Dialogue (along with field theory and phenomenology) can rightfully be considered one of the “pillars” on which Gestalt therapy is based. And before revealing the essence of the dilogical way of interaction between the therapist and the client, let’s say a few words about two other pillars. This approach, we hope, will be both logical and justified. So, phenomenology. In it, for the therapist, in order to be a therapist (and not a detective concerned with finding the truth and the culprit), it is important to focus on describing phenomena (what happens to the client during a session), and not on interpretation. If the client's eyes become moist or he actively begins to manipulate the wedding ring, then removing it and then putting it back in place, draw his attention to these phenomena - let him say what they mean. The therapist cannot know this for sure, although due to his experience he can with a high degree of probability assume the “correct” reasons. In the flow of phenomena everything turns out to be important. And it is not the therapist who decides what is important and what is not important - that is the client’s task. In line with this approach, the client is delegated a greater degree of freedom to choose the priorities on which therapy will be focused. Priority here is built in a simple way - as a rule, the individual satisfies the most pressing need, and not the most ethical and not the highest in culture. You can notice it during the session through bodily and non-verbal manifestations. And if the client is not fully aware of his current need, then the therapist’s task is to draw his attention to the signs (markers) with which it manifests itself. Now about field theory. As you know, not a single person living on Earth is self-sufficient. He was born by his parents, grew up and became a man thanks to numerous contacts with representatives of the human race. Those. it can only exist in an environment, together with which at every moment it forms a single integral field. And then his behavior can be considered as a function of this field. This behavior (activity or passivity, as well as their combinations) is determined by the nature of the relationship between the individual and his environment. (A special case of behavior is the interaction between the client and the therapist in a therapeutic session). If the relationship mutually satisfies both sides of the process, such behavior is considered normal. If there are unreasonably frequent or completely unresolvable conflicts, then the person’s behavior will be defined as abnormal. At the same time, the environment does not create the individual, just as the individual does not create the environment. Here it is appropriate to talk about one or another degree of influence and even immanence of the field. Both the environment and the individual are what they are, with their own specific character, thanks to their relationships to each other and to the whole. Let us note that recently, among practicing Gestalt therapists, more and more attention is being paid to the significance of the background, without at all to the detriment of the relevance of the figure (priority need). Well, you must agree, how is it possible, considering contact as a psychological phenomenon of relationships between people, to diminish the importance of the background as a means of support and support for the individual. For example, the strength of his convictions and fortitude in general as belonging to certain values. Dialogue. In short, communication with the client is primary, everything else should not exist for the therapist, since inclusion (and only it) in a dialogical relationship makes it possible for everything that was hidden to appear, for everything that can arise and benefit therapy. In other words, dialogue is both fertile soil that produces shoots, and life-giving moisture and sunlight... The emotional and sensory state of the therapist during a session with a client is close to empathy. He shows an interested presence, remaining, so to speak, in “his own skin”, maintaining therapeutic objectivity. It is impossible for a therapist to take the position of a client, and he does not have such a task. And here, it seems, once again it is worth noting that.