Abstract
The distinction between the Cycle of Experience and the sequence of contacting has significant implications. Dan Bloom argues that Seán Gaffney's improvement to it still does not remedy the widespread misimpressions within Gestalt therapy for which the Cycle of Experience has been responsible. Bloom urges that the sequence of contact provides a descriptive and explanatory model, which is more philosophically, psychologically, and historically grounded than the Cycle of Experience. The sequence of contact may be initially more challenging to teach, but it is a more substantial ground for the praxis of Gestalt therapy. Gaffney's re-Cycle incorporates much of the sequence of contact but remains problematic so long as it continues to be linked to the Cycle of Experience.
