
Rainette Fantz (Cleveland, Ohio)
Marty From (Miami, Fla.)
Marjory Kreelman (Cleveland, Ohio)
Abe Levitsky (S.F., Calif.)
Ruth Ronall (New York, N.Y.)
Irma Shepherd (Atlanta, Ga.)
Joe Wysong (New York, N.Y.)
Dan Cohen (New York, N.Y.)
Elinor Greenberg (New York, N.Y.)
Ed Harris (St. Louis, Mo.)
Wesley Jackson (Cleveland, Ohio)
Jerry Kogan (S.F., Calif.)
Stephen Tobin (L.A., Calif.)
Roslyn Wallace (New York, N.Y.)
Alice Aslin (St. Louis, Mo.)
-450-
Jim Clendenen (Evergreen, Colo.)
Steve Isenberg (Boston, Mass.)
Conrad Sommers (St. Louis, Mo.)
Tom Watkins (Boston, Mass.)
Annie Young-Villiers (Boston, Mass.)
Joen Fagan and Gary Yontef also gave interviews, but the tapes
were too indistinct to be transcribed accurately. A number of therapists,
including Joe Zinker and Erv and Miriam Polster, were not available for
interviews during the time these were being conducted, although they
had agreed in principle to take part. A small number of therapists dec-
lined to be interviewed.
The background and training of the therapists in each generation
prior to their training in Gestalt therapy was as follows:
Table A
Background and Training of First Generation Gestalt Therapists Interviewed
Prior Orientation Number
Psychoanalytic (P.A.) 3
P.A./ Rogerian 2
Neo-P.A. / Rogerian / Hypno-
therapy / Rational Emotive Therapy 1
Adlerian 1
Rogerian / Eclectic 1
No prior training 1
9
Thus, 75% of the first generation Gestalt therapists had some prior
training in analytic theory and techniques. Seven of these therapists
were primarily trained in Gestalt therapy by Fritz Perls, two by Laura
Perls.
-451-
Table B
Background and Training of Second Generation Gestalt Therapists Interviewed
Rogerian 1
No special prior
orientation 1
No prior training 1
7
Thus, 60% of the second generation Gestalt therapists had had some
prior training in analytic theory and techniques. They received their
primary training in Gestalt therapy from the following sources:
Table C
Major Training in Gestalt Therapy: Second Generation
Trainer Number
New York Gestalt Institute 2
Isadore From 1
E. & M. Tolster; Los Angeles
Gestalt Institute 1
Cleveland Gestalt Institute 1
Eugene Sagan 1
Jim Simkin 1
Table D
Background and Training of Third Generation Gestalt Therapists Interviewed
Rogerian 2
-452-
Table D (cont)
P.A. / Behavioural / Rogerian 2
Psychomotor Therapy / Transactional
Analysis / Jungian 1
6
Thus, only 33% of third generation Gestalt therapists had had
significant prior training in analytic theory and techniques. They
received their principle training in Gestalt therapy from the following
sources:
Table E
Major Training in Gestalt Therapy: Third Generation
Trainer Number
Ed Harris 1
Cleveland Gestalt Institute 1
Boston Gestalt Institute 2
Associates for Human Resources, Boston 1
Varied sources 1
II.2 The Interviews
Interviews were conducted as informally as possible; most took place
in the office or home of the interviewee, but several were conducted in
restaurants, over a meal. Interviews were structured, but freedom was
provided for interviewees to raise material not specifically elicited by
the planned questions. Interviews varied in length from 45 minutes to
approximately two and a half hours. The major areas explored were:
1. Prior orientation (if any), background and training (see Tables
-453-
A to E) .
2. Reasons for choice of Gestalt as a major mode of therapy.
3. Perceived differences between Gestalt and other therapies; the
relationship between Gestalt therapy and psychoanalysis.
4. Which techniques interviewees most frequently used in therapy;
conversely, which techniques they avoided using.
5. Interviewees' opinions of the most important theoretical concepts
in Gestalt therapy.
6. Use of individual or group therapy.
7. Fritz Perls' relevance in 1980.
8. Other theoretical approaches interviewees combined with Gestalt
therapy.
9. Interviewees' perceptions of differences between "schools" of
Gestalt therapy.
10. Perceived limitations of Gestalt therapy.
11. The future of Gestalt therapy.
Interviewees opinions on these subjects are summarized in the following
sections. Interviewees are classified by generations.
II.2.1 Reasons for choosing Gestalt as a major mode of therapy
Interviewees produced a wide range of material in this area, with 42
individual concepts being mentioned. These fell into five major groups:
1. Characteristics of the therapy in action ("practical" consider-
ations) , e.g.,
Fast, powerful, efficient, effective, dynamic, realistic, complete,
down-to-earth, equalitarian (respect for people), constructive.
2. Theoretical aspects (including relationship to other theories), e.g.,
-454-
Excitement, responsibility, contact, relationship with psycho-
analysis, with Gestalt psychology, with Eastern approaches, with
existentialism.
3. Techniques, e.g.,
Useful techniques/procedure, present-centeredness, process-
oriented, non-interpretive, feeling-oriented, experiential, use
of drama, bodywork, learning, self-discovery.
4. Role of the therapist, e.g.,
Creative, natural, playful, informal, active, alive, free, inn-
ovative, experimantal.
5. Personal variables, e.g.,
Suits my life and personality, personally "right", liked my
trainer, confident of my ability to do Gestalt therapy.
Frequency of usage of the five categories by first, second and third
generation Gestalt therapists was as follows:
Table F
Reasons For Choice of Gestalt Therapy x Generation
Category
1. Practical
2. Theory
3. Techniques
4. Role of Therapist
5. Personal
This summary indicates that all three generations of Gestalt therap-
ists were attracted to Gestalt therapy by its techniques. For first
generation Gestalt therapists, however, "practical" aspects were
as important; they were much less so for second generation therapists,
while no therapist in the third generation made a response in this categ-
Generation
1st 2nd 3rd
9 4 0
7 6 4
9 9 5
1 11 2
0 2 2
-455-
ory. Theoretical aspects seem equally important to all three generations.
There is, however, a large and interesting discrepancy in the area of
perceived role of the therapist. For all but second generation Gestalt
therapists, these factors were of negligible importance. Table F also
reveals a tendency for third generation Gestalt therapists to report less
factors in response to this questionjust over two each on average, while
second generation therapists reported over five each, and first generation
therapists three each. This is a little surprising, in that for most
third generation therapists their choice of Gestalt therapy is more recent
than that of second, and certainly first generation Gestalt therapists.
This recency is not reflected in the detail of their responses.
II.2.2 Differences between Gestalt and other therapies
In addition to commenting on their reasons for choosing Gestalt ther-
apy as a major mode of therapy, some interviewees elaborated on what they
saw as the unique features of Gestalt therapy. The major themes which
emerged from these comments are summarized, by generations, below:
Table G
Distinctive Features of Gestalt Therapy x Generation
Generation
1st 2nd 3rd
Feature
Experientially based 2
Responsibility 3-2
Method of breaking through impasse 1 - ~
Present-centeredness 2 3 1
Non-intellectual 2 1
Non-interpretive 2 1
-456-
Table G (cont)
Feature
Not an "adjustment" therapy 1
No specific model of health 1
Emphasis on awareness 1
Approach to dreamwork
Simplicity
Creative -
Dynamic
Number of interviewees responding: 8 7 3'
Although these responses are diverse, the major features of Gestalt
therapy which are perceived as distinguishing it from other therapies
appear to be present-centeredness, responsibility and a non-interpretive
stance.
The small number of responses from the third generation Gestalt
therapists presumably reflects their lesser experience with other forms
of therapy.
II.2.3 Relationship between Gestalt therapy and psychoanalysis
An interesting trend emerged in interviewees' comments on the relat-
ionship between Gestalt therapy and psychoanalysis. Several first gener-
ation Gestalt therapists maintained that Fritz Perls retained an analyt-
ical, interpretive approach to his therapeutic work, although in his
writings he rejected interpretation as a useful therapeutic tool. One
first generation Gestalt therapist describes himself as a "Gestalt analy-
Generation
2nd 3rd
1
I
1
2
1 1
-457-
st"; another claims that Fritz Perls always assumed that his trainees
had a solid background in psychoanalytic theory.
Several second and third generation Gestalt therapists mentioned the
importance for them of taking histories of clients, in order to view curr-
ent behaviour in the context of past experience, an important practice in
psychoanalysis.
Psychoanalysis was described as "our background language, from which
we started" (Conrad Sommers) and as "the very basis for just about all
contemporary psychotherapies" (Abe Levitsky). Stephen Tobin saw one of
the directions in which Gestalt therapy would develop as "by going back
and getting some things from psychoanalysis"; Tom Watkins claimed: "I
am as much a Freudian in my thinking as I am a Gestaltist, at least theor-
etically. There's too much good stuff in psychoanalysis to reject it".
It would thus appear that practising Gestalt therapists of all three
generations make much more use of psychoanalytic concepts and practices
than would be inferred from the Gestalt therapy literature, which remains
on the whole anti-psychoanalytical.
(See Tables A, B and D for percentages of Gestalt therapists in each
generation interviewed who had received prior psychoanalytic training).
II.2.4 Most frequently used techniques
All interviewees responded to this question. The most frequent res-
ponses are summarized below:
-458-
Table H
Favoured Techniques x Generation
Generation
Technique
Awareness cont
Dreamwork
Empty chair
Polarities
Experiment
Fantasy
Here and now
Hotseat
Bodywork
Dialogue (not
Using fewer as
experienced
:inuum
empty chair)
; become more
1st
5
2
2
1
1
-
1
2
2
1
2
2nd
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
4
3r
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
-
-
(Other techniques mentioned by one therapist only were: non-interpretation,
psychodrama, enactment, humour, hypnosis, homework, excitement, labelling
existential style, using therapist as instrument, combination of free
association and awareness continuum, repetition, taking responsibility
for statements, using non-verbal cues, Masters and Johnson sex therapy
and teaching the client to be his/her own therapist).
Table H indicates that many therapists still find the "classical"
techniques of Gestalt therapy useful and powerful in their work. It should
be noted, however, that second generation Gestalt therapists in particular
often commented that they found themselves using techniques per se less
frequently as they became more experienced as therapists. As Elinor
-459-
Greenberg said: "...the more flamboyant practitioners of Gestalt who are
very good, who do it, who evolve and make up techniques as they go along,
have had a very strong influence on getting people to accept Gestalt thera-
py .. . then the hacks look at the techniques and solidify and codify them,
make lists of them, which is fine when you are teaching someone initially...
but people seem to think of Gestalt therapy as a technique, and it isn't".
This view is perhaps related to the high importance attached by sec-
ond generation Gestalt therapists to role of therapist variablescreat-
ivity, naturalness, playfullness, informality, activity, aliveness, free-
dom, innovation, experimentin determining their choice of Gestalt as
a major mode of therapy. The "gestalt" which seems to emerge is that
second generation Gestalt therapists are concerned with their personal,
unique, creative input as therapists, with freedom to experiment with
their own capabilities, rather than reliance on established techniques.
A statement by Jerry Kogan supports this view when he claims that the
Gestalt therapists of the 50's have gone on to become leaders, whereas
his generation of Gestalt therapists, the 60's generation (from which many
second generation Gestalt therapists were drawn) "went off and did their
own thing".
II.2.5 Techniques avoided or seldom used
Again, all interviewees responded to this question. Their respon-
ses are presented below:
-460-
Technique
Table I
Unused Techniques x Generation
Generation
1st 2nd 3rd
Fritz Perls' hard, contemptuous,
arrogant, impatient style 4 1
(all female therapists)
Dreamwork - 1 3
Hotseat 12-
Empty chair - 2 -
Doing individual work in front
of group - 2 -
Group exercises 1 - -
Exclusive here and now work 1 - -
None 2-1
The two major trends which emerge from these responses are a movement
away from major interest in dreamwork among second and especially third
generation Gestalt therapists, and a tendency for female therapists who
worked with Fritz Perls to disavow themselves from the extremes of his
aggressive, frustrating style.
II.2.6 Important theoretical concepts in Gestalt therapy
All interviewees responded to this question. Their most frequent
responses are summarized by generation below:
-461-
Concept
Table J
Important Theoretical Concepts x Generation
Generation
1st 2nd 3rd
Here and now 3 7 2
Awareness 4 3 2
Contact/contact boundary 2 3 3
Cycle of experience (homeostasis,
figure/ground, gestalt formation
and destruction) 5 2 1
Responsibility 3 12
Excitement 12 1
Theory of neurosis 12 1
Existentialism 111
Experiment 111
Dreamwork 11-
Anti-analysis 1 1
Polarities - 1 1
(Other concepts mentioned were: action, authenticity/honesty, energy,
feeling, growth, holism, human potential, individuality, observation,
phenomenology, process, resistance).
Table J provides a "definition" of the theoretical concepts which
some practising Gestalt therapists regard as most important. Surprisingly,
the gestalt cycle is not the most commonly reported concept, except for
first generation Gestalt therapists. This may reflect their greater fam-
iliarity with the formal theoretical underpinnings of Gestalt therapy.
For second generation Gestalt therapists, the most important concept
-462-
is the here and nowthis was unanimously endorsed.
A consideration of the mean number of concepts produced in response
to this question (first generation: 4.5; second generation: 5.1 J third
generation: 3.0) reveals that the third generation Gestaltists produced
fewer concepts, indicating that these therapists were less fluent in theory
than were first and second generation therapists.
Lastly, it should be noted that the theoretical concepts listed are
not claimed to be unique to Gestalt therapy. As Jerry Kogan stated after
giving his list: "Most of these things are not particularly original to
Fritzwhat was original was his ability to integrate some very complex
material from the different points in his life into a kind of fabric,
and in that sense in itself is new".
II.2.7 Individual versus group therapy
Contrary to Perls' contention that individual therapy is obsolete
(Perls, 1967), none of the 22 therapists interviewed used only group
sessions. Three therapists, one from each generation, said that they did
predominantly individual work. The others used some combination of ind-
ividual and group therapy, using either individual sessions leading to
later group work for most clients, or individual and group sessions tog-
ether .
It seems that Abe Levitsky was right when he said (of Perls' "obsol-
etion" statement): "In that respect, I would say he was about 110% wrong".
-463-
II.2.8 Fritz Perls' relevance in 1980
All interviewees responded to this question. Their responses are
summarized by generations below:
Table K
Perls' Relevance x Generation
Relevance
Completely relevant
Relevant, but some criticisms
Not at all relevant
Unable to decide
1st
Generation
2nd
5
2
3rd
Table K shows clearly that first generation Gestalt therapists resp-
onded positively to the question of Fritz Perls' relevance in 1980 more
often than did second and third generation therapists.
Second generation Gestalt therapists, while acknowledging Perls'
relevance as a founder of Gestalt therapy and as a theoretician, also
saw some areas where his approach needed modifying to remain relevant
to present day problems (see Table L below for a summary of these critic-
isms) .
Third generation Gestalt therapists were the only group among which
some therapists saw Perls as being irrelevant in 1980; their responses
reflect more polarization than those of the other two groups. This may
reflect their distance, not only from Perls himself, but from people
who had extensive contact with him, and thus their reliance on literature
or hearsay in answering the question.
-464-
Table L
Criticisms of Perls' Relevance x Generation
Criticism
Dated
1st
Generation
2nd 3rd
(Appropriate to the 60's, e.g.,
language, style, narcissism)
Theory
(Need integration, academic
acceptance, can't reject
psychoanalytic concepts)
Personal
(Sexist, lacked compassion,
couldn't "get it together" in
personal life)
Thus, it can be seen that the most common criticism of Perls' rel-
evance in 1980 was that his theory was propounded in the 1960's, and has
therefore become inappropriate in some respects due to social changes.
Stephen Tobin commented: "Fritz fitted right in with the spirit of the
60's". Ed Harris expanded: "In the 60's, the emphasis was on personal
rights...the beginning of the new age of narcissism, and he fit right into
that because of who he was. Not so today...what was missing then was the
sociallike the responsibility not for you, _to you".
Third generation Gestalt therapists tended to be critical of Perls
on a personal levelinterestingly, because few had ever met him.
II.2.9 Combination of other approaches with Gestalt therapy
The following combinations of therapeutic and theoretical approaches
with Gestalt therapy were reported by the interviewees:
-465-
Table M
Combination of Approaches x Generation
Generation
1st 2nd 3rd
Approach
Body Approaches
Bioenergetics 2-1
Psychomotor therapy 1-1
Bodywork - 2 1
Dance - 1 _
Yoga 1
Reichian therapy - - 1
Spiritual Approaches
Spiritual 1-1
Meditation 111
Transpersonal - - 1
Taoism - - 1
Buddhism . - - 1
Other Theoretical Approaches
Transactional analysis 2-1
Psychoanalysis 1-1
Jungian 1-1
Adlerian 1
Neurolinguistic programming - - 2
Number of interviewees responding: 6 2 5
Once again, the responses of the second generation Gestalt therapists
differ from those of the first and third generation therapists. Examin-
ation of their interview transcripts revealed that they tended to report
-466-
modifications they had made either to their style of doing Gestalt
(e.g., "use own personal history and teaching stories", "work with whole
group", "use own feelings, body"), or to new applications of Gestalt
techniques (e.g., "apply Gestalt therapy to sexual fantasies", "set up
work-life program, educators' program"), rather than to the use of app-
roaches outside Gestalt.
There is also a tendency for the younger, third generation Gestalt
therapists to incorporate spiritual approaches more often than first or
second generation therapists, perhaps reflecting their response to social
trends.
II.2.10 Styles of Gestalt therapy
Six first, four second and two third generation Gestalt therapists
responded that they felt there were different regional schools of Gestalt
therapy, and attempted to describe what they saw as characteristics of
these schools. One first generation and two third generation therapists
stated that they felt differences between individual therapists were
greater than those between schools. The remainder claimed that their
experience with therapists from other regions was not extensive enough
for them to comment.
There were no obvious generational differences in the responses of
the twelve therapists who did describe different schools of Gestalt therapy.
The responses overall, however, yielded an interesting picture of the
stereotypes of Gestalt therapy as practised in three major centersthe
East and West coasts of the U.S.A., and Cleveland, Ohio:
-467-
West Coast
Hard, aggressive, abrasive, provocative, non-supportive, confrontive
emphasis on anger, focus on one-to-one work, use of hotseat.
Fast.
More into ethereal, spiritual approaches than East coast.
East Coast
Rational, emphasis on thinking, analysing, theoretical grounding.
Slow, conservative, formal, traditional.
More training, supervision than on West coast.
More participation, support.
Cleveland
Balanced, solid, academic, learned, scholarly.
Slower than West coast.
Emphasis on contact, relationships, loving.
Eclectic.
II.2.11 Limitations of Gestalt therapy
All interviewees responded to this question. Their most frequent
responses are summarized by generations below:
Table N
Limitations x Generation
Generation
T
. . . 1st 2nd 3rd
Limitation
Inappropriate with particular
kinds of clients (e.g., psychotics,
children, substance addicts, the
uneducated, those who won't
fantasize
4 3 1
-468-
Table N (cont)
Limitation
Cannot stay exclusively in the here
and now; need to know client's
history
Insufficient theoretical material
(e.g., on personality, self,
development)
Narrow, stylized, technique-
oriented if followed exhaustively
Anti-intellectual
Limitations are of therapist,
rather than approach
Not aware of any limitations
1st
1
1
Generation
2nd
1
1
3rd
(Responses made by only one therapist were: poor training, needs research,
ignores group dynamics, non-directive, becoming watered-down, too intense
for some clients, not spiritual, not body-oriented enough).
The major limitations of -the Gestalt approach as seen by this sample
of therapists thus seem to be its inapplicability to all client popul-
ations and its emphasis on working exclusively in the here and now.
Second generation therapists alone were concerned with the lack of solid
theoretical material. Almost 25% of those interviewed saw no limitations
in the Gestalt approach itself; it appears, however, that there are several
areas where the approach could be modified to make it more useful in
practice.
II.2.12 The future for Gestalt therapy
Two interviewees, one first and one third generation Gestalt therapist,
-469-
said that they had no idea of what the future held for Gestalt therapy;
all other interviewees responded to the question. Some spoke of changes
they felt would occur; others referred to changes they hoped would happen,
The pattern of responses was overwhelmingly positive:
Table 0
Positive or Negative Future x Generation
Generation
Future
Positive
Negative
1st 2nd
7
1
6
1
3rd
5
0
The most common responses are summarized by generations below:
Table P
Future Predictions x Generation
Prediction
Will move into research and
publication; gain academic
acceptance
Will provide the theoretical
groundwork for other approaches
Will flourish and grow
Will diversify
May lose its identity
1st
1
1
2
2
Generation
2nd 3rd
1
2
(Other responses were: may rigidify, will be used with larger and
larger groups, will achieve a better balance between feeling and cognition,
will attract ex-Freudian therapists as clients move away from traditional
analysis, will pervade the culture more, will become accepted as a philo-
-470-
sophy of life, will simply be itself, will be more applied, e.g., in educ-
ation, will become more spiritual, will return to psychoanalytic theory
for clarification of concepts).
II.3 Conclusion
These interviews revealed several trends in the development of Ges-
talt therapy, as well as generational differences between Gestalt therap-
ists. The major findings were:
1. Most first and second generation Gestalt therapists had had train-
ing in psychoanalysis before becoming Gestalt therapists. Less
than half the third generation Gestalt therapists had had such
training; the background of Gestalt therapists appears to be
changing.
2. First generation Gestalt therapists were attracted to Gestalt
therapy by its techniques and by practical considerations; second
generation Gestalt therapists were attracted by the role of the
Gestalt therapist and by Gestalt techniques; third generation
Gestalt therapists were attracted by techniques and by Gestalt
theory.
3. All generations saw the most distinctive features of Gestalt ther-
apy as: present-centeredness, responsibility and the avoidance
of interpretation.
4. There was a trend for Gestalt therapists of all generations to
stress the importance of the relationship between Gestalt therapy
and psychoanalysis. They disagreed with Perls' rejection of many
psychoanalytic concepts and practices.
-471-
All therapists made some use of "traditional" Gestalt techniques;
some therapists, however, particularly from the second generation,
mentioned that they were relying less on techniques as their
skill and confidence as therapists increased.
Second, and especially third, -generation Gestalt therapists repor-
ted a movement away from focusing on dreamwork in therapy; female
therapists who worked with Perls tended to reject his aggressive
style.
The most important theoretical concepts in Gestalt therapy were
reported as: here and now, awareness, contact and the cycle of
experience.
All of the therapists interviewed made some use of individual
therapy.
Most therapists saw Perls as being relevant in 1980, although he
was criticized for the datedness of some of his concepts, for
theoretical inadequacies and for some personal failings.
First and third generation Gestalt therapists reported combining
Gestalt therapy with a variety of other approaches, body-oriented,
psychological and spiritual. Most second generation Gestalt
therapists said they used Gestalt alone..
Those therapists who felt they had experienced regional styles
of Gestalt therapy reported that the West coast style is fast,
aggressive, and emphasizes spirituality; the East coast style
is slower, more "rational", more participative and emphasizes
training and supervision; the Cleveland style is more "academic",
slower' than the West coast,and emphasizes love and contact.
-472-
12. The major limitation of the Gestalt approach was seen to be its
unsuitability for use with some clients, e.g., psychotics, chil-
dren.
13. Most therapists saw a positive future for Gestalt therapy; accep-
tance by the academic establishment and combination with other
approaches were the most common predictions.
The interviews thus show that Gestalt therapy has continued to grow
and change since Fritz Perls' death in 1970, although it remains essent-
ially "true" to his theory and practice as described in his published
works. Most therapists reported that Gestalt therapy would continue to
respond to social changes, and to become applicable to more and more areas
of human concern.
Appendix III
Index of the Complete Works of F.S. Perls
-473-
Throughout this index, books and articles by F.S. Perls (some as
sole author, some written in collaboration with others) are referred
to by their original date of publication. The page numbers given are
relevant to the following editions of Perls' works:
1946 : Perls, F.S. Planned psychotherapy. The Gestalt Journal,
1979, II (2), 4-23.
1947 : Perls, F.S. Ego, hunger and aggression. N.Y.: Vintage
Books, 1969.
1948 : Perls, F.S. Theory and technique of personality integr-
ation. In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab,
1950 : Perls, F.S. & Goodman, P. The theory of "the removal of
inner conflict". In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is.
Moab, Utah: Real People Press, 1975.
1951 : Perls, F.S., Hefferline, R.F. & Goodman, P. Gestalt
therapy: excitement and growth in the human person-
ality. Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin, 1976.
1953 : Perls, F.S. Morality, ego-boundary and aggression. In
J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real
People Press, 1975.
1957 : Perls, F.S. Cooper union forumlecture series: "The
Self"; "Finding self through Gestalt therapy" The
Gestalt Journal, 1978, I (1), 54-73.
1959 : Perls, F.S. Resolution. In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt
-474-
is. Moab, Utah: Real People Press, 1975.
1965 : Perls, F.S. Gestalt therapy and human potentialities.
In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah:
Real People Press, 1975.
1966a : Perls, F.S. Four lectures. In J. Fagan and I.L. Shepherd
(
Eds
-)> Gestalt therapy now. N.Y.: Harper Colophon,
1971.
1966b : Perls, F.S. Dream seminars. In J. Fagan and I.L. Shepherd
(Eds.), Gestalt therapy now. N.Y.: Harper Colophon,
1971.
1967
1968
1969a
1969b
1973
1975
Perls, F.S. Group vs. individual therapy. In J.O.
Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab, Utah: Real People
Press, 1971.
Perls, F.S. & Clements, C.C. Acting out vs. acting
through. In J.O. Stevens (Ed.), Gestalt is. Moab,
Perls, F.S. Gestalt therapy verbatim. N.Y.: Bantam
Books, 1974.
Perls, F.S. In and out the garbage pail. N.Y.: Bantam
Books, 1972.
Perls, F.S. The gestalt approach and eyewitness to therapy,
N.Y.: Bantam Books, 1976.
Perls, F.S. Legacy from Fritz. Palo Alto, Calif.:
Science and Behaviour Books, 1975.
1978a : Perls, F.S. Psychiatry in a new key. The Gestalt Journal,
-475-
1978* 1,(1), 32-53.
1978b : Perls, F.S. Psychiatry in a new key: Part 2. The Gestalt
Journal, 1978, I (2), 48-65.
This index was printed using the facilities of a Univac computer;
the typeface is thus slightly different from that used in the rest of
the dissertation.
-476-
ABOUT(ISM)
1946 15
1951 :48,50
1957 -57
1959 -70,71
1966A:15
1969A:16,17,63,86,95,134
1969B:209,210
1973 142,150
ABRAHAM, K-
1947 85.129
ABSTRACTION'
1946 :17.21
1947 26 57,83,210,212,213
1948 51
1951 10,11,68,95,98,99.109,110,114,115,127.147,182
262,263 273,289,314-317,332,336,342-344,350,353
360,364,366-369,37 7,37 9,383,384,404,426,429 432
434,435,443,447,448,454,476,477,495-498,502,507
514,516.518
1953 30
1967 10
1969A:63,64,85
1978A:35,38,43,50,52
ACCEPT:
1946 16,20
1947 110,114,124,125,158,160,170,199,218,271
1948 :62.67
1951 :105,117,154,155,189,190,191,232,276,294,313,
3 96
1965 :2
1969A:10,12,29,30,75,76,78,122,193
1978B:51
ACHILLES:
1947 :176
ACTING/ACTOR:
1947 -26.29,30 139,207,222,234
1951 :14,138.230
1965 4,6
1966A:31
1966B:222
1968 :17,18,19 20,21.23.25
1978A:43
1978B:60
ACTION:
1946 -6,15
1947 :21,43.52,175-6,178,180,181,194 199,213,234,
254,261
1948 :51,55,61
1951 .27,58,69, 71, 78,99,104,106,114,127, 129,131,
159,189,214,273,291
1959 :72
1965 7
1966A:32
-477-
1978A:40,41
1978B-54.61
ACTIVITY:
1947 21 216.218,220,221.222,232,237
1951 :47,48,66,215,430.433,446,479,487,506
1965 1
1966A:38
ACTUALITY:
1946 :13,14.16,18
1947 95,97,205,206,207,208,209-212,213,225,254,2
1948 57,60
1951 :67,68,69,76,82,90,93,98,102,112,114,115,139
147,193,283,295,2 99.32 7,32 9,336,337,340,
353,357,37 4-3 7 6,37 8,383,385,387,402,427-42 9
446,480,493,503,507,508,515.525-52 7
1965 5
1967 .11
1969A:6,50
1973 :84,86,93
1975 :160
1978A-.37,40-42,45
ACTUALIZE:
1947 208
1951 :10.57,58,59,60,63,64,66,67,371, 396,422,432,
436,465,473
1965 2
1966A:20
1969A:20,33,34,41,85
ADJUSTMENT:
1946 :8,13,19,21
194 7 : 46.55,81,92,97,102,176,224, 247,263
1948 :49.50 51,65,67
1951 :108,132,181,233,250,259,276,277,278,284,288
293-2 95,298,299,309,311,317,32 5,33 5,338,
34 8,354,360-3 62,36 5,3 70,387 ,390,392,406,418
4 2 0,42 7,428,45 6,45 8,461-4 63,471,47 2,483,488
499,505,510,515,519
1969A:52.68
ADLER, A:
1946 .-12,13,14,21
194 7 66,67,72,75,92,93,101,126,160,169,218,266
1948 49,52,57,61,68
1951 :17,65,66,329
1967 10
1968 :20
1969B:51,169
1973 :51
AFFECTION-
1947 -23,83.100,110,117,159,160,168,170,198,242,2
266,271
1951 :232,233,373,374,395,417,434.490,493,497,498
504,505,512,517
1957 60
1975 137,214
-478-
1978 :50,51
1978B:57
AFRAID:
1947 43,136 160,161,179,193,195,242,244,245 253
1951 :82 '
1969A:103,108,113 119,139,160,161,285
AGGRESSION:
1946 ill
1947 5,6,7,23,24,29,48 49,63,64.67,68,75,87 102
103,109,113,114,116,117-119.120,121,123 127
130-133,135-137,140,145,148,149.153-155 157-
161,163-165,167.171,172,174,176,185,188!194-
196,221,222,225,240-242,245,246,254,262 263
1948 48.58,60.64
1950 :41
1951 :17,18,19,79,97,100,101,155.164,166.167,180
181,186,187,189.190,195,200,202,212,213 217
218.231,233,236,240,241,243,247 254,255^258'
262-265,279,280.290,295-297,335,347,351 353
357,372.387.389,390,391.393,395,396,398-400'
402,406,407,410,415,416,418-422,42 7,42 8 433
434,447,450,460,461,463,469.474,475.483,490
491,501,504,505,509,510,516-518,526
1953 28,29,31,33,35,36,37
1965 4
1966A:21,27,30,38
1966B:212
1968 :20,21.23,25
1969A:88,89,124,149,199,202,254,279
1969B:169,176,190,216
1973 -34,35,83,110,131,151,154,188,189
1975 114,151
1978B 49,54
AGORAPHOBIA:
1946 :17
1947 :73,178
"AHA":
1951 :54.279,438
1969A:258
1969B:33,117
1973 68,100
1975 :120
AIMS:
1947 185,186,190.229 238,270,271
1948 :55
1951 67,69,83,89.90,116,184,259,286,289,329,338.
359,387,411,481
1965 1
1969A 71
1975 144,180
AIR-
1947 267,271
1957 -62
1966A:30
-479-
ALCOHOL:
1946 :19
1947 24,68,257
1951 -235.236,289
ALERT:
1946 :21
1947 -230,233
1951 170,313,338
1966A:38
1978B:64
ALEXANDER, F.M:
1946 21
1947 47,67 100.112,125,151,180,181
1948 -61
1951 341
1978B:60
ALIENATION:
1947 138,139,141.143,144,146 147,149,150,151,153,
161,170,186
1948 :55
1950 :40
1951 10,17,191,206,259,281 287,314,320 345,367,373,376,
379,409,416,417,418,420,42 6,428-4 30,432,433,43 5,445,
44 7,460,461,46 9-4 71,473,474,481-4 83,504,50 9,512,52 2,
523 526,527
1953 30.31.32
1965 :2.6
1966A:17,21.27
1969A:8,10,12,40,72,80,107,130,178
1973 :26.39,181,182
1975 113,114,120
ALIMENTARY:
1946 :20
1947 -.42,170,171
1948 -50,64
1951 :213,220.243,244
ALIVE:
1947 133,199
1959 72
1968 25
1969A:61,66,74,95,100,107,116,253,280
1975 102,118.119,153
AMBIDEXTROUS:
1966B:212
1978B:63
AMBITION:
1946 :16
1947 210,232 255,259,271
1951 66,67,340
1969A:161,232
AMBIVALENCE:
1947 53,56,57,197,244
1951 505
1973 :50
-480-
AMNESIA
1946 :12,13
1947 -88.216,
1951 16,310
ANAESTHESIA:
247
1947
1951
ANAL:
1947
45,156,164,165,236,250
57
74,79
164
83,84,85,94,109,112,114,125,131,156
165,244 247,249,250,251
252
219
10
1951
1967
1969A:251
1969B:157
1978B-.64
ANALYZE:
1946
1947
329.516
186,293
5,11,13,15,18,21
73,78,82,83,88,89,93,96
154,156,158,159
198-200,202,203
269,331
164
209
1948
1951
1957
1968
1969A
1975
ANATOMY
1947
1951
1957
1978A
ANDERSON
55
74
57,58,59,60,61,62,63,68
266,278,281.283,285
153
195
250
54
18
437.442,492,500,517,524
67
18,21
70
148
31
358
55,68
44.45
A:
101
169
222
112,125,126
178-181
230-232
151
185,191
236-239
380,383 384.431
1966A:19
ANGER:
1947
1948
1950
1951
1957
1966A:
1966B:
1967
1968
1969A:
1973
1975 :
1978A
ANGYAL,
1978A:
30,54,
62
41
84,97,
274,280,297
402,410,461
58,60
15,22,23,27
215,218,220
14
20,25
51,52,60,68
146 161,162
97,114,203
51,52
A:
36
58.117,144,254
131,132,136,15 9,16 6,189,240.243,26 6
299,303,377
464,465,475
31
393
488
394
514
396
525
397,398
80,97,152.160, 165.214,256
166
-481-
ANIMALS r
1947 : 26,34,48,64,82,83,113,158,198,208.212,229,24
272
1948 -45 T
1951 :109.274,275,280,283,285,286,307,308,309,310,
311,331359,360,363,365,367-370,373,394,405,
406,413,415,440,448,454,456,45 7,462,465,524
1959 :70
1968 -.25
1975 :104
1978B:60
ANNIHILATION:
1947 :23,59,64,65,66,99,113,268
1948 -50,63,64
1951 183,297,344,353,393,394,395,398,402,413,414,
417.419,428,458,459,461,467,478,483,488,490,
491,494-496,501,504,512,513,516,517,520
1953 33.34
1978A :41,52
1978B:49,53,58
ANNOY (ANNOYANCE):
1947 -25,113,120,158.174,177,180,181.194. 217, 253, 2
259,260
1951 :67,109,134,160,194,206,219,240
1957 57
ANTEOS:
1969A:68
ANTHROPOLOGY:
1951 147,289,358,359,361,362,366,45 5
ANTICIPATE:
1947 -26.208,249,259
1951 -59,65,67,116,255,340,357
ANXIETY:
1947 .-25,33,43,46,66,68,74,75,76,77,78,79,91,100,1
133,194
1948 :55,60,67
1951 :15,16,67,82,88,92,108,116,119,131,152,153,16
163,171,181,186,203,207,247,248,27 7,27 9,287,
289,295,309,312,335-338,373,377,378,390,392,
401,419,430,442,447,450.457,46 6,46 7.47 0,471,
480,484,487,489,490,504,507,510,511,514,515,
519,521,525
1956 :35,36
1957 :54,57.59,60,62,65
1966A:16,26
1969A:2,3,32,33,50,51 69,82.131,276,278
1969B:168.169,170,172,173.174,175,176,183.220
1973 87.89,91,93.97,123
1975 :105,107,112
1978A:49
1978B:54
ANTI-SOCIAL:
1951 -386,38 7,389.393,406,410,425
A.P.A., A-A.P:
-482-
1969A:77
1969B:113,135,139.265
APPETITE:
1947 -45,96,108,113,125,126,128,156,157.179,188,
190,198,199
1951 240,250,276,294.373.390,394,395,396,397,398.
