Why are there still so many approaches to psychotherapy? Why is there no psychotherapeutic empirical research with conclusive outcomes? How come somebody who has had no personal therapy can charge more than another therapist who has many years of personal therapy many times a week? How come the professional bodies are still able tomake distinctions important to them but might bamboozle the general public? We have, for example, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy’s (BACP’s) ‘MBACP’ and ‘MBACP Accredited’, or The United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy’s (UKCP’s) ‘Psychotherapist’ and ‘Psychotherapeutic Counsellor’, and the British Psychoanalytic Council’s (BPC’s) ‘Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist’ and ‘Psychodynamic Psychotherapist’.How can someone anxiously seek therapy make an informed choice between these professionally sanctioned labels let alone knowing the differences between the myriad of competing modalities within them? If such problems arising from these competing cultural practices are to be minimised how then should future psychological therapists be trained? It is argued here that phenomenology might be a better basis for training psychological therapists rather than starting with theoretical frame-ups that too frequently become competing dogmas. The reasons for this are twofold: Psychotherapy is first and foremost a practice, Freud, Klein et al. first discovered practices which they subsequently attempted to theorise (Heaton, 2000; Loewenthal, 2011) and secondly, that this practice is a cultural one (Loewenthal, 2016). In terms of knowledge, an argument is that the psychological therapies are not so much about explicit knowledge but rather tacit knowledge (Polanyi, 1966) which is more likely to be imparted and acquired than taught and learnt. The closest theoretically we might come to exploring such practices is through phenomenology. Phenomenology’s history of particular interest to us might be seen with Brentano’s lectures on descriptive psychology which were attended by both Edmund Husserl and Sigmund Freud. It was Husserl who passed this on to Martin Heidegger and Emanuel Levinas was taught by both of them, taking phenomenology to France influencing two generations of French philosophers: the first involving the likes of Simone de Beauvoir, Jean-Paul Sartre and Maurice Merleau-Ponty and the second generation including the likes of Jean-Francois Lyotard and Jacques Derrida. Foucault was also initially EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY & COUNSELLING 2019, VOL. 21, NO. 1, 1–4 https://doi.org/10.1080/13642537.2019.1565667

中文翻译：

---

现象学、个人治疗和心理治疗师的培训

为什么还有这么多的心理治疗方法？为什么没有具有决定性结果的心理治疗实证研究？为什么一个没有接受过个人治疗的人比另一个每周接受多次个人治疗的治疗师收费更高？为什么专业团体仍然能够区分对他们来说很重要的区别，但可能会迷惑公众？例如，我们有英国咨询和心理治疗协会 (BACP) 的“MBACP”和“MBACP 认证”，或英国心理治疗委员会 (UKCP) 的“心理治疗师”和“心理治疗顾问”，以及英国精神分析委员会的（ BPC）“心理分析心理治疗师”和“心理动力学心理治疗师”。焦急地寻求治疗的人如何在这些专业认可的标签之间做出明智的选择，更不用说了解其中无数竞争方式之间的差异了？如果要尽量减少由这些相互竞争的文化实践引起的此类问题，那么应该如何培训未来的心理治疗师？这里有人认为，现象学可能是培训心理治疗师的更好基础，而不是从经常成为相互竞争的教条的理论框架开始。造成这种情况的原因有两个：心理治疗首先是一种实践，弗洛伊德、克莱因等人。首先发现了他们随后试图将其理论化的实践（Heaton，2000 年；Loewenthal，2011 年），其次，这种实践是一种文化实践（Loewenthal，2016 年）。在知识方面，一个论点是，心理疗法与其说是关于显性知识，不如说是关于隐性知识（Polanyi，1966），这种知识更可能是传授和获得的，而不是传授和学习的。从理论上来说，我们可能最接近探索此类实践的方法是通过现象学。我们特别感兴趣的现象学历史可以从布伦塔诺关于描述心理学的讲座中看出，埃德蒙·胡塞尔和西格蒙德·弗洛伊德都参加了这些讲座。胡塞尔将这一点传递给了马丁·海德格尔，伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯由他们两人教授，将现象学带到法国，影响了两代法​​国哲学家：第一代涉及西蒙·德·波伏娃、让-保罗·萨特和莫里斯·梅洛-庞蒂等人第二代包括让-弗朗索瓦·利奥塔 (Jean-Francois Lyotard) 和雅克·德里达 (Jacques Derrida) 等人。福柯最初也是《欧洲心理治疗与咨询杂志》2019 年第 2 卷。21，没有。1, 1–4 https://doi.org/10.1080/13642537.2019.1565667