In treatment, there is a delicate balance between the technical and the human. On the one hand, there is the “technical”, the “way in which the treatment is supposed to take place”. The “technical” is embodied in laws (e.g., the command not to have a relationship with the patient outside of therapy), traditions (e.g., emphasizing the unconscious part of therapy), and methods of action (e.g., transfer analysis). On the other hand, there is the “human”, the “spontaneous move in which the treatment is supposed to move.” The “human” is derived, in fact, for the simple reason that although “therapeutic connection” is “therapeutic”, before it is such it is “connection”, and connection to the world is loaded with “human”. For the most part, there is a fit between the “technical” and the “human” (i.e., to be “technical” is also to be “human”); But – not always. Irwin Hoffman, in a 1993 article on “dialectical thinking and therapeutic action,” describes the tension between the “technical” and the “human” as a tension between traditional rituals and personal spontaneity. Referring to the height at which tensions arose between the “technical” and the “human,” he writes: “I began to wonder to what extent a sense of deviation from tradition or from what seems” more psychoanalytically correct “is important and perhaps even crucial, in therapeutic action.” The same “deviation from tradition” (the same tradition that teaches the therapist to be impersonal, neutral, and distant), Hoffman calls “throwing the book.” In “throwing the book,” the therapist breaks the classic claim to be “technical.” And discovers himself, within the treatment, as a person. The
exact position, between the “technical” and the “human”, is complex. In some ways, it is this position that makes the “therapist” a “master therapist”. As we mentioned in our first conversation (” To change from a therapist to a master-therapist “) This requires deliberate practice, that is, a deliberate and systematic practice. This allows the therapist to identify those” areas “in which he needs to improve and perfect. For this purpose, the therapist is obliged to evaluate Our second conversation (“Measuring means managing”) dealt with the importance of evaluation and measurement, an action at the end of which the therapist can extract the characteristics of his therapeutic action. The tool, which continuously analyzes the conduct of the therapeutic hour, uses two questions to examine its “running” sections: who is the section talking about (patient / therapist / dyad), and p. What does the section talk about (experience content / relationship between experience content / experience potential). While studying the sequence, the tool allows the therapist to pinpoint, and refine, his therapeutic action. The fourth and fifth conversations dealt with the unique “areas” in the Matrix. The fourth conversation (“the dyad – an accelerator of relationships”) was about the dyad, the same connection between the patient and the therapist, a connection that at the time belonged to the two components of it; The fifth conversation (“The potential – from the series to growth”) was about potential. The sixth conversation (“breaking and repairing”) examined how fragments of matrix sequences constitute therapeutic movement, and in fact – in them lies the healing ability of therapy.
We invite you to experience the Matrix, learn from it the art of refraction and repair in therapy, to touch through it potential and dyad, to know through it the breadth of psychotherapy, to evaluate through it the therapeutic action, and finally – to become from therapist to master therapist.
