1

Published in “Matrix”, No. 2, 2007

(translation Dorte Silver)

FEEDBACK IN GESTALT THERAPY

and in gestalt therapy training

By Hanne Hostrup

The concept of feedback is essential in gestalt therapy due to its theoretical and
methodological basis in existentialist phenomenology and the understanding of self-
regulation in gestalt psychology. A distinction is made here between professional
feedback and the feedback that occurs on an ongoing basis in everyday contact, and
the myths and misunderstandings that exist about giving feedback are outlined and
addressed. The article explains how and why professional feedback must be part of
training in every stage of gestalt therapy education.

Feedback is a concept that contains the essence of what gestalt therapists do in the
therapeutic contact.
That may sound quite simple, and of course it is not; it is in fact a difficult art that
requires extensive and repeated training to benefit our clients.

Feedback is a response to an effect. It is a message from one person to another which

says something about the effect of this other person’s behaviour. Therefore, the
person who receives feedback gains important information from the environment that
he or she is situated in. The feedback expresses how the person affects his or her
environment, and how he or she is perceived in a particular situation in a particular
contact. It is a message that can reveal whether a particular behaviour should be
corrected, reinforced or abandoned altogether to ensure optimum survival conditions in
a particular environment. Thus, feedback is crucial for maintaining psychological and
physical self-regulation.i

WHY IS FEEDBACK SUCH A CRUCIAL CONCEPT IN GESTALT THERAPY?

The crucial role of feedback in gestalt therapy stems from the fact that gestalt therapy
is founded on phenomenological existentialism, gestalt psychology and the
phenomenological method.
This meta-theoretical foundation moors gestalt therapy in a perception of
humanity that does not consider man self-sufficient. For that matter, there is no I,
except in a field (Lewin 1951, Yontef 1993). Consequently, there are no subjective
experiences that are not somehow connected with an object. A truly autonomous inner
psychological function (as described in classic psychoanalysis and as reflected in the
emphasis on free associations) does not exist in gestalt therapy, and
development/growth can only occur as the result of an interaction between the
individual and the world. Individuals are not seen, as they are in behaviourism, as
stimulus-response machines that based on learning reflect the outer world as an
objective world (as reflected in the therapist’s suggestions for changes in thinking and
behaviour). In gestalt therapy, the individual is seen as a dialogic, relational being with
an inherent or innate capacity for making sense of stimuli and for “responding” to
 2

stimuli with his or her own unique “interpretations”. According to gestalt psychology,
which provides the basic understanding of perceptual phenomena, the meaning-
making process unfolds as the automatic organization of input into a pattern where
what is essential – in relation to the person’s needs and experience – is organized as
foreground, while the less important becomes background. With this fundamental view
of man as a relational, forward-looking, actively meaning-seeking being, the mutual
exchange of information with the world becomes essential and indeed a prerequisite
for maintaining psychological and physical self-regulation.
Awareness (unfocused alertness) and (phenomenologically based) dialogue are
therefore the key methods in gestalt therapy, and thus, the therapist must participate,
alertly and with awareness, in the mutual exchange of information that takes place in
the therapeutic contact (Yontef 1993, p.144). To ensure that the dialogue represents
an authentic exchange of information, the therapist must strive to establish a horizontal
relationship as far as this is possible. Contact/dialogue is considered the most
important reality, and the task for the therapist is to point out and highlight what is
going on between the therapist and the client (in a description of immediately
recognizable facts) rather than encouraging the client to turn the gaze “inward”.
The therapeutic goal of gestalt therapy is not change as such but clarity; a goal
which implies that the therapeutic contact should help the client identify with
him/herself as he/she is, for better and for worse.

Thus, gestalt therapy rejects dualism, i.e. the assumption that the individual can be
seen and understood as an entity that is separate from the world. It also rejects social
constructivism, which exclusively sees the individual as a product of the social system
that the individual is situated in. In gestalt therapy the individual is seen as
simultaneously separate and connected, as independent and dependent, i.e., as a
social being as well as a being with his or her own volition and the ability to choose.
This dual position contains an existential dilemma that requires the individual to relate
and participate actively all the time.
Thus, I am not seen as separate from or part of a field but always as someone
affecting and responding within a FIELDii – within a context. This view of the world and
of human psychology permeates the theory and practice of gestalt therapy, and as a
consequence it is only possible to understand other people’s (clients’) reality in
accordance with their own definition (perception) of it.
On this background the concept of contact takes on a central and nuanced role in
the theory and method of gestalt therapy.

