From the author: Published for the first time The question of which method of therapy is better, more effective, more useful always arises among both clients and those “simply” interested. It arose both for me and for me. I fully corresponded to the saying about the intimate love relationship of a cricket with a certain pole dear to its heart, when with an air of humble tolerance I said: “all therapies are good, choose your taste, BUT ... and after the “but” there followed a tirade that left no doubt that that body-oriented therapy is really “oh yes!” Then I was absolutely sincerely convinced of every word I said. Now my answer to any question involving comparison is: “No.” What kind of no will be clear below, if you have enough masochism to finish reading, my opus, born of an irrepressible desire to change the world and do good, to the end. So, in my opinion, the question of which method of psychotherapy is better cannot be associated only with the sector of psychotherapeutic services; it comes from a completely different area. It’s just that for some reason the habit of comparing Better or Worse has permeated everything, regardless of the field of activity and area of ​​application. Having given myself over to basic observation of myself in particular and people in general, I suddenly discovered how the pattern of comparing everything, everyone and everyone was ingrained into almost every second of my existence. We compare constantly, every minute, out loud, to ourselves, in public, modestly buried in a rag. We compare others, ourselves, loved ones, children, cats, types of toothbrushes, degree of cellulite, IQ level: being a businessman is better and more effective than being a doctor, and being a doctor is better than being a milkmaid, etc. Religious fanatics have become hoarse, preaching the truth only of their faith. Men fight to the death for the title of smarter and more important, Women for the dubious charms of being the very neck that is more cunning, more manipulative, but at the same time more moral. Widespread patriotism, which shocks me with its naivety and is based on unethical comparisons, is blooming in full bloom (I would like to point out that the more elements of dictatorship are included in the structure of government, the more purposefully this second-rate brew is implanted among the population), which is based on an absurd, unproven assertion of chosenness, the eminence of one people over others, and no one is embarrassed that these “inferior” peoples have no less arguments and confidence in their superiority. Then “where is the truth, Brother”? For me, the truth is that pragmatism rules, that is, if some habit is so widespread and ingrained, then someone needs it. In trying to discover what kind of joy it is to constantly lower one thing at the expense of another, I discovered a lot of interesting things and learned for myself another tool, how to still grow from a “trembling creature” to homo, to sapiens. And perhaps all these discoveries remained secret only to me, and everyone else is already reaping the benefits of knowledge, I still want to share a piece of my own, albeit naive, understanding! Here's what I discovered: the very desire to give one phenomenon greater value (cost) at the expense of another is rooted in the most powerful of instincts - the instinct of survival. Everything around him is subordinated to him. Anything and everything. His power is enormous. Let me explain: the animal world is structured in such a way that everyone feeds on the life of another living creature. Everyone hunts for food and resources that can ensure their livelihoods, no matter what they are expressed in. That is, every living organism SURVIVES at any cost. Well, it can’t be any other way. Instiinct!!! And although for modern humans the list of resources supposedly required for survival is unusually wide, the necessary minimum remains unchanged throughout the history of life on Earth: oxygen, water, food, territory, the absence of a stronger predator in the habitat, the presence of a partner for reproductive activity. The struggle to obtain these conditions is coeval with life on our planet. That is why the calls of humanists of all stripes to beMore humane, more compassionate, more altruistic have remained a theory of little applicability in everyday life for most people for thousands of years. It would seem so obvious, so clear, at least in relation to one’s own species: all people feel, pain is equally terrible for everyone, pleasure is equally attractive. But why then, despite the evidence, does this knowledge not work and we continue to crush our own kind with amazing ruthlessness? Why and how this relates to what I called “statement of priority.” In search of an answer to this question, I relied on the understanding that, as I wrote above, if, despite the sobs of conscience, and the feeling of discomfort that “well, somehow it doesn’t work out neatly,” a living creature continues to use the same scheme, then... he it's profitable. So what is the benefit of comparing everything and everyone that is so firmly rooted in our civilization? I see: that the statement I am better, stronger, smarter is actually nothing more than a hidden appropriation of the right to dispose of the energy, freedom and life of another living being. Any of its resources. In its most primitive form, this can be seen in competitions: whoever jumps farthest, whoever solves the problem faster will assert their priority in gaining access to greater privileges in the distribution of worldly goods. It is in no way reminiscent of the animal world: whoever is stronger and weighs more gets any female and priority access to the feeding trough. But in animals everything is simpler and more obvious. For people, with their passion to veil the basest aspirations with highly moral screw-ups, everything is much more desolate. By comparing, we depersonalize those around us, that is, we make it easier for ourselves to appropriate their resources. For the most part, few people of their own free will are ready to just lay out their hard-earned money. Hence, there are two options for getting what you want and need: take it away or exchange it. Confiscation is always associated with violence. As a rule, it causes resistance. But how nice and simple it would be: “Allow me, my dear, to eat a piece from you,” “Oh, of course, be so kind.” Don’t embarrass yourself, don’t embarrass yourself.” Alas and ah, the attempt on the limbs dear to the heart evokes completely legitimate resistance. And here, with a cynical grin, Standards, Criteria, Assessments and Norms, that is, the entire assessment toolkit, rush to the aid of the haves. They shout: “Where are you, a dear man with a pig’s snout, in a Kalash line? Your loaf is not according to your stigma, therefore it would be FAIR to take it away from you for other more worthy fellow citizens. Compared to them, you are too thin, fat, stupid, smart, ugly and... so on. For most, this story begins from early childhood, with the most important and closest people: “You are bad and wrong, and I am good, so I have the right to manage your life as it suits me.” Almost every one of us received such an explicit or hidden message from significant adults, almost everyone, unconsciously or consciously, put in a huge amount of effort to deserve at least some semblance of a positive assessment. But alas and ah, “Your only fault is that I want to eat.” Comparison depersonalizes and makes violence possible. Violence becomes possible only when we do not see or feel in another the same living being, who also passionately desires to live, who also experiences pain, love, fear. It turns out to be such a vicious circle: depersonalized since childhood, having lost contact with our individuality, accustomed to being taken advantage of even by those closest to us, we have naturally lost the ability to see personality in others. Conclusions: 1) From early childhood we have been crippled. Comparing or evaluating a small child who does not have the opportunity to defend his understanding, his uniqueness is a tool of depersonalization, depriving him of dignity and contact with reality. Comparison kills the priceless uniqueness of any phenomenon. And it doesn’t matter whether this comparison is positive or negative for the object. After all, being better just because there is someone worse does not mean being valuable in itself.2) Any value judgment basically consists of two components: aggression and.