Psychologist And His Trauma. Who Is Studying Psychology And Why - Self-development, Society

Some psychologists are not averse to joking about the fact that they once went to study to solve their own psychological problems. But here's the trouble: this joke, once launched by someone very funny, has recently begun to be taken seriously

Myth as it is

Some potential clients of psychologists have recently begun to completely purposefully study the life path of their therapists in order to "make sure" of their "professionalism". Sincerely believing that divorce is better understood by the one who divorced, and more than once, and in the fight against depression, only the one who once coped with it will help. We asked systems psychologist Boris Novobozhkin to comment on the viability of the hypothesis that modern psychologists turn to the comprehension of this science only to solve their own problems.

Give it to all psychologists

By certificate.

Yes, the seal so that

it would be round It would be right on the forehead.

For Perls to be jealous, For Freud to strain, For Rogers to nervously

Smoke in the corner.

Boris Novozhderkin

“It is quite obvious that this is a myth, once invented by someone - and, perhaps, solely because of the beauty of the metaphor,” he believes, “for the sake of a catchphrase, as they used to say. Well, you must admit, this sounds cool: psychologists themselves are crazy, they study in order to cure themselves. In fact, I have very rarely encountered such a phenomenon. But I can guess why this myth turned out to be so tenacious."

Second higher

“Many psychologists receive this specialization after their basic education - as a second higher or additional. I was lucky, I got carried away with psychology quite early - when, in the last grades of school, I read the book by Yakov Kolominsky “Man Among People”. This became my incentive to go to the psychology department of Moscow State University. But I still think that this is a great luck - my "hit" in the direction of future work on a vocation.

For the most part, we are not aware of our interests and needs while we study at school and choose a university for admission. All this happens at the instigation of parents or at the behest of society. I understood this perfectly well when I taught at the Natalya Nesterova Moscow Academy of Education, where I taught psychology for students in both day and evening departments. You can’t even imagine how much more the “evening parties” returned, while the “diaries” treated knowledge very superficially.

Be that as it may, we see now that psychology is more likely a second education or courses, certificates, trainings, etc. That is, it seems that people turn to this training much later, which quite "fits" with the idea, as if this knowledge is needed to combat some new problem."

Eternal learning

“Today we see more and more psychologists who literally“collect”certificates. But this is not their fault. The fact is that in conditions of great competition, when the overproduction of psychologists is clearly visible on the market, some specialists have occupied another niche - the niche of education for psychologists.

In the field of psychology, network financial pyramids are being built, where certificates play the role of some kind of “internal money”

A novice psychologist or an amateur who is interested in a topic comes to courses, masters step by step, then he himself becomes a teacher, in parallel going through the imposed hours of individual therapy. And so on and so forth. As a result, few students become independent therapists. The system is closed to itself. Inside it, it is proposed to learn more and more, thereby cultivating the idea that a person is not ready for independent work. As a result, instead of psychotherapy, we get an imitation of it.

It turns out that the one who gets hooked is invested in training, which leads to nothing, except for the development of their own complexes. And here it is - the psychologist heals his own problems

The trouble with this kind of training (in addition to the obvious sectarian flavor) is that a certain level of psychological knowledge is at the forefront, and not the real ability of a specialist to save the client from problems."

Personal growth

“In 1990 I went to one of my first educational intensives on gestalt therapy in Germany and was amazed at one seemingly simple thing. It turned out that not all of those present were psychologists. And many were trained not at all because of certificates and the need to confirm their professional status. There were people of various professions who participated in the gestalt intensive simply out of their personal interest in psychology and for the sake of gaining new experience.

For the West, this is a completely normal practice, but in the Russian Federation it never took root. The first groups of personal growth also started out as a reasonable and worthy undertaking, but then they also slipped into primitive sectarianism. A stereotype has developed in society that bored ladies have become interested in psychology, whose “personal growth” is “sponsored” by their husbands or partners. As a result, everything again came down to the idea that teaching psychology is about solving personal problems."

Don't underestimate

“Meanwhile, improvement and development is one of the key points in psychology. After all, the task of any psychologist is to solve the client's problem. And it can be solved, including by realizing its place in human life. Of course, there is classical psychology, which implies only the presence of a norm and, in contrast, the presence of pathology. But already Maslow draws us a pyramid of needs, thereby adding a plus scale to zero and minus. And now humanistic psychology and psychotherapy consider the psychological state of the patient in continuous movement and development.

Consequently, the effectiveness of psychotherapy can be considered not only within the framework of medicine (within the framework of norm and pathology), but also outside of it

It is difficult, of course, to assess the therapist's contribution to the client's condition, if not based on the concepts of norm and pathology. But the obvious advantages of a dynamic approach cannot be ruled out either. The client's tasks are solved faster if you see the problem not by itself, but in combination with all the circumstances. If you see the emotional state of the client in dynamics. If you do not try to strike exclusively at the problem, but strive, for example, to get around it (figuratively speaking).

If the boundaries are widened, it is not necessary to go directly. If you need help, you don't have to re-injure. If you don't look at one point, you can find more solutions

I would give an example here with a karateka. After all, what helps him break a board or brick with a kick? Only that it represents the object of impact further than it actually is. This allows you to "deceive" the reflex, which at the moment of approaching danger makes the leg numb and pulled back. And if you imagine the object further, then the fear of pain and reflexive inhibition does not work - and everything works out.

Psychology works the same way. I myself am a proponent of the problem-oriented approach. My job is to solve customer problems. And from my own experience, I know that if the solution to a problem is built into the overall development of a person, everything falls into place in the coordinate system.

For this reason, I urge everyone not to underestimate the importance of personal development and self-education. But also do not confuse numerous courses, personal development with professional education, on the one hand, and “collecting certificates”, on the other. These are all completely different things. "

Recorded by Ekaterina Alipova