FEEDBACK AS A THERAPEUTIC TOOL

Our clients usually come to us because they want to change – or because they want
something or someone in their world to change. As we/the therapists are not part of
the field (the feedback system) that created the client’s desire for change we cannot
fulfil their wishes directly. All we can do is take an interest in their experience of reality
and respond to what we are hearing and seeing in the therapeutic meeting. And this is
where professional feedback comes in as our most important therapeutic tool.
In the therapeutic meeting the client experiences herself in a different relationship
than the one that led to her desire for change. The client is simply positioned in a
different phenomenological field or feedback system. She has moved physically out of
her customary field and into a new one, but she probably continues to behave as
though she were still in the relationship or environment that generated the problem.
 3

When the therapist is able to tell the client, simply and clearly, how she has heard,
seen and experienced the client’s words and behaviour, the client receives new
information about herself. She simply experiences how she also comes across, i.e.,
who she also is.
That is why it is so important for the therapist not to help the client change in
accordance with the desire she originally presented. If the therapist did this, she would
become part of a project that belongs in a different feedback system, which, sooner or
later, would reveal the therapist as false. In gestalt therapy the therapist’s only task is
to experience and respond to the client as she is or comes across here and now.

To achieve this, the therapist must direct her attention both at her own phenomenology
(figure/ground gestalt formation), which appears as experience/response, and at the
client’s phenomenology, which appears in nonverbal behaviour and stories about her
experiences. This requires respect for and attention to the issues of separateness and
difference. It also requires a capacity for “bracketing”, i.e. the ability to set one’s own
prejudices, hypotheses, assessments, analyses etc. aside in order to be able to offer a
phenomenological response to what is happening in the contact. It also requires the
ability to select the relevant response among the many, many different possible
“replies” that arise in the therapist.

As a horizontal relationship is the condition for a truly reciprocal interaction, the gestalt
therapist refuses to assume a “top dog”iii position; that is, she refuses to tell the client
how to be, or how the people in her world should be. The therapist “merely” tells the
client about the effect (with regard to emotions, thoughts and bodily sensations) that
the client’s behaviour has on her. This is precisely what constitutes the therapeutically
active element, as the therapist’s responses become a new “piece in the puzzle” of the
self-image that the client started out with at the beginning of therapy. When new
“pieces” are added to a gestalt, the automatic effect is a reorganization of the entire
gestalt.iv The client’s self-image is shaken out its customary pattern, and a new gestalt
is formed. In a sense, the gestalt therapist does the opposite of what the client
expects, as the therapist does not want to change the client but “merely” seeks to
register, accept and respond to her as she comes across in the therapeutic meeting.
This encourages the client to edit or expand her self-image – to be more of herself
(authentic), which can be experienced like a surprising and important change.

However, the condition for this process to be effective is that the therapist is able to
give and receive feedback in a way that respects the boundary between I-YOU without
polluting the relationship with contact disturbances.

PROFESSIONAL FEEDBACK

All living beings automatically give and receive feedback constantly. Professional
feedback, however, cannot be automatic.
The story the therapist tells the client and the way it is delivered is what
constitutes feedback. It is dialogic in nature, as it reveals as much information about
the person providing the feedback as it does about the person receiving it.
The meeting between therapist and client therefore contains the potential for what
Daniel Stern calls “A process of mutual regulation”.
 4