39 9,400.404,47 457,458,460.463,465,46 6,467,
47 3,475.476,478.484,490,504,505,512,513
1953 35,36
1969A:9
1978B:54
APPRECIATION:
1947 115,153,168,177,195,215,221,231,269,271
1948 64
1951 :71,94
1966B-212
1967 14
1973 172
1978B:54
ARISTOPHANES:
1951 .391
ARISTOTLE:
1946 :16
1951 -27 5,276,303,311,36 5,427,430
1969B:50,170
ARMOR:
1947 65,67,70,72,7 7,124,132,230,267
1948 49,58,59,60,65
1951 14,262,421,524
1957 -57
1965 4
1969A:7.55,93
1969B:231,255,276
1973 :51,95
ART:
1947 105,129,268
1951 :13,52,158,259,290,293,355,370,378,411,451,
464,479,498,507
1957 :70
1969A:54,71,232
1975 113
1978A :43
ASHLEY MONTAGU, F"
1951 365
"AS IF":
1946 18,19
1947 26,67,109,110,128,130.131,133,141,142,143,153,
166,193,220,221,236,237,238,253
1951 :110,353,362
1953 28
1957 :64,70
1966A:20
1969A:50,53,54,59
1969B:191,248,291
-483-
1973 113
1975 -99
1978A 42,53
1978B:57,59
ASLEEP:
1947 192,201
1951 :45,110,134,309,311.405,43 6.501
1957 59
1966A.-31
ASPIRIN:
1947 :151
1948 -54
1951 :58,205,297,318
ASSIMILATION:
1946 :11,20,21,23
194 7 4,5,6,8,34,65 76,84,98,103,104 105,110,115,116
123-12 7,130-13 3,148,158,160,164-168,172,173,17
191,192,195,19 9,200,201,204,218,22 5,237-246,25
257
1948 :54,55,61,63,67
1950 43
1951 14,110,154,15 5,157,185,205,208,230.231,232,233
242-245,251,262,276,27 7,280,281,33 5.340-3 43.
36 6,372,378,394,395,39 7,406,407,412,414.416,
417,422,427,42 8,433,43 8,448,450,456,457,459,
460,463,466.471,473,47 7-4 7 9,482.484-487,491,
506,510,512,515,517,524,52 5
1953 33,35
1959 -71
1966A22.27
1967 10
196 8 20
1969A:23,32,34,45,55,60,72,74,80,105,107,114.131,202
203,230
1969B:13,173,191,213,276
1973 :32.33,42,49,54,58,59,65,83,179,182,189,190
1975 :96,100,119,120.137,145,150,158
1978A :38,53
1978B:55,65
ASSOCIATION:
1946 -9
1947 :7,13,14,27,43,79,82,92,128,187,202,204,205
1948 :50,58
1951 :19,285,306.379,380,452,453,454
1969A:55,73,98,121
1973 :73,88,104
1975 :101.118
1978B:55
ASTHMA
1948 60,66
1951 :318
1957 :62
1973 39
ATROPHY:
-484-
1947 :46,168
1951 -303
ATTACK:
1947 -.48,130,131 153,155,158.161,165,167,195,241,
266,269
1951 105 132,186,189,243,262,296,297,398
1978A:42
ATTENDANCE:
1947 :154,208,233
1951 85 86,88,100,107,108,114,115,117,118,242,2 93,
316,338,414,470,475,489
1975 98
ATTENTION:
1946 :13,18
1947 17 49,50,57,67,70,89.92,125,126,131,139,153.
156,171,173,185,187.190,200.204,210,213,214,
2 21,22 9,232,233.235,23 6,238,250,254,260,263,
269
1948 48,50 51,62 ;
1951 15,16 51,58,63.64,83-85,87-9 3,96,104,106,107,
112.113,115,118,122,125,133-135.139,146,147,151,
152,154,155,166,170,184,187,203.205,206,208,|219,
242,263,280,287,288,293,298,305,307,308,313,316,
323-325,327,328,337,373,379,382,413,416,421,433,
460.461,46 7,472,488,48 9,492,494,495,501,502,507,
521,526
1957 60,68,69
1965 :4
1966A:29,35
1969A:45,56,57,58,65,68,85,107,256,259,299
1969B:239,294
1973 :11,12,30,51,64,87,88,98,100,112, 113,141,147,
152
197 5 -.93,96,9 7,98,99,100,101,102,111
1978A:37,38,40.43,48,49
1978B.-64
ATTITUDE:
1946 :18
1947 :5.14,19,28,44,53,57,67,69,73,79,93,98,100,
110,114,115,122,124,125,129,134-136,145,149,
151,155,161,162,167,171,172,175,178,180,181,
185,186,188,191.193,194,19 7-200,209,213,214,
216,218.228,232,238,242,243,248,252-2 54,256,
263,268,271
1948 50,57,58,60,61
1950 :43
1951 :17,20,27,28,48,55 83,89,98,106,119,130,134,
157,159,163,178,189,191 192,193,195,218,230,
231,232,242,245,251,254,258,262,281,292,296,
298,315,316,333.337,341.343-345.347-352,356,
358,367 373,3 75,376,37 8,381-3 83,388,38 9,391,
394,407 409,414,418,422,42 9,431,43 7,438,445,
463,481,484,485,490,491,495,496,503,505,511-
514,516,517
-485-
1953
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1968
1969A
1973
1975
1978B:49,63
ATTRACTION:
28
3,4
20,25.3
204
12
17
6,46.55
20.33 3
101,103
1947
1948
1951
1969A
1978B
AUDIENCE
189,215
48
83,86,8
9,11.23
50
,72,83.175,246
5 42,51,72.79,81.83,102.103,104,138,204
,108
,255.256,269
8,89,33 7,346,474,494.501,502 514
165
62
206
14
83.85
:37
352,378,381 484
113,131,139,154,155,17 7,234,276
20
32
152
1951
1957
1966B;
1967
1969A:
1978A
AUTHENTIC
1966A:22
1967
1968
1969A
1969B:
1973
1975
AUTHORITY:
1946 :20
1951 :40 41 351,354,355,366,381,391 416,420,421,513
1965 5
1969A:120
AVENARIUS:
1947 21
AVOIDANCE
14
18
31
286,
176
95,100,
287
2,24,25
4,53,56,60,98,
.295
192
154
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1957
1965
1966A
14
7,8,20
96,97,1
161 162
202 203
235,249
58,61.6
58,67,8
190,208
377,387
467,472
36
59,68
4
17,20,2
67.68-70,71,73,74,77,82
131, 136,147,149,155,156
155,257
221
263
226,228 231,234
25,43 63,64,66
10,113,124,125
,165,171 172,176,178.179,181,189,195,199,
,204,207,208,216,219
,250,251 254,21
2,67
9,111,130 136,
,219,242,258,2:
,394,407,410,4:
,489,504,512 5!
3,25,27,28
139,159,176,177,178,183
76,288,297,307,309,328,
12,413,415,416,459,465,
.14-517
-486-
1966B:204;219,228
1967 11
1968 18,22
1969A:21,41,42,55,56,58,60.70,72,75,80,124,129,131.
164,247,275
1969B:294
1973 -75,97,130,131,132,136,140
1975 -.96,98,101, 102.103,115, 120,187
1978B:58
AWAKE:
1947 42.62,91 206,208,214,231 261
1951 -44,99,114,132,133,311
1965 :6
1966A.-34
1966B:215,216
1969A:133,134,179
AWARE(NESS):
1946 :9,13,14.17,19-22
1947 : 5,17,18,33,35,38,42,50,51,55,66,69,73,87,91,
92.137,139,140,164-166,171,172,179,180,181,
186,193-195,198,19 9,202,203.206.209.213,218,
223,226,22 8,232,236,240,249,250,255,256,25 7,
259.263,269
1948 -50,52,53,55,56,57,58.59,60,62,63,64,66.67
1950 :40.41.42
1951 : 9,15. 20,40,41 48,50,58,59,61,62 63,64,65,67,
68,70.72-74 81-83,87,89,92,100,102,104-108,
112-120,124.127,129-134,136,137,139-142,146,
147.151,163,167,175,177.184,186-191,195,196,
200.203,204,213-215.217,230,232-2 34,254,25 5,
258,273,274,276,27 7,27 9,282.286-288,290,291,
293,296-298,306-314,316,317,323,32 4,32 7,341,
345,347,348,35 9,362,363,366.369,373,375.380-
381-383.387,397 3 98,400,401,410,412,417,422,
429,432-43 6,438,440,442-44 5,451-4 53.45 7,458,
459,460,462,464,466,467,469,470,473,475.47 7,
47 9,484,489,491-494,496,499,504,506,508-512,
516.521,523-526
1957 :55,56
1959 :69 70,71,72,73
1965 4,6
1966A:14,17,21,26,29,33,3 5,37,38
1966B:219
1968 17.1820,22,23
1969A: 1,9 ,14, 16, 17.25.28.29,41,43,44,48.50,52,53,54,
55,56.58 61,64.67,72,76,78 79,108.116,119,120,
125 133,139,164,177,194.253,256,258,270,277,298
1969B:26,29,69,86,159,160 161 238, 261,272
1973 .-5,8,11.12.24,30,47,49.53,54.55.63-65,66.68,71,
73-7 5 79.85,86,88-93,96,100.101,105,106,107-
115,121.126-141,145,167,188,194-201
1975 :96,97,98,100 101,102,103,105,106 108 111,113,
118,180 189,204
1978A-37,38,40
-487-
1978B:53 54 57,59,62
AWKWARD:
1946 13
1947 156.177 214.224 228,233,254 256
1951* -20 519
1966A-.38
BABY -
1947 134.157,170,191.192,270
1951 :9,46240
1966A:25
1969A:30,31,109
BACH, J.S
1948 48
BACKGROUND:
1946 :8,10,13,19
1947 36.41.49,52,53,54,57.60 62,68 69 82 91.95 96,
101.110,139,143,147,156,177 187,188,189,213.
230,231,23 5.244,2 53,25 6 25 7,270
1948 :51 52,56,62
1951 16.18.51,52.53,55,85.86,88,89 191.274,275,278,
280 285 287,292 297,298.303,307,311 315,318.
344,371 382,407 429,432.433 439,457-461,468-
470,47 3,47 6-47 8,49 2.494-496 500,507,509,510,
518,525
1957 -68
1959 70,71
1965 1
1966A:16,26
1969A:38,51^64 95,141
197 3 :189
1975 98,100,105,106 153
1978A:47 51 52
1978B:51,59
"BAD"
1946 -7
1947 51-59,61,79,186,215
1948 66,67
1950 :41
1951 190 410.483
1953 27 28 29,30,32,37
1968 -23
1975 110
BALANCE:
1946 21
1947 7,16 19,31 34,35.46,47,48.50 69,70 76,77,85,
92,95 103,15,168,190 200,208,222,224.231,232,
258
1948 48,63
1950 40,41
1951 :18,70,71,159.202 220,221,250,409.410
1957 58 69
1959 :72
1965 4
1966A 24,27,38
-488-
1967 12
1968 23 24,25
1969A:6 13 .15 17,41.47 , 65 75
1969B:79 87 -180
1973 -5.7 18,27 28,31,43.51,52,64,65 172
1975 105 106,107
1978A:43,44 47
1978B:53 56 64
BARRIERS
1948 67
1951 :47,98,101 106,115,241,250 262
1959 :69
1969A:30
1975 97
BARTOK (VIOLIN CONCERTO):
1969A 252
BASEDOW'S (DISEASE)
1951 15
1969B:172
1978A-.43
BEATLES
1969A:23
iBEETHOVEN, L-
1948 :48
BEHAVIOUR:
' 1946 :10,16
1947 27 30,34.46,53 55,56.58,61,73.93,98,110,112,
113,115 124,125.145,154,156,192.193,194,198,
200,206,207.214,216,235,237,244,246,254,271
1948 -45,46.47,50.52
1950 -43
1951 :10.13,18,19 30,3143,44,45,48,54,58.60,67,68,
77,82 83.92,98 105,114,12 5.12 7 , 128 130,13 5,
138.140,146.151,158,166,175,177,181,183-185,
187.189,190,193.194,202,204-206,215,230,231,
240,241,245,254,255,257,259,277,278,283 285,
28 9 2 92.298,303.306,314,317,320 323,324,32 8,
32 9.334 33 7,338,342,344 34 9 352 354,35 5,35 9,
3 60 365,3 70,374-3 7 6,37 9,384-3 87 4 78-480,482.
483,492,493,506,508,509.511,513,516,518
1957 :58,68
1965 1 2 3,4,5
1966A:14,16,30
1966B:217
1967 9.10 11.12
1968 21 22,23 24
1969A 2,6,7.10,11 20,31 47,48 63,64 65,68,136,140,
175,202
1973 10,11,16.17,19,25,30,31,33,35,40,42,55,64,68,
7 2 75,76,80,81,99,102,104,105,108,111,157,166
105 108,111,157,166
1975 :98,99.108-111,113
1978A:36,42,43 50
1978B 60,62,63
-489-
BEHAVIOURISM
1947
1966A
1967
1969B:
BEING:
1947
1966A
1969A
BEISSER,
1969B:
BELIEVE:
1947
1951
1969A:
1973
BENEDIKT
1947 :
BERGLER,
1951
1953
BERGSON,
1947
1951 :
1966A:
1969B:
1975 :
1978A:
BERNE, E
1947 :
1966A:
1969A:
1969B:
269
14
9,11
33 86
212
31
42,71
A:
265
159,161 239.261
106,114,132.239
21.31 32-67
143 230 373
34,42,45 57
168,172.179
, T
75
E-
502
31
H:
120-122 123,144,149,166,216,234
376
61 64 73 77 80,89.91,203,248,267
195
66,84
15
30
170
96
50
5
20
59
22
86.212 229,255
136 .254 255
BIBLE (BIBLICAL)
1946 :20
1947 18,112.144
1953 27
BINSWANGER, L:
1965 :1
1966A:16
1969A 16,17
1969B:60
BIOLOGICAL:
1946 :8.11,12,13.21
1947 5,7 29.33 35
85.94,99,108,110 114
147,151.164,166,187
229,230,245.247,260.
1948 49 50,53,66
1951 10,99,132 140 147.207,217,233 243 275
282 288,359,360,404,4 26,448,45 3,508
1965 :1
1966A:16,24
1969A:17,25,36,71,135.202
42,46,49,50,56,61,63,64
116,127.129,135
66.84,
138.139
189,194-196
270 272
206,212 215,224
278
-490-
1973 188
1975 96.102,104
1978A:44
1978B:50,59,63,65
BIRTH:
1947 72 75 86 170,212
1951 164,232
1969B:180 181 242
BITE:
194 7 108. 109,113,115,130,131, 134,135, 158,161,171.
108,109,113 115 130,131 134,135,158,161 171,
240
1948 64
1950 :42
1951 :9,42,232,234,235,241,243,246,247,248 250,395,
411 512,513
1953 33,34.35
BLAME:
194 7 .120 147,151.158.178,216,217 231
1951 :49.66 117 195 252,258.259 . 521
1966A:25
1969A:43,45
1975 :108,153
BLIND:
1947 :39,194 205.230,250
1948 49
1951 151.152 153.489
1969A:60 72 131,153
1973 99
1978B:49,52
BLOCKS:
1946 :13.17 19,21,23
1948 49,68
1951 : 55.73,80,83,85,107,111.113,115,117.132.133,
135-137,140,151,153,164,165. 169, 171,185-187,
203,206,208,20 9,215,216.218,219,241,278.255,
281,283 357 390-3 92,411,412,522,525
1957 60
1965 2.4
1966A:17,34
1968 :20
1969A:2,38 41 48 57.60,69 93,146 169
1969B:90,91 142,175
1973 43,57 78,82,90,111,206
1975 101,113 121,187
1978B:59
BODY
1946 5 6,8. 18,23
1947 :31.32.33,34.46 73,103,114 120,121 147,154.160,
17 4,190 202,215,218,228-236,248, 250.251,255,
265
1948 48,61 66
1951 14,19,42 45,55,86,107,111,115,117,118,119,120
122,125 127,130-132,139,146,147, 151, 182, 185,
-491-
204.208.209,216.217,219,220.288,294
307 311.313 314.317-319 328.337,349
371 374,377 389.394,395,398,407 410
44 8,457-461.463 464,467,468,473.477
496 499.510 514 516 519,525
1957 :56,63,65 66 70
1966A 20
1969A:6,68 71 82,101 102,108,110,115,126
225
1975 104
1978A 36 39,42,44,50
1978B:63
BODY LANGUAGE:
1947 73
1968 18
1973 :56.139
BODY/MIND (SEE SEPARATE ENTRIES)
1947 :32
1969B:8 38,168
BOLSHEVIKS:
194 7 :12 3
BONAPARTE, M:
1947 85
BORE(DOM):
1946 :18,19
1947 50,70 91,193.199,266
1951 16,67,85,90,129.133,134,137,170.171.
421 484,500,501 517,521
1957 :59,60,63
1959 71 72
1966A:17,18,19.34,36
1967 :11,14
1969A:44,66,67,71,75,82,94,138, 203.247,274
1969B:274 285
1973 :23 46,113,133,151
1975 137,187
1978B:50,52
BOSS, M:
1969A:22
BOUNDARY (SEE ALSO CONTACT):
. 298,303-
.363-365,
.436 443-
487-490,
158,177,2
297 ,357,
-, 275
1947 :49 68 138,139.141-145 147,148,149,150,153,154
193,236 ,244
1948 64
1950 40
1951 103, 116,153,155,181,245.273, 275 276,
308-311,313,314 326,420,427,429, 439.
445,44 8,453 456,468,474,477.486,50 6,
522-525
1953 31,32
1957 :55
1959 :70,71,72
1969A:7,8,9,10,12,13.14,15,16 32,270,272
1969B:269,270-1-2-3.276-8,285.291-2
1973 :26 30,31,32,35 38,40,43
306,307,
442 443,
507 516,
-492-
BRADLEY. F H:
1951 351
BREAST/BOSOM:
1947 53.54,86,108,115134
1951 164,240
1969A:243
BREATH:
1947 33.46,55,7 5,76,77,78,228,263,264,266
1948 60
1951 :18,100 108,131,153,164,165,166.167,170 171
207 240 248.249,377,442,466.467,470,513
467 470 513
1953 :35
1957 62,70
1966A:30
1966B:221
1969A:22.31,37 85.86,113,133,145
1973 :39,65 87 198
1978A:43,49
1978B:57
BUBER, M:
1957 -55
1965 1
1966A:16
1969A 17
1969B:60
BUDDHA/BUDDHISM:
1959 72
1966A:15
1969A 41,159
1969B:59
BULLY:
1951 :194 216 484
1966A:21
1968 23
1975 93
BUSCH, W
1947 235
BUT
1969A:175,221
1973 158,159
1975 126
CAPULET
1953 :32
CASSIRER. E
1978A:50
CASTRATED:
1947 -70 82,85,86 96,128.160,161,167,250
1951 .-247,476
1969A:140
1978A :53
CATASTROPHIC:
1947 221,271
1951 185 404
-493-
1953 34
1965 7
1966A:23 25
1966B:229
1967 14
1969A:19 33,34,42 49,75-106 135,158
1969B:49,150,168.173,214,268
1973 :132,136 180.196
1975 100,101,103,107,112.113
1978B:60
CATATONIC:
1957 :98
1966A:20,22.23
1969A:60,61.65
1973 108
1975 60
CATHEXIS
1947 41,42.54.55,84.132 176,180 205
1948 -51 62.66
1951 15 283,442,443 462 468.476,497.525
1957 62
1967 12
1969B:258
1973 19 20 22 24 29 45,48,50,51 57.90,94,111.113
1975 -.96
1978A:44,47 48 51,52
1978B:49,50-53.59.60
CAUSES
1946 10 13.14
1947 7 14,20,21,22 32,43,66,71,81 85,89.92,93.94.
96,98,102 151.161,205,207.216,217,229,270
216 217,229,270
1948 57
1951 18.47,48,66,334 405,467
1965 1
1966A:37
1967 :12
1969A:46,47 .245
1973 52-3,55.77,87
1975 :101,102
1978A.-44
1978B-.52
CENSOR:
1946 15
1947 :51 81,113 150,153,165 170,174.195,219,251,253
1948 62
1951 17 18 20,83,115 200,297.380,381.492 495
1969A 253
1978B:55 56,57
CENTER:
194 7 6.15,48-50.91,92. 155,161,187,189216-238,259
1948 49
1951 :20,344.420
1959 69 72
-494-
1966A
1968
1969A
1969B
1973
1975
CEZANNE
1951
CHAIR
1969A
38.79
25
4,18,22
31-32, 10
120,131,
111 119,
P:
451
32,40,64,68,69 85, 187.229
3, 161
140,152,194
137 162,192
117 120
170,256
CHAMBERLAIN, N:
122, 1
264,2
30,141,142,144,154,155 157,167
96
1947
CHANGE
1946
1947
18
1948
1951
1953
1959
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1969A
18
19,21 22
92,97,10
177, 180,
213 , 217
253-256,
51.52,55
40,50,58
206 207.
406 413,
471-473
481,489,
30 37
72
7
25 26
218
10 13
7 32 33,
114,116,
203,232
241,260,
25 76,10
96 101.1
c-
30 121
,26,3
0,101
181
218
264
,56
,60
276
414
3,41,50,52,56,65,66,68,78,79.91,
,120,130,132,135, 136, 142 161.176
88.192,193.195. 196,204,207,209,
21,224,226,232 234.237,239,245,
69
9,67
5,67,85,121,152,183,187,190,193,
77.281,299,347,356,388,389,
2 6,42 7,42 9,43 0,442,46 2,463,
490,494,502,511,517
1969B
1973 :
1975
CHAPLIN,
1947
CHARACTER-ANALYS
1946 18
1951 :283 286
CHARACTER ARMOUR
1946 17,262
1951 :18
CHARACTER CLASSI
1947 221
CHARACTER FORMAT
1946 :12
1948 -.53,56
1967 12
CHARACTER(ISTIC)
1946 8.10,12,
43,47
122 . 1
247,2
266
5, 107
08, 11
51,52,55.64,74 76,77,79,90,
23.125,142,167 171.175 193.
87,296
,122
4.117 ,192
IS
296,332 393,394,420,508
FICAT
ION:
ION
23
-495-
1947 14 15 53,55 58,63,64,68,77,85.89,112 115
122,134 136,145-153-155 157 160 161,166,
168 170 .171.175,179,194-196,216,229.237
238 240.241,244.245,254 261.269
1948 54,56.60
1951 277,292,315 317 334,342,354,375 394 419 420
506-509 517 520.522
1957 -64
1965 3,7
1967 11
1969A:7,35,37 68,71,74,107 132
1975 93,106,114
CHARACTEROLOGICAL:
1946 :20
1947 229
1948 :49-59
1951 :204,291
CHARYBDIS
1947 193
1953 :27
1969A:3
CHASE, D:
1969B:265
CHEMISTRY
1947 :22 23 108 109,176 , 201,221
1951 :70.479
1969A:136
1975 97,105
CHEW/BITE
194 7 109,110,111,122-3,126-7.130,132,134,158,163.
165,172,175 181 193,194,204,214,222
1948 64
1950 42
1951 9,62,99,154,23 2,233,23 5,238,242,243.24 5,246,
247.250,320,350,395,411,477,512.518
1953 :33,34,35,36
1969A 51,76.203
CHICKEN SOUP:
1973 148
1975 :109
CHILD
1946 12 14
1947 :20,23.25 30 35,42 53 54-59.63,66,69,75,83,84,
88.91 96,98,99,108,109 112.114.116,122 125,126
134 135,141.143,144,145,149,155,156,158 160,
166,169,170 176,177,188,197-19920 7,20 9,212.
220-222.225,226,238,239.261 271
1948 :52,53,57.64
1950 :39
1951 10 43 50 51,75,83.109,115,128 130 152 184,
185,186,231-233.240,250,252 255 262 266,281,
288,293,316,319,320324,330,335 340.341,347.
348,349-356,358.359,371 373,381-384 388,389,
391,392,395-398 408,415,418 484,491 496,499,
-496-
503,504 511-513
1953 30,33
1957 66
1966A:17,18,19
1967 -.13
1968 19.23
1969A:45,55,59,61,70,112,118-120. 12 5.166-7,169
1975 93,111 120
1978A:41
1978B-.49 ,61 ,62
CHINESE WU GI
1947 :18.112
CHISOLM, R.M:
1946 :8
CHOICE
1947 63
1950 -41.43
1951 :298 354 385,433 469,470,482
1957 59,69
1965 :7
1966A:24,27
1969A:22.31.32 59.80,102 105
1969B 147, 178
1973 3 24,49,50 66,74,79.111
1975 -.158
1978A:43,48
1978B:53,58.59
CHRISTIAN:
1947 120.122,218,222
1948 -45
1966A 20
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE:
1946 :7
1947 -236
CHRONIC:
1946 :18
1951 :18,57,63.78,121,124 152 155,175,184,251,255
288,312-314,317,321,325,327,330,338,369 446,
447,458,488 489,491,509,510.512
1953 :34
CHURCHILL, W.S:
1947 :214
1969B:251
CIVILIZATION:
1947 44,112,114,119-121 128.147.211
1948 47 53
1951 45.175 351.363.370.392,419
CLASSIFICATION:
1947 :185,220
1951 68
CLIENTS
1947 :83
1969A:79
1975 118,119
-497-
1978B:65
CLINICAL
1951 30,33 34,36,39,46,47,49,50 64,100,186,292,299,
439
1957 :69
1967 :10,11
CLOSURE-
1947 -.249
1951 -311
1957 69
1959 :69 72
1966A:27
1968 19
1969A 27 66,76,123
1969B:86 93 142 171 228
1973 -9
1975 :103
1978A :43,51
COGNITION:
1951 :447 465 466
1969B:278
COHEN, |H:
1951 480
COLLECTIVE :
1946 8,20
1947 :61 62,63,102,218
1965 2
1967 13 14
COLOUR:
1947 :46
1951 :112
1969A:252,256
COLUMBUS, C
1969B:236,237
COMFORT
1947 59,63,113,179
1951 108
1969A:36.51.56 62 65.66,67.83,84,106 , 116 117,203,267
COMMANDMENTS (BIBLICAL):
1947 71
1973 114
COMMITMENT:
1951 72,78,83.88.354,437
1969A:128
COMMUNICATION:
1946 10
1947 -73,154,164 166
1950 40
1951 :9,276,289,290 316,319.329.348,364,372.374,
375,377 386 409,426,427,438,451
1957 55.56,57 60,63.65,71
1969A-6,43,48 51,52,57,64,121. 145
1969B:256
1973 112 113.135-146,150 181,187
-498-
1975 55-
COMMUNISM:
1947 122
1965 1
1966A 16
COMPENSATIO
1947 37.
1951 10
1969A:133
1975 :98
COMPLETE (C
1947 15
240
1948 62,
1951 :15,
417
1957 :59
1968 :18,
1969A:28,
1975 :104
1978B :60
COMPLAINING
57,60 63,65 71
, 128-9,196
N:
65 67,115 120,154 196 198,209,248 266
76
OMPLETION):
52,53 70,102,174,178,193 200,204.228.238.
,251,259 270
63,64,67
16,20,84,285,32 3,32 6 341,343,346.405,406,
,42 7 428,442,453,459,462 463.471,520,524
69
19
2930,39,69,79.102.104,106,202
1947
1948
1951
1969A
COMPLEX
1946
1947
67,156,225,247
58
484
150
7
13.
210
46.
89,
12
19
53,
50
100
51
27 29.88,96 101,114, 136,160 ,167,173,188,
,228,269
57
90,109.273,296,344.350
135
51 104,129,132
45,155
1948
1951
1967
1968
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
COMPLIANCE
1946 18
1947 20
1948 56
1965 :7
1969A:95
1973 :165
COMPULSIVE:
1947 :100,101.102
1951 =16,47,76,83,86 89,135,139,193,194,325,342,343,
390403,502,519,520
1966A:17,29
1967 10,13
1968 18 21 24
1969A-.11 64,80 95 99,188
1969B:65 66
-499-
1973 :29 186
1975 :112,189
COMPUTER:
1965 :2,3
1966A:25,29,38
1966B 204
1967 :10
1969A:62 71 76,133 135
1975 112
CONCENTRATE:
1946 :16,17
1947 :8.49,60 70,79,81,82 90,91,93,124,143,153,156
165-167,177.180,181,183.185-205,209,213 215,
218 228-236 238,240,249,250 251 256,263.265
268-271
1948 :52,61
1951 83 84,85 87,88,89,93,99 100,101,102,104,108.
112 114 117,118,123,132-135,147.158,166.191,
203,204,206,207,209,213-215,217-219,221.222,
230,234 245.247 248 264 283 284,287 292.294,
297,298 308.333 334,336-338,373 375,376,378,
380.382,427 429.433-436 441,442 464,484,492,
500 523-525
1966A:35
1973 67,68,69,195
1978A:48
CONCEPTS:
1947 :197,200,218
1950 39
1951 262,357,413,437.443
1965 1.2,3
1966A:18,20
1968 :23.24
1969A:63,70,269
1978A 39,42,43,48
CONDITION
1947 47,49,57 73 , 82,92,99.100,108,125.141,180 , 181.
185,186,195,196,260,270
1951 280.331,453,486
1965 :2,4
1967 9,10,12
1969A:2,40.63,64,70
1969B-.260 271
19 7 5 .118
CONFIDENCE:
1946 :12
1947 :178,186,203 219.233,254,255
1951 10,206,280,397 418
1969A:112,114 187,240
1975 :106
CONFIGURATION
1951 :16,51 273,279.281,412,417.426
CONFLICTS
1946 7.16.19.20
-500-
1947 22,30,36,57 60,61,62,69,73.77.81.114,126,134,
141,148-150,159,180,190,216.220,221,226,235.
240,244,245.253.257,266
1948 :47 53.55 56 61,62 63,67
1950 39,40,41 42 43
1951 10.11,73,89,107,116,118 123,131 155 164.165.
175 184,191,200-202 205.206,209,212,214-217,
220,245,255,287 292,297 298 , 336,360 370,372
37 3 386,389,303,407-418 .421,427-429.442,449,
462,466-470,475 482,505,512 518,527
1953 :28,31 36
1957 57,62
1959 72,73
1965 1 2,5,6
1966A:16 17,38
1966B:212
1967 :9,13
1969A:9 11 19,33,43 72,74,77,118 152 167,233 234 258
296
1969B:256,268,294
1975 105,114,162,192,193
1978A:48
CONFLUENCE
1947 :65 110,134,139,144,145,149,154,156,164,165.
166,167,171,172,193.195,196,235.251
1948 :64,67
1951 :151,153,154,155, 156,157-163 ,179,181.190,215,
232,233 235,240,246 247,254,429,510.511,516,
517,518 519 , 521,522 523
19 59 -.71
1966A:35
1969A:268 272
1969B:117.261
1973 -38.40,42,79,80,87,94,107
CONFORMITY-
1947 55,102
1951 277 294,295,372,453
1965 2
CONFRONT:
1951 88,429,467 471 478,512 513,517
1965 6
1975 :150
CONFUSION:
1946 :21
1947 27,57.97 138,139 154.172 180 181 185,196,206,
213,218,255,256,271,
1951 16 281 324,328,335,414 430,470,483.516,525,526
1968 20,23
1969A:11.25 26 41.66,75,130
1973 50,97,98,99,100,101,114,122
1975 :98
1978A:37,47.48,50.51 53
1978B 58,61,62
CONSCIENCE:
-501-
1946 :19
1947 58. 63,68.71.81,92,97,101,110,117,129,131,140,
147,150,159 188,204 205.223,224 240
1948 53,63
1950 :39
1951 116,164 236,263.264,265,408
1953 -27,31
1957 -72
1966A 21.30 33
1969A-. 18
1969B 125
CONSCIOUS
1946 :6.8,12,19,21
1947 17,33 42,49 50.54,55,64,66,68,69,71,74,83,
86,87,91 100,103,108,113.125.131,132,134,139,
140,143,147 149 153 154,157,158,171,172,179,
181,186, 188,192,194,196,201,217,218,220,221,
222,230 232 234 235,237,238,241,244,248,249,
250,253-260,263-266,269,270
1948 -45,50,56,62,63,65
1951 :44.65,164,281 286,287,290,293,296,303.304,
305-315 322,324,364,408,434,4351.438,439 441.
44 744 8,453 485.49 7,498,49 9,524
1953 27
1959 :70 71,72
1966A:14 16
1967 :10
1968 :17,18
1969A:28,64,135
1973 :54.65 66 188
1978A:36-39
CONSTIPATION:
1947 164.247,248
1948 :66
1951 :124
1969A:251
CONSUMING:
1947 :92,108 119,194,198,200 247
1969A:270
CONTACT:
1946 11,14,16,17,18.20.21
1947 7,23 24,39,49 50,59,62-64.65,67,69 72 73,91
92,95-9 8,102,110,113,114 116, 122,125,126.130.
132.135,136.139,142-145.149,154 156,158,166,
167,171,172 178,179.193 195,196,199,201,203,
204, 207, 208,212 214. 219,221,223,225,226,229,
231-2 34.239,240,2 50-2 5 2
1948 :46,56,58,60,64,65,66.67
1950 39 40,42,43
1951 -.15, 16, 20, 48,57. 90,92,93, 96,97. 98, 100, 101, 102,
103-105 110,118.119,139.151,153,154,156 157,1
163,164.181,190,205 206.214,219,235,236,250,2
273-281,285,287,288,290.293-296,298,299,303,3
309 311-313,317.318,323-325 337,362 -364,366,
-502-
1953
1957
1959
1966A
1966B
1967
1969A
1969B
1973
373
422
454
504
37
56-59
70,71
35
222
10
3 6
167
117
374
425
469
506
376,377
431 .433
462 463
507
,510,
3 84,385,39 3-3 95,39 9,408,409,412
443,448 449,452
485-491,495,498
522, 524-527
434,436,439-441
466-468,
511
473-482
514,516-520
62
72
69
9, 10, 15,44,53,60,65,69,110, 124, 126,164.
199,269-273,275
261,295
7,16-24,26,28,30,38
76,90,95-98,107,111
48,55,57,66,68,69,72 73
132-175
29
89
1978A:39
1978B-.50
CONTEXT
1947 -17
1951 .81
1969A:65
CONTINUUM:
1951 72,128
1969A:108
CONTRACTION-
54,57,58,60,62,63 65
30
90
59
1946
1947
1948
1951
1966A
1978B
20
188
65
155
35
64
201,202,217,233.234
171,209,238 489
235,248-50
265,266
CONTRADICTION:
1947
1951
1969A
CONTROL
1947
1947
1948
1951
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1968
1969A
1975
1978B
81.86 87
262,493
80
97
70
20,21
77,78.147
265.266
65
9 10,17
184,185
338.364
498,501
1 5.7
21 .38
207,211
11 12
25
3-5 19
134
221,230
95,105
:57
123,146
155 177 201,224,233.234
249,250
251
35,47,106,117 128. 129,130,133.164,165
200.201,204,258,28 9,313.317 321,337.
434
517
421
515
222
,20,21,24
454
519
467
520
487-489,491 493,497
151,153
25,33.35,42 56,61.71,111
155 157.158,166,169,193,194,
-503-
CONVERSATION-
1947 180 205,262
1969A 123
CO-OPERATE
1946 :15,19
1969A:93
COPE(ING)
1947 192,24
1948 52 55,60
1951 -10,18 202,203,254,276 338.442,488,507,508,509
514,520
1953 34
1965 2,5 7
1966A 18,31
1967 :11.13
1969A:7,12 40,55,65 77,136,202
1969B:168.171,175,188,197
1973 42 83 104,128,140,180,181 196
1975 93 94,99,100 101,102 106,113,144,147,187
1978A :45 47 50
1978B:55,58,60,62
COUE, E
1947 :234,235
COURAGE:
1947 :154,251
1951 279,338
1966B:228
1978B:58
CRAMP:
1947 233 234
1951 :489
CRAZY
1948 59
1951 110,257,362
1965 7
1966A 30
1968 24
1969A:43,46,50,57 65,79,136,252,274
1975 103 109
CREATE
1947 15,31 38,44.56 60,61 63,68,69.91,93 102,135
149,153 165,167,180,192,202 205,208,220,237
239,246,251,260
1948 47.68
1950 42
1951 16 17,18 19 72,73,78,82,83,88,98,108,158,164,
181,186 233,259,277,279, 280,282,283,287,291,
292-299,321,328 331,333 334,336,338 340,350,
3 56,367.370,37 3,37 4,382,384,385 394,404,407,
411-417,421.42 2,42 5,42 8,430-43 3,43 8,43 9.44 5.
