Spheres of awareness of Gestalt psychotherapy

In the Gestalt psychotherapy, we distinguish three spheres of awareness – all are equally important and valuable. There is even a commonly used comparison of the human being to a table with three legs (Francesseti et al., 2016).

Intermediate sphere

For many people, this is the most favourite sphere because it is not limited by anything – this is its potential and, at the same time, danger.

The intermediate sphere of awareness are our thoughts and imagination – everything that is “produced” by our brain. It allows us to plan, reminisce, expect and learn. We use it all and it is particularly useful to scientists, all types of analysts, artists, teachers or the clergy as they often navigate abstract areas. On the other hand, thoughts are what makes it difficult for us to stay mindful in the so-called here and now. They take us not only into the realm of our dreams, but also fears. Note that we are usually afraid of what can happen, not what is happening. It is our images on the future that make us worry (or be hopeful).

Where does the notion of “intermediate sphere” come from? Our thoughts mediate internal experiences (body and emotions) and external ones (senses), imparting meaning to signals derived from them. At times, we get into a vicious circle because of this, e.g. by interpreting neuralgia as a heart attack and worrying that we will soon die. In turn, experience of stress leads to worse functioning of our nervous system and our heart. Think freely, then, without losing touch with the reality when this is not required.

External awareness

Senses are responsible for the content found in our external sphere of awareness. They help us read information flowing into us from the external world. It has always been the condition for survival of the entire species and individual organisms. This obvious statement is relevant for instance when you are reading this text or crossing the street.

Using your senses significantly supports orientation in the world, but it also serves other purposes. In the Gestalt modality (not only in psychotherapy, but also in the approach to life), it is important to experience life fully. This means deep curiosity and openness to the objects that surround us, the smells carried in the air and the people around us. Oftentimes, children are masters at this – they “finger” toys in shops or even lick objects like doors, door handles and walls.

When was the last time that you looked at your partner with the mindfulness of a person being in love? What colour are your children’s irises? Of course, this is neither needed or possible to be curious about all stimuli which our body could potentially capture. This is why the optimal situation occurs when we use the selectivity of perception consciously, having the courage to deepen that sensual experience of the world simultaneously.

Internal sphere

The internal awareness are emotions and body signals such as stomachache, sadness or a joyful movement in the solar plexus. It is good when you treat such sensations as information from yourself, for yourself and about yourself. For instance, when you feel that your stomach is very tight, you can start to realise your stress or worry and start to “work on it” – accept it, understand its causes or simply take care of yourself and relax. It happens that we forget about ourselves and only serious disruptions in our functioning pose an opportunity for us to make changes, see our needs and receive help. Emotions are similar – which are actually easily “transformed” by the body into somatic symptoms and the so-called muscle blocks. For example, if you do not relieve your daily anger or frustration, you can experience migraines “of unknown origin.” Is the origin actually unknown, though? Conscious experience of emotional states is not only healthy, but also useful. By openly listening to your gut, it will be easier for you to recognise what is important to you, what choice to make and what your needs are.

Remember that caring for yourself is not egoistic.

Connections between spheres of awareness

The way of thinking is closely connected with our emotions, bodily reactions and behaviours. A simple example: a man “knows” that a woman that he likes thinks that he is a failure (a fantasy, or more professionally – a projection). Therefore, when he meets her, he starts to be ashamed, be afraid of how she responds to his greeting (emotions) – his hands are shaking and he is sweating profusely (body). There isn’t a remote chance of having a chat with her about the weather, not to mention inviting her for coffee (behaviour). As he abandons action and does not engage with the woman, he confirms his original belief: “I’m a failure, she won’t even look at me” (thought). A reverse example: a woman is waiting for a job interview during which she will be tested on topics she would have to deal with at the job. She really wants to get the job and she has heard that the recruiter is extremely strict. She is starting to experience, to feel terror (feelings), her stomach shrinks, her intestines work like crazy (body) and her head is filled with chaos and the expectation of failure (thoughts). Instead of following the possible scenarios of what may happen – including how she will pay off the loan if she does not get the job – she focuses on her breath, sits upright and presses her feet hard into the floor. She is breathing more and more deeply and freely, counting the seconds of each inhalation and exhalation or perhaps repeating an uplifting sentence to herself. The thoughts, of course, keep flowing in (this is their nature). The woman notices them and lets them flow by. She still feels slight uneasiness in her stomach, but the stress is decreasing and, most importantly, is not escalating.


Francesetti G., Gecele M., Roubal J. (2016). Psychoterapia Gestalt w praktyce klinicznej. Od psychopatologii do estetyki kontaktu [Gestalt psychotherapy in clinical practice. From psychopathology to aesthetics of contact] Publisher: Harmonia Universalis.