Feedback in therapy is testimony to the client’s work and thus reinforces the
impression of what is happening and underscores the meaning of the relationship.
(“When I experience what you do and are, I am affected/changed.”)
There lies a message both in the content of the feedback and in the way it is delivered.
Therefore, it is crucial to ensure consistency between the therapist’s personal
authenticity and her professional knowledge and discipline. In brief, this can be defined
as a requirement that feedback must be given in a personal, clear, phenomenological
and clinically useful way.
Personal means that the therapist manages to remain true to her own everyday
manner and demeanour (her style). This means that she cannot assume some
therapist’s facade that hides her way of being.
Clear means that the therapist conveys to the client what arose in her here and
now – without polluting her messages with some sort of boudary fusion.
Naturally, any normal contact involves the transfer of experience from a previous
situation to a current one. But if the therapist transfers experiences from a previous
relationship, without correcting for the current time and place, and from a contact that
was characterized by contact disturbances (e.g. projection, deflection, confluence,
retroflection, introjection) the contact becomes unclear.
Phenomenological means that the therapist keeps her messages purely
descriptive. The messages are simply descriptions of the therapist’s responses in
relation to the sensory experiences that the therapist registered and which caused the
responses. If the feedback is polluted by explanations, hypotheses, consolation,
advice, new questions, causal analysis, assessment or self-centred sentimentality, the
attention is shifted away from the client’s efforts to the therapist’s own inner processes,
which is not the purpose of feedback. The therapist is not neutral when she shares her
observations and responses with the client in a sincere manner. However, she also
does not claim to be able to sum up the client. This highlights the boundary between I
and YOU as well as their mutual bond – and thus our responsibility for what we as
humans do and are.
Clinically useful means that the feedback is offered with understanding and with a
sense of the workings of the client’s self-support system, i.e. in a way where the
messages that the therapist chooses to share with this particular client can be received
and help bring about a clarity that helps the client with herself.
This requires a phenomenological diagnostic professionalism that uses feedback
to promote growth and development without offending the client’s (sense of) self or
underestimating the client’s capacity for learning but instead coordinating it to match
the client’s psychological potential.
Professional feedback supports and facilitates the development of the client’s self
(and the therapist’s), as it underscores and accepts WHAT IS, as it is. Professional
feedback helps the client (and the therapist) find the ability/willingness/courage to be
what she is. In gestalt therapy this insight is considered the prerequisite of
development, a point that has been articulated by Arnold Beisser as “the paradoxical
theory of change”.v

RESISTANCE

If the therapist fails, the client will respond with resistance. In gestalt therapy resistance
is understood as the client’s way of protecting herself from abuse. Thus, resistance is
not a sign of the client’s unwillingness to develop but instead a form of feedback for the
 5

therapist; a message that the therapist made a mistake by doing or saying someone
that failed to fully consider the client’s self-support.
Resistance is an invitation to examine what it was the therapist did that the client
could not abide. When resistance occurs it is, therefore, a welcome opportunity for
both the client and the therapist to develop greater “awareness”.
This aspect of therapy requires considerable therapeutic skill and tact, and in
particular, the therapist must remain aware of her own narcissistic tendencies, so that
the process does not turn into a devaluation of the client (you’re no good) or of the
therapist (I’m no good). In some cases, however, resistance can be a hidden message
that the client may wish to undergo therapy but is unwilling to discover anything. She
wants to be heard, be met with compassion and feel validated. In brief: The client
demands a feedback that coincides with her own self-image. This is of course
necessary in the early stages of therapy (especially in relation to a client with a
personality disorder) in order to establish a relationship of trust between client and
therapist. But if the process ends there, the therapist has to examine and assess
whether the client in fact has the capacity and the willingness to discover and learn. If
that is not the case, therapy will be a waste of time (and money), and it is then the
therapist’s responsibility to suggest a different treatment approach and, in any case, to
terminate the therapy.

II
FEEDBACK IN TRAINING

I have often come across fully trained gestalt therapists who feel insecure about the
true nature and purpose of feedback.
The only explanation I can think of for this confusion is that the activity of giving
feedback does not occupy the key position in training that in my opinion it should.
In the following, therefore, I will briefly outline how feedback training is carried
out. Obviously, gestalt therapy can only be learned and practiced within the framework
of an experientially oriented approach.

Most gestalt training programmes last 3-4 years and can be divided into three stages
that overlap and interact. Part one consists of own therapy in the training group; here
the student undergoes individual therapy in a group with the trainer as a therapist. This
part of the training does not require any form of theoretical or therapeutic skill or
knowledge from the students. Here, the emphasis is on giving the student insight into
his or her own contact competence, contact disturbances, etc. In part two of the
training the student gets an opportunity to work in triads, i.e. the student works with two
other students, taking turns to “play” the therapist, the supervisor and the client and
sharing and discussing the difficulties and discoveries that they make in the process.
The trainer pays close attention to this activity, and afterwards the students “report”. In
part three of the training programme the student works as a therapist for a model
client, i.e. an outside person who agrees to be a client, and who is not part of the
training programme. This takes place with direct supervision from the trainer and with
the group members as observers who afterward offer feedback to the client and to the
therapist and supervisor.

