Humanistic Perspective Approach in Their Therapeutic and Research Practices to Understand the Lived Experiences of Andrew M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
H Humanistic Perspective approach in their therapeutic and research practices to understand the lived experiences of Andrew M. Bland1 and Eugene M. DeRobertis2,3 individuals as active participants in their life- 1Millersville University, Millersville, PA, USA world – i.e., situated in sociocultural and eco- 2Brookdale College, Lincroft, NJ, USA psycho-spiritual contexts. 3Rutgers University, Newark, NJ, USA From its inception, humanistic psychology has been “a diverse amalgam of secular, theistic, indi- vidualistic, and communalistic strands” Synonyms (Schneider et al. 2015, pp. xviii–xix) in both its range of influences and its proponents. It is best Constructivist; Existential; Holistic; Humanistic understood as a broad-based yet theoretically- psychology; Person-centered; Phenomenological; delineated movement rather than a highly special- Self-actualization; Third Force; Transpersonal ized school. Humanistic psychologists share a vision of psychology as a holistic, phenomeno- logical exploration of the processes that organi- Introduction cally promote psychological health and growth in accordance with people’s innate nature and poten- The humanistic perspective on personality tials. Such an intentionally non-exclusive emphasizes the individualized qualities of optimal approach has been preferred in order “to keep well-being and the use of creative potential to things open and flexible” (Bühler 1971, p. 378), benefit others, as well as the relational conditions with the deliberate goal of continuous revision that promote those qualities as the outcomes of and elaboration in order to “establish itself anew healthy development. The humanistic perspective for each generation” (Criswell 2003, p. 43). Con- serves as an alternative to mechanistic and/or temporary humanistic psychology is a “concerted reductionistic explanations of personality based brew” of three ontologies: on isolated, static elements of observable behavior (e.g., traits) or self-concept. Humanistic psychol- • Existential psychology – which emphasizes ogists contend that personality formation is an freedom, experiential reflection, and ongoing process motivated by the need for rela- responsibility. tive integration, guided by intentionality, choice, • Transpersonal psychology – which stresses the hierarchical ordering of values, and an ever- spirituality, transcendence, and compassionate expanding conscious awareness. Humanistic psy- social action. chologists employ an intersubjective, empathic # Springer International Publishing AG 2017 V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1484-1 2 Humanistic Perspective • Constructivist psychology – which accents cul- explore how different values/belief systems influ- ture, political consciousness, and personal ence commonalities and diversity in individuals’ meaning. (Schneider et al. 2015, p. xviii/xxiii) lived experience. Thus, humanistic psychologists “pose two Taken together, these provide the foundation overarching challenges to the study of conscious for a human science and clinical outlook that and nonconscious processes: (1) what does it values the whole person in context and that, by mean to be [a] fully experiencing human and its methods, serves to reconcile the dualities of (2) how does that understanding illuminate the objective/subjective, individual/species, disposi- fulfilled or vital life?” (Schneider et al. 2015, tional/situational, nature/nurture, art/science, sci- p. xvii). Humanistic psychologists believe that ence/spiritual, mind/body, Eastern/Western, focusing on life stories or narratives – sometimes aesthetic/pragmatic, etc. in conjunction with objective data – is the ideal Rather than view the healthy personality as the means of understanding where individuals have absence of pathology and/or the achievement of been and who they are becoming. In addition, “happiness” as understood on an egoic basis, humanistic psychologists address societal/ecolog- humanistic psychologists highlight maturity and ical conditions that promote or impede the devel- the roles of meaning-making and of values – e.g., opment of social intimacy and personal identity autonomy and commitment, freedom and respon- within a community as principal components of sibility, personal decision and worldly adaptabil- healthy personality development. ity, and self-awareness and the awareness of Taking these assumptions together, the human- others. Humanistic personality theory emphasizes istic perspective is summarized by five basic individuals’ motivation to continually progress postulates that lead off each issue of the peer- toward higher levels of interactive functioning reviewed Journal of Humanistic Psychology. and their present capacities for growth and change Human beings: irrespective of past limitations and future uncertainties. • As human, supersede the sum of their parts. Humanistic psychologists also contend that the- They cannot be reduced to components. ory or method should not univocally precede sub- • Have their existence in a uniquely human con- ject matter. They believe that the technocratic text, as well as in a cosmic ecology. assumptions and practices of the natural science • Are aware and are aware of being aware – i.e., approach conventionally adopted by psychologists they are conscious. Human consciousness in the interest of prediction, manipulation, and always includes an awareness of oneself in control of behavior are insufficient to appropriately the context of other people. capture and contextualize the nuances of human • Have the ability to make choices and, with that, experience, of which behavior is a by-product. responsibility. They question the placement of the observer and • Are intentional, aim at goals, are aware that the observed in passive roles in the interest of they cause future events, and seek meaning, certainty and generalizability at the expense of value, and creativity. contextually-situated perspectives gleaned from meaningful empathic interaction. Likewise, at the The “common denominator of these concepts,” clinical level, the employment of monolithic theo- said Bühler (1971), “is that all humanistic psy- ries and the preoccupation with technique in psy- chologists see the goal of life as using [one’s] life chotherapy are considered inadequate to to accomplish something [one] believes in” and to appropriately understand and address human suf- create something that outlives oneself (p. 381). fering. Rather, a more flexible, process-oriented, Following is a brief overview of the evolution descriptive approach is favored to promote individ- of the humanistic perspective on personality. It uals’ self-awareness and self-regulation and to begins with an assessment of the historical context Humanistic Perspective 3 in which the humanistic perspective arose as the conformity, compartmentalization of experience, Third Force in American psychology, followed by and disempowerment of the individual in society a summary of the influences that inspired the (Arons 1999; Wertz 1998). They cautioned that humanistic movement. It then provides a brief the “limited and limiting images” (Frick 1971, outline of the progression of the humanistic per- p. 10) propagated by “low-ceiling psychology” spective on personality from its Third Force con- (Maslow, quoted in DeCarvalho 1991) would ceptualization through three subsequent seep into the greater culture and lower ordinary interrelated movements – existential, transper- people’s expectations of themselves and their sonal, and constructivist. Note that the eras during potential. At best, the prevailing schools offered which each ontology gained prominence greatly images of personality that were comparable to overlapped; thus the outline is more thematic than “pages torn from a book, only parts that contribute chronological. Finally, examples are given of how to a greater whole” (Frick 1971, p. 10). these movements coalesced into contemporary Several of the psychologists who affiliated humanistic constructs and of the interdependence themselves with the humanistic movement had between developments in humanistic and conven- been trained as experimentalists/behaviorists tional positivistic psychologies. Schneider et al.’s and/or psychoanalysts, and many had developed (2015) Handbook of Humanistic Psychology is respected reputations in the field during the 1930s recommended for additional perspective on con- and 1940s. However, by the 1950s, their own temporary conceptualization in and practical experiences as both people and professionals pro- applications of humanistic psychology in therapy, mpted them to question the conventional thinking research, and society and for a listing of current in psychology and to note its limitations. It should participants in the humanistic movement. be clarified that humanistic psychologists did not deny the contributions of behaviorism and psy- choanalysis. They incorporated the insights of the Historical Account of Theoretical/ existing schools into a broader phenomenological Philosophical Foundations and Key orientation that emphasized the validity of human Principles experience and meaning. Humanistic psycholo- gists thus referred to themselves as the Third Humanistic psychology began as a revolution Force – i.e., a third option – in psychology that within the field in response to a concern that sought to consolidate the best of the prevailing prior to the mid-twentieth century “none of the schools while also drawing from additional tradi- available