446-453,456,458.460-464,466,468,470,471,47 5
480-483,485,487,491,497,49 9,500,502,506-509,
512,513 524,526
1953 :33 36
-504-
1957 :59.60,62
1959 -69,71,73
1965 2
1966A-.27 30. 31
1968 18,24
1969A 3,7,35,36,38,49 54,87,93,99.101 120
1973 21.36,59,92,127.189
1975 :93,95,98,104,107,111,157
1978A:39,43
1978B:52,62
CREATIVE INDIFFERENCE
1947 :13 14,15 19
1950 43
1951 368,519.523.524 526
1959 71
1969B:102 103
CRIMINAL:
1947 58,61,63,64,141,149
1951 264 286 401
1969A 32
1973 :27
1978B 58
CRISIS (CRISES)
1947 :253
1978B:59 60
CRITICIZE (CRITICISM)
1947 :127, 161,168,200.213,226.251
1951 100
1969A:39
1975 110
CRONIN'S NOVEL, "HATTER'S CASTLE"'-
1947 171
CRUEL
1947 123,195 196,222 239
1951 97.186,264
1966A:21 28
1968 20
CRY(ING):
1947 43,55.96,148,150,151,152,158,159,174,176,207
224,236,266 270
1948 :54,62
1951 :137,155,201,202.203,217.218,319.325
1957 -.5672
1966A:17,23
1969A:31,35 68,108,114,155,166,188,189
1969B:230,231
1973 :39 87,96,134.151,174,196
CULTURE:
1946 :8,23
1947 13,116
1948 51 66
1951 275,288 295,350,354,358,360,362. 366,367.
373 395,403.448 490 509,512-514
1953 27,33 34
-505-
1965 1 2
1966A:24
1968 22
1969A:61
1975 98
CURE
1946 :7 12
1947 7 35,63,68,78,81,88,96,97,99,104,124,126,
132,138,159,172.176 179,190, 196-199,209,
217 218,219,223-2 25,23 6,241,248,24 9.250.
256-2 58,2 60,261,263 267-2 69,272
1948 :64
1951 40,119.132,146.147,167.177.218 27 9,288,292,293,
296,318381.385,455 463
1965 3 4,5,6
1966A:26
1967 :10 13
1968 :22
1969A:1,17,42,74,79.80,136.233,245
1969B:67,80 90,168.169-189.214.228,271
1973 :46,68.84 87
1975 201 204
CURIOUS:
1947 31 99,122,143.10,151,179
1951 :55,119.350,353,392,502,503
1969A:85
1978 :42
CYBERNETIC
1951 16,17
1978A:52
19 7 8B-.52
CYNICAL:
1947 32 254
1951 137
CZECHOSLOVAKIA:
1947 48
1953 33
1969A:152
D'ALEMBERT, J. LE R:
1947 :21
DANCE:
1947 198,224,225,255
1951 125,431
1966A.-31
1968 26
1969A:101 143,144, 151 . 156
DANGER:
1946 :11
1947 -48 49 59,63 64.65 66,59.75,78.199,135,137,153,
154.160,161,172,176,181,191 195 196,204,221,225
241,245,248,251,255,263
1948 61
1950 43
1951 :132,183,255,258.309,310 312.313 325 328,336,343
-506-
345,346,369,394,395,403,413 459 470.482,487-489
496,504,516
1953 32
1965 -4
1966A:23
1967 14
1978A:53
1978B:49,55 58
DANTE (ALIGHIERI)
1947 68
DARWIN, C
1951 329.430
1969B:186.256
DASEIN(S)
1969A:16,17
1969B:61
DAYDREAMS:
1946 :10,14
194 7 66,95,110,136,169,190,193, 194,201,202,209,
210 216.243,257,260
1951 :57 66,68,80,85,88.89,116,234,314.466
1969B:243
1943 :123
1978B:41,43
DEAF :
1967 13
1969A.-72
DEATH
1946 :11
194 7 22,31,32.59,64 74,97,100,103,128,170,177,186,
203 222.260
1951 .-20.107 252 318 328,362,401,403,457,480
1957 60 64
1959 71
1966A:20-22,27,28
1966B:214
1969A:31 34.37,42,61,86,96 97,98,99,102 106,115,
119 135,149.154,156,157 247.263 266 267 274,
278 290,301
1973 5,20,42 44 46
1975 137,143 158
1978A:53
1978B:50,58
DEATH INSTINCT(THANATOS)
194 7 8,18,22.75,87,100 102,103,131,180
1948 48
1951 .403,404
1966A:30
1968 24
1969A:60,61.95
1969B:65,169,189,216
1973 7,42 186
1975 119
1978B:54
-507-
DEATH LAYER:
1966A:20
1969A:97 152
DEATH WISH:
1947 10 102.142
1951 164 403
DECISION:
1947
1951
1966A
1969A
1973
1978B
DEFENCE
66
83
43
78
30
22
13
58
(DEFENSE)
203,237
69 .201,204
100
28
193
1947
1948
1951
29 44,48 51,64.7 0,87,124,14 4,153,154-5
:59
19
31
61
1953
1957
1969A
1973
1978B
DEFIANCE
1947 :150
1951 62
DEFINITION:
1947 29,
1951 :39,
1957 :67
1969A:133.
DELIBERATION:
23
45
17,105 185 250 291
441,466,490 504
32
60,62
139,246,255 292
73
296.333,334,335,394,421
, 193
219 ,335,369,504
31,39,179,261
307,370,372,373
405
234
1946
1947
1948
1950
1951
53
7,9,10,13 15-18
187.216,229 ,234
45,47,50,52,
41
54,55 83,84,
118,134,146,
307-315 .
353,356,
,20
. 250
60,65
85.89,105,106, 107,108,114,116,117
294
351
441
474
443
476
1953
515-517
30
445
487
522
152
317
364
447
488
526
190,206
323-325
392,414
460,462
490-496
527
,243
,328
,421
,463
.498
281,288-290 293
337,339,344-346
431,433-435,438
465.466,468,469
500,504,506,507
1966A:35
1966B:204
1968 18
1969A:71
1978A:38
1978B:54,61
DELINQUENCY:
1947 :7,63
1951 -.264,330
DELUSIONS:
387
-508-
1947 ;67,201
1951 319
1965 -6
1969B:293
1973 35
1975 :118
DEMANDS:
1946 16,19
1947 44,45,53,55 57,58 61,70,71,74 76,81,90.92,
103,109,113.115 124 138,144-147,150,151,154,
155 160 167.170,174,178,185.189,193.222,224,
235.238.240 248,254,268
1948 55
1951 10.20,63,71,108,109,163,189,193.236,263.265,
372,458,511,517
1959 :71.72
1965 :1,2,3,5
1966A:16,21,33
1959A:7,19,20,22,34,35 36,38 44,52-54,70,76
1969B-.210.256 267
1973 27 77 96,106.110 112 113,114,115.121,125,
135,137,150 154,162-166
1975 93,94,105 110
1978B:52,62
DEMILITARIZED ZONE (DMZ) (SEE ALSO ZONES):
1969A:6,53.135,202
1969B:36 125,128,138,146-149,159, 161,198,224,240,254,
293
1973 :129,130,132 195,196
1975 100,101
DENTAL:
1947 114,115,116,117,119,122, 123, 124. 127, 130-3,
134 148,163,165,175,188,192 193,240,243,247
1951 :57,58,265
DENY/DENIAL
1947 63,236.247
1951 :42,48
DEPEND:
1947 :38,39
1950 41
1951 :9.58 349,350 354,372.386,392 397 410,426.525
1953 :32
1966A:17,18
1969A:31,36,104
1975 93,108
1978B:58
DE-PERSONALIZATION:
1947 41
1951 -202
1975 180
DEPRECATE (DEPRECIATION)
1947 110 169,178,250
1951 195
DEPRESS
-509-
1947
1948
1951
1959
1966A
1967
1969A
1975
1978B
DEPRIVE
1947
1950
1951
DESCARTES,
1951 94
DESCRIPTION
33
66
134
70
32 33
11
207
103
55
70,78,90,133.176 208.235,266
135,207 219,447
109 111
154 223 86
39
319.391
R:
393,408
1946
1947
1951
1975
1978A
(DESCRIPTIVE)
93,94
13
21 58
67,13,525
118, 119
39 40
187 195,204 207,208
229,245
DESENSITIZATION:
1946
1948
1951
1953
1959
1975
1978B
DESIRES
1947
1948
1951
1965
1975
1978B
DESPAIR
1947
1948
1951
1953
1966A
1967
1969A
1969B
1978B:
DESTROY:
1946 :
1947
13 17,18,19 23
:64 66,67
: 202 217,245,250,27 9,310,344,390,400,401,413,511
517
35
70
106
49,55,64
23,34,59,82
200 202,226
67
84 .90,106 193
83,87 92, 102,103.144,150,160,193
247.256.259 260,262,267
369
503
349
501
1 , 2
192
50
77 169
60,68
132, 194
27
21
13
3,274
235,243
58,62
387
512
263,265 313,314,344,345.347
39 5
518
396
519
398,402,415,462.469 493
170,190 230.271
332 374,415 421 474,476
10
23
129131, 133-136,148 150, 153,165,172,176,181,192
64,86,87 92 103 110 115,116.117 121,122,127
-510-
196,198,226,268 272
1948 -63 65
1950 41,43
1951 :53 97 98,100,101 102,106 187 205,231 232,
241-243,247,279,280 290,295 297 321,335.357,
376,378,385 387 389,391,393,395-399,401,402,
406,410,413,414,417,418,422,42 8,452,463,464,
468,470,471,479 50 6,514,518,520.52 4,525
1953 32,33
1966A:21,27
1969A:271
1978A :53
1978B-.49 ,55
DETERIORATION:
1947 99 219
1948 :47
DETERMINATION:
1947 21.43,84,197,199,201
1951 :146,475
1968 :18
1969A:128
1978B:52
DEUTSCH, H:
1946 :18
1947 :130,143
1966A:20
1969B:56 137
DEVELOP (-MENT, -ING):
1946 12,16.20
1947 5 20 26,50,53 54.61,63,64.67,72,75 77.81,83,
84,89 91-93,102,104,105,109 110 112 113.115.
116 120 123-125,129.131,132,134,135,145,147,
149,150,158,160.166-172 173,177.185,186,188,
191,194 196,198,201,204,208,209,218,227 229,
232-234 236 240 243,245,251,254 268,271
1948 45,46,47.49,52,53,54,55 63,64.67
1950 :42
1951 :9,10 15,19,42,69,85 105 152.153,167 186,190,
193.194 206 212,216.217 ,219,230,232-235,240 241
284.287,329,354,363 364 369,382,390 391,392,420
459 468 492.494,509
1957 59.66,69
1968 :19,21
1969A:30,34,35 38 40,42,56,76,77,85 107.111,141 175
1973 34,59,72 98,110,111,186
1975 :93,98
1978A:40,43
1978B:56,60,61,62,63,65
DEWEY, J:
1969A:11
1978B 60
DIAGNOSIS
1951 :509
1969A 36,57.95,269
-511-
DIALECTIC
1947 14 17.56
65 72,88,142 153,176,221,237.247
54
82,83,88 89 111,180,234.249
49.53
127,287 288.290
63
209,250
:43,44
1948 :48
1951 :296,373
1978A:47
1978B:50-52
DIALOGUE:
1947 -.30
1969A:74
DICHOTOMY:
1948 :46
1951 :46
1957 66
1978A:50
1978B 61
DIET:
1951
1978A
DIETRICH, M:
1969B:1951
DIFFERENTIAL THI
1946 12
1947 13,14,15
1951 90
DIFFERENTIATE
1947 :13 15-20
84 100 1
176.192
1948 64
1951 15,18,71
127,128,
232.234,
487
1957 :55,64
1959 :70,71,72
1965 :2.7
1966A:19.29 31.37
1968 19,22
1969A:5 6 8 68
1975 :103,104,
1978A :53
1978B:50,61,64
DIFFICULTIES
1947 7,102 114,127,195,197,203,214,225,244,262
NKING
,16,20
22,212 213
,20.22
10,117
204 20
,77.87
130,13
240.24
26,29-31,33,42,52,53,64,73,76
125.131,134.139. 140.157,165,1
7 210,213,217,228,245,272
,88,90,91,93,96,97.102 104,117
5,153,155,163,185-187,212-215,
1,2 7 6,36 3-3 6 6,37 2,430,440,46 5,
72,74,79,101,135 271,273
166
1951
1966A
1969A
DIGEST:
1947
1948
1951
1953
1969A
1973
61
26
52
194
85
54
60 80 ,82, 10
09, 116
230,23
1'
103
64
102, 154 ,
33,35
9,34 202
32-3,42
7,104,257,259
,123,124.126,164 165,175.201.2
1,232,243 395,428,456,478,485
-512-
1978A :43
DILEMMA:
1951 17
1978B 53
DIRECTION:
1947
1951
1965
1969A
DISAPPEAR:
1947 -23
1951 :42
1959 71
DISAPPOINT
1947 19,
1951 48,
1969A-.231
1978B.54
DISCHARGE:
187,225
73 183
2
98
226.229,233.234,240,260
177,197.220,232 253 256-7
21
67
-2
90,97,100
177,520
101.102,168,210,255,263
1946
1947
1948
1951
19
176
64
136
497
31
52
177 207,221.225,245 260,266
213,321,32 3 .351,394,40 2,488 .490,491,493,4 95
1966A
1978B
DISCIPLINE:
1947 160,
1969A-.54
1969B:209,
DISCOVER (Y)
198,224
251
1947 17,46,88,93
159.164,172
236,238,244
1950 :42
1951 28 29,64,67
180.185 187
430,434,440
1957 :63 71
1965 4
1966A 17,18,25 26,29 ,37
1967 13
96,112,119,124,128,129,133,134,150.
178,185,194 200 203,213 214 216.219
68,79 81,91
206,209,211
461 466,473
98,99 110,112,119, 137
212
482
214
491
217
526
220,285
1969A:3 8,27 28
76 . 78 . 107
260-268
1973 68 69 93,96
1975 :113.114,166
DISCRIMINATION:
31.35. 38 .39,40 41,42
233 131,132,1345 171
50,53.75
234,256-259
100
168
108112 127.144
1947
1948
1951
1953
1969A
1978A
20,251
67
153,256,
30,31.32
21 70
42
364
33
36
-513-
1978B:51
DISEASE
1947 74,81 185,199.209,236
1951 281,351 401.409.447,458
DISGUISE:
1947 189
1948 64
DISGUST:
15
33,43,58,74
166, 170-172
56,64 67
76,82,90,99
242-245,250
512,521,525
1953 :28 36
1969A:9 10,11
1969B:229
1973 58 59,97
1978B:50
DISINTEGRATE:
491
1946
1947
1948
1951
80,82,96,113,114,126 154,156,165
176 178,179 190,197-199.251
100,130,167 180,205,233
251.363,373 480.482.497
234,240,241 ,
504,505,
1947
1951
1978B
193,213,251
89,436,441,
63
500
DISORGANIZATION
1947 61.105
1978B:61,62
DISOWNED:
1946
1947
1948
1951
1966A
1966B
1967
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
DISPLACEMENT:
1947 66 67
1950 41
1951 219
1973 88
DISSOCIATE:
1946
1947
1948
218
8
216
64
17 134
27,35
212
14
10,11,36
182
114,119 .
39
191 514.517
40,41 55
120,137,145,150
68,70
369,497
11-13,20,21
7-9
150
47 42 55 56
1951 :232 264,283
1953 32,35
1966A:17
1969A:72
1978A:39
1978B:56
396,498 500
-514-
DISTINGUISH:
1947 198,199,209
1951 83 153
1969A:269
DISTURB'
1946 :10,20
1947 :16,45.61,81,84,104,112 180.187 188.193,201 233.
243 258-260,268
1950 39 40
1951 :10 15,16,80 85,408,409 488,491
1957 :58
1969A:71
1978A:44
1978B:62
DOCTOR (MEDICAL)
1947 207,216,217
1948 62
1951 19,40,41,47,58,318,361,444
DOGMA/DOGMATIC
1947 :159,160 180
1951 .42
DOMINATE
1947 -.199,224,253
1951 18 233 323,324,326,327-8-9 337 343 349,355,362,
3 94.407,417,418,420,43 3,43 6,440 496501,519
1959 72
1966B:211
1967 :12
1978B:59
DOSTOYEVSKY
1957 72
DOYLE C
1947 :32
DRAMA:
1951 111,436
1968 :17
1969A:71
1975 119
DREAD:
1959 :72
1973 :20,23 30,48
1975 98
1978A 41,48,51.53
1978B 54,55 57,58,59
DREAMS
1947 17'27 36,37,42,63,92,122,139,158,160,174,203-5,
209,210,215 217,240,241,261
1948 :63,65
1951 59 74 79 80,109 134,245 259,265 , 266 286,290,292,
293,310,311,313,314,319-322,342,346,353,362,370,
379 381,390,393,40 2,404,419.443,444,44 7,453.458,
\
-515-
1957
1959
1965
1966A
1966B
1968
1969A:43
95
1969B
1973
1975
1978A
DREYKHOS
1969B
DRINK:
1946
1947
1950
DRIVE:
1946
1947
1948
1950
1951
464,492
57,59,72
70
6
18.27,28,29
205,210 212
17
,50 53,67
96,97.99
121 122 124
156,158-160
203-213,224
288,290,298
65,181,215,
12 51,59-61
173 180-186
94 103,115
153 157,158
39,43
, E
243
19
198
42
10,19
140.180,181
62
41 42 43
218.258 259
394,406
503,504
494-496,498 501.514
33
213
215,219,222 223 224,227
72,73 ,71
100,102,
126-137,
,164,169.
,237-245,
,299.301
241,254,2
,87,130,1
,190-194,
116,117-1
. 187,188,
74.75 ,80,85,87
105,106,114-115
139 142,143,152
172 176 178,179
88
117-119,
153,155,
195, 196,
260,261 275-277,280,285.
74
44,147,153-156.
196
21,126,147,148 150,151,
197
1957
1959
DRUGS:
1946
1947
1951
1967
1969A
DUALISM
1946
1947
1948
1951
1965
1973
1978A
388
495
69
71
263,274,290,32 9,334,33 9,385
411,412,418,420,448,462,475
508 512 516 520
386
487
62,185,257,258,260
.19
56
58
12
: 12
5,7,8
18,32 . 36,
46,47 48,
14 42
7
23,52,106
:50
138
49,53
61
DUMMY (COMPLEX)
1946 19
1947 :134-137
1950 41 61
1951 .-21,501
156 168.172.180,188,194,240,257,270
-516-
1968
1978B
DUTY
1947
1951
1953
1969A
DYNAMIC
1947
1951
1959
1975
EARS:
1947
1951
1966A
1969A
1975
EASTERN
1966A
23
50
70
89
34
70
170
265
188,231.248
107,126
85,86,187.245,276,278 284,285 329,332.360
21.49 58,64,88,100,101,266
51
367
70
96
378 394,438 439,453,455,468,470,499,504
98,119,192
48
44
49,66, 125,200
475,489
39
10
33
42,57,58,6977 232
114
1938
1969A-.61
1973 104
EATING:
1947
1951
1953
1957
1978
ECCENTRIC
48,112-114,119
65 99-102 234,
428.477 503
27 35
58
52
125 146,148
238,239 241,250
158,164 192-199,263
252.274,308,427,
362 1951 334
1965 6
ECOLOGY
1951 :320
1969A 6
EDDINGTON, A.S
1947 20
EDUCATION:
1946
1947
1948
1951
1965
96,122
11 , 12
31,52.61 , 7 3
53
13,20,49.109,244,283
396,397,408
2
141,160 176,178
328,339 350, 361,367 373,391
1969A:30,233
1969B:260
1973
1978B
EFFECT
1947
1951
1975
71,121
63
14 198
44,48 . 105
101,102
EFFICIENT
-517-
1946
1951
1957
EFFORT
1947
1951
EGO:
1946
1947
89
57
10
73,
235
65
134,135
,248,267
70,83,116
167,168
187.188197,201.213230,234,
323,346,462,488
1948
1951
1953
1959
1966A
1968
1969A:
1969B:
20
5,6 7 8,20,36,50,60,64,74,80,83,84.86,87,93
94.109,112,124,12 9,130,131,132,138-147,149-
151,153,154,156-159,164-167.170-172,179,180
186-188,193,201,202,209 210,216-221,224,228
229,233,234 240,250,260,443,524
63,65
17,107,264.281,290,295.296.339,354,357,418
425 430.432-437.439-447.452,454,455.460,468
480.487.488-492
522-524,526
478
-520
97
37
53
1973
1975
1978A
1978B
EHRLICHS:
1947 :35
EIDETIC
1947
1951
1973
EINSTEIN,
469 474,476
509-511 516
30,31,32
69,70
21
23
7,8,55.70.81.268,269
5,31,39,65 ,76,87 , 184,216
276-279.285,291,293-295
41.42,51 , 128, 181 188,189
104 . 192
501,502,506
255,260,261,269
56,65
42,205 213
109,110,382
101
496
1947
1948
1959
1969A
1969B
1973
1978A
91
48
111,186 86,
46,
71
13 ,36
51 ,52
112
50
EJACULATIO PRAECOX
1947 :167 168
1951 101
ELAN VITAL:
1947
1951
1966A
1969A
1975
1978A
84
15
23,
68
96
:50
86
30
119
-518-
ELASTIC:
1946 :21
1947 :153,230
1951 16,18
ELIOT. T.S:
1969A:35
ELLIS, W.D:
1951 -304 326
EMBARRASS:
1946 15
1947 -25,27,73,74,113 115,126,145.156,172-4,177-9,
180,198.199,205,214.219,223-226 241 245 253.
257,262 264
1948 56 58 67
1951 :90.115,116.130,152,185,191 203,213 218 307,349,
352,355,377 491,499,513,521
1957 70
1966A:26
1968 22
1969A-.132
1973 145
1978B:54.55.57 62
EMERGENCY:
1946 11
1947 230,260
1951 288,310-314,317,320 321,323.326,327,336-338,
340,425 446,456,458.460,466,491 496,505,510
1965 2
1966A:31
1967 9,14
1969A:17.21-23
1978B:61
EMERGING:
1947 -204
1951 16 51,430,483,526
1965 1
1966A:16,19
1969A:22 23,54,56
1973 196
1975 105 106,153
EMOTIONS
1946 5,9,14.15 16,17 19,21
1947 :19,27,31.33 34 40,42,43,48 , 57-59 70,71,74,78,
81.83 90,97,110,112 113 114,116,117,120,129.
133.137,140,148.155-157 159. 160 164,165,174-
181,198 200,202,203 205.207,209,212,216,219,
221 224 230,233,234,245,248,253,254.257.262,
263,266
1948 55.59,61,62,65 65 66,67
1950 :42,43
1951 15 31,47,90,91,92 97 99,110,111,115,117,127,128,
129-133,135-137,146,147 158,159,179,187,20 2,216,
217,23 4,240,266,280,288.289 292,345,347,365,368.
372,379 380,408,411,414,416,426 428 454,457,459,
-519-
460,463-466,468,471,475 476 499.513-515 517-519
525 526
1953 30 31 35
1957 -.59,60,62 66.67 71
1959 71
1965 2,4
1966A:15-18,26,30,31,32,34 38
1966B 212
1967 :11
1968 25
1969A:52 60,66,68,69,70,92 94,98,253,156,251,256
1969B:51,170,171,172,175.182,187 189,191
1973 :20.24,25 50 55,57.58,60,85,90,97,108,111,201
1975 :137
1978A:49,50,53
1978B 51 52,54.57 65
EMPATHY:
1951 .379
1957 56,71
1973 :105 106,107 204
EMPTINESS:
1946 18
1947 :168
1953 -28
1965 :4
1966A:27,28
1969A:61.274 275 278
1975 :98
EMPTY CHAIR:
1969A:1 2,84,89 90,91.95 181,185,203
1969B.-244
1973 122 124
1975 144,198
ENCOUNTER:
1947 5 197
1965 :6
1966A:37
1966B:218,220
1969A:63,71 74,81 130,232,234,249,251 27 7.279,282,289
1973 188,196
1975 ,150,187
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITTANICA:
1947 86,221
END-GAIN:
1947 :50,120,268,269,271
1969A.-22.23 . 25 37
1978B:60,63
ENERGY:
1946 :11,12
1947 :7,19 21 22,23.26,41,54,67,70.78,83,86 100,101,
103.125,132,138 145 147,153-155,167 168,175,
179,194,210,215,229,235,245,260,266
1948 48 63,66 67
1950 :41
-520-
1951 7 17,63 73,84 85,86,108,114 128,129.132,135.
146,153-156,164 181,184,185,206,216 217,219,
242,278,279 293 297 303 310 311,317,324.325.
326,327,329,335 336,343,345.360 368 376-379,
3 82 390 396,399,403,404,408,410-412.418-42 0,
422,427,428.435,436,439,440, 443.448,453.459
463,46 8 46 9,4 71,474,47 6,481,486,496 49 7,501.
514,515,520,522 525,527
1953 33,37
1957 :60,66
1959 70 72
1965 :2,6
1966A:19,21,22.23,24.30,31 33,35. 37,38
1967 13
1968 24,25
1969A 12,15 24,35 37,38 39,53,61,62 68.70.71,74.75,
97,101,115,116,135,141 ,151
152,170,178,202
1969B 169,171 293
1973 13,14 111,126,152 182
1975 96-100,104,120,158.192
1978A:40,43,49,50,52
1978B-.52 56
ENGELS, F-
1947 129
ENJOY(MENT)
1947 :154 155,168,190,197.198 256
1951 :118,134 153,193-394,395 401
1969A:91
ENTHUSIASM:
1947 43.124,167 176,218.240,257
1951 62
1957 :60
ENVIRONMENT
1946 :6,8,10,13,17,20,21
1947 :5 7,26 30,38,44-45,46,47,62,68,81 98.99,131,
138145,147-149 166,170,177,180, 193,19 9,200,
202.206,208,220,221,224,231, 236, 237,240,244,
245,353-356
1948 -50 53,64 67
1950 :39,40
1951 19,43,48 68 86,88,90,92,93,94,100,101,102,104,
105-107,110,115 118 127-129 131,132,135,13 9,146,
147.151, 152 181.183.185,186,188,189,193,194,200,
202 205,214 216 232,233.235 244,252 254,255,259,
266,273-282,293,296 299 307-314 321 324,328,345,
347,35 6,360,363 364,372-374,377,385,392.394,399
400,405,406,408,409 410 42 2 . 42 6-43 0,433,434.439,
440 444-4 48,455-4 71,473-4 78.499,508-5 20,52 3-5 25
1953 :35,37
1957 56.66,68,69
1965 4 5.7
1966A:17,18,25,26,30
1967 -11,12,13
-521-
1969A 5,7,9,14.15 31,35 37 38,39,57 65 75,95,105,
114,125,126,138 141,207,230
1969B:67 146,259 268
1973 14 16,17 18,19,22 23.24 25,26,28.29,30.31,
32 33,35,38,40,43,45-50.59,71 98,103,105-
107,134 196
1975 93,94,95.105
1978A:40 43 44 45,47,51
1978B 50,61 62
ENVY:
1947 160.253
1951 -505
1973 200
EQUILIBRIUM:
1946 :10
1947 -46.102 103,134.135,174
1951 70,71 309,310 312,323,325 343 352,361,369 390
404-406 427-429,457,502
1957 69
1973 :5,7,19 20 27
ERECTION:
1947 177
1951 201
EROS :
1946 7.11
1947 -22 36 87,100,138
1951 .-403,404,419,429,505
1978A:44,50
EROTIC
1947 70
1951 :90 164,290,349.350,4106,514 516
ESALEN:
1969A:224,232,233,237
1969B:6,54.95,96.99,102,104 128,145 151 152 166,221,
223,224,228 - 237,262
1975 126-180
ESTHETICS:
1969B:291
1973 :33
ETHICS:
1947 32 52,56,58.59,61,153
1951 :324.327,328.370 372,385,419,480
1973 33 72
1978B:63
EUCLID:
1951 342
EVALUATION
1947 52 53,150,159.170,195,197 201,215,239
1951 49,74,82,98,106,129,186,195, 200,230,231,323.
324.32 7 338,339346,373,385, 388,482,483
1953 27,29
EVIL:
1946 :7
1947 153,222
-522-
1951 483
1953 29
1959 72
EVOLUTION
1947 :112
1948 :54
1951 :354
1978B:64
EXAGGERATE:
1947 197
EXCITEMENT:
,234
.358,361,363.372,404
.263
1947
1948
1950
1951
1953 :
1957 :
1959 :
1966A-
1969A:
1969B-
1973
1975
1978A
1978B:
EXCRETE
1947
1951 :
1966A:
EXCUSES:
1947 :
1951
1969A:
1975 :
1978B:
EXHALE
1947 :
1951 :
1957 :
1978B:
EXHAUST:
1947
1951
1965
1966A
26,
229
67
41 .
15,
153
235
367
416
464
506
30
60,
70,
31.
2,3
136
142
1,2
98
:43
50
175
479
31
70,
66
47
100
52
263
167
63
51
50,
10
466
7
36
260,263,264,266,267
33,70 7 4,7 5,7 6-80,84,109,133,167-8,198,209,
230.251
42
16 20 63,70,83,85,87,88.98,104,128,129.131.
.154.157,163,155,203,20 7 208,215,216,218,219
,245, 247, 248,254,277,280,318,321.346.359 362,
,369,370,375,390,391,400,401,407,410 412,413.
,417,419,421,422,4 50,451 452,454,457-4 61,463,
,466-4 7 2 476-4 80,48 7-4 92:, 494,49 7,499-502,504,
,507 510-514,517,519,520
525,526
62
72
32
,3
1
,1
4,
10
,4
52
,73
7,49 53 62,68,69,82.84
64, 188,201.203,247,253
71,175,183,186,199,293
56,89-90,93,101,172
4 105 107,112
9-51
.54,59
107 ,115,116,135
296
248
515
197
194
. 101
264-267
163-171,248
189,210
233 266,271
168, 175.179
310.311,313,317,319,340,360,368,37 7,3 7 8,458,
,490.491,501.516
-523-
19694
1978E
i" 151
1:50
EXHIBITIONIST
1947
1948
1951
1957
1978B
33 66,77 145.177,179
:67
166,467
57
:54
EXISTENCE
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1957
1959
1965
1966A
1969A
1973
1975
:10 19,20
:13 22 31,32
103,120,143
186,188,200
232,236,241
47 49.55,57
:9 42,49 115
30
59
69 70,71,72
6
14.19 20,21
:25 34.36.44.
,38,39,52
,145,153,
204,206,
245 247
67
,118,133,
.28
.50,59,61
.255
.53 .
154,
208,
250,
140,
63,
-7,266,502.503 521
56,58,63
160, 165 .:
209 ,212,:
255 272
,66.67.80 97,100
L67.170-172,185,
213,220.223.229,
342,445.461
65,66,71,
75.76,79.80.
97,127.129 132,133,159,160,193.225.257 267
180 186 187
:108.114,118,
EXISTENTIAL
1946
1947
1951
1957
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1969A
1969B
1973 ;
1975
1978A:
1978B:
16,19
5
327
55 59.64
1 6
:14,15,16,20,
:214.216
:10 13
:4,6,10,16 33
160 161,185 -
195
,120,151
27,31,32
.47.48,71
201,214
53 60,139,140,141,205
:20,44,45,49,
117,126 147.
53
59.60.63
EXPECTATION
1947
1948 :
1951 :
1959 :
1965 :
1966A
1967 :
1969A:
1969B:
1973
19,20.73,80,
185,210,242
53,62
61 341 482
71
1 2 , 3 4 . 5 7
28. 30
12,13
50 65.66,
148
97,98,101
254,263
. 75 ,80,87,99
,210,214,228
98,1
102
4,39.40.42,43 50,55,69,75
173
50,75,137,141-143,145 -149
, 105, 132.133,
235 256.294
Ll1 151,186.188
: 110,134
,107,110
,150,151
,160, 167-8,175
, 145,209,210
, 158
1975 101 107.110,198
-524-
1978B:54
EXPERIENCE:
1946 :10,14,15 16 20.21
1947 16 33,34,35,38,39,42,48,50,54,55,56,59,63 67.
73 75,76.78,81,82,86,90,91 93,96 97,99,100,
105 109 110,113,116,122-124,127,130,139,140
146,149,150 151,156,158-160,166 167.169,170,
172,177 178180,195,197,199,203 205,206,208,
210 211 213-215.225,230,232 236 239.240,245.
250,254 256,258 260,265,267,271
1948 45,50.56,57.58,60 64,65,67
1951 :18 39,41,42,47 49,50.59,60 61.62.65 68,73,76,
84.85 87,88,93,95,98,105-111.113-119,124,126,
127-139 142,146-149,151,153,155,158. 163,164,
178 181,185,201.203.231.232,236,243,247,248.
254 259 262,265,273,275.277-281,284,285,289.
2 91,295 297.304-306 309,312,315-317,322,325,
331 335,342 345.348,357,363,368,375,376,381,
382,384 395 422,42 9,433.434 439,444,446,447
450,46 5,467 468,473-480,487 ,491,492 493,495
496,498 507-510,517,519,520,523,526,527
1953 28 29,30,31
1957 :55,56,58 59.60.62,67 69,73
1959 :69,70,71,72 73
1965 :1.4,6
1966A:14,17,18,19,20,21.22,23,26.27,31.33,34
1966B:215,222.225,229
1967 :10,11,15
1968 19,23
1969A:7,8,12,13.15,18,21,23,24,25,27.29,33 34,35,
37,40,43,45,47-49.50-53.5 5,56,59,60,61,64,
66,67,69 72 75,77-80 82,91,92,97.100,103,105,
106,108,114,115,119,120,123-125 135,137,139,
148,150,153.155 156 160,166,169,177,182,183,
188,200,203,208 217,219,232-234,245.247,252.