Other articles

Filter articles
Scientific research
Scientific research
What psychotherapy is and what it is not
The word "psychotherapy" stems from two Greek words: psyche (soul) and therapein (to treat). Even though the first mentions on the treatment of mental diseases could be found as early as in prehistoric times in the form of shamanic practices, the contemporary, scientific and knowledge-based psychotherapy has a relatively short history. It is agreed that its emergence happened upon the publication of Sigmund Freud and Josef Breuer's book entitled "Studies on Hysteria" (1895), which started the first school in psychotherapy, i.e. psychoanalysis. Ever since, a huge number of schools and currents of psychotherapy have been created (there is currently ca. 500 of them!), which makes it significantly difficult to define this peculiar profession. Speaking more broadly, however, psychotherapy means each and every method of treating mental or psychosomatic disorders using intentionally specialised psychological measures (Grzesiuk, 2005). In particular, psychotherapy is an experience that may lead to a better understanding of oneself and that, in turn, may improve the psychosocial functioning and the quality of life of psychotherapy clients (Francesetti et al., 2016; Zinker, 1991). Psychotherapy is sometimes confused with many forms of professional psychological activities. Please note that psychological counselling, psychological diagnosis, crisis intervention, psychological skill training, coaching, mentoring etc. are not psychotherapy. What is more, psychotherapy has its non-professional side as a lot of people present themselves as "psychotherapists" even though they do not have any qualifications to do so. Psychotherapy does not involve giving "good advice on how to live" or ready-made solutions to different problems – it involves as little (or as much) as accompanying a client in the process of better understanding of what they are and what they really need or not need. Remember that the clients of psychotherapy are the best experts in themselves. After all, for psychotherapy to be effective, it requires mutual
Psychotherapy as reconstruction
Kazimierz Dąbrowski (1979), a Polish psychiatrist and psychologist, was the author of the theory of positive disintegration. He meant a process of developmental change, which is immanent to humans – that is it happens to everyone and is a necessary stage in the actualisation of one's true potential. The moment of disintegration is usually not pleasant, often filled with tension and anxiety, tiredness and pain, doubt or breakdown (let us recall the hardships of puberty: mood swings, hurting body, restlessness). Working on yourself can be compared to a renovation of a house – more or less capital, with or without destruction of the walls. To get better, it must first get a bit worse. In psychotherapy, we rebuild non-functional models of behaving and experiencing into more functional ones. We touch emotions that were long frozen, which we pushed deep under our skin with our willpower (often as children). And after several, several dozen meetings with a psychotherapist it turns out that as we deepen our breathing and regain contact with ourselves and another human being, we have some desires which might be unsatisfied (and it might hurt!), or we get sad or furious when we realise that our parents actually did not give us what they should have. The question I often ask myself and my clients is, "what is this whole suffering for?" Why should I torment myself so much? Isn't it better not to feel? No, it isn't. The cause of our current problems might hide in the lack of experiencing of those emotions. On the other hand, when we express them and integrate them with ourselves, we can deal with our current matters with more force and relief. There is also an additional benefit derived from such "working through" unpleasant stories, feelings and aspects of ourselves. Namely,
Depression – disease known for ages
A lot is being talked nowadays about a peculiar epidemic of depression, particularly in highly developed countries. Such unfavourable features of big city life as overpopulation, excessive noise, haste, ubiquitous consumerism and superficial relationships with others all contribute to the widespread sense of loneliness, emptiness or depersonalisation – states leading to depression very frequently (Pużyński, 2005). Depression is a source of suffering for millions of people around the world. In some, it results in only a transient disappearance of the willingness to live, showing by cyclical states of apathy and discouragement; in others, it wreaks havoc in life, often leading to permanent disability and even to the most tragic effect of that terrible disease – suicide. As Erich Fromm (1970) stated, the "age of anxiety," which reigned during the Cold War, has been followed by the "age of melancholy." Epidemiologic studies carried out worldwide are showing that ca. 17% of the general population suffers from depression during their lifetime. 12-25% of patients reporting to their general practitioner suffer from depression, out of which a half meets the criteria for moderate or severe version of this disease. However, it would be an oversimplification to state that people did not suffer from depression in the past. History shows that regardless of the time and the cultural environment, man experienced this state in a similar way – it was an inability to active participation in social life. In antiquity, clear accounts on the state of melancholy can be found in works of Plutarch, Aretaeus, Gailen and Hippocrates. These accounts do not significantly diverge from what is observed in patients with depression in this day and age. Here, it is worth quoting the abovementioned Plutarch (after Pużyński, 1988): ". . . man in depression exaggerates the smallest evil under the influence of anxiety. They
Scientific research
Psychotherapy: science, craft or art?
