IJSP Number 7, 2025

International Journal of Supervision in Psychotherapy, Number 7, 2025 Page | 62 “The solid self is made up of clearly defined beliefs, opinions, convictions, and life principles. These are incorporated into self from one’s own life experiences, by a process of intellectual reasoning and the careful consideration of the alternatives involved in the choice. In making the choice, one becomes responsible for self and the consequences.” [11] As such, Bowen seems to be on pretty much the same page as Brooks with his ‘freedom to ’. In both cases there is a commitment to something very intimate and basic, something that becomes, once adopted, self-defining and, in the same time self-fulfilling. Such a commitment is however, something that is first of all a self-building, in the sense that it is not only the end of a process or the process itself, but it is at the same time its own commencement. Those commitments are only possible on the most conscious level someone can apply, a level that has to be maintained and continuously enhanced afterwards. Adoption of life principles, as in Bowen’s theory, or attachments and commitments to moral formation, as in Brooks’s ideas of the ‘second mountain’, are touching in fact the same core of differentiation of self . The main paradigm is the long and arduous process of humanisation, respectively going beyond the simpler but more common purpose and finality of hominisation. After all, it is the solid self that has to be constructed out of everything that evolution (as in hominisation) had put into our hands as humans. Such a solid self can solely be found in the core of what a fully-fledged human being can offer as basic building material. The solid self is the apex of humanisation, which is the main objective of that long process of hominisation. The consequence of such a massive undertaking is that we will have a solid core of life conceptions and principles, which are well integrated in the conscious construct of the solid self . Because of this advanced integration: “Each belief and life principle is consistent with all the others, and self will take action on the principles even in situations of high anxiety and duress.” [11] Bowen points here at the differentiation between the intellectual system, where those principles are seated, and the emotional one which is the main source of anxiety and every problem that can disturb the equilibrium of the intellect. Not everyone who can think clearly in the midst of any duress is ‘cool’, but s/he is cool because s/he has succeeded in the process of differentiation of self (namely to detach from the imperatives of the emotional system). Such ‘coolness’ is an ulterior quality that comes and emphasis one’s own evolution on the differentiation of the self . But, as we see every day, not everyone is cool, although almost everyone nowadays tries to look as such. Why is that so? Because, although most of us make great efforts to look cool, underneath the superficial varnish of the pseudo-self (or the persona ) there is the underlying anxiety, which has a chronic and ubiquitous character. The marvels and endless problems of psychotherapy and supervision Authors S. Sloman and P. Fernbach are right when they accentuate that we are captive in a collective cloud, which is practically inescapable: “This is because our beliefs are not isolated pieces of data that we can take and discard at will. Instead, beliefs are deeply intertwined with other beliefs, shared cultural values, and our identities. To discard a belief often means discarding a whole host of other beliefs, forsaking our communities, going against those we trust and love, and in short, challenging out identities.” [20]