253,259,261,265 268,270 271,275.276,278 282,
286 ,295,298,301
1969B:171,241,261
1973 2.16,17,18,19,20,28,38,45,50,52,58,64,65,66 67,
68,70,71,83.84,88 89,9294 97,100,101,103.106
115,123,124 128,132-134 140-143,146,149,168,
170,172,180 190,195,198.204
1975 :96 ,98.99,100 101,102,103,104,113,114,118,120,
121 124, 126, 128,129,144. 145.158,189
1978A 39 41,48-51,53
1978B:50.55 57 58
EXPERIENTIAL
1951 43,44,32 3.33 6,33 7,338,340,341
1965 :1
1967 9,10,15
1969A 64
EXPERIMENT
1947 26 187,212,250
1948 :54 55 56,57,58,59,60,62,65 68
-525-
1951 -9,19,20 31,32 33,34.36, 39 40 46 49 50.52 53,
55,60-69,73,75 76,80-83,87.88.90-92,94 96,99,
100-103 106-121.126,127,131, 134-139.143,146,
147,151-153,159 17 6,180.181,183,188,191,193,
19 4-197 200,202,206-209,214,215-217,230,237,
238,242,243.248,250,252,254,260,262,266,27 9,
281-283,286,295-2 97,310-312,315,34 9,3 53,36 2,
368,379,383,400 404 445,451,453,454,464,521
525
1965 7
1967 14
1969A 65 66,72.108,131,133,264
1973 71,72 73 74.81-82,87,90,97,100.101,138
1975 181
1978B:58,62
EXPLAIN
1947 :21,22,29,52,83,85,88,96.100,101 103,151,158-9,
180 225,228.229
1951 297,340,346,347,373,380,437 454,462 492
1966A:17,37
1967 11
1969A:27 47,70 71,122,132,133,246,260
1973 :73,124
1975 100.101,103
1978B:52
EXPLODE
1947 174,188,254,263.271
1951 84,159.391 402,466
1966A:22 23.24,25,31
1966B:222
:
1968 20.24 25 26
1969A:12,60-62,97,98.102,151-2 160
1969B:232,235
1975 97,192 207
EXPLORE:
1947 86
1951 :121,130 312,315,349,382,445.448,463
1966A:19
1969A:107
EXPRESS
1946 9.13 15
194 7 5,22,24,25,34,54,66.6 7,75,7 7,80,85,97,100.102,
143,157 159,160,166,167,168 170,172,174,176-
178,181,187,189,190,197, 203,207 ,208,210,212,
213-219,221-2 24,229,230,235 238,241,245,246,
250.253.254,256,258,259. 262
1948 48 50,59.62,66
1951 18,66.80.90,92,115,136, 137, 138, 141,142,146,152,
166.167,181,183,184,185,187,188,192 194,2 02,205,
209,215-217,219.241,244,250,254,258-260,278,283,
289.296,316,318,324,325.334,335.345-347,356,367,
370.374,376-3 78,380 40 2.428.452,461,462.46 5,484,
492 495 499,502
1953 29
-526-
1957
1966A
1968
1969A
1975
1978A:
1978B:
EXTERNAL
57
20
18
52
58
22
19
53
63
27
22
57
36
58,60,72,76,77 81. 104.116,117,128,142
177
151
40
54 .57
240
214
1946 12
1947:44 45.69.71. 148,149,206,214,216,231,232
1951 43 64,104 107 114 117,127,130,142,143,165
425,434,443 445-447,486
1965 1,5 7
196 7 .10.12
1969A 106
1975 111
1978A 42
1978B :51,56.58,61,62 64
390
EXTEROCEPTORS :
1951 :104,107
EXTROVERT
111,127.131, 151
1947
1969A
EYES:
1947
1948
1951
1957
1966A:
1969A:
72,221
202
56,58,49.50 55,151.156,201,202,233,234,236 5 .41
261
54
10.44,109
500 509
60
18,25 35
39,42,57,58
110, 111,114
266 ,270
120
110,202,203,248,273,345 366,377,475
264
114
62,77,83,84
131 , 132,169
271 , 275,286
85,105,106 108,109,
177 , 257,258,259,263
294
1975
EZEKIEL:
1951 :483
FACIAL:
1951 :278,380
1969A:72,73
FACILITATE:
427
1946
1947
1978B
FACT:
1947
1951
1969A
FAECES:
1947
FAMILY:
12
6, 69
60
13 31,42
158, 178.
220 ,221,
,58
185
229
63,86 114,115,117,122. 127,129,143
188,192,196 201,208,209,214-216,
247,256 261
46 47
102
231,259,320,351
34, 112,114,156,164,169-71 248,249,251
-527-
1947 ;68
1951 :395
FANTASY (SEE ALSO PHANTASY):
1946 :23
1947 :26 31,101,117 122.223
1951 80 82 92 109 114.131.132,134,136.137,151,158
180,214,216-219,24 7.256,264,265,294.353,436,
437,444 453 466500,514,515,518-521
1957 -.59 60 62.64 65
1959 69 70
1965 2
1966A:20 22.23.25,26 28,29 33,35 36
1966B 216 225,233
1967 11,12
1968 17,25
1969A:18,19,24,37,42,43,50,52-54, 61,62 63,68,70,72.
78 89,95,130,135 136,155,160,170.171,194
1969B148 149 150 161,175,190 202-245,268,269,272,291
295
1973 12,15,20,29 30,36,44 53,57,58.60,63,64,66.72,82,
83,86 92-102,108,110,127, 129. 130, 158,159,180,
181,195 196
1975 101,102,103,104.107,111.113. 114, 115,117,118,145.
160,162
1978A 37-43.47-49,51-53
1978B:53,53-60
FASCINATION:
1947 177,188,232.233
1951 83,469,475
FASCISM:
1947 -61,122.196
FATHER:
1947 150
1951 :354.408
1966A:18
1966B:222
FATIGUE:
1947 188,189,190,259
1951 :57.58,67,85.87,126,134,194, 297,209,219.43 6,45 7.493
501
FAULKNER, :
1947 :113
FEAR
1946 :15,16,19,20
1947 :42 43,62,63,68,70,71,73,74,75,95.96 101,109, 113,
114,119,130 131,135,158,160,161 167,171,172,178,
179,180,198 202,203 223,225.226,230,231,237,239,
245,250,254,257,259
1948 56.58,62 64,67
1950 43
1951 76,82,132,139,140,165,166,175,185.186,187,188,216,
247,255 265.279,280,328,352 359 369,383 395,396,
3 9 7,412,415,417,420.446,449,450.464,466,471,509,
511,515,516,520,525
-528-
1953 -34,36
1965 7
1966A-22.23
1966B:223
1969A32 68,70 96,156 178
1973 :132-138
1975 107,112.114,115,119
1978B:51
FEDERN, P:
1947 138,141,142,143,144,164,196
1951 :442,443,444,440,446
1969A-70
FEEDBACK-
1947 5
1969A:100,260
1975 :157,158
FEEDING:
1947 :128,129,134,135.192,228
1951 244,463,504,512
1969A:87
FEELING:
1946 18
1947 23,32 33,45,51,52 53 55 56,57,59,66,67 68.73 ,
78.82 88 92,96-98.103,115.125-127 131.139-141,
146 151,155,156,158,159,169 164-166,169-171,
173.177-179,185,186,189 192-195,198,199,201
203,205 209,212-214 217,219,225,226,228,232,
233-237 244,24 5,248,250,251 254-2 56,259,260,
263.268,271
1948 55,65
1951 :14,47,57,59,61 62,63,64 67,68,75 , 76,79,80,83,84.
88,90 91.92,102,104,105-111, 116,118,120,122.127,
128,129,131,132,134,136,137,139,142,146-149,152,
156,160.163,164,178,180,185,188-190,192,195,203,
204.206,214-216,218,222,230,242,244.254,255.258,
259,263,265,273,274,276,278,280.282,283,290,291,
29 7,298 .303 307.308,309,311,312,314,318,319,323,
33 5,33 7,33 8,341,344-3 4 8,352,35 5 356,359,365.374,
37 5-3 7 9,381.382,385,390,394.399.400,402,415,419,
42 7,42 8,43 0,431,43 2,43 5,43 7,440,44 2,443,446,44 7,
451.457,460,462,463-466,469,471,474-478,480,482,
484,485,487.493,497,502,504.50 6,50 7,511,513,514,
519-521,523-526
1953 :30,32,34,37
1957 :62,63 64,66,72,73
1965 2,4
1966A:14,19,22,26.27 29,31,34
1966B:209,213 215 216,228,230
1967 11
1968 25
1969A:11 27,39,50,52,59,60,67,68,69 71,73,79.80
83-86,88,90,92.98,103,105,107,109,111,113,
115-117,120,123,125,128 131,132.139,140 142
143,145 147,149 156 160,164,168,177 188,201.
-529-
225.230 234 252,257 265-267 274
1969B:231
1973 66.67,68,75,84 89,96,97,102,134,139,144,149,
150 170,174,201,204
1975 105,106,109,110,198
1978A:39.42,43,50
1978B:52.58.65
FEMALE
1947 160 167
1951 218 258
1966A:38
1966B:211,212
1969A:279
FENICHEL 0:
1959 78
1969B:39.40
FERENCZI. S:
1947 74,249
1951 :124,283.350
FERTILE VOID:
1951 413,416
1969A:33,61,275
1969B:11,199 242
1973 :100.101
FIELD:
1947 7
1948 48
1950 39 40
1951 121.153 274 275,277 278,280,285 286,292,299 307 ,
308,313,317,319,320,323,348.350,354.355,356,358,
363,372-374 385 394,395,397,399,404 405 406,408,
409,414,42 2,42 7,42 8,431,434,43 6,43 9,443,446,447,
448,449,455,456,45 7,4 59,4 61,462,464,465,47 5,47 9.
483 485,506,514,523,524
1957 :55,56 60
1959 69.73
1973 16.17,19 20.25,26.28,31,49,52 53,87,105,107,113
1978A:37.44 47.50,52,53
1978B:50 52
FIGHT(ING):
1947 :64,81,149,155 265
1951 -.11,84,202 275
1965 6,7
1966B:207,211
1969A:71,74,103.193.230,232.234,254
1969B.-256
1975 119 158.192,214
1978B 51,60
FIGURE
1946 :8,9,10,13,19
1947 :27,41 42 44 46 50,52,53,54,57 58,59,60,62,59 82,
91 94.95,109,113,125 139 , 146 , 147 , 153,155,156 165
177. 187,188.189 201,213.230. 231,235.238,239,244.
253,254 256.270
-530-
1948
1951
1957
1959
1966A:
1968
1969A:
1969B:
1973
1975
1978A:
1978B:
FINISH:
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1957
1966A
1969A
1973
1975
1978B
FIXED:
1946
1947
1948
1951
61 62
53 55.82.85
108 112 115
266 277
335,337
428-430
468-470
86.87.88,89,90,92,96 98
119.120,128 134,142,151
207
325
420
465
-281.285
338,371
433 434
.473-477
494-496,499 501.505
287,292,297,303
376380,382,396
439 441,450,454
479,480,483 487
509,514,519,525
,64
25,139,160 1
9,98,103,105
69.241 258
106,113 189
52 55 56,58
16,18 51.52
102.104 197
152 153 206
311 314 324
411,415,417
457-461 464
488,490-492
526
55 68
70 71
16
23.25
11,15,21 56
92 93,115 1
4 9 18,20 2
98,100
47,51 52
51 59 20
45,102 153.168,174,175 196,197,243,258,259 260
271
52 63
40,285
34 37
58,59
33
15 17,45
203
57,64,66,67
121 180 186
120
53,55
309,327 403 435
60,67.69,70
,52,54 68 74
69 71,83,88
195 196
51
95 125 131.171 190,202,
92.99,103 104 106,110
1953
1953 36
1965 :2,3
1966A 35
1966B 213
1968 :23
1969A-22,
1975 98
FLATTERY:
1947 -24
1951 135
23
58 66.68,10
145 151 175
64
16,84 86,87
316 325-338
422,429,430
516-523 525
36
1,112,125, 13
,181,186,187
.89,96,233 2
342-344,357
,432,434,445
,527
1,134, 135, 136 137, 141,
,226 239
40.246 247,255,281,315
,364,377 ,399,403,407
,447,471,500.507,509.
35
99
123
37 65
-531-
1965 5
1966A-18
1967 11 13
FLEISS R:
1973 87
FLETCHER:
1947 193
1951 242
FLIGHT
1946 12 14
1947 8 43 49 64 66 70,92 95,202 270
1948 56
1951 87,89 310 313,318 340.362 369.394 461.495
1965 4.7
1969A 55
1975 162
1978B:49
FOETUS'
1947 84 108
1951 232
FOOD:
1946 :17
1947 34 35,42 43,54,70 75 83 85,108,109.110 111,113.
114-117 119 122-128 130.132-134 146 148 154 156,
163 165 167.172,174,176 192 195 197-200,212 247,
270
1948 58,63
1951 :9 99 101 102 154,164 230 231 232 233,234 235,236,
241.243 244 249-251 274 , 276 308 , 395,396,427,428,
474,503-505
1953 -33,35 36
1968 20
1969A:25 65
1969B 173 211,212.258,259
1973 32
FOOL-
1946 19
1947 172,191,250
1969A 57 58,81
FORCE
1947 21.22 23194 231,232 233,245,249 260
1951 17 55 70.106 107 108 , 109 , 11 5 . 137 146 , 191 , 194 .. 21 6
231 234 241 244.285 392,448 480 483
1965 1
1969A 53,68 233
1973 22 24
1975 107 120
FORGET
1947 :23 74,90,99,160,180,201,204 247 260 269,270
1948 45
1951 17 58 184,216,259 343 344 487.489.490 492 494 500
504 510
1969A 52
1975 118
-532-
FRACTIONALIZED PEOPLE (SELF)
1969A 95
1973 181
FRAGMENT
1951 98 394,447 460
1965 6
1969A:10,11 19 70 72 74 82 105-6 114 121,126,131 155
1973 103
1975 :120.147 148 153
FRANKL, V
1969A:16
FREE:
1947 49 61.68 77,82 83,92.125.147,151 175 200,204
206 217 225 229
1948 50
1951 88,89,115206.353 390 392,420,422,437,438,513,
524
1953 35
1966A:26
1966B:233
1969A:34 42,67 73 79,106,135
1973 1:66
197 5 93.94
1978B :52.53,58
FREE ASSOCIATION:
1947 8,79,189 231
1948 :56
1951 89.115 245,379 380 381,382.383,404,43 5.492
1965 4
1966A:17
1969A 55,155
1969B-232
FREUD, A:
1947 :64 238 245
1951 17 74,75 440.441 446
FREUD, S:
1946 7 10-14 17,21 23
1947 5 7 13.17 22,27 35,36 41 42.51 53,55 64.66
69,70-75,77 79 88 , 91-94,97.100-104,112 116,
117 124,128 129 131,132 138-141,147,150 156,
160 174,179 181 187,188.203,204.206,209,217-
219,221 222 233,238 240,247,252,253 266 269,
270
1948 46,48,49.50 52 54,55,57,63 65,68
1951 14,15 17,36 38.65,66,115 165,175 179 201.231
281 283,286,290 304-307 310,319-322 329,330,
334.341 342 246 347,349,351,352,354 360,375
383 387-389 393.400.403-405,418,425,435,439,
4 50,451 453,467,468,487,491-494,496-499,50 2-
504
1953 27.31
1957 -.56-58 63.65
1965 .3-5
1966A.-16 17.20,21,29,30,37
-533-
1966B:204 222
1967 10 11 12
1968 17,18,19 20.22 23 24
1969A:18 30,46,47 50 51,53 55,59,60 62,63 65 70
71,96,106 135,151 166,167.190,213,245
1969B:4 5,15 34,35,41,44 45 50,51,52 56,57 59 65
66 87 99,114.136 139 141 142.156,157,168-170,
175.176,183 184 186-188,191.202 215,216,217,
247,248,255,256.258 272 274,276 287 293
1973 7,19.41 42,51 56 57 59,60 70 86,87,92.95 98,
101,104,121 123,125 129,181 183 186 188.189
207 208
1975 -.96 101,114,119
1978A :37-41 44,47.49,50,51
197 8B:4 9,52 53,55.56 5 7,59,61
FRIEDLANDER, S
1947 13,14 15 19,180
1969B:51 70 71 74,75,76,78 85 102 116,117 172,259,277
FRIGHT
1947 61 78 158,241
1951 203 204.466,467
1968 23
1969A:119 139 237
1978A 53
FRIGID
1946 13
1947 24 70,77 78,113 114,156,156 164 168 177 199,217
247,257
1948 50,60
1951 129 135 165 218
1953 28
1966A-31
1969A69
FROMM, M:
1951 329 448
19698:62,104.139 193 194 195 196,201 204,233,236
FROMM-REICHMANN, F:
1973 :107
FRUSTRATION:
1946 19
1947 52-4,55,56,57-9,80,81,108, 119,134.135,150.158,
163.176,181 201,219,271
1948 64
1951 10 66,80,131 132,183,186 200 217 240 263,274
290 303,309.310-312,340 341.344-347,352 357
392 397-399 401,414 464 487 488 490,491,505
509-512,514-516,520
1953 37
1959 72
1965 :3 4
1966A:18.21,34,38
1967 12.13
1969A:35 40 41 56 60 77 79 96 136 159,182 213.247
1973 :50,51,77,78 82 96,106.107 108,109,110,111 115.
-534-
120,12 5 133 16 8,180
1975 93 94,101.153 189 193
1978A 43,51
1978B:54 58.59
FUNCTION:
1946 7 10,11,20 21
1947 15.21.22 30 34 49 61.65,67,74 80,93.99 117,121
127 131 132,138.139,141,143,146-148.156.158,
167,172.176,178,187.221 224,229 248.251
1948 48 53 54 55 56 57 61.64.66 , 67
1950 40
1951 40 41 42 45,46.48 58,67 68 75 95 101,105 106,
107 114 115 118,128 129,131.141,146,147 151.
152,153 155,156 175,178 181 , 182 187 201,204.
216 219,220,233 237-241 243.245,254 255,258
265,273,275 276,277.288 295,303.307,309,310,
311 313 314.316-319 321,338 343,348,362,365,
366 369,394,395,399,409,413,425-433,435 437.
440 442 443.446 447,448,453 454,456-458 461
464-466 468,469,473-475 483,489,490 495,497,
500,506 511,520,522,523 525,526
1953 30 31,36
1957 56 59,64
1959 70,72
1965 2
1966A:16,20,30 31
1969A:63 64,106,137
1975 104,105
1978A :52
1978B:51,60 63 65
FUTURE
1946 13,14.15 16,20,21
1947 26 66,75,88 89,92,93 , 94 95,96,97;98.99,100,166
207,208.209.249
1948 49.57 60,62
1951 59.60,65,66,67,68.72,108 114.255 281.340,341,
356 367.429,461,514
1957 62
1965 4 6
1966A:14 17
1969A:33 44,47,48 49,50 51,82,156,190
1969B:173,174,175,176 178
1973 -44 123 127 128 195
1975 106 107
1978A:39,41
GALILEO:
1947 86
GALTON, F
1947 39
GAMES
1947 5 26.222
1957 64,70
1965 6
1966A:15.20,21,24,32,33,37
-535-
1966B:212,213
1969A:37 56 59 61 63 70 77 85 93.113,116 140 160,167
173,185 221 185 221 245
1975 :102 103 113,148.153
GAP
1947 8 15 66.195 196.218,250
1948 51.82
1951 363,523
1969A 48,51 82
1975 106,107
GARBAGE PAIL (IN AND OUT THE)
1969A:202.203,232 244
1969B 150,151.167211 219,242
GELB, A
1969B 61,62,174
GENETIC
1951 213 315.329,405
1969A:50
GENITALS:
1946 18
1947 :70.83,84,85,112.113 -114 123 159 160,167 177,236
250,251
1950 :41 42,43
1951 .-10,118,126 218,221 308,349 365 410,411,412,503
1967 10
1968 :26
1969A:39,85 126,273
1973 87
1975 120
1978B:65
GENIUS:
1951 9
1965 4
1966A 38
1966B:212
1969A:1
1978A :39,42
GENUINE
1948 :52,54
1951 190,195
1957 63
1965 3
1966A:21
1968 :18
1975 :115
GERMANY
1947 27,51,60,85 90,122 131,148
1951 16 51.159,481
1953 33
1957 :67
1966A:38
1969A:33 49
1969B:40.41,48.71,126,129,131 155,168,178.179 181,202
232,263 280
-536-
1973 177.178
1978B:63
GESTALT
1946 23
1947 :27 28 41,60,100,146 186,186 189,200
1948 57
1951 15,16,20.55.85,86 88 111 115,127,128 277-9,291
294 3944 428.433,441,445 447 449 451 454,469,
524-526
1957 67-9
1959 -69
1965 7
1966A 16
1968 :19 20 21 23
1969A:11 15.16,23 45 54,64 76,95 124 202 158
1969B:10 30,35.38 61-5,86 92.114,115.117.142,160,171
187 198 239
1973 19,22,23,29 57,103 180.186,189
1975 100 101,103-6.120,148 153
1978A 38 43,47 51
GESTALT THERAPY/GESTALT APPROACH/GESTALT PHILOSOPHY:
1947 5
1951 :9 14 15 18,19 . 278 279,287-6.290 298,299
1953 :30
1957 55,58 59,60 70 71
1959 6971
1965 1 2.4,6 7
1966A 14,16.18 20 30
1967 9-15
1968 17.18
1969A:2,4 8,15-17 28.31,39,47,51 54-8,63 64,70,71,73
78 80 81,135.143,145 155,217,232 235.237,255
1969B:62,118,144,145.148,180,193, 264, 265,272,276
1973 19,25,30,51 53 62-4,67,81,83-5,87,92,108,110,
111 120 124,133,134,148 157 159,179-189,191,
195
1975 94,98 103,107,114,115.117 118,126,144,147,148,
151,158,159,166 183 201
GESTALT THERAPY (JOURNAL OF)
1969A:254
GESTALT KIBBUTZ:
1969A:78
1969B:243 288-90
GESTALT MANIFESTO:
1969B: 243
GESTALT PRAYER:
1969A:4
1973 :141-151
GESTALT PSYCHOLOGY
1946 6.9,11 22,23
1947 14 27-9.43.52,189,253
1948 49 50 55
1951 13,16 51-2,85 284-7 303,305-8,454,498
1957 58
-537-
1967 ,10
1969B:53,61-4,169
1973 :2-5,9
1978B:51
GESTALT THERAPIST/GESTALTIST
1946 :23
1957 69
1968 21
1969A:1
1973 65,83-5 104
1975 94
GESTURE-
1946 10
1047 :17
1951 345,377
1969A 57 126,235
1978A 41,52
1978B:54
GHANDI, M:
1951 503
GINDLER, E
1946 21,22 23
1948 61
GLANDS-
1947 45 61 82,99 195
1975 104
GOALS
1946 :13 19 21
1947 210
1948 -52
1951 -66,107,32 9,33 7.34 7,356.380,381.39 7,397.398,405,
411 431,434.460 461,469 473
1959 69
1966B:216
1969A:29 32.153 160
1973 -8.12,29.43 44,45,81 103
1978B:53,58
GOD:
1947 :14 18,22,31,67,72 97,119,157.218 222 227.231,237
241,271
1948 48 64
1966A 207
1969A:9 18
1973 194
1975 99 101
1978A:50
1978B:58
GOETHE, J W:
1947 42 49,68,103 105
1948 46 48
1951 109.110
1973 101
1978A.-37
GOLDSTEIN, K:
-538-
1946 6 23
1947 20,26 49
1948 49 50
1951 13.21
1969A :6
1969B:4.39,51 57 59 62 168,173,174.205.263,287
1978A 36 45
1978B:60
GOOD
1946 7
1947 51-52 53,54,55,56.57.58 59 61,80,186.215
1948 66.67
1951 388,389,391,483
1953 27 28,29,30,32 37
1959 72
GOODMAN P
1951 13,368
1969B:201
1978A:51
GOSSIPING:
1947 123
1966A:15 36
1966B:218
1969A:90
1973 134,150
1978B:218
GOULDING, B:
1969B:254
GRAMMAR
1951 373
1969A:52,207
1973 181
GRATIFICATION
1946 :59,13
1947 7,36,38,40,41,42 44 45,50,54,55.56,59 63,70 81,82
83-88.91.101,103,110,115 .117, 129, 132, 135,146,147,
156 164 168.179,192,198,202,206,223.227,229 255,
256,259,260 271
1948 45 52 53
1951 67,188,241,43 9,440,446,461,462,466,490,513
1953 28
1966A 27
1978A:51
1978B:54.60
GREED:
1947 110,115,123 126,129,133,154,160 164 168,177,
179 192,194 198 243 262
1948 -64.67
1951 :76 234 236 240,241 248
1953 :28 29 34,35
1966A:21,32
1969B:201
1973 49
1975 166
-539-
GREEK:
1947 21 30 119 120,255
1948 45 49
1951 352 392,417,431
GREEN, H:
1969A:46
GREENWALD, J.A:
1969A:150
1969B:131
GRIEF:
1950 40
1951 :132,137,192 410,414,465,466,491,514,520,525
195 7 -.60,7 2
1966A:22 23
1966B:222
1967 14
1968 20,25
1969A:60 61 ,68 97,166
1969B:231,277
1975 97,143,176 203
1978B-55 57
GRIFFITH. D.W:
1951 400
GRODDECK, G
1947 73 218
1969B:154
GROF, S
1969A:152
GROOVING:
1975 :97 100,101
GROUND (SEE ALSO FIGURE):
1951 18,85.86,87,88,89,90,94,112,115, 119.128,133,
134.151 152,153,266277 278,280,281 285,382,
42 8-430 440.446,449.459,460 465 468-470,473,
474 478,488-490.501 509 510
1966A 26
1968 :23,25
GROUNDED:
1947 :50
1951 :16
1969A:40
1969B:219
1973 2
GROUPS
1946 :11
1947 60,61
1951 330.408.481 482,483,485
195 7 .54.60
1965 6
1966A 19,36
1966B-217 224
1967 9,11,13,14
1968 24 26
1969A:41 77 78,88,104 151 162,217,237,239,265,281 284
-540-
1969B
1973
1975
GROWTH:
1947
1951
31
28
189
29,30 124.150
108 126.144 189
105,199,203
15,18,101,105 108 157,181,185 187.231 233
275,276 277 280.282,284,293,2 94.32 8 331
355,356
427
485
338,341
410 420
473 478
348,
422,
480,
351
425
481
430
486
360,373
433.447
516.517
394
448
526
405
455
527
1953
1957
1959
1966A
1966B
1967
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
1978B
GUILT
1947
1951
1953
1957
1966A
1969A
1969B
1973
1975
1978B
GUNTHER
1969B
GURU:
1969B
GYMNAST
1947
1951
HABITS
1946
1947
1950
1951
6,65
9,14
251,273
333.336
406,407
461,472
33,35
66 .68
72
33 34
212.222
12. 14
1 2,30 31,32,33
60.76-78,87,125
203,233 247,260
8.32,34 42 49 55 58,71
:93.100 103,114 117 120
43
56 61.65
62 66,58,71,73 74 131.140,158, 159,178,219,237,
240 245,259
67,91,155-158,159,163, 164 185 186,18 9,218,335,
34 35,40,41
126 148,151
42 46 49,51
166-169,175
52 53
193,
120 127,147 172,181 201
339-341,355
418 450 480
27 37
59 62,63,71
:26,27 28,30
:51 52 53,76
:182,183.185
66,106,114,
107,109
:54
. B
:144,255
:70 99
ICS
:232
125
11
34 35 62,78
198,201,217
41 42
16,28,63 74
159.181 184
313-316,318
396,399,400
481,485-487
359
491
372
503
387
518
390
522
393,398,403,413
72 . 73
168 145
186
123,151
161 163.164
92 101,129,141,151 180 181,186,195
218,233,238 247 ,266,269
83,99,102,106 116.155.156,157 158,
19 5,230,259,27 9 288,292,294,305,
32 8,342-34 6,356 364,37 2.373,382,
412.43 5,461,462,465,472,474,478
489-491,494,496 498,506 507,510,
-541-
511
1953 35 36
1967 10
1968 18,21
1969A.-37
1969B:66,240
1973 -46,54 66
1975 :97
1978B:49.53 60 61.65
HALL B:
1969B:248
HALLUCINATING:
1946 10
1947 .42,65 67 102 122,143 156,161 167 201,206 221,237,
239
1951 110.257 259 277 290.295 310,311,312,319,352.355,
362,368,369 436,452 460.461,464,466,469,493 513
1965 4
1973 103
HAMLET:
1947 :30
HANDED:
1969A: 118,122,126,134,139,193,277.278.279,286 304
HANGING:
1947 108,109,110.155,175 181,188,192,193,230,233,270
1948 :66
1951 517
1968 23
HAPPEL, C:
1969B:49,52,53.205,295
HAPPY (HAPPINESS)
1947 54,56 103,148,160 168,181,210,223
1951 292 299351,353 401,420,493
1957 -60
1969B:238
1975 120
HARMONY
1947 :46.116121 150 155 180,187 192,201.224 255
1951 132,135,304 309,370,411,440,469
1953 37
HARNICK:
1947 75
1969B:48
HARTMANN, H:
1947 139
HATE :
1947 :18.57 58 68,80,117 120,144 . 148 176 , 223 , 242,254
1948 64
1950 40
1951 90,91 231,258,346,393.397.398.399 402.409,413,503
1959 72
1959A 10,11 12
1975 183,214
197 8B:54
-542-
HEADACHES
1947 :70 73.91,151 152 190 216 217,219,258
1948 54,60 66
1951 57 58,87.201,203 205,206,217,318,413
1953 34
HEALING:
1951 36,39 46.381,383
HEALTH(Y):
1946 21,163174,172,178,179,180,187,191 197,198,221 230
231 237,239,248,258,268
1948 :52.54,59,63
1950 40 52,43
1951 10,18,60.68,6971.83,84.101,105,106.108,110,
139,146 151,153,154,156 157 164.171,178,180,
187, 190,202,217-219.231,232,243-245,250,251,
255,276 284,289 293-295.309,311 313,326,328,
329 331,334-336,339 342.343 358-360,362,369,
371 374 391,394,418,420 433,434,439.442,447,
452,457466.498,499,507,510,524,526
1953 30
1957 66.69
1966A:16 19
1967 12
1969A:6,32,33,43,50,51 54,65 81 89,97,133,202
1969B-.293
1973 5,6.35,42,104,106,123
1975 -99,104
1978B:50
HEAR(ING) :
1947 :50,66.143.179,197,205 ,213 i
1951 98 104,105,106 107,111.377.426,475,477
1957 55
1966A:14 29
1966B:223
1967 :10
1969A:24 25 34 66.85,92 96,134,137,168.169,224
1975 100.198
HEART:
1947 33,61,74,76.77,228
1957 62
1969A:69.82 85,117,202
HEFFERLINE, R:
1951 :13
HEGEL. G.W.F:
1947 14
1969B 8
HEIDEGGER,M:
1966A 16
1969A.-17 214
1969B:60.112,278
HEINE. H:
1947 241
HEISENBERG:
1947 20
-543-
1969B:199
HELL
1947 :32,52 222
1965 7
1975 :162
HELP(LESS)
1947 23 34 98,119 164.208.210.242
1951 -83 106,193,319 320,332 348,365 484.506
1957 71
1965 4
1966A:18 35
1967 11,13,14
1969A36 39 49,62 66,77 79.80.111,127,171,199
1969B 231
1973 48,104,111,196
1975 93,94 111
1978A 37
1978B:61,62
HERACLITUS
1946 8
1948 48
1966A 19
1969A:46
HERCULES:
1947 132
1969A:68
HERE (SEE ALSO NOW)
1946 14
1947 -5
1948 :56,57
1951 59 61,62,63.65 66,68,69,88,93.98,102,103,109.
114,116,284,331 336
1959 71
1965 4
1966A 14 18
1967 10,11
1968 19,23
1969A:2 44 47,48,54,64,66 67 79,133
1973 63 64 65,66,67 68,69,70,71,72,73,85,99,102,195
1975 103 118 183
1978A:41
HERMANN I:
1947 155
HERO(ISM)
1947 14.243
1948 54
1951 328
1965 2
1966A:24
HESSE, H:
1969A 41
HETEROSEXUAL
1951 :350
1959 :71
-544-
HIPPOCRATES
1948 67
HIRSCHMAN:
1969B:56
HISTORY/HISTORICAL:
1947 72.74,75 78.89,92,96.97,98 ,100 ,115 209,216,218
1951 46.275 288 298.329 371 392 508
1957 67
1965 6
1969A:33
1975 157
HITCHCOCK, A:
1969A:261
HITLER, A:
1947 :18 19 58,148.149245
1951 :17 481
1953 33 34
1969A:52
1969B:246
1973 176
HOELDERLIN. F:
1969A:214
HOLE:
1947 52 53
1951 9 10
1965 4
1966A:21,27,35
1969A:2,39 40,41,69,75,85.96, 105 106,131 168
1969B:242,293.294,295
1973 153
1975 98114,120,192
HOLISTIC/HOLISM:
1947 5.28,29,31,32,33,50 52,60 61,64,72 102.114,
136 143,144.147,150,172 180 190.193,232,258.
268
1969B:160,168.192,247
1973 -3,9,15
HOLLAND:
1969B:39,40 41
HOLOIDS
1947 27 269
HOMEOPATHIC
1947 26
1973 179.180
1978A.-40
HOMEOSTASIS:
1957 58 69
1969B:8
1973 :5.6,7.26,45
1978A:43 47.50,53
1978B:53,55,59
HOMOSEXUAL
1946 16
1947 226
-545-
1951 :257 264,350 354,481.482
1959 71
1966A:23
1969A:22
1969B:201,205
1973 110
HONEST(Y):
1951 334
1966A:21
1969A:48,59,69,77 - 110,133
1969B:177
1973 110,127.143,144.145,151,202
1975 108
HOPE(LESS)
1946 :11
1947 -.97 125,171 210.251
1948 57
1951 66,332,414
1969A:78
1969B-243
1973 137
1978B:58
HORMONES
1947 45,84
1966A 31
1975 96
HORNEY K:
1946 :21
1947 75.110 160 225,242,266
1948 48
1951 329,348.448
1953 31
1969A:39,205
1978A 53
HOSTILITY/HOSTILE
1946 :7 8
1947 :23 24,48,58,62,64,65.71 124,129.133,142,144,146
148-150,153,162.165,174 185,209,218,245 264
1948 :67
1950 39
1951 :11 76,106,157,183.246,258,290 314,335 350,389,
393 396,398-400,408,505,514,517, 519
1953 32
1965 :3-6
1966A 23,31
1966B:212
1968 20
1969A 9 12.246
1978A:42
HOT SEAT
1969A-79 81,84,89.90 91.95,290
1969B:239,267
1973 122,128,130
1975 144 180
-546-
HOW :
1947 93 124 213 229-250,255,270
1951 :18 41.119 158 167 185,278,297 , 377 507,509 525
1966A:16,29
1969A:20,27,43,47,48,54,7696,107,108,112,120,151
1969B-.240
1973 54,59,77,122.128
1975 101 120 159
HUMILIATE:
1951 130,136 152 407 415,418
1978A 53
HUNGER:
1947 8.34 42 43,45 48,50,53,54.71,80,81,82,84,85.
87,91.94 107-113,117,118.123.125 128,133,
135 141 146 154 192,200,206,259.266
1951 44,240 241,343,428,457,463
1953 :37
1957 58
1969A:37.68,69 70 116 273.274
1975 104
HURT:
1947 108,109,155 161171 172,176,195
1951 202,247,514,515
1957 63
1969A:251
1978A :42
HUSSERL. E
1946 16
HUXLEY, A:
1947 -.121.209
1951 35
1969B:113
HYPER-AESTHESIA:
1947 155 156,164
HYPERTROPHY
1947 46,65,67 68,221 228
1951 135 139
HYPNAGOGIC
1951 110,436,514
HYPNOSIS:
1946 14
1951 158 177
1966A 36
1967 12,14
HYPOCHONDRIA:
1947 66 218,226
1948 60
1951 121 135,197,204
HYPOCRISY:
1947 125,157,174,178 227,252
1951 391
1953 36
HYPOTHESIS:
1947 185
-547-
1978A:42,49,51
HYPOTROPHIED
1947 228
1951 135 HYSTERIA/HYSTERICAL
1947 64,66 78 81,83,84 112,165,172,236
1948 54
1951 :135,330,393 511,517,519 523
197 5 -98
I
1947 :138 139 145 217.218.219,220,244
1948 60,65 66
1951 116 157,191,193,194 197,203,216 231,232,245.
254,259 260,374,375 377,430 432,444,445 456,
475 476,506,507
19 5 3 -.31
1957 :57,59
1965 4
1966A 20
1969A:4.6,7,10 43,47.70,75 76 107,114,254
1969B:114,115 216
1973 41 42 65 68,76,131 135 , 136 , 142 , 145,148,149.188
189.190 191
1975 119,120
1978A 38
ID:
1946 7
1947 87 93,139,140.147,218
1951 .259,290 387,388,420,42 5,432 433,435.436,437
4 3 9,440,454,455.459,468,469,487,490,492
1959 :69
1965 5
1966A:21
1973 41
IDEA:
1946 12
1947 90,92 94 95,124,126,127,153 157 161-166,174,
180 187,197,201-241 248 270
1948 55 56 68
1951 89115,230 378,492,493,515
1953 30.31 32
1965 .2,4,7
1966A:20 21
1969A:72 107 132,193,243 257 264,269
IDEAL
1946 18 19
1947 7,14,290 32 48,57,62,96,102,112,121 128,140,
154,188 210 216.220,224,228,241,266,268.271,
272
1951 :165,256,306,315,357,375.419
1953 28
1957 70
1965 2,3
1969A:43 245
1975 105
-548-
1978A:42
1978B:52
IDENTICAL
1947 33,61 98 139 154 199,236 239,249
1969A:107
IDENTIFY
1946 20
1947 21,33,108.130138,139-145,146 147 149,150,
151-153 157.158,164,166,170,178,186,188 200,
205,206 210,213,216,218-2 20,224,234,241
1948 30,31,32,55,62,65
1950 40 43
1951 17 116,117,157 158,190,191,192,194,205.230
243-246,255,263 264,282 290,321,354,357,
3 66,367,372.373,387 392,395,399,400,408
409,414-417,42 0 426,428-430,432-435 440,
445,460,468.469.471-473,474,478 479,480
481 482.484.497 498,504.506,509,512,513
516-518 522,524,526,527
1953 28
1965 1 5
1966A:27,29,32
1966B:210 212
1967 11
1969A:8,12,47.62,63,70-7 3 75,77,94,103.107.114,118.
