The Operating Principle of the “Process this” Processor

The “Process this” processor is not a standalone technique in itself, but a control macro. A single short command initiates several internal processes at once, all aimed at processing the selected mental material. By “mental material” here we mean anything that can be held in attention: thoughts, emotions, beliefs, reactions, memories, evaluations, and the automatic patterns associated with them.

Within the processor, several independent modules are engaged. Some of them are based on modified and adapted processes known from other systems (in particular, from the work of Živorad Slavinski), while others are proprietary developments and a synthesis of ideas from different authors. This chapter does not aim to prove the validity of any particular model. The goal is to give a general understanding of what kinds of internal processes are being activated, so that further use of the processor does not raise questions like “what is actually happening there.”

For simplicity, consider a hypothetical problem formulated as “I hate Joe.” After attention points to this material (through the formulation itself), and the command “Process this” is given, a sequence of automatic actions is initiated.

The first thing that happens is that the system refers to past experience and searches for episodes that may have served as the source or amplifier of this reaction. These episodes are processed in order to reduce or eliminate the emotional charge associated with them. Separate internal processes are used for this.

Next, an attempt is made to break the original problem down into smaller components. Most persistent reactions are not monolithic — they consist of a set of specific triggers, evaluations, and interpretations. In our example, these might include elements such as “his manner of speaking irritates me,” “he reminds me of someone else,” “I don’t accept his social circle,” and so on. Automatically breaking complex material into parts allows it to be processed more quickly and precisely. Even if this decomposition is not consciously perceived, the system attempts to carry it out in the background.

The next block deals with previously made decisions, conclusions, and beliefs related to this material. This refers to conclusions that may have been formed many years ago and are no longer consciously remembered, yet continue to influence reactions. These can include childhood generalizations, protective decisions, or unconscious behavioral rules. For example, at some point in the past a conclusion like “people like that can’t be trusted” may have been formed — later forgotten, but still participating in the formation of the current reaction. Such decisions, along with their associated justifications and evaluations, are also processed.

At the same time, beliefs and convictions related to the problem itself, its components, and the people or objects involved in the situation are processed. This also includes beliefs about the possibility or impossibility of change, about the “nature” of the problem, and about one’s own resources. Work at this level is aimed at weakening rigid cognitive structures that support the problem.

A separate stage concerns personality aspects — those functional parts of the psyche that participate in creating or maintaining the reaction. Within the processor, an automated version of aspect (subpersonality) work is used, adapted for background operation. As a result, these parts are not suppressed or “eliminated,” but integrated into a more coherent configuration of the personality. In practice, this manifests as a gradual reduction of internal contradiction and conflict.

Next, the system works with emotional charges associated with resentment, non-acceptance, judgment, and complaints — both toward other people and toward oneself. Related evaluations of the world, reality, and events are also processed. The purpose of this stage is to remove the emotional tension that fuels the problem.

After that, the material is processed as a whole — no longer as separate components, but as a single structure. Several processes are used to stabilize the result.

The final stage is auxiliary in nature. After the problematic material has been eliminated or weakened, the system performs a symbolic “closure” procedure — forming a neutral internal representation that prevents the automatic return of the previous configuration. It is not essential how exactly this is interpreted — whether as an imagined operation, a cognitive fixation, or a conditional marker of completion. Practice shows that the presence of this step subjectively increases the stability of the result. That is sufficient; theory here is secondary.

Thus, the command “Process this” initiates not a single action, but a set of processes that sequentially dismantle the problem from different angles. Some elements (for example, working with resistance or fears of the problem returning) are taken outside the processor itself and implemented in automatic protocols. This separation is deliberate — it simplifies manual work and increases the overall efficiency of the system.

It is important to understand: this is not a “magic command,” but a standardized way of initiating internal processing of material without the need to manually control each stage. This makes the processor universal and suitable for working with virtually any mental content.