Carl Rogers, Martin Buber, and Relationship
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Éisteach Volume 14 l Issue 2 l Summer 2014 Carl Rogers, Martin Buber, and Relationship by Ian Woods Abstract This article gives a brief biographical sketch of Carl Rogers (1902-1987) and Martin Buber (1878-1965) and summarises their respective views on relationship before outlining the public dialogue in which they engaged in 1957. The outline concentrates on the part of the dialogue dealing with the therapist-client relationship and indicates some of the essential points of the exchanges between the two men, drawing out their differing perspectives. As well as commenting also on Brian Thorne’s view of the dialogue, the author’s own views are indicated both on the content of the dialogue and its implications for practice. The two men. assumption of power in 1933. He 1937 was published in English as “I arl Rogers and Martin Buber met had by then become the leading and Thou”. Cin public dialogue on 18 April interpreter of Hasidism and Jewish Following an enforced departure 1957 in the University of Michigan, mysticism and had begun what from Germany in 1938 (the same U.S.A. There was an age difference became a lifetime’s large literary year as Freud’s move to England), of 24 years between them, Buber output including more than sixty Buber became professor at the being 79 and Rogers 55 at the volumes on religious, philosophical Hebrew University of Jerusalem until time. The difference in background and related subjects. In 1923 he his retirement in 1951. During the between the two men was even more published “Ich und Du” which in early years of the State of Israel, he considerable. Buber had been born in Vienna in 1878, grown up in a wealthy Jewish uber had been born in Vienna in 1878, grown up in family in Poland and returned to a wealthy Jewish family in Poland and returned to Vienna to attend university as a B young man. Following further studies Vienna to attend university as a young man... became the at other universities, in 1923 he leading interpreter of Hasidism and Jewish mysticism and... became professor of Jewish theology, a lifetime’s large literary output including more than sixty history of religion, and ethics at the volumes on religious, philosophical and related subjects. University of Frankfurt until the Nazi 14 Irish Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy Volume 14 l Issue 2 l Summer 2014 Éisteach worked in assisting the assimilation ogers spent two years at Union Theological Seminary of the many Jewish immigrants to the R in New York during which, as well as his difficulty new State. Like Rogers, he enjoyed with adherence to religious dogma, his life-long interest in a life-long marriage and family life. human psychology developed. During retirement, he travelled and lectured widely including in the U.S. family life, these activities continued people, in particular between and his work achieved international to be amongst the main features of therapist and client, which offers recognition in both Jewish and his life until his death in 1987. By the therapeutic benefit seems to be Christian circles. At his funeral in time of his dialogue with Buber in one characterised by congruence 1965, his mourners included Arab 1957, he – like Buber – had already in which the therapist relates, in all students of the Hebrew University become an established figure in his their realness, to the client so that whose rights he had consistently field. the client’s congruence evolves advocated. Their views of relationship in response in the relationship Rogers, having been born in between them both as persons. The Chicago in 1902, from the age of 12 Buber’s “I and Thou” (the English translation) is written in quite therapist’s realness involves their grew up on the family farm, deep in being open to all aspects of their the countryside west of the city. The abstract and at times poetic language which is difficult to own experiencing and willing to family was close knit, characterised communicate this, as appropriate, by a strict Evangelical moral code paraphrase briefly for the purpose of this article. In Part One of the book, to the client; their relating to the including no alcohol, much hard client includes a continual attempt work, and little social contact with humans are described as having only two primary ways of relating, I-Thou to understand them empathically the outside world… though also a at the same time as valuing them setting in which the young Rogers and I-It. We live mostly in the world of I-It relations in which we relate to the in a positive and unconditional way. developed a close interest in the life (Rogers 1961; Kirschenbaum & of the natural world. people and things in our environment as objects which we can use for our Henderson 1990) Following the liberating experience benefit and view in an systematised The dialogue of his undergraduate years at the way. We can have moments of I-Thou Reading the text of the dialogue University of Wisconsin, Rogers relation which are characterised by (compiled verbatim from a spent two years at Union Theological mutual giving of ourselves to one recording), I was struck by the Seminary in New York during another with no separation between humanity of the interaction between which, as well as his difficulty with us. We need to live in the world of I-It the two in conversation with one adherence to religious dogma, relations but without I-Thou relations another. They related to each his life-long interest in human we are not fully human. We can another with courtesy, restraint psychology developed. After studies move between times of I-Thou and and humour during their hour–long in psychology to doctoral level, I-It relations with different people as conversation in front of an audience. he worked for over ten years as a well as with the same person over I don’t propose to cover all the issues psychologist with delinquent young time, the I-Thou moments tending to raised during the dialogue but to people. Starting in 1940 with Ohio be more short-lived than the times of concentrate on those germane to the State University, he was appointed to I-It. (Buber 1937). question of relationship, particularly a series of professorial positions at a in the therapeutic context. In the number of American universities and Neither is it easy to summarise following abbreviated account, I was later involved in other institutes Rogers’s view of optimal have highlighted the points which such as the Centre for Studies of the relationships given how often, as his seem (to me) to be essential, with Person - which he helped found - at understanding evolved over many an occasional commentary. Those La Jolla, California. During these years, he expressed it in different of you who read the full text of years (the 1930s and decades ways and with varying emphases. the dialogue – which I heartily following), there evolved his unique For him, the relationship between approach to working with clients umans are described as having only two primary ways combined with ongoing research and the publishing of his many works, H of relating, I-Thou and I-It. We live mostly in the world including on the theory and practice of I-It relations... We can have moments of I-Thou relation of the person-centred approach. which are characterised by mutual giving of ourselves to one Together with a happily-married another with no separation between us. Irish Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy 15 Éisteach Volume 14 l Issue 2 l Summer 2014 recommend – will see that I have to a greater extent and in a he kernel of the followed its wording quite closely way in which the client cannot T difference between their with certain phrases quoted see the therapist; two approaches. For Rogers, verbatim, and put between inverted • the client is not interested when another person is commas, for purpose of emphasis. in the therapist as a person really expressing himself (Kirschenbaum & Henderson 1990) in anything like the same The single largest component of way in which the therapist is and his experience, he the dialogue deals with the nature interested in him. (Rogers) doesn’t feel different of the therapist-client relationship. This is Buber’s initial response from him in the way Buber It begins with Rogers outlining his which he sums up as the therapist describes; in that moment, understanding of this relationship being a “detached presence”… Rogers can look on the other and wondering how it compares with which Rogers clarifies so that he person’s experience as having the I-Thou relation as understood understands accurately but to which equal authority and validity by Buber. Rogers describes his he doesn’t immediately respond. relationship with the client as with the way Rogers sees life Buber goes on to make, as a effective when he, Rogers, and experience. For Rogers, second response, that: • enters the relationship as a there is a real sense of • in the therapist-client situation, subjective person; the therapist sees and equality between the two. • is relatively whole and experiences the situation from transparent in the relationship; both his own side and from is a real sense of equality between • has a real willingness for the that of the client; the client, the two. client to have the feelings and however, remains as his own Buber doesn’t doubt Rogers’s attitudes that he has and to be side only of the situation. feeling in the situation but, rather the person that he is; They each have a necessarily than focussing on Rogers’s feeling, • is able to sense with a good different stance to the rejoins that in the given situation deal of clarity the way the situation.