Our starting point in this article is that the question of the essence of psychotherapy has to some extent been neglected. Its medical context has strengthened the tendency to interpret psychotherapy in general from a technical and overtly rationalistic standpoint. Instead, we would underline the importance of the philosophical and historical roots of all psychotherapies. In our view, it is imperative to acknowledge the antirationalistic underpinnings that have always informed the discipline. We show how speculative mysticism and the late philosophy of Martin Heidegger have proved to be indispensable tools in setting psychotherapies in their philosophical and historical context. Robert Stolorow has also recently emphasised that Heidegger's philosophy in Time and Being can be used to both understand and develop thinking in psychotherapies. We find it surprising that Heidegger's late philosophy has not previously been considered a promising standpoint for theoretical research and show how Heidegger's concepts of twofold thinking and Gelassenheit are useful conceptual tools in understanding various dimensions of psychotherapies.

We reflect on family therapy and its history from two points of view, as an entity that becomes understood with the help of a twofold concept of a game, and a twofold concept of liberty. Systemic family therapy has always been comprehended with the help of game theory. Its development becomes more properly understood if we keep in mind that game itself is a dualistic concept entailing both a cultural and a logico‐mathematical interpretation of a game. We show how cultural ethos has molded the ways how game metaphor have been implemented to systemic thinking. In the same manner we show how Isaiah Berlin's idea of two incompatible concepts of liberty helps to contextualize family therapy in a way that its connections to sociopolitical theories of liberty become obvious. We believe that we have been able to demonstrate, how this twofold recontextualisation enriches the understanding of the ideological history of the family therapy. We claim that our reflections imply that family therapy is essentially a dualistic endeavor, that in the amid of it is a rift that cannot become repaired but only contemplated, that integrity of family therapy requires that we preserve both conflictual views, and don't try to simplify situation by abandoning one or the other. As a result, our article intends to develop further and deepen the idea that is originally presnted in the article "Strategy and intervention or non‐intervention: A matter of theory" by Harold Goolishian and Harlene Anderson.

In this article, we seek to clarify the historical and philosophical roots of Bion's somewhat enigmatic concept of reverie. We also reflect on the rhetorical reasons for Bion's decision to introduce the concept into psychotherapeutic discourse. Although Josef Breuer and Sigmund Freud (1894) had used the term in their Studies on Hysteria, prior to Bion it had lost its independent significance and role in psychotherapeutic theories. We would contend that even if the concept reverie has become increasingly popular in recent psychotherapeutic discourse, the relative neglect of its history and philosophy have led to problematic ways of implementing the concept in both the theory and practice of psychotherapy. We start from Jean‐Jacques Rousseau, moving on to Freud, William James, Henri Bergson and Gaston Bachelard. We present our view of why Bion considered reverie to be an indispensable tool in explicating certain psychoanalytic dimensions. We also reveal the kinds of historical and philosophical commitments that are embedded in the concept of reverie and append brief comments on the relevance of our analysis to the present state of psychotherapy and psychotherapy research.