History

The idea of creating this association was born from a simple reflection: “If the ”normodotati” have the opportunity to be part of a real football team, why not think of creating one open to all those who want and can physically wear football boots and run behind a ball?”. But football, after all, for the Quartotempo project, is an “excuse”, a tool to allow us to work on something else. For a psychologist, it’s an excellent place to look out over and observe: that’s how the initial idea included the figure of a psychologist. The football field could be a new setting, full of relationships and simple rules, of physical and mental movement, of satisfaction and disappointment, of exchange. In short, life. The role of “psychologist in the field” therefore: a reference point for athletes who had a new place all for themselves, where parents had no access except on rare occasions and where the figures constantly present in the lives of athletes could appear from time to time, a person responsible for observations on how athletes moved in relationships, and which parents could refer to enrich their knowledge of the child.
The approach to the person adopted was that of G.A.Kelly’s ”Theory of Personal Constructs”. The drafting of the project was imbued with the most significant notions of the theory.

According to Buber, life, reality, the world, are, essentially, a complex of interpersonal relationships. Life is between people and between things, not in them, and we cannot become ourselves or live as ourselves except in relationships, because the knowledge of ourselves is eminently knowledge of ourselves in relation to another. There is not an “I” in itself, but only an “I” in front of a “you” in the reality of the relationship. “Through the You a man becomes I”, a person (Buber, 1923/1937, p. 28).
Perhaps this was the sense that served as a spring and triggered the beginning of the project, more than ten years ago. Many years, if you think that we are talking about free time, erroneously considered not a primary need. Its longevity, in our opinion, supports the idea that the “I” is complementary to the “You”, as Buber recalls.
Our association tries to take advantage above all of the invitation that every point of view is legitimate, that it is constructive to think that there can be no given reality, just and better than another. We would lose ourselves in a sterile competition, in solipsism, in a private existence from the richness of confrontation with the other.
At the heart of the theory is the concept that interaction between two people is possible if there is mutual understanding. If two people are completely different, it does not mean that they cannot understand the way in which each person constructs events. In order to be able to relate to another person, it is not strictly necessary for that person to be similar to us. Instead, one has to take his point of view, “put oneself in his shoes”, even if very different from ours, to look at the world through his “glasses”. In that field of diversity there is plenty of it and the more you dive the more difficult it is to interpret what we see as absurd, to feel superior or therefore inferior, to see oneself in the right or to think oneself wrong. It is in this way that the concept of “disability”, slowly, can change shape until it no longer has the sense that most of the culture still gives it.
Everything is relative: it depends on the point of view from which you look out over the world.