In all three stages, feedback is an essential skill that has to be trained. This
incorporates and clarifies both the individual student’s process and the group
processes and makes it impossible for the student to hide under a passive
 6

“knowledgeable” mask. Throughout the training process there are theoretical

discussions in the group and brief lectures by both the trainer and the students.
Throughout the training process students can also ask for individual therapy in the
training group with the trainer as the therapist – however, toward the end of the training
this will mostly revolve around problems that the students experience in the group in
their role as group members, therapist or supervisor. Some training programmes
require a certain number of sessions of own therapy with a gestalt therapist who is
independent from the training programme.

Training therapy should not be confused with “real” individual therapy, as it has a
different purpose. Both types of therapy focus on developing awarenessvi, but in
training therapy this includes the development of the student’s professional/therapeutic
skills, as the student’s knowledge of him/herself, his/her resources and limitations,
blind spots etc. are associated with the client-therapist relationship. Another purpose of
training therapy is to have the student experience the role of client first-hand, and thus
it emphasizes both the equality of therapist and client and the difference in terms of
roles and tasks as well as the distinction between the therapist’s own material and the
client’s material.

The therapeutic “craft”, however, cannot be learned from the client’s position alone.
Therefore, the student is not only active as a “client” but also an observer and a group
member. From these two positions the student can relate to the therapy on different
levels. As already mentioned, later in the training the student is also allowed to act as a
“student therapist” under direct supervision (practice therapy).

TRAINING IN PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL FEEDBACK

When a group member has worked with own therapy in the group there is an
opportunity to offer the “client” feedback. Students who felt stimulated by the session
can now tell the “client” about the impression that it had on them.
Here, the students are supposed to learn to express themselves in a way that
facilitates the client’s self-discovery (or points out the lack of self-discovery). This
requires feedback that is given in a personal, clear, phenomenological and clinically
useful manner (see the description page 4).
When the student fails to achieve this – and that is often the case in the early
stages of training – the trainer must help the student understand why and how. The
trainer does this by intervening in a variety of ways, either during the process or
afterwards. The purpose is both to protect the “client” from being harmed and to give
the student an opportunity to address any contact disturbances or lack of theoretical
insight.
Some students are profoundly interested in learning and hence perceive the
trainer’s intervention as a welcome opportunity to develop their therapeutic
competence. Others have difficulty accepting correction and invariably perceive it as a
(narcissistic) transgression.

This aspect of the training demands a great deal of the trainer. He needs all his
therapeutic and educational competence to help the student become aware of his/her
contact disturbance or lack of diagnostic understanding. Besides, the trainer must be
able to control his own narcissistic tendencies to avoid offering correction in a way that
devalues the student. In some cases, however, the trainer has to realize that a very
 7

touchy student does not belong in the training group. A responsible trainer will take the
consequence of his own flawed assessment and ask the student to either do that year
over, get more own therapy or leave the training programme altogether.

Giving feedback in a training group trains the most important therapeutic skill there is:
giving the client back to herself in a form that helps her discover how she comes
across once she has been “digested” by a YOU.

It is very difficult to fully master this discipline, as in our culture we are used to fixing
problems. Shortcomings and insecurity should be transformed into competence and
confidence. Suffering should be alleviated or encountered with consolation and
compassion. In gestalt therapy, however, the goal is not problem solving, consolation
or change. The goal is clarity. And the process that leads to clarity is discovery on
various levels of experience. Professional feedback is the therapist’s way of telling the
client that she has been seen and heard the way she is. Many clients have no idea,
after all, that everybody has to be what they are – that it is in fact impossible to be
anything else. They have often learned the opposite: being who others want them to
be.

The student should learn to provide professional feedback to clarify the

phenomenology of the contact disturbances and the way in which they occur, thus
clarifying the important existentialist message: that no one can free of guilt and
responsibility, since we always affect one anothervii.

MYTHS AND MISCONCEPTIONS

Unfortunately, many strange notions and ideas have developed about feedback. This
is undoubtedly due to earlier incarnations of gestalt therapy, which were a mix of
cultural rebellion against any form of structure and authority and the atheoretical
American “therapy import” in the 1970s.
Some gestalt circles seem to construe feedback as a matter of being “nice” to the
client. Other environments take pride in delivering the “cruel truth” served straight up,
without any sweeteners. Some, in turn, think that feedback should contain a lecture or
an assessment of the client or that it should serve as the basis for a discussion with
the client. These are all misconceptions.
The tricky part is that there is no simple recipe for offering feedback, because
feedback is the function of an experience here and now and thus always unique.
However, the presentation of the experience should always be phenomenological and
stay within the gestalt therapy framework – in theory as well as practice.

