The myth of mental stability makes a person’s daily life more stable. Moreover, it appears to stabilize some cultural processes as well. The world now appears to each individual as something that can be controlled and manipulated. As a result, there is a certain confidence that nothing threatens me. And from the point of view of culture as a whole, as well as the everyday life of the average person, this is wonderful. But what price does culture as a whole and each person in particular have to pay for this wonderful deliverance from the anxiety of uncertainty? How much does it cost to “victory” over the chaos inherent in psychological life? Such a “victory” automatically implies the rejection of those changes in man and culture that could occur. For example, our consciousness and ideas about the world turn out to be limited and rigid. A person in the process of his life, as a rule, in this case changes only slightly, if at all. As a result, vitality is lost. Or, to maintain it, a person resorts to various forms of addiction - he strives for thrills, not noticing in everyday life any basis for experiencing his Life, uses drugs that change the state of consciousness, etc. On the other hand, the rigidity of ideas about reality imposes its own a special imprint on a person’s ability to survive a crisis. Thus, if one or another factor invades his fairly stable life, dramatically transforming the life situation, then the person is often not ready to face such changes. A person’s life, unfolding on the principles of the myth of stability, does not use the extremely rich resources of the field’s vitality. We rob ourselves, not giving ourselves the opportunity to notice something that does not fit into the framework of the self-paradigm - new unexpected feelings, sensations, images, thoughts, etc. The power of any worldview, which rigidly determines the behavior of both an individual person and the human community in In general, it is based on the myth of mental stability. The myth of mental stability often manifests itself in the overvaluation of our “past.” Which sometimes seriously complicates a person’s life in the present. “The past will not return,” as it is sung in some popular song. However, this is not only a thesis of public consciousness. Almost all modern psychotherapy is based on the supervaluation of the past. For example, psychoanalysis simply became a cult from the past. Whatever a person does today, no matter what symptoms of a somatic or mental nature he suffers, everything is determined by the fixed past. And so in psychotherapy we spend years making sure that the past is unchanged. It's turning out to be an expensive project. Moreover, as experience shows, the more a person is attached to the value of mental stability, the less he changes in the process of psychotherapy. The past in this case becomes only a means of explaining the present - problems, symptoms, difficulties in building relationships, etc. Thus, in the process of psychotherapy, which takes the primacy of mental stability, the client becomes more and more competent regarding the problems of his life. But changes in it, if they occur, are likely not due to this stability, but in spite of it. And for this it is often necessary to change the “past”. According to D. Stern, “if the present cannot change the past, then psychotherapy is impossible” [from a personal conversation with Jacques Blaise]. So, the myth of mental stability, while creating the basis for a person’s stability in life, on the other hand, imposes significant restrictions on the possibilities of psychological changes in it. http://pogodin.kiev.ua/news/kakova-cena-predstavleniy-ob-ustoychivosti-lichnosti-dlya-cheloveka