A major aspect of intellectual and cultural life in the twentieth century has been the study of psychology – present, of course, for many centuries in practical form and expression in the wisdom and insight to be found in spirituality, in literature and in the dramatic arts, as well as in arts of healing and guidance, in both the East and West.

In parallel with the deepening interest in the inner processes of character and relationships in the novel and theatre in the nineteenth century, psychiatry reformulated its understanding of the human
mind, and encouraged, in those brave enough to challenge the myths of mental illness, new methods of exploration of psychological processes.

The twentieth century witnessed, especially in its latter half, an explosion of interest both in theories about personality, psychological development, cognition and behaviour, and in the practice of therapy, or perhaps more accurately the therapies. It also saw, as is not uncommon in any intellectual discipline, battles between theories and therapists of different persuasions, particularly between psychoanalysis and behavioural psychology, and each in turn with humanistic and transpersonal therapies, as well as within the major schools themselves. If such arguments are not surprising, and indeed objectively can be seen as healthy – potentially promoting greater precision in research, alternative approaches to apparently intractable problems and deeper understanding of the wellsprings of human thought, emotion and behaviour – it is none the less disturbing that for many decades there was such a degree of sniping and entrenchment of positions from therapists who should have been able to look more closely at their own responses and rivalries. It is as if diplomats had ignored their skills and knowledge and resorted in their dealings with each other to gun slinging.

The psychotherapeutic enterprise has also been an international one. There were a large number of centres of innovation, even at the beginning: Paris, Moscow, Vienna, Berlin, Zurich, London, Boston,and soon Edinburgh, Rome, New York, Chicago and California,saw the development of different theories and therapeutic practice.

Geographical location has added to the richness of the discipline,particularly identifying cultural and social differences, and widening the psychological debate to include, at least in some instances,
sociological and political dimensions.

The question has to be asked, given the separate developments due to location, research interests, personal differences and splits between and within traditions, whether what has sometimes been called ‘psycho-babble’ is indeed a welter of different languages describing the same phenomena through the jargon and theorizing of the various psychotherapeutic schools. Or are there genuine differences,which may lead sometimes to the conclusion that one school has got it right, while another has therefore got it wrong; or that there are ‘horses for courses’; or, according to the Dodo principle, that ‘all shall have prizes’?

The latter part of the twentieth century saw some rapprochement between the different approaches to the theory and practice of psychotherapy (and counselling), often due to the external pressures towards organizing the profession responsibly and the high standards demanded of it by health care, by the public and by the state. It is out of this budding rapprochement that there came the motivation for this series, in which a number of key concepts that lie at the heart of the psychotherapies can be compared and contrasted across the board. Some of the terms used in different traditions may prove to represent identical concepts; others may look similar, but in fact highlight quite different emphases, which may or may not prove useful to those who practise from a different perspective; other terms, apparently identical, may prove to mean something completely different in two or more schools of psychotherapy.

In order to carry out this project it seemed essential that as many of the psychotherapeutic traditions as possible should be represented in the authorship of the series; and to promote both this and the spirit of dialogue between traditions, it seemed also desirable that there should be two authors for each book, each one representing, where practicable, a different orientation. It was important that the series should be truly international in its approach and therefore in its  authorship; and that miracle of late twentieth-century technology, the Internet, proved to be a productive means of finding authors, as well as a remarkably efficient method of communicating, in the cases of some pairs of authors, half-way across the world.

This series therefore represents, in a new millennium, an extremely exciting development, one which as series editor I have found more and more enthralling as I have eavesdropped on the drafts shuttling back and forth between authors. Here, for the first time, the reader will find all the major concepts of all the principal schools of psychotherapy and counselling (and not a few minor ones) drawn together so that they may compared, contrasted and (it is my hope) above all used – used for the ongoing debate between orientations, but more importantly still, used for the benefit of clients and patients who
are not at all interested in partisan positions, but in what works, or in what throws light upon their search for healing and understanding.

Michael Jacobs
x Conscious and unconscious





心理治疗的事业也是国际化的事业。它有大量的核心地区,不仅包括巴黎、莫斯科、维也纳、柏林、苏黎士、伦敦、 波士顿,还包括爱丁堡、罗马、纽约、芝加哥和加利福尼亚等,在这些地区都能观察到许多不同流派的心理治疗的理论和实践的发展。地理位置的不同也极大地影响了不同地区的心理学发展特色,特别是在文化和社会制度不同的地区这种差别特别显著,至少在某种程度上受了社会和政-治的影响的不同流派之间的差异拓展了心理学不同学派之间的交流空间。



  • irismaple 开心果 +28 鼓励挑战现有译文,PLUS,现有译文不一定都 ... 2009-5-8 10:28
  • database 开心果 +60 非常感谢支持:) 2009-4-24 15:03







谢谢楼主啦  辛苦啦,我也喜欢精神分析  欢迎交流啊