130 202
1969B-.115 116 214,267 278,293
1973 38 42,64,107 111 182,189 190
1975 94.104,119,120.183
IDEOLOGY
1947 63,70 122,129 144 145 147,148,151 242
1951 17
1969A:13
ILLNESS
1946 11
1947 61,66 83,94,102,172,185,208, 216 217, 236,237,258,
260.269
1948 48
1951 197,309,310,318,414,420,515 518
1953 29
1965 7
1969A 46,193,245
1978A:53
1978B:61
ILLUSION:
1947 63.122 172
1951 158 299 304,307,312 313,339 349,448,450
1969A.-54
IMAGE:
1947 25 34,35,36,40,41,42,44,45,48 53,54,57,61.63 64,
66,69,89,91,110,113,122,137,138,143, 166,170,187,
195 201-205,208,210,212 213 216.217,225,228,234,
236,237.239,241.242,244,245.250,253,255,257
1951 59 74,75 76,80.81.82,85,101 110 111 112 117
-549-
140 142,187,214,256 257,27 7,283,297 310,311,
315,316 319,320,337 340 342,344,345,347 348,
353,356 364 374-376,381.382,398,413,414,428,
436 461,477,489.492 500,514
1953 31
1957 60
1965 2,3,4,6
1966A:18 26,28 35
1966B:222
1967 14
1969A:57,66 72,98,114,116,120,121.167,239 245,269
1975 95 100,113,118
1978 -39,40,41,42,47,49
IMBALANCE
1951 13
1969B:102 115 185
1973 45
1978A:50
IMITATION:
1951 350,364,365.366-368 372,386,387,390,426,478,479,
481.500 512
IMMOBILIZING:
1946 18
1951 362,488
IMPASSE
1947 6,222
1965 3,4,6
1966A:18 22,24,25 26,31,32
1967 :13 14
1968 :20 25
1969A:31 38 39 41 42,43,52,60 75,94,97,167,201,247,274
1969B:22,24,187 206,22 0,25 6
1973 :148,152
1975 93;120. 187 189, 192, 192. 187
IMPATIENCE
1947 91 92,109,110,192 194.196,202,206,262,263,265
1951 55,67,88,100 234.236,240,241 243.248,297,352 370
1957 60
1969A:82
1973 20.23 30
1978A:51.52
1978B:54.55,57,58,59
IMPLOSIVE
1966A:20 22.23,24,25 31
1968 :20.24,25
1969A:60 62,97,98.102,143,152,247.301
1969B:187,188,190, 192
1975 :200,201
IMPOTENCE .
1946 :9,17
1947 82,113,132 172,175,176.190 236,237 254 271
1948 :66
1951 398
1953 :33
-550-
1968 26
1969A:57,80.111,115.202 230
1973 87
1978B:58
IMPRESSION:
1947 27,134 195.201,208.255.256
1951 286,436
1965 3
1969A:72.246,295
IMPULSIVE
1947 92,109 124 151,153,154,155 156,158,181,205,206,
253,271
1951 17 81,89,183 184,185.186 187,240,201 206 214
215-217,246,254 255,257,259 262 264,274,293,'
324 325349,385.387,396 434,436 439
465.468 469,483,492-4 94,499-511,519
1953 33
1965 4
1966A:21 -
INCEST
1947 126
1951 -.351
196 7 12
INCISORS:
1951 232,241.243
INCOMPLETE:
1947 37.99,131 165,190 196,227 240,255
1948 :52 61
1951 10,15 441.493
1953 34,35,36
1966A 23,26
1968 18
1975 120
1978B:54 61
INDEPENDENCE
1947 -98 101,115,176,193
1950 41
1951 42/326 329 350,355 410
1975 94
INDIFFERENCE:
1947 :16,17,139,222
1948 :67
1951 72 523
1975 102
INDIGESTION:
1947 103 104
1951 244 245 250
INDIVIDUAL:
1946 :19
1947 : 52.53,55.60,61-63,72,73,105,115,116,
131, 132.135,136,144,147-149,154,167
193,196 197 200,224,237,252,254.256,
1948 46,50,51,55,64,66
1950 39,40,42
,440
, 520
120,
171
271.
441,
121.128,
178,190,
272
-551-
1951 18 54.111 157 283.329,331,367,370 3 72,386,408.409
442 444,482,483.524
1953 29,33
1959 72
1965 1,2,3,4
1967 -9,11,13,14,15
1968 24
1969A:33,34
1978A 50
INDIVIDUAL THERAPY:
1947 :5 7
1951 41
1966A:36
1968 :22
1969A:77,223
;
237
1969B:289
1973 147
INFANTILE:
1946 21
1947 :20,89 98,160 167 181,209
1948 64 67
1951 14 109.205 288 293,319,321.322,329,341 344.347,
348-35,352 353,382 425,448 449,452,492-494,
497 499,502,503
1957 66
1965 4,5
1966A:17,26,37
1967 11,12 14
1968 23
1978B:61,62
INFERIORITY
1947 :67 101,169,170,225,256,271
1948 52
1951 195,370,392,393,397
1965 :3
INFLUENCE :
1946 :12
1947 100,101,201,211 234,254,258
1951 .99
INFORMATION:
1947 13
1966A:18
1969A:76
INGEST(ION):
1947 :198
1951 238 240
INHALE
1947 262.263,264 267
1951 167.163-171
1957 62
1978A:49
1978B:51
INHERITED:
1951 456,463,485,499 503
-552-
1966A:21
1978B 63
INHIBIT
1947 38,65,66,70 78,84,91.108,109,123 125,126 132.
133 142,150 155,157,160.177,180,181,188.192,
219 22 0,22 4 227,233,245.253,256,257,262,266
1948 :52 66
1951 :17,47,48,81 152, 155,164. 184, 202,250.254,277.
279.280,282,287,294,299.316 318 321 324,336,
33 7,344-346,353,3 58,37 2 387 390,393.395,398.
402,403,412,421,422,425,426 430,434 436 451.
45 2 480,481.483.487-4 90,49 2-4 94,496-5 00,503,
504.509 510,512-515
1953 36
1957 56
1965 4
1969A.-41
1973 :174
INITIATIVE:
1948 64 65 66,67
1951 101,105 117,353,368,392,393,396,397,398,399,401,
402,407.433,434,436 461
1978B:57
INNER:
1950 39 40.61 62
1951 76,89,90,104,127 132 184,214,307 , 313,375 , 386 ,
408,409,410,415,526
1965 1,2 5
1966A:17 33
1966B:212
1967 13
1975 108,192,193
INSANE
1947 -98,213 241 266 270
1951 :19.292
1953 -27
1966A:16
1975 112
1978B 58
INSECURE:
1947 218
1948 68
1951 309,312,352 397 401,420
1957 60
INSIDE
1947 251
1951 443.448.456
1953 :32
1978A:44
INSIGHT:
1946 8,16
1947 13,14 15,16 29 63,80,88,101,103.143,186,194,218
250 251
1948 50 64
-553-
1951 19,54,117 122 259,277 285.286.287,289.293 299
306 322.438,474,476
1957 69
1969A:73.78.155
1969B 201
1973 100
1975 120
INSOMNIA:
1946 9
1947 174 223,258,259 260,261 271
1951 57 58 436,500,501
1957 58
1973 21
1978B.53,54
INSTINCTS
1946 :8,10,11 13
1947 7,34,35 36,43,45,50,54,63,69,71,73.75 80,81,82,83,
85-87,98,100,103 110,113 . 120 , 123,128 . 129,138,140,
141,147,150,15 7 164,189,193,266,271
1948 45,50,53
1950 :39,40.42
1951 165,290,309,312,344,400,404,408,411.421,43 9
441,446 450.468,471,477
1957 58
1965 5
1968 :24
1969A:17,24,128
1969B:39,93
1973 7 9.71
1975 104
1978A 44 47 48,49,51
1978B:51,52,53.54,55.59 60 62
INTEGRATE:
1946 :5-8,10-13,21,23
1947 -31,32,60 64 65.73.105 128 , 136 140,143,144,146.
149.172
1948 46-50,53.54.55 58-61,63,64 65,67
1951 .-20,102,111 115,119,132,135,140,141,143,147-150,
175.182 204.206,211,216.232,234,246,247,255,265,
279. 281-284,287,292,293,295-297,340.360,363,369,
3 82.404,415,42 0,42 2,428,442,456,4 65,4 76.483,491,
520
1953 32.34,35
195 7 .-66
196 5 :1.2 5,6,7
1966A:38
1966B:204,207 212
1967 :9,11,13
1969A:13,14.18,24,25.28,30.48.54.56,62,67,69,70,
71,73,74,76,79 82,114,131,155,193 202 221.
232,252.259 260
1969B:180 191.256 276
1973 :16 26,30,43,49,70 73,79,80.82 83,94.103,111,
114,131,141 181,182,190
-554-
1975 96 97 100 101.117,119,120.145,148,153,162
1978A:39 43 48 49,50
1978B:54,56,58,62
INTEGRITY
1951 14,283
1973 49
1978A:53
INTELLECTUALIZE
1946 5 14,19
1947 7 13,14 20,26 34,38,65,67 93,105,117.126.127,
129,174 186 212,218.228,233 241
233 241
1948 62,66
1951 11, 68,110, 135.139,242,245,328
1953 :35
1957 71
1965 2,4
1966A 15,18
1966B:213
196 7 .11
1969B: 189
1973 :47,50,98. 100,124,129 184
1975 :148
1978A 47
1978B:58,65
INTELLIGENCE
1946 10
194 7 15.42,64,67.101,115,127,190,192, 198,204,212,221
1951 20
1966A:26 31
1969A 24,32 38 71 76,91,141
1975 105
INTENSITY-
1947 :176,188
1951 312
1978A 42,43
INTENTION:
1947 :7 120,136,186 221,233.250,271
1951 18,134,137,142,143.153, 181. 191. 305,306,321,337,
354.464.515
1957 59
1965 7
1966B:204
1967 10
1969A:55 69.71, 193
INTERCOURSE
1947 113 156,166,168,218,219
1978B 51
INTEREST
1946 17,19
1947 23 38-41,43 50,52.53,55.57,58,67 92,102,110,112,
122.124-126,129 135,144 154,177 179,187.188 190
192-194,197,200-2 04 215,22 4. 230-2 32,235,244,254.
257.269-270
-555-
1948
1950
1951
1957
1965
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
1978B
,70 82-
94,206
16,434
51 59,60 67
43
16,51
190,1'
414,4:
60
47
85
3
99
47
50
89,99,106 109,112,115,146
277 .278.280,282,324 355
459.474,488,506 523 525
152,156
407,412-
527
139
54
INTERFERENCE
13
44 18
271
15 18
3,4
17 29
204,2
71. 77
105, 1
63
1946
1947
1951
1965
1966A:
1966B:
1969A:
1975
1978B
INTERNAL
1946
1947
1951
1965
1967
1975
1978B
INTERPERSONAL
8 198 202,203.220,224,225,237,238,260.264,
,20,84,97,115 351,485
11
80,217,296
48 153
7 20
69,71
221. 2
43,11
334,3
5
10
101 111 150
61
148 1
!31 , 232
0,114,
166,406
50,153,181 190,195 202,206 212-216,
236,240,264
117,141 201,203,248,278,307,315,324
,410,417,457
1946
1948
1950
1951
1953
1978B
15. 20
52. 54
40,42
19 40
222,2
347
446
32
65
,56 67
137,1
43,247
64,366
84 504
47,158,188,189,190,195,204.215.216
,249,260.281.286,288289 298,337
,367 372-3 74,40 7 409,410,418 437,
,511
INTERPRETATION
1946
1947
1948
1951
1965
1966A
13,18
73,88 89,93
221, 228,231
48
18,59,82,11
347.354 377
414 431,437
511,519,521
6
15 17,18 27,37
.96,124 125,137 138 , 160 .161.170,192
.238,244 247,267
6,245,265,283 287 330,332 336,345,
,383,394,399 400 402.403,410.412-
,480,490,49 5,496 .49 9 ,500,502,503,
,524
-556-
1966B:204,211.213
1967 11,12,15
1969A:55,58,73 . 77 95.97,120 130,131,217 246,260
1969B:62
1973 16,46.52 60,70 78 98 101,105 111 124,144,174.
184, 185
1975 94,112 118 148,151.153.198
1978B:52,57
INTERRUPT:
1947 45 69.91,196 230 232,251 261
1951 76,86,153,155.163,181,233,254.277,279 466,467,
471 480 481.487 507-510 513,514,516 517 521,525
1953 35
1957 58 60.68,69
1966A:17,22,27
1969A .-3,55,56,65 108 . 179 , 282 , 286
197 3 67-7 2,74,77,90-9 3,96,100,102,103,104,105,185
186,192
1975 :100,101 .103,104,113 114,151
1978B:51 53-59,63,65
INTERVIEW:
1947 :207
1948 :56
1951 40,336,337
INTRA-ORGANISMIC FIELD:
1947 :237,240
INTRA-PERSONAL
1946 7.8
1950 40
1951 :409
INTRA-PSYCHIC
1950 41 42
1951 410.411
INTROJECT
1946 21
1947 81,84,103,122.128,129,130,131132 133,141,143,
145 156,157.159,163-166,168-172 195 198,199 203
218 221,239 241 248 252.265
1948 ;54,63
1950 39
1951 -14, 16, 62, 98, 100, 11 0,157, 181.217, 23-0, 253, 254, 255,
263.265,288,295354,357.366 370,376,381.395,397,
40 5,408,416,421,422,43 7,450,46 3.471,47 9-481 483-
4 85,504 510,512,513516-518.521-52 3
1953 31 35
1968 20
1969A:151
1969B:138,211,213,215 216,217,256,258,268,292
1973 32,33,34,35,37,40,42.58 59,71,73,77,79,81.94,96,
97,104.115,189
1978B:56,62
INTROSPECTION:
1946 20
1947 :226.228
-557-
1948 60
1951 :28.89,106,107,196 290.304,342,435,436,444,445,
495,516,526
1973 100
1978A-.40
INTUITIVE:
1947 92,148 212 229,255
1951 10 135 464,513
1953 30,31
1966A-.38
1969A 24. 77 ,131
1975 .99,112,113
1978B:63
INVENT
1951
1969A:338,440.461 473.482,491,52 6
INVESTIGATION
1947 172,196,201,203 210
1951 98
1951 98
1965 4
IRRATIONAL:
1946 21
1951 :264,284 379,436.462,471,482
1957 65
1975 118
1978A:42
IRRITABLE
1947 23 25.70,116,117,132,148 156,166.168 175,188,
196,245 246 254
1951 84 194,233,318,332
1953 34,35
1966A:23
1978B:54
IS-ISM:
1959 72
1966A:15
1973 151
ISOLATION:
1947 -.27,28 29,31 32,38,65,73,78,80,91,92 138,144,
145,149 166,167,169,177 247,250,270,272
1948 :67 68
1951 19,155 157 163,216,255,288,289 313,318,319,320,
321,328,333,362,364,369,372 377 390,391 393,406,
414,429,434,43 5 4 54,498 . 499 , 516 , 518,519,520,523
1953 29
1957 65,69
1966A 30.35
1969A.-48 167
IT
1947 -217.218 ,219,234 245
1948 65
1951 258,259.374 375,377,378 430,432,475
1966A 20,36
1969A:75,76,106,113
1973 :36,65,68,76,81,145
-558-
JACOBSON, E
1947 229,230
1948 61
19 51 -.123
JAENSCH. E:-
1947 42
1973 :101
JAMES, W:
1951 307
JAPAN
1947 30
1966A:37
1969A:40
1969B 105,106,109,113,122 128,129,130 131 145
JEALOUSY
1947 132,161,166 244,246
1951 257 350
1969B:208
JEKYLL (DR) AND MR HYDE:
1947 :268 269,270,271,272
1953 :31
JESUS CHRIST:
1947 :245
1969B:131
1973 -.160,169
JEWISH/JUDAISM:
1947 63 97,119 120,123,231
1957 55
1965 1
1966A 16,30
1969A:17 82,140,141,142,17 2
1969B:59,123,124,127,129.144 182,197,223,249
1973 146
1975 109
JONES, E:
1947 :62
1969A 49
1969B:41,58
JOULE, J.P
1947 21
JOY(OUS )
1947 167
1951 :158.232,391,476
1957 72
1966A:22,23 31
1966B:215
1967 14
1968 :20,25,26
196 9A:1,3,60,67,68,94,97,119 .152,160,233,247,266
1975 :97,120,204
JUDGE:
1947 150,197
1951 75,377,482,483
1953 30
-559-
JUNG, C.G:
1946 :21
1947 -27,72,102,218,221
1951 283,330,499
1957 :70
1969B:51
JUSTIFICATION:
1946 19
1947 20,170,174,237,244,248,269,271
1951 257
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY:
1947 154
1957 :72
KAFKA, F
1951 524
KAMIYA, J:
1969A 21
KANT, E:
1947 14
1951 281,342,358.441,462
1957 67
1969A-.18
1969B:256
KARMA:
1973 122
1975 117
KIERKEGAARD, S:
1965 1
1967 :13
1969A:126
1969B 214,228
KILLING:
1947 110,171.196,223
1951 393,394,395
1953 :32
1966A:21
1968 :21 26
1969A:11,13,106,202
1975 :126,153
KLEENEX:
1969A:81
1969B:227 .230
1973 122
1975 :218
KNOWLEDGE:
1946 14
1947 13,31,38,51,53,63,84,88 93,117,123,126-7,134,
148,165 180,195,201,20 9.212-214,22 3,233.241
1951 47,48 109,118,119.154,280,338,342,343,344,348,
353,362,366,36 7,381-38342 2,463,465.467,489,
499,502.508,527
1953 27,36
1957 -62
1965 6
-560-
1968 :24
1969A:23.27,48,70,260
1975 :97 103,106,111
1978A-.47
1978B:58
KOHLER, W:
1947 26.27
1948 50
1951 :13,303
1969B 61,62
KORZYBSKI, A
1946 12,21
1947 212
1948 :47
1951 :16,19,21
1969B:46,108
1978A 36
KUBIE, L:
1969B:24,243
L S.D. TRIPS:
1969A:2,3.152
1969B:83,102,104, 140,179,241,262
1973 135
LAKE COWICHAN:
1969B:296
LANDAUER, K:
1947 69,81 248
1948 59
1969B:39
LANGE, J:
1951 131,464
LANGUAGE:
1946 7,8,18
1947 :15.17,25,85,99,198,199. 207 ,209 .212.213,219,232,
245,255,262
1948 :46-49 59,61,62.63,65
1951 :10,14.42,50,51,52,69,80 105,140,157,188,244,257,
258-260,289,292,307, 341,344, 347, 349,354,364-366,
373,378,381,384,385,410,425,431,444,465,479,481,
492 ,511
1953 :37
1957 56,65.66,72
1965 2,5
1966A 19,20,38
1969A:6,17 104,136,143,233
1969B:168,191,209,210,221
1973 95,166
1975 .137
1978A:36,38
1978B-52,60,63
LAO-TZE
1969B:76
LATENT:
1947 195
-561-
1948 :
LATIN:
1947
1948 :
1951 :
1978A:
197 8B
LAUGHTER
1947
1957
1969A
LAW:
1946
1947
1951
1953
1957
1969A
LAWRENCE
48
17
48
40
47
51
8,76,77,233 255
4 48
176
58.72
60,119 .120,223 ,246
6
20,2
295,
32
64
34,4
, D.
23
6,52,53
366,380
,58.60,61,64,71,97,119 176 199
,392,453
1946
LAYERS:
1947 :63
1948 53,
1951 20
1953 -32
1957 64,
1966A:20,
1968 20,
1969A:59,
1969B:136,
1975 200
1978B:65
LEARN(ING) :
7,156 198,199,212,215,229,230, 247
6
5,66
1,22,23
2,24,25
0,61,97
240.241
,24
,152,247
,272
1946
1947
1948
1950
1951
1957
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1968
1969A
1969B
1973
16 2
7,53
161,
212,
265,
61,6
40
9.41
315,
373,
479-
69
5
18,3
222
10,1
19
2 4,
131,
33,8
,55,57,69.7 8,96,99,100,103,115,12 6 131,154
173 190
214,215
270
2
191
,219
194
224
195
233
197
239
199,201,203
245-247 ,250
208
252
210
263-
,80,83,
316,320
382,385
482,484
3,35,36
2,13,14
89,185,186,20 5,243,28 5,290,29 5,29 6,
,33 2,345,34 7,350,353,354,3 64,367,368
,386,391,409,427,442,459,463,471,478
-490,498,506 508,510,514,526
,37
1,35,38,40-2,57,69.7274,77,126,
,233,234.247
27,28 3
166.187
5,117
10,33,65,68,71,98 124,126,127,182,194
-562-
1975 93.94,112,117,144,158
1978B:60,63
LECTURE:
1947 214,261
1951 249
1957 54
LEFT:
1951 220,221
1966A 37 38
1975 151 162 190.199
1978B:63
LEGMAN K:
1951 :390
LEIBNIZ, G.W:
1947 :32
LEONARDO DA VINCI
1948 :46
LEVERRIER J.J:
1947 :86
LEWIN, K
1947 :101
1951 13,326,331
1969B.-62
1973 :113
LIBIDO:
1946 :11,21
194 7 8,22,42.54,70,7 2,74,80-87,92,101,102.112,116,
123,12 8-130.133,138,142,144 145,151,180,185.
187,192 217,221,228,252
1948 -46,47,48
1951 17,164,329,349,403
1957 63
1966A:30,31
1968 :24
1969A:68
1969B:87,168,169 176,186 247,258,293
1975 96
1978A:49.50
1978B:54,59,65
LIES/LYING
1947 66,71
1969A:46,57.70,113,151,168,268,272
1973 :56,157
LIFE:
1946 17,19
1947 7 18,20-22,30,31,32,33,38,54,55,68,78 80,86,88
91,92,96,97 ,100,102,115,224,233,264
1948 54,60
1951 14,28,47,48,61,71,78,88.90,91,101,105,109.133,
175,180,185,192.213,232,245,281,284,315,321,
329,350.370,37 6,379 404, 406.492,497,526
1957 59
1959 72
1965 :7
-563-
1966A:8,18,22,23 25,29,30,31,38
1966B:9,204 215
1968 18.25
1975 :94 96,98,101,107,111,118,119,120
1978A:50
1978B:51,52,65
LIFESCRIPTS:
1951 :10
1973 122,126,135,148.152,155,156,171,172,181,186
1975 102,108,117,118,119
LIMITATIONS:
1947 80,97
1951 48,49
1965 3
1969A:80
1969B:215
LINCOLN, A
1969A:43
LINGUISTICS
1946 :7,8.13
1947 220
1948 47,50,53,65
1951 :15,16,147,188,192,385
1978B:51
LISTEN(ING)
1947 30,50,125,126,200,213,214,215,260,264,265
1948 62
1951 10 11,110,140,141 142,249
1957 -56
1965 6
1966A:27.33,35,36
1969A:20.36,38,40,41 48.52,56,57,68,85,93,100,107,
114. 128,144, 150,151.181,194,203
1973 167
1975 :114,158
LITERATURE:
1947 24,105 123,199,221,230
LIVE (LIVING):
194 7 49.5687,131,167,171,203,206,208
1951 41 46,47,49,50,108,110,264
1957 59
1965 2,3,7
1968 18
1969A:31,49,50.56,57,73,78,80,103. 107 116,126,133,159
160
LIVINGSTONE, D:
1946 21
1947 86
LOGIC
1947 :26,90
1951 147 384
1975 :118
LONELINESS:
1951 :219 ,328,329,335,517
-564-
1969A.-34.167
1969B-222
1973 46
LOVE
1947 18,22 32,57,58,59 68,71 80 , 83,84,90,100,103,118,
120 129 131,133 140,144,154,160,168,170,174,176.
203,210,224,228,242,244,246 253,254
1948 :63 64,65
1950 :40,41
1951 76,79,80,93,98,187,231,264,290.299,328,339.349,
359,369,372,386 390,391 396,398-400,402,406,407
409,410,415,416,419.42 7,428 459,466,476,480,503,
505,514,521
1953 -28
1959 :71.72
1965 3
1966A-18,25,26,31
1966B:211
1968 :20,25
1969A-9,10,19,34,36,42,43,61,83.112,126,140.151,167,
168
1969B:101,201,221,232
1973 50,135,146.147,152
1975 :94,162
1978B:54
LOWEN, A:
1969B:188
LUCY:
196 9B:201,202,203.204,205,208
LUST:
1947 :85,196,222
1948 61
MACDOUGALLS W-
1973 -7
1978A 44
MCLUHAN. M:
1967 :9
1969A:22
MACH, E-
1947 21
MAGIC:
1946 :7
1947 21,31.62,187
1948 :47.50
1951 176,194,409
1969A:72,74,80.172
1973 :21,29
1978B:49,58
MAHARISHI:
1969B:137 178
MALADJUSTMENT (SEE ALSO ADJUSTMENT):
1951 :175,360
MALE:
194 7 -30
-565-
1951
1966A
1966B
1969A
1975
218
38
211,
279
151
212
MANIPULATION
1946
1948
1951
6,9-12,15,20,21
50 51,52 64.66
9.20.44,45,46,63
1957
1965
1966A
1967
1969A
1973
155,183
241,276
363,364
433,436
484,487,
66
4,7
18,19 ,20
11 ,12,13
3.19,35,
151
19 26,29
106,109 .
118,119 131,138
193
,277
.367
,440
,498
194
,294
,368
,451
,514
,195,
,298,
,374,
,459,
.520
200
310
375
460
201,203
321 ,332
384,385
463-465
151,152,153
233.
,362,
428,432,
470,475,
348
,204,209
,333
,426
,468
,25,30,31,33
,14
37,38,39,40,42, 60,71,116,138,141,149
,40,46,47-9,50,66,74,79
110-113,115 ,143, 151.196
81.83,90,91,105
83
78
62
11
1,3
25
41.42
1975
1978A
1978B
MARCUS
1951
MARCUSE, H
1947 49
MARRIAGE:
1947
1951
1965
1966A
1969A
1973
1975
MARX, K
1946
1947
1969B
MASK:
1947
1950
1951
1969A:240
1978A:37
1978B:65
MASLOW, A:
1969B-.5
1973 196
1975 :104
MASOCHISM:
1947 :17,
93. 94
:42,45,47
:53,60,64
AURELIUS:
97
108,109,110, 111
49
135,245
79,80,156
157,330
43,129,167,171
13 5-141,148,152,157,158,159-172
158,192
19
14
128,129
8,46 59
174,195
41
:427,437
245,247 250
197,199
179.222,223
-566-
1948 :49
1951 258 393,400-4,480,502,513,516,517
1966A:38
1969B:239
1973 121
MASSAGE:
1951 123,125
1969A:233,266
MASTURBATION
1947 70,77,96,113,117.118,226
1951 166,197 218,219,335.387,389.393 436,502,515,516
1969B:201 ,241
1978B:65
MATERIAL(ISM):
1946 :5
1947 32.208,272
1951 288
MATURITY
1947 -6 98
1948 :48
1951 :9,130,288, 322 340,347,348,349,351-5,358,370,371
425,512.516
1957 -66
1965 1,4,5
1966A17,18,34,36
1966B:212.216 222
1967 -11,12
1969A:27,28 29,30,34 38,46,56,60,69,74,107,125.126,
141,167
1973 72,73
1975 93,101
1978B:61
MAUTHNER, F"
1947 :21
MAYA:
1969B:291 292,294
1975 :118,180
MEANING (-FUL, -NESS):
1946 7
194 7 -7,25,26,29,51,78,133,151,158,187.194,199 201,
207 .208,212,213,226.244
1951 :16, 61. 80,88,93, 121,126, 192,215, 285.303,305,306,
311,356,380 ,385,390,428,485.508
1957 :68
1969A:65,85 97,126
1973 189
1978A 38,41
1978B:53
MEANS WHEREBY:
1947 74,88,135,178,192,204.225,256,265.268 269,270,
271,272
1948 .-47,49
1951 17
1978B:60
-567-
MECHANICAL:
1946 6,7
1947 :64,135,200,216
1948 :49.50,65,66
1951 20,254,255,306,394.499,506.507,508,516,518
1957 :70
MEDICINE (MEDICAL)-
1946 :5
1947 18,19,25,31,126,165,221
1951 -20, 41,177,296,328,359,360.369,371,387.447,455
1969A:6,17,30,54
1973 :179
MEDITATION:
1966A:33.35
1969B:102,135
MEGLOMANIA:
1946 :21
1947 :169-73,210
1969A:107
1969B:243,292
MELANCHOLIA:
1947 :33,80,120,129 130,132,133,155,221
1951 134
1978A:41
MEMORY:
1946 :11
194 7 .-42,54,55,56,66,91,92,94,95,99,100,101,103,104,
126,132,159,165,201,202,204,233,247,250,260
1948 :57
1951 :66,109,110,111,112.114,132,138,142,151,209,216,
24 7,26 6,305,33 7,340,341,344,347,364,37 5.3 7 6,43 5,
460,466,47 2,47 8,486,487,48 9,494,497,498,510,519
1957 54
1965 4,5
1966A:16,21,27
1967 :10
1969A:44,45,46,55,106.111,167, 243
1969B:142,143,148,149,174,179,191,192,215
197 3 10,46,63,66,67,83,88,148.17 2-9,181,195
1975 115
1978A:41
MENTAL (-ACTIVITY, -LIFE):
1946 5,8,11
194 7 -.7,8,14,16,18,25,2 7,56,66,67,73,80,81,84,85,100,
103,111-115,128,130,133,14 7,156,157,164,165,
172,187,189,192,194,195,197,198,199,201,202,
204-208,210,214,216,231,23 2,236,249,251,255,
272
1948 -47,58.63
1951 :14, 15, 43,44, 115,179,235,251,288,304,305,306, 317,
319,321,362,364,389,435,44 3,444
1953 :33
1957 63,64,69
1959 70
-568-
1966A-.15.27
1966B 216
1969A:89,136,161
1973 12,13,14,53,55
1978A:39,42
MENTAL METABOLISM:
1947 :105-184,247
MEPHISTOPHELES:
1947 :103
1969B:233
MERRY-GO-ROUND:
1967 :13
1969A:60,97,172,274
1969B:152,233
1973 148
METABOLISM:
194 7 :16,34,69,76,91,105-184,219, 247
1951 15,128,164,248,307,457,463
1966A:31
1969A:15,37,69
1975 105
1978A-.49
METAPHOR-
1951 50
1975 100
1978A:41
METAPHYSICAL
1947 14
1951 :60 342 429,511
MIDDLE:
1947 -253,254,255
1951 :96,431,438,445.473,474,479, 487, 522
MILK:
1947 134,167
1951 :9
MIND -,
1946 :5,7,8,10,17,19
1947 : 25, 27, 29, 31,32,33,34,40,42.43.49,50,51,52,60,73,
75,91,9394,99,101,113,114,125,126,139,147,153,
172, 174,178,189.194,200-203,207,208,213-216,224,
231,23 3,234,237,248,251,253,255,257,260,262,266,
270
1948 -.45.48,55,66
1951 :14, 19, 33, 42,43, 104,107, 109,110,115,117,130,142,
209,24 9,2 88,303-307,311,312,314,315,317-319,407,
444-447
1957 -63,64,65,66,70
1959 69,70
1966A-20,30,38
1967 11,12
1969A 50,53,71 74.91,94,110,118,119,120,128.135.136,
170,220
1969B:150,167,247
197 3 9,10,11,14,15,16,17,20,26,33,48,51,53,55,60,130,
-569-
180
1975 103
1978A:36-40.42,43,44,47
1978B:51,52
MIND-FUCKING:
1969A:58,77,95,171 217
1969B:208.209
1973 :124,139-142.143
1975 :101,103
MIRRORS:
1947 30,73,209
1951 -81
1966B:215
1969A:83,85 159,264
1975 :113 114
MISTAKES:
1947 18,120,143,209,217,239.271
1969A-20
MOBILIZE
1946 :16,17 21
194 7 48,77,78,134,151 171.177,228
1948 -50,64
1951 9, 10,100. 128,131.132,153,164.200,241,247,248,
250,251,315.323,327,342,350,433,442,454,466,
47 3,505,508,509,515,520,52 5,52 6
1953 36,37
1965 -5,7
1966A:18,31
1967 11
1969A:55,56,68,101,107,141,203,274
1975 :106,108,201
MOHAMMED:
1947 :91
MOLAR
1947 109 130,132,148 171,195
1951 :232,241,243
1953 34
MONEY:
1947 56,115,150,167,170,210,212
1948 46
1950 -41
1951 339,368,409
1953 29
1969A:63,75,146,160
MONTAGUE R:
1953 32
MOOD:
1947 -33
1951 243
1953 31
1969A:130
MORALITY:
1946 :7.10
1947 :45, 51,52,53,57,58,61,62,83,93,105,141,196,222,
-570-
223,238.245,248
1948 -52,66 67
1951 :18,49,67,74,208,243,244,263, 264, 265,284,287 295
373,388,412,481,482-484.504,505,514
1953 :27,28.29,30,33,35,36,37
1957 59
1968 23
1969A:1,16
1969B161,203 247,256,259.270
1973 =33,120,122,150
1978B:50,60
MORENO, J:
1947 222
1951 -330
1969A:130
1973 -94
1975 157.158
MOSES (BIBLICAL):
1947 118,120
1978A:50
MOSES, P:
1969A:57
MOTHER:
1947 53-5 7,59,75,86,96,98,108,115,119,142,143.144,158,
160,167,170.193
1951 9,81,164,220,240,319,34 7,408
1966A:25
1966B:222
1968 :23
1975 :183,214
MOTIVATE:
1947 :219
1951 111 -176,178,189,206,259,324,349,384,465,470,475,
476,499
1957 :69
1969A:202
MOTOR-
1946 :6,10.13
1947 49,50,61 67 , 77,112,117,139 155,190,191,192,226 ,
228,22 9,230,233,234,250,2 54,257
1948 :49,50,60,66
1951 13, 17, 20,119,132,151,167,201,202,203,242,273,
274,276-2 79,288,306,308,309-311,314,321,32 3,
337,342,365,384,396.414,428. 433,434,436,439,
444,44 6,461,468,474,485,489,491,495,497,498,
514
1966A:31,38
1967 10,11
1969A:65 68,69
1969B:160,171,279,290
1973 18,23,24,54.55,96,99,104
1975 :106,151
1978A:40,45,49
MOTOR CAR:
-571-
1947 32,57,100,121.153,224
1966A 30
1969A-60 73,160
MOURNING:
1947 :96,97,175,176
1951 -325.414,417,476
1966B-.222
1967 14
1968 20
1969A:166,190
1978B:55 .56
MOUTH:
1947 : 94. 109. 110, 131, 133,134,165 166,170,188,193,194,
195,197,198,24 7,250,252,262,263
1951 241,248,308,363.37 7,394,504
1953 :35
1978B:64
MOVEMENT
1947 5,228,251
1948 :48.55
1951 18,20,105,106,110,111 118 . 151 152 , 166
1966A:19,31
1969A:57 ,58,68,69,71,101,-104,143
1969B:272
1973 27 138
1978B:57
MUSCLES:
1947 45,61,64,67,70,72,74,76,77,79,121,130.132,151,
155, 156, 171 ,177,178,188. 196,201,203,217,229,230
233,234,248,250,265,266
1948 49 54,60,62,65,66
1951 -20.43,44,45.49,55,81,99,105,107,108,110,111,117
118,119,126,127,147,151-153,164.166,167,171,183
186 200-204,207 ,209,214-2 20,222 223,235,247,262
286,292,297,307, 309,311,313,318,325,332,344,345
3 65,36 8 416,428,431,43443 6,440,444,447,464,467
4 74,478,488,489,492,495,509,511,514,519
1953 :34,36,37
1959 71
1966A:22
1966B:226
1968 24
1969A:62,68,69,108
1978B.-64
MUSIC
194 7 :28,197,198,200,201,215,225, 270
1951 428 475 .480
1969A 57 ,252
NAPOLEON (BONAPARTE)-
1978B 64
NARCISSISTIC:
194 7 :80,101,118,120,161,169,223, 242,255,256
1948 -65
-572-
1951 329,350,354
NARCO-ANALYSIS:
1947 -205,230
NARROW:
1947 39.77,142,143,266,267
1969A:69
NATION:
1947 :154,155
1951 11
1953 33
1966A:21
NATURE:
1946 -7 18,19
1947 22,23,35,48,49 54,63,122,124.151,180,188,198,
207,209,212.214,229,231,233
1948 -53.54,55
1950 :40,41
1951 14.18,76,82,101,134,146,180, 185,194,231,247, 250,
251,254.284,285,289,295,306 320,32 8-331.334,33 5,
3 50,35 8-36 2,38 5 386,391,405,412,425,426,450,454,
473,485-487,489,507,512
1953 :30,32,33
1957 .-62,64,68,70
1965 2,7
1966A:16,21 26,30,31,33
1968 21
1969A:25,26,33,34,56,87
1973 49
1975 :101 102,105,106
197 8B:52
NAZI"
1947 :48,51,57,59.122 123,193
1948 54
1966A:16
1969A:49,203
NECK:
1947 :231
1951 126,202,203
NEED:
1946 -.9,10,11.13,16,20,21
194 7 -5,34,35,36,38,40,42,43,44,45,46,50,52,53,54,55,
57,59 61,71 85,87 ,96,100,102,117 121,128,129,146
147,150-152,159,160.166,168,175, 192,206,208,210,
212,224,22 8,22 9,231,232,242,246,255,256,266,26 9,
271
1948 45,50,51,52,53,59,62
1950 :41
1951 9,11,14,18,56,58,62,64,66,67,69,80,84,86,90,98,
105,108,115,130,140,142 146,155,164,166,167,171,
183,188,191,214,219.231,232,236 240,250,251,257,
266,27 8-281,294,307,311,32 3,324,32 8,32 9,344,346,
3 47 349,35 7,360,362,3 69,370,374,376,3 78,380,391,
3 92,395-3 99,403,405,40 7 415-419,421,426,428,434,
440,454,457,459-461,466,469,471,481,482,484,486,
-573-
4 91,496,500-503,506,508,511,512,516,52 3,52 4
1953 30,32-36
1959 72
1965 1,2,3
1966A:16 19.21,24.30,31
1966B:215
1968 19
1969A:5.17,22,23,25,35 36 , 40,41 54 , 57 , 62,70,75,99,
103-105,107.121,12 5,126,136,146,149,160,167,168,
181,232,235.254.281
1969B 11,256,259,268
1973 5,7,8,9,18,19.23,24 25-30,33,40,45,49,52,53,67,
90.103 106.107,109,111,112 115,121,135,140 162,
181,196,198
111,112,115,121,135,140,162,181,196,198
1975 :93,94,97,99.104,105,106
1978A:42,44,47,50,51
1978B:51 53-56,58,62
NEGATION:
1947 247-252,257
NEGATIVE:
1947 :174,176,177 ,185,188,193,233,268
1948 48,60
1951 :79 190 207 334,483,505
1953 -31
1975 108
1978A:52
1978B:50 51,53
NERVOUS
1946 .1
194 7 -8,25,49,50,55,91,100,155,180,188,202,224,233.236
259,271
1948 50
1951 :17 ,264,330,365,392,453
1953 :33
1965 7
1969A:18,20 75 , 117 143 173,188
1975 :97,106
1978A:50
NEURASTHENIA:
1947 165,172.187-191,261
1951 387,393,467
NEUROLOGY:
1946 :6
1947 49
1948 54
1951 :305.306,308
1975 106
1978A:45
NEUROSIS:
1946 :7,8,11.12,14,16,19-22
1947 :5.33,36.38,39,55 60-71,73,79,81,83,84,86,88,89,
92, 94-96,99,100,101,104,110,116,129.132 139, 142,
153,157,159-161,166,168,170-172,178,179,189,190,
-574-
192.201,207 ,209,217,219,222,225,22 8,22 9,230,23 6
238 241 247,251 258 268
1948 -49,50,52,53 54,57.60,61,62,64,66,67
1950 :39,40,42
1951 9,16,17,18,20,41,66,76,83,118,119,164,165,167,
17 7-181 184,190,193-195,200,206,218,243,244.247
2 54-256,262,277,27 9284,287-2 91,293,296,303,309
312,313.321,323,325,326,329,330,331,333-336,338
339,342,343,347,351 352,353,357,359,360-362,366
370-374,376,382,383,387,388,390,393-3 95.399,400
403,407-409,411,413,415,420,42 2,441,442,445,446,
448,451,452,457,458,460,461,463,46 7,479,485,487!