Example of professional feedback:

“I was going out of my mind seeing how you struggled so stubbornly to solve the
problem that you told again and again that you cannot solve. It was an amazing
moment when you discovered the true nature of the situation – and took it in. You
practically seemed to melt. Your face and your body suddenly relaxed, and I was so
happy for you and became quite calm myself. Your work reminds me how I sometimes
struggle in vain myself to maintain control over something that I really can’t control.”

Example of unprofessional feedback:

 8

“I was very affected by your work, because I have experienced the same problem in
my relationship with my parents. They’re completely disrespectful and lecture me
constantly and tell me what to do, like I’m still a little girl. They ... (here follows a long
story about what they do). And for far too long I have tried to put up with it – as you
have – in order to maintain good relations with them, but fortunately I finally realized
that I couldn’t stand them. It has been so painful for me (crying), but I have solved the
problem by cutting off contact with them. I really hope for you that you can break free
as well.”

Bad feedback is far too often an opportunity to share one’s own feelings and problems.
It may look like an attempt at telling the client that she has an effect on others, but the
attempt fails because it is self-centred and thus fails to facilitate the client’s self-
support. At its worst, this sort of feedback turns to self-promotion and manipulation and
carries the message, “You will never be really happy until you do what I did.”
This is a mistake that should be pointed out because it prevents the student from
becoming a competent gestalt therapist.

FEEDBACK FOR THE THERAPIST

In training groups the students also give the trainer feedback on his work as a
therapist. This promotes a learning that is at least as important as learning to give the
“client” feedback, as it confronts the student’s ability (or inability) to deal
phenomenologically with what the therapist did without losing the professional angle
and without selling out on authenticity, courage, integrity or sincerity. It is a demanding
process, because it involves giving feedback to an authority figure, and the student
may rightly worry that the trainer will be angry, hurt, happy, flattered or critical in
response to what the student says. The trainer is not just anybody; he is someone who
is ultimately involved in assessing the student’s competence.
It is also challenging for the trainer to receive feedback from his students. He has
to be prepared to hear their responses, positive as well as negative, and he has to take
what he hears under serious consideration. He has to be able to “swallow” critical and
perhaps unfair feedback “raw” without rejecting the bits that he cannot “stomach” and
“spitting them out” in the student’s face. This part of the training confronts narcissistic
tendencies both in students and the trainer, and it is therefore perhaps the most
demanding part of the training.

THE THERAPEUTIC LANGUAGE

However, it is not enough to be able to provide phenomenological and clinically precise

feedback. It is at least as important to provide feedback in straightforward and down-
to-earth everyday terms. Clichés and jargon have no room in therapy.
In theoretical discussions between fellow professionals, of course, a certain
professional terminology may be quite appropriate. But in therapy any form of jargon or
other form of linguistic exclusivity serve only to undermine the gestalt therapy project
because it introduces alienating elementsviii into the therapeutic meeting. Many
therapists have adopted a “psychotherapy lingo” that seems self-important and
pompous. Apparently they do not care whether they are talking to a colleague or a
client. What is even worse is when the professional terminology is distorted into
pseudo psycho-babble. Examples of this practice include expressions such as, “You
are unable to contain me”, “You have to own it,” “I have come into contact with,” “I hear
 9

you saying that,” etc., etc. By now there is a whole host of peculiar phrases that are
used instead of everyday language. Unfortunately, gestalt therapists too have adopted
this strange language and use it to gain entry to a therapeutic subculture where these
strange linguistic quirks are in vogue.
In training, any form of psycho-babble must be rooted out because it repels so
many people or makes them feel inferior. A good gestalt therapist should of course use
everyday language like a fellow human being, not some sort of therapy jargon.

CREATIVITY AND FEEDBACK

Once there was an attempt to teach doctors to communicate better with their patients
by means of what was sarcastically referred to as “parroting”. It was a pathetic attempt
at teaching the general practitioners to offer phenomenological feedback. The trick was
simply to repeat what the patient had just said: “I hear you saying that you are upset
because your wife has left you,” etc. Presumably, patients would feel that they were
being heard, and they would benefit from hearing their own statements. The intentions
were good, but the outcome was bad. The patient found it somewhat disorienting to
simply be quoted. The method has little in common with phenomenological feedback,
as it lacks the other person’s personal “digestion” of what was heard and seen. The
creative aspect of the feedback is completely absent in parroting.
Phenomenological feedback is the result of a process where one person is
affected by another person, and where this effect kicks off a gestalt formation process
where the less relevant aspects (to the person providing the feedback) become
background, while the essential aspects are the foreground. This puts the trainer’s
creativity to the test, as he has to be able to offer a “live” demonstration of the
effectiveness of allowing the gestalt formation process to lead to creative elements that
are known as condensations (or metaphors). What is so particularly effective about
condensations is that they offer a brief and clear summary of a complicated story,
condensed into one powerful image. This is a creative process that unfolds in the
therapist and is then shared with the client.

