The Concept of Personality in Gestalt Therapy - Essay Example

? Responsibility And ‘Ability To Respond Two Sides Of Same Coin of the of the Introduction Personality is an integration of various traits of a person. It is the physical, mental, emotional, social and spiritual aspects of a person that make his personality. If different aspects of personality are disintegrated, then it leads to development of emotional and psychological problems in a person as he finds it difficult to cope with the conflict created due to disintegration within him. Hence, the field of psychology aims at helping people achieving a balance between all the aspects of their personality. However, the therapy that is most prominent in emphasizing the importance of balance between different aspects of the personality is the ‘gestalt therapy’. The originator of the gestalt therapy, Fritz Perls (1969) said that gestalt therapy aims to deal with the ‘total existence of a person’ and not just with symptoms of character structure (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.113). When there is balance between mental, emotional, physical and spiritual aspects of a person, then he achieves integration, which makes him ‘whole’. It is not the ‘part,’ but the ‘whole’ of the personality that makes a person achieve happiness and content in life. Hence, gestalt therapy aims at helping people to become ‘whole’ and achieve their highest potential through integration of personality. However, according to the gestalt therapy, the most important requirement for a person to achieve the ‘wholeness’ is for him to take the ‘responsibility’ of his existence (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.113). At the same time, gestalt theory also emphasizes that it is a person’s ‘ability to respond’ to his environment that helps him in taking the ‘responsibility’. Hence, even though the concepts of ‘ability to respond,’ and ‘responsibility,’ which lie at the core of the gestalt therapy, appear different from each other, they are in fact, complementary to each other as one cannot exist without the other. The Core Of The Gestalt Therapy The concept of gestalt therapy can be understood from the meaning of German noun ‘gestalt,’ which means form or shape (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.116). The core of gestalt therapy, which is to create an ‘organized whole’ by integrating the patterns, structures and forms of the personality, is derived from the German verb ‘gestalten’ (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.116). Psychologists who studied and practiced gestalt believed that human beings always aim to form the ‘meaningful wholes’ by organizing the different things they perceive in their environment (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.116). The gestalt psychologists maintained that human beings do not perceive things in isolation but always try to integrate the isolated things and merge them into ‘one whole’ (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.116). For example, a person can perceive a straight line when he is shown a row of dots and is asked to give a meaning to it (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.116). This shows that things in the environment are not perceived as separate by human beings, but are perceived as inter-related and associated with each other. Hence, gestalt therapy considers the human being’s environment and his response to it as the core of its theory, as it is the human being’s perception and interaction with his environment that creates a foundation for his personality. According to gestalt therapy, environment plays an essential role in person’s life and hence, one should understand the person’s ongoing relationship with his environment if one is to understand the deeper aspects of his personality (Corey, 2009, p. 198). Gestalt therapy takes the existential and phenomenological approach to therapy and counselling as it believes that human being’s perception and reaction to his environment plays a major role in his life (Corey, 2009, p. 198). According to gestalt therapy, client’s perception of reality can be understood through phenomenological approach and his process of “becoming, remaking and rediscovering,” which he is always experiencing, can be understood through existential approach (Corey, 2009, p. 198). According to Yontef (1995), ‘existence’ is given major importance in gestalt therapy as it believes that client’s experience of his ‘existence’ plays a major role in his process of perception, which is the basic factor for his capacity for growth (Corey, 2009, p. 198). Other reason for gestalt therapy taking an existential approach is that it believes that a person’s capacity for growth and healing is shaped by his interaction with his existence, and through interpersonal contact and insight during the therapy, his capacity can be understood (Corey, 2009, p. 198). This shows that the main focus of gestalt therapy is human being’s ‘existential’ situation, and his ‘response’ to this situation. Hence, according to gestalt therapy, a person’s strength lies in his ability to handle his situation, and that ability is known as the ‘response-ability’. Response-ability Response-ability is the ability of human beings to respond to various situations (Gladding, 2009, p. 214). According to Houston (1993), gestalt therapy views human being as a being who has the “ability to respond to his environment in appropriate and flexible way” and hence, he is considered as ‘response-able’ (Capuzzi & Gross, 2007, p. 222). Hazler (2001) believes that even though there are limitations in human being’s environment, he can respond to his situations by choosing and valuing the right things from the real alternatives available (Capuzzi & Gross, 2007, p. 222). However, choosing the right option from available alternatives depend on person’s ability to respond to his environment. ‘Ability to respond’ depends on the circumstances and the person’s situation and hence, is not fixed