Giorgio Nardone's LACT/CTS clinical master's is training in a systemic and strategic approach that is unique in France. Intended for psychiatrists, psychologists, psychotherapists, doctors or helping relationship professionals who can demonstrate solid practice. This training offers a specialization in brief therapy in the field of psychopathologies.

The Clinical Masters of Giorgio Nardone organized in collaboration by LACT and the CTS of Arezzo brings together the teaching of the original intervention models patented by Giorgio Nardone:

• Brief strategic therapy with treatment protocols and therapeutic strategies dedicated to the different types of psychopathology.
• Strategic problem solving
• Systemic and strategic coaching.

It is aimed at all practitioners at the BAC+4 level with a practice of the helping relationship. The Masters includes 170 hours of lessons, 3 individual supervisions of 45 minutes and approximately 175 hours of personal work.

Since 1985, Giorgio Nardone has carried out empirical and experimental research aimed at developing brief therapy models that could offer rapid and effective solutions to the most important forms of psychopathology.

Brief systemic and strategic therapy is currently the most effective and efficient psychotherapy on a wide range of psychopathologies, in particular for cases of panic attacks, obsessive-compulsive disorders, anorexia, binge eating, vomiting or even sexual dysfunctions.

In the Clinical Master of Giorgio Nardone LACT/CTS, several types of pathologies are addressed, including phobias , pathological doubt, panics , obsessive disorders, OCD, paranoia, borderline profiles , eating disorders, psychotic disorders and sexual , depressions and PTSD disorders .

This technique represents both the starting and finishing line of all the research, clinical practice and managerial advice carried out by Giorgio Nardone and Paul Watzlawick at the Center for Strategic Therapy in Arezzo after its foundation. It can be considered as a "finish line" because the strategic dialogue, an advanced technique for conducting a single "therapeutic" session and capable of inducing radical changes in the interlocutor, represents a synthesis of all that has been achieved so far in the field. This refined strategy, which aims to achieve maximum results with minimum effort, can be seen as a natural evolution from the previous formulation of specific treatment models for particular pathologies. These are therapeutic stratagems and a sequence of ad hoc maneuvers constructed specifically for different types of problems. This was the great success of such protocols in terms of effectiveness and efficiency in structuring the first therapeutic interview as a real intervention, rather than as a preliminary phase.

Thus, the questions became more and more strategic, the paraphrase became very reframing, the language became very evocative of sensations, and finally the prescriptions became the spontaneous evolution of a strategically constructed dialogue, rather than an injunction. forced. In this way, the approach of knowing the problems through their solutions, from a method of construction and pure research, has become an operational and strategic logic to be used during the first, and often the only, therapy or coaching session. The therapist, like a wise strategist, guides the interlocutor through skilful maneuvers, to be the main protagonist of the scene, so that the latter can convince himself of what he has come to feel and discover. The "magic" of this technique lies in its disruptive essentiality, in accordance with the Wisdoms of the Hellenic tradition, "not too much, just enough".

Ever since humans have lived on Earth, they have had to develop logic to plan actions towards goals. Whether we are aware of it or not, we all use logics of thought and action whenever we want to achieve a certain goal.

The history of logic, as a discipline, emerges in the Hellenic world in the West and with the art of strategy in ancient China in the East. Until the advent of platonic philosophy, logic was a combination of art and science in the service of achieving various kinds of goals, such as winning a war or a tournament, successfully hunting prey, persuading someone or solve complex individual and social problems. Aristotle provided the first formulation of a rigorous model of logic, in which, however, everything that was not considered in this model, was excluded and labeled as a non-rigorous method. Consequently, art, creativity and, above all, non-linear dynamics (paradoxical, contradictory and circular dynamics) were excluded from rational logic when they were already recurrent in human dynamics. Since then, for more than two millennia, Western thought has been dominated by the "goddess of reason", that is, by rationalism of which Aristotelian logic was the main principle.

In fact, in academic philosophy, traditional and rational logics are still considered the essential point of reference for thought and action planning and non-linear and non-ordinary logics are again excluded from this context. Curiously, if we analyze the constant dynamic that each of us lives with ourselves, others and the world, we perceive that reason and rationality are not predominant, but that contradictions, paradoxes and beliefs dominate entirely, that is, anything that can be defined as logical ambivalence. Over the centuries, only a few authors have dealt with the logic of ambivalences, although these underlie the most frequent interactions between humans. For this reason, people who have worked on developing winning strategies have always exceeded the limits imposed by strict formal logic.

The strategic logic is an action planning model based on the objectives to be achieved and the problems to be solved, rather than on the respect of the reference theory. This type of logic has always considered the phenomena of logical ambivalence and used paradoxes, contradictions, prophecies and self-deception as real operational tools.

This original technique is an essential element of the systemic and strategic model of problem solving formalized by Giorgio Nardone and represents a kind of "trump card" against seemingly immutable situations. It consists of asking ourselves what actions we should take or avoid to voluntarily worsen the current situation, which we would instead like to improve. Likewise, we may ask ourselves what things we should voluntarily think and/or avoid thinking to deliberately complicate these problems, rather than lead them to their solution. After that, we make a careful list by writing down the most important things first, then the less important ones. This may seem like an absurd question, since subjects would like to improve their condition by solving their own problems. However, this is a form of strategic self-deception based on the logic of paradox: “if you want to straighten something, first try to bend it even more”. The reader should know that if I really try to think of all the ways to make my situation worse, the effect will be of two types. I will identify a range of counterproductive actions, which I will immediately begin to dislike. And that, of course, will cause me to avoid them.

The second effect, even more surprising, is that the spirit, pushed in this direction, will rebound, like a spring, towards its opposite. That is to say, I will begin to see the situation from other points of view and often I will be able to design solutions that I was not even able to envisage before. It is no coincidence that all the greatest scientists in history, from Archimedes to Edison, have used this mental strategy extensively to increase their ability to invent. As William James, the first great modern psychologist, wrote: “genius is nothing but the ability to perceive things from an unordinary point of view”

These logic models, in addition to the formulation of effective and efficient validated treatment protocols of brief systemic and strategic therapy , have made it possible to intervene successfully in non-clinical contexts, in particular in the world of art, military and sports performance, both at individual and team level. This theoretical-applicative development made it possible to apply the model to the world of productive organizations with measured efficiency with interventions in private companies and public institutions to solve their complex problems, as well as to train their managers to become effective problem solvers.