Ever since the emergence of modern psychotherapy, there has been a dispute around its scientific status (see Cook et al., 2017; Chrząstowski, 2019; Eysenck, 1952; Lambert, 1992; Rakowska, 2005). Are the psychotherapeutic theory and practice based, or should they be based, on scientific data, just like medicine (see evidence-based medicine)? Or is psychotherapy rather a set of practical skills which can be practiced like craft? Perhaps the psychotherapist should only use their unique intuition and clinical experience while working with people and not subject themselves to the rigid criteria of scientific assessment, and psychotherapy is a form of art and each psychotherapist is an artist to an extent? Trying to answer the above questions, we need to attempt to combine two issues that are difficult to combine at first glance. On the one hand, you need to take into account the criterion of scientific viability from the perspective of philosophy of science (Brzeziński, 2019). On the other hand, the theory- and research-based object of psychotherapy needs to be taken into account, as well as its non-homogeneity, interdisciplinarity and peculiar entanglement into many different disciplines of science – from philosophy, through psychiatry, psychology, sociology, culture studies, down to neurobiology even (Kratochvil, 2003). Simply speaking, sciences can be divided into formal (e.g. mathematics and logic) and empirical sciences, which are classified into natural (e.g. physics and biology), humanistic and social (e.g. philosophy and psychology). In such a perspective, psychotherapy can be classified under empirical studies, but some of its modalities are closer to natural sciences (see the cognitive-behavioural modality) or humanistic and social sciences (e.g. the humanistic-existential modality). This peculiar methodological split – that is manoeuvring between the methodology of natural sciences (see behaviourism, neopositivism), the methodology of humanistic and social sciences (see mentalism and phenomenology) and the contemporary integrative and transtheoretical
Scientific research
Is psychotherapy effective?
More or less since the 1950s, empirical studies started to be carried out into a widely understood effectiveness of psychotherapy (Rakowska, 2005). They attempted to answer fundamentally three questions: a. Is psychotherapy an effective method of treatment and/or supporting people struggling with mental disorders, particularly in comparison to pharmacotherapy?b. What factors affect whether psychotherapy is or is not effective?c. What is the effectiveness of individual schools of psychotherapy? The discussion in this respect was started by an eminent personality psychologist, Hans Eysenck (1952), who carried out a meta-analysis of several dozen studies into psychotherapy effectiveness conducted at the time and came to the conclusion that a more or less the same number of psychiatric patients achieve improvement through psychotherapy and heal spontaneously without any psychotherapeutic intervention. However, literally hundreds of alter studies on psychotherapy effectiveness analysed in a lot of meta-analyses challenged the conclusions of Eysenck and provided reliable empirical data proving the fact that psychotherapy is not only an effective form of treatment of mental disorders, but also a method significantly supporting the development of humans and improving the quality of their lives (see e.g. Bergin, 1971; Elkin et al., 1988; Lambert, 1992; Luborsky et al., 1975; Smith and Glass, 1978). What is more, the turn of the 20th and 21st century brought fascinating discoveries from the border of psychotherapy and neurobiology indicating that psychotherapy can have an equally significant effect on the functioning of the brain as pharmacotherapy (see e.g. Etkin et al., 2005; Gabbard, 2000). As a result of the above, the World Health Organisation (WHO) regarded psychotherapy as an equally effective method of helping individuals with mental disorders as pharmacological treatment (WHO, 2001). However, it proved more problematic to receive an answer to the two remaining questions, particularly the one concerning the comparison of the effectiveness
Mourning or depression?
When we see deep and painful discouragement, cessation of interest in the external world, loss of the ability to love, inhibition of every single skill (Freud, 1970), we see a person engulfed in unhappiness. The image of that unhappiness can be similar in depression and mourning, which is shown in Robert Redford's film entitled "Ordinary People" (1980). It tells a story of an American family from the upper middle class, whose members deal with the death of Buck, an older son, in very different ways. The mother (Mary Tyler Moore) becomes indifferent and is emotionally distant from the family, but she keeps the appearances of normality. The father (Donald Sutherland) strives to be bursting with joy, willing to bring a living son back to life and take care of him. The main character is Conrad (Timothy Hutton), a teen brother of the dead, who participated in the accident with him. We are introduced to the family when Conrad comes back home from a psychiatric hospital, where he ended up after a suicidal attempt. Until we get to know about the tragic death of Buck, Conrad's symptoms indicate depression: he has not strength to get up, has no motivation to act, acts in front of his parents that everything is alright, but he gets angry easily, isolates himself from friends, is evidently in constant tension and, as Freud would put it, suffers from depressed mood expressing in the form of accusations and blames directed at himself, going as far as deranged expectation of punishment (ibid.). In the case of Conrad, the expectation of punishment is all the more justified as he suffers from the sense of guilt because he had survived the accident. Both in mourning and depression – a state formerly known as melancholy – we deal with the loss
Rotate your screen to view website