490,491,496,499,505-507,510-518,520,52 4-52 6
1953 :28,30,31,33 34,35
1957 57,59,62,66,69,72
1965 :6,7
1966A:16,17,18,19,20,24.26,28,32.38
1966B:204,212
1967 .-11,12,13,14
1968 :17,18,22,25
1969A:20,30,31,32,37,39,41,42,46,54,58,59,71,79,97,
135,141,245
1969B:19, 23, 35,65 89,135.136,140,141,168,175,180,
187-189,228,268,292,293
1973 7,16,18-20,21 23,24,25 26,31,32,34,35.36.41,42,
43-7 4,78-85,92,95,97-9 9,104-115,121,127,152,179,
189,190
1975 :99,117,120,192
1978A:41,48
1978B:50. 52, 54,56,57,60,61,62,64
NEWTON, I
1951 :39
NIETZSCHE, F
1947 57
1951 483
1957 :72
1969A:30,45,203
1969B.2,103,256
1973 179
NIGHTMARES (SEE ALSO DREAMS):
1947 -240 241
1951 :265
1966B:215
1975 .119,153
NIRVANA:
1947 :32,100,102,103
1966A- 15
NOISE:
1947 188
1948 -62
1969A:145,294
NORDINGER, S"
1947 20
NORMAL
-575-
1947 15,16,45,78.84,98,99,179
1948 :47
1951 :13,15,19,54,175,218,278,284. 285, 336,361,371,385,
393,461,510,526
1953 -29
1973 16,35
NOTHING(NESS):
1947 :251
1951 -217
1953 33
1965 4
1966A:19,21
1966B 219
1969A:14,44,49,60,61,62,75,131 132 149,163
1969B:69, 70,116 141,17 4,188 ,228,294
1973 :195
1975 98 99
NOURISH:
1947 103
1950 :40
1951 98,159,232,240,242,24 5,24 7,276,277,350,365,366,
376,389,479,485 517
1953 :35
1969A:150 151,202,273,274
NOVEL:
1951 :20,63,276,277, 281 294,295,307,308,341,343,422,
42 7.440,451 ,45 6-4 61,463.475,477.478,485,486,
489,517,523,524
1978A:39,40
NOW
1946 :14
1947 5
1948 :56 57,67
1951 18,59.67,68,69,88
1959 :71,72
1965 :4
1966A:14,17,18 19,29,30,36
1966B:205
1967 :10,11
1968 :19,23
1969A:3,32,33,44,45,47 48,50,54,56,58,64,66,67,70,
73,76,79,81,82,100.108,131,133,13 9,190-192,
243 256,260,261.275,282
196 9B:103.174,175,184.216,240
197 3 -.16,63-73,121,122,123,13 6,143,168
1975 :99,100,103,106,118,144,183
NUCLEUS:
1947 :187,199,209,241,251,254
1951 263
NUMB(NESS) :
1946 20
1947 :156,171,177.179,198,199,228,234,236,251
1951 :129,202,217,219,415,416,523
1969A:109,263
-576-
OBEDIENCE:
1946 15
1947 193,194
OBJECTIVE:
1946 :16,20
194 7 :5, 38,39, 53,57, 66, 86,87, 88,110,117,118,120.128,
136,13 8-140,144,146,159,165,175,177,186,187,
188,189, 198, 199 203,225, 231, 242.244,256
1948 48,64,65.66
1950 :43
1951 33,43.46,47.48,49.50,51,52.74,79,90,93,95,98,
105,106,139 165, 193,195. 237, 244, 258,262,273,
285, 288,325,354,363,364,372,394,395,407,426,
429,44 5-447,454,459-4 61,465,466,46 9,470,475,
476,477,490,494,501,504
1953 :30
1957 :65
1966A:22.28.29,34,36
1967 10
1969A:13,14,82
1973 195
1975 :117,158
1978B:50
OBLIGATION:
1966A:30
1969A:69,107
1975 :108,111
OBSERVATION:
1946 :13
1947 : 7,13, 31,34,36,39,49,50,56.86,91,94,112,113,114,
123,124.134,139,157,170,194,199,202,203,208,218,
226,228,250,252,257
1948 :54.55
1951 27,47 65,75 85,87,114.256,257,283,291.311,312,
315,317,377,384,444,519
1966A:14 19
1967 :10,11
1969A:63,64,72,79,106,124
1973 35
1975 100,114
1978A:40.42
OBSESSION:
1946 8,19
1947 -20 .36,64,65.67,82,101,110,116,125,13 7,139,142,
169,187 ,188,193,194,213,214,216,240,269,2 70
1948 :46.54,56,58,59
1951 .116,139 242,310,313,314,330 350,362,37 8,448,469,
505,515,518
1953 34
1957 54
1965 7
1969A:68
1969B:291
1973 29
-577-
1978A:41
1978B59
OBSOLETE:
1947 :233
1951 :18,430
1965 :7
1967 9
1968 :22
1969A:77 78
1975 101
OBVIOUS
1947 :189
1948 :56.57,59.64.66
1951 :18 80,82,116,324
1966A:19,37
1967 :13
196 9A:41,57,58,75,106,274
1969B -277
1973 76,138,139,179
1978A:36
O'CONNELL, V:
1969B 237
OEDIPAL
1947 83,158
1951 :247,525
1967 12
1969A:46
1973 39
1978A:39
OMNIPOTENT:
1947 :237,241
1951 319.320
1968 -24
1969A:107
1975 :94
1978B:58,59
OPHUIJSEN, J.H.W. VAN:
1947 131
OPINION:
194 7 :57, 93,125,126,127,196,209,250
1948 :62
1951 76,77,157,291,513
1966B:228
1967 15
1969A:71,77,134,135
1975 148,151
OPPOSITE:
194 7 :15-19,22,23,25,29,30,32,33,54,65,72,73,80,95
176 .177 189,193,196
1951 :71 ,74,77 ,79,81,82
1959 69,71,72
1966A:19
1969A 133
1975 158
-578-
ORAL:
1947 74,80,83 84 , 85 112 , 123 , 124 , 125 ,131,134,148,159,
160,164,165,168,171,197-199
1950 43
1951 :219,232.235,241 329,377
1953 37
1967 10
1969B:157,186,293
1973 26,32,33,34
ORGANIC
1948 :48.54
1951 :265 278 279,280 281 282,288,294,307,311,324,
346,353,373,374,376,37 8,391,396.403,405,407,
417,426,42 8.433,434,43 6,43 7,446 456,462,47 7,
485 ,493,494 502
1953 :34,35
ORGANISM:
1946 6,8,9,10,12,23
1947 -5 7,13,14,15,16,18 19,20,30-36,38,40,42.43.
45-50,53-5 5,58,60,61,64,66,67,79,71-7 3,75,76,
7 7,78,80-8 7 , 92 , 100 . 102 , 103
:
, 105 . 108 , 109 ,113 , 114 ,
116,117 121,123.126,129,132,138-147,150,153,154,
157 ,162-168,174-17 8,180,181,186,188,189,19 5,198,
200,201,203.209,210,216,218,220-2 23,229,231-2 35,
240,243,247,251,25 8-2 60 266,26 9,271
1948 :45,48,49,50,51,52,61,62,63,66,67
1950 :39,40,41,42
1951 14-20,41,43-4 8,52,5 7,71,84,86,93,100,101, 10 5,
106,107,109,114,118,121,12 7-130,132,139,146,
147,151,154,155,164,165,16 7,170,171,175,180,
183,185,202,203 205,216,217,230,231,233,241,
244,245,250,252,258,273-283.294,299,307-311,
314,32 3-32 6,32 8,343,346,349,350 351,3 54,356,
362,363 366,367,369,372-3 74,376-3 78,385,386,
389,390,391 394,395,399,403-406,408,409,411,
412,42 2,42 6-4 30,43 3,43 4,436,437,43 9,440,446,
44 7,44 8,45 5-4 60,462.464.465,470-473,47 5,47 7,
478, 486. 492,496,499.502,508,509,517,523,524
1953 :29-33,35,36,37
1957 -58,60,62,65.67,69
1965 4
1966A-.24 30,31.34 35,36
1966B:233
1968 :18
1969A:6,7,10,11,13,14,15,21-25,54,63 64.68,71,87,106,
116
196 9B:67,160,167 170 186,247,257,258,259,268,293
1973 7,22,25 26,28,31,33,52,188,189
1975 :96,97 ,98,100,102,104
1978A:36,43,44.45,47,48,49,50,51,52
1978B:50-53.56,59,60 61,62
ORGANIZE:
194 6 :21
1947 =49,50,72-79,148,20,207,213
-579-
1948 51
1951 --15.18,28,51,63,93,104,285,290,303,308,315,32 3,
324.328,365,406,466,470 496,502
1953 32 34,35,36
1957 -65
1973 :3,19
1975 :192
1978A 48.50
1978B:60
ORGASM:
1946 :7,12
1947 70,76,83,112,167
1948 :52
1950 42
1951 :218, 219,334,339,365.387, 402,412,448,457,474,477
479,516
1957 :62
1959 -71
1966A:22,23
1969A 22,60.97,192
1973 :88
! 1975 97
1978A:51
1978B:51
ORGONE
1946 12
1951 :16,17 448
1966A:31
ORIENTATION:
1946 6,7,9-12,15,20-22
1947 26 212
1948 50,51,52,59,62 63,66,67 68
1951 : 20,131,132, 152,153,180, 233,264,265,277,362,363,
367.368,374,385,426,431,433,434,436,440,460,464
46 5 46 6,46 8,474,4 7 5,49 8,500.501,514,515,519,520
524
1966A:31
1967 10.11
1969A:65
1973 :24
1978A:45,47,48,50
1978B:53,60,63
OTHERNESS:
1948 64
1951 :153
1953 :32
1957 :55 69
1969A:7,8
1975 104
1978B-.50
OTIOSE:
1951 :296,297,428,439,441,442,447,450,455
OUTER(WORLD):
1948 :62
-580-
1950 :40
1951 127 132,214 307,409,415,526
1975 108
OUTSIDE:
1947 205 251
1948 :64
1951 :45,104,443,451,486
1953 32
1959 -70
1975 -94
1978A:44
OUTWARDS:
1947 -.51,254
1951 :214,280
OXYGEN:
1947 -.46,54,75 76,77,108,133,163,230,263,266,267
1951 -.9,164,165,166,232,248,274
1957 :62
1966A-.25
1969A:30,31,69
1978A:49
PAIN:
1946 :18
1947 -16 19,38 54,55,56,71,80,84,85,108,109,137,151,
155,160,179,206,222,224.231,235,236,260,269
1948 :66
1950 :39
1951 57,58,88,118,124,130,136,176,177,178,181,183,
204-207,209,216,217,230,248,275,281.318.319,367,
3 94,395 ,39 7,39 9,400,408 ,413,414,456 45 7-4 60,467,
471,47 5-4 7 7,480,488,490,491,493,500,502,504,505,
513,514,521,522
1965 4
1966A:21
1968 :22
1969A:56,60,230,247
1969B:231,233,239,285,2 92
1973 :68,69,88,121
1975 :96,101,102
1978B:53
PALATE:
1947 :197,198,199
1951 :111, 235,244,245,250
PANIC:
1947 :180,223
1951 :310
1975 98
1978B:58
PARACELSUS:
1948 68
PARADOX:
1947 100,117 124.165,179,258,260,264
1951 29
1957 -66
-581-
1959 :71
1965 :2
1969A:7,35,
1973 :60 96
PARALLELISM:
1947 32
1948 -48
1957 -.64
PARALYSIS:
1947 230
54,193
1948
1951
1965
PARANOIA
1946
1947
50
316
7
235.257 258
359,415,442 509,511
517 ,519
20
8,63.66
163-172
240,241
104
175
113
176
116
181
244-246,251
120,129
196,197
252.268
132
211
136,137,157,161
221 , 231,237,239
1948
1951
1953
1957
1966A
1969A
1969B
1973
1975
1978A:42
PARENTS:
1947
1948
1950
1951
256,257
64
105
29
58
27
39,65,137,246
149.214,291
35,37,131
113,114
254
92. 141,155,159,198,271
187.211,231,241,244,250,281 349
408,416
1953
1966A
1968
1969A
1975
1978B
PASSIVE
1947
1948
1951
1968
1975
PARTS:
1946
1947
1948
57
53
39.41
66,82
354,355,391,392,398
30,33,35
17.27,34 35
23
45,46,143,144,145,167,202,231,232,2 76
110
52,62
350,351,
167 174,200 201
50,65 66
47 48,191,193
436
21
111
216,218
220 ,221,222,226,237
218,256,258,276,297,401,430,431
438,444
445,446
473,479,514,518
27,28,31,33,38,39,48,53,64,67,69,73,84,89,
123,124,130,131,143.158,160,164,170
11,20,21
20,26,
96-98,113,121
188,193,195
250,271
64 66
209,213,
218,232.235.236,23 8-2 40,244
-582-
1950 :
1951 :
1953
1957 :
1959
1965
1966A
1966B:
1967
1968
1969A
1973
1975
PAST:
1946
1947
1948
1951
1957
1959
1965
1966A
1967
1968
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
39
19,28,55 73,83,98,107,113.118,125,128,147,153,
15 5.184-188,191-194,196,204,205,220.230,232,2 35,
262,26 5,266,2 83,287,303,306,307,309,315,316,319,
338,34 9,388,394,405.408,413,42 2,434,442,447,451,
454,468,473,474.47 7,479,480,498,499,503,506,523,
527
31 .32,34,35
67
:70,71.72
2,6
15,21,27,29
:210.211 212
10
18,20,23,25
: 11, 28,40,45.60,62,67,71,72,73,74,75,80, 82, 95, 10i
105,107,117,126,129,130.134,232,240,276
:182,189,190
-94,95 100,113,114,115,119,120,137,148,150,192,
200
10,13,14.15 21
7,26,66,78,81,88,90,92.93,94-98,99-104,12 9,132,
159,208,209
:49.50,57,62
: 28, 59,60,65. 66,67,68,72,108,114,176,266,279,288
294.298,336 340,341,342,343,347 348,356,357,395
414,42 2,42 9,430,433,451.461,470,471,480.503,508
515,524
57.58,67
72
4
:14,17
10
:17
: 44, 45, 46,47,49,51 55,73,132,200,224
:44 51,52,54,57,63,67,88,97,103,127,181,195
100 107
:41
PATHOLOGY:
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1966A
1968
1969A
1969B
1973
1978B
=13,14,21 ,, w o
: 27, 30,31.35,36,41,68 80,82,85,129 130,141,143,
154,163-165,176,196,223,225,231,248.251,253,258
63,65
: 106, 108,155 166,184,186,205,264,362,363
:33,34
:35
:18,22
:10,11,17,18,65,72
-.215
:35 38,39
:50 , 64
"PATIENT":
1946 :12-18,20 21
-583-
1947 5 6,25 31,33,73,74,78,82,88,89.93,95,96,98,99,
110,112,124-126,131.136,139,143,151,153,154.156,
158.159,161,164,166,167,170,175,17 8,179,180,185,
189 193,194.198,199,203 209,217.221,222,230,231,
232,237-239,247,257,258,260,265,267,270
1948 :52,54,55,56, 57, 60,61,62,64,65, 66,67,68
1950 41,43
1951 :17.18,20,21,33,40,41, 47, 48, 49.57,64,66,74,89,
110,132,164.17 6-180,207,240,245,281-2 84,287,
290,292 295-2 98,32 6,330-338,341,347,34 9,359-
361,371,37 9-3 83,404,411,412,414,420,421.432,
43 5,441,442,463.470,481,484,498 .505-50 7,50 9,
511,513,517,521,522,525
1953 34,36
1957 54,56-59,66 67
1965 :4,5,6,7
1966A:22,23,26,27,28,29,30,35,36,37
1967 :9,10,11,12,13,14
1968 -20-24
1969A-22,31,39, 40, 43,46, 55,56, 58, 68, 79, 83,104,130,136,
274
197 3 45,47.51,53,57 ,58,59,60, 61,64, 65, 68, 75-85,86-
102,104-115
1975 :93,94 103,115,118,119,120,148,180,183,192
1978B:55,57 ,58,60,62,65
PAVLOV, I
1947 -57
1951 51
PEACE;
1947 103 150,224
1951 :400,416,417
1978B:54
PEGUY, C P :
1951 -417
PEAK EXPERIENCES:
1969B:231,233
PELVIS:
1951 :218,219,220,262,512,513
1978B:51,64
PENIS
194 7 :67,96,159, 160,161,166, 167,226,250
1951 :247
PERCEPTION:
1946 :6
194 7 31,38,39,41,42,66,67,137,155,200,205
1951 :13,51,153,274,277,281,284,285,287,291,303,306,
307,308,311,314,315,319-3 21 363,3 64,368,384,425,
426-4 28,431,43 3,43 4,440,44 2,444,446,447,451,453,
454,45 8.460-4 64,474,480,488,489.491,493,497,498
1959 :71
1966A:15
1969B:278
1973 -3,11
1978B:60
-584-
PERFECTION(ISM):
1947 -263,271
1948 :66
1951 264
1965 1 3
1969A:19,20,76,90,91
1973 :135
PERLS, F.S- (AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES)
1969B:l-238
1973 :209
PERLS, L:
196 9B 40,41,49,52,62,66,81,113,127,132,133,142,201,
202,204,232.263,264
PERSONA:
1969B:219
1973 =69,95,144
PERSONALITY
1946 -7 8,10,11,12,18-20
1947 -13,20,29-31,44 49,54.61.63,65,67,68,69,73,75,80,
82,84,89,91,92,95,100,101,104, 112,116,121,123,124.
126,129-133,135-137,139,141-143,146-161,164,167-
170,172,177,178,188,191-193,199, 202,205,209,214,
218-221 .228,230,235,236,239,241 ,244,245 ,251,256,
263,268,269
194 8 :45,47,48,49,50,52,53,54,55 ,58,60,63,64,65,67
1950 =40
1951 -9,10,18,30 31,34,35,66,6 7,68,73,74,80,82,83,84,
102,119,121,131,134,135.139,140,143,146,147,155,
183-194,200,202,205.206 ,210,220,230-2 32,235,244,
24 7,254,25 5,259 .262,266,280.283,288,316,318,329,
330,348,360,361,367,369,372,373,376,37 8,386,394,
409,416,421,42 5,426,432,43 3,43 7,43 8,442,443,448,
449.454,45 5,481-4 85,491,498,503,512,514,517,520,
524
1953 28,31,33,34
1965 :4
1966A:16,21,31
1966B 212
1967 10,11
1968:18,19,25
1969A-2,3,10,18,29, 30, 32, 39, 41, 55, 58.62,68 59,71,72,
74,75,81,82,85 ,90,126,128-131,155,194.202
1969B:62,242,259,275,293,294
1973 23,29,33,34,35,37,41,42,51,52,70,73,83,104,12 5,
153,186,188,190,195,196,201
197 5 :95,113,115,119,120. 147,148, 192
1978A:38,39
1978B:52,56
PERSONOLOGY:
1948 :68
PERSUADE:
1947 -74,113,247
1951 186.299,512
1969A 28
-585-
PERVERSIONS:
1947 70,117.164,179,187,198
1951 :330,393
1953 -.28,34
PHALLIC:
1947 123,228,240
1951 329
1966B-213
1978B:59
PHANTASY (SEE ALSO FANTASY):
1947 :70,136, 137 156,160 166,169,171,174,203,204,205,
225,24 5,250,255,257,259.2 64
PHENOMENA:
1946 14,21
1947 85.225,236,238,239
1948 =63
1951 51,52,71.72,91,384
1965 :3
1969A-65,257
1975 102,106
PHENOMENOLOGY:
1946 :16,18
1951 15,114,432
1966A:14
1969A:16,95
'1969B:69,169,210,277
1973 128
1978B:57
PHENOMENON:
194 7 159,165,193 .201,209,213,221,232
1951 :285
PHILOSOPHY:
1946 :7,8,19
1947 :13,14 18,21,26,38,60,122,128,228
1948 -45,48,49,50,51,52
1951 14,16,30,94,114,288,307,327,367,373,375,384,385
443,44 6,44 7,44 9,47 8,48 5,490,491
1957 =55,67,68,72
1965 :15,19,20
1969A:16.17,47,50 61,62,132.133
1969B:9
1975 :106
1978A:39,44
1978B:52
PHOBIA:
1947 -5,36,64,73,158,196
1951 330
1965 3,4
1966A:17,22,23,24,25,34,37
1966B:204
1967 :14
1968 :22
1969A:41,55,56,60,72,75,129,247
1969B:233,240
-586-
1973 120/127
1975 96,102,103
PHONY:
1951 :10
1965 3,4
1966A:18,20,21,24,25
1969A:1,41,59,76,93,109,146,173,260,275,281
1973 :175.176,178,202
1975 .95,115,151
1978A:35
PHOTOGRAPH(IC):
1947 :41,203,208
1951 109,110,111,112
PHYSICAL:
1946 -.14
1948 58,63
1951 :43,87,115,117,146.147,151,181,204,208.209,233,
2 3 5,23 6,243,244,2 74,280.283 295,303,305,306,
310,318,354,358,3 7 4,3 84,39 2,401,43 7,443,44 8,
454
1953 33,35
1957 :64
1966A:19
1966B:233
1975 113
1978A:40,41,42
PHYSICIAN:
1946 -9
1947 16,236
1950 :43
1951 284,288,414,447,524
1953 29
PHYSICS
1946 :11
1951 :39,46,275,326,342,383,453
1957 55
1975 96,97
1978A:45
PHYSIOLOGY:
194 7 -.23,31, 32, 33, 61, 73, 75, 76, 82 ,83, 108, 110, 114, 115,
12 5,132,133,13 8,142,147,154,164,165,17 2,176,
177,194,195.199,228,249,260,265
1948 :61
1950 :40
1951 9,14,15,276,32 2,33 7.358,400,404,409,447,456,45 7
458-460,463,47 7.47 8,480,485,486,488,490,491,
494,499,510,517
1957 :55
1966A:22,31
1969A:5,63 66 , 68,92,134,135 . 136 ,148 ,177 , 252
1973 5 10,11,14 20,24,25,27,32,33,51,53,55,56.69,80,
81-83,198
1978A 43,49
1978B 59,65
-587-
PITY:
1947
1951
1969A
1978B
PLANCK'
1947
PLATO:
1951 :303
1969B:75
PLAY(ING):
222
,192,
:207
187
:103
:64
S QUANTUM
:20
227
193
514
THERORY
1947
1951
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1968
5,24,30.96,
82 ,138,280,
3,4,5,7
15.20,29,35
212,215,216
11 ,14,15
20
157
283
207
290
293 294,337 341,345
362,365
222
1969A:54,56,59,76,98,99,109,110,111,119,120,130,
146,160, 166,221,239,245,252.256,276.277,302
1975 -95,102,103,120,137,150,151
1978B:61
POLARITY:
1947
1951
1953
1965
1966A:
1968 :
1969A:
1969B:
1973 :
1975 :
POLITE:
1946 :
1947
1951
1957
1978B:
POLITICS
1947 :
1950
1951 :
POSITIVE
1947
1951 :
1953
1957
1969A
1978B
POSTURE
1951
6 16,18,19,73
11,427 432,459
463,468
27
7
37
23
9,11,71,95,135,137,225
3,82
176
98,158
230,232 233,282
146,255,291
162
15
125,179,209,245
505
69,70
57
57 .62,64,129,143,149
39,41,51
2 84,286,288,289,328,359,363
449,455.503,507
368,396
409,448
174,176
187 ,190,268
79
31
52
96
50
100,190
51
317,334
417,448,476,478,509
119,131,132,183,220,221,278,315,363
491
369 458,489
-588-
8,45,
272
157
198
63 64
57,58,81
101,126 133,139,296 1969A
1969B
1973
1975
1978B
POISON-
1947 175
1951 =230,458,490
1969A:151,221
1969B:229,285
PLEASURE:
1947 16,17 54-6 84.85,110,168,172,176,177,179,198
225-227,232,233.235,238,240,244,255,
1948
1951
1975
199 ,206
256,265
59,66
92, 127,219,280,308,319,329,349
376 .388,390,3 93,3 9 9,400,407
493,504,516
96,97.102
351,353,359
412,413 453,462
374,
,480
POTENTIAL:
1947
1948
1951
1957
1959
1965
88 ,133 ,
52 ,53
9,10,47
464 . 476
62
60,72
175,253
73,155
507
273,371
374,377,429,430 432,436
510,512,513
1-7
1966A-.16 ,17 ,18,27
1966B:212,215
1967 11.12,13
1968 :24
1969A:1,2,11,29,30,31,32,33
106,107.128,160,203
161,256,273,286,293
74 86. 104,120,124,127
93,96,106.107,113,113
56 62
35 40,41.72,75 76,93 94
1969B
1973
1975
1978B
POTENCY
1946
1951
POWER:
1947
1948
1950
1951
181
114
182, 196
19
111
419,516,521
191,198 200 203,204.214
19661
1966B
1969A
1975
1978
PREJUDICE:
1947 197
122
61
40,41
233,341,
447,467
527
21,35,38
208
79 ,97,98
106,151
37
215,244
256
472
363
473
369
481
370
487
372
514
410
517
414
519
255
418
520
442
522
446
525
127 128,178
202
-589-
1951 :217,258,265,313,396,422
1969A=53,54
1973 179
1975 -100
PRESENT:
1946 14,16,21
1947 8,66 81 88,92,93,94,95,96,97,98 99-104,170,196,
205-209.235
1948 :56,57
1951 -59,60,65,67,95,108,266,281,294,324,340,341,342,
343-345,347,350,37 4,350,357,374,395,403,40 5,413,
414,42 2,42 5,42 6,432,480,481.484,506,524,52 5
1966B:215,219
1967 :11
1969A:44,56,66,67,73,90,95,119,159,178
1973 44 51,54,57.64-66,67-72,83,88,121,128,142,181,
186,195
1975 :107,118
PRESENT TENSE:
1946 13,14
1951 :136
1966B:205
1969A 224
:
1975 =118.119,121,122,154
PRICE, D-
1969B:287 ,288
PRIDE:
1947 101,151,176,177,256
1951 92,137 504,505
1957 71
1969A:45
1973 :148,172-179
PRIMITIVE:
1947 119
1948 56
1950 :40
1951 :128,189,212,213,215,217, 350,384,405,409
1953 :29
1957 :64
1978B:59
PRINCIPLE:
1947 17,101,136,141,145,176,223
1948 51,52
1951 :10,18,194,264 360,406
1975 :102
1978A 51
PROBLEM:
1947 :66,196,209,260,261
1951 :40,49,115,287,298 303,305,206,324,506,507,524,
52 6
1969A 45,79,82,106,269
PROCESS:
1946 10,1116,20,21
n
_,
n
1947 176,181,194.198,204,220,221,223,232,238.252,270
-590-
1948 46,48,51.53,54,57,62,63,66
1950 :40,41
1951 14,40,64,97,107 117 ,127 . 133 , 146 *151, 152 , 153 ,154 ,
175,185,232,244,250,259,279,309,311,315,321,32 2,
324,347-349,380,409,413,426,433,459,468,473,475,
485,487,489,491,497-500 506-509,515,516,518
1957 68
1965 1
1966A:19,20,23,29,34
1967 12
1968 21,22
1969A:34,106,115,164,165 166, 203
1973 :58 128.129
197 5 -93.96,97.98,99,100 101,103,105,106,108,111,113,
115,118-120
1978A 41,43.44,51
1978B:50-53,56,57
PROCUSTES:
1951 :147
1969A:20,63
1969B:273
1978B:59
PROJECTION:
1946 :19 21
1947 :23, 38,44,56, 59. 63,65,66,67,68,69,70,89,103,109,
116,119,121,122,124,12 7,130,131,136,141,143,150,
155,157-162,164-175,177,181,188,196,203,218,221,
222,224,231,235-2 46,252-2 54,25 7,267
1948 :46,63,64,65,66
1950 -41
1951 :10,16,105,134 135,164,181,217,244,247,254,268,
2 77,313,319,320,349,354,356,357,37 8,37 9,387,389,
393,399,402,418,447,448,450,464,467,47 9,483,499,
510,513,514,518,521-523
1953 29,30,31.32,34
1957 :72
1959 :69,70,95.119.120
1965 :6
1966A:17,26,27,28,29,35
1966B:212,228
1967 :12
1969A:11,18,20 39,40,42,45,51 70,72,74 78,85,102,106.
107 126,128,149,181,256,303,305,306
1969B:201,210.212,214,215,218,228,244,257.258,260,273,
2 85 29 2
1973 3536,37,40,71,79,81,82,89,90,96,103,110,145,159,
173.182
1975 -94,113,114,115.145,158.183
1978A:42.51
1978B:51,62
PROOF:
1947 196,209,243,256
1951 :39
1973 :195
-591-
PROPRIOCEPTIONS :
1951 15,45 99
308-314
1967 :10
1973 -88
PROTESTANT:
105,107,111
428,431 434,436
117,118
442.
,126,127
443,444
130,131,151,
447,464,491
1
16
17
100
193
5 7
73
;39
408
1965
1966A
1969A
PROVERB
1947
1969A
PSYCHE
1946
1947
1950
1951
PSYCHIATRY
1946
1947
1951
1953
1957
1965
1966A
1967
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
1978B
135,146
409
11
28
33
73
5,8.
5,81
15,16,
28,29,
66,72,
:3
: 16,19
10,11
2,10,32,46,
=9,28,30,39,
:101.107,115
35,36,38
49,51,52,61
77 ,305,316
50,58,79,
50,55,60,
,157 ,213,
82,202
72,86 104
218
105
PSYCHOANALYSIS:
1946
1947
1948
1950
1951
11-14,19.23
5,7,8 11,13,17
80-89,92,95,97
122-124,126
151,153,159
187,189,199
231,232,238
271
59,65
39
14.16,21,36-39
18,33 42,53,57
98,100,101,108
61,64,66,69,72-75
112.116.117.120,
128-130
160,164
200,203
239,247
132
167
204
249
133
170
209
253
136-139,
171,174,
214,221,
255,257,
142,143
179,180
222 . 225
266,267
149,
185-
230,
269,
59,74,83,89 185,245,259,266,279
286
361
290
367
1953
1957
1965
1966A:16,17
1966B:213
1967 :11,12
1968 :17,19
1969A.-1.17,
281 ,283
347,359
450,452.
