Psychodynamic Psychotherapy and Gestalt Therapy: Similarities
As Yontef and Jacobs (2011) note, initially, it was fairly simple to compare Gestalt to other systems of therapy, largely due to the fact that Gestalt could clearly distinguish itself as the system that upheld existential and humanistic characteristics. Over time, however, the distinction between the fields has become more and more narrow. Following are the similarities between Gestalt boundary differences and psychodynamic defence mechanisms:
Both theoretical approaches mention projection as a defence mechanism or boundary difference that they seek to address. The psychodynamic approach describes projection as “unacceptable impulses or feelings of his own to another person (or agency)” …show more content…
This is largely due to the fact that the Gestalt approach seeks to place the onus of behaviour squarely on the shoulders of the individual, albeit compassionately. Following is an expanded explanation of the root of this difference.
Yontef and Jacobs (2011) note that at the heart of the differences between the two theoretical orientations is a disagreement on the concept of the conscious/unconscious and awareness/unawareness. Freudian conceptualization of the conscious and unconscious does not allow for the fluidity between awareness and unawareness as Gestalt therapy does. Furthermore, in application of both theories, this disagreement becomes more pronounced when defining the role of the therapist and patient. For the psychodynamic approach, the therapist is the “expert,” equipped with highly specific knowledge of the unconscious and armed with psychoanalytical tools at their disposal to discover, extract and interpret the objective truth for their patient. It is thought that “[P]atients’ statements of their feelings, thoughts, beliefs, and wishes were not considered reliable because they were assumed to disguise deeper motivations stemming from the unconscious” (Yontef & Jacobs, 2011, p. …show more content…
As was mentioned earlier, Gestalt therapists so not claim to know more than their patients about their patient's experience, after all, they too are human and are bound by the same relative experience guidelines that their patients are. Thus, it is the therapist’s duty to come to the therapeutic relationship with their own awareness and the knowledge that “people are inclined toward growth and will develop as fully as conditions allow” (Yontef & Jacobs, 2011, p. 353). When faced with what the psychoanalyst would call “resistance” the Gestalt therapist will instead understand that their patient’s perception of the therapy relationship is that it is not yet safe enough for them bring elements of their subjective states into their awareness. As such, attempts by the patient to relate to their therapist's experience will be considered an attempt to connect, and they may be inclined to indulge their patient, rather than a
As Yontef and Jacobs (2011) note, initially, it was fairly simple to compare Gestalt to other systems of therapy, largely due to the fact that Gestalt could clearly distinguish itself as the system that upheld existential and humanistic characteristics. Over time, however, the distinction between the fields has become more and more narrow. Following are the similarities between Gestalt boundary differences and psychodynamic defence mechanisms:
Both theoretical approaches mention projection as a defence mechanism or boundary difference that they seek to address. The psychodynamic approach describes projection as “unacceptable impulses or feelings of his own to another person (or agency)” …show more content…
This is largely due to the fact that the Gestalt approach seeks to place the onus of behaviour squarely on the shoulders of the individual, albeit compassionately. Following is an expanded explanation of the root of this difference.
Yontef and Jacobs (2011) note that at the heart of the differences between the two theoretical orientations is a disagreement on the concept of the conscious/unconscious and awareness/unawareness. Freudian conceptualization of the conscious and unconscious does not allow for the fluidity between awareness and unawareness as Gestalt therapy does. Furthermore, in application of both theories, this disagreement becomes more pronounced when defining the role of the therapist and patient. For the psychodynamic approach, the therapist is the “expert,” equipped with highly specific knowledge of the unconscious and armed with psychoanalytical tools at their disposal to discover, extract and interpret the objective truth for their patient. It is thought that “[P]atients’ statements of their feelings, thoughts, beliefs, and wishes were not considered reliable because they were assumed to disguise deeper motivations stemming from the unconscious” (Yontef & Jacobs, 2011, p. …show more content…
As was mentioned earlier, Gestalt therapists so not claim to know more than their patients about their patient's experience, after all, they too are human and are bound by the same relative experience guidelines that their patients are. Thus, it is the therapist’s duty to come to the therapeutic relationship with their own awareness and the knowledge that “people are inclined toward growth and will develop as fully as conditions allow” (Yontef & Jacobs, 2011, p. 353). When faced with what the psychoanalyst would call “resistance” the Gestalt therapist will instead understand that their patient’s perception of the therapy relationship is that it is not yet safe enough for them bring elements of their subjective states into their awareness. As such, attempts by the patient to relate to their therapist's experience will be considered an attempt to connect, and they may be inclined to indulge their patient, rather than a