or same in every person (Parlett, 2003, p.55). Moreover, the habitual response pattern and past learning experience influences the person’s responses and hence, no two people respond in similar way to one situation (Parlett, 2003, p.55). This shows that it is important for a client to develop a habit of making right and empowering choices. Hence, according to Hazler (2001), a human being can create a healthy balance between self and surroundings with the aid of his response to situations, and the choices he makes (Capuzzi & Gross, 2007, p. 222). Unfortunately, very few people are endowed with the quality of response-ability. Response-ability, i.e. the ability to respond appropriately, is not an easy thing to achieve. Only those human beings have the ‘ability to respond’ appropriately to situations, who have clarity of thoughts and emotions. However, most of the times, people are confused about their situations and have emotional problems. People’s ability to respond flexibly in ‘present’ is restricted by their complex emotional life (Mackewn, 1997, p.191). The confusion and the muddled emotions distort person’s understanding of his environmental situations, and hamper his interaction with people and situations in his environment (Mackewn, 1997, p.191). If person’s emotional life is not sorted out, his response-ability deteriorates with passing time and instead of becoming a master of his situations, he becomes a victim. However, gestalt therapy does not view human being as a weak being. According to gestalt therapy, human beings have the ‘ability to respond’ to their environment in flexible and appropriate way, and hence, they are strong and ‘responsible’ beings (Mackewn, 1997, p.191). Responsibility The originator of gestalt therapy, Fritz Perls, developed the concept of ‘responsibility’ (Rubenfeld, 1996, p.155). According to Perl, responsibility is to make a meaningful contact with oneself and others, through the ‘ability to respond’ (Rubenfeld, 1996, p.155). In other words, even though a counsellor can support and encourage a client in therapy, ultimately it is the client who is ‘responsible’ for his change. This is because it is the client who interacts and ‘responds’ to his daily situations, and not the counsellor. Hence, gestalt therapy views the client as the one who is ‘responsible’ for change and hence, has the ‘responsibility’ to create a change. However, taking ‘responsibility’ is not an easy task as it depends a lot on the mental and emotional health of a person. People can take responsibility of their lives only when they are ‘fit’ to do so. People who are severely disturbed, or are suffering from psychotic conditions, cannot take responsibility for themselves and for others, as their ability to interact with self and others is severely disturbed (Harris, 1996, p. 248). Even taking basic responsibility of their lives is an impossible task for them (Harris, 1996, p. 248). This means that people who do not have the ‘ability to respond’ cannot take the ‘responsibility’ of their lives. This shows that ‘responsibility’ depends on person’s ‘ability to respond’. Hence, one of the goals of gestalt therapy is to help the client in taking personal and social ‘responsibility,’ by increasing his ability to get what he needs, from within and without his self (Hukabay, 1996, p.318). The term ‘personal responsibility’ is used to emphasize the fact that feeling responsible for others is not the only essential aspect of life, but it is also important for people to take responsibility of their own personal development (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.99). People who are ‘personally responsible’ are capable of taking control of their lives by accepting the responsibility of their thoughts and their behaviour (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.99). Hence, only those people who accept the responsibility of changing themselves are capable of being effective and productive in their lives (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.99). However, what really helps a person to take responsibility of his life is his ‘ability to respond’. Awareness and ‘Ability To Respond’ Fritz Perls believed that autonomy in decision making, self-support and behavior makes human being efficient and hence, he considered ‘responsibility’ as the most important aspect of human being (Ginger, 2007, p.112). Gestalt therapy is based on the understanding that “‘existential choice’ is fundamental to being human” (Clarkson, 2004, p.14). It means that whatever people accept, reject, think, feel and how they behave, is a result of the choices they make (Clarkson, 2004, p.14). However, the problem is that people are not ‘aware’ of the fact that it is ‘they,’ who are making those choices and not other people or the external situations. Hence, Perls (1976) emphasized that meaning and pattern can be given to individual’s life if he is helped to take responsibility of his life by making him develop ‘awareness’ of his self and of his responses to others around him (Clarkson, 2004, p.14). Hence, responsibility can be taken only when the person develops the quality of awareness towards his responses to situations. The avoidance of responsibility or avoidance of feeling in clients was challenged by Perls during his therapy sessions (Corey, 2012, p.289). Increased awareness is the key concept of gestalt therapy as it produces growth in human being (Corey, 2012, p.290). According to Yontef and Jacobs (2011), awareness can be developed only when client faces the reality by accepting his real self, developing self-knowledge, living in the ‘now,’ and taking responsibility for his choices (Corey, 2012, p.290). The clients can realize that they have the capacity to solve their problems, when they know that the resources lie within themselves, and when they become completely aware of their mental, emotional and environmental situations (Corey, 2012, p.290). Gestalt therapy views that a client cannot tap the tools necessary for personality