27 31
54,57,59 62,64
1.6
293,295,304,305,319
379,380.382
389,392,
329
408
341
435
345
446
454,455,492,499,517,524,52 5
18,26
,21
46,
35
23
, 22
49.52.53.55
58,59
61 73,120,135,155
-592-
171,221,223.232,245
1969B-54, 60,62,81,90,102,126,142,168,180,186,187,214,
254,278,295
1973 :16,21.48,51 67 83,84 85.86 , 88.101,111,123,123,
125,181,188
1975 117,118
1978A :39.51
1978B 49 56,57
PSYCHODRAMA
1951 -283
1969B:215
1973 -66,82,86,90-102,130
1975 :157
PSYCHOLOGY:
1946 :6,7,21
194 7 :5,7.13,14,15,16,23,25,28,32,33,41,62,72,74,84,
90,91.104,12 8,129,13 3,162 ,186,199,206
1948 48 59,61
1951 -9,13,14,15,19,30,33,36,44,47,52,58,107,147,192,
196,234,24 4 245,273,274-2 78,280,282,284-2 86,
2 93,304,306,315,32 2,32 6,342,35 9,363,371,37 4,
3 83,391 .401, 405^,42 5, 42 6, 43 2, 445, 446, 451,453,
454-45 7,466,47 8,47 9,485,490,498,499,52 4
1953 -29
1957 55,63,67.72
1959 =69
1965 :1
1966A:14.19,29.30
1967 9,10 12
1969A:51,56,63,64,79,133,134,150
1973 17,25,27,28,33
1975 :98,102
1978A:36,38,44,45,49,50
1978B:50
PSYCHOPATHOLOGY:
1947 -.7 94,128,132
1951 =10,15,210,264
1959 :71
1969A:32
1969B:149
1975 103,107
1978A.-41 ,50
1978B:51
PSYCHO-PHYSICAL:
1948 :48
1951 :304
PSYCHOSIS:
1947 67,79,86,110,158,171 187,238
1948 -58
1951 :16 175,330,447,450,452.490,491
1965 :6
1966A:28
1968 :26
1969A 32,50,54,104,135,136.245
-593-
1969B:L28,180
t
201,292,293
1973 -98,107,108,111,181
1975 112
1978B:50,62
PSYCHOSOMATIC:
1946 5,11
1951 17 .58,119,12 4,164,200,201,204,207,209,213,216,
244, 245, 283,286,288,303,306,317,359,369,443,44
447,448,499,515
1969A:37,108,193
1969B:8,81,126,168
1973 =9,15,39,55,56,68,80,95
1978A :36
1978B:62
PSYCHOTHERAPISTS:
1948 :45,52,55,58
1951 :374
PSYCHOTHERAPY
1948
1950
1951 1966A
1967
1975
(SEE ALSO THERAPY)
50 ,61
40,41
356,359,361,378,3 80,389,392,393,409,410,421,44
455,464,466
19,37
10
96.106,158,192
PSYCHOGENETIC
1947
1951
PUNISH
1946
1947
249
201
20
204,393
52 .,61, 71, 96,110,114, 117, 131, 150, 199, 261,222, 22
237,269
1948 66
1951 -67,152,159,166,183,184,187,189,192,193,197,241
242,264,319,389,416,419,467,483,484
1957 57,64
1965 :3,5,7
1966A:21
1969A:51,61,294,295
1973 :180 203
PURITANISM:
1947 :224,225
1969A 1
1973 120
PURPOSE
1946
1948
1951
1966A
1975
1978A
PURPOSIVENESS:
1947 :8,21..66,81,92,94,98,100,136 ,207,210,216,217
10
49
47
17
99
40
16
57
73
41
81 105,106
2 90,305,306,312,342,462.494
218.223,237 ,265.269,270
-594-
QUALITY:
1947 19,26.52,53,56,154,171,176
1951 53,324
1978A:42
QUANTITY
194 7 :19.26,52,56,164,171,176,177
1951 :52,324
1978A:42
QUESTIONS"
1947 38,43,207.229
1951 :437 508
1957 70
1959 :71,72
1966A:18.26
1969A:38.48,75,76.118,138,140,141,234,235,274
1973 -75-85
1975 :101
1978A:35
RACE:
1947 :119,128,129
1951 258,369
RADO, S
1947 :67
RAGE:
1947 -33,54,116,117,176,209,259
1951 :166,194,203,319.391,466,490,491
1957 60
RANK, 0:
1947 72,75,218
1951 :283.284,286,297,391,451,479,480,496
1973 :48
RATIONALITY:
1946 -5
194 7 20,57,70,93,119.123,151-161,174,223,230,237,244.
250
1948 :56
1951 : 48,121,133,139,143,179,184,189,190,193,257,264,
286.311.350,370,37 7,37 8,394,399,447,470,52 7
1953 28 29
1957 :65
1966A:15.17.29,37
1967 11
1968 22
1969A:47,53,71,136,137,161,167,202
1969B:161.201
1973 -.10,98
1975 :102,103
1978A:42,43
1978B:52
RAUSCHNING, H:
1947 :7,121
REACT(ION):
1946 =16
1947 -7,8,34,43,49,54,56-5 9,80,88,89,97,108,12 4,137,
-595-
150,197,200,203,207,215,220,22 6,23 8,239.256
266
1948 :51,56
1951 .61,62,76,83 97,100,111,131,134,135,137 140,143,
177 194 197,240,244.259,266.289,309,325,333,350,
360 392,413,453,480,489,526
1957 56
1965 -2,3.7
1969A:70,92,169,271,272
1973 -.168
1975 :137
1978A:42,43,47
REACTION-FORMATION:
1951 : 441,490,496,499,504,505,510,518,525
1978B:60,65
READING:
1947 99,127,193,194,213
1951 101,234
REALIZE (REALIZATION):
1946 18
1947 :34,35,40,45.48,50,53,57,59 64,67,73,76,77,88,
96,98,115,123,12 5,126,128,129,138,141,147,153,
17 5,17 9,185-188,194,198,200-203,208,209,214,
217 .22 5.226,228,233,241,245,248-251,255,25 7,
258,261,267,271.272
1948 :61,62,68
1951 :9,20,30 61.95,106,110,114,116,117,153,187,190,
195,203,206,211,254,255,265,277,280,295,297,338,
396 414,450,451,464
1957 69
1965 4
1966A:26,33,35
1968 =26
1969A :3,23,33 36,42.43,49,50.52,60,62,64,67,77,106,
117,118,148,159,160,171.234,240
1973 178.181,182
1975 :94,100,106
REALITY:
1946 10,13,14,23
1947 :5,13,14,17,21,25,31,32,34,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,
45 54-56,63,67,69,70,83,84,90-92,95,97,102,110.
112,117,122,136,137,146,153,159,161,170,190,200,
203,205,206,208-210,231,232,234,236,237,239,240,
257,271,272
1948 47,51,52,56,57,65
1951 14,78,81.104,114,130,132,139 158,259,266,273,
275.277.278,280,284,287,288,290,294,295,297,
298,304,319,320.322,323,327,336.349,351,353,
354.374,378,380.384,385,398,407.425,426,429,
434,443,44 5.446,44 9,450,452,458,459,461,462.
463,471-473,476,478,483.485,495-4 99,508,512,
513,516,521
1957 59.62
1965 7
-596-
1966A:14,19,22,27,28.29
1966B:215,216
1967 10
1968 :24
1969A:3,4,24, 2 7 .42,43,46,50,53,54,55,57,59,62,66,6
71-7 3,78,98,102,115,134,160,167 202,217,240,
245,256,265,266
128,222,240,268,291,292,294
13,17,130.139,149,152,176,180,204
95,100,102,103,107,114-115,118,151,160,180
1969B
1973
1975
1978A
REASON
1947
1951
1969A
1975
1978A
1978B
RECEDE
1951
1975
RECEPTORS:
1951 44
42,51
81,202
138
35 132
102
39
59
16,18
105,153
207
155
244
246
59,87,104,107,151,153,308,312
1978A:45
RECOGNIZE (RECOGNITION):
194 7 -23,143,17 3,17 5,200,202,214,231.241,244,247,2
253,268
1948 :64
1951 :146,243,379,526,527
1965 :3
1969A 92,99,124,258,304
RECURRING:
1947 158,160
1951 :343
REFLECTION:
1947 =158,193
1951 :81,280,308,367,497,503
1969A:83,159,265
REFLEX:
1946
1947
1948 :50
1951 :15
1966A:30
1969A:65
1978A 44
REFUSE (REFUSAL):
1947 110.113,127
202,254
1951 :244
1969A:110 . 129,275
REGRESS(ION):
1947 :20,26.63,83
1950 :43
-.6,22
:43,49.50
51
19,20
45
101
262
155,200
263,285
216,220
296,307,350.452,453,486
155,157,158,168,175,17 8,193,199,
89,98,100,169,209,216,229
-597-
1951 15,298,32 9,369 412,481,511,517
1969A:30,65
1978B:61
REGULATE (REGULATION):
1947 45,248
1951 45 49,203,325
REHEARSE:
1947 -30 213 225
1951 66,140
1966A:14,16 17
1966B 227,229
1967 :11
1969A:24,50,51,61,121.154,256
1973 :180
1975 :112.113
197 8A -.41
REICH, A:
1947 :238
REICH. W-
1946 12.18,21,23
194 7 5,45,67,70,72,74,75,77,79,112,123,124,129,132.
155,169,222,229,238,248,266^
1948 49,52.60,61
1951 :14,15,16,17,18 262,281,283,311,330,365,400,404,
421,448,479
1957 -57
1965 :4
1966A:31
1967 10
1968 20,24
1969A:61
196 9B-39,46,48-51,75,88,168,188,189,191,192,202,206,
225,255,276
1973 52,53,70,96
1978B:5564
REIFICATION:
1966A:20
1969A-.115
REINFORCE-
1947 13,58
1951 447
1966A-21
1969A:48,185,193
1973 -129,162,167,201
REINHARDT, M:
1969B:43,282
REINTEGRATION:
1946 -7,11,21
1951 :73,205,206,219
1978B:63
REJECT(ION):
1946 :20
1947 69,188
1947 :69,188
1948 :54,62,6567
-598-
1950
1951
1953
1959
1966B
40
;9,28,76,101
387.395,409
154,199,244 245
471,479 512
250,254-7,276,363
31,32
71
228
1969A:9,70,112
1973 39,48
1978B:51
RELATIONSHIPS:
1947
1948
1957
1959
1978B
RELAX:
1947
1948
1951
137,169 135
48
59
72
63
135,192,201
60,61,62
17 .20.108
175,252
213 229,230,232
234 249,250
258
,115,122,123
110.116,143
341,345
175,294
235254,266,267
18 21,44,61,62,63,67,70,82,88,97,100,103,
297 ,309 ,312.338
500,504 . 509 514
1966A:35
1969A:84
1978B:51
RELIEF:
1947 5684.151,158
1951 -47 48,191,493
1969A:247
1978B.59
RELIGION:
1946 5,12
1947 7,13.
119-123,129.216,232,241,272
1951 186,368
1953 :28,29
1957 :68
1966A:15,20
1966B:207 ,215
1969A:54,86,152,159
1969B:161,249
1973 29,194
1975 :106
1978A:42,50
REMEMBER(ING):
1947 17,25,26,54,56,92,94
222 247 .264
127 ,134,202,203,289,290
436,438.463,488,492,
101,133,179,180,203,208,
1951 :59,85104
342.346
17 . 18
108-112,117,152 153,155
209,278,281,
1968
1969A:109
1975 :117
1978A39
REORGANIZE:
1946 -21
129,130,137,252
-599-
1947 :189
1951 17,54
1967 :13
REPETITION:
,210, 230 263,268
55
1947
1951
1966A:
1966B
1967
1968
1969A
1975
27,99
346
35
223
10,13
18,23
100.101 ,102,
403,460,502
123
515
126,203,233 238,343
37 ,95,96,131
118
119,120 189
REPRESSED
1946
1951
1957
1965
1975
1978A
1978B
20
430
13
67
56
4 5
95 .96
38,39
52,53
441,450,451,462,525
51
54
REPRESSION
1947
1948
1951
1953
1959
1966A
1966B
1969A
1969B
1973
1975
7,8,22,23,41
91 ,96,98,100
139,142,143,
174,177-179.
230,233-235,
272
:46,49
=10,16,17,18,
241,250,257 ,
334,337,344,
396,398,399,
490,492-494
28,32
70
17
212
30.56
,55,63,65 66,68.69,75,77
,109,113,114,116,120,124
150
199
238
81,84,88,
125,128,138
151,
204,
241,
153,154
218
244
157
220,221
247-249
158
223
253
165
224
254
166
226
172
229
268,270-
115,
258,
346,
402.
152,
265,
347,
415,
164
283
349
419
175
297
352
420
184-6,212,213,219
497 .500,501-506
299
370
425
509
319
382
439
510
322,325,
386-388,
468,487,
518
329,
391-
489,
57 105
169,272,276,293,294
7,10.16,54,90,108,124
101
RESENTMENT
1947
1948
1951
1953
1957
1959
1966A
1966B
1969A
1969B
1973
92,135,153,175,202
66
66,158,163
522
34,36
179,185 .243
352.391,393,483,484,491
37
72
35
63,71
71 .72
26,27
206
51,52
182,184
135-138
73
53 .76
185
161
145,
190,
162,
146,
256,
163,
148
271
166
168,255
167 ,170,172
-600-
1975
1978B:
108
54 57
RESIGNATION:
1947
1951
1965
1978B
= 96,97 ,150 175,176,261
=351,405,415,4156,418,419,42 0.421,42 5.46 7,512,
512,517 518
= 3,7
:55
RESISTANCES:
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1965
1969A
1969B
1973
1975
:12.15.17,20
5,23,33,41.46,48,49,64,74,81,88,89,95.99,109,
112-118,124-126,134,151,153-156.164.174-181,
185, 189,190,193,197,202-204,216,220,223, 229,
230,232,234, 241,244,245,247,249,250,251,2 60-
264,269
=55,56,57,59,60
:20,64.67-7 0,7 3,74,82,83,84,88 . 889 , 90,92,100 , 107-
111,113-115,119,121,123, 124, 126, 129,137,147,163,
167,178,180,182,193,194, 203,218,234,240,296-298,
3 32,333.33 5-338,35 9,380,389,391,392,403,42 0,455,
463,464 522
-.33
= 22
:55 ,134,130,230,231
: 50
:48,51.66,105.108,114
:129
RESOLUTIONS
1947
1951
1959
1978B
101 ,229,269
66,297
:69,70,71,72,73
:52
RESOURCES:
1947
1965
1969A
48
:5,7
:35,36,42,56,68,141
RESPONSE:
1947
1948
1951
1953
1965
1967
1973
145
45,51,66
20,62,104,107.183,184,194,195,202,256,259,277,
281,319,32 5,337.34-2,346,349,355,372,376,394,
395,42 6,42 7,430,433,43 6,449,453,460,467,47 5,
487,488,503,510
:29.30
3,3,7
11
:99,101,108,111,112
RESPONSIBILITY
1946
194 7
1948
1951
:14
:57.75,93,96,97,UO,139, 142, 147. 151,155,158,202,
216-218,251,259,265
= 65
9,48,105.117,121,157,163,181,192,195.205,216,
323,352,354-356 376,381,438
-601-
1953 30
1957 -68
1966A:17,30
1966B-.222
1967
1968
1969A
11.12
24
43,45,
115,12
60 115
35,49,
107,10
52
1969B
1973
1975
1978B
REST:
1947 =258
1951 310
RESTLESS(NESS)
1947 77,91,
1951 164,19
1969A:296
1978B:58
RETALIATE:
46,48,56,69,70,75,76,78,79,91,107,108,
1,151,167,203 213
,127,161,215,240,242,247 ,260
59,65,68,75,79,80,81,95,96,110,145,172
8,117
259,260
180,202
3
1947
1951
1953
226
202
36
227
RETROFLECTION
1946
1947
1948
1951
20
8,66 ,6
155,16
233,23
= 63 ,65,
167,18
214,21
393,41
:98,211
:40,41,
9,109,110,118,121
9,170,173,174,188
5 238,253-255,257
66
1,183-193,195,196
8-220,229,230,241
6,500,510,514-518
,214,258
42,43,72,73,79,80,103
122,130,133,150,154,
198,207 220.227,229,
200,201,202,206,212,
243,245,255,263,264,
521-523
55,62
H:
34
132,22
80
58
398
3,226,227,259
,466
1969B
1973
1978B
REUSCH,
1966A
REVENGE
1947
1951
1957
REVERSAL: _
1951 -.74,75,77-82,86,102,186,187,188,190,191,194,214,
259
REVOLUTION:
1951 :102.
1969A-3
1978B:52
REWARD(ING):
1947 -71,115
1951 193
1965 2
1969A:131
449.483
-602-
RHETORIC
1951
RHYTHM:
1947
1951
1966A
1969A
1978B
RIGHT:
1947
1951
1953
1966A
1975
1978B
RIGHTEOUS:
1947 -.226
1951 -505
1965 :5
1966A:21
373,378,384,481,484
90,192,248
278,375
31
65 203
51
151,186
220,221
27
29,37,38
151 162 ,189
63
255
376,377,385
428
199
1968
RIGID:
1947
1947
1948
1951
1953
1966A
1968
1969A
1973
1978B
RILKE,
1948
1969B
RISK:
1951
1965
1966A
1968
1969A
1969B
RITUAL:
1947
1973
1978B
ROBOTS:
1946
1947
1951
1969A
1978B
23
18,
58,
249
54,55
16.19. 89,152,166,194,218-221,247.248,265,316
21
100
141 , 153 ,171,172
187,198 228,229,233
251,254,266
325,333
:31
= 22
21 ,24
:10.12,15
=138,139
:60
R.N-
:57
:180
334,363 377.382,514,519
37
280
4
23
26
32,34
150
422 517,527
36,42,49,147
82
28,29 . 30,38
59
19
263
63
107
52
-603-
ROGERS, C
1947 :5
1969A:58,100
1969B:261
1975 157,158
ROLES (AND GAMES):
1946 :18
1947 -30,130,158,222
1948 :65
1951 10,50,80,94,120,138,157,189,211,215,2 58,2 64
288,29 6,314,354 362,372,378,381.418,419,430
437,438,457 459
1965 3,4.5,7
1966A:17,18,20,23,24,25,32,34,36
1966B:206,208,209,215
1967 11
1968 -.17,18,20,22,24
1969A:2.25,29,31,32,33,35,37,39, 50,59.61,63,76,79
85,110,122,125,130,149,160,203,237,245,252,
275,287
1969B:136,138,150,175,183,219,228,254,255,287,291
1973 :94,97,122,146,184
1975 93,94,103,110,137.157,183
ROLF, I-
1969A:101
1969B:166,185,191 , 192
RORSCHACH:
1969A:57
1973 101
ROSEN, A:
1973 107
ROUSSEAU:
1951 =367
RUDE
1947 179
1951 190
RULE
1947 219
1951 :263
1957 64
RUSSELL, B:
1947 82,207
RUSSIAN:
1947 :60,129,145,159,176,268
1967 13
1969A:31,33
1975 :192
1978A-64
RUSSIAN-PSYCHIATRY:
1966A:18
SABOTAGE:
1947
1951
1965
180
193
7
-604-
1969A:230,231
1975 -.192
SADISM:
1947 17.23,117,131,168 241.265
1948 :48
1951 '218,233,319,390,393,400,402,403,513,516,518
1953 :34,35
1966A:38
1968 :20
1969A:80,202
1973 108,109
SADO-MASOCHISM:
1948 :64
1951 369,393,394,402,419
SAFE(TY):
1947 63
1951 :336,337 362,401,461,471,496,517,517
1967 14
1969A:104
1973 :143
1978B:61,62
SAINT THOMAS
1951 291
SALTER:
1973 -51
SANITY (INSANITY)'
1947 7,26.42,62,77.83,167
1951 391,496
1953 :27
1966A:16 31
1969A:20,32,43,133
1969B:271,291
1973 =130,180
1975 :114
SANTAYANA, G:
1951 481
SARTRE, J.P:
1965 :1
1966A:16
1969A:17
1969B:60,187
SATIR, V:
1969B:223,242
1973 205
SATISFACTION:
1946 :5,10,20
1947 :48,53,54,57,70 71,83.85,110,117,126,132,134,1
160,167 168, 175, 180,194,198,202,209.210, 225, 2
255,260,263,271
1948 :52
1950 :42
1951 10,18,83.105,118,122.125,157,183,185,186,191,
195,20 5 219,236,240,279,285.290,311,312,319,
341,344-3 46,349,352.360,368,373,377,3 89,390,
-605-
396,398,401.402,411,415,417,418.420,432,43 3,
43 5,462 464,481,491,502,503,509,511-517,521,
524
1953 :28,30,34.35,36
1959 72,73
1966A:19,24 34
1966B-.215
1969A:25,37,51,69,88.160,245
1973 19,43,46,47,50 51,111.112,115,203
1975 102,105
1978A:43,45,51
1978B:54,59
SATORI
1965 6
1966A:34
1969A:43,53,132,134,159
1969B:90,106,107,108,273
1973 :133
1975 180
SCHACHTEL, E:
1951 =348,496
SCHELER, M:
1947 :201
1969B:60
SCHILDER, P
1969B:55,56
SCHILLER, F"
1947 :187
SCHIZOPHRENIA:
1946 :16,23
1947 136
1948 :46
1951 :75,110,330,443
1966A:17,18
1969A:39,54,55,65,135,137
1969B:149,198,240, 284,287,291
1973 -21,100
SCHMIDT, A:
1947 246
SCHNITZLER, A:
1969B 138
SCHUBERT, F
1947 68
SCHUTZ, W:
1969A:224
1969B:144,188,189,224,255
SCIENCE (SCIENTIFIC):
1946 -522
1947 :13.14,20.22,29,50,57,60,80, 81. 86,93,99,105,119
12 3,139,185,186,207,208,220,255
1948 58,50,68
1951 30,37,43,46,47.50,51,241,280,284,285,288,289,
291 304,311.314,316,318,320,329,330.332,334,
33 7.368,373,374,391,392,401,404,406,450,4 54,
-606-
462
1953 28
1957 62
1966A:15,19,30,34
1969A:13,15,17.46
1975 -101
1978A:43,48
1978B:50 51,52
SCOTOMA-
1946 13
1947 23.33,65,66,70,131,15 5.161,180,232,236,238,244,
250
1948 50,55
1951 :217
1953 :36
1978B:49
SCREEN
1947 :23,25,161,202, 204,230, 238. 239
1951 262,263,264,266
SCRIPT:
1966B:228
1968 18
1969A:74,82,93,122,142
1975 :94,115
SCYLLA:
1947 193
1953 27
1969A=3
SECURITY:
1946 :8,11
1947 96 115,171
1951 '279,280,370,403,407,408,416,421,437,470.471,472
511
1953 27,36
1966A:19
1969A:9,32,42,65,81,82
1978A:53
1979B:60-61
SEDUCTION:
1951 :396
1967 13
SEE(ING):
1947 66,113,202,239
1951 =52,98,104-107 109,111,273
1957 :55
1966A:14,29,31
1966B:206
1969A:24.25,36,39,50,72,83,84,106,126,129,133,160,
245,256,257,261,270
1975 100,198
1978B:64
SELECTIVE:
-607-
1947 65,66,197,244
1951 =251,276,309,314,323,324
SELF:
1946 13,16,18
194 7 87,89,98,102,118,131,142,143,147,15 7,163,209,
212,214,220-2 24,228,22 9,23 9,263
1948 :43
1951 :14,17,19,27-29,47.118,143,151.180,186,187,211,
231 233,246,2 58,2 81,282,286-2 88,290,292,295,296,
2 9 8,303-305,309,310,313,314,324,32 5,334,33 6,341,
348,355,360 ,364.366,367,373,381 387,391.393,395,
3 97-400,403,404,407,413-418,420-4 2 2,42 5,42 7-4 38,
442,444-448,450,454-458,461-4 63,466,467,469,470-
473 475.477-482,485-492,494,498-500,506,507,510,
512-514,518-520,522-527
1953 :30,36
1957 :55,57 ,59.64,66
1959 -72
1965 5,6
1966A :20-22
i968 =24
i969A-7,8,14,20.37,40,48,53,60,71 80,81,92,107.23 6,
147,151,234 239,269 271,273
1969B=5,7,8,190,214,267,294,295
197 3 :2, 30,38.41,42.49,50,56,59,65,69,80-85,96,97,99,
105,112,113,130,181.190,194.196
1975 105,113,158
1978B:50,51,56,57
SELF-ACTUALIZATION
1965 2 3
1969A:20
1969B:4-7,24,175,262,286
SELF-ADJUSTMENT:
1947 46
1951 =319
SELF -AGGRESSION:
1951 185,186,189,236,436
SELF-ALIENATION
1966A.-27
1966B:212
1969A:76
SELF-ASSERTION
1951 :377,415
1973 105
SELF-ASSURANCE
1946 :12
1951 :418
SELF-AWARENESS:
1946:19
1947 231,253,255
1948 =65
1950 43 _
nnn
1951 : 62,65,103,106 ,107,113,196,204.216.265,296,297,
314,336,340,341,346,414,433,437,517
-608-
1953 :30
1967 :10
1969A:53
1973 130,131
1975 :104
SELF-BOUNDARY:
1951 510
1969B:269
SELF-CENTRED:
1947 :226
1957 -66
SELF-CONCEPT:
1951 :189,518
1969B:4,5,7,8,175
1973 :20,49,50,99,111,115
1978A:42,53
1978B:60,65
SELF-CONFIDENCE
1951 -394.395,401
1969A:90
SELF-CONGRATULATION:
1951 =192
SELF-CONQUEST:
1951 : 258,259,290,346,369,372,415,417,419,420,421,447,
450,452,467,483,484,505
SELF-CONSCIOUS(NESS):
219.232,253,255,257,262
1947
1948
1951
1968
1969A
1969B
1973
1975:
30,66,157
65
16,90,165
19
60
10
22
:39,60,70,139
:214
= 173
114
379,491,519
1978B:54
SELF-CONTEMPT:
1951 :130,143
SELF-CONTROL:
194,195
1946
1947
1948
1951
91,171
223.224,226,230
1953 :
1969A:
1973 46
1975 105,106
1978A38
1978B:55,57
SELF-CREATIVE:
1950 :43
1951 :331,412
SELF-DECEPTION:
1947 :234
18,20
61,66
53,65
17 130,136,193,216,217,246,258,259,264,419,471
515,520
32-34
18,21
24.68
-609-
1951 64,443
1953 36
1966B:216
1969A-.160
1969B:8
SELF-DEFEATING:
1951 -58,111
1965 1
1973 :47
1975 -.192
SELF-DEFENSE:
1947 -36,258
SELF-DESTRUCTION:
1947 110,130,132,
1948 65
1951 :399,402,414,
1953 34
1965 1
1969B:243
SELF-DISCIPLINE:
1947 224
1969A:93
SELF-DISCOVERY:
1951 27,28
SELF-ESTEEM:
1947 5
1951 -328 329 335,
1953 -35
1957 -58,61
1967 14
1969A:36.45,46,57
1969B:3,4
1973 -46,49,135
SELF-EVIDENT
1947 =14
1966A-229
SELF-EXPRESSION
1946 :9,12,21
1947 :219,245 262
1948 =35-55,64,67
1969A:52
1969B:190
1973 49.82,83,93
1975 :201
1978B:57,58,65
SELF-FEELINGS:
1951 :107,308
SELF-FRUSTRATION:
1966B:215
1969A 136,159
1975 :94,153
SELF-FUNCTIONING:
1951 :439,440,443
1969B-.294
133,223
518
340,419,420
,108,111
,446,456-458 ,461,490
-610-
SELF-IMAGE:
1965 -1
1969A-20
1969B:3,4,267,268,273
SELF-IMPROVEMENT -
1966A:15
1968 -23
SELF-INTEGRATION:
1951 146,149
SELF-INTERRUPTION:
1973 :54,56
1978B:69-73,93,111
SELF-KNOWLEDGE-
1951 318,383
SELF-LOVE
1948 :65
1951 :264,418
1969B:3
SELF-OBSERVATION:
1947 226
1948 -60
SELF-PITY:
1947 :222
1951 192,193
1967 :11
1975 :203
SELF-PRESERVATION
1947 -36,45,48,64
1951 328,427
1978B:62
SELF-PUNISHMENT:
1946 =20
1948 :65
1961 .162
1953 :34
SELF-REALIZATION:
1947 -206,234
286
86,87 ,128,129 .193
192.341,400
1948
1951
1953
53,67
483
36
SELF-REGULATION:
1947
1950
1951
53,56,61,105
139,248
45,46
40
18,45,203,207,264,295,323
33 8,339,343,389,390,392,409,412,418,447,456
485,486,488,491 494
325-329,331,334-336
458,463
5,17,25
6,26,27
106
48
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
SELF-REPROACH-
1946 20
1947 :159,223
1948 66
116
31
225,226
-611-
1951 189,340
SELF-SENSE:
1951 :203,443
SELF-SUFFICIENT:
1947 :38 117
1973 115
1978A:44
1978B:65
SELF-SUPPORT:
1951 -9,10
1957 :66,67
1965 1,4
1966A:17,18,35
1967 11,12
1968 -26
1969A 2.30,31,38 125,141
1969B 18,19
1973 =16,26,32,45. 46,47,57,58,63,66,71-73,75,79,84, 85
90,93,95,98,101,103,105 108,109.111,115
1975 -93.94,98,99,107
1978B:61,62,64,65
SELF-SYSTEM:
1948 :52
1953 31
1973 49
SELF-THERAPY
1966A:33
1967 :14
1969A:60
SELF-TORTURE:
1947 :119
1966A:15
1967 13
1969A-20,24,61,74,75.167,171,175,193, 207,245,296
1969B:214
1975 94
SELIG
1969B:189 262
SELVER, C:
1946 :23
1969B:144
SEMANTIC:
1946 7,11,12,13.21,22
1947 7,199,207 212,223 493
1948 :55,61
1951 :14, 16,139,147,216.289,374,389,410,493
1957 55,68
1966A:16,30
1968 :17,20
1969B 64,232,233,279
1973 :78,103,114,157,189
1978B:53
SENSE-
1946 :7,16,18
-612-
1947 "39,50,62,91,97,164,176,177,191,198,199,200,201,
205,,211.214,215, 224, 230, 232,233,239,241,248,
250,265
1951 :15,20,44,60,68,82,85,99,104,105,107,108,109,110,
111,114,115,117-119,132,135,139,146,147,151,152,
153,182,206-208,219,243,252,276,281,293,303,314,
342,359,363,365 366,378,380,400,413,457,474 477,
480,507,511,513,515,519 521 52 2.52 3,52 6
1953 27,36,37
1957 -63
1965 :2.6
1966A:14,19,31,34,38
1967 :10 11
1969A:23.27 ,31,40.50 ,53,62,64,65,66,68,69,72,74, 107,
119,137.159,160,256,279
1973 :19,201
1975 -96,106,114
1978A:43,47
1978B:49 ,64
SENSORIC SYSTEM:
1946 :6,10
194 7 26,33,48,49,50,120,153-15 6,174,202,205,2 2 6,22 8,
230,235,250
1948 :50
1951 20,65,115,151 ,288,293,365,36 9,384,42 8,43 4,43 6,
491,496
1967 :10
1969A:65,69
1969B:160,279,290
1973 :18,23,24,96,97
1975 118
1978A-43.45
1978B:52
SENSOR:
1948 :50
SENSORY-
1947 -67,269,270
1951 23 2,273,308,310,313,315 342,344.34 5
1969A:1,233
1975 -.106,204
SEX '
1946 -7,9,17,19,21
1947 7,18,23,24,25,32,34,42,45.48,62,70,76,80,81,82,
83,84,87,103,112,117,118,128,135,136,144,154,
15 5,158,160,161,166-16 9,192,200,209,228,233,236,
248,250,259
1948 :52,61,67
1950 :39
1951 166,236,343,359,365,366,383,394,401,502,505
1953 :28.34,36
1957 60,62
1966A:27,31
1966B:213
1967 14
-613-
20,21,22,25
22.37,46 60
72,87,135
96,101
51,52
41,51,52,59
147
36
68,97
152,192
33,70,71 74
80,173
67
130,166,264,318,418
172,173.175
97,111
I.L:
1968
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
1978B
SEX FANTASY:
1969B 243,245 246,257,274,275.294
SEXISM:
1969B
1973
SHAME:
1947
1948
1951
1969A
1973
SHEPHERD
1969B.-135
SHIT:
1947 170
1959 -.71
1969A:47
SHOCK:
1947 -46 50,257
1951 :112,310,390
1966A 22,28
SHOSTROM E:
1969B:22
SHOULD(ISM)
1946 :18
1951 :154
1957"-59,73
2,3,5
15,20,25
16,19 .20,43
38
71
269,273
176-179,180.216,219,256
55 57,79 133,243 25 1 255
1965
1966A
1969A
1969B
1973
SHUTTLE
1969A
1973
1975
SHYNESS
1947
1951
SICK:
1951
1969A
1975
"SICK-POINT
1966A:18
1966B:204
1967 13
1975 -192
185
120
44
189,210
76,90 115,132 171,245 304
125.150,151
166-168,170
204
66,139,254,261
86-102,13 0,131,13 6,180,196
187
113
188
145,177 202 203,242 251
9,318 328,334 361
65
93
81
-614-
SILENCE:
1947 :212-215,226,229.258,265
1951 :110,141,142,143,297,374,375,377,522
1957 :58
1965 7
SIMKIN, J:
1969B:104,144,201 207,241
SIMPLIFICATION:
1947 201,212
1951 -.308,313
SIN:
1947 :150
1951 :514,518
1953 :27
SISYPHUS:
1947 -244
1948 :61
1973 :49
SITUATION-
1946 -.11,13,14,15,18
194 7 17,18,29,30,31,33,37,41,42,43.44,45,68,69,70,71,
7 7,82,88.96,98.99,100,101,102 109,114,125,127,
130,131,137,141 146,150,153,155,156,159,170,174,
175,17 7,17 8,181 185,187,189,199,202,210,214,217,
224 22 5,226,228,231,233,235,238,243,255,257,259,
262-265
1948 :50,51 52,55,61,63,66,67
1951 :19,20,60,61,67,71,72,73,78, 81, 84,85,86,88,90,
109111,121,128-130,132.136,139,148,155,156,170,
171 178-180,184,187,189,191-195,202,209,244,246,
255-257,262,264,265,283,284-286,309,320,325-328,
330-334,336-3 38,341.343-346,355,42 2,42 7,428,430,
431,434,437,472,480,494,501,503.504,506-508,515,
5l9',520-527
1953 :28
1957 59,60
1959 71,72
1965 2.3,5,7
1966A:27.31,33,34.36
1968 -.18,20,21,24 26
1969A-40,56.57.64,65,66, 67, 68-70, 72,74,76,78,124,136,
153,203,247
1975 94,117,120,187,192,193
1978B:53,55 58,59,60,61
SKILL:
1947 243
1968 :24
1969A:81
1973 -.122
1975 :218
1978B:65
SKIN:
1947 :48,64,154 163,167,195
1950 39
-615-
1951 15,43,44,45,64,273,275 399,408,409.448,456,467,
515
SLEEP:
1947 -36,58,71,91,134,138,139,189,203,218,236 250,
258 259,260,261,271
1948 62,63
1951 :110,113 170,171,208,281310,440,491,500,501
1959 72
1966A 33,36
1969A=54,67,75,138,169
SMELL-
1947 53,170,199,205
1951 : 99,104,107 ,110,111,117,244,363,47 7
1978B:64
SMILE:
1947 :244
1951 513
1957 :60
1975 :109,110
SMOKING:
1947 :154
1969A:81,109
1969B:201,219,241,291
SMUTS, J:
1947 :28,29,33,102,104,105
1969B:51
SOCIAL/SOCIETY
1946 8,13,19,20,21,22,23
1947 : 7,19, 38. 39, 54,55,58,61,63,64,71,83,84,87,96,
105 122,128.129,147,149,154,198,206,217,224.
229,266
1948 :45,46,47 48,49,53,66,67
1950 :3^,40,41,42
1951 9,10-11 18,19,40,41,46,47,48,54,75,77,83,99,
101-108,117,152,165,175,184,186,187,190,191.
