Do you think that the famous antagonist of all times and peoples, Poligraf Poligrafovich Sharikov, could become a psychologist? I think so. Living by the principle of “take and divide,” he could enroll in a workers’ school, and then infiltrate some profession in order to study methods of influencing the masses, control the crowd, and find justice for Preobrazhensky and Bormental. The product of Professor Preobrazhensky's scientific experiment also became the main thorn in the side of the Russian intellectual-oppositionist of the Soviet state. Sharikov is, of course, a colorful figure. Behind the mask of this creature, everyone can see something of their own, their pain, their trauma, resentment... For me personally, this type aroused extreme hostility for just one phrase: “Yesterday cats were strangled, strangled, strangled, strangled...”. Here he is, “Sharikov the Inquisitor” (this combination was chosen with the help of Irina Nikolaevna Panina). And today each of us can face such an apotheosis of intellectual rigidity. Many of my respected colleagues work with symbols. Symbols can be different - these are MAC, Tarot, and runes. If we look at them through the prism of Jungian psychology, we will see many facets. Any symbol will be multi-component, as well as the personality that addresses us. My respected colleagues use both Tarot and runes in practice, but they are not charlatans. In this aspect of activity there is no forecast or programming, but there is a high-quality psychosemantic analysis that helps a person understand his life, past and present, with the help of symbolic and sign constructs. I’ll tell you a story. The other day I posted an article about work on the Tarot in one group of psychologists. I will not clarify or specify. It happened on one of the social networks. So here it is. The article was published by a moderator, who is also the leader of the group, who publicly lynched my work! In the spirit of the mentioned character. I don't know who this person is. he calls himself a "psychologist." But it is likely that a person does not know that psychology is translated from Greek as “the science of the Soul,” and at the same time it contains many paradigms of different kinds, approaches, schools, directions. The most memorable thing was that after publishing a comment under my article with the words “With a creaking heart, I posted an article” (exactly! Apparently my heart is creaking))), this man accused me of all my sins. He needed my article for reprisals... His angry comment was followed by sycophantic groans from the followers of this newly minted “guru-inquisitor,” along the lines of “I haven’t read the heresy, but I support you, teacher!” and so on...Well, ok, I think. The words “abuse, bullying, mobbing” flashed through my head. I stood up for myself. Putting him firmly in place. Having explained popularly that if “His SharikoFF majesty” allows you to post an article “in his own” group, then at the moderation stage a colleague should write that it’s “not a format”, “for that - goodbye”. However, there was no adequate answer. Why did this Sharikov-inquisitor need to hold a “trial” over my article? In order to assert himself (Freud is right, a thousand times right. A man is single, well over forty or even fifty, lives a lonely life, tries to play “professional”, but it turns out clumsily, because neither about Jung, nor about psychosemantics, nor about forms of work , other than “Rogers’ client-centered approach,” people have never heard). Women cause fear for such a man, perhaps my article became a trigger. Well, who knows, maybe his ex was a tarot reader?)) As we remember, this approach is non-directive, but the man is clearly somehow attracted to him. But does this approach meet his needs? Hardly. Since the man clearly stated that “cats must be strangled”, “tortured”, any of my appeals to dialogue on equal terms, to professional ethics, stimulated hundreds of words from him, including insults.. Fortunately, there were people who stood up for me and my work. But after thinking, I remembered Joe Dispenza’s wonderful formula, “Our energy goes where our attention goes,” and left the dialogue, as well as