change if he does not practice ‘awareness’ in his daily life (Corey, 2012, p.290). The gestalt therapy aims at integrating the conflicting dimensions within individual by helping him to take the responsibility of his self and his environment (Corey, 2012, p.290). Gestalt believes that the ‘integrated whole’ can be achieved by taking responsibility of those parts of oneself which are avoided and disowned by a client under the stress and distortion of emotional life (Corey, 2012, p.290). Gestalt also believes that clients can achieve a state of meaningful existence by making informed and positive choices by becoming ‘fully aware’ of their responses (Corey, 2012, p.290). In other words, by taking the responsibility of their responses to their environment, a client can achieve the state of integration and hence, a state of ‘wholeness’. This shows that the ‘responsibility’ and ‘ability to respond,’ even though are different aspects of personality, are not really different from each other as they are dependent on each other. Relationship Between Responsibility And ‘Ability To Respond’ According to Martin Buber, an Austrian philosopher who believed in the theory of existentialism, “genuine responsibility exists only where there is real responding” (Friedman, 2002, p.240). Buber believed that a person should take his decisions not only on the basis of traditional values and norms, but also on the basis of what he thinks is right action in that ‘instance’ and hence, respond according to the ‘present’ situation (Friedman, 2002, p.240). In short, Buber believed that responsibility is nothing but responding from the depths of one’s being to the crude and disharmonious situations that arise in daily lives (Friedman, 2002, p.108). Buber also believed that one can have confidence in one’s responses only when one responds as a ‘whole person’ (Friedman, 2002, p.109). That is, if a person responds on the basis of universal perceptions and objective knowledge about the right and wrong, then he cannot be confident of his responses as those responses come from outside, and not from the inside, of his being (Friedman, 2002, p.109). Hence, Buber also believed that through personal responsibility, not only the crises in personal life, but also the crisis in the community, can be resolved and overcome (Friedman, 1981, p.171). This existential belief of responsibility and response-ability is accepted by gestalt therapy as gestalt also takes the existential approach towards therapy. Hence, in reality, there is no difference between ‘responsibility’ and ‘ability to respond’. In fact, it is by enhancing client’s ability to respond that he is helped in taking responsibility of his life (O’Brien & Houston, 2007, p.135). Similarly, a client is also made aware of the fact that it is ‘his’ responsibility, and not the counsellor’s, to change himself as it is the way ‘he’ responds and connects with his self and his environment that makes his personality. In a way, the foundation of human existence lies in the concept of responsibility (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.230). Freedom of human being lies in his freedom to choose, i.e. to respond, in a way he wants to (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.230). However, he can enjoy this freedom to choose only when he takes responsibility, i.e. the control and the charge, of the responses and choices he makes (Nelson-Jones, 2006, p.230). Conclusion The discussion above shows that responsibility and ‘ability to respond,’ are two sides of a same coin. Their existence depends on each other. Without the ‘ability to respond,’ one cannot take the ‘responsibility’ of his own self and his life. Similarly, without taking the responsibility to change, one cannot enhance the ‘ability to respond,’ which is the key to achieving the ‘integrated whole’ in life. Hence, responsibility and ‘ability to respond’ are not different but are interdependent aspects of the ‘integrated whole’. References Capuzzi, D. & Gross, D. (2007). Counseling And Psychotherapy: Theories And Interventions (4th ed.). New Delhi, IN: Pearson Education, Inc. Clarkson, P. (2004). Gestalt Counselling In Action (3rd ed.). London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd. Corey, G. (2009). Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/ Cole. Corey, G. (2012). Theory and Practice of Group Counseling and Psychotherapy (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/ Cole. Friedman, M. (1981). Martin Buber’s Life and Work New York, NY: E.P.Dutton Inc. Friedman, M. (2002). Martin Buber: The Life Of Dialogue (4th ed.). London, UK Routledge Kegan Paul Ltd. Ginger, S. (2007). Gestalt Therapy: The Art Of Contact. London, UK: Karnac Books Ltd. Gladding, S. (2009). Counseling (6TH ed.). New Delhi, IN: Pearson Education, Inc. Harris, C,O. (1996). Gestalt Work With Psychotics. In E. C. Nevis (Ed.), Gestalt therapy: Perspectives and Applications (pp.239-262). New York, NY: Garden Press, Inc. Hukabay,M.A. (1996). An Overview Of The Theory And Practice Of Gestalt Group Process. In E. C. Nevis (Ed.), Gestalt Therapy: Perspectives and Applications (pp.303-330). New York, NY: Garden Press, Inc. Mackewn, J. (1997). Developing Gestalt Counseling. London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd. Nelson-Jones, R. (2006). Theory and Practice of Counselling and Therapy. London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd. O’Brien, M. & Houston, G. (2007). Integrative Therapy: A Practitioner’s Guide (2nd ed.). London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd. Parlett, M. (2003). Creative Abilities and the Art Of Living Well. In M.S. Lobb & N. Amendt-Lyon (Eds.), Creative License: The Art of Gestalt therapy (pp.51-62). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag Wien. Rubenfeld, I. (1996). Gestalt Therapy And The BodyMind: An Overview Of The Rubenfeld Synergy. In E. C. Nevis (Ed.), Gestalt therapy: Perspectives and Applications (pp.147-178). New York, NY: Garden Press, Inc. Read More