First of all counseling theories and psychological approaches reveal their limitation. Even the classification of the word ‘emotion’ seems to be the subject of scientific discussion. There is no common agreement on what exactly emotion is. As previously mentioned in the previous question each theory has its own limitation. The advantages and disadvantages of each singular theory lead me to the conclusion that psychologists need outside help to put scientific constraints into theory. A good example is the IQ test. Alfred Binet invent this scale it must be rise that he was not a psychologist. However, the Binet scale is widely adopted and used in psychology. Based on my knowledge I prefer the neurological approach to all theories. There are neurotransmitters and hormones like; dopamine, serotonin, oxytocin, and many others regulating thought processes and therefore human experiences. The correlation of chemistry, therefore, influence to human psychics is essential. Lack of precision in counseling theories and in psychology, in general, discourages scientists from participating in discipline. On the other hand, we do not have better methods. Counselling theories congruent belief that if the precision scale and methods need to be discovered. In my scientific careera, I would like to propose scalable and replicable new metode to treat PTSD. I learn much more about how to understand myself from scientific articles rather than from counseling theory. However I admire the work of Carl Jung and his archetypes as a perfect approach to assess unknown factors. In my individual case better introspection into myself provide techniques like meditation and Neuro-Linguistic Programming.