193,216,231,233,235,236,251,258,263,264,274,
280 283,284,286-289,292,294,295,298,316,319,
320 322 324,325.329,331 339.348-351,356,360,
361'362 I 364-368,370-378, 384, 386-395,400-402,
406 409.410,412,413,415-42 2,425,426,446,448-
450[455,459,463,467,471,480-484,490,502,503,
505',512^524
1953 =28,32,35,36
1957 -55,64.73
1965 1.2,3
1966A:16,25,30,31,32
1968 -20.25
1969A:7,12,32,33,34,59,63,124
1969B:268,270
1973 -26,27,31,34,113,120
1975 :105.109,112
SOCIALIZATION PROCESS:
1951 :43
1975 119
-616-
SOCIALISM:
1947 61,128,145
1951 :354
1969A 17
SOCIOLOGY:
1946 :8
1951 147,274,282,288
1957 55
SOCRATES:
358,359,362 367 ,400,455
1951
1957 :
1966A:
1969A:
1969B:
1973 :
1975 :
SOMATIC:
1946 :
1947
1951
1978A:
SOUL:
1946
1947
1948
1951
1957
1968
1969A
1975
1978A
1978B
SOUNDS -
1947
1951
1969A
1978A
75
63
19
46
76
50
160
5,7
162
235
36:
141 296,383
169
305
174
312
175,229
328,329
6,12
31,32,
33,34
66
19,295
63
25
54.68,81,94
104,120
36,39
52
120,121
413 .508,509
174,255,263
,303,311,431
233
446,456
39
117
:57,
:52
379
58,72
96,169
SOUTH AFRICA:
1946
1947
1953
1966A
1969A
1969B
SPACE
194 7
1948
1951
1978A
SPEECH:
1947
1948
1951
21
81
36
37
49
39
22
48
342
50
213
53
140
289
23
40,42.58,59,.89,132,194,208
369
217.218 233,245,262,263
237,264
141,142.146,157 175 182,219 248,249,274,287
290 316,333,342,349,354,365,372-379-382-385
-617-
438,477,481
1953 -37
1969A:100
1973 150
1978A:41
SPHINCTER:
1947 -248,249,250
1951 191
1969A:251
SPINOZA, B:
1947 72
1948 -48
SPIRIT(UAL):
1946 5
1947 =31.32,83
1957 70
1969A:233
SPITE
1947 .-132,167 220,271
1951 :505
1965 7
1969A:95,230,283
1973 164,165
SPITZER, R S :
1973 :118,119
SPLITS
1946 7,20
1947 -30,32,80 83,91,120,133,146,152.170,220,224
1948 :47 49 65
1951 :10,14,46,67,73,107,121,183,191,193,196,285,287,
288,289,290,304,314,316,341,349,361,369,381,383
395,449,520
1953 :32
1959 71,73
1965 -6
1969A-6,10,11,20,23,95,116,187
1973 :41,125,130,181
1975 :97,104.119,151,162
1978A:36,43,50
1978B:61
SPONTANEOUS/SPONTANEITY:
1946 -7,8,9,10,18.20
1947 -5,8,62,88,89,93. 124,139,172,181.188.224,229,
257
1948 45,47,50,52,53,60,62
1951 =53 ,'55. 66, 69, 80, 84, 85, 87, 89, 93, 94,104,105 -106,
108,114,116,130,134,146,147,164,167,170,171,
186,190.194,203,206,215,216,218,220,221,231.
242,245,262,277,280,282.289.293-295,309,311,
313 322-325,333,334,348,350,355,356,363,366,
371 373 391 392.395,407,409,412.419,430-438,
449'450'452,460-462,469,474-477 479,487,490-
496',499, 501, 503, 506, 511516, 518, 519, 526
-618-
1953 :30.33
1965 -2,5,7
1966A:27 34
1966B:204
1969A:3,21,51,54
1969B:287
1973 =29,49,96,133
1975 108
1978A:38
STABLE (STABILIZATION)
81 135,236
:471
:30.37
71,121 131,234
1947
1951
1953
STAGE:
1947
1951
1957
30,131,245
14.241,349
56 57,65
STAGE-FRIGHT
1947
1951
1957
1966A
1975
STAGNATION:
1951 :15,
1975 :98
STAMMERING:
1947 =151
1951 :249
1969A 134
STANISLAVSKI:
78
165
59
16,26
144,153
16
214,233 262
265,316
1951
STARE:
1947
1951
1978B
STARVE:
1947
1950
1951
STATE:
1946
1947
138
202,257
87 ,89,110
51
313
177,209 96,115,117,125,128,141
39 .40
23 3,309,310,396,401,408,409,490
76.77.103,104.117,129.136,148,149,187,193
198,201 , 209,213,215,221
1948
1951
1957
1959
1966A:21
1969A:69,70
1975 :107,112
1978B
STATEMENTS
11
56
195
245,251 ,255,258,267
60,64,65,67
48, 78,110,186,248,429,476,489
59,60,61
222,226
505
229 230,236
71
61,62
114
-619-
1947 -.124,245
1951 100
1966A:26
1969A-.38 123,138,140,141,234
STATUS QUO:
1946 =20
1947 -6
1948 :58
1951 -42,106,132,159,279,287,407,471
1965 -.3,6
1966A:17.26,34
1967 13
1969A:42,43,48,49,167,171,258
1975 98,192,193
STEIN, G
1969A:133
1969B:5
1973 -208
STEINBECK, J:
1969A:133
STEINFELD:
1973 :107
STEKEL, W:
1947 33 226
1951 :381
STERBA:
1947 :138
STEREOTYPES:
1951 =68,190.276, 277, 369, 373, 376, 377,379,384
STERILE:
1951 365,401
1969A 129
STERILE VOID:
1966A:163,275
1966B:219
STIMULATION
1947 70,200
1951 459.460,461,486,487,488,489,504,510,517
1953 29,30
1975 :101
STOMACH: _
nni
1947 -123,124,126,170,195,197,199,201
1948 :58,64
1951 102,126,230,252
1953 35
STRESS:
1947 -.41,174,209,229
1951 :28 59.66,111,340,341
1973 -93
STRUCTURAL PSYCHOLOGY:
1947 =13,14
STRUCTURE :
1946 12
n nro
1947 -1523,30,172,193,212,223 268
-620-
1948 :63,65
1951 16 67,278.283.284 285,287 292,312,334,336,340,
345,465
1969A 47,63 71 . 77,93 101
1975 102
STUCK
1966A-26
1969A35 42.43,51,52,56 60.66 82,93,94,95,171,172.182,
273 274
1973 :152-157.158
1975 187-189.192
STUPID
1947 111 122,172
1951 =10
1965 -5
1966A:35
1967 11,13
1969A:36,141 273
1975 :93,137
SUBJECT:
194 7 :14,38,39.52,128,140,146,255
1948 48 64
1951 -33 44 46,47,49 51.54,286.288,325,385,454.455,
477
1966A:14
1969A:13,14
1973 195
1978B:50
SUBLIMATION-
1947 66,67,68 70,82 83.97 110 116,117 123,133,181,
206
1950 -41
1951 :329,351,410,484,490 502 503 510 518
1967 :13
SUBMISSION^
1959 72
1965 1 5
1968 23
SUBVOCAL
1951 373,374-379
1978A:41
SUCCESS:
1947 137,153,179,181 187 . 188 , 198 , 213
1951 40,343
SUCK
1947 54,130 134 193
1950 42
1951 .-9,232,233,241,246,349,411
SUFFERING:
1947 -104,114,116,123,160,196,220,222228,237,241,244,
248,257
1950 -41,42,43
nn o n o
1951 =58,102.107,114,192,193 205,259,263,265 297.298,
345,347,36 9.370 410.412-418,421,469,471,490,525
-621-
1965 4
1969A:50
1978B 54
SUICIDE
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1966A
1969A:
1969B:
1978B:
SULLIVAN
1947
1951
1953 :
1969A
1973 :
1978A:43
SUPER-EGO
60,79,247 248,249
394,403
32
16
120
49
233
27
30
8,79
214,
58
, H.S
5
19.195
31
4 185
51 52,60
179,222 ,236
215,233
329.330
1946
1947
1951
1953
1957
1959
1965
1966A
1967
1968
1969A
1973
1975
1978A
SUPPORT
1947
1948
1951
1957
1959
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1968
1969A
1969B
1973
7
27,
16,
31
55
70
5
21
12
23
18 ,
41
114
41
139
452
140,141 145,147.150.218 248
247
42 94
125
218
280
67
7
25
1975
1978A:58
1978B:51
188
45
9,105
62 ,66
70
1 ,3 4
17,18.
220,222
11.12 13
26
30,31 ,35
125 , 126,
268
20,29 ,45,46
141,146,147
93,94,95,97
26,36
.14
.36
138
38 39,41,42,59.63,65,68,70.77
139,141,151,164,167,181,267
114
49,50
196
103
55,77,78,79,90 91,104-115,140
56,58,60-64
-622-
SUPPRESSION-
1946 20
1947 -70 73,75,77
175-179,209
1948 :62
1950 41,43
1951 17,85,89.109,117,118,127,129,130,135,146,152
78,91,96,116,121,150,154,160 166
214,224,225,238,249.2 54,2 58,269
165,166
241,376
494,496
170
393
500
171
402
503
184,185
412-414
504
190
452
191
468
230,231
488,489
235
492
1978A:42
1978B:63
SURFACE-
1947
1950
1951
178
40
18,20,107 ,114
448,451,462
1966A:19
189,199. 204 221,228.230.245
116.273.304 307.310,311,319,419
1968 :18
1975 137
1978A 38
SURPRISE
1947
1951
1959
1969A
1975
SURVIVE
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1966A
1968
1969A
1973
1978A:43
1978B:59
SWALLOW:
1947
153 ,209,236
61 ,91 ,203 ,516
50,
54,
72
240
166
8 10,11
48 87,193
45,46,49.55
66
10
30
27
21
17
8
,11,18
,33
246,401
37,41 42
48.49.51
113,122,123,124 126,133
148,164,165 168,194
1948
1951
1953
1968
1969A
1973
SYMBOLS
1946
1947
1948
154 231,232,240.241,242 245,277,381,428
88
262
46,58
62,98
474,477.478 488,512
35
20
270,273
58,59
:5%4,122 133 148,160,170,177,203,206,212,216,218
240,241,267
:65
-623-
1951 89,
373
31
59,
:71
1953
1957
1959
1966B-213
1969A:70,
1973 12
1975 120
1978A:38
1978B:53
SYMPATHY
283 289.290, 305,306,316 321.345,367.368,369,
,375,378.379 384,385,401,407 503
1947
1948 :
1950
1951 =
1957
1966B:
1969A:
1969B:
1973
SYMPTOMS
1946
1947 :
1948
1950
1951
65 66
72
88,239
15.98,104,188
41 42,43 52
59,60
.159 208
141
54
40
191
56,
222
166
231
105,106,107 ,134
,192,255.367 .386,397
71
11,
5,8
155
209
258
53,
42
9,4
202
351
499
29,
58
37
10
41,
87
98
1953
1957
1966A
1967
1969A
1973
1975
1978A:41
1978B:53
SYNONYMS:
1947 -.117
1948 :57
1951 :192
SYNTAX
1951
SYNTHESIS:
1947 73
1951 441
1967 -11
1969A:59
SYSTEM:
16,18,21
,33,46,61 66,68,70,73,77,81,82,91,96,132,151,
,160,161,165,166,169,172,189,190.193,197 201,
,217,218,22 5,228-230,232,233 235-2 37,247,2 51,
,265 ,266 ,268,270
54,56,59,60 ,63,66
8,105,117.119,124,138,158,164.165,177,197,
,204.206,217,245,281.284,298,330,334,336.
360,362,369,375,383,393 405 458,459,467.
.524
34,35
58,71,108 116,117,132,193,195,252 274
95,123
101 107
54,62,64
,140,187,218
278 329,373,375,379,384,385,484
442,446,447,454,526
-624-
1946 19
1947 195
1951 100,104,326,401
1975 107
"T PEOPLE" AND "N PEOPLE"'
1969A:150
1969B:137 138,259
TABOO:
1947 :18,58,112,119 202,223 226,239
1951 257 263,266,387,389,391
1966A:15
1968 17,18,19,21,22.25
1978B:55,59 60
TALKING
1947 -25,70,74,120,193,194,205,213,215,22 5,264
1951 -10,18,48.50 62,141,142 244,249.320,350.377
1966A:15
1969A:7 22.24.3 7.39 45 , 48 , 50 , 52 , 55 60 62,83,86,89,
90,91,95,99.107,108,111,113,118,119,127,129,
134,137,154,157 166,168,171 237 250.264,267,
268,269,276,294,301
1969B:1 .219
1973 139-143 147-150
1975 :114
1978A:41
1978B.-58
TAO:
1951 :194.295,413
1959 -7l
1969B:13
TASTE:
1946 17,20
194 7 :110,113,114,118,125.127,156,165,170-2,186,190,
192,193,195,197-199,205 214
1951 65,99,104.107,110, 111 .240,241 ,242,244,308,363,
474 477,512
1953 :36
1969A:270
TEACH
1947 52.57 102,203,221 269
1948 -54
1951 :40,41,350,459
1953 35
1957 -54
1969A:40,41,118
1978B-62
TEARS:
1947 151,195.205
1948 -60
1951 193,318
1966A:31
1978B:50,56
TECHNIQUES
1947 6, 8-, 55, 71. 74, 78. 79. 81, 82, 86, 92. 12 5,148,181,185
-625-
186,195,204 205,207 222 229,235,238,263,264,270
1948 55,56,58,60
1951 27 31,49,89,103,107,140,151,17 5,187,202,206,20 7,
2 30,240,262,29 2,296,2 9 8,331,332,342,34 6,348,35 2,
362,367 37 9 ,381,420,427,440,444,446,451,461.463,
483-485,490,494 509,512,52 6
1965 6
1966A:17,27 37
1969A:1,27 54,114 131,232
1973 79,83,84,86-102,108,112,115
1975 137,157,158
1978B 58
TEETH:
1947 108 109 110,113,114,115,117,122 124 130,132,134,
135.148 161,171.193.195 196,198 204.262
1951 62,232 241,243.248,319,363,394,395,467 488,511,
522
1953 33
1966A-.22
TELEOLOGICALLY:
1947 75,88 93,100
1951 =405
TENNYSON, A. (LORD):
1951 192
TENSE
1947 216-219,218,219
1948 61 65
1951 65.81
1959 71
1966A:22,23
1978B:54,59
TENSION
1946 :10 19
1947 19,42,43,45,54,55,56,68,69,70,76,78,79,90,91
117,119,140,156,176,177,179,181,187 192,198,
208,230,231,233,234,236,250,254,255,265
1948 =49,60,62
1950 - 39 40 42
1951 -18'44.49,64,108,110,117-120,122-127,167.170,184
191 201 205 207,208.209,216,221 248,280,281.283
303'309',310, 312. 313, 317. 319, 323 339.343,346,347
351 352 365 390,397,400 402-404,408.409,410,412
416'.44o] 447, 465 ,466 479,488.493,500
1957 =68
1965 3
1966A:16
1969A 50,51,67,108,115,169,177,224
1973 131.133,134,136,138 141,149
1975 189,198
THANATOS (SEE ALSO DEATH INSTINCT):
1946 8,11
1951 403
1978A:43,50
THEOLOGY
-626-
1947
1951 :
1965 =
THEORY
1946
1947 :
1948
1950
1951 :
1957
1959
1966A
1966B
1967
1969A
1969B
1973
1975
1978A
1978B
THERAPY
1946
1947
1948
1951
1953
1957
1959
1965
1966A
1966B
1967
1968
1969A
1969E
1973
21 ,29
303,472
1
6,7,11.12,16,23
5,7,8 13-15,22,27 32,33,36,41,49-51,55,57,72
75.76,81.83.86,88,93,102,112,114 123,126,128.
12 9,139 142,143,159,174,180,185,187,200,208,
218 223,229,231,235,236 259
46 51
41
= 13-16,18,19,47,67.73,89 103,118 122.139.164,
185. 203 204,218,237,238,262,274, 278,286,287,
2 90-2 95,297,298 306,310,314-316,328,329,330,
33 5,342,360,361.36 7,3 70,403-405,408,411,420,
43 5,43 7,43 9,441,442,445-448,450,452,453,455,
482,490,494,497,49 8,502,504,50 7,508,52 4
63,64
69
:17 .31
:204
12
:12,47,57,59,63,129,152,233,257
:31.34,68,114 160,166,170,172,175,201.216,242
:3,11 53,105,123,188 189,196
:96,104
36,37 42 49,50
:52,58,59
7.8 9,11.12 13,21,22
5,6 8 69,132,133 179,183,189.221
-.52,57,59,61
i
}
9,13,14,17,19.20,36,40,41.47,89,90,132,146,147,
155,163,175-178,249,262,274,277,278,281-284,
292,293 295,297,298,312,325,326,329,330-339,
346,347,349,350,353,359-360,362,379-383 386,
399 400 412,420-422,428,432,435,437-439 441-
448.457,458,463,470,481,484 489,490,491,498-
505-509,513,520,521,522,524-527
35 ,36
54 56 57 ,66,67
-71 72
:1,3,6,7
:15,17,18,19,22,26,29.34.35.37
:215
9-14
:17, 21,22,23,24,25 26
.:2,23,28, 31.32,34,39,40, 41.42,43,45 52 53 56
57 58,6067,70,78,79,80 106,120,134,141,151
159,160 217 .223,233
1:190,215,228,267,268,296
: 3,15,16,18,19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 42,43,44,45,46,48
289,
342,
394,
443,
500 ,
>
)
/ n
,49 ,
50-63,65.68-115 127.148,185
1975 94103.105,107,137 148,180 183 ,192,204
-627-
1978A:39
1978B:55,56,60,62.63 65
THINGS:
1966A 19,20
1966B:214
1975 99 147
THINKING/THOUGHTS
1946 7,8,10,11.14,15,16
1947 14 17 18.19,22,25,26.29
91-95,97 114,115,122.123
156 158 171,177,181,193,
212,213,215 216,218,225
1948 45,50 53,57,59 61,65
1951 10,14,19,68 74,77,89,104
129,135,140,141 ,146,195,
259 ,282,283 ,310,313,347,
426 432,442,443.445-447
500,503 .514,522
1953 -30
1957 65,72
1959 71
1966A:14-17,22,30,33
1966B:204
1967 :11
1969A:10.11-24,27,31,37,39.40
70,71,73,79,92,93,95-97
128,130,133.135,169,181
1969B:216,291
1973 1011,12,14,15,20,30-42
138 142,143,150
1975 :99101 102,180
1978A:36,39,40,41,42,47,51,53
THIRST:
1947 -34,110
1951 :308,311,327
THOU:
1951 -374,375,377,378,475,476
1957 :55
1965 :4
1973 131
THOULESS, R-H:
1947 -27
THREAT(EN)
1947 :160,161,199
1951 193,369,387,413,414.510
1953 :32,33
1966A:21
1975 110
1978A:53
THROAT:
1947 151 193,195 233
1951 214 216.248,249 318
TIGHT(EN)-
1947 193,233
31.32,51-3,63,70,82,88,
.125 126,13*6,142,143,
196,197 200,203,206,207
232 241,250
,108,110.114-117,
216,219,234,249,
348,374,375,381,
453,465 .494 497,
.47,50,55,59,62.64,69,
,104.105 110,120,121,
,65.99.102,128,136,137,
,477.481
,518,525
-628-
1951 108
TILLICH, P:
1966A:16
1969A:17
1969B:60
TIRED:
1947 70 168,200,236,250
1969A:169
1978B-50
TIME
1946 :16
1947 -22 26,49 50 89.90-94,95 146,186,188,206-208,262
1948 =48,57
1951 63,65 88,342.369,406
1965 6
1969A:42,49.70 78,81 120,168,170
1978A 40,41
TITCHENER, E.B:
1951 =51
TOLERATE:
1947 120 126,159,170,210,214,239
1948 65
1951 58,90,110,136,185 279,299,338. 490,505
1953 =37
1965 :45
1969A:75,162
TONE
1951 -278,375,377,378,380,385
1966A:15
1966B:224
1969A:235
TOOLS:
1946 :8
1947 38,117,212,213,268
1948 45.47
1951 =40,65,364,365,366 383
1957 -56 66
1965 4
1975 =100,114,218
1978A:43
197 8B-.60
TOPDOG-UNDERDOG:
1946 16
1947 170
1959 72
1965 :5,6.7
1966A:15.21,32,33,37
1968 :23
1969A:18,19 20,82,91,92,228,247,292,294,297,298
1969B:46,47,118,119,157,159,161-4,205-217,255,291,295
1973 :94,125,159 166
1975 108,114,162,192
TOPOLOGICAL:
1948 63,64
-629-
1978A:38
TORTURE:
1947 126,226,241 265
1951 186 515
1965 3 4
1968 -21
1969A:75
TOUCH:
1947 23 155
1951 99 104
1967 10
1969A:21,50,53,54
135. 137 ,139
270 .275 ,299
195 199
102,106
76,80.113.141.193 207
107 111,426,427,428,477 479
56,61.65,68
177 - 178, 193
69,
199
80,83,95
,247,249
114
260
124
269
1973
1975
TRACING
1975
TRAGEDY
1969A
1975
TRAIT-
1947
1951
100
QUEEN
244
109
78
157
384
7
158 233
474,505
254
508
258,262 288,334,348,349.356.370
1965
TRANCE-
1947 193
1948 62
1951 85,87
1965 -6
1966A:33
1969A:133
1975 :180
1978B:51
TRANSACTIONAL
1969B:254
TRANSFERENCE:
201,209,214
94,114 ,134,158,298
134 ,160 265
266,268
ANALYSIS
1946 7
1947 -7,81 88,89,93
232,238,239
48,56,58
123,124 ,125 133,137
153,185,231,
1948
1951
1966A
1967
1969B
1973
TRANSFORM:
1951 =493
1969A:73,
1978A:40
1978B:52,
TRANSITION:
1947 193
74,76,90
18,29 35
10,11, 14
215,218
47,48,56
74
179.266,281283 297 330,336
463,498 525
57,58 59.103,109
54,59
61.62
-630-
1965 -4
TRAUMA(TIC):
1946 21
1947 54 55,95,99 100,103,108,123,169 238
1948 50 52
1951 233,246,345.346,403,466 467
1966A:17 18
1968 :19
1969A:46 137,167,245
1973 31,32,89
1975 147
1978B:61 62
TREATMENT:
1946 :11 .12,17 ,20,21
1947 31,63,69 79 ,124 ,132,161 180.185,197,209 223,230
238 244,247,269,270
1948 52,59,60,62,65,66,67
1951 :49,58,177 185,284,287,292,296,298.332.336,441
1968 17
1969A 132
: 1975 -166,168
! 1978B:61
TRIAL & ERROR:
1947 -191
1951 20.362
TRIALS:
1951 -527
1966A:16
TRUTH:
1947 -88,120,124,146,209,217,234.272
1950 :39
1951 216.291,297,327,374,379.381 383
1957 :71
TRY
1947 :196,214,225
1951 :63,66
1969A:194,268
TURNED ON:
1969A:1 2,79,223
ULCER
1947 :103,109
1951 =102,393
1953 :34
1969A:116
UNAWARE
1950 39,40,41
1951 :360,380.383,39,399.402 408 409,427,441,445,447.
452,455,456 458,462.476-479,481.482,487 489,496,
501,502,510,511,515,516,519,52 4,525
1968 18
1978A:38
UNCONSCIOUS:
1946 8 21
194 7 =7,14,17,27,66.72,75,78,80-84.86,89,91.93,95,102.
-631-
115,119,124,132,138,139 141.157,158,164,171,177,
178,187-189 192,196,201,209.218,220 222,231,234,
236,238,248,258.266
1948 55,61
1951 :15,18,116. 152 .284,286,287,290,293.296,304,30 5.
306,308,352,380,408,410,42 2.492,494,495,497,
499
1953 27
1957 :63
1959 70
1966A:16
1966B:204
1967 10 12
1969A-28,30.57,71
1969B:247,258
1973 10.51,54,55 56,96,121
1975 -98,114
1978A:36-39
1978B:57 .61
UNDERDOG (SEE ALSO TOPDOG):
1959 -.72
1965 5,6,7
1966A:15,21.38
1966B 209
1968 23
1975 162,192
UNDERSTAND(ING):
1947 -28,52,53 57,71,78,115,120 127,141,142,150,186,
191,19 5,205,207,210,212,22 3,224,231,23 7,23 9,
248,271
1951 19 30,31,98,159
1959 71
1965 4,6
1966A:22,37
1969A 27,41,43.44,47.48,53,54,56,61,70,74.75,77,104,
118,120,127,132,140,160,232,251
1975 96,97 100,110 113,118.183
1978B=58
UNFINISHED SITUATIONS:
1946 :9,10 14
1947 66.97 98,165 ,175 176 ,179 , 189 ,190,205,216,237 238
1948 52,53.61.62,63
1950 43
1951 15,16,18.57,109,136.176,211 233.245 247,280,281,
285,308 318,319.323,325-32 7,339,341,343-346,349,
356 374-37 7,380,396 398,403 ,405.412,416,417,428,
43 3.43 5,436,451.453,45 7.459,462,463,466,468,471,
473,481,484,485488 500,501,509,52 5,526
1953 37
1957 -58 59.60,67 69,70
1959 :72
1966A:16,19,27,33.34
1966B:215
1968 18,19,20
-632-
1969A:23,124,159.167 190,254
1969B:65,67,79,92. 93.185. 190
1973 :16
1975 117,126 147
1978A:51
1978B:53,55
UNIFIED FIELD:
1951 -85,87,93
1969A.-28
1973 15
UNIFY-
1947 -212
1948 -.48,49
1951 14,111,116,273,277,278 280,287,441,525
1953 27,28
1959 -69,70,72,73
1965 6
1969A:33,71
1973 87,194
1975 106
1978A:37,48,50
UNIQUE:
1951 :94,95,334,477 ,508
1978A:39
UNITARY:
1946 :7,8,11,21
1948 -46,47 48,49 57
1951 :18, 42,104.105,107 ,115 216,274,27 8,285,287,288,
289 304,305,320.344,440.453,460,466
1978A:42
U-S.A.
1946 =8,11,19,22,23
1947 :65,148
1951 393,400,402
1953 :28,32
1966A:23,24 32
1969A:1,33,34,36,54,64.234
1973 188
UNITY:
1946 :6,20
1947 28,33,144,148213
1951 :74 88,96,97,100,102,127 132,141,146,147,151,152
220,277,281.283,285,286,288,292,304,314,323,359
360,364,366,384,434,436,441,442,445447,448,455
474^475,497,498,526
1957 66
1959 :69,72
1969A:252
1978A:36
UNIVERSE
1966A:29
1969A:13,34,36
1975 :96
-633-
UNPLEASANT (SEE ALSO PLEASANT):
1947 210
1965 -4
1966A:21,22.34
1975 101 102,103
URETHRAL
1947 85.109
1951 191
URGE:
1947 .-140,141,175,231 234,248.249,250,251 253,257
1948 :63
1951 :200,201 203,392,457,458.483,490
URINATE
1947 -34,36,116,175,205,234
1948 :63
1951 190,192,193.203
VACUUM:
1947 -23,134,192
1975 -104,114
VAGINA:
1947 160.161,267
1948 -63
1951 203 247,265
1969A:270,273
1978B-59
VAIHINGER, H:
1969A:50
1969B:4
VAIN/VANITY:
1947 .123,147,271
1951 =491
1975 118
VAN DUSEN, W:
1969A:39
1969B:40 139
VEGETATIVE ENERGY (REICH):
1947 229
1951 :307,332
VERBAL/VOICE:
1946 :10
1947 .-5,25,38,120.143,148,174,176,208.213,214,215,229,
231 ,232,264
1948 46,54,56,59,67
1951 10,43,44,47,51.61,65,90,91 92.95,96,97,109,110,
112-118,122,124,128,135,138,140-143.145-147,169,
178 179 188,195.203,216,237,245,247,248,259,263.
278',279, 289, 31 5, 31 6, 321. 377, 378, 452, 484, 522
1953 30,37
1957 55
1966A:19 20,36
1966B:223 ,224
1969A:28', 34 ] 55, 57, 58. 73, 92, 99. 108,114,122. 126,128,
133 134,142.152,168,169,175,187,232,235,245,
-634-
246,264.266
1969B:219 .220,221
1973 30,60,63 65
130,132 137
117
37,41,44,51
1975
1978A:
VERBIAGE
1969A:47
287,300
222,228,272
75,78,83,86,90,91
157,167,198,202
96,97,99 100,104
52
135,172
1975
VIENNA:
1969B
VIETNAM
1969A
1973
1975
VIRGIL:
1947
VISION:
1947
1948
1951
1957
1969A
1978B
VISUAL
1946
1947
:98 ,100,101
:53,54,55
:241
152
112
:148
202
68
87,107,109,111,114,2 73,308,345,363,382,426,477
:66
:48
-.51
10,14,17
25,26.42,89,91
233,245
1948 :61,68
1951 44,51,52
1969A166
1973 89,90,97,99,109
1978A:47
1978B-65
VITALITY:
1947 :61,
1951 -40
448
1969A:63,66,69,75,116,136
157,166,200-205 213 .214.216,228
85,110, 111,112,118,119,203
121
47,73
480 ,508,526
146 296 306,334,362,376,403,420,422,
1975
VOCAL:
1947
1978A
VOID:
1951
1965
1966A
1969B
1975
VOMIT:
1947
1951
1953
WAGNER,
98
213
41
214
194,416,430,512,525
4
18.20,21,61
294,295
98
75,132
163 ,275
103,113
123,201
35.36
R:
114
203
132,165,170,198,247,252
208,244,245,250,251,395,489
491
-635-
1951 91
WAGNER-JAUREGG
1969B:55
WAKING:
1948 :63
1951 110,453,495,496
1966A:27,28
1969A:159,160
1975 118,180
WANTS:
1947 -34,148,229,260
1951 187
1953 -37
1957 54,56,67
1969A-29.72 79,98,103.104,125,142,143 171 254,268,269
1973 :75 .137 ,148,149
WAR:
1947 7.21,36,60,61,64,66,110,119,122,123,129,144,
176 ,185 ,196,212,269
1951 1120,233,369 393,402,403,417 450
1969A:12234 235
1969B.2,72,73,87.88,122,152,154 155,165 178,179,188,
193,235,269
1975 =112
1978B:55
WASHINGTON SCHOOL-
1948 -61
1951 281.316448
WATSON'S BEHAVIOURISM:
1951 51
WATTS. A:
1969B:222.223,294
WEANING:
1947 :85,86,109
1951 :232,511
WEBER, M:
1951 :392
WEININGER:
1969B:180
WEINLAND:
1947 54
WEISS, P:
1969B:112.113 .237
1973 -.101
WELTANSCHAUUNG:
1946 7 8
1947 -21,32,128
1957 70
1973 =72
1978A:42,50,53
1978B 63
WERTHEIMER, M:
1947 27
1948 50
-636-
1951 :13,304
1969B 61,62
WHAT/WHAT IS
1946 =18
1947 -213,229,250
1951 -18,116,119,278
1966A:37
1969A:17,55,64 76,95,133
1975 -98,101
WHITE, W.A:
1948 49
WHITEHEAD. A-
1978A 36
WHITTAKER
1969B:96
WHOLE(NESS):
1946 12,21
1947 -27 28,29,31.52 56,60,64,72,89.97,100 135,136,
139,143,146 148,151,178.190,201,204,214,218,
232,250 271
1951 14 15,16,19,98,107 111,118,220,231 232,236,241,
273,277,285 286,287,303 306,308,311,315,326 329,
331,335,339,349 355 356 362,366,367,369,380,388,
392,394,405 .406.417,422,425,434,451,452-454,456,
459, 461, 462 464,473, 474,477 47 8,498,508,509,512
1953 35
1957 68,70
1965 :6.7
1967 :11
1969A:9,10,16 53 58,63 71,74,102 115
1969B:8,31 167,293
1973 :3 14,15,16,26,27,33,52,58,73,181
1975 100 104 114,120
WHY-
1947 -20 93,223,229
1951 119,390
1966A:16,37
1969A:46,47.76
1973 :53 70 77,122.168
1975 101
1978B 57
WHYTE, L L
1948 47
1951 21.46
1978A 36
WIENER:
1951 :17
WILL(ING):
1946 20
1947 38 124,125,151,181,200 232 233,260
1948 :45
1951 : 55, 290, 297 314,317,328,340,430,504,52 3
1965 :3
1969A:11 48,56.61,66 70,78 81 93.107,247,273,299
-637-
1975 :94
1978A:37
1978B:53,58
WILL-POWER
1947 -35,84 154 220
1951 106 108
1978A 38
1978B:52
WINTER, J.A:
1951 17
WISE (WISDOM):
1946 :9
1947 126
1951 204,324,328,381,410 418,461 499
1957 :71
1965 7
1966A 31 .36
1969A:71 ,111
WISH(FUL) :
1946 10
1947 :23,44,51,57,66,67,69,70, 80, 87,90,91,97,101,102,
103,110 116,126 136,138,140,143 144,150,155,157
161,166,176,177,179, 183 210 215.220,223,236,237
241,244,246,256,257.259,260,270,272,334
1948 50 62
1951 -58 59.66,67,73,74,90,92,105 114,202,334.346,372
400,403 ,451 492,493,495.496,499-502
1965 6
1966A:27,28
1969A:47,96,103
1973 30
1975 114
WISH FRUSTRATION:
1947 17.59
1953 :33
WISH FULFILLMENT:
1947 17 59.170,240
1951 257 259,310 313
1966B:215
1969A:159,213
1969B:150
1973 :59,60
1975 117,147
WIT:
1947 217
1951 :299
1969A:62.79
1975 111
WITHDRAWAL:
1947 :63 108 134,180
1951 157,297,310,344,421,466
1953 34
1957 69
1966A:35,36
-638-
1967 :14
1969A 23,65,67,68.137,203 248,253
1973 .-21,22,23 24 28,30,56,72.98 100 , 132 133 ,136 , 140 ,
181,196
1975 =96,103,111,187.188
1978B:49,50,51,54,55 57,59,60 61,63,65
WITTGENSTEIN, L
1957 -65
WORDS
1947 25,26,28,29,201,202,207 208,212,214,263
1948 -.46
1951 :65,95 110,375-378,380,381,383,384,385
1957 :66
1969A:57,72,73 107 109,121.128
1978A:36 38,52
WORK-
1946 19
1947 -55,81,96 116 117,121,164 188 . 256 260
1948 :59
1950 42
1951 :20.132.289,295. 368,410,412, 460. 468,475,477,478
484 496
1959 :72
1965 :4
1966A:16,27
1966B-204
1968 18,21 22,25
1969A:40,50.70 75 77,78,79,80,81,85,93,107 130,202,
222 ,239,269 ,299.303,306
1973 73 180
1975 -96,153,180,201
WORLD:
1946 7,13 17,20.23
1947 =39,40.43,46 49,52,53,69,109,117,120.128,134,135,
149,154,156.158,163-166.169,170,175,193.195,196.
19 9,201,202,206,215,217,221 ,231 ,240,241,244,252,
254
1948 :46,48,64,66
1950 39
1951 11 33 42,43,47,99 110,127,265,288,303,306,307,
311 314,317.319 320,322,348,42 5,434,44 5-447,453
1957 :64,66
1959 -70,72,73
1966A:19,20,27,31,33
1969A=5,7,9,23,39,47 50,53,58,60,65,69 74 77,107,108,
126.135,137,253 257,258
259,260
1973 179,180,181,182
1975 -93 101.102,104,105,106.109,110
1978A:47 52
1978B-65
WORRY-
1947 96 133 141 174,175,194,210,260,261
1951 259
-639-
YAWNING
1947 -46 266
1951 170,171
YEATS, W.B:
1951 -462
YIN/YANG-
1959 71,72
YOGA/YOGI-
1947 -.186
1951 :107
1957 :70
1969A:4,233
YOU
1947 145.218 219,230 233 . 234 , 244
1948 60
1951 29,60,67,430,432,460
1966B:210
1969A:4,6 7 . 90 ,254 270
1973 :73,131 135 136,142.145,174
ZEN:
1957 -55,71
1965 -6
1966A:38
1966B:215
1969A:14,44,54.72.159,267,268
1969B:13,59,106,110,112,113,130,222
1975 :180
ZERO POINT:
1947 15,16,18,19,22,26,69,70,72,84,88,90,95,175.177,
180,187 241
1951 72,74 78
1957 69
1959 71
1969A 44
ZONE:
1947 138
1969A:245. 246, 247, 253,258.260
1975 -100

The Derivation of A Psychological Theory - Gestalt Therapy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Derivation of A Psychological Theory - Gestalt Therapy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Derivation of A Psychological Theory - Gestalt Therapy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Wollongong

You might also like