Example:
“You keep saying that you can’t solve the problem but also that you have to solve the problem. You
can’t – yet you must! To me it sounds as if you are being your own tyrant. I’m beginning to understand
why you are confused – and why you are suffering.”

The phrase “your own tyrant” creates a powerful image of the dilemma where two opposing forces:
control/power and powerlessness/oppression are at war with each other in one and the same person,
making action impossible (a process that is typically expressed as ambivalence).

The creative condensations make up the “gems” in the professional feedback, because
they make the vague crystal-clear without altering it.

CONCLUSION

There are many factors to consider in learning how to provide feedback. Of course,
many students complain that it is such a difficult skill (“... and now I don’t know if I have
the nerve to say anything at all”).
Of course it is hard to learn a new discipline, and it takes time to make it one’s
own natural process. Therefore it is also an illusion to think that the student will master
this skill after completing the training. However, it must be a minimum requirement of
 10

the trainer and the training institution that the students have been told and have
experienced what good professional feedback is about, and why it is so essential, and
that they have had the opportunity to practice it under supervision.

Hanne Hostrup
November, 2006

REFERENCES

Beisser, Arnold. The Paradoxical Theory of Change (p. 87), The Gestalt Journal,
Number 2, Fall 2001
Buber, Martin. Jeg og Du. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag, 1997
Hostrup, Hanne. Gestalt Therapy, Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press 2010
Husserl, Edmund. Fænomenologiens idé. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels forlag, 1997
Sartre, Jean-Paul. Eksistentialisme er en humanisme. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels
Forlag, 1997
Stern, Daniel, Non-Interpretive Mechanisms in Psychoanalytic Therapy (p. 37),
International Gestalt Journal, Volume 25, Number 1 - 2002
Wertheimer, Max. Laws of organisation in perceptual form. In: Ellis, W. (ed.). A source
Book of Gestalt Psychology. New York: The Gestalt Journal Press, 1997
Yontef, Gary. The Relational Attitude in Gestalt Therapy (p. 15), International Gestalt
Journal, Volume 25, Number 1, 2002
Yontef, Gary. Awareness, Dialog & Process. New York: The Gestalt Journal Press,
1993

TERMINOLOGY
i
Self-regulation: a process that ensures our survival as needs and varying situations are automatically
and mutually adjusted to maintain a sort of physical and psychological equilibrium. Gestalt psychologists
have documented how this process takes place by virtue of an innate, automatic process where gestalts
are formed as figure/ground.
ii
Field: is understood here as psychologist Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) described it in his field theory, that is,
as the physical/psychological mutual context that we as humans enter into.
iii
Top dog: an expression used by Fritz Perls (1893-1970) about someone who behaves
dominantly/oppressively in a relationship, while the other assumes the role as “under dog”.
iv
Reorganization of the gestalt: the process that occurs when a person acquires new meaningful
experience(s). As a consequence, old experiences, habits and fixed ideas that until then had been
organized in a particular pattern/gestalt, governing the automatic response patterns, are broken up and
reorganized into a new pattern. This in turn generates new response patterns.
v
The paradoxical theory of change was articulated by Arnold Beisser in 1970 and is contained in the
sentence, “When you become who you are – you change" (see the reference list).
vi
Awareness: In gestalt therapy awareness refers to a state of alertness, a form of unfocused attention
that makes it possible, at any time, to notice and focus on inner/outer phenomena that have an impact
on self-regulation.
vii
The existentialist understanding of guilt and responsibility: differs from what one might call actual guilt
and neurotic guilt. The existential understanding of guilt is a given aspect of existence, since as living
 11

human beings we cannot avoid having an effect on others. This means that we have to assume
responsibility for our being/actions. Existential guilt may cause existential angst because it reminds us
that we are connected and responsible for ourselves and others, which is a condition of life.
viii
Alienation: means that certain factors can make a person feel anonymous – out of touch with their
social reality. It leads to a sense of being a non-self. A phenomenon that has been described in
particular by Jean Paul